{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_8566/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_8566","id":"gutenberg_8566","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/8566","summary":null,"tags":["Bible. New Testament -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.","Bible. New Testament -- History","Bible. Old Testament -- Introductions","Category: History - Religious","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Judaism"],"text":"Produced by Charles Aldarondo, Tiffany Vergon, David Widger\nand the Online Distributed Proofreading Team\n\n\n\n\nTHE ORIGIN AND PERMANENT VALUE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT\n\nBY\n\nCHARLES FOSTER KENT, PH.D.\n\nWOOLSEY PROFESSOR OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE IN YALE UNIVERSITY\n\n\n\n\n  \"Ye shall know the Truth and the Truth shall make you free\"\n\n\n\nPREFACE\n\nDuring the past generation the Old Testament has commanded equally with\nthe New the enthusiastic and devoted study of the great body of biblical\nscholars throughout the world. Two out of every three graduate students\nin our universities who specialize in the general field of biblical\nliterature choose the Old as the special centre of their work. At the\nsame time the tendency of the rank and file of the Christian church\nwithin the past decade has undoubtedly been to neglect the older\nTestament. Preachers as a rule select less than a fourth of their texts\nfrom it; the prevailing courses of Bible study devote proportionately\nless time to it; and teachers and scholars in the great majority of\ncases turn to the Old Testament with much less enthusiasm than they\ndo to the New. Why are these two great currents setting in opposite\ndirections, and what are the causes of the present popular neglect of\nthe Old Testament? If the Old Testament should be relegated to a second\nplace in our working canon of the Bible, let us frankly and carefully\ndefine our reasons. If, on the other hand, the prevailing apathy and\nneglect are due to ignorance of the real character and value of the Old\nTestament, let as lose no time in setting ourselves right.\n\nThe present volume has been suggested by repeated calls from ministerial\nbodies, popular assemblies, and groups of college students for addresses\non the themes here treated. The aim has been to give in concise, popular\nform answers to some of the many questions thus raised, with the\nconviction that they are in the mind of every thoughtful man and woman\nto-day, and especially on the lips of earnest pastors, missionaries,\nand Sunday-school teachers. There are indications on every side of\na deepening and far more intelligent interest in the needs and\npossibilities of religious education. Its vital importance to the life\nof the Church and the nation is being understood as never before.\nEarnest and fruitful efforts are being put forth to improve the methods\nand courses of instruction. The first essential, however, is a true\nunderstanding and appreciation of that Book of Books, which will\nforever continue to be the chief manual \"for teaching, for reproof, for\ncorrection, for instruction, in righteousness, that the man of God\nmay be perfect, completely fitted for every good work.\" The supreme\nimportance and practical value of the New Testament are recognized by\nall, but we usually forget when we quote the familiar words of Paul that\nhe had in mind simply the Scriptures of the Old Testament.\n\nIn divine Providence mighty forces have been quietly at work during the\npast century removing false rabbinical traditions and misconceptions\nthat had gathered about these ancient Scriptures, while from other\nsources has come new light to illumine their pages. The result is that\nin the Old Testament the Christian world is discerning a new heritage,\nthe beauty and value of which is still only half suspected even by\nintelligent people. This fact is so significant and yet so little\nrecognized that one feels impelled to go out and proclaim it on the\nhousetops. The Old Testament can never be properly presented from the\npulpit or in the class-room while the attitude of preacher and teacher\nis apathetic and the motive a sense of duty rather than an intelligent\nacquaintance with its real character and genuine admiration and\nenthusiasm for its vital truths. The irresistible fascination which has\ndrawn many of the most brilliant scholars into the Old Testament field\nis a proof that it has lost nothing, of its power and attractiveness.\nAlready the circle of those who have rediscovered the Old Testament is\nrapidly broadening. Observation and experience confirm the conviction\nthat all that is lacking to make that devotion universal is a right\nattitude toward it and an intelligent familiarity with its real origin,\ncontents, and teachings. The sooner this is realized the sooner some of\nthe most difficult problems of the Church, of the Sunday-school, and of\npopular religious education will be solved.\n\nAs the repository of a great and varied literature, as a record of\nmany of the most important events in human history, and as a concrete\nrevelation of God's character and will through the life and experiences\nof a race and the hearts of inspired men, the Old Testament has a vital\nmessage marvellously adapted to the intellectual, moral, social, and\nspiritual needs of to-day and supremely fitted to appeal to the thought\nand imagination of the present age.\n\nThis little volume is intended to be simply a very informal introduction\nto it. Since of the two Testaments the New is by far the more easily\nunderstood and the better known, it is made the point of departure in\nthe approach to the more complex field represented by the Old. Many\nunexpected analogies will aid in understanding the intricate literary\nhistory of the older Scriptures. The point of view assumed throughout is\nthat of the busy pastor, missionary, Sunday-school teacher, and scholar,\nwho have little time for technical study, but who are not afraid\nof truth because it is new and who firmly believe that God is ever\nrevealing himself more fully to men and that his truth shall make us\nfree. It is hoped that this general survey will prove for them but an\nintroduction to a far deeper and more profitable study.\n\nTo the Reverend J.F. McFarland, D.D., of the Bible Study Union, to the\nReverend S.A. Cooke, D.D., of the Methodist Book Concern, to Mr. John\nH. Scribner of the Presbyterian Board of Publication and Sunday-school\nWork, to the Reverend M.C. Hazard, D.D., of the Pilgrim Press, and to\nthe Reverend F.K. Sanders, Ph.D., of the Congregational Sunday-school\nand Publishing Society, who have generously read the manuscript of this\nbook, I am deeply indebted, not only for their valuable suggestions, but\nalso for their strong expressions of personal interest in the practical\nends which it seeks to conserve, I am also under great obligation to the\nReverend Morgan Miller, of Yale, for his untiring vigilance in revising\nthe proof of a volume written within the all too brief limits of a\nChristmas vacation.\n\nC.F.K.\n\nYALE UNIVERSITY,\n\nJanuary, 1906.\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\nI. THE ECLIPSE AND REDISCOVERY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT\n\nII. THE REAL NATURE AND PURPOSE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT\n\nIII. THE EARLIEST CHAPTERS IN DIVINE REVELATION\n\nIV. THE PLACE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT IN DIVINE REVELATION\n\nV. THE INFLUENCES THAT PRODUCED THE NEW TESTAMENT\n\nVI. THE GROWTH OF THE OLD TESTAMENT PROPHETIC HISTORIES\n\nVII. THE HISTORY OF THE PROPHETIC SERMONS, EPISTLES, AND APOCALYPSES\n\nVIII. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE EARLIER OLD TESTAMENT LAWS\n\nIX. INFLUENCES THAT GAVE RISE TO THE PRIESTLY LAWS AND HISTORIES\n\nX. THE HEBREW SAGES AND THEIR PROVERBS\n\nXL THE WRITINGS OF ISRAEL'S PHILOSOPHERS\n\nXII. THE HISTORY OF THE PSALTER\n\nXIII. THE FORMATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT CANON\n\nXIV. THE INTERPRETATION OF THE EARLY NARRATIVES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT\n\nXV. PRACTICAL METHODS OF STUDYING THE OLD TESTAMENT\n\nXVI. RELIGIOUS EDUCATION--THE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM OF TO-DAY\n\n\n\n\n\nI\n\n\nTHE ECLIPSE AND REDISCOVERY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT\n\n[Sidenote: _Jesus' study of the Old Testament_]\n\nThe opening chapters of the Gospels record only three or four meagre\nfacts regarding the first thirty years of Jesus' life. The real history\nof those significant years ran so far beneath the surface of external\nevents that it completely escaped the historian. The history of the\nmental and spiritual life of the Master is recorded in his mature\ncharacter and teachings. The fugitive hints, however, vividly illustrate\nthe supreme fact that he ever _grew stronger, becoming filled with\nwisdom;--and the grace of God was upon him_ (Luke ii. 40). They reveal a\nsoul not only in closest touch with God and with human life, but also in\neager quest for the vital truth regarding God and man recorded in the\nScriptures of his race. It requires no imagination to picture the young\nJew of Nazareth eagerly studying in the synagogue, at the temple, and\nalone by himself the sacred writings found in our Old Testament, for\nthis fact is clearly recorded on every page of the Gospels.\n\n[Sidenote: _His familiarity with all parts of it_]\n\nThe events of Hebrew history, and its heroes --Abraham, David, Elijah--\nwere all familiar to him. The Old Testament was the background of a\nlarge portion of the Sermon on the Mount. From Deuteronomy vi. 4, 5, and\nLeviticus xix. 18 he drew his marvellous epitome of all law and duty. In\nthe wisdom literature, and especially in the book of Proverbs, he found\nmany of those practical truths which he applied to life with new\nauthority and power. From the same storehouse of crystallized experience\nhe derived certain of those figures which he expanded into his\ninimitable parables; he adopted also, and put to new use, the effective\ngnomic form of teaching of the wisdom school. As in the mouth of his\nherald, John the Baptist, the great moral and spiritual truths, first\nproclaimed by the ancient prophets, live again on the lips of Jesus. At\nevery point in his teachings one recognizes the thought and language of\nthe older Scriptures. At the moments of his greatest temptation and\ndistress, even in the last agony, the words of the ancient law and\npsalms were on his lips and their consoling and inspiring messages in\nhis mind.\n\n[Sidenote: _Attitude of the apostles_]\n\nWhat is so strikingly true of Jesus is equally true of the apostles and\ndisciples who have given us the New Testament books: the atmosphere in\nwhich they lived, the thoughts which they thought, and the language in\nwhich they spoke, were those of the Old Testament. Not bowing slavishly\nbefore it, as did their Jewish contemporaries, but with true reverence,\nsingling out that which was vital and eternal, they made it the basis of\ntheir own more personal and perfect message to humanity. But for them,\nand for the early Church, until at least the middle of the second\nChristian century, the only scriptures regarded as authoritative were\nthose of the Old Testament. Even then, only gradually, and under the\npressure of real needs, were different groups of Christian writings\nadded and ascribed an authority equal to that of the older Scriptures.\n\n[Sidenote: _Attitude of the later Church, and especially Puritanism_]\n\nThroughout the Middle Ages and in the eyes of the Protestant reformers\nthe two great divisions of the Bible continued to command equal respect\nand attention. From the Old Testament and its reflection in the\nteachings of Paul, Puritanism and the theology of the past three\ncenturies derived most of that which revealed their strength as well as\ntheir weakness. From the law, the prophets, and the book of Proverbs\nthey drew their stern spirit of justice, their zeal for righteousness,\nand their uncompromising condemnation of everything that seemed to them\nwrong. Their preachers nobly echoed the thunders of Sinai and the\ndenunciations of an Elijah, an Amos, and an Hosea. They often failed,\nhowever, to recognize the divine love which prompted the stern words\nof the prophets, and to see that these denunciations and warnings were\nsimply intended to arouse the conscience of the people and to make\nthem worthy of the rich blessings that God was eager to bestow.\nMisinterpretation of the spirit of the later Old Testament reformers,\nwho dramatically portrayed Jehovah's hatred for the abominable heathen\ncults in the form of commands to slaughter the peoples practising them,\nfrequently led the Puritan fathers to treat their foes in a manner\nneither biblical nor Christian. To this narrow interpretation of the\nletter rather than the spirit of the Old Testament, and the emphasis\nplaced upon its more primitive and imperfect teachings can be directly\ntraced the worst faults of that courageous band who lived and died\nfighting for what they conceived to be truth and right.\n\n[Sidenote: _Reaction against the Bible of Puritanism_]\n\nIt is undoubtedly true that during the past two decades the Old\nTestament has in fact, if not in theory, been assigned to a secondary\nplace in the life and thought of Christendom. This is not due to the\nfact that the Christ has been exalted to his rightful position of\ncommanding authority and prestige. All that truly exalts him likewise\nexalts the record of the work of his forerunners which he came to bring\nto complete fulfilment and upon which he placed his eternal seal of\napproval. Rather, the present eclipse of the Old Testament appears to be\ndue to three distinct causes. The first is connected with the reaction\nfrom Puritanism, and especially from its false interpretation of the\nBible. Against intolerance and persecution the heart of man naturally\nrebelled. These rang true neither with life nor the teaching of Jesus.\nRefuge from the merciless and seemingly flawless logic of the earlier\ntheologians was found in the simple, reassuring words of the Gospels.\nThe result was that, with the exception of a very few books like the\nPsalter, the Old Testament, which was the arsenal of the old militant\ntheology, has been unconsciously, if not deliberately, shunned by the\npresent generation.\n\n[Sidenote: _Doubts aroused by the work of the \"Higher Critics\"_]\n\nWithin the past decade this tendency has been greatly accelerated by the\nwork of the so-called \"Higher Critics.\" Because it presents more\nliterary and historical problems, and because it was thought, at first,\nto be farther away from the New Testament, the citadel of the Christian\nfaith, the Old Testament has been the scene of their greatest activity.\nWith what seemed to the onlooker to be a supreme disregard for the\ntraditions long accepted as established by the Church, they have\npersistently applied to the ancient Scriptures the generally accepted\ncanons and methods of modern historical and literary study. In their\nscientific zeal they have repeatedly overturned what were once regarded\nas fundamental dogmas. Unfortunately the first reports of their work\nsuggested that it was only destructive. The very foundations of faith\nseemed to be shaking. Sinai appeared to be enveloped in a murky fog,\ninstead of the effulgence of the divine glory; Moses seemed to become a\nvague, unreal figure on the distant horizon of history; David's voice\nonly faintly echoed through the Psalter; and the noblest messages of\nprophet, sage, and psalmist were anonymous.\n\n[Sidenote: _The mistakes of the critics_]\n\nLittle wonder that many who heard only from afar the ominous reports of\nthe digging and delving, and vague rumors,--all the more terrifying\nbecause vague,--either leaped to the conclusion that the authority of\nthe Old Testament had been undermined or else rallied in a frantic\neffort to put a stop, by shouting or compulsion, to the seemingly\nsacrilegious work of destruction. When the history of the Higher\nCriticism of the Old Testament is finally written, it will be declared\nmost unfortunate that the results first presented to the rank and file\nof the Christian Church were, as a rule, largely negative and in many\ncases relatively unimportant. In their initial enthusiasm for scientific\nresearch scholars, alas! sometimes lost the true perspective and failed\nto recognize relative values. The date, for example, of Isaiah xl.-lv.\nis important for the right understanding and interpretation of these\nwonderful chapters, but its value is insignificant compared with the\ndivine messages contained in these chapters and their direct application\nto life. Moreover, instead of presenting first the testimony and then\npatiently pointing out the reasonableness and vital significance of the\nnewer conclusions, scholars sometimes, under the influence of their\nconvictions, made the fatal mistake of enunciating those conclusions\nsimply as dogmas.\n\n[Sidenote: _Resulting loss of faith in the Old Testament_]\n\nHistory demonstrates that established religions and churches always hold\ntenaciously to old doctrines, and therefore regard new conclusions with\nsuspicion. This tendency is clearly illustrated in the experience of\nJesus; for with all his divine tact and convincing authority, he was not\nable to win the leaders of Judaism to the acceptance of his\nrevolutionizing teachings. Yet one cannot escape the conviction that if\nin this age of enlightenment and open-mindedness, the positive results\nof modern scholarship had been presented first, this latest chapter in\nGod's revelation of himself to man would have been better understood and\nappreciated by the leaders of the Church, and its fruits appropriated by\nthose whose interests are fixed on that which is of practical rather\nthan theoretical import. At least many open-minded people might have\nbeen saved from the supreme error of writing, either consciously or\nunconsciously, _Ichabod_ across the pages of their Old Testament.\n\n[Sidenote: _Difficulties in understanding it_]\n\nThe third reason why the Old Testament has suffered temporary eclipse in\nso many minds is more fundamental; it is because of the difficulties in\nunderstanding it. The background of the New Testament is the Roman world\nand a brief century with which we Western readers are well acquainted;\nbut the background of the Old is the ancient East--the age and land of\nwonder, mystery, and intuition, far removed from the logical, rushing\nworld in which we live. The Old Testament contains a vast and complex\nliterature, filled with the thoughts and figures and cast in the quaint\nlanguage of the Semitic past. Between us and that past there lie not\nmerely long centuries, but the wide gulf that is fixed between the East\nand the West.\n\n[Sidenote:_The new light from the monuments_]\n\nWith three such distinct and powerful currents--reaction, suspicion, and\nmisunderstand--bearing us from the Old Testament, it might be predicted\nthat in a decade or two it would lie far behind our range of vision.\nOther forces however are, in divine providence, rapidly bringing it back\nto us again, so that we are able to understand and appreciate it as\nnever before since the beginning of the Christian era. The chasm between\nus and it is really being bridged rather than broadened. The long\ncenturies that lie back of the Old Testament have suddenly been\nilluminated by great search-lights, so that today we are almost as well\nacquainted with them as with the beginning of the Christian era. From\nancient monuments have arisen, as from the dead, an army of contemporary\nwitnesses, sometimes confirming, sometimes correcting, but at all times\nmarvellously supplementing the biblical data. Now the events and\ncharacters of Old Testament history no longer stand alone in mysterious\nisolation, but we can study in detail their setting and real\nsignificance. At every point the biblical narrative and thought are\nbrought into touch with real life and history. The biographies and\npolicies, for example, of Sennacherib and Cyrus, are almost as well\nknown as those of Napoleon and Washington. The prophets are not merely\nvoices, but men with a living message for all times, because they\nprimarily dealt with the conditions and needs of their own day. The\nvital relation and at the same time the infinite superiority of the\nreligious teachings of the Old Testament to those of earlier ages and\npeoples are clearly revealed.\n\n[Sidenote: _Modern aids in interpreting the Old Testament_]\n\nInterpreted in the light of contemporary literature and language, most\nof the obscurities of the Old Testament melt away. Modern research in\nthe fields of Semitic philology and syntax and the discovery of older\ntexts and versions have put into the hands of translators new and\nvaluable tools for making clear to all the thoughts in the minds of the\noriginal writers of the Old Testament. Studies in comparative religion,\ngeography, and modern Oriental life and customs have illuminated and\nillustrated at every point the pages of the ancient writings. To utilize\nall these requires time and devotion, but he who is willing to study may\nknow his Old Testament to-day as well as he does the New.\n\n[Sidenote: _Rejection of rabinical traditions_]\n\nFully commensurate with the great light that has been shed upon it from\nwithout, is that which has come from a careful study of the testimony of\nthe Old Testament itself. Until recent times the Church has been content\nto accept blindly the traditions of the late Jewish rabbis regarding the\norigin, history, and interpretation of their scriptures. Handed down\nthrough the Church Fathers and interwoven with creeds and popular\nbeliefs, they have been identified in many minds with the teaching of\nthe Bible itself. Yet, when we analyze their origin and true character,\nwe find that many of them have absolutely no support in the Scriptures,\nand in many cases are directly contradictory to the plain biblical\nteachings. Too often they are but the fanciful conjectures of the\nrabbis. Developed in an uncritical age, and based upon the unreliable\nmethods of interpretation current among the Jews in the early Christian\ncenturies, they are often sadly misleading. A close analogy is found in\nthe traditional identifications of most of the Palestinian sacred sites.\nTo-day the Oriental guide shows the skull of Adam beneath the spot where\ntradition places the cross of Christ. If the traveller desires, he will\npoint out the very stones which Jesus declared God could raise up to be\nchildren of Abraham. Every question which curiosity or genuine interest\nhas raised is answered by the seemingly authoritative voice of\ntradition. Investigation, however, proves that almost all of these\nthousand identifications are probably incorrect. The discovery is a\nshock to the pious imagination; but to the healthy mind uncertainty is\nalways better than error. Furthermore, uncertainty often proves the door\nwhich leads to established truth.\n\n[Sidenote: _Acceptance of the testimony of the Old Testament regarding\nits origin and history._]\n\nEven so the modern historical and critical spirit has led men to turn\nfrom the generally accepted but exceedingly doubtful rabbinical\ntraditions regarding, for example, the date and authorship of many of\nthe Old Testament books, to the authoritative evidence found in those\nwritings themselves. In this they are but following the example of the\nGreat Teacher, who repeatedly appealed from the same rabbis and their\nmisleading traditions to the same ancient Scriptures. The saddest fact\nis that many of his followers, even to-day, hesitate to follow his\ninspired leadership. Fortunately, as the varied, strata and formations\nof the rocks tell the story of the earth's early history, so these early\nwritings furnish the data for reconstructing the illuminating history of\ntheir origin, growth, and transmission. Often the testimony of the facts\ndiffers as widely from the familiar inherited traditions as the\nconclusions of modern science from the vague guesses of primitive man\nregarding the riddles of existence. Neither may represent absolute and\nfinal truth, and yet no serious-minded man can question which is really\nthe more authoritative. To-day one of the most vital issues before the\nChristian. Church is whether it will follow the guidance of its Founder\nand accept the testimony of the Bible itself or cling blindly to the\ntraditions of the rabbis and Church Fathers.\n\n[Sidenote: _Historical significance of the modern movement_]\n\nThe student of history at once recognizes in the modern movement, of\nwhich the watchword is, \"Back to the testimony of the Bible,\" the direct\nsequel to the Protestant Reformation. The early reformers took the\nchains off the Bible and put it into the hands of men, with full\npermission to study and search. Vested interests and dogmatism soon\nbegan to dictate how it should be studied and interpreted, and thus it\nwas again placed practically under lock and key. It is an interesting\nfact that a young Zulu chief, a pupil of Bishop Colenso of South Africa,\nfirst aroused the Anglo-Saxon world to the careful, fearless, and\ntherefore truly reverential study of its Old Testament. With this new\nimpetus, the task of the Reformers was again taken up, and in the same\nopen, earnest spirit. For two generations it has commanded the\nconsecrated energies of the most thorough scholars of Christendom. Those\nof England, Scotland, Ireland, France, Germany, Austria, Switzerland,\nNorway, Sweden, America, and Canada have worked shoulder to shoulder,\ndividing the work, carefully collecting and classifying the minutest\ndata, comparing results, and, on the basis of all this work, formulating\nconclusions, some assured and some hypothetical, which best explain the\nfacts.\n\n[Sidenote: _The unveiling of the Old Testament_]\n\nOften, to those who have not followed the detailed steps, these\nconclusions have seemed only destructive. Many of them are assuredly so;\nbut the vital question which every honest man should ask is, Do they\ndestroy the Bible, or simply the false traditions that have gathered\nabout it? Fortunately, most of the leaders of the Church and most\nintelligent laymen have already discerned the only emphatic answer to\nthis question. The Church is undoubtedly passing quietly through a\nrevolution in its conception and attitude toward the Bible, more\nfundamental and far-reaching than that represented by its precursor the\nProtestant Reformation; but its real significance is daily becoming more\napparent. Not a grain of truth which the Bible contains has been\ndestroyed or permanently obscured. Instead, the _d\u00e9bris_ of time-honored\ntraditions and dogmas have been cleared away, and the true Scriptures at\nlast stand forth again in their pristine splendor.\n\n[Sidenote: _The true Old Testament_]\n\nFreed from the misconceptions and false traditions which have gathered\nabout it, the true Old Testament rises from amidst the dust and din of\nthe much digging and delving. To those who have known only the old it is\na fresh revelation. Its literary beauty, its naturalness, its dignity,\nits majestic authority are a surprise to those who have not followed its\nunveiling. The old vagueness and mystery have in part disappeared, and\ninstead it is found to contain a thousand vital, living messages for to-\nday. Its human as well as its divine qualities command our interest and\nattention. Through it all God speaks with a new clearness and authority.\nThus, that which we thought was dead has risen, and lives again to\ninspire us to noble thought and deed and service.\n\n\n\n\nII\n\nTHE REAL NATURE AND PURPOSE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT\n\n[Sidenote: _A large and complex library_]\n\nTurning from the Jewish and medi\u00e6val traditions and theories which so\neasily beset us, we ask, What is the real nature of the Old Testament as\nit is revealed in this new and clearer light? The first conclusion is\nthat it is a library containing a large and complex literature,\nrecording the varied experiences, political, social, ethical, and\nreligious, of the Israelitish race. The fact that it is a library\nconsisting of many different books is recognized by the common\ndesignation of the two testaments. As is well known, our English word\n_Bible_ came originally from the Papyrus or Byblus reed, the pith of\nwhich was widely used in antiquity as the material from which books were\nmade. It was natural, therefore, that in the Greek a little book should\nbe designated as a _biblion_. About the middle of the second Christian\ncentury the Greek Christians (first in the so-called Second Epistle of\nClement xlv. 2) began to call their sacred scriptures, _Ta Biblia_, the\nbooks. When this title was transferred to the Latin it was, by reason of\na natural and yet significant error, treated as a feminine singular,\n_Biblia_, which, reappears In English as _Bible_. This most appropriate\nname emphasizes the fact that the books thus described are a unit and\nyet a collection of little books, selected from a larger literature and\ngiven their present position of preeminent authority.\n\n[Sidenote: _The record of God's vital, personal relations to the\nIsraelitish race_]\n\nThe term Testament suggests not the form and authority of the books, but\ntheir theme. It is the English translation, through the Latin and Greek,\nof the Hebrew word, _ber\u00eeth_, usually rendered, _covenant_. It means a\n_bond_ or _basis of agreement_. It implies a close and binding contract\nbetween two parties, and defines the terms to which each subscribes and\nthe obligations which they thus assume. The _Old Covenant_ or\n_Testament_, therefore, is primarily the written record of the origin,\nterms, and history of the solemn agreement which existed between the\nIsraelitish nation and Jehovah. The early narratives preserve the\ntraditions of its origin; the lawgivers endeavored to define its terms\nand the obligations that rested upon the people; the prophets\ninterpreted them in the life of the nation, and the sages into the life\nof the individual; and the historical books recorded its practical\nworking. The significant fact is that back of the Old Testament records\nexists something greater and deeper than pen can fully describe: it is a\nvital, living connection between Jehovah and his people that makes\npossible the unique relation which finds expression in the remarkable\nhistory of the race and in the experiences and souls of its spiritual\nleaders. Thus through life, and in the concrete terms of life, God\nreveals himself to the life of humanity.\n\n[Sidenote: _Written in history and human minds and hearts_]\n\nIn the light of this truth the Jewish and medieval dogma that every\nword, and even every letter of Scripture, was directly dictated by God\nhimself, seems sadly mechanical and bears the marks of the narrow\nschools of thought in which it took form. Hebrew was not, and probably\nwill never be, the language of heaven! Not on skins and papyrus rolls,\nbut in the life of the Israelitish race and on the minds and consciences\nof enlightened men, God wrote his revelation. History and the character\nand consciousness of the human race are its imperishable records.\nFortunately he also aroused certain men of old, not by word and act\nonly, but by the pen as well, to record the revelation that was being\nperfected in the life of their nation and in their own minds and hearts.\nHe did not, however, dictate to them the form of their writings nor\nvouch for their verbal inerrancy. In time, out of their writings were\ngradually collected and combined the most significant passages and\nbooks, and to these was finally attributed the authority that they now\nrightfully enjoy.\n\n[Sidenote: _Secondary sources of its authority_]\n\nThe ultimate basis of that authority, however, is not their presence in\nthe canon of the Old Testament. At the same time their presence there is\ndeeply significant, for it represents the indorsement of many ages and\nof countless thousands who, from the most varied points of view and amid\nthe most diverse experiences, have tested and found these ancient\nscriptures worthy of the exalted position that has gradually been\nassigned to them. It is not the support of the Church, although this\nalso for the same reason is exceedingly significant. It is not the calm\nassumption, of authority that appears at every point throughout the Old\nTestament, although this is richly suggestive; the sacred writings of\nother religions make even more pretentious claims. It is not that its\ncommands and doctrines come from the mouths of great prophets and\npriests, like Moses, Samuel, Isaiah, and Jeremiah. This fact undoubtedly\nhad great weight with those who formed the final canon of the Old\nTestament, and the authority of a strong, noble personality is supremely\nimpressive; but divine authority never emanates primarily from a man,\nhowever great be his sanctity. Furthermore, to establish the authority\nderived from a Moses or a Samuel it is necessary in every case to prove\nthat the books attributed to them by late tradition actually came from\ntheir pens. Even if this could in every case be done, some of the\nnoblest passages in the Old Testament remain avowedly anonymous; for the\ntendency of the great majority of its authors was clearly to send forth\ntheir messages without any attempt to associate their own names with\nthem.\n\n[Sidenote: _Its ultimate basis of authority_]\n\nThe ultimate authority of the Old Testament, therefore, is not dependent\nupon devoted canon-makers, nor the weighty testimony of the Church, nor\nupon its own claims, nor the reputation of the inspired men who have\nwritten it, nor the estimate of any age. Its seat of authority is more\nfundamental. It contains the word of God because it faithfully records\nand interprets the most important events in the early religious history\nof man, and simply and effectively presents God's revelation of himself\nand of his will in the minds and hearts of the great pre-Christian\nheralds of ethical and spiritual truth. Back of the Old Testament is a\nvast variety of vital experiences, national and individual, political\nand spiritual, social and ethical, pleasurable and painful. Back of all\nthese deeply significant experiences is God himself, through them making\nknown his character and laws and purpose to man.\n\n[Sidenote: _Its authority ethical and religious, not scientific_]\n\nStudents of the rediscovered Old Testament also recognize, in the light\nof a broader and more careful study, the fact, so often and so fatally\noverlooked in the past, that its authority lies not in the field of\nnatural science, nor even of history in the limited sense. Time and\npatience were destined to increase man's knowledge in these great\ndepartments and also to develop his mind in attaining it. The teaching\nof the Old Testament is authoritative only in the far more important\nrealm of ethics and religion. Paul truly voiced its supreme claim\nwhen he said that it was _profitable for teaching, for reproof, for\ncorrection, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be\nperfect, completely fitted for every good work_ (II Tim. iii. 16, 17).\nThe assertion by the Church in the past of claims nowhere made or\nimplied by the Old Testament itself is unfortunately still a fertile\nsource of perplexity and dissension to many faithful souls. Their\nsalvation is to be found in a clear and intelligent appreciation of the\nreal nature and claim of these ancient writings.\n\n[Sidenote: _Its dominant purpose to teach spiritual truth_]\n\nOne dominant aim determines the form of each book and the selection of\nindividual passages and binds together the whole: it is effectively to\nset forth spiritual truth and to mould in accordance with God's will the\ncharacters and beliefs of men. It was the supreme bond that bound\ntogether prophets, priests, sages, and psalmists, although the means by\nwhich they accomplished their common purpose differed widely. Many a\ncurrent tradition, and the crude conceptions of the ancients regarding\nthe natural world, are recorded in the Old Testament; but they are not\nthere merely to perpetuate history nor to increase the total of\nscientific knowledge, but rather because they concretely illustrate and\nimpress some vital ethical and spiritual truth. Such singleness of\nreligious purpose is paralleled nowhere else except in the work and\nteachings of Jesus and his apostles.\n\n[Sidenote: _Its present fruits the proof of its inspired authority_]\n\nThe ever-present evidence of the divine authority back of the spiritual\nteachings of the Old Testament as a whole is that they ring true to\nlife and meet its needs. By their fruits we know them. It is the\ndemonstration of the laboratory. We know that they are inspired because\nthey inspire. The principles underlying the social sermons of Amos are\nas applicable to present conditions as when first uttered. The sooner\nthey are practically applied the sooner our capitalistic civilization\ncan raise its head now bowed In shame. The faith that breathes through\nthe Psalms is the faith that upholds men to-day in the midst of\ntemptation and trial. The standards of justice, tempered by love, which\nare maintained in the Old Testament laws make good citizens both of\nearth and heaven. As long as men continue to test the teachings of the\nOld Testament scriptures in the laboratory of experience and to know\nthem by their fruits, nothing can permanently endanger their position\nin the Christian Church or in the life of humanity. Neglect and\nindifference, not Higher Criticism, alone permanently threaten the\nauthority of the Old Testament as well as that of the New.\n\n[Sidenote: _Significance of the variations and inconsistencies_]\n\nRecognizing the real nature and purpose of these ancient records, the\ntrue student neither denies nor is disturbed by the marks of their human\nauthorship. As in the case of the Gospels, the variations between the\nparallel narratives are all evidence of their genuineness and of the\nsincerity of their purpose. They demonstrate that God's revelation\nis adapted to the needs of life and the comprehension of man, because it\nwas through life and expressed in the terms of life. Their individual\npeculiarities and minor errors often introduce us more intimately to\nthe biblical writers and help us to understand more clearly and\nsympathetically their visions of truth and of God. Above all, they teach\nus to look ever through and beyond all these written records to the\ngreater revelation, which they reflect, and to the infinite Source of\nall knowledge and truth.\n\n[Sidenote: _The record of a gradual revelation_]\n\nThe inconsistencies and imperfect teachings which are revealed by a\ncritical study of the Old Testament are also but a few of the many\nindices that it is the record of a gradually unfolding revelation. Late\nJewish tradition, which is traceable even in the Old Testament itself,\nwas inclined to assign the origin of everything which it held dear to\nthe very beginnings of Hebrew history, and in so doing it has done much\nto obscure its true genesis. Fortunately, however, the history of God's\ngradual training of the race was writ too plainly in the earlier Old\nTestament scriptures to be completely obscured by later traditions. The\nrecognition that God's all-wise method of revealing spiritual as well as\nscientific truth was progressive, adapted to the unfolding consciousness\nof each succeeding age, at once sweeps away many of the greatest\ndifficulties that have hitherto obscured the true Old Testament. Jesus\nwith his divine intuition appreciated this principle of growth.\nUnhesitatingly he abrogated certain time-honored Old Testament laws with\nthe words, _Ye have heard that it was said ... but I say to you_. His\nown interpretation of his relation to the sacred writings of his race\nwas that he came to bring them to complete fulfilment. Rearranged in\ntheir approximately chronological order, the Old Testament books become\nthe harmonious and many-sided record of ten centuries of strenuous human\nendeavor to know and to do the will of God and of his full and gracious\nresponse to that effort. The beatitude of those who hunger and thirst\nafter righteousness was as true in the days of Moses as it was when\nJesus proclaimed it.\n\n[Sidenote: _Its different books of very different values_]\n\nFinally, the right and normal attitude toward the Old Testament leads to\nthe wholesome conclusion that its different books are of very different\nvalues. The great critic of Nazareth again set the example. As we have\njust seen, certain of the Old Testament laws he distinctly abrogated;\nothers he quietly ignored; others, as, for example, the law of love\n(Deut. vi. 5, and Lev. xix. 19) he singled out and gave its rightful\nplace of central authority. A careful study of the Gospels, in the light\nof the Old Testament, demonstrates that a very important element in his\nwork, as the Saviour of men, was in thus separating the dross in the\nolder teachings from the gold, and then in giving to the vital truth a\nclearer, more personal, and yet more universal application. For the\nintelligent student and teacher of to-day the Old Testament still\nremains a great mine of historical, ethical, and religious truth. Some\nparts, like Genesis, Deuteronomy, Hosea, Jeremiah, Isaiah xl.-lv., and\nthe Psalter, are richly productive. Others, like Numbers, Chronicles,\nand Esther, are comparatively barren.\n\n[Sidenote: _Application of this truth_]\n\nSince the Old Testament is the record of a progressively unfolding\nrevelation, it is obvious that all parts do not possess an equal\nauthority. To place the example of the patriarchs or of David, who lived\nwhen ethical standards and religious beliefs were only partially\ndeveloped, on an equality with the exalted ideals of the later prophets,\nis to misinterpret those ancient Scriptures and to reject the leadership\nof the Great Teacher. At the same time, studied from the newer point of\nview, the examples of those early heroes are found to illustrate vital\nprinciples in human life and to inspire and warn the child of to-day as\neffectively as they did far back in the childhood of the race.\n\n[Sidenote: _The Old Testament not a fetish but a spiritual guidebook_]\n\nIn these later days God has taken the Bible from the throne of\ninfallibility on which Protestantism sought to place it. By a gradual\nyet benign process, which we were nevertheless at first inclined\nbitterly to resent, he has opened our eyes to its true character and\npurpose. Again, he has pronounced his _Thou shall not_ to the natural\nand yet selfish human desire to transfer moral and intellectual\nresponsibility from the individual conscience to some external\nauthority. Again, he has told us that only in the sanctuary of the human\nsoul is the Infallible One to be found. Yet in order that we each may\nfind him there, the cumulative religious experience of the countless\nthousands who have already found him is of inestimable value. The Old\nTestament contains not merely the word of God, but, together with its\ncomplement the New, is the great guide-book in finding and knowing him,\nIt blazes the way which, the pilgrim of to-day, as in the past, must\nfollow from his cradle to the throne of God. At each point it is richly\nillustrated by the actual religious experiences of real men and women.\nTheir mistakes and their victories, are equally instructive. From\nmany vantage-points reached by prophets and priests and psalmists,\nwe are able to catch new and glorious visions of God's character and\npurpose for mankind. Through its pages--sometimes dimly, sometimes\nbrightly, But growing ever clearer--shines the giving light of God's\ntruth and revelation, culminating in the Christ, the perfected\nrevelation and the supreme demonstration that man, though beset by\ntemptation, baffled by obstacles, deserted by friends, and maligned\nby foes, can nevertheless, by the invincible sword of love and\nself-sacrifice, conquer the world and become one with God, as did the\npeerless Knight of Nazareth.\n\n\n\n\nIII\n\nTHE EARLIEST CHAPTERS IN DIVINE REVELATION\n\n[Sidenote: _The nature of inspiration_]\n\nSince the days of the Greek philosophers the subject of inspiration and\nrevelation has been fertile theme for discussion and dispute among\nscholars and theologians. Many different theories have been advanced,\nand ultimately abandoned as untenable. In its simplest meaning and use,\ninspiration describes the personal influence of one individual upon the\nmind and spirit of another. Thus we often say, \"That man inspired me.\"\nWhat we are or do under the influence of that intellectual or spiritual\nimpulse is the effect and evidence of the inspiration. Similarly, divine\ninspiration is the influence of God's spirit or personality upon the\nmind and spirit of man. It may find expression in an exalted emotional\nstate, in an heightened clarity of mental perception, in noble deeds, in\nthe development of character, indeed in a great variety of ways; but its\nseat is always the mind of man and its ultimate cause the Deity himself.\n\n[Sidenote: _In the Old Testament_]\n\nThe early Old Testament expression most commonly used to describe\ninspiration was that _the Spirit of God rushed upon the man_, as it did\nupon Saul, causing him to burst forth into religious ecstasy or frenzy\n(I Sam. x. 6, 10), and upon Samson, giving him great bodily strength or\nprowess in war (Judg. xiv. 6, 19, xv. 14). Skill in interpreting dreams\nand in ruling was also regarded as evidence that the Spirit of God was\nin a man like Joseph (Gen. xli. 38); but above all the prophetic gift\nwas looked upon as the supreme evidence of the presence of the Spirit of\nJehovah (Hos. ix. 1; Micah ii. 7, iii. 8). The word _spirit_ as thus\nused in the Old Testament is exceedingly suggestive. It means primarily\nthe breath, that comes from the nostrils. Though invisible to the eye,\nthe breath was in the thought of primitive man the symbol of the active\nlife of the individual. In the full vigor of bodily strength or in\nviolent exercise it came quick and strong; in times of weakness it was\nfaint; when it disappeared, death ensued; the living personality was\ngone, and only the play remained. The same Hebrew word, _r\u00faach_,\ndescribed the wind--unseen, intangible, and yet one of the most real and\nirresistible forces in all the universe. Thus it was a supremely\nappropriate term to describe the activity of God, as it produced visible\neffects in the minds and lives of men. In the later Old Testament\nliterature its use was extended, so that to the Spirit of God was\nascribed activity in the natural world and in human history.\n\n[Sidenote: _Nature of revelation_]\n\nOf the two terms, _revelation_ is broader than _inspiration_. Sometimes\nit is used collectively, to designate the truth revealed, but it more\nproperly describes the means or process whereby it is made apparent to\nthe human mind. It implies that truth is always existent, but only\ngradually recognized. Inspiration is one of the chief means whereby the\nhuman vision is clarified so as to perceive it. Natural phenomena,\nenvironment, and above all experience, are also mighty agents in making\nthe divine character and truth clear to the mind of man. The author of\nthe Epistle to the Hebrews declares, with true insight, that _God spoke\nin divers manners_. All the universe, all history, and all life reveal\nhim and his ultimate truths, for each is effective in opening the mental\nand spiritual eye of man to see the realm long awaiting him as\nconqueror.\n\n[Sidenote: _Man's role in the process of revelation_]\n\nFor countless ages electricity has inscribed its magic tracery on the\nstorm-cloud and performed its all-important functions in organic life,\nbut not until men's eyes were opened by experience and trained\nobservation to recognize its laws, was it practically applied to the\nneeds of civilization. Similarly, unchanging moral and spiritual laws\nhave existed through all time, but they have not become operative in\nhuman life until the eye of some seer is opened by a great experience,\nor under the direct influence of the Spirit of God he is led to see and\nproclaim them. Thus God is in all and reveals himself through all nature\nand life, but it is only through the mind and on the lips of his highest\ncreature, man, that truth is fully appreciated, formulated, and applied.\n\n[Sidenote: _The revelation recorded in the Bible_]\n\nIn the broader sense all revelation is divine, for it reveals God and\nhis laws; and yet it is obvious that there is a real difference between\nthe revelation recorded in a scientific book and that of the Bible. It\nis a difference both in subject-matter and in the ends to which the\ntruth thus made manifest shall be applied. The one relates to the\nobjective world, the world of things; the other relates to human\nbeliefs, emotions, and acts.\n\n[Sidenote: _Its breadth and gradualness_]\n\nMoreover, it is evident that the spiritual revelation which is in part\nrecorded in the Bible was not limited to the Israelitish race or to the\ntwelve centuries represented by the Old and New Testaments. The biblical\nwriters themselves assume this fact. According to the early Judean\nprophetic narratives, Enoch, who lived ages before Abraham and Moses,\nwas a worshipper of Jehovah (Gen. iv. 26). Cain and Abel are both\nrepresented in the familiar story of Genesis iv., as bringing their\nofferings to Jehovah. One of the chief teachings of the earliest stories\nin the Old Testament is that men from the first knew and worshipped God\nand were held responsible for their acts according to their moral\nenlightenment. History, science, and the Bible unite in testifying that\nthe revelation of spiritual truth to mankind was something gradual,\nprogressive, and cumulative; also that it is dependent upon the ability\nof men to receive it. This capacity of the individual to receive is,\nafter all, the determining factor in the process of divine revelation;\nfor God's truth and his desire to impart it are always the same. Hence,\nwhenever conditions favor, or national or private experiences clarify\nthe vision of a race or group of men, a revelation is assured.\n\n[Sidenote: _Antiquity of human civilization and religion_]\n\nIn the light of ancient history and the result of recent excavations it\nis possible, now as never before, to study the varied influences and\nforces employed by God in the past to open the spiritual eyes of mankind\nto see him and his truth. The geological evidence suggests that man, as\nman, has lived on this earth, fifty, perhaps one hundred thousand years.\nAnthropology, going farther back than history or primitive tradition,\ntraces the slow and painful stages by which early man learned his first\nlessons in civilization and religion. From the beginning, man's\ninstincts as a religious being have asserted themselves, crude though\ntheir expression was. The oldest mounds of Babylonia and Egypt contain\nruins of ancient temples, altars, and abundant evidence of the religious\nzeal of the peoples who once inhabited these lauds. The earliest\nexamples of human literature thus far discovered are largely religious\nin theme and spirit.\n\n[Sidenote: _Primitive unfolding of the innate religious instinct_]\n\nAll these testify that early man believed in a power or powers outside\nhimself, and that his chief passion was to know and do the will of his\ngod or gods. Jesus himself bore witness in the opening words of the\nprayer which he taught his disciples, that this is the essence of\nreligion. It was natural and inevitable that primitive man, with his\nnaive view of the universe, should believe not in one but in many forces\nor spirits, and that he should first enthrone the physical above the\nethical and spiritual. It is the instinctive tendency of the child\nto-day. The later identification of the divine powers with the sun, that\ngave light and fertility to the soil, or with the moon, that guided the\ncaravans by night over the arid deserts, or with the other heavenly\nbodies, that moved in majestic array across the midnight sky, was\nlikewise a natural step in the evolution of primitive belief.\n\n[Sidenote: _Reasons why Babylonia developed an early civilization_]\n\nCivilization and religion in antiquity developed, as a rule, side by\nside. The two great rivers, the Tigris and the Euphrates, commanding\nthe trade of the north and the south; proximity to the desert with its\ncaravans of traders going back and forth from the Euphrates to the Nile;\nthe rich alluvial soil, which supported a dense population when properly\ndrained and cultivated; and the necessity of developing in a higher\ndegree the arts of defence in order to maintain the much contested\nterritory,--these were a few of the many conditions that made ancient\nBabylonia one of the two earliest if not the oldest centre of human\ncivilization. The commercial habits and the abundance of the plastic\nclay, which could easily be moulded into tablets for the use of the\nscribe, also fostered the early development of the literary art. The\ndurability of the clay tablets and the enveloping and protecting\nqualities of the ruined mounds of ancient Babylonia have preserved in\na marvellous way its early literature. The result is that we can now\nstudy, on the basis of contemporary documents, this early and yet\nadvanced chapter in that divine revelation, the later culmination of\nwhich is recorded in the Bible.\n\n[Sidenote: _Progress during the period of city states_]\n\nIt begins as far back of Moses as he is removed from us in point of\ntime. Its political background at first is the little city states of\nBabylonia, each with its independent organization and its local schools\nof artists, whose products in many respects surpass anything that comes\nfrom the hands of later Semitic craftsmen. Each city had its temple, at\nwhich the patron god of the local tribe and district was worshipped. In\nsome places it was the moon god Sin, as at Haran and Ur beside the\ndesert; elsewhere, as at Nippur, Bel, or at Eridu near the Persian Gulf,\nEa, the god of the great deep, was revered. In the name of the local\ndeity offerings were brought, hymns were sung, and traditions were\ntreasured, which extolled his might. The life of these little city\nstates centred about the temple and its cult. To make it more glorious\nthe artisans vied with each other, and the kings made campaigns that\nthey might dedicate the spoils to the deity.\n\n[Sidenote: _The growth of extensive empires_]\n\nIn time, perhaps as early as 4000 B.C., certain more energetic and\nambitious kings  succeeded in conquering neighboring cities; they even\nbroadened their boundaries until they ruled over great empires extending\nto the Mediterranean on the west and the mountains of Elam on the east.\nIn the name of the local god, each went forth to fight, and to him was\nattributed the glory of the victory. Naturally, when the territory of a\ncity state grew into an empire, the god of that city was proclaimed and\nacknowledged as supreme throughout all the conquered territory. At the\nsame time the local deities of the conquered cities continued to be\nworshipped at their ancient sanctuaries, and many a conquering king won\nthe loyalty of his subjects by making a rich offering to the god and at\nthe temple of a vanquished foe.\n\n[Sidenote: _Its effect in developing the pantheon and popular theology_]\n\nThe logical and inevitable result of political union was the development\nof a pantheon, modelled after the imperial court, with the god of the\nvictorious city at its head and the leading deities of the other cities\nin subordinate positions. When, during the latter part of the third\nmillennium before Christ, Babylon's supremacy was permanently\nestablished under the rule of Hammurabi. Marduk, the god of that city,\nwas thus placed at the head of the Babylonian pantheon. The theologians\nof the day also recast and combined the ancient legends, as, for\nexample, those of the creation, so as to explain why he, one of the\nlater gods, was acknowledged by all as supreme. A relationship was also\ntraced between the leading gods, and their respective functions were\nclearly defined. Corresponding to each male deity was a female deity:\nthus, the consort of Marduk was Ishtar, while that of Bel was Belit.\nFurthermore, the ancient myths appear to have been, co\u00f6rdinated, so that\nfrom this time on Babylonian, theology presents a certain unity and\nsymmetry, although one is constantly reminded of the very different\nelements out of which it had been built up.\n\n[Sidenote: _Development of ethical standards and laws_]\n\nParallel to the evolution of Babylonian religion was that unfolding of\nethical ideals and laws which finds its noblest record and expression in\nthe remarkable code of Hammurabi (about 2250 B.C.). In its high sense of\njustice; in its regard for the rights of property and of individuals; in\nits attitude toward women, even though it comes from the ancient East;\nand above all in its protection of widows and orphans, this code marks\nalmost as high a stage in the revelation of what is right as the\nprimitive Old Testament laws, with which it has points of striking\nresemblance.\n\n[Sidenote: _A general comparison between the religions and laws of Egypt\nand Babylonia_]\n\nThe evolution of ancient Egyptian civilization and religion was parallel\nat almost every  stage with that of Babylonia, only in the dreamy land\nof the Nile the pantheon and the vast body of variant myths were never\nso thoroughly co\u00f6rdinated. The result is that its religion forever\nremains a labyrinth. Since all interest centred about the future life,\ninstead of commercial pursuits, there is no evidence that the Egyptians\never produced a legal code at all comparable with that of Hammurabi.\nThey did, however, develop a doctrine of sin which anticipates that of\nthe Hebrew prophets. While the Babylonians conceived of sin as simply\nthe failure to bring offerings, or to observe the demands of the ritual,\nor, in general, to pay proper homage to the gods, the Egyptians held\nthat each individual was answerable, not only to the state, but also to\nthe gods, for his every act and thought.\n\n[Sidenote: _Significance of this early religious progress_]\n\nIf they admitted of a comparison, it would be safe to say that the\nBabylonian religion and law in the days of Hammurabi were as far removed\nfrom the crude belief in spirits and the barbarous cults and practices\nof primitive man as the teachings of Jesus were from those of the kingly\nBabylonian lawgiver and his priestly advisers. Humanity's debt is\nexceedingly great to the thousands of devoted souls who, in ancient\nBabylonia and Egypt, according to their dim light, groped for God and\nthe right. In part they found what they sought, although they never\nceased to look through, a glass darkly.\n\n[Sidenote: _Its arrest and decline_]\n\nThe sad and significant fact is that from the days of Hammurabi to those\nof Nebuchadrezzar, Babylonian religion, law, and ethics almost entirely\nceased to develop. No other great kings with prophetic insight appear to\nhave arisen to hold up before the nation the principles of justice and\nmercy and true piety, The old superstitions and magic also continued in\nBabylonia as in Egypt to exercise more and more their baneful influence.\nSaddest of all the priesthood and ceremonialism, which had already\nreached a point of development commensurate and strikingly analogous to\nthat of later Judaism, became the dominant power in the state, and\ndefined religion not in terms of life and action, but of the ritual, and\nso constricted it that all true growth was impossible. Hence the\nreligions of the Babylonians and Egyptians perished, like many others,\nbecause they ceased to grow, and therefore degenerated into a mere\nworship of the letter rather than the spirit.\n\n\n\n\nIV\n\nTHE PLACE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT IN DIVINE REVELATION\n\n[Sidenote: _Advent of the Hebrews_]\n\nModern discovery and research have demonstrated that the truth revealed\nthrough the Babylonians and with less definiteness through the people of\nthe Nile was never entirely lost. Such a sad waste was out of accord\nwith the obvious principles of divine economy. As the icy chill of\nceremonialism seized decadent Babylonia and Egypt, there emerged from\nthe steppes south and east of Palestine a virile, ambitious group of\nnomads, who not only fell heir to that which was best in the revelation\nof the past, but also quickly took their place as the real spiritual\nleaders of the human race. Possibly their ancestors, like those of\nHammurabi, belonged to that wave of nomadic emigration which swept out\nof overpopulated northern Arabia about 2500 B.C., part of it to settle\nfinally in Babylonia and part in Palestine.\n\n[Sidenote: _Why were they the chosen people?_]\n\nWhatever be the exact date of their advent, the much mooted and more\nfundamental question at once presents itself, Why were the Hebrews \"the\nchosen people\"? It is safe to assert at once that this was not arbitrary\nnor without reason. Moreover, the choice was not that of a moment, but\ngradual. Rather the real question is, By what divine process were the\nIsraelites prepared to be the chosen people that their later prophets\nand the event of history declare them to be? Certain definite historical\nreasons at once suggest themselves; and these in turn throw new light\nupon the true relation of the Old Testament to divine revelation as a\nwhole.\n\n[Sidenote: _Their preparation to be the chosen people: genius for\nreligion_]\n\nThere is undoubtedly a basis for what Renan was pleased to call, \"the\nSemitic genius for religion.\" It is a truly significant fact that the\nthree great conquering religions of the world, Judaism, Christianity,\nand Mohammedanism, sprang from Semitic soil. To this might be added the\nreligion of Babylonia, which, was unquestionably the noblest of early\nantiquity. In general the Semitic mind is keen, alert, receptive, and\nintuitional rather than logical. Restless energy and the tendency to\nacquire have also tended to make them leaders in the widely different\nfields of commerce and religion. The patriarch Jacob is a remarkable\nexample of these combined qualities and results. By day he got the\nbetter of his kinsmen, and by night he wrestled with God. These combined\nand highly developed characteristics of mind and nature at least suggest\nwhy the Semites have furnished the greatest prophets and prophet nations\nfor the moulding of the faith of the world.\n\n[Sidenote: _Inheritance through their Arabian antecedents_]\n\nIn contrast with contemporary Semitic nations, and especially the highly\ncivilized Babylonians, the Hebrews were fortunate in their immediate\ninheritances through Arabian or Aramean ancestors. The wandering,\nnomadic life leaves no place for established sanctuaries, with their\nelaborate ceremonial customs and debasing institutions inherited from\nmore primitive ages. Instead, that life imposes limitations that make\nfor simplicity. The mysteries and constant dangers of the wild desert\nexistence also emphasize the constant necessity of divine help. The long\nmarches by night under the silent stars inspire awe and enforce\ncontemplation. The close unity of the tribe suggests the worship of one\ntribal god rather than many. From the desert the ancestors of the\nHebrews brought strong bodies, inured to hardship, and a grim austerity\nthat found frequent expression on the lips of their prophets and a\nresponse in the minds of the people, when luxury threatened to engulf\nthem. They also inherited from their desert days those democratic ideas\nand high ideals of individual liberty which, enabled Elijah and Isaiah\nto stand up add champion the rights of the people even though it\ninvolved a public denunciation of their kings.\n\n[Sidenote: _Contact with Babylonian civilization_]\n\nOn the other hand, the Israelites undoubtedly became in time the\ninheritors of the best in religion and law that had been attained by the\nolder Semitic races. Their late traditions trace back their ancestry to\nancient Babylonia. Already for long centuries, by conquest and by\ncommerce, the dominant civilization of the Euphrates valley had been\nregnant in the land of Canaan, The Tell-el-Amarna letters, written from\nPalestine in the fourteenth century, employ the Babylonian language and\nsystem of writing, and reveal a high Semitic civilization, closely\npatterned after that of Babylonia. When the Israelites settled in Canaan\nand began to intermarry and assimilate with the older inhabitants, as\nthe earliest Hebrew records plainly state (_cf_. Judg. I.), they found\nthere, among the Canaanites, established civil and religious\ninstitutions and traditions which were largely a reflection of those of\nBabylonia. Also, when in the eighth and seventh centuries Assyrian\narmies conquered Palestine, they brought Babylonian institutions,\ntraditions, and religious ideas. We know that during the reigns of Ahaz\nand Manasseh these threatened to displace those peculiar to the Hebrews.\nAgain, during the Babylonian exile the influence of the same powerful\ncivilization upon the thought and religion of Israel was also strongly\nfelt. Thus the opportunities, direct and indirect, for receiving from\nBabylonia much of the rich heritage that it held were many and varied.\n\n[Sidenote: _Heirs of the older Semitic civilizations_]\n\nCertain parts of the Old Testament itself testify that the wealth of\ntradition, of institutions, of laws, and religious ideas, gradually\ncommitted to the Semitic ancestors of the Hebrews and best preserved by\nthe Babylonians, was not lost, but, enriched and purified, has been\ntransmitted to us through its pages. A careful comparison of the\nbiblical and Babylonian accounts of the creation and the flood leaves\nlittle doubt that there is a close historical connection between these\naccounts. Investigation reveals in language, spirit, and form many\nanalogies between the laws of Hammurabi and those of the Old Testament\nwhich suggest at least an indirect influence. Many of the ceremonial\ninstitutions of later Judaism are almost identical with those of\nBabylonia. While it is exceedingly easy to over or under estimate this\ninfluence, it is a mistake to deny or ignore its deep significance.\n\n[Sidenote: _Recipients of all that was best in earlier revelation_]\n\nThus one of the chief elements in the providential training of the\nHebrews as the heralds and exponents of the most exalted religious and\nethical truths revealed before the advent of the Prophet of Nazareth was\nthe fact that they were the heirs and interpreters of the best that had\nbeen hitherto attained. Babylonia, Egypt, and later, Persia and Greece,\neach contributed their noblest beliefs and ideals. In the Israelites the\ndiverse streams of divine revelation converged. The result is that,\ninstead of many little rivulets, befouled by errors and superstitions,\nthrough their history there flowed a mighty stream, ever becoming\nbroader and deeper and clearer as it received fresh contributions from\nthe new fountains of purest revelation that opened in Hebrew soil.\n\n[Sidenote: _In close geographical relations to the earlier civilizations_]\n\nClear evidences of the divine purpose to be realized through the obscure\npeasant people who lived among the uplands of central Canaan are found\nin a study of the characteristics of the Old Testament world. It is\nindeed the earliest and one of the most significant chapters in divine\nrevelation. Most of its area is a barren wilderness, supporting only a\nsmall nomadic population. The three fertile spots are Babylonia, Canaan,\nand Egypt. The first and last are fitted by nature and situation to be\nthe seats of powerful civilizations, destined to reach out in every\ndirection. Canaan, on the contrary, is shut in, with no good harbors\nalong the Mediterranean; and its largest river system leads to the Dead\nSea, far below the surface of the ocean,--an effective negation to all\ncommerce. Although thus shut in by itself, Canaan lies on the isthmus of\nfertile land that connects the great empires of the Nile and the\nEuphrates. On the east and south it is always subject to the influences\nand waves of immigration, that come from the Arabian desert. It\nattracted from their nomadic life the ancestors of the Israelites, and\nduring their early period of development gave them a secluded home. When\nthey were ready to learn the larger lessons in the stream of life, Egypt\nand the great empires of the Tigris and Euphrates valley contended for\nthem, conquered and ultimately scattered them throughout the then known\nworld. While their conquerors, Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Persia,\nGreece, and Rome, the greatest powers of the ancient world, took from\nthem their gold and their freedom, from the same conquerors they appear\nto have received the infinitely more precious treasures of tradition and\nthought.\n\n[Sidenote: _Trained by remarkable national experience_]\n\nGreat as was their heritage from the past, the truth that came through\nthe Hebrews themselves constitutes by far the greatest and most\nsignificant part of that revelation which the Old Testament records.\nTheir history suggests the ways in which, Jehovah opened the spiritual\neyes of the people. From the beginning to the present day it has been\ncharacterized by a series of crises unparalleled in the life of any\nother race. Experiences, intense and often superlatively painful, have\ncome to them in rapid succession, forcing them to think and develop. The\nlittle street Arab, alert, resourceful, uncanny in his prematurity, is a\nmodern illustration of what grim necessity and experience can produce.\nIt was in the school supremely adapted to divine ends that Jehovah,\ntrained his people to be his spokesmen to the world.\n\n[Sidenote: _Guided by unique spiritual teachers_]\n\nOther peoples, however, had their crises and yet had no such message as\ndid the Israelites. What made the crises in the history of the\nIsraelites richly fruitful in ethical and spiritual truth was the\npresence within their midst of certain devoted, responsive teachers, and\nespecially the prophets, who guided them in their time of peril,\ninterpreted its significance, and appealed to the awakened conscience of\nthe nation. Like begets like. At the beginning of Israel's history\nstands the great prophet Moses, and during the long centuries that\nfollowed the voice of the prophets was rarely hushed.\n\n[Sidenote: _Taught by inspired prophets_]\n\nIn seeking the ultimate answer to our question, How were the Israelites\nprepared to be the chosen people, we are confronted by a miracle that\nbaffles our power to analyze: it is the supreme fact that the Spirit of\nthe Almighty touched the spirit of certain men in ancient Israel so that\nthey became seers and prophets. This is their own testimony, and their\ndeeds and words amply confirm it. The experiences of men to-day also\ndemonstrate its possibility. Indeed it is not surprising, but most\nnatural, that the one supreme Personality in the universe should reveal\nhimself to and through human minds, and that the most enlightened men of\nthe most spiritually enlightened race should be the recipients of the\nfullest and most perfect revelation. It is the truth that they thus\nperceived, and then proclaimed by word and deed and pen, that completed\nthe preparation of the chosen people, for it was none other than the\npossession of a unique spiritual message that constituted the essence of\ntheir choice. Furthermore, as the greatest of the later prophets\ndeclares (Is. xl.-lv.), that divine choice did not mean that they were\nto be the recipients of exceptional favors, but rather that they were\ncalled to service. By the patient enduring of suffering and by voluntary\nself-sacrifice they were to perfect the revelation of God's character\nand will in the life of humanity.\n\n[Sidenote: _Jesus' relation to the Old Testament_]\n\nThe Old Testament, therefore, is the final record of a revelation\nextending through thousands of years, finding at last its most exalted\nexpression in the messages of the Hebrew prophets, and its clearest\nreflection in the thoughts and experiences of the priests, sages, and\npsalmists of ancient Israel. In varied literary forms and by many\ndifferent writers the best fruits of that revelation have been\npreserved. Ancient traditions, songs, proverbs, laws, historical\nnarratives, prophecies, and psalms, each present their precious truth.\nThe Israelitish race, however, never fully completed the work to which\nit was called. A master was needed to distinguish between the essential\nand the non-essential, to simplify and unify the teachings of the Old\nTestament as a whole, and to apply them personally to individual life, A\nman was demanded to realize fully in his own character the highest\nideals of this ancient revelation. A divinely gifted prophet was\nrequired to perfect man's knowledge, and to bring him into natural,\nharmonious relations with his Eternal Father. The world awaited the\nadvent of a Messiah who would establish, on the everlasting foundations\nof justice and truth and love, the universal kingdom of God. These\nsupreme needs were met in fullest measure by the Master, the perfect\nMan, the Prophet, and the Messiah, whose work the New Testament records.\n\n[Sidenote: _Points of likeness and contact between the two Testaments_]\n\nWhile there are many superficial points of difference in language,\nliterary form, background, and point of view between the Old and the New\nTestaments, these are insignificant in comparison with the essential\npoints of likeness and contact. Each Testament is but a different\nchapter in the history of the same divine revelation. The one is\nthe foundation on which the other is built. The writers of the New\nconstantly assume the historical facts, the institutions, and the\nteachings of the Old. Although in Greek garb, their language and idioms\nare also those of the Old. On many themes, as, for example, man's duty\nto society, Jesus said little, for the teachers of his race had fully\ndeveloped them and there was little to add. Repeatedly by word and act\nhe declared that he came not to destroy the older teachings, but simply\nto bring them to full perfection. The Old Testament also tells of\nthe long years of preparation and of the earnest expectations of the\nIsraelitish race; the New records a fulfilment far transcending the\nmost exalted hopes of Hebrew seers. The same God reveals himself through\nboth Testaments. One progressively unfolding system of religious\nteachings, one message of love, and one divine purpose bind both\ntogether with bonds that no generation or church can break.\n\n\n\n\nV\n\nTHE INFLUENCES THAT PRODUCED THE NEW TESTAMENT\n\n[Sidenote: _Importance of the study of origins_]\n\nThe present age is supremely interested in origins. Not until we have\ntraced the genesis and earliest unfolding of an institution or an idea\nor a literature do we feel that we really understand and appreciate it.\nFamiliarity with that which is noble breeds not contempt but reverence,\nand intelligent devotion. Acquaintance with the origin and history of a\nbook is essential to its true interpretation. Therefore it is fortunate\nthat modern discovery and research have thrown so much light upon the\norigin of both the Old and the New Testaments.\n\n[Sidenote: _The growing recognition that the natural is divine_]\n\nEqually fortunate is it that we are also learning to appreciate the\nsublimity and divinity of the natural. The universe and organic life are\nno less wonderful and awe-inspiring because, distinguishing some of the\nnatural laws that govern their evolution, we have abandoned the\ngrotesque theories held by primitive men. Similarly we do not to-day\ndemand, as did our forefathers, a supernatural origin for our sacred\nbooks before we are ready to revere and obey their commands. With\ngreater insight we now can heartily sing, \"God moves in a natural way\nhis wonders to perform.\" Our ability to trace the historical influences\nthrough which he brought into being and shaped the two Testaments and\ngave them their present position in the life of humanity does not in a\nthoughtful mind obscure, but rather reveals the more clearly, their\ndivine origin and authority.\n\n[Sidenote: _Value of the comparative study of the origin of both\nTestaments_]\n\nThrough contemporary writings and the results of modern biblical\nresearch it is possible to study definitely the origin of the various\nNew Testament books and to follow the different stages in their growth\ninto a canon. This familiar chapter in the history of the Bible is\nrichly suggestive, because of the clear light which it sheds upon the\nmore complex and obscure genesis and later development of the Old\nTestament. It will be profitable, therefore, to review it in outline,\nnot only because of its own importance, but also as an introduction to\nthe study of the influences that produced the older Scriptures; for\nalmost every fact that will be noted in connection with the origin and\nliterary history of the New has its close analogy in the growth of the\nOld Testament.\n\n[Sidenote: _The threefold grouping of the New Testament books_]\n\nWe find that as they are at present arranged,  the books of the New\nTestament are divided into three distinct classes. The first group\nincludes the historical books: the Gospels and Acts; the second, the\nEpistles--the longer, like the letters to the Romans and Corinthians,\nbeing placed first and the shorter at the end; while the third group\ncontains but one book, known as the Apocalypse or Revelation. The\ngeneral arrangement is clearly according to subject-matter, not\naccording to date of authorship; the order of the groups represent\ndifferent stages in the process of canonization.\n\n[Sidenote: _Why the Gospels are not the earliest_]\n\nTheir position as well as the themes which they treat suggest that the\nGospels were the first to be written. It is, however, a self-evident\nfact that a book was not written--at least not in antiquity, when the\nmaking of books was both laborious and expensive--unless a real need for\nit was felt. If we go back, and live for a moment in imagination among\nthe band of followers which Jesus left behind at his death, we see\nclearly that while the early Christian Church was limited to Palestine,\nand a large company of disciples, who had often themselves seen and\nheard the Christ, lived to tell by word of mouth the story of his life\nand teachings, no one desired a written record. It is not surprising,\ntherefore, that the oldest books in the New Testament are not the\nGospels. The exigencies of time and space and the burning zeal of the\napostles for the churches of their planting apparently produced the\nearliest Christian writings.\n\n[Sidenote: _Origin of the earliest epistles_]\n\nIn his second missionary journey Paul preached for a time at\nThessalonica, winning to faith in the Christ a small mixed company of\nJews and proselyte Greeks. His success aroused the bitter opposition of\nthe narrower Jews, who raised a mob and drove him from the city before\nhis work was completed. But the seed which he had planted continued to\ngrow. Naturally he was eager to return to the infant church. Twice he\nplanned to visit it, but was prevented. In his intense desire to help\nthe brave Christians of Thessalonica, he sent Timothy to inquire\nregarding their welfare and to encourage them. When about 50 A.D.\nTimothy reported to Paul at Corinth, the apostle wrote at once to the\nlittle church at Thessalonica a letter of commendation, encouragement,\nand counsel, which we know to-day as First Thessalonians and which is\nprobably one of the oldest writings in our New Testament, Galatians\nperhaps being the earliest.\n\n[Sidenote: _Paul's later epistles_]\n\nAnother letter (II Thess.) soon followed, giving more detailed advice.\nAs the field of Paul's activity broadened, he was obliged more and more\nto depend upon letters, since he could not in person visit the churches\nwhich he had planted. Questions of doctrine as well as of practice which\nperplexed the different churches were treated in these epistles. To\ncertain of his assistants, like Timothy, he wrote dealing with their\npersonal problems. Frankly, forcibly, and feelingly Paul poured out in\nthese letters the wealth of his personal and soul life. They reveal his\nfaith in the making as well as his mature teachings. Since he was\ndealing with definite conditions in the communities to which he wrote,\nhis letters are also invaluable contemporary records of the growth and\nhistory of the early Christian church. Thus between 30 and 60 A.D.,\nduring the period of his greatest activity, certainly ten, and probably\nthirteen, of our twenty-seven New Testament books came from the burning\nheart of the apostle to the Gentiles.\n\n[Sidenote: _Growth of the other epistles_]\n\nSimilar needs impelled other apostles and early Christian teachers to\nwrite on the same themes with the same immediate purpose as did Paul.\nThe result is a series of epistles, associated with the names of James,\nPeter, John, and Jude. In some, like Third John, the personal element is\npredominant; in others, the didactic, as, for example, the Epistle of\nJames.\n\n[Sidenote: _Purpose of the Epistle to the Hebrews_]\n\nA somewhat different type of literature is represented by the Epistle to\nthe Hebrews. Its form is that of a letter, and it was without doubt\noriginally addressed to a local church or churches by a writer whose\nname has ever since been a fertile source of conjecture. The only fact\ndefinitely established is that Paul did not write it. It is essentially\na combination of argument, doctrine, and exhortation. The aim is\napologetic as well as practical. Most of Paul's letters were written as\nthe thoughts, which he wished to communicate to those to whom he wrote,\ncame to his mind; but in the Epistle to the Hebrews the author evidently\nfollows a carefully elaborated plan. The argument is cumulative. The\nthesis is that Christ, superior to all earlier teachers of his race, is\nthe perfect Mediator of Salvation.\n\n[Sidenote: _Value of the Epistles_]\n\nThus the Epistles, originally personal notes of encouragement and\nwarning, growing sometimes into more elaborate treatises, were made the\nmeans whereby the early Christian teachers imparted their doctrines to\nconstantly widening groups of readers. At best they were regarded simply\nas inferior substitutes for the personal presence and spoken words of\ntheir authors. Like the Old Testament books, their authority lies in the\nfact that they faithfully reflect, in part at least, the greater\nrevelation coming through the lives and minds of the early apostles.\n\n[Sidenote: _The larger group_]\n\nAs is well known, the twenty-one letters in our New Testament were\nselected from a far larger collection of epistles, some of which were\nearly lost, while others, like the Epistles of Barnabas and Polycarp and\nClement, were preserved to share with those later accepted as canonical,\nthe study and veneration of the primitive Church.\n\n[Sidenote: _Influences that gave rise to the earliest Gospels_]\n\nThe influences which originally produced the Gospels and Acts were very\ndifferent from those which called forth the Epistles. The natural\npreference of the early Christians for the spoken word explains why we\ndo not possess to-day a single written sentence in the Gospels which we\ncan with absolute assurance assign to the first quarter-century\nfollowing the death of Jesus. Two influences, however, in time led\ncertain writers to record his early life and teachings. The one was that\ndeath was rapidly thinning the ranks of those who could say, _I saw and\nheard_; the other was the spread of Christianity beyond the bounds of\nJudaism and Palestine, and the resulting need for detailed records felt\nby those Christians who had never visited Palestine and who had learned\nfrom the lips of apostles only the barest facts regarding the life of\nthe Christ.\n\n[Sidenote: _Testimony of Luke's Gospel_]\n\nThe opening verses of Luke's Gospel are richly suggestive of the origin\nand growth of the historical books of the New Testament:\n\nForasmuch as many have taken in hand to draw up a narrative concerning\nthose matters which have been fulfilled among us, even as they delivered\nthem unto us,--they who from the beginning were eye-witnesses and\nministers of the word, it seemed good to me also, having traced the\ncourse of all things accurately from the first, to write unto thee in\norder, most excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the certainty\nconcerning the things wherein thou wast instructed.\n\nThis prologue states that many shorter Gospels had previously been\nwritten, not by eye-witnesses, but by men who had listened to those who\nhad themselves seen. Luke leaves his readers to infer that he also drew\na large number of his facts from these earlier sources as well as from\nthe testimony of eye-witnesses. The implication of the prologue is that\nhe himself was entirely dependent upon written and oral sources for his\ndata. This is confirmed by the testimony of the _Muratorian Fragment_:\n\nLuke the physician, after the ascension of Christ, when Paul had taken\nhim, as it were, as a follower zealous of the right, wrote the gospel\nbook according to Luke in his own name, as is believed. Nevertheless he\nhad not himself seen the Lord in the flesh, and, accordingly, going back\nas far as he could obtain information, he began his narrative with the\nbirth of John.\n\nHis many literal quotations from it and the fact that he makes it the\nframework of his own, indicate that Mark's Gospel was one of those\nearlier attempts to which he refers.\n\n[Sidenote: _Luke's motive in writing_]\n\nThe motive which influenced Luke to write is clearly stated. It was to\nprepare a comprehensive, accurate, and orderly account of the facts in\nregard to the life of Jesus for his Greek friend Theophilus, who had\nalready been partially instructed in the same. His Gospel confirms the\nimplications of the prologue. It is the longest and most carefully\narranged of all the Gospels. The distinctively Jewish ideas or\ninstitutions which are prominent in Matthew are omitted or else\nexplained; hence there is nothing which would prove unintelligible to a\nGreek. The book of the Acts of the Apostles, dedicated to the same\npatron, is virtually a continuation of the third Gospel, tracing, in a\nmore or less fragmentary manner, the history and growth, of the early\nChristian Church, and especially the work of Paul.\n\n[Sidenote: _Purpose of Mark's Gospel_]\n\nVery similar influences called forth the shortest and undoubtedly the\noldest of the four Gospels, the book of Mark. The testimony of the\ncontents confirms in general the early statement of Papias and other\nChristian Fathers that it was written at Rome by John Mark, the disciple\nand interpreter of the apostle Peter, after the death of his teacher.\nThe absence of many Old Testament quotations, the careful explanation of\nall Jewish and Palestinian references which would not be intelligible to\na foreigner, the presence of certain Latin words, and many other\nindications, all tend to establish the conclusion that it was written\nfor the Gentile and Jewish Christians, probably at Rome, and that its\npurpose was simply historical.\n\n[Sidenote: _The two-fold purpose of the Gospel of Matthew_]\n\nThe memoir of Jesus, which we know as the Gospel of Matthew, is from the\nhand of a Jewish Christian and, as is shown by the amount of material\ndrawn from Mark's Gospel, must be placed at a later date. The great\nnumber of quotations from the Old Testament, the interest in tracing the\nfulfilment of the Messianic predictions, and the distinctively Jewish-\nChristian point of view and method of interpretation, indicate clearly\nthat he wrote not with Gentile but Jewish Christians in mind.\nNevertheless, like that of Mark and Luke, his purpose was primarily to\npresent a faithful and, as far as his sources permitted, detailed\npicture of the life and teachings of Jesus. His arrangement of his\nmaterial appears, however, to be logical rather than purely\nchronological. The different sections and the individual incidents and\nteachings each contribute to the great argument of the book, namely,\nthat Jesus was the true Messiah of the Jews; that the Jews, since they\nrejected him, forfeited their birthright; and that his kingdom,\nfulfilling and inheriting the Old Testament promises, has become a\nuniversal kingdom, open to all races and freed from all Jewish bonds.\n[Footnote: Cf. e.g., x. 5, 6; xv. 24; viii. 11, 12; xii. 38-45; xxi. 42,\n43; xxii. 7; xxiii. 13, 36, 38; xxiv. 2; xxviii. 19] This suggests that\nthe First Gospel represents a more mature stage in the thought of the\nearly Church than Mark and Luke.\n\n[Sidenote: _Origin of Matthew's Sayings of Jesus_]\n\nIts title and the fact that the Church Fathers constantly connect it\nwith Matthew, the publican, and later apostle is explained by the\nstatement of Papias, quoted by Eusebius:\n\nMatthew accordingly composed the oracles in the Hebrew dialect, and\neach one interpreted them as he was able (H.E., iii. 39). These oracles\nevidently consisted of a written collection of the sayings of Jesus.\nSince they were largely if not entirely included in our First Gospel,\nIt was therefore known as The _Gospel of Matthew_. There is no evidence\nthat the original Matthew's _Sayings of Jesus_ contained definite\nnarrative material. The fact that the First Gospel draws so largely from\nMark for its historical data would indicate that this was not supplied\nby its main source. The _Sayings of Jesus_ was probably the oldest\nwritten record of the work of Jesus, for, while oral tradition, easily\nremembers incidents, disconnected teachings are not so readily preserved\nby the memory. Their transcendent importance would also furnish a\nstrong incentive to use the pen. It was natural also that, of all the\ndisciples, the ex-customs officer of Capernaum should be the one to\nundertake this transcendently important task.\n\n[Sidenote: _Aim of the The Fourth Gospel_]\n\nThe Fourth is clearly the latest of the Gospels, for it does not attempt\nfully to reproduce the facts presented in the other three, but assumes\ntheir existence. Its doctrines are also more fully developed, and its\naim is not simply the giving of historical facts and teachings, but\nalso, as it clearly states, that those reading it _might believe that\nJesus was the Christ, the son of God, and that believing they might have\nlife in his name_ (xx. 31). The motive that produced it was, therefore,\napologetic and evangelical rather than merely historical.\n\n[Sidenote: _Review of growth of the Gospels_]\n\nA detailed comparison of the differences between the Gospels, as well as\nof their many points of likeness which often extend to exact verbal\nagreement, furnishes the data for reconstructing their history. In\ngeneral the resulting conclusions are in perfect harmony with the\ntestimony of the Church Fathers. Mark, the shortest and more\ndistinctively narrative Gospel, is clearly the oldest of the four.\nPossibly it was originally intended to be the supplement of the other\nearly source, Matthew's _Sayings of Jesus_, now known only through\nquotations. These two earliest known Christian records of the work of\nthe Master in their original form were the chief sources quoted in the\nFirst and Third Gospels. So largely is Mark thus reproduced that, if\nlost, it would be possible from these to restore the book with the\nexception of only a few verses. But in addition, Matthew and Luke each\nhave material peculiar to themselves, suggesting other independent\nwritten as well as oral sources. To such shorter written Gospels, and\nalso to the oral testimony of eyewitnesses, Luke refers in his prologue.\nIn the Fourth Gospel, the doctrinal motive already apparent in Matthew,\nand prominent in the Church at the beginning of the second Christian\ncentury, takes the precedence of the merely historical. A distinct\nsource, the personal observation of the beloved disciple, probably also\nfurnishes the majority of the illustrations which are here so\neffectively arrayed.\n\n[Sidenote: _Influences that produced the apocalypses_]\n\nMore complex were the influences which produced the single example of\nthe third type of New Testament literature,--the Apocalypse, or Book of\nRevelation. The so-called apocalyptic type of literature was a\ncharacteristic product of later Judaism. The Book of Daniel is the most\nfamiliar example. Although in the age of scribism the voice of the\nprophets was regarded as silent, and the only authority recognized was\nthat of the past, the popular Messianic hopes of the people continued to\nfind expression anonymously in the form of apocalypses. In the periods\nof their greatest distress Jews and Christians found encouragement and\ninspiration in the pictures of the future. Since the present situation\nwas so hopeless, they looked for a supernatural transformation, which\nwould result in the triumph of the right and the establishment of the\nrule of the Messiah. Underlying all the apocalypses is the eternal truth\nvoiced by the poet: \"God's in his heaven and all's right with the\nworld.\"\n\n[Sidenote: _Origin of the Book of Revelation_]\n\nThe immediate historical background of the Apocalypse is the bitter\nstruggle between Christianity and heathenism. Rome has become _drunk\nwith the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs of Jesus_\n(xvii. 6). The contest centres about the worship of the beast,--that\nis, Caesar. The book possibly includes older apocalypses which reflect\nearlier conflicts, but in its present form it apparently comes from\nthe closing years of Domitian's reign. The obvious aim of its Jewish\nChristian writer was to encourage his readers by glowing pictures of\nthe coming victory of the Lamb, and thus to steel them for unfaltering\nresistance to the assaults of heathenism. The purpose which actuated the\nwriter was therefore in certain respects the same as that which led Paul\nto write his letter to the persecuted church of Thessalonica, although\nthe form in which that purpose was realized was fundamentally different.\n\n[Sidenote: _The literary activity of the first four centuries_]\n\nMany other apocalypses were written by the early Christians. The one\nrecently discovered and associated with the name of Peter is perhaps the\nmost important. Thus, the second half of the first century after the\ndeath of Jesus witnessed the birth of a large Christian literature,\nconsisting of epistles, gospels, and apocalypses. The work of the next\nthree centuries was the appreciation and the selection of the books\nwhich, to-day constitute our New Testament. The influences which led\nto this consummation may be followed almost as clearly as those which\nproduced the individual books.\n\n[Sidenote: _Influences that led to the canonization of the Gospels_]\n\nEarly in the second century the motives which had originally led certain\nChristians to write the four Gospels induced the Church to regard those\nbooks as the most authentic, and therefore authoritative, records of the\nlife and teachings of the Master. We have no distinctive history of the\nprocess. It was gradual, and probably almost unconscious. The fact that\nthree of the Gospels were associated with the names of apostles and the\nother with Luke, the faithful companion of Paul, undoubtedly tended to\nestablish their authority; but the chief canonizing influence was the\nneed of such records for private and public reading. The production,\nearly in the second century, of spurious gospels, like the Gospel of\nMarcion, written to furnish a literary basis for certain heretical\ndoctrines, also the desire of the Church Fathers to have records to\nwhich they could appeal as authoritative hastened the formation of the\nfirst New Testament canon. The use of the Gospels in the services of the\nchurch, which probably began before the close of the first Christian\ncentury, by degrees gave them an authority equal to that of the Old\nTestament Scriptures. The earliest canon consisted simply of these four\nbooks. They seem to have been universally accepted by the Western Church\nby the middle of the second century. About 152 A.D. Justin Martyr, in\nproving his positions, refers to the _Memoirs of the Apostles compiled\nby Christ's apostles and those who associated with them_, and during the\nsame decade his pupil Tatian made his _Diatessaron_ by combining our\npresent four Gospels.\n\n[Sidenote: _The second edition of the New Testament_]\n\nMeantime the natural desire to supplement the teachings of Jesus by\nthose of the Apostles led the Church to single out certain of the\nepistles and associate them with the Gospels. Already in the first\ncentury the apostolic epistles and traditions were cherished by the\nindividual churches to which they had been first directed. In time,\nhowever, the need for a written record of the apostolic teachings and\nwork became widely felt. Hence, by the end of the second century, Acts\nand the thirteen Pauline epistles, First Peter, First John, and the\nApocalypse, were by common consent placed side by side with the Gospels,\nat least by the leaders of the Western Church.\n\n[Sidenote: _The disputed books_]\n\nRegarding the authority of the remaining New Testament books, Hebrews,\nJames, First and Second John, and Jude, opinion long remained undecided.\nConcerning them an earnest discussion was carried on for the next two\ncenturies. By certain leaders in the Church they were regarded as\nauthoritative, while elsewhere and at different periods, other books,\nlike the Gospel to the Hebrews, the Epistle of Barnabas, Clement's\nEpistle to the Corinthians, the Shepherd of Hermas, and the Apocalypse\nof Peter, were included in the canon and even given the priority over\nthe disputed books later included in our New Testament.\n\n[Sidenote: _Final completion of the New Testament canon_]\n\nThe final decision represents the result of an open and prolonged and\nyet quiet consideration of the merits of each book and of its claims to\napostolic authority. The ablest scholars of the early Christian Church\ndevoted their best energies to the problem. Gradually, thoughtfully,\nprayerfully, and by testing them in the laboratory of experience, the\nChristian world separated the twenty-seven books which we find to-day\nin our New Testament from the much larger heritage of kindred writings\nwhich come from the early Christian centuries. Time and later\nconsideration have fully approved the selection and confirmed the belief\nthat through the minds of consecrated men God was realizing his purpose\nfor mankind. As is well known, at the Council of Carthage, in 397 A.D.,\nthe Western world at last formally accepted them, although the Syrian\nchurches continued for centuries to retain a somewhat different canon.\n\n[Sidenote: _Conclusions from this study of the influences that produced\nthe New Testament_]\n\nThis brief historical study of the origin of our New Testament has\ndemonstrated twelve significant facts: (1) That the original authors of\nthe different books never suspected that their writings would have the\nuniversal value and authority which they now rightfully enjoy. (2) That\nthey at first regarded them as merely an imperfect substitute for verbal\nteaching and personal testimony. (3) That in each case they had definite\nindividuals and conditions in mind. (4) That the needs of the rapidly\ngrowing Church and the varied and trying experiences through which it\npassed were all potent factors in influencing the authors of the New\nTestament to write. (5) That certain books, especially the historical,\nlike Luke and Matthew, are composite, consisting of material taken\nbodily from older documents, like Matthew's _Sayings of Jesus_ and the\noriginal narrative of Mark. (6) That our New Testament books are only\na part of a much larger early Christian literature. (7) That they are\nunquestionably, however, the most valuable and representative writings\nof that larger literature. (8) That they were only gradually selected\nand ascribed a value and authority equal to that of the Old Testament\nwritings. (9) That there were three distinct stages in the formation\nof the New Testament canon: the gospels were first recognized as\nauthorative; then Acts, the Apostolic Epistles, and the Apocalypse; and\nlast of all, the complete canon. (10) That the canon was formed as a\nresult of the need felt by later generations, in connection with their\nstudy and worship, for reliable records of the history and teachings of\nChristianity. (11) That the principles of selection depended ultimately\nupon the intrinsic character of the books themselves and the authority\nascribed to their reputed authors. (12) That the process of selection\ncontinued for fully three centuries, and that the results represent the\nthoughtful, enlightened judgment of thousands of devoted Christians.\nThus through definite historical forces and the minds and wills of\nmen, the Eternal Father gradually perfected the record of his supreme\nrevelation, to humanity.\n\n\n\n\nVI\n\nTHE GROWTH OF THE OLD TESTAMENT PROPHETIC HISTORIES\n\n[Sidenote: _Analogies between the influences that produced the two\nTestaments_]\n\nVery similar influences were at work in producing and shaping both the\nOld and the New Testaments; only in the history of the older Scriptures\nstill other forces can be distinguished. Moreover, the Old Testament\ncontains a much greater variety of literature. It is also significant\nthat, while some of the New Testament books began to be canonized less\nthan a century after they were written, there is clear evidence that\nmany of the Old Testament writings were in existence several centuries\nbefore they were gathered together into a canon and thus crystallized\ninto their final form. The inevitable result is that they bear the marks\nof much more elaborate editorial revision than those of the New. It is,\nhowever, not the aim of the present work to trace this complex process\nof revision in detail, nor to give the cumulative evidence and the many\ndata and reasons that lead to each conclusion. These can be studied in\nany modern Old Testament introduction or in the volumes of the present\nwriter's _Student's Old Testament_.\n\n[Sidenote: _The present classification of the Old Testament books_]\n\nIn their present form, the books of the Old Testament, like those of the\nNew, fall into three classes. The first includes the historical books.\nIn the Old, corresponding to the four Gospels and Acts of the New, are\nfound the books from Genesis through Esther. Next in order, in the Old,\nstand the poetical books, from Job through the Song of Songs, with which\nthe New Testament has no analogy except the liturgical hymns connected\nwith the nativity, preserved in the opening chapters of Matthew and\nLuke. The third group in the Old Testament includes the prophecies from\nIsaiah through Malachi.\n\n[Sidenote: _Close correspondence between the Old Testament prophecies and\nthe New Testament apocalypses and epistles_]\n\nOne book in this group, Daniel, and portions of Ezekiel and Joel, are\nanalogous to the New Testament Apocalypse, but otherwise the prophetic\nbooks correspond closely in character and contents to the epistles of\nthe New. Both are direct messages to contemporaries of the prophets and\napostles, and both deal with then existing conditions. Both consist of\npractical warnings, exhortations, advice, and encouragement. The form is\nsimply incidental. The prophets of Jehovah preached, and then they or\ntheir disciples wrote down the words which they had addressed to their\ncountrymen. When they could not reach with their voices all in whom\nthey were interested, the prophets, like the apostles, committed their\nteachings to writing and sent them forth as tracts (_cf_. Jer. xxxvi.).\nAt other times, when they could not go in person, they wrote letters.\nThus, for example, the twenty-ninth chapter of the prophecy of Jeremiah\nopens with the interesting superscription:\n\nNow these are the words of the letter that Jeremiah the prophet sent\nfrom Jerusalem unto the residue of the elders of the captivity, and\nto the priests, and to the prophets, and to all the people, whom\nNebuchadrezzar had carried away captive from Jerusalem to Babylon; by\nthe hand of Elasah the son of Shaphan, and Gemariah the son of Hilkiah,\nwhom Zedekiah king of Judah sent unto Babylon to Nebuchadrezzar.\n\nIf it were not for this superscription, no one would suspect from the\nnature of the letter which follows that it was anything other than a\nregular spoken or written prophecy. Its contents and spirit are exactly\nparallel to those of Paul's epistles. Undoubtedly many prophecies were\nnever delivered orally, but were originally written like Paul's Epistle\nto the Ephesians, and sent out as circular letters. The Babylonian\nexile scattered the Jews so widely that the exilic and post-exilic\nprophets depended almost entirely upon this method of reaching their\ncountrymen and thus became writers of epistles.\n\n[Sidenote: _The oldest literature poetry_]\n\nLike the Epistles in the New, certain of the prophecies,--as, for\nexample, those of Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah,--are among the earliest\nwritings of the Old Testament. But in the light of modern biblical\nstudy, it has become apparent that prose was not the earliest form of\nexpression among the Hebrews, In this respect their literary history\nis parallel with that of other early peoples; for first they treasured\ntheir thought in heroic song and ballad. While they were nomads,\nwandering in the desert, and also while they were struggling for the\npossession of Canaan, they had little time or motive for cultivating the\nliterary art. The popular songs which were sung beside the camp-fires,\nat the recurring festivals, and as the Hebrews advanced in battle\nagainst their foes, were the earliest records of their past. There is\nevidence that many of the primitive narratives now found in the opening\nchapters of Genesis were also once current in poetical form. In some\ncases the poetic structure has been preserved.\n\n[Sidenote: _Israel's early song-books_]\n\nThe earliest collections of writings referred to in the Old Testament\nbear the suggestive titles, _The Book of the Upright_ (i.e., Israel),\nand, _The Book of the Wars of Jehovah_. From the quotations which we\nhave from them it is clear that they consisted of collections of songs,\nrecounting the exploits of Israel's heroes and the signal victories of\nthe race.\n\n[Sidenote: _The Song of Deborah_]\n\nThat stirring paean of victory known as the Song of Deborah was perhaps\nonce found in the Book of the Wars of Jehovah. It is one of the oldest\npieces of literature in the Old Testament, and breathes the heroic\nspirit of the primitive age from which it comes. Through the eyes of the\npoet one views the different scenes in the mighty conflict. [Footnote:\nThe translation is from \"The Student's Old Testament,\" Vol. I., pp.\n320-323.]\n\n[Sidenote: _Exordium_]\n\n  That the leaders took the lead in Israel,\n  That the people volunteered readily,\n  Bless Jehovah!\n  Hear, O kings,\n  Give ear, O rulers.\n  I myself will sing to Jehovah,\n  I will sing praise to Jehovah, the God of Israel.\n\n[Sidenote: _Advent of Jehovah_]\n\n  Jehovah, when thou wentest forth from Seir,\n  When thou marchest from the land of Edom,\n  The earth trembled, the heavens also dripped,\n  Yea, the clouds dropped water.\n  The mountains quaked before Jehovah,\n  Yon Sinai before Jehovah, the God of Israel.\n\n[Sidenote: _Conditions before the war_]\n\n  In the days of Shamgar the son of Anath,\n  In the days of Jael, the highways ceased to be used,\n  And travellers walked by round-about paths.\n  The rulers ceased in Israel, they ceased,\n  Until than didst arise, Deborah,\n  Until thou didst arise a mother in Israel.\n\n         *       *       *       *       *\n\n[Sidenote: _The rally about Deborah and Barak_]\n\n  Then the people of Jehovah went down to the gates, crying,\n  \"Arise, arise, Deborah,\n  Arise, arise, strike up the song!\n  Arise Barak, and take thy captives, thou son of Abinoam!\"\n  So a remnant went down against the powerful,\n  The people of Jehovah went down against the mighty,\n  From Ephraim they rushed forth into the valley,\n  Thy brother Benjamin among thy peoples,\n  From Machir went down, commanders,\n  And from Zebulun those who carry the marshal's staff.\n  And the princes of Issachar were with Deborah;\n  And Napthali was even so with Barak,\n  Into the valley they rushed forth at his back.\n\n[Sidenote: _The cowards who remained at home_]\n\n  By the brooks of Reuben great were the resolves!\n  Why didst they sit among the sheepfolds,\n  Listening to the pipings for the flocks?\n  By the brooks of Reuben there were great questionings!\n  Gilead remained beyond the Jordan;\n  And Dan, why does he stay by the ships as an alien?\n  Asher sits still by the shore of the sea,\n  And remains by its landings.\n\n[Sidenote: _The battle and defeat of the Canaanites_]\n\n  Zebulun was a people who exposed their lives to deadly peril,\n  And Napthali on the heights of the open field.\n  Bless Jehovah!\n  Kings came, they fought;\n  Then fought the kings of Canaan,\n  At Taanach by the waters of Megiddo;\n  They took no booty of silver.\n  From heaven fought the stars,\n  From their courses fought against Sisera.\n  The river Kishon swept them away,\n  The ancient river, the river Kishon.\n  O my soul, march on with strength!\n  Then did the horse-hoofs resound\n  With the galloping, galloping of the powerful steeds.\n\n[Sidenote: _David's dirge over Saul and Jonathan_]\n\n  In the Book of the Upright is included that\n  touching elegy which David sang after the\n  death of Saul and Jonathan, and which stands\n  next to the Song of Deborah as one of the\n  earliest surviving examples of Old Testament\n  literature.\n  [Footnote: \"Student's Old Testament,\" Vol. II., pp. 113,114.]\n\n[Sidenote: _The greatness of the calamity_]\n\n  Weep, O Judah!\n  Grieve, O Israel!\n  On thy heights are the slain!\n  How have the mighty fallen!\n\n  Tell it not in Gath,\n  Declare it not in the streets of Askelon;\n  Lest the daughters of the Philistines rejoice,\n  Lest the daughters of the uncircumcised exult.\n  Ye mountains of Gilboa, may no dew descend,\n  Nor rain upon you, O ye fields of death!\n  For there was the shield of the mighty cast away,\n  The shield of Saul, not anointed with oil.\n\n[Sidenote: _Bravery and attractiveness of the fallen_]\n\n  From the blood of the slain,\n  From the fat of the mighty,\n  The bow of Jonathan turned not back,\n  The sword of Saul returned not empty.\n\n  Saul and Jonathan, the beloved and the lovely!\n  In life and in death they were not parted;\n  They were swifter than eagles,\n  They were stronger than lions.\n\n[Sidenote: _Saul's services to Israel_]\n\n  Daughters of Israel, weep over Saul,\n  Who clothed you daintily in fine linen,\n  Who put golden ornaments on your garments, [and say:]\n  \"How have the mighty fallen in the midst of battle!\"\n\n[Sidenote: _David's love for Jonathan_]\n\n  Jonathan, in thy death hast thou wounded me!\n  I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan!\n  Thou wert surpassingly dear to me,\n  Thy love to me was far more than the love of woman!\n\n  How have the mighty fallen,\n  And the weapons of war perished!\n\n[Sidenote: _The blessing of Jacob_]\n\nThe so-called _Blessing of Jacob_ (Gen. xlix, 2-27) is a poetical\ndelineation of the strength and weakness of the different tribes of\nIsrael with references to specific events in their history. These\nhistorical allusions suggest that it probably comes from the reigns of\nDavid and Solomon, when the tribes were for the first time all united\nunder a common rule and had passed through certain of the experiences\nalluded to in the poem.\n\n[Sidenote: _Israel's heritage of oral traditions_]\n\nThe Israelitish race was supremely rich in possessing not only many\nancient songs, but also a large body of oral traditions which had\nlong been handed down from father to son or else treasured by the\nstory-tellers and by the priests of the ancient sanctuaries. Many of\nthese traditions were inherited from their Semitic ancestors, and, in\nthe light of recently discovered Babylonian literature, can be traced\nback far beyond the days of Abraham and Moses. Some were originally\nthe possessions of certain nomadic tribes; others recorded the early\nexperiences of their ancestors or told of the achievements of early\nheroes. In the process of continuous retelling, all unnecessary details\nhad been eliminated and the really dramatic and essential elements\nemphasized, until they attained their present simple, graphic form,\nwhich fascinates young and old alike.\n\n[Sidenote: _Value of these oral traditions_]\n\nThe superlative value of these varied traditions is apparent. They were\nthe links which bound later generations to their prehistoric past.\nIncidentally, in the characteristic language of Semitic tradition, they\npreserved the memory of many important events in their early tribal\nhistory. They are also the illuminating record of the primitive beliefs,\ncustoms, and aspirations of their Semitic ancestors. Subject as they\ninevitably were to the idealizing tendency, they became in time the\nconcrete embodiment of the noblest ideals of later generations. Thus\nthey presented before the kindled imagination of each succeeding age,\nin the character and achievements of their traditional ancestors, those\nideals of courage, perseverance, and piety which contributed much toward\nmaking the Israelites the chosen people that they were.\n\n[Sidenote: _Influences that led to the writing of history_]\n\nIn time this growing heritage of traditions became too great for even\nthe remarkable Oriental memory to retain. Meantime the Hebrews had also\nacquired that system of writing which they learned from their more\ncivilized neighbors the Canaanites and Phoenicians. From, the days of\nSolomon, scribes were to be found in court and temple, and probably\namong the prophetic guilds; although the common people, as in the same\nland to-day, doubtless had little knowledge of the literary art. While\nthe nation was struggling for the soil of Canaan, or enjoying the full\ntide of victory and achievement that came under the leadership of David,\nthere was no time or incentive to write history. But with the\nquieter days of Solomon's reign, and the contrasting period of national\ndecline that followed his death, the incentive to take up the pen and\nrecord the departed glories became strong. With a large body of definite\noral traditions dealing with all the important men and events of the\nearlier periods, the task of the historian was chiefly that of writing\ndown and coordinating what was already at hand.\n\n[Sidenote: _The early Judean prophetic history_]\n\nThe oldest Hebrew history that has been preserved in the Old Testament\nwas the work of an unknown Judean prophet or group of prophets who lived\nand labored probably during the latter part of the ninth century before\nChrist. This history corresponds closely in relative age and aim to\nMark's graphic narrative of the chief facts in the life of Jesus. The\nmotive which influenced the earliest historians both of the Old and New\nTestaments to write was primarily the religious significance of the\nevents which they thus recorded. This early Judean prophetic history\n(technically known as J) begins with the account of the creation of man\nfrom the dust by the hand of Jehovah, and tells of the first sin and its\ndire consequences (Gen. ii. 4 to iii. 24); then it gives an ancient list\nof those who stood as the fathers of nomads, of musicians and workers in\nmetal (Gen. iv. 1, l6b-26). This is followed by the primitive stories\nof the sons of God and the daughters of men (Gen. vi. 1-4), of Noah the\nfirst vineyard-keeper (ix. 20-27), and of the tower of Babel and the\norigin of different languages (xi. 1-9). In a series of more or less\nclosely connected narratives the character and experiences of the\npatriarchs, the life of the Hebrews in Egypt and the wilderness, and the\nsettlement in Canaan are presented. Its basis for the history of the\nunited kingdom was for the most part the wonderfully graphic group of\nSaul and David stories which occupy the bulk of the books of Samuel.\nThus this remarkable early Judean prophetic history begins with the\ncreation of the universe and man and concludes with the creation of the\nHebrew empire.\n\n[Sidenote: _Its unity and characteristics_]\n\nIn its present Old Testament form it has been closely combined with\nother histories, just as Mark's narrative is largely reproduced in\nMatthew and Luke; but when, it is separated from the later narratives\nits unity and completeness are astounding. Almost without a break it\npresents the chief characters and events of Israel's history in their\nrelations to each other. The same peculiar vocabulary, the use of\nJehovah as the designation of the Deity, the same vivid, flowing\nnarrative style, the same simple, na\u00efve, primitive conception of\nJehovah, the same patriotic interest in the history of the race, and the\nsame emphasis upon the vital religious significance of men and facts,\ncharacterize every section of this narrative and make comparatively easy\nthe task of separating it from the other histories with which it has\nbeen joined.\n\n[Sidenote: _The early Ephraimite prophetic history_]\n\nA little later, sometime about the middle of the eighth century before\nChrist, a prophet or group of prophets in Northern Israel devoted\nthemselves to the similar task of writing the history of Israel from\nthe point of view of the northern kingdom. Since this state is called\n_Ephraim_ by Hosea and other writers of the North, its history may be\ndesignated as _the early Ephraimite prophetic_ (technically known as E).\nNaturally its author or authors utilized as the basis of their work\nthe oral traditions current in the North. Sometimes these are closely\nparallel, and sometimes they vary widely in order and representation\nfrom the Judean versions. In general the variations are similar,\nalthough somewhat greater than those between the parallel narratives of\nMatthew and Luke.\n\n[Sidenote: _Its characteristics_]\n\nMarked peculiarities in vocabulary and literary style distinguish\nthis northern history from the Judean. Since _Elohim_ or _God_ is\nconsistently used to describe the Deity, it has sometimes been called\nthe _Elohistic_ history. Interest inclines to the sanctuaries and heroes\nand events prominent in the life of the North. In that land which\nproduced a Samuel, an Elijah, an Elisha, and an Hosea, it was natural\nthat especial emphasis should be placed on the role of the prophet.\nThroughout these narratives he is portrayed as the dominant figure,\nmoulding the history as God's representative. Abraham and Moses are here\nconceived of as prophets, and the Ephraimite history of their age is\nlargely devoted to a portrayal of their prophetic activity.\n\n[Sidenote: _Its scope_]\n\nThe interests of later editors who combined these early prophetic\nhistories, as we now find them in the Old Testament, were centred in the\nJudean, and hence they have introduced citations from the Ephraimite\nnarratives chiefly to supplement the older history. Possibly it never\nwas as complete as that of the South. At present it begins with Abraham\nand traces the parallel history of the patriarchs and the life of the\nHebrews in Egypt and the wilderness. Its account of the conquest, is\nsomewhat fuller, probably because Joshua was a northern leader. It also\npreserves many of the stories of the heroes in the book of Judges. With\nthese the citations from the early Ephraimite prophetic history seem to\ndisappear, but the opening stories in the book of Samuel, regarding the\ngreat prophet whose name was given to the book, apparently come from the\npen of later disciples of this same Ephraimite group of prophets.\n\n[Sidenote: _Later editorial supplementing and combination of the two\nhistories_]\n\nThe eighth and seventh centuries before Christ were periods of intense\nprophetic activity both in the North and the South. It was natural,\ntherefore, that these early prophetic histories should be supplemented\nby the disciples of the original historians. Traditions that possessed a\npermanent historical or religious value, as, for example, the familiar\nstory of Cain and Abel (Gen. iv. 2-16), and the earlier of the two\naccounts of the flood, were thus added. Also when in 722 B.C. the\nnorthern kingdom fell and its literary heritage passed to Judah, it was\nmost natural that a prophetic editor, recognizing the valuable elements\nin each, and the difficulties presented by the existence of the two\nvariant versions of the same events, should combine the two, and\nfurthermore that, in the days of few manuscripts, the older originals\nshould be lost and only the combined history survive. To-day we find\nthis in turn incorporated in the still later composite history extending\nfrom Genesis through Samuel.\n\n[Sidenote: _Method of combining_]\n\nThe later editor's method of uniting his sources is exceedingly\ninteresting, and is analogous in many ways to the methods followed\nin the citations in Matthew and Luke from their common sources, the\noriginal Mark and Matthew's _Sayings of Jesus_. Where the two versions\nwere closely parallel, as in the account of Jacob's deception of\nhis father Isaac, or the story of the spies, the two are completely\namalgamated; short passages, verses, and parts of verses are taken in\nturn from each. In other cases the editor introduced the different\nversions--as, for example, the two accounts of the flight of Hagar--into\ndifferent settings. From subsequent allusions to two versions, of which\nonly one survives in the Old Testament, it is to be inferred that\nsometimes he simply preserved the fuller, usually the Judean. As a rule,\nhowever, there is clear evidence that he made every effort to retain\nall that he found in his original sources, even though the resulting\ncomposite narrative contained many inconsistencies.\n\n[Sidenote: _Practical value of the rediscovery of the original histories_]\n\nTo the careful student, seeking to recover the original narratives in\ntheir primal unity, these inconsistencies are guides as valuable as the\nfossils and stratification of the earth are to the geologist intent upon\ntracing the earth's past history. Guided by these variations and the\ndistinctive peculiarities in vocabulary, literary style, point of view,\nreligious conceptions, and purpose of each of the groups of narratives,\nOld Testament scholars have rediscovered these two original histories;\nand with their recovery the great majority of seeming inconsistencies\nand many perplexing problems fade into insignificance. Supplementing\neach other, as do the earliest Gospels, these two independent histories\npresent with new definiteness and authority the essential facts in\nIsrael's early political, social and religious life. Like eye-witnesses,\nthey testify to the still more significant fact that from the first God\nwas revealing his character and will through a unique race.\n\n[Sidenote: _The brief late prophetic history_]\n\nA third survey of the period beginning with the sojourn in Egypt and\nconcluding with the conquest of the east-Jordan land is found in the\nintroduction to the book of Deuteronomy. It is the prologue to the laws\nthat follow, appropriately and effectively placed in the mouth of the\npioneer prophet Moses. A comparison quickly demonstrates that it is in\nreality a brief summary of the older histories, and especially of the\nearly Ephraimite prophetic. Like the Gospel of Matthew, its aim is not\nmerely to present historical facts, but to illustrate and establish a\nthesis. The thesis is that Jehovah has personally led his people, and\nthat when they have been faithful to him they have prospered, but\nwhen they have disobeyed calamity has overtaken, them. The message is\ndistinctly prophetic; and to distinguish this third history, which was\nprobably written near the close of the seventh century before Christ,\nfrom the earlier, it may be designated as the late prophetic or\n_Deuteronomic history_ (technically represented by D).\n\n[Sidenote: _Comparison of the Old with the New Testament histories_]\n\nThese three prophetic histories correspond strikingly to the three\nsynoptic Gospels: Mark, Luke and Matthew. The essential differences in\ntheir literary history are that they come, not from a single limited\ngroup of writers and a brief quarter century, but represent the work\nof many hands and at least two hundred and fifty years of literary\nactivity. Two, at least, of these histories, are no longer extant in\ntheir original form, but only as they have been quoted verbatim by\nlater historians and closely amalgamated. Similarly, as is well\nknown, Tatian, the pupil of Justin Martyr, in the middle of the second\nChristian century, did for the four Gospels precisely what an Old\nTestament editor did for the two early prophetic histories,--he combined\nthem into one composite, continuous narrative. By joining passages\nand verses and parts of verses taken from the different Gospels,\nby omitting verbal duplicates, by rearranging in some cases and by\noccasionally adding a word or phrase to join dissimilar parts, Tatian\nproduced a marvellous mosaic gospel, known as the _Diatessaron_. All of\nthe Fourth Gospel is thus preserved, and most of the first three.\nSo successfully was the work done that the volume was widely used\nthroughout the Eastern Church. If, as once seemed possible, it had\ncompletely supplanted the original four Gospels, the literary history of\nthese would have been a repetition of that of the earliest Old Testament\nrecords.\n\n[Sidenote: _The dominant motive of the prophetic historians_.]\n\nIt is very important to note that the motive which led the prophetic\nhistorians to commit to writing the earlier traditions of their race was\nnot primarily historical. Like the author of the Fourth Gospel, they\nselected their material chiefly with a view to enforcing certain\nimportant religious truths. If an ancient Semitic tradition illustrated\ntheir point, they divested it of its heathen clothing and, irrespective\nof its origin, pressed it into service. For example, it seems clear that\nthe elements which enter into the story of the Garden of Eden and man's\nfall were current, with variations, among the ancient Babylonians\ncenturies before the Hebrews inherited them from their Semitic\nancestors. The early prophet who wrote the second and third chapters\nof Genesis appreciated their value as illustrations, and made them the\nmedium for imparting some of the most important spiritual truths ever\nconveyed to mankind. Like the preachers or moral teachers of to-day, the\nfirst question the prophets asked about a popular story was not, Is it\nabsolutely historical or scientifically exact? but, Does it illustrate\nthe vital point to be impressed? Undoubtedly Israel's heritage of oral\ntraditions was far greater than is suggested by the narratives of the\nOld Testament; but only those which individually and collectively\nenforced some important religious truth, were utilized. Just as Jesus\ndrew his illustrations from nature and human life about him, so these\nearlier spiritual teachers, with equal tact, took their illustrations\nfrom the familiar atmosphere of song and story and national tradition in\nwhich their readers lived. A secondary purpose, which they obviously\nhad in view, was also to remove from certain of the popular tales the\nimmoral implications which still clung to them from their heathen past,\nand to reconsecrate them to a diviner end.\n\n[Sidenote: _The permanent and vital value of these narratives_]\n\nQuestions of relative date and historical accuracy concern the\nhistorian, but they should not obscure the greater value of these\nnarratives. To the majority of us, who turn to the Old Testament simply\nas the record of divine revelation and as a guide to life, the essential\nthing is to put ourselves into touch with these ancient prophets, who\ntaught by illustration as well as by direct address, and ask, What was\nthe ethical or spiritual truth that illumined their souls and finds\nconcrete expression and illustration through these primitive stories? To\ndiscuss the literal historicity of the story of the Garden of Eden is as\nabsurd as to seek to discover who was the sower who went forth to sow\nor the Samaritan who went down to Jericho. Even, if no member of\nthe despised Samaritan race ever followed in the footsteps of an\nhypocritical Levite along the rocky road to Jericho and succored a needy\nhuman being, the vital truth abides. Not until we cease to focus\nour gaze on the comparatively unimportant, can we discern the great\nspiritual messages of these early narratives.\n\n[Sidenote: _The sequel to the early prophetic histories_]\n\nThe sequel to the great prophetic histories which underlie the Old\nTestament books, from Genesis through Samuel, is in the books of Kings.\nThese carry the record of Israel's life down to the Babylonian exile.\nThe opening chapters of First Kings contain the conclusion of the Judean\nprophetic David stories. Fortunately the rest of the biblical history to\nthe exile was largely compiled from much earlier sources. As in most of\nthe historical writings, the later editors, also, quoted _verbatim_ from\nthese earlier records and histories, so that in many cases we have the\ntestimony of almost contemporary witnesses. The titles of certain of\nthese earlier books are given: _The Book of the Acts of Solomon_, _The\nChronicles of the Kings of Israel_, and _The Chronicles of the Kings of\nJudah_.\n\n[Sidenote: _Earlier sources quoted by the editor of Kings_]\n\nA careful study of the books of Kings suggests many other ancient\nsources. For the reign of Solomon, state annals, temple records, and\npopular Solomon traditions appear to have been utilized. The graphic\naccount of the division of the Hebrew empire was probably drawn from\nan early Jeroboam history. In the latter part of First Kings appear\ncitations from an early Ahab history and a group of Ephraimite Elijah\nstories. The political data throughout First and Second Kings were\nprobably drawn from the annals of the northern and southern kingdoms.\nFurthermore, in II Kings ii.-viii. appear long quotations from two\ncycles of Elisha stories, centring, respectively, about the ancient\nnorthern sanctuary of Gilgal, near Shiloh, and about Samaria. The rest\nof the book includes citations from sources which may be designated as a\nprophetic Jehu history, temple records, a Hezekiah history, and a group\nof Isaiah stories.\n\n[Sidenote: _Influences that produced this later prophetic history_]\n\nThese valuable quotations the late prophetic editor of Kings has\narranged in chronological order and fitted into a framework which gives\nthe length of each reign and the date of accession of the different\nkings, according to the chronology of the other Hebrew kingdom. To this\ndata he adds a personal judgment upon the policy of each ruler, thereby\nrevealing his prophetic spirit. History is to him, as to every true\nprophet, a supreme illustration of fundamental spiritual principles.\nClearly the influence that led him to compile and edit his great work\nwas his recognition of the fact that the record of Israel's national\nexperience as a whole was of deep religious import. The same motive\nundoubtedly guided him in the selection of material from his great\nvariety of sources. Only that which was essential was presented. Thus\nhe, or a later editor of his book, traced Israel's remarkable\nhistory down to the middle of the Babylonian exile (560 B.C.), and\ncompleted that wonderful chain of prophetic narratives which record\nand interpret the first great chapter of divine revelation through the\nchosen race.\n\n\n\n\nVII\n\n\nTHE HISTORY OF THE PROPHETIC SERMONS, EPISTLES, AND APOCALYPSES\n\n[Sidenote: _Real character and aims of the prophets_]\n\nTo understand and rightly interpret the prophetic writings of the Old\nTestament it is necessary to cast aside a false impression as to the\ncharacter of the prophets which is widely prevalent. They were not\nforetellers, but forth-tellers. Instead of being vague dreamers,\nin imagination living far in the distant future, they were most\nemphatically men of their own times, enlightened and devoted\npatriots, social and ethical reformers, and spiritual teachers. Their\ncharacteristic note of conviction and authority was due to the fact\nthat, on the one hand, they knew personally and distinctly the evils\nand needs of their nation, and that, on the other hand, their minds and\nhearts, ever open to receive the truth, were in vital touch with the\nInfinite. Thus, just as Aaron became Moses' prophet to the people,\npublicly proclaiming what the great leader imparted to him in private\n(Ex. vii. 1, 2), so the Hebrew prophets became Jehovah's heralds and\nambassadors, announcing by word and life and act the divine will.\n\n[Sidenote: _Influences that led the prophets to write down their\nsermons_]\n\nWhile the historians were perfecting their histories certain prophets\nalso were beginning to commit their sermons to writing. The oldest\nrecorded address in the Old Testament is probably that of Amos at\nBethel. His banishment from the northern kingdom under strict injunction\nnot to prophesy there (Am. vii. 10-17) may well explain why he resorted\nto writing to give currency to his prophetic message, though, like Paul\nin later days, he undoubtedly regarded writing as an inferior substitute\nfor the spoken word. Jeremiah appears to have preached twenty years\nbefore he dictated a line to his scribe Baruch, and then it was because\nhe could not personally speak in the temple (xxxvi. 1-5). Sometimes\ncomplete sermons of the prophets are preserved, but more often we seem\nto have only extracts and epitomes. In some of the prophetic books, like\nthat of Jeremiah, there are also popular reports of a prophetic address,\nand narrative sections, telling of the prophet's experience.\n\n[Sidenote: _The editing of the earlier prophecies_]\n\nEvidences of editing are very apparent in the earlier prophecies. Sudden\ninterruptions, and verses or clauses, in which appear ideas and literary\nstyle very different from that of the immediate context, indicate that\nmany of the prophecies have been supplemented by later notes, some\nexplanatory and some hortatory. Other longer passages are intended to\nadjust the earlier teaching to later conditions and beliefs and so to\nadapt them to universal human needs that they are not limited to the\nhour and occasion of their first delivery. Some of these passages come\nfrom the hands of disciples of the prophets and often contain valuable\nadditional data; others are from later prophetic editors and scribes. A\ndetailed comparison, for example, of the Hebrew and Greek versions of\nJeremiah quickly discloses wide variations of words, verses, and even\nlong passages, added in one or the other text by later hands. All these\nadditions testify to the deep interest felt by later generations in the\nearlier writings, even before they were assigned a final place in\nthe canon. It is one of the important tasks of biblical scholars to\ndistinguish the original from the additions and thus determine what were\nthe teachings of each prophet and what are the contributions of later\ngenerations.\n\n[Sidenote: _The background of Isaiah xl.-lv._]\n\nMany of the later additions possess a value and authority entirely\nindependent of that possessed by the prophet with whose writings they\nhave been joined by their original authors or later editors. Thus the\nsublime chapters appended to the original sermons of Isaiah contain some\nof the noblest teachings in the Old Testament. The different themes\nand literary style; the frequent references to the Babylonians, not as\ndistant allies, as in the days of Isaiah the son of Amoz, but as the\nhated oppressors of the Jews; the evidence that the prophet's readers\nare not exiles far from Judah; the many allusions to the conquests of\nCyrus,--all these leave little doubt that chapters xl.-lv. were written\nin the latter part of the Babylonian or the first of the Persian period.\nInterpreted in the light of this background, their thought and teachings\nbecome clear and luminous. Similarly, the varied evidence within the\nchapters themselves seems to indicate that Isaiah lvi.-lxvi. contain\nsermons directed to the struggling Jewish community in Palestine during\nthe days following the rebuilding of the temple in 520 B.C.\n\n[Sidenote: _The order and date of the prophetic books_]\n\nThe prophetic sermons, epistles, and apocalypses fall naturally into\nfive great groups. The books prophets of the Assyrian period were Amos\nand Hosea, who between 750 and 734 B.C. preached to Northern Israel;\nalso Isaiah and Micah, whose work lies between 740 and 680 B.C. Nahum's\nlittle prophecy, although much later, echoes the death-knell of the\ngreat Assyrian kingdom, which for two or three centuries dominated\nsouthwestern Asia. The prophets of Judah's decline were Zephaniah (about\n628 B.C.), Jeremiah (628-690), and Habakkuk (609-605). To the same\nperiod belong Ezekiel's earlier sermons, delivered between 592 and 586,\njust before the final destruction of Jerusalem. The prophets of the\nBabylonian exile were Obadiah, whose original oracle belongs to its\nopening years; Ezekiel (xxv.-xlviii.), who continued to preach until 572\nB.C., and the great prophet whose deathless messages ring through Isaiah\nxl.-lv. The prophets of the Persian period were Haggai and Zechariah,\nwhose inspiring sermons kept alive the flagging zeal of those who\nrebuilt the second temple; the authors of Isaiah lvi.-lxvi.; the author\nof the little book of Malachi; and Joel. To this list we may perhaps\nadd the prophet who has given us that noble protest, found in the much\nmisunderstood book of Jonah, against the narrow and intolerant attitude\nof later Judaism toward foreigners.\n\n[Sidenote: _Growth of anonymous and apocalyptic literature_]\n\nWith the exception of Ezekiel, Haggai, Zechariah, and Joel, all the\nprophecies which come from the centuries following the fall of Jerusalem\nin 586 B.C. are anonymous. The worship of the authority of the past had\nbegun, and there is evidence that the belief was gaining currency that\nthe days of the prophets were past. Hence the natural tendency to resort\nto anonymous authorship or else to append a later message to an earlier\nprophecy. Chapters ix.-xiv. of the book of Zechariah illustrate this\ncustom,--chapters which apparently come from the last Old Testament\nperiod, the Greek or Maccabean. The habit of presenting prophetic truth\nin the highly figurative, symbolic form, of the apocalypse also became\nprominent in later Judaism. This has already been noted in the study of\nthe growth of the New Testament, and is illustrated by the book of\nRevelation. It was especially adapted to periods of religious\npersecution, for it enabled the prophet to convey his message of\nencouragement and consolation in language impressive and clear to his\npeople, yet unintelligible to their foreign masters.\n\n[Sidenote: _The historical background of the book of Daniel_]\n\nTo the mind of one who has carefully studied the book of Daniel in the\nlight of the great crisis that came to the Jews as a result of the\nrelentless persecutions of Antiochus Epiphanes, between the years 169\nand 165 B.C., there remains little doubt that it is in this period the\nwonderful apocalypse finds its true setting and interpretation. The\nfamiliar examples of the heroic fidelity of Daniel and his friends to\nthe demands of their religion and ritual were supremely well adapted\nto arouse a similar resistance toward the demands of a tyrant who was\nattempting to stamp out the Jewish, religion and transform the chosen\npeople into a race of apostates. The visions found in the book trace\nrapidly, in succession, the history of the Babylonian, Median, Persian,\nand, last of all, the Greek kingdoms. The culmination is a minute\ndescription of the character and reign, of the tyrant Antiochus\nEpiphanes (xi. 21-45). He is clearly the little horn of chapter viii.\nBut suddenly, in the midst of the account of the persecutions, the\ndescriptions become vague and general. Nor is there any reference to the\nsuccess of the Maccabean uprising; instead, the prediction is made that\nJehovah himself will soon come to establish his Messiah's kingdom.\n\n[Sidenote: _Date of the book_]\n\nThe inference is, therefore, that the prophecy was written a short time\nbefore the rededication of the temple in 165 B.C. This conclusion is\nconfirmed by many other indications. For example the language, in part\nAramaic, is that of the Greek period. The mistakes regarding the final\noverthrow of the Babylonian empire, which was by Cyrus, not Darius,\nand brought about not by strategy, but as a result of the voluntary\nsubmission of the Babylonians, are identical with the errors current\nin Greek tradition of the same late period. Here, as in the early\nnarratives of Genesis, a true prophet has utilized earlier stories as\neffective illustrations. He has also given in the common apocalyptic\nform an interpretation of the preceding four centuries of human history,\nand showed how through it all God's purpose was being realized, The book\nconcludes with the firm assurance that those who now prove faithful are\nto be richly rewarded and to have a part in Ms coming Messianic kingdom.\n\n[Sidenote: _The common motive actuating the prophets and the authors of\nthe New Testament_]\n\nThus, from the minds of the prophets come the earliest writings of the\nOld Testament. They consist of exhortations, warnings, messages of\nencouragement, or else stories intended to illustrate a religious\nprinciple or to present, in concrete form, a prophetic ideal. The\nfundamental motive which produced them all was identical with that which\nled the disciples and apostles to write the Gospels and Epistles of the\nNew. In the case of the historico-prophetic writings, like Samuel and\nKings, the desire to inspire and mould the minds and wills of their\nreaders was combined with the desire to preserve in permanent form a\nrecord of the events which, in their national history, revealed most\nclearly Jehovah's character and purpose. In this respect they correspond\nperfectly to the Gospels and Acts of the New Testament. It is easy to\nsee, therefore, that kindred aims and ideals actuated these unknown\nprophetic writers and their later successors, Matthew, Mark, and Luke.\nTheir literary products differ only because their subject-matter is\ndifferent. The one group records Jehovah's revelation of himself through\nthe life of the Messianic nation, the other through the life of the\nperfect Messiah.\n\n[Sidenote: _The New Testament the sequel of the prophetic writings_]\n\nIt is interesting to note, in conclusion, that from the point of view of\nthe Old, all the literature of the New may be designated as prophetic.\nThe three distinct groups of writings found in the New, namely, the\nGospels and Acts, the Epistles, and the Apocalypse, correspond exactly\nto the three types of prophetic literature found in the Old: the\nhistorico-prophetical writings, direct written prophecies, and\napocalypses. If the final canon of the Old Testament had been completed\nbefore the days of Josiah, there is every reason to believe that it\nalso would have contained little beside prophetic writings. In divine\nprovidence it was not closed until seven centuries later, so that, as it\nhas come to us, it is a comprehensive library, representing every stage\nand every side of Israel's development. It is, however, in perfect\nkeeping with the spirit of the Master that the New Testament should\ncontain significant facts and broad principles rather than detailed laws\nor even the songs of worship. He whose ideals, teachings, and methods\nwere in closest harmony with those of the Hebrew prophets, naturally\nbegat, through his immediate followers, a group of distinctively\nprophetic writings.\n\n\n\n\nVIII\n\nTHE DEVELOPMENT OF THE EARLIER OLD TESTAMENT LAWS\n\n[Sidenote: _First the principle, and then the detailed laws_]\n\nIf the canon of the New Testament had remained open as long as did that\nof the Old, there is little doubt that it also would have contained many\nlaws, legal precedents, and ecclesiastical histories. From the writings\nof the Church Fathers and the records of the Catholic Church it is\npossible to conjecture what these in general would have been. The early\nhistory of Christianity illustrates the universal fact that the broad\nprinciples are first enunciated by a great prophetic leader or leaders,\nand that in succeeding centuries these new principles are gradually\nembodied in detailed laws and ceremonials. Also the principles must be\naccepted, partially at least, by the majority of the people before the\nenactments based upon them can be enforced. This important fact, stated\nin Old Testament terms, is that the prophet must and always does precede\nthe lawgiver.\n\n[Sidenote: _Meaning of the Hebrew word for law_]\n\n_Torah_, the common Hebrew word for law, comes from a Hebrew word\nmeaning to _point out_ or _direct_. It is probably also connected\nwith the older root signifying, to cast the sacred lot. The _torah_,\ntherefore, was originally the decision, rendered in connection with\nspecific questions of dispute, and referred to Jehovah by means of the\nsacred lot. Thus the early priests were also judges because they were\nthe custodians of the divine oracle.\n\n[Sidenote: _Origin of this Hebrew belief in the divine origin of law_]\n\nHere we are able to trace, in its earliest Hebrew form, the universal\nbelief in the divine origin of the law. In the primitive laws of Exodus\nxxi.-xxiii., in connection with a case of disputed responsibility for\ninjury to property, the command is given: _the cause of both parties\nshall come before God; he whom God shall condemn shall pay double to his\nneighbor_ (xxii. 8, 9). In ancient times all cases of dispute were thus\nlaid before God and decided by the lot or by God's representatives,\nusually the priests. When, in time, customs and oral laws grew up on the\nbasis of these decisions, a similar divine origin and authority were\nnaturally attributed to them. Individually and collectively they\nwere designated by the same suggestive term, _torah_. When they were\nultimately committed to writing, the legal literature bore this title.\nIn the Hebrew text it still remains as the designation of the first\ngroup of Old Testament books which contain the bulk of Israel's laws.\n\n[Sidenote: _Its ultimate basis in fact_]\n\nA belief in the divine origin of law was held by most ancient peoples.\nIn connection with the tablet which records the laws of Hammurabi, we\nhave a picture of Shamash the sun-god giving the laws to the king. In\nthe epilogue to these laws he states that by the command of Shamash, the\njudge supreme of heaven and earth, he has set them up that judgment may\nshine in the land. The statements in the Old Testament that Jehovah\ntalked face to face with Moses or wrote the ten words with his finger on\ntablets of stone reflect the primitive belief which pictured God as a\nman with hands and voice and physical body; still they are the early\nconcrete statement of a vital, eternal truth. Not on perishable stone,\nbut in the minds of the ancient judges, and in the developing ethical\nconsciousness of the Israelitish race, he inscribed the principles of\nwhich the laws are the practical expression. If he had not revealed\nthem, there would have been no progress in the knowledge of justice\nand mercy. The thesis of the Old Testament, and of Hammurabi also, is\nfundamentally true. The vivid forms in which both expressed that thesis\nwere admirably fitted to impress it upon the mind of early man.\n\n[Sidenote: _Method in which Hebrew law grew_]\n\nThe early Israelitish theory of the origin, of law provided fully for\nexpansion and development to meet the new and changed conditions of\nlater periods. Whenever a new question presented itself, it could be\nreferred to Jehovah's representatives, the priests and prophets; and\ntheir _torah_, or response, would forthwith become the basis for the new\nlaw. Malachi ii. 6,7 clearly defines this significant element in the\ngrowth, of Israel's legal codes: _the torah of truth was in the mouth\nof the priest... and the people should seek the torah at his mouth._\nSimilarly Haggai commands the people to ask a _torah_ from the priests\nin regard to a certain question of ceremonial cleanliness (ii, 11).\nUntil a very late period in Israelitish history, the belief was\nuniversal that Jehovah was ever giving new decisions and laws through\nhis priests and prophets, and therefore that the law itself was\nconstantly being expanded and developed. This belief is in perfect\naccord with all historical analogies and with the testimony of the Old\nTestament histories and laws themselves. Not until the days of the\nlatest editors did the tendency to project the Old Testament laws back\nto the beginning of Israel's history gain the ascendency and leave\nits impression upon the Pentateuch. Even then there was no thought of\nattributing the literary authorship of all of these laws to Moses. This\nwas the work of still later Jewish tradition.\n\n[Sidenote: _Moses' relation to Israelitish law_]\n\nThe earliest Old Testament narratives indicate clearly the real\nhistorical basis of the familiar later tradition, and vindicate and\nhelp us in the effort to define the title, _Law of Moses_. The early\nEphraimite narratives describe Moses as a prophet rather than as a mere\nlawgiver. In Exodus xviii. they give us a vivid picture of his activity\nas judge. To him the people came in crowds, with their cases, _to\ninquire of God_ (15). In 16, to his father-in-law Jethro, he states:\n_whenever they have a matter of dispute they come to me, that I may\ndecide which of the two is right, and make known the statutes of God and\nhis decisions (t\u00f4r\u00f4th)_. Jethro then advises him to appoint reliable\nmen, gifted with a high sense of justice, to decide minor cases,\nwhile he reserves for himself the difficult questions involving new\nprinciples. The origin and theory of Israel's early laws are vividly\npresented in Jethro's words to Moses in verses 19, 20: _You be the\npeople's advocate with God, and bring the cases to God, and you make\nknown to them the statutes and the decisions, and show them the way\nwherein they must walk, and the work that they must do._\n\n[Sidenote: _Historical basis of the tradition of Mosaic authorship_]\n\nIt appears from these and other passages that Moses' traditional title\nas the father of Israelitish legislation is well established. As a\nprophet, he proclaimed certain fundamental principles that became the\nbasis of all later codes. As a judge, he rendered decisions that soon\ngrew into customary laws. As a leader and organizer, he laid the\nfoundations of the later political and institutional growth of the\nnation. Furthermore, it is probable that he taught the people certain\nsimple commands which became the nucleus of all later legislation.\nNaturally and properly, as oral laws subsequently grew up and were\nfinally committed to writing, they were attributed to him. Later, when\nthese laws were collected and codified, they were still designated\nas _Mosaic_, even, though the authors of these codes added many\ncontemporary enactments to the earlier laws. Thus the traditions, as\nwell as the theory, of Israelitish law fortunately raised no barrier\nagainst its normal growth. It was not until the late Jewish period, when\nthe tradition became rigid and unnatural, that the rabbis, in order to\nestablish the authority of contemporary laws, were forced to resort to\nthe grotesque legal fictions which appear in the Talmud.\n\n[Sidenote: _Evidences that the earliest laws were oral_]\n\nThe earliest Hebrew laws, like the traditions, were apparently long\ntransmitted in oral form. The simple life of the desert and early Canaan\nrequired no written records. Custom and memory preserved all the laws\nthat were needed. Also, as we have seen, before the Hebrews came into\ncontact with the Canaanites and Phoenicians, they do not seem to have\ndeveloped the literary art. Instead, they cast their important commands\nand laws into the form of pentads and decalogues. The practical aim\nseems to have been to aid the memory by associating a brief law with\neach finger of the two hands. The system was both simple and effective.\nIt also points clearly to a period of oral rather than written\ntransmission.\n\n[Sidenote: _The earliest Hebrew laws_]\n\nThe nucleus of all Israelitish law appears to have been a simple\ndecalogue, which gave the terms of the original covenant between\nJehovah and his people, and definitely stated the obligations they must\ndischarge if they would retain his favor. The oldest version of this\ndecalogue is now embedded in the early Judean narrative of Exodus xxxiv.\nThere is considerable evidence, however, that it once stood immediately\nafter the Judean account of Jehovah's revelation of himself at Sinai,\nand was transposed to its present position in order to give place\nfor the later and nobler prophetic decalogue of Exodus xx. 1-17. Its\nantiquity and importance are also evidenced by the fact that it has\nreceived many later introductory, explanatory, and hortatory notes.\nExodus xxxiy. 28 preserves the memory that it originally consisted of\nsimply ten words. The slightly variant version of these original ten\nwords Is also found in Exodus xx. 23, xxiii. 12, 15, 16, 18, 29, 30.\nFurthermore, it probably once occupied a central position in the\ncorresponding Northern Israelltish account of the covenant at Sinai.\n\n[Sidenote: _The oldest decalogue_]\n\nWith the aid of these two different versions, that of the North and\nthat of the South, it is possible to restore approximately the common\noriginal:\n\nI. Thou shalt worship no other God.\n\nII. Thou shalt make no molten gods,\n\nIII. Thou shalt observe the feast of unleaven bread.\n\nIV. Every first-born is mine.\n\nV. Six days shalt thou toil, but on the seventh thou shalt rest.\n\nVI. Thou shalt observe the feast of weeks and ingathering at the end of\nthe year,\n\nVII. Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven. VIII.\nThe fat of my feast shall not be left until morning.\n\nIX. The best of the first-fruits of thy land shalt thou bring to the\nhouse of Jehovah.\n\nX. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother's milk.\n\n[Sidenote: _Its date_]\n\nThese laws bear on their face the evidence of their primitive date and\norigin. They define religion not in the terms of life, as does the\nfamiliar prophetic decalogue of Exodus xx., but, like the old Babylonian\nreligion, in the terms of the ritual. Loyalty to Jehovah, as the God of\nthe nation, and fidelity to the demands of the cult is their watchword.\nTheir antiquity and the central position they occupy in Old Testament\nlegislation are shown further by the fact that all of them are again\nquoted in other codes, and most of them four or five times in the Old\nTestament. Three of them apply to agricultural life; but agriculture is\nnot entirely unknown to the nomadic life of the wilderness. Possibly\nin their present form certain of these commands have been adapted to\nconditions in Canaan, but the majority reflect the earliest stages in\nHebrew history. In all probability the decalogue in its original form\ncame from Moses, as the earliest traditions assert, although comparative\nSemitic religion demonstrates that many of the institutions here\nreflected long antedated the days of the great leader.\n\n[Sidenote: _The_ Judgements _of Exodus xxi., xxii_]\n\nAlthough in part contemporary, the next stage in the development\nof Israelitish law is represented by the civil, social, and humane\ndecalogues in Exodus xx. 28 to xxiii. 19. The best preserved group is\nfound in xxi.1 to xxii.20, and bears the title _Judgments_, which recalls\nHammurabi's title to his code, The _Judgments_ of Righteousness. Like\nthis great Babylonian code, the Hebrew _Judgments_ deal with civil and\nsocial cases, and are usually introduced by the formula, _If so and so_,\nfollowed by the penalty or decision to be rendered. They are evidently\nintended primarily for the guidance of judges. The parallels with the\ncode of Hammurabi are many, both in theme, form, and penalty, although\nthere is no conclusive evidence that the Hebrew borrowed directly\nfrom the older Babylonian. Undoubtedly many of the striking points of\nresemblance are due simply to common Semitic ideas and institutions and\nto the recurrence of similar questions. But on the whole, the Hebrew\nlaws place a higher estimate on life and less on property. They reflect\nalso a simpler type of civilization than the Babylonian.\n\n[Sidenote: _Their arrangement and contents_]\n\nWhen three or four obviously later additions have been removed, the\n_Judgments_ are found to consist of five decalogues, each divided\ninto two pentads which deal with different phases of the same general\nsubject. They are as follows:\n\n_First Decalogue: The Rights of Slaves._\n\nFirst Pentad: Males, Ex. xxi. 2,3a, 3b, 4,5-6. Second Pentad: Females,\nxxi. 7, 8, 9,10, 11.\n\n_Second Decalogue: Assaults._\n\nFirst Pentad: Capital Offences, xxi. 12, 13,14, 15, 16.\n\nSecond Pentad: Minor Offences, xxi. 18-19, 20, 21, 26, 27.\n\n_Third Decalogue: Laws regarding Domestic Animals._\n\nFirst Pentad: Injuries by Animals, xxi. 28, 29, 30, 31, 32.\n\nSecond Pentad: Injuries to Animals, xxi. 33-34, 35, 36; xxii. 1,4.\n\n_Fourth Decalogue: Responsibility for Property._\n\nFirst Pentad: In General, xxii. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.\n\nSecond Pentad: In Cattle, xxii. 10-11, 13, 14, l5a, I5b.\n\n_Fifth Decalogue: Social Purity._\n\nFirst Pentad: Adultery, Deut. xxii. 13-19, 20-21, 22, 23-24, 25-27.\n\nSecond Pentad: Fornication and Apostasy, Ex. xxii. 16, 17, 18, 19, 20.\n\n[Sidenote: _Their date_]\n\nMany of these laws anticipate the settled agricultural conditions of\nPalestine. Society, however, is very simple. The decalogue and peatad\nform also points clearly to an early period, when the laws were\ntransmitted orally. Many of the laws probably came from the days of the\nwilderness wandering, and therefore go back to the age of Moses, in some\ncases much earlier, as is shown by close analogies with the code of\nHammurabi. Although in their present written form these oral _Judgments_\nbear the marks of the Northern Israelitish prophetic writers who have\npreserved them, the majority, if not all, may with confidence be\nassigned to the days of David and Solomon.\n\n[Sidenote: _The early humane and ceremonial laws_]\n\nThe remaining verses of Exodus xx. 23 to xxiii. 19, contain, groups of\nhumane and ceremonial laws. In the process of transmission they have\nbeen somewhat disarranged, but, with the aid of the fuller duplicate\nversions in Deuteronomy, four complete decalogues can be restored and\npart of a fifth. The following analysis will suggest their general\ncharacter and contents:\n\n\nHUMANE AND CEREMONIAL LAWS\n\n_First Decalogue: Kindness._\n\nFirst Pentad: Towards Men, Ex. xxii. 2la, 22-23, 25a, 25b, 26-27.\n\nSecond Pentad; Towards Animals, Ex, xxiii. 4 [Deut. xxii. 1], Deut.\nxxii. 2, 3; Ex. xxiii. 5\n\n[Deut. xxii. 4], Deut. xxii. 6-7.\n\n_Second Decalogue: Justice_.\n\nFirst Pentad: Among Equals, Ex. xxiii. 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b, 3.\n\nSecond Pentad: On the Part of those in Authority, xxiii, 6, 7a, 7b, 7c,\n8.\n\n\n_Third Decalogue: Duties to God._\n\nFirst Pentad: Worship, Ex. xx. 23a, 23b, 24, 25, 26.\n\nSecond Pentad: Loyalty, Ex. xxii. 28, 29a, 29b, 30, 31.\n\n_Fourth Decalogue: Sacred Seasons._\n\nFirst Pentad: Command to Observe them, xxiii. 10-11, 12, l5a, 16a, 16b.\n\nSecond Pentad: Method of Observing them, xxiii, 17, 18a, 18b, 19a, 19b.\n\n[Sidenote: _Period represented by the primitive codes_]\n\nHere the primitive ceremonial decalogue has been expanded into the third\nand fourth group given above. Like the _Judgments_, these decalogues\nbear testimony to their northern origin, and probably they also have\nhad much the same history, although their relation to the primitive\ndecalogue and the fact that they are prefixed and added to the solid\ngroup of _Judgments_, would seem to indicate that they were somewhat\nlater. These two collections, together with their older prototype, the\nancient decalogue, represent the growth of Israel's laws during the\nfour centuries beginning with Moses and extending to about 800 B. C. To\ndistinguish them from later collections they may be designated as the\n_Primitive Codes_.\n\n[Sidenote: _The need for new laws_]\n\nThe eighth and seventh centuries before Christ which brought to the\nHebrews great crises and revolutionary changes in both their political\nand religious life, witnessed the epoch-making work of Amos, Hosea,\nIsaiah, and Micah. This remarkable group of prophets proclaimed so many\nnew principles that a fundamental revision and expansion of Israel's\nprimitive codes became necessary in order to adapt the latter to the new\nneeds of the age. The reactionary reign of Manasseh had also brought out\nplainly the contrast between the older heathen cults, still cherished\nby the people, and the exalted ideals of the true prophets. If the\nprophetic teachings were to become operative in the life of the\nnation, it was also seen that they must be expressed in concrete legal\nenactments, which could be universally understood and definitely\nenforced.\n\n[Sidenote: _Application of prophetic principles in the life of the\npeople_]\n\nAccordingly, a group of prophets, disciples of the older masters,\nand inspired by the spirit of reform, devoted themselves to this\nall-important task. The results of their work are represented by the\nprophetic law-book of Deuteronomy. Through its pages glow the new\nethical teachings of the prophets of the Assyrian period. The elements\nof Hosea's doctrine, love to God and love to men and kindness to the\nneedy and oppressed, in their new setting and application, make it one\nof the evangels of the Old Testament. Its lofty standards of justice\nand social responsibility reflect the impassioned addresses of Amos\nand Hosea. Since the new laws, as a whole, represented the practical\napplication of the messages of the prophets to life, they were justly\nand appropriately placed in the mouth of Moses, the real and traditional\nhead of the nation and of the prophetic order.\n\n[Sidenote: _Relation to the older laws_]\n\nA comparison of this prophetic law-book with the older primitive laws\nshows that the latter were made the basis of the new codes, since most\nof them, in revised form, are also found in Deuteronomy. The prophetic\nlawmakers, however, in the same spirit that actuated Jesus in his\nattitude toward the ancient law, freely modified, supplemented, and in\nsome cases substituted for the primitive enactments, laws that more\nperfectly embodied the later revelation.\n\n[Sidenote: _Promulgation and date of the prophetic codes_]\n\nThe nature of the reforms instituted by Josiah, according to II Kings\nxxii., clearly prove that the laws which inspired them were those of\nDeuteronomy, and that this was the law-book discovered in the temple by\nHilkiah the priest and publicly read and promulgated by the king in 621\nB.C. Originally it was probably prepared by the prophetic reformers as a\nbasis for their work; but it incorporates not only most of the primitive\ncodes, but also many other ancient laws and groups of laws, some\ndoubtless coming from the earliest periods of Israel's history. It also\nappears to have been further supplemented after the reformation of\nJosiah. In general it represents the second great stage in Old Testament\nlaw, as it rapidly developed between 800 and 600 B.C. under the\ninspiring preaching of the remarkable prophets of the Assyrian period.\n\n[Sidenote: _Their historical and permanent value_]\n\nThese laws represent, in many ways, the high-water mark of Old Testament\nlegislation. Every effort is made to eliminate that which experience had\nproved to be imperfect in the older laws and customs. The chief aim\nis to protect the rights of the wronged and dependent. The appeal\nthroughout is not to the fear of punishment--in a large number of laws\nno penalty is suggested--but to the individual conscience. Not merely\nformal worship is demanded, but a love to God so personal that it\ndominates the individual heart and soul and finds expression through\nenergies completely devoted to his service. These laws required strict\njustice, but more than that, mercy and practical charity toward the\nweak and needy and afflicted. Even the toiling ox and the helpless\nmother-bird and her young are not beyond the kin of these wonderful\nlaws. Under their benign influence the divine principles of the prophets\nbegan to mould directly the character and life of the Israelitish race.\nThe man who lives in accord with their spirit and injunctions to-day\nfinds himself on the straight and narrow way, hallowed by the feet of\nthe Master.\n\n\n\n\nIX\n\nINFLUENCES THAT GAVE RISE TO THE PRIESTLY LAWS AND HISTORIES\n\n[Sidenote: _Influences in the exile that produced written ceremonial\nlaws_]\n\nThe Babylonian exile gave a great opportunity and incentive to the\nfurther development of written law. While the temple stood, the\nceremonial rites and customs received constant illustration, and were\ntransmitted directly from father to son in the priestly families. Hence,\nthere was little need of writing them down. But when most of the priests\nwere carried captive to Babylonia, as in 597 B.C., and ten years later\nthe temple was laid in ruins and all sacrifice and ceremonial worship\nsuddenly ceased, written records at once became indispensable, if the\ncustoms and rules of Israel's ritual were to be preserved. The integrity\nand future of the scattered Israelitish race also largely depended upon\nkeeping alive their distinctive traditions. Torn from their altars,\nthe exiled priests not only had a strong incentive, but likewise the\nleisure, to write. The ritualistic zeal of their Babylonian masters\ndoubtless further inspired them. The result was, that during the\nBabylonian exile and the following century most of the ceremonial laws\nin the Old Testament appear to have been first committed to writing.\n\n[Sidenote: _Ezekiel's Code_]\n\nEven Ezekiel, the prophet of the early exile, yielded to the influence\nof his early priestly training and the needs of the situation. In 572 he\nissued the unique code found in chapters xl.-xlviii. of his prophecy. It\nprovides for the rebuilding of the temple, and defines the duties of its\ndifferent officials and the form of ritual that is to be observed. The\nwhole is intended primarily to emphasize, through the arrangement of the\nsanctuary and the forms of the ceremonial, the transcendent holiness of\nJehovah. Ezekiel also proclaims, through this elaborate program for the\nrestored community, the certainty that the exiles would be allowed to\nreturn and rebuild the temple. He evidently reproduces many of the\nproportions and regulations of the first temple, but, with the same\nfreedom that characterizes the authors of the Deuteronomic codes, he\nunhesitatingly sets aside earlier usages where something better has been\nrevealed.\n\n[Sidenote: _Genesis and character of the Holiness Code_]\n\nEzekiel's code was never fully adopted by the later Jews, for much of\nit was symbolic rather than practical; but it powerfully influenced\nsubsequent lawmakers, and was indicative of the dominant tendency of\nthe day. Even before he issued his code, some like-minded priest had\ncollected and arranged an important group of laws, which appear to\nhave been familiar to Ezekiel himself. They are found in Leviticus\nxvii.-xxvi., and have felicitously been designated as the _Holiness\nCode_, because they constantly emphasize the holiness of Jehovah and the\nnecessity of the people's being holy in thought and act. In chapters\nxvii.-xix. most of the original laws are still arranged in the decalogue\nand pentad form. This strong evidence that they had been transmitted by\nword of mouth from a much earlier period is supported by their contents.\nThey resemble and supplement the primitive laws of Exodus xx. 23\nto xxiii. 19. Many of them probably came from the early periods of\nIsraelitish history. Most of the laws, like those of the prophetic codes\nin Deuteronomy, are ethical and humane rather than ceremonial. The\ncode, as a whole, is a remarkable combination of prophetic and priestly\nteaching. It marks the transition from the age of the prophets,\nrepresented by Deuteronomy, to that of the priests and ritual,\nrepresented by the priestly codes proper. Like every important early\ncollection of laws, It also has been much supplemented by later editors;\nthe original Holiness Code, however, may be given a date soon after the\nfirst captivity in 597 B.C.\n\n[Sidenote: _The priestly codes_]\n\nThe influences represented by Ezekiel and the Holiness Code have given\nus the remaining laws of the Old Testament. These are found in Leviticus\ni-xvi., xxviii., and, excepting Exodus xx.-xxiii., xxxiv., in the legal\nsections of Exodus and Numbers. They deal almost entirely with\nsuch ceremonial subjects, as the forms and rules of sacrifice, the\nobservation of the annual religious festivals, and the rights and duties\nof priests. Many of them incorporated laws and customs as old or older\nthan the days of Moses. An early and important group, technically known\nas the Priestly teaching (Lev. i.-iii., v.-vii., xi.-xv.; Num. v.,\nvi., xv., xix. 14-22), is repeatedly designated as _the torah of the\nburnt-offering_ (Lev. vi. 9), or _the torah of the meal-offering_ (vi,\n14), or _the torah of the unclean and clean beast or bird_ (xi. 46, 47).\nIt is evidently based upon the _toroth_, or decisions, rendered by the\npriests concerning the various ceremonial questions thus treated. The\nrecurring phrase, _according to the ordinance_, probably refers to the\nfixed usage observed in connection with the first temple.\n\n[Sidenote: _Their date_]\n\nThe atmosphere and point of view of these priestly laws as a whole are\nthe exilic and post-exilic periods. The ritual has become much more\nelaborate, the position of the priests much more prominent, and their\nincome far greater than before the exile. The distinction between priest\nand Levite, which was not recognized before the exile, is clearly\ndefined. The annual feasts have increased, and their old joyous\ncharacter has largely disappeared under the dark shadow of the exile.\nSin-offerings, guilt-offerings, trespass-offerings, and the day of\natonement (practically unknown before the fall of Jerusalem in 586 B.C.)\nreflect the spirit of the later Judaism which sought to win Jehovah's\nfavor by its many sacrifices. Within these priestly codes there is also\nevidence of development. The older collections, such as the priestly\nteachings, were probably made early in the Babylonian exile. Others\nrepresent the gradual expansion and supplementing of these older groups,\nthe process apparently continuing until the days of Nehemiah and Ezra.\nThe whole, therefore, is the fruit of the remarkable priestly literary\nactivity between 600 and 400 B.C., and possibly extending even later.\n\n[Sidenote: _Adoption of the priestly law about 400 B.C._]\n\nThe Jewish community which Nehemiah found in Palestine was still living\nunder the Deuteronomic law, and apparently knew nothing of the very\ndifferent demands of the priestly codes. His reform measures recorded in\nNehemiah v. and xiii., as well as his effective work in repairing the\nwalls, prepared the way for the sweeping innovations which followed the\npublic acceptance of the new law-book, brought according to tradition by\nEzra. Five out of the eight regulations specified by the oath then taken\nby the leaders of the nation (Neh. x. 30-39) are found only in the\npriestly codes; one of them, indeed, is not presented elsewhere in the\nOld Testament. Henceforth the life of the Jewish race is moulded\nby these later codes. It is, therefore, safe to conclude that they\nconstituted the essence of the new law-book solemnly adopted by the\nJewish community as its guide somewhere about 400 B.C.\n\n[Sidenote: _Aim and characteristics of the priestly narratives_]\n\nInasmuch as the interest of the priests centred in ceremonial\ninstitutions and the history of the law rather than about individuals\nand politics, it was natural that they also should write their own\nhistory of the race. Their general purpose was to give an introduction\nand setting to their laws. As might be anticipated, this priestly\nhistory incorporates the traditions of the late priestly school, and\ntherefore those current long centuries after the events recorded\ntranspired. As in the case of the prophetic narratives, the aim is not\nprimarily historical, but doctrinal. The peculiar vocabulary, language,\nand theological conceptions are those which distinguish the post-exilic\npriestly editors of the latest Old Testament laws.\n\n[Sidenote: _Their sketch of the earlier history_]\n\nTheir history begins with the majestic account of creation in Genesis i.\n1 to ii. 4a. God does not form man from the dust, as in the primitive\nprophetic account, but by a simple word of command; and by progressive\nacts of creation he realizes his perfect plan, which culminates in the\ncreation of mankind. The literary style is that of a legalist: formal,\nprecise, repetitious, and generic. The ultimate aim of the narrative\nis to trace the origin of the institution of the Sabbath back to the\ncreation. The genealogical history of Genesis v. connects this account\nof creation with the priestly version of the flood story which leads\nup to the covenant with Noah. The priestly genealogical histories of\nGenesis x. and xi. 10-27 trace the ancestry of the Hebrews through\nAbraham. Regarding this patriarch these later historians present only a\nbrief sketch; in Genesis xvii., however, they expand their narrative\nto give in detail the origin of the rite of circumcision, which they\nassociate with him. Jacob is to them chiefly of interest as the father\nof the ten tribes.\n\n[Sidenote: _from Egypt to Canaan_]\n\nThe history of the experiences of the Hebrews in Egypt is briefly\noutlined as the prelude to the traditional institution of the feast\nof the passover. Sinai, however, is the great goal of the priestly\nnarratives, for about it they group all their laws. It is their concrete\nmethod of proclaiming the antiquity and divine origin of Israelitish\nlegislation. The period of the wilderness wandering is also made the\nbackground of many important legal precedents. The priestly history\nconcludes with an account of the conquest of Canaan and the allotment of\nthe territory to the different tribes.\n\n[Sidenote: _The lack of historical perspective_]\n\nIn these late priestly narratives the historical perspective is\nsometimes considerably shortened and sometimes lengthened. Moreover,\ntheir representation often differs widely from that of the parallel but\nmuch earlier prophetic histories. The original traditions have also\nassumed larger proportions, and the supernatural element is much more\nprominent. This is evidently the result of long transmission, in an age\nthat had largely lost the historic sense, and among the priestly exiles,\nwho were far removed from the real life of Palestine.\n\n[Sidenote: _Variations between the older and later narratives_.]\n\nThe wide variations between the older prophetic and late priestly\naccounts of the same events might be illustrated by scores of examples.\nThe following parallel account of the exodus will suffice:\n\n[Sidenote: _Early Judean Prophetic Account_]\n\nEx. xiv. l9b. Then the pillar of cloud changed its position from before\nthem and stood behind them. (20b) And the cloud lighted up the night;\nyet throughout the entire night the one _army_ did not come near the\nother. (21b) And Jehovah caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind\nall the night, and made the bed of the sea dry. (24b) And it came to\npass in the watch before the dawn that Jehovah looked forth through the\npillar of fire and of cloud upon the host of the Egyptians, (25) and he\nbound their horsemen.\n\n[Sidenote: _Late Priestly Account of the Exodus_]\n\n(21a, c) Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and the waters\nwere divided, (22) so that the Israelites went into the midst of the sea\non the dry ground; and the waters were a wall to them on their right\nhand and on their left. (23b) And the Egyptians went in after them\ninto the midst of the sea, all Pharaoh's horses, his chariots, and his\nhorsemen. (26) Then Jehovah said to Moses, Stretch out thy hand over\nthe sea, that the waters may come again upon the Egyptians, upon\ntheir chariots and their chariot wheels, so that they proceeded with\ndifficulty. Then the Egyptians said, Let us flee from before Israel;\nfor Jehovah fighteth for them against the Egyptians. (27b) But the sea\nreturned to its ordinary level toward morning, while the Egyptians were\nflying before it. And Jehovah shook off the Egyptians into the midst of\nthe sea, (28b) so that not one of them remained. (30) Thus Jehovah saved\nIsrael that day out of the power of the Egyptians; and Israel saw the\nEgyptians dead upon the sea-shore.\n\n(27a) So Moses stretched forth his hand over the sea, (28a) and the\nwaters returned and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, even all the\nhost of Pharaoh that went in after them into the sea. (29) But the\nIsraelites walked upon dry land in the midst of the sea, the waters\nbeing a wall to them on their right hand, and on their left. [Footnote:\n\"Student's Old Testament,\" Vol. I., 175, 176.]\n\n[Sidenote: _Inferior historical value of the priestly narratives_]\n\nNo one can doubt for a moment that the older, simpler, and more natural\nversion is, from the historical point of view, the more accurate.\nThe normal man to-day has outgrown the craving for the grotesquely\nsupernatural. The omnipotent, omniscient, loving Creator, who\nreveals himself through the growing flower, commands our admiration\nas fully as a God who speaks through the unusual and extraordinary.\nEverything is possible with God, and the man is blind indeed who would\ndeny the Infinite Being, who is all and in all, the ability to pass\nbeyond the bounds of that which we, with our extremely limited vision,\nhave designated as natural. The real question is, How did God see fit to\naccomplish his ends? Our judicial and historical sense unhesitatingly\ninclines to the older and simpler narratives as containing the true\nanswer. In distinguishing these different strands of narrative, it must\nbe acknowledged that modern biblical scholarship has performed a service\ninvaluable alike to the student of literature, of history, and of\nrevelation.\n\n[Sidenote: _Recognition of their defects and real value_]\n\nIn passing, it is instructive to note that, almost without exception,\nIngersoll's once famous examples of the mistakes of Moses were drawn\nfrom the priestly narratives. It is safe to predict that had that\nlearned jurist been introduced, when a boy, to the Old Testament, as\nrevealed in modern light, he would have enjoyed a very different popular\nfame. In the divine economy, however, even the sledge-hammer of ridicule\nmay play an important r\u00f4le in shattering false claims and the untenable\ntheories which obscure the real truth. It is wholesome to apply the\nprinciple of relative values to the Bible, since one cannot fully\nappreciate the best without recognizing that which is inferior. These\npriestly narratives come from a school which, in its reverence for the\nform and the letter, had began to lose sight of the vital and spiritual.\nIts still later product is that ritualistic Judaism which stands in such\nunfavorable contrast to the perfected spiritual revelation which came\nthrough Jesus. At the same time, the recognition of the defects of the\nlate priestly school should not deter us from appreciating the rich\nreligious teaching of a narrative like the first chapter of Genesis,\nnor from accepting its great message, namely, that through all natural\nphenomena and history God is revealing and perfecting his gracious\npurpose.\n\n[Sidenote: _The ecclesiastical history of Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah_]\n\nThe long ecclesiastical history found in I and II Chronicles and the\noriginal sequel of these books, Ezra and Nehemiah, were written from the\nsame general point of view as the late priestly narratives, but in a\nmuch later period. The same peculiar literary style and conceptions,\nwhich recur throughout these four books, show clearly that they are from\none author and age. Since they trace the history to the beginning of the\nGreek period and speak of the kings and events of the Persian period as\nif they belonged to the distant past, it is evident that the anonymous\nauthor, who is usually designated as the Chronicler, lived after the\nconquests of Alexander. The internal evidence all points to the middle\nof the third century before Christ as the date of their composition.\n\n[Sidenote: _Its general point of view_]\n\nFrom the author's evident interest in the ritual of the temple, and\nespecially its song service, it would appear that he belonged to one of\nthe guilds of temple singers that became prominent in the post-exilic\nperiod. His history centres about the sanctuary and its services. Since\nJudah, not Israel, is the land of the temple, Northern Israel is almost\ncompletely ignored. Like the late priestly historians, his chief aim\nis to trace the origin of the ceremonial institutions back to the\nbeginnings of Hebrew history. Thus he represents the song service and\nthe guilds of singers as having been established in the days of David.\nLiving as he did under the glamour of the great Persian and Greek\nempires, he, in common with his contemporaries, idealized the past\nglories of his race. As we compare his versions of early events with\nthe older parallel accounts of Samuel and Kings, we find that iron\nhas become gold, and hundreds have become thousands, and defeats are\ntransformed into victories. No mention is made of the crimes of such\nkings as David and Solomon, since they are venerated profoundly as the\nfounders of the temple.\n\n[Sidenote: _Sources of I and II Chronicles_]\n\nThe basis of I and II Chronicles is the prophetic history of Samuel and\nKings; from these the author quotes _verbatim_ chapter after chapter,\naccording as their contents are adapted to his purpose. This groundwork\nhe supplements by introducing the priestly traditions current in his\nown day. Possibly he quotes also from certain somewhat earlier written\ncollections of traditions, for to those, following the example of\nthe author of Kings, he frequently refers his readers for further\ninformation. In some cases these later traditions may have preserved\nauthentic, supplemental data; but when the representation of Chronicles\ndiffers, as it frequently does, from that of Samuel and Kings, the older\nand more sober prophetic history is undoubtedly to be followed.\n\n[Sidenote: _The older sources quoted in Ezra-Nehemiah_]\n\nIn Ezra and Nehemiah the author has preserved some exceedingly valuable\nhistorical material, for he has quoted, fortunately, long sections from\ntwo or three older sources. Oae is the document in Ezra iv. 7 to vi. 14,\nthe original Aramaic of which is retained. This appears to have been\na temple record, dating from the middle or latter part of the Persian\nperiod, and tells of the interruption of the temple building in the days\nof Darius and the finding of the original decree of Cyrus sanctioning\nthe restoration of the shrine of Jerusalem. Still more important is the\nwonderful memoir of Nehemiah quoted in Nehemiah i., ii., iv. to vii. 5,\nxii. 31, 32, 37-40, and xiii. 4-31. Here we are able to study the events\nof an exceedingly important period through the eyes of the man who, by\nhis able and self-sacrificing efforts, did more than any one else\nto develop and shape later Judaism. Less important, yet suggestive,\ncitations are taken from the priestly traditions regarding the work of\nEzra. The final editor has apparently rearranged this material in order\nto give to the work of Ezra the scribe such precedence over that of\nNehemiah the layman, as, from his later Levitical point of view, he\ndeemed proper. Restoring what seems to have been the original order\n(_i.e._, Ezra vii. viii., Neh. vii. 70 to viii. 18; Ezra ix., x.; Neh.\nix., x.) and studying it as the sequel of Nehemiah's essential pioneer\nwork, the obscurities of this period begin to disappear and its\nsignificant facts to stand out in clear relief.\n\n[Sidenote: _Value of the writings of the priestly school_]\n\nThus we find that, quoting largely as he does, from much older sources,\nthe author of this great ecclesiastical history of Judah and the\ntemple has given us, in Ezra and Nehemiah, some exceedingly important\nhistorical data. His writings also clearly reveal the ideas and\ninstitutions of his own day; but otherwise it is not as history that his\nwork is of permanent value. Rather it is because, in common with all the\ngreat teachers who speak to us through the Old Testament, he believed\nfirmly in the moral order of the universe, and that back of all events\nand all history is an infinitely powerful yet just and merciful God who\nis constantly revealing himself to mankind. While these later priestly\nwriters were not in such close touch with fact and life as were the\nprophets, and while they were subject to the defects of all extreme\nritualists and theologians, they were faithful heralds of truth to their\nown and later generations. Behind their symbolism and traditions lie\ncertain great universal principles which amply reward an earnest quest.\n\n\n\n\nX\n\nTHE HEBREW SAGES AND THEIR PROVERBS\n\n[Sidenote: _R\u00f4le of the sages in Israel's life_]\n\nIn the days of Jeremiah and Ezekiel (Jer. xviii. 18; Ezek. vii. 26)\nthree distinct classes of religious teachers were recognized by the\npeople: the prophets, the priests, and the wise men or sages. From\ntheir lips and pens have come practically all the writings of the Old\nTestament. Of these three classes the wise men or sages are far less\nprominent or well known. They wrote no history of Israel, they preached\nno public sermons, nor do they appear to have been connected with any\nsanctuaries. Quietly, as private teachers, they appealed to the nation\nthrough the consciences and wills of individuals. Proverbs viii. 1-5\nreveals their methods:\n\n  Doth not wisdom cry,\n  And understanding put forth her voice?\n  On the top of high places by the way,\n  Where the paths meet, she standeth;\n  Beside the gates, at the entry of the city,\n  At the coining in at the doors, she crieth aloud:\n  Unto you, O men, I call;\n  And my voice is to the sons of men.\n  O ye simple, understand prudence;\n  And ye fools, be of an understanding heart.\n\nAt the open spaces beside the city gates, where legal cases were tried,\nat the intersections of the streets, wherever men congregated, the sages\nof ancient Israel could be found, ready and eager to instruct or advise\nthe inexperienced and foolish.\n\n[Sidenote: _Their functions_]\n\nThe wise man or sage is a characteristic Oriental figure. First Kings\niv. 30 speaks of the far-famed wisdom of the nomadic tribes of northern\nArabia and of the wisdom of Egypt. The sage appears to have been the\nproduct of the early nomadic Semitic life, in which books were unknown\nand the practical wisdom gained by experience was treasured in the minds\nof certain men who were called the wise or sages. In our more complex\nwestern life such functions have been distributed among the members of\nthe legal, medical, and clerical professions, but even now, in smaller\ntowns, may be found an Uncle Toby who is the counterpart of the ancient\nHebrew sage. To men of this type young and old resort with their private\nproblems, and rarely return without receiving real help and light. In\nthe East, sages are still to be found, usually gray-bearded elders,\nhonored and influential in the tribe or town.\n\n[Sidenote: _Source of their knowledge and inspiration_]\n\nOf the three classes of Israel's teachers the sages stood in closest\ntouch with the people. They were naturally the father-confessors of the\ncommunity. Observation was their guide, enlightened common sense their\ninterpreter, and experience their teacher. The great book of human life,\nwhich is one of the most important chapters of divine revelation, was\nthrown open wide before them. The truths that they read there, as their\neyes were divinely opened to see it, are recorded in the wisdom books of\nthe Old Testament,--Proverbs, Job, The Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes.\n\n[Sidenote: _The objects of their attention_]\n\nIt is significant that neither Israel nor the nation is mentioned in all\nthe wisdom literature, and that man is spoken of thirty-three times\nin the book of Proverbs alone. Man was the object of their study and\nteaching; the nation, only as it was made up of individuals. In this\nrespect the sages stand in contrast with the prophets, whose message\nusually is to the nation. They also have little to say about the ritual\nor the forms of religion. _To them the fear and knowledge of God is the\nbeginning of wisdom_, and its end a normal relation to God, to one's\nfellowmen, and to life. Their message is directed equally to all\nmankind. The subjects that command, their attention are of universal\ninterest: the nature and tendencies of man, and his relations and duties\nto God, to society, to the family, and to himself. Everything that\nconcerns man, whether it be the tilling of the soil, the choice of a\nwife, the conduct of a lawsuit, or the proper deportment in the presence\nof a ruler, commands their earnest consideration.\n\n[Sidenote: _Their aims not theoretical but practical_]\n\nThe Hebrew sages, however, were not mere students of human nature or\nphilosophers. Knowledge to them was not an end in itself, but only a\nmeans. Their contribution to Israel's life was counsel (Jer. xviii.\n18). Their aim was, by the aid of their tried maxims, to so advise the\ninexperienced, the foolish, indeed, all who needed advice, that they\nmight live the fullest and best lives and successfully attain all worthy\nends. While their teaching was distinctively ethical and religious, it\nwas also very practical and utilitarian. As pastors and advisers of the\npeople, they drew their principles and ideals from Israel's prophets,\nand applied them to the practical, every-day problems of life. It is\nobvious that without their patient, devoted instruction the preparation\nof the chosen people for their mission would have been imperfect, and\nthat without a record of their teachings the Old Testament would have\nbeen incomplete.\n\n[Sidenote: _Their teachings preserved in proverbs_]\n\nThe proverb was the most characteristic literary form in which the sages\ntreasured and imparted their teachings. Poetical in structure, terse,\noften figurative or epigrammatic, the proverb was well calculated to\narouse individual thought and make a deep impression on the mind.\nTransmitted from mouth to mouth for many generations, like the popular\ntradition or law, it lost by attrition all its unnecessary elements, so\nthat, 'like an arrow,' it shot straight to the mark. Based on common\nhuman experience, it found a ready response in the heart of man. In this\nway crystallized experience was transmitted, gathering effectiveness\nand volume in each succeeding generation. Job viii. 8-10 speaks of this\naccumulated wisdom handed down from _the former age, that which the\nfathers have searched out. They shall teach man and inform him, and\nutter words out of their heart_. Job xv. 18 also refers to that _which\nwise men have told from their fathers and have not hid it_. A proverb\nthus orally transmitted not only gains in beauty of form but also in\nauthority, for it is constantly being tested in the laboratory of real\nlife and receives the silent attestation of thousands of men and of\nmany different generations.\n\n[Sidenote: _Expansion of the proverb_]\n\nWhen the sages desired to treat a many-sided subject, as, for example,\nintemperance, they still used proverbs, but combined them into brief\ngnomic essays (_e. g_., xxiii. 29-85, xxvi. 1-17). Sometimes, to fix the\nattention of their hearers, they combined two proverbs, so as to produce\na paradox, as in Proverbs xxvi. 4, 5:\n\n  Answer not a fool according to his folly,\n  Lest them also be like unto him.\n  Answer a fool according to his folly,\n  Lest he be wise in his own conceit.\n\nLater they developed the simple gnomic essay into a philosophical\ndrama, of which Job is the classic example, or into a homily, like\nEcclesiastes.\n\n[Sidenote: _Use of fables and riddles_]\n\nSide by side with the proverb, the sages appear from the earliest times\nto have used the fable also; this is illustrated by the fable of Jotham\nin Judges ix. 6-21. Of the riddle a famous examples is that of Samson\nin Judges xiv. 14, 18, which combines rhythm of sound with rhythm of\nthought and well illustrates the form of the earliest popular Hebrew\npoetry:\n\n  Out of the eater came something to eat,\n  And out of the strong came something sweet,\n\n  And its answer: If with my heifer you did not plow,\n  You had not solved my riddle now.\n\nProverbs xxx. 15-31 contains a collection of numerical riddles, combined\nwith their answers.\n\n[Sidenote: _Traces of proverbs and the work of sages in the Hebrew\nhistory_]\n\nProverbs are found in the oldest Hebrew literature. The Midianite kings,\nawaiting death at the hand of Gideon, cite a popular proverb, _For as\nthe man, so is his strength_. David in his conversation with Saul says,\n_As runs the proverb, \"Out of the wicked cometh forth wickedness\"_ (I\nSam. xxiv. 13). Frequent references are also found to wise men and\nwomen, and examples are given of their prudence and insight Thus Joab,\nDavid's iron-hearted commander, brings a wise woman from Tekoa, the\nlater home of the prophet Amos, to aid him in securing the recall of the\nbanished Absalom. By her feigned story she succeeds in working upon the\nsympathy of the king to such a degree that he commits himself finally to\na principle which she at once asks him to apply to the case of his own\nson (II Sam. xiv. 1-24).\n\n[Sidenote: _Basis of Solomon's reputation for wisdom_]\n\nThe stories told in I Kings iii. 16-28, to illustrate the wisdom of\nSolomon, suggest the historical basis of the reputation which he enjoyed\nin the thought of succeeding generations. Such stories also indicate, as\ndo the other early examples of the work of the wise, the conception of\nwisdom held in that more primitive age. Such wisdom does not necessarily\ninclude ethical righteousness or even practical executive ability, for\nthe true Solomon of history was lacking in both; but rather a certain.\nshrewdness, versatility, and keenness of insight which enable its\npossessor to discern what is not clearly apparent. First Kings iv. 29-34\ncontains the later popular tradition of Solomon's wisdom:\n\n(29) And God gave Solomon wisdom and insight in plentiful measure, and\nbreadth of mind, even as the sand that is on the seashore, (30) so that\nSolomon's wisdom surpassed the wisdom of all the eastern Arabians and\nall the wisdom of Egypt. (31) For he was wiser than all men: than Ethan\nthe Ezrahite, and Heman, Calcol, Darda, the sons of Mahol, and his fame\nwas in all the surrounding nations. (32) And he uttered three thousand\nproverbs, and his songs were five thousand. (33) And he spoke of\ndifferent varieties of trees, from the cedar that is in Lebanon even to\nthe hyssop that springs out of the wall; he spoke also of beasts, of\nbirds, of creeping things, and of fishes. (34) And there came some from\namong all peoples to hear the wisdom of Solomon, deputed by all\nkings of the earth, who had heard of his wisdom.\n\n[Sidenote: _Reason why all ancient proverbs were attributed to him_]\n\nA popular proverb, like a primitive oral law, usually grows out of\ncommon human experience, and is gradually formulated and moulded into\nits final literary form by successive generations. No one man can claim\nit as his own, and even if he could, the ancient Semitic East, which\ncared so little about authors' titles, would have quickly forgotten his\nname. That Solomon did utter certain brilliant aphorisms, embellished by\nillustrations drawn from animal and plant life, cannot be doubted;\nand that some of them have been preserved in the book of Proverbs is\nprobable. These facts and the popular tradition that tended to exalt his\nwisdom clearly explain why all Hebrew proverbs were attributed to him\n(Prov. i. 1), in the days of the final editing of the book of Proverbs.\n\n[Sidenote: _Evidence that Proverbs comes from many different writers_]\n\nThat our present book of Proverbs is the work of many unknown sages,\nand consists of a collection of smaller groups coming from different\nperiods, is demonstrated by the superscriptions which recur throughout\nthe book, such as, _These are the proverbs of Solomon_ (x. 1), _These\nalso are the sayings of the wise_ (xxiv. 23), _These are the proverbs of\nSolomon which the men of_ _Hezekiah king of Judah copied out_ (xxv. 5),\n_The words of King Lemuel_ (xxxi. 1), The same proverbs also recur In\ndifferent groups, indicating that originally they were independent\ncollections, gleaned from the same field. When the first collection was\nmade, the title _Proverb of Solomon_ evidently meant a popular maxim\nhanded down from antiquity and therefore naturally attributed to the\nmost famous wise man in Israel's early history. It is an instructive\nfact that later proverbs, the immediate superscriptions to which plainly\nstate that they come from many different sages, are still called\n_Proverbs of Solomon;_ it betrays an exact parallel to the similar\ntendency, apparent in the legal and prophetic literature, to attribute\nlate anonymous writings to earlier authors. This is also further\nillustrated by such late Jewish books as _The Wisdom of Solomon_ or the\n_Psalms of Solomon._\n\n[Sidenote: _Testimony of the individual proverbs_]\n\nThe individual proverbs confirm the general conclusion that they come\nfrom many different authors. Those which commend fidelity to one wife\nand kingly consideration for the rights of subjects, qualities in which\nSolomon was sadly lacking, do not fit in his mouth. Many are written\nfrom the point of view of a subject, and describe what a man should do\nin the presence of a ruler. Furthermore, the ethical standards upheld\nare those of prophets who lived and taught long after the days of the\nGrand Monarch who fascinated his own and succeeding generations by his\nbrilliant wit rather than by his sterling virtues.\n\n[Sidenote: _Real nature of Proverbs_]\n\nThe book of Proverbs is far more than an epitome of his versatile\nsayings: it represents at least ten centuries of experience divinely\nguided, but won often through mistakes and bitter disappointments. It\ncontains the many index hands, set up before the eyes of men to point\nthem from error to truth, from folly to right, and from failure\nto success. Like most of the Old Testament books, it embodies the\ncontributions of many different teachers writing from many different\nages and points of view. Their common aim is well expressed by the sage\nwho appended to Proverbs the preface:\n\n  To acquire wisdom and training,\n  To understand rational discourse,\n  To receive training in wise conduct,\n  In uprightness, justice, and rectitude,\n  To impart discretion to the inexperienced,\n  To the young knowledge and insight;\n  That the wise man may hear and add to his learning,\n  And the man of intelligence gain education,\n  To understand a proverb and a parable,\n  The words of sages and their aphorisms.\n\n[Sidenote: _The first edition of Proverbs_]\n\nThe structure and contents of the book suggest its literary history.\nLike the New Testament, it appears to have passed through different\nstages, and to have been supplemented repeatedly by the addition of new\ncollections. The original nucleus is probably found in x. 1 to xxii.\n16; this is introduced by the simple superscription, _The Proverbs of\nSolomon_. The form of the proverb is simple; the atmosphere is joyous,\nprosperity prevails, virtue is rewarded; a king who loves justice and\nrighteousness is on the throne (xiv. 35, xvi. 10, 12, 13, xx. 8, xxii.\n11); the rich, and poor stand in the same relation to each other as\nin the days of the pre-exile prophets; and the teaching of their\nprophets--righteousness is more acceptable than sacrifice--is frequently\nreiterated (xv. 8, xvi. 6, xxi. 3, 27). While this long collection\ndoubtless contains many proverbs antedating even the beginnings of\nIsrael's history and possibly some added later, the indications are that\nthey represent the original edition of the book which the Jews carried\nwith them into the Babylonian exile. This early collection was perhaps\nmade under the inspiring influence of the reign of Josiah.\n\n[Sidenote: _Dates of the other collections_]\n\nUndoubtedly the remaining collections also contain many very ancient\nproverbs, but as a whole their literary form and thought is more\ncomplex. The descriptions of the kings suggest the Persian and Greek\ntyrants who ruled over the Jews during the long centuries after the\nexile (_cf._ xxv. 1-7, xxviii. 2, 12, 15, 28, xxix. 2, 4, 16, xix. 14),\nThe age of the prophets has apparently been succeeded by that of\nthe priest and the law (xxix. 18). Already the Jews have tasted the\nbitterness of exile (xxvii. 8). There are also certain points of close\ncontact with proverbs of Ben Sira, written about 190 B.C. The sages as a\nclass are very prominent, as in the later centuries before Christ. These\nand many other indications lead to the conclusion that the different\ncollections were probably made after the exile, and that the noble\nintroduction, i.-ix., and the two chapters in the appendix were not\nadded until some time in the Greek period,--not long before 200 B.C. The\ndate, however, when these proverbs arose and were committed to writing\nis comparatively unimportant, save as a knowledge of their background\naids in their interpretation, and as they, in turn, reveal the life and\nthought of the persecuted, tempted Jews, whose religious life centred in\nthe second temple.\n\n[Sidenote: _Teaching of the Song of Songs_]\n\nProbably in the Greek period also a poet-sage collected and wove\ntogether certain love and wedding songs of his race. The result was\ncalled the Song of Songs, that is, the Peerless Song. According to one\ninterpretation, it presents, in a series of scenes, the heart struggle\nof a simple country maiden with the promptings of a true, pure love for\na shepherd lover and the bewildering attractions of a royal marriage;\nand true love in the end triumphs. Whatever be the interpretation, it is\nclear that this exquisite little book, so filled with pictures of nature\nand simple country life, was intended to emphasize the duty and beauty\nof fidelity to nature and the promptings of the human heart. This\nthought is expressed in the powerful passage which seems to voice the\ncentral teaching of the poem:\n\n  Love is strong as death;\n  Jealousy is as cruel as Sheol;\n  Its flashes are flashes of fire,\n  A very flame of Jehovah.\n  Many waters cannot quench love,\n  Neither can floods drown it:\n  If a man would give all the substance of his house for love,\n  He would utterly be condemned.\n\n\n\n\nXI\n\nTHE WRITINGS OF ISRAEL'S PHILOSOPHERS\n\n[Sidenote: _Discussions the problem of evil_]\n\nAn intense interest in man led certain of Israel's sages in time to\ndevote their attention to more general philosophical problems, such as\nthe moral order of the universe. In the earlier proverbs, prophetic\nhistories, and laws, the doctrine that sin was always punished by\nsuffering or misfortune, and conversely that calamity and misfortune\nwere sure evidence of the guilt of the one affected, had been reiterated\nuntil it had become a dogma. In nine out of ten cases this doctrine was\ntrue, but in time experience proved that the tenth case might be an\nexception. While most of the teachers of the race denied or ignored this\nexception, certain wise men, faithful and unflinching in their analysis\nof human life, faced the fact that the innocent as well as the guilty\nsometimes suffer. Their quest for the answer to the eternal question,\nWhy? is recorded in the books of Job and Ecclesiastes.\n\n[Sidenote: _The primitive story of Job_]\n\nThe basis of the book of Job Is undoubtedly a primitive story. Traces\nof a tradition somewhat similar have recently been discovered in the\nBabylonian-Assyrian literature. The Babylonian treatment of the moral\nproblem that it presents is even more strikingly similar. Ezekiel also\nrefers to a well-known popular Hebrew version of the story of Job (xiv.\n14): _though these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it_\n(the guilty land), _they would deliver simply their own lives their\nrighteousness, saith the Lord Jehovah_ (_cf._ also xiv. 20). Evidently\nin Ezekiel's day these names represented three ancient worthies, each\nconspicuous for his superlative piety. The Hebrew word here used also\nindicates that the righteousness attributed to them was conformity to\nthe demands of the ritual. This agrees closely with the representation\nof the prose version of the story found in Job i. ii. and xlii. 7-17;\nhere the supreme illustration of Job's piety is that he repeatedly\nsacrifices burnt-offerings, whenever there is the least possibility that\nhis sons have sinned (i. 4, 5). Also in describing his perfection (i.\n1), the same unusual term is employed as in the priestly narrative of\nGenesis vi. 9, where Noah's righteousness is portrayed.\n\n[Sidenote: _Original teaching and application of the prose story_]\n\nIt seems probable, therefore, that the ancient story of Job was committed\nto writing by some priest during the Babylonian exile. Since Job and his\nfriends live out on the borders of the Arabian desert to the east or\nsoutheast of Palestine, it seems clear that the tradition came to the\nHebrews originally from some foreign source; but in the prose form in\nwhich we find it in Job, it has been thoroughly naturalized, for Job is\na faithful servant of Jehovah and the law. Ignoring for the moment the\npoetical sections (iii. 1 to xlii. 6), we find that the prose story has\na direct, practical message for the broken-hearted exiles, crushed\nbeneath an overpowering calamity. Jehovah is testing his servant people,\nas he tests Job in the story, to prove whether or not they _fear God for\nnought_ (i, 9). If they bear the test without complaint, as did Job, all\ntheir former possessions will be restored to them in double measure\n(xlii. 7-17).\n\n[Sidenote: _The problem of the poetical sections of Job_]\n\nThis prose story has apparently been utilized and given a very different\ninterpretation by a later poet-sage in whose ears rang Jeremiah's words\nof anguish, found in chapter xx. 14-18 of his prophecy (_cf_. Job iii.),\nand to whose ears came also the cry of the pious voiced in Malachi ii.\n17: _Every one who does evil is good in the sight of Jehovah, and he\ndelighteth in_ _them. Where is the God of justice_? The old solutions\nof the problem of evil were being openly discarded. _They who feared\nJehovah_ were saying (iii, 13, 14), _It is vain to serve God; and what\nprofit is it to have kept his charge or to have walked in funeral garb\nbefore Jehovah of hosts? Even now we must congratulate the arrogant;\nyea, they who work wickedness are entrenched; yea, they tempt God and\nescape!_ With a boldness and thoroughness that must have seemed to his\ncontemporaries dangerous and heretical, the great poet-sage presents the\nproblem in all its intensity.\n\n[Sidenote: _The role of Job and his friends in presenting the problem_]\n\nHe adopts the popular story, utilizing it as his prologue and epilogue:\nbut as we pass to chapter iii, the simple, pure Hebrew yields to sublime\npoetry, shot through with the words and idioms and ideas of a much later\nage. The designation of God is no longer _Jehovah_ but _El_ or _Eloah_\nor _Shaddai_. The character of Job suddenly changes; instead of being\nthe patient, submissive servant of the law, he boldly, almost defiantly,\ncharges God with injustice. The role of the friends also changes, and\nthey figure as champions of the Deity. In their successive speeches they\npresent in detail the current dogmas and the popular explanations of\nsuffering. In his replies Job points out their inapplicability to the\nsupreme problem of which he is the embodiment. The action and progress\nin this great drama is within the mind of Job himself. By degrees he\nrises to a clear perception of the fact that he is innocent of any crime\ncommensurate with the overwhelming series of calamities which have\novertaken him; and he thus throws off the shackles of the ancient dogma.\nFrom the seemingly cruel and unjust God who has brought this undeserved\ncalamity upon him, he then appeals to the Infinite Being who is back of\nall phenomena.\n\n[Sidenote: _The message of the book_]\n\nThe reply to this appeal, and the author's contribution to the eternal\nproblem of evil, are found in xxxviii. I to xlii. 6. It is not a\nsolution, but through the wonders of the natural world, it is a fuller\nrevelation to the mind of Job, of the omnipotence, the omniscience,\nthe wisdom, and the goodness of God. Even though he cannot discern the\nreason of his own suffering, he learns to know and to trust the wisdom\nand love of the Divine Ruler.\n\n  I had heard of this by the hearing of the ear;\n  But now mine eye seeth thee (xlii. 5).\n\n[Sidenote: _Teaching the Elihu passage xxxii-xxxvii_]\n\nFaith triumphs over doubt, and the problem, though unsolved, sinks into\ncomparative insignificance. Apparently another poet-sage has added, out\nof the depths of his own experience, his contribution to the problem\nof suffering in the speeches of Elihu (chapters xxxii-xxxvii). It is\nthat suffering rightly borne becomes a blessing because it is one of\nGod's ways of training his servants. This indeed is an expansion of the\nexplanation urged by Eliphaz in v. 17, _Behold, happy is the man whom God\ncorrecteth_. While these speeches of Elihu are written in a different\nliterary style and have, in fact, no vital connection with the original\npoem of Job, they nevertheless contain a great and intensely practical\ntruth; they have rightly found a place in this marvellous book.\nSimilarly the sublime description of wisdom in chapter xxviii. makes\ngood its title; it can, however, be studied best by itself apart from\nJob's impassioned protestations of his innocence (chapter xxix.).\n\n[Sidenote: _Probable history of the book of Job_]\n\nThus the book of Job, like so many other Old Testament writings, has its\nown literary history. Somewhere and sometime, back in an early Semitic\nperiod, there doubtless lived a man, conspicuous for his virtue and\nprosperity. Upon him fell a misfortune so great and apparently\nundeserved that it made a deep impression, not only upon his\ncontemporaries, but also upon the minds of later generations. Thus there\ngrew up a common Semitic story of Job which was in time thoroughly\nnaturalized in Israel. Probably a Jewish priest in the exile first\ncommitted it to writing in order to assure his fellow-sufferers that\ncould they but be patient and submissive Jehovah would soon restore them\nto their former prosperity. The painful experiences that came to the\nJews, especially to the pious, during the middle and latter part of the\nPersian period (sometime between 450 and 340 B.C.), convinced a poet-\nsage that the old interpretations of the meaning of suffering did not\nsuffice. Accordingly into the heart of the familiar story of Job he\ninjected his powerful, impassioned message. Later writers, inspired by\nhis inspiring genius, added their contributions to the solution of the\nperennial problem. Hence by 200 B.C., at least, the book of Job was\nprobably current in its present form.\n\n[Sidenote: _Age and point of view of Ecclesiastes_]\n\nThe same ever-recurring, insistent questions regarding the moral value\nand meaning of life led another later wise man to embody the results of\nhis observation and experience in what we now know as the book of\nEcclesiastes. Although i. 16 and ii. 7, 9 clearly imply that many kings\nhad already reigned in Jerusalem, the author seems to put his\nobservations in the mouth of Solomon, the acknowledged patron of wisdom\nteaching. The evidence, however, that the book is one of the latest in\nthe Old Testament is overwhelmingly conclusive. The language is that of\nan age when Hebrew had long ceased to be spoken. The life mirrored\nthroughout is that of the luxurious, corrupt Greek period. If not\ndirectly, at least indirectly, it reflects the doctrines of the Stoics\nand the Epicureans. It was a crooked, sordid, weary world upon which its\nauthor looked. It is not strange that a vein of materialism and\npessimism runs through his observations and maxims. _All is vanity_ is\nthe dominant note, and yet light alternates with shadow. He loses faith\nin human nature; yet he does not give up his faith in God, though that\nfaith is darkened by the desolateness of the outlook. While the book has\npractical religious teachings, perhaps its chief mission, after all, is\nvividly to portray the darkness just before the dawn of the belief in a\nfuture life and before the glorious rising of the Sun of Righteousness.\n\n[Sidenote: _Significance of the later additions_]\n\nIts teachings naturally called forth many protests, explanations, and\nsupplements, and these have found the permanent place in the book that\nthey rightfully deserve. Its fragmentary structure and abrupt\ntransitions also made later insertions exceedingly easy. These are the\nsimplest and the most natural explanation of the sharp contradictions\nthat abound in the book (_cf. e.g_., ii. 22 and iii. 22, or iv. 2 and\nix. 4, or iii. 16 and iii. 17, or viii. 14 and ix. 2, or iii. 1-9 and\niii. 11). The preacher, whose painful experiences and prevailingly\npessimistic teachings are the original basis of the book, appears to\nhave been consistent throughout. He ends in xii. 8 with the same\nrefrain, _Vanity of vanities; all is vanity!_ In a divine library like\nthe Old Testament, reflecting every side of human thought and\nexperience, such a book is not inappropriate. Its contradictions provoke\nthought; they beget also a true appreciation of the positive notes thus\nbrought into dramatic contrast with the ground tones of pessimism which\nresound through all literature and history.\n\n\n\n\nXII\n\nTHE HISTORY OF THE PSALTER\n\n[Sidenote: _Nature of the Psalter_]\n\nCorresponding to the book of Proverbs, itself a select library\ncontaining Israel's best gnomic literature, is the Psalter, the\ncompendium of the nation's lyrical songs and hymns and prayers. It is\nthe record of the soul experiences of the race. Its language is that of\nthe heart, and its thoughts of common interest to worshipful humanity.\nIt reflects almost every phase of religious feeling: penitence, doubt,\nremorse, confession, fear, faith, hope, adoration, and praise. Even the\nunlovely emotion of hatred is frankly expressed in certain of the\nimprecatory psalms. The Psalms appeal to mankind in every age and land\nbecause, being so divine and yet so human, they rest on the foundations\nof universal experience. Whenever a heart is breaking with sorrow or\npulsating with thanksgiving and adoration, its strongest emotions find\nadequate expression in the simple and yet sublime language of the\nPsalter.\n\n[Sidenote: _Influence of the prophets upon it_]\n\nIn the familiar doings of Mary and Zacharias, found in the opening\nchapters of Luke, we may trace the beginnings of the hymn literature of\nthe early Christian Church, a literature which later became one of the\nChurch's most valued possessions. If the canon of the New Testament had\nbeen closed in 1000 instead of 400 A.D., its books would doubtless have\nincluded a hymnal which would have corresponded closely to the Psalter\nof the Old. Just as the Psalms represent the application of the great\ndoctrines of the Hebrew prophets in the spiritual life of the community,\nso this new hymnal would represent the personal application of the\nteachings of Jesus and the apostles to the religious life of the Church\nand the individual. The Psalter is also what it is because its\nbackground is a period of stress and severe trial. In the hot furnace of\naffliction and persecution the psalmists learned to appreciate the\ntruths which they so confidently and effectively proclaim. Then the\nspiritual teachings of the earlier prophets, which were contemptuously\nrejected by their contemporaries, were at last appropriated by the\ncommunity. The Psalter as a whole appears, therefore, to be one of the\nlatest and most precious fruits of the divine revelation recorded in the\nOld Testament.\n\n[Sidenote: _Evidence of distinct collections of psalms_]\n\nIn its present form, the Psalter is divided into five books or\ncollections. At the end of each collection there is a concluding\ndoxology (xli., lxxii., lxxxix., cvi). The last psalm (cl.) serves as a\nconcluding doxology, not only to the fifth collection, but also to the\nPsalter as a whole. Certain psalms are also reproduced in two different\ncollections with only slight variations. For example, xiv. is\npractically identical with liii., except that in the first _Jehovah_ is\nalways used as the designation of the Deity, and in liii. _Elohim_ or\n_God_; again Psalm xl. 13-17 is reproduced in lxx.; lvii. 7-11 and lx.\n5-12 are together practically equivalent to cviii. These and kindred\nfacts indicate that the Psalter, like the book of Proverbs, is made up\nof collections originally distinct. The division into exactly five\ngroups appears to be comparatively late, and to be in imitation of the\nfivefold division of the Pentateuch.\n\n[Sidenote: _The oldest collection_]\n\nThe genesis of the book of Proverbs is exceedingly helpful in tracing\nthe closely analogous growth of the Psalter. The prevailing form of the\nsuperscriptions and the predominant use of the name _Jehovah_ or\n_Elohim_ also aid in this difficult task. Psalms i. and ii. are\nintroductory to the entire book. Psalms iii-xli. all bear the Davidic\nsuperscription and use the designation _Jehovah_ two hundred and\nseventy-two times, but _Elohim_ only fifteen. The form and contents of\nthese psalms, as well as their position, suggest that they are the\noldest collection in the book. In the Greek version all the psalms of\nthe collection found in li-lxxii., excepting Psalm lxvi., which is\nanonymous, and lxxii., which is attributed to Solomon, have also the\nDavidic superscription. Although certain subsequent psalms are ascribed\nto David, as, for example, lxxxvi., ci., and ciii., the close of the\ncollection, is the significant epilogue (lxxii. 20), _the prayers of\nDavid the son of Jesse are ended._\n\n[Sidenote: _Meaning and value of the superscriptions_ ]\n\nBefore the approximate date of these collections can be determined the\nsignificance of the Davidic title needs interpretation. In the Hebrew\nversion, this title is borne by seventy-three psalms. Two are ascribed\nto Solomon (lxxii. and cxxvii.), one to Moses (xc.), and twenty-four to\nthe members of the post-exilic guilds of temple singers. The\nsuperscriptions of the Greek and Syrian versions contain many variations\nfrom those in the Hebrew. This is probably due to the fact that\nsuperscriptions are usually added by later scribes in whose minds the\nquestion of authorship first became prominent. In earlier Hebrew the\nphrase commonly translated _Psalm of David_ would more naturally mean a\n_psalm for David_ or _dedicated_ or _attributed to David._ The latter\nappears to have been its original significance. Like the title,\n_Proverbs of Solomon,_ it was used to distinguish an ancient poem,\nwhich, being a psalm, was naturally ascribed to David, and to him later\nJudaism, in common with the New Testament writers, attributed all psalm\nliterature. A detailed study of the superscriptions soon demonstrates\nthat the majority of them represent only the conjectures of scribes who\nwere guided by current traditions or suggestions embodied in the psalms\nthemselves. In this manner, to Solomon, the builder of the temple, is\nascribed Psalm cxxvii., because it refers to the building of the house\nin its opening verse. The Greek version even attributes to David Psalm\nxcvi., which, it states, was written _when the temple was being built\nafter the captivity._\n\n[Sidenote: _David's relation to the psalter_]\n\nSince the superscriptions to the Psalter were only very late additions,\nthe question still remains, What was the basis of the late Jewish\ntradition that makes David the father of the psalm literature, as was\nSolomon of the wisdom, Moses of the legal, and Enoch of the\napocalyptical? The other Old Testament books give no direct answer. They\ntell us, however, that the warrior king was skilled in playing the lyre,\nand we are aware that to this, in antiquity, an improvised accompaniment\nwas usually sung. We also have the account of David's touching elegies\nover the death of Saul and Jonathan and of Abner (II Sam. i., iii. 33,\n34). Moreover, the early historical books vividly portray the faults of\nDavid, the limitations which he shared in common with his\ncontemporaries, and his deeply religious spirit; but they leave the\nquestion of his relation to the Psalter to be settled by the testimony\nof the individual psalms. Here the evidence is not conclusive. It is\nclear that many of the psalms attributed by tradition to him were\nwritten in the clearer light of later prophetic teaching and amid very\ndifferent circumstances from those which surrounded Israel's early king.\nStill it would be dogmatic to assert that nothing from his lips is to be\nfound in the Psalter; and to point out with assurance those passages and\npsalms which must be Davidic is quite as unwarrantable.\n\n[Sidenote: _Evidence of pre-exilic elements in the Psalter_]\n\nThe Psalter is clearly the repository of that which was best in the\nearlier spiritual life and thought of the race. While there are no\ndirect references to songs in connection with the pre-exilic Jewish\ntemple, Amos (v. 23) found them in use at the sanctuary at Bethel; and\nfrom Psalm cxxxvii. 3, 4 it would appear that the exiles in Babylonia\nwere acquainted with certain _songs of Zion_ or _songs of Jehovah_.\nTreasured in the hearts of the people, and attributed, perhaps even by\nthe time of the exile, as a whole to David, they constituted the\nbasis of the earliest collections of psalms, which, as we have noted,\npractically without exception bear the Davidic superscription. The date\nof each individual psalm, however, must be determined independently on\nthe basis of its own testimony, although the historical allusions are\nfew and the data in many cases are far from decisive.\n\n[Sidenote: _Approximate date of the earliest collections_]\n\nJust when the earliest collections, found in iii.-xli. and li.-lxxii.,\nwere made is a comparatively unimportant yet difficult question to\ndecide. Probably the rebuilding of the temple in 516 B.C. was one of the\ngreat incentives. The example of the Babylonians, who possessed a large\nand rich psalm literature, may also have exerted an indirect influence.\nAt least it is certain that the guilds of temple singers and the song\nservice became increasingly prominent in the religious life of the\nJewish community which grew up about the restored temple. The presence\nof alphabetical psalms, as, for example, ix., x., xxv., xxxiv., xxxvii.,\nin the earliest collection suggests also the leisure of the exile. The\nhistorical background of many of these psalms is clearly the exile and\nthe long period of distress that followed. They voice the experiences of\nthe poor, struggling band of the pious, who, living in the midst of\noppressors, found in Jehovah alone their refuge and their joy. Some of\nthese psalms also reflect the prophetic teachings of Jeremiah (_e.g._,\nxvi., xxxix) and of Isaiah xl.-lxvi. In general their attitude toward\nsacrifice is that of the prophets:\n\n  For thou desirest not sacrifice;\n  Else would I give it.\n  Thou delightest not in burnt offering.\n  The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit;\n  A broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.\n\nReligion is defined in the terms of life and acts. Ceremonialism has not\nyet cast its chilling influence over the heart of the nation. Therefore\nthe earliest collections may, with considerable assurance, be assigned\nto a date not later than the days of Nehemiah (about 400 B.C.).\n\n[Sidenote: _Later collections_]\n\nPsalms xlii.-l. and lxxiii-lxxxiii. constitute a collection of Levitical\nhymns. If we may follow the indications of their superscriptions,\nthey consist of two originally distinct groups, the one, xlii.-xlix.,\nassociated with and possibly at first collected and preserved by the\npost-exilic guild of temple singers, known as the sons of Korah, and the\nother, l., lxxiii.-lxxxiii., similarly attributed to Asaph, the guild of\ntemple singers, mentioned first in the writings of the Greek period. In\nthese two groups the priests and Levites and the liturgy are prominent.\nPsalms lxxxiv.-lxxxix. constitute a short Levitical supplement.\nThe remainder of the Psalter is also made up of originally smaller\ncollections, as, for example, the Psalms of Ascent or the Pilgrim Psalms\n(cxx.-cxxxiv.), and the Hallelujah Psalms (cxi.-cxiii. and cxlvi.-cl.).\nSome of the latter come perhaps from the Jews of the dispersion. Each\ncollection appears to represent a fresh gleaning of the same or slightly\ndifferent fields, incorporating ancient with contemporary psalms, and,\nas has been noted, not infrequently including some already found in\nearlier collections.\n\n[Sidenote: _Completion of the Psalter_]\n\nCertain of the psalms, such as lxxiv., lxxix., lxxxiii., seem clearly\nto reflect the horrors of the Maccabean struggle (169-165 B.C.). Later\nJewish literature bears testimony that in the last two centuries before\nChrist psalm writing increased rather than decreased (_cf. e.g._, Psalms\nof Solomon). Certainly the experiences through which the Jews passed\nduring the middle of the second century were of a nature to evoke psalms\nsimilar to those in the Psalter. The probabilities, therefore, are that\nthe Psalter, in its final form, is, like the book of Daniel, one of\nthe latest writings in the Old Testament. It was possibly during the\nprosperous reign of Simon, when the temple service was enriched and\nestablished on a new basis, that its canon was finally closed.\n\n[Sidenote: _The book of Lamentations_]\n\nThe fact that they all gather about a definite event in Israel's\nhistory, and probably antedate the majority of the psalms in the\nPsalter, explains why the little collection of lyrical poems, known as\nthe book of Lamentations, never found a place beside the kindred psalms\n(_e.g._, Pss. xlii., xliii) in the larger book. Their theme is the\nBabylonian exile and the horrors and distress that it brought to the\nscattered members of the Jewish race. Their aim is prophetic, that is,\nto point out and confess the guilt of the nation and its dire\nconsequences. They reflect the teachings of both Jeremiah and Ezekiel.\nWhile it is not strange that later tradition attributed the collection\nto the first of these prophets, its contents do not support the\nconjecture. Four out of the five poems are alphabetical, and distinctly\ndifferent points of view are represented. Chapters ii. and iv. probably\ncome from the middle of the Babylonian exile, and to the remainder must\nbe assigned a still later period.\n\n[Sidenote: _The national and individual element in the Psalter_]\n\nThe Psalter, with its natural appendix, the book of Lamentations, was\nthe song and prayer book of the Jewish community. A majority of the\npsalms, and especially those in the latter part of the book, were\ndoubtless originally intended for liturgical use. Many, particularly\nwhere the first person singular is used, are to be interpreted\ncollectively, for here, as often in the book of Lamentations, the\npsalmist is speaking in behalf of the community. Others have been\nadapted to liturgical ends. But in the final analysis it is the\nexperience and emotions of the individual soul that find expression\nthroughout all the psalms. Since these experiences and emotions were\nshared in common by all right-minded members of the community, it was\nnatural that they should in time be employed in the liturgy.\n\n[Sidenote: _E pluribus unum_]\n\nAgain, as we review the history of the Psalter, we are impressed with\nthe many sides of Israel's life and human experience that it represents.\nNot one, but perhaps fifty or a hundred, inspired souls, laymen,\nprophets, priests, sages, kings, and warriors, have each clothed the\ndivine truth that came to them or to their generation in exquisite\nlanguage and imagery, and given it thus to their race and humanity.\nSuccessive editors have collected and combined the noblest of these\npsalms, and the Psalter is the result. The exact date of each psalmist\nand editor is comparatively unimportant, for though differing widely in\norigin and theme, they are all bound together by a common purpose and\na common belief in the reality and the immediate presence of God. All\nnature and history and life are to them but the manifestation of his\njustice and mercy and love. In direct communion with the God whom they\npersonally knew, they found the consolation and peace and joy that\npasseth all understanding, even though the heathen raged and their foes\nplundered and taunted them. To that same haven of rest they still pilot\nthe world's storm-tossed mariners.\n\n\n\n\nXIII\n\nTHE FORMATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT CANON\n\n[Sidenote: _Israel's literature at the beginning of the fourth century\nbefore Christ_]\n\nCould we have studied the scriptures of the Israelitish race about 400\nB.C., we should have classified them under four great divisions: (1)\nThe prophetic writings, represented by the combined early Judean,\nEphraimite, and late prophetic or Deuteronomic narratives, and their\ncontinuation in Samuel and Kings, together with the earlier and exilic\nprophecies; (2) the legal, represented by the majority of the Old\nTestament laws, combined with the late priestly history; (3) the\nwisdom, represented by the older small collections of proverbs; (4) the\ndevotional or liturgical, represented by Lamentations and the earlier\ncollections of psalms.\n\n[Sidenote: _The combining of the prophetic and priestly histories_]\n\nEven before all the Old Testament books were written, the work of\ncanonization began; before the first large canon was adopted, the\nprophetic and priestly narratives, and with them the earlier and later\nlaws, were combined. This amalgamation was the work of a late priestly\neditor. The Pentateuch and its immediate sequel, Joshua, is the result.\n\n[Sidenote: _The method of combining_]\n\nA study of these books makes clear the editor's method. Naturally he\ngave the late priestly versions the precedence. He placed, therefore,\nits version of the creation first,--a position that it well deserves.\nProbably as a result of this arrangement the older and more primitive\nprophetic version of Genesis ii. 4a-25 was somewhat abridged, for it\nbegins with the picture of a level plain, watered by a daily mist, and\nis immediately followed by the account of the creation of man. Genesis\niii. and iv. are taken entirely from the prophetic, and practically all\nof v. from the priestly, group of narratives. Confronted by two variant\nversions of the flood, he joined them together into a closely knit\nnarrative; but all the elements of both versions are so faithfully\npreserved that when they are again separated, behold! the two originally\ncomplete and self-consistent versions reappear. The story of Noah,\nthe first vineyard-keeper, in ix. 20-27, is taken entirely from the\nprophetic history, but in x. two distinct lists of the nations are\njoined together. All the story of the tower of Babel in xi. 1-9 is from\nthe prophetic, while the genealogical list in the remainder of the\nchapter is from the priestly history. The patriarchal and subsequent\nnarratives are likewise combined with, the same remarkable skill.\n\n[Sidenote: _Later biblical analogies_]\n\nThus the first six Old Testament books were given their final form. The\nmethod in general was the same as that followed by the authors of the\nFirst and Third Gospels in their use of Matthew's Sayings of Jesus and\nthe original Mark narrative, or by the authors of Samuel, Kings, and\nChronicles in their citations from the older sources. In his close\nfusion of three or four parallel narratives the editor's work resembled\nmost closely that of Tatian, who thus combined the four Gospels in his\n_Diatessaron_. So far as we are able to observe, the final editor of\nthe Hexateuch preserved, like Tatian, most of the material in his older\nsources, except where a parallel version verbally duplicated another.\nThe prophetic and priestly narratives also followed lines so distinctly\ndifferent that cases of duplication were comparatively few.\n\n[Sidenote: _Deep significance of the work of the later editors_]\n\nTo the latest editor of the early narratives we owe the preservation of\nsome or the oldest and most valuable sections of the Old Testament. In\nthat age and land of perishable writing materials, the prevailing method\nof compilation was one of the effective means whereby the important\nportions of primitive records were handed down in practically their\noriginal form. It is well that we are beginning to understand its\nsignificance in the realization of the divine purpose. Important beyond\nwords, although often overlooked, were the services of the faithful\neditors who without the slightest desire for personal glory or reward,\nother than the perpetuation of truth, carefully selected, condensed, and\ncombined material gleaned from earlier and fuller sources. To them is\ndue the marvellous preservation of our Old Testament, To the honored\nr\u00f4le of the prophets and apostles, therefore, let us add the anonymous\nredactors.\n\n[Sidenote: _Date of the beginning of the cannonization of the Law_]\n\nThe final editors were the immediate precursors of those who formed the\nsuccessive canons of the Old Testament. Indeed, between the work of the\nformer and the latter there is no clear line of demarcation. A period\nshortly after 400 B. c. is the date usually accepted for the work of\nthe final editor of the Pentateuch; the canonization of the law, which\nincluded these five books, is dated between 400 and 300 B.C. The real\ncanonization of Israel's laws had, however, begun much earlier. The\nprimitive decalogue, represented by Exodus xxxiv., and probably from\nthe first associated with Moses, appears, in the earliest periods of\nIsrael's history, to have enjoyed a canonical authority. The primitive\naccounts, in Exodus xix., of the establishment of the covenant\nby Jehovah with his people mark the real beginning of the process of\ncanonization,--a process, that is, of attributing to certain laws a\nunique and commanding authority.\n\n[Sidenote: _Popular acceptance and promulgation of the earlier codes_]\n\nLikewise the successive civil, humane, and ceremonial decalogues appear\nfrom the days of the united kingdom to have occupied a similar position.\nPrimarily this was probably due to the fact that each was based upon a\ndivine _torah_ or decision, received from Jehovah through the priestly\noracle. The public reading and promulgation of the Deuteronomic laws in\nthe days of Josiah, with the attestation of the prophets and the solemn\nadoption by the people, was an act of canonization far more formal than\nthe final acceptance of the New Testament writings by the Council of\nCarthage.\n\n[Sidenote: _Adoption of the late priestly law_]\n\nThe next great stage in the canonization of the law is recorded in\nNehemiah x. Then the representatives of the Jewish community _entered\ninto a solemn obligation and took oath to walk in God's law, which was\ngiven by Moses the servant of God, and to observe to do all the commands\nof Jehovah our Lord and his ordinances and his statutes_ (v. 29.) This\naction appears to be the historical basis of the fanciful and incredible\nJewish traditions concerning the work of the Great Synagogue and the\nauthority of Ezra. The new law thus adopted was evidently the one\ngradually developed and finally formulated by the Jewish priests in\nBabylonia. It was accepted, as was the earlier Deuteronomic code,\nbecause it met the needs and appealed to the moral and religions sense\nof those by whom it was adopted.\n\n[Sidenote: _Acceptance of the completed Torah_]\n\nTo set completely aside the Deuteronomic lawbook and the primitive\ndecalogue of Exodus xx.-xxiii., already in force among the Jews of\nPalestine, was impossible and unnecessary. Hence, as we have noted, it\nwas the task of some editor of the next generation to combine these\nand the earlier prophetic histories with the late priestly law and its\naccompanying history. Naturally this whole collection was still called\nthe _Torah_ or _Law_ and was at once accepted as canonical by the Jews.\nThis step was also most natural because their interests all centred\nabout the ritual, and for two centuries the dominant tendency had been\nto exalt the sanctity of the written law.\n\n[Sidenote: _Date of the final canonization of the Law_]\n\nIt is possible to fix approximately the date of this first edition of\nthe Old Testament writings, since the Samaritans adopted and still\nretain simply the Pentateuch and an abbreviated edition of Joshua as\ntheir scriptures. Although Josephus, following a late Jewish tradition,\ndates the Samaritan schism at about 330 B.C., the contemporary evidence\nof Nehemiah xiii. 28 suggests that it was not long after 400. It is\ntherefore safe to conclude that by 350 B.C. the first five books of our\nOld Testament had not only been singled out of the larger literature\nof the race, but were regarded as possessing a unique sanctity and\nauthority.\n\n[Sidenote: _Principles of canonization_]\n\nAs the name _Law_ suggests, the chief reason for this was the fact that\nthese five books embodied laws long since accepted as binding. The\nsecond reason was probably because they were by current tradition\nascribed to Moses. The third, and not the least, was, doubtless, because\nthey met the need felt by the community for a unified and authoritative\nsystem of laws and for an authentic record of the earlier history of\ntheir race, especially that concerning the origin of their beloved\ninstitutions.\n\n[Sidenote: _Evidence that the Law was first canonized_]\n\nThe priority of the canon of the law is also proved by the fact that,\nalthough it contains some of the later Old Testament writings, it stands\nfirst, not only in position but in the esteem of the Jewish race.\nFurthermore, it became in time the designation of all the Old Testament\ncanonical writings. The term _Law_ is thus used in the New Testament\n(_e.g._, John x. 34, xii. 34; I Cor. xiv. 21), in the Talmud, and by the\nrabbis, indicating that the later groups of historical, prophetic, and\npoetical books were simply regarded as supplements.\n\n[Sidenote: _Canonization of the prophetic writings_]\n\nThe history of the canonization of the next group, known as the\n_Prophets_, is very obscurely recorded, and this largely because it\nreached its culmination in the Greek period, concerning which we have\nonly the most meagre information. Here analogy with the history of\nthe New Testament is helpful. The same influences which led the early\nChristians to add the Epistles and Acts undoubtedly operated upon the\nminds of the Jews. The Law represented only a limited period in their\nnational and religious history. But the addition of the early prophetic\nand legal histories to the detailed laws prepared the way for the\nexpansion of the canon. This included first, the four historical books,\nJoshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings, with the exception of Ruth. These\nwere designated as the _Former Prophets_. Thus even the later Jews\nrecognized their true character and authorship. The second division of\nthe _Prophets_ included Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Book of the\nTwelve, which contained the minor prophets.\n\n[Sidenote: _Evidence that the historico-prophetic books were first added\nto the Law_]\n\nThe order of the book and the probabilities of the situation suggest\nthat the _Former Prophets_, since they were the immediate sequel of the\nprophetic histories of the Pentateuch, and recorded the deeds of such\nheroes as David, Solomon, and Isaiah, were added first. That they also\nbear the marks of late priestly revision, is direct evidence of the\nesteem in which they were held by the late priestly school that\ncompleted the canon of the Law. They therefore may have been added as\nearly as 300 B.C. They were certainly known to the author of Chronicles,\nas his many quotations from them show, although it is difficult to see\nhow he would have felt as free as he does to substitute the testimony of\nlater tradition, if they were regarded as equally sacred with the Law.\n\n[Sidenote: _Reverence for the prophetic word_]\n\nThe reference to the prediction of Jeremiah, in the opening verse\nof Ezra, suggests the reverence with which the author of Chronicles\nregarded the words of this prophet. The post-exilic Jews never ceased\nto revere the prophetic word. The popular belief, current in the Greek\nperiod, that the prophets had ceased to speak only deepened their\nreverence for the teachings of Moses' successors (Deut. xviii. 15-19).\nThe devotion of the later scribes is evinced by the scores of glosses\nwhich they have added to the older prophecies. It is manifest,\ntherefore, how strong was the tendency, even in priestly circles, to add\nthe Prophets to the Law.\n\n[Sidenote: _Date of completion of the prophetic canon_]\n\nThe process was probably gradual and perhaps not complete until the Jews\nhad learned fully to appreciate the value of their ancient Scriptures,\nafter martyrs had died for the sacred writings during the Maccabean\nstruggle. Aside from supplements made to older books, as, for example,\nZechariah ix.-xiv., the canon of the prophets was probably closed not\nlater than 200 B.C. From direct evidence it is clear that the book of\nDaniel (written about 165 B.C.) did not find a place in this canon. It\nis also significant that in the prologue to the Greek version of Ben\nSira or Ecclesiasticus (132 B.C.) the translator refers repeatedly--as\nthough they were then regarded as of equal authority--to the _Law and\nthe Prophets and the rest of the books_, or to _the other books of the\nfathers_. But most significant of all, Ben Sira, who wrote about 190\nB.C., includes in his list of Israel's heroes (xliv.-l.) not only those\nmentioned in the _Torah_, but also David, Solomon, Hezekiah, and the\nchief characters in the _Former Prophets_. Furthermore, Isaiah and\nJeremiah and Ezekiel are introduced in their proper settings, and the\npanegyric closes with a reference to the twelve prophets collectively,\nindicating that Ben Sira was also acquainted with the _Latter Prophets_\nas a group.\n\n[Sidenote: _The beginning of the last stage in the canonization of the\nOld Testament_]\n\nThe reference to _the rest of the books_ in the prologue to Ben Sira\nindicates that even before 130 B.C. certain other writings had been\njoined to the canon of the Law. Ben Sira himself, to judge from his\ndescription of David (_cf_. xlvii. 8, 9, and I Chron. 25), Zerubbabel,\nJoshua, and Nehemiah, was acquainted with the books of Chronicles, Ezra,\nand Nehemiah. Chapter xlvii. 8 apparently contains an allusion to a\nhymn-book attributed to David. Evidently he was also familiar with the\nbook of Proverbs, including its introductory chapters. Thus we have a\nglimpse of the beginning of that third stage in the canonization of the\nOld Testament which, as in the case of the New, continued for fully\nthree centuries.\n\n[Sidenote: _Canonization of the Psalter and Lamentations_]\n\nThe Psalter doubtless passed through different stages of canonization,\nas did the Old Testament itself. The earliest collection was, in the\nbeginning, probably made for liturgical purposes, and its adoption in\nthe service of the temple was practically equivalent to canonization.\nWhen successive collections were added, they too were thus canonized.\nThe result was that the Psalter, when complete, enjoyed a position\nsomewhat similar to that of the Law and the Prophets, although the\nauthority of each rested upon a different basis. That the Psalter was\nearly canonized is further demonstrated by a quotation in I Maccabees\nvii. 17 (about 125 B.C.) from Psalm lxxix. 2, 3, introduced by the\nwords, _as it is written in the Scriptures_. This conclusion is also\nsupported by the significant reference in the New Testament to the _Law,\nthe Prophets, and the Psalms_ (Lk. xxiv. 44). Jesus' use of the Psalter\nindicates that in his day its canonicity was already thoroughly\nestablished. Lamentations, by a late tradition attributed to Jeremiah,\nwas probably also canonized contemporaneously with the Psalms.\n\n[Sidenote: _The other books of the fathers_]\n\nThe canonization of the book of Proverbs, like that of the Psalter, was\nundoubtedly by successive stages. The Jews of the Greek and Maccabean\nperiod were especially appreciative of this type of literature, and it\nwas doubtless accorded its position of authority primarily because it\nrang true to human experience. That it was attributed to Solomon also\ntold in its favor. Ben Sira's indirect testimony suggests that it and\nthe books of Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, which were in close accord\nwith the point of view of later Judaism, were already in his day\nassociated with the Law and the Prophets. The book of Ruth was probably\nat this time added to the other historical books.\n\n[Sidenote: _Canonization of the book of Daniel_]\n\nThe absence of any reference in Ben Sira to Daniel is significant. The\nfirst allusion to it comes from the last half of the second century\nbefore Christ. First Maccabees i. 54 appears to quote the prediction of\nDaniel ix. 27, and in I Maccabees ii. 59, 60, Daniel and his three\nfriends are held up as noble examples of virtue. Thus it would seem that\nwithin a half century after the book of Daniel was written its authority\nwas recognized. In New Testament times its canonicity is fully\nestablished (_e.g., cf_. I Cor. vi. 2, and Dan. vii. 22).\n\n[Sidenote: _Date of the completion of the Hebrew Old Testament canon_]\n\nConcerning the canonicity of two books, Ecclesiastes and the Song of\nSongs or Canticles, the opinions of the rabbis continued to differ until\nthe close of the first Christian century. From the Mishna we learn\nthat the school of Shammai accepted Ecclesiastes, while that of Hillel\nrejected it. Finally, in a conference in Jamnia, about 100 A.D., the two\nschools finally agreed to accept both books as canonical. From Second\nEsdras and Josephus, however, we learn that the present Hebrew and\nProtestant canon of the Old Testament had already for some time been\npractically adopted by common consent.\n\n[Sidenote: _Contents of the last group of writings_]\n\nThe last collection, which includes eleven books known as the\n_Hagiographa_ or _Sacred Writings_, constitutes the third general\ndivision of the Hebrew Scriptures. It is a heterogeneous group of\nhistories, prophecies, stories, and wisdom books. Some, like the\nPsalter, were, as we have seen, probably canonized as early as the\nProphets; although the final canon of the Old Testament was not closed\nuntil 100 A.D. Even later the canonicity of Ecclesiastes, the Song of\nSongs, and Esther was sometimes questioned; most of them were regarded\nas authoritative as early as 100 B.C. Here, as in the case of the New\nTestament, the real decision was not the work of any school or council;\nbut gradually, on the basis of their intrinsic merit, the twenty-four\nbooks of the Hebrew Bible were singled out of a much larger literature\nand recognized, at least by the Jews of Palestine, as the authoritative\nrecord of God's revelation through their race.\n\n[Sidenote: _Differences between the Palestinian and Alexandrian canons_]\n\nJewish tradition, represented by Second Esdras xiv. and the Talmudic\ntreatise _Baba Bathra_ xv. a, states that all the canonical books were\nin existence in the time of Ezra. While the tradition is refuted by the\nhistorical facts, it appears to have influenced the Jews of Palestine in\nshaping their canon; since no books purporting to come from a later date\nor author are found in it. The broader-minded Jews of the dispersion,\nand especially Alexandria and the early Christian Church, refused to be\nbound by the narrow principle that divine revelation ceased with Ezra.\nAccordingly we find them adopting a larger canon, that included many\nother later writings known in time as the apocryphal or hidden books.\n\n[Sidenote: _Additional books in the Greek and Christian canon_]\n\nThese consisted of three genuine works,--I and II Maccabees and Ben Sira\nor Ecclesiasticus; two didactic stories,--Tobit and Judith; four books\nwrongly ascribed to earlier authors,--the Wisdom of Solomon, Baruch, the\nEpistle of Jeremy, and Second Esdras (Gk. IV Esdras); and four additions\nto the Hebrew canonical books,--First Esdras, an expansion of the book\nof Ezra, the Prayer of Manasses, and additions to Esther and Daniel.\n\n[Sidenote: _History of the Apocryphal books in the Christian Church_]\n\nAs is well known, these books were retained by the Christian Church,\nas they still are by the Roman Catholic and Greek churches, until the\nProtestant reformers relegated them, as a whole, to a secondary place.\nUltimately the Bible societies, during the first part of the last\ncentury, ceased to print them in the ordinary editions of the Bible.\nThe result is that the present generation has almost forgotten their\nexistence. The last decade or two, however, has witnessed a significant\nrevival of interest among the scholars of Christendom, and the wholesome\ntendency to restore certain of the Apocrypha to the working Old\nTestament canon is very marked. This is only a correction of the error\nof the Protestant reformers in estimating the Apocryphal books, not by\nthe intrinsic merit of each individual writing but of the group as a\nwhole.\n\n[Sidenote: _Great value of these later Jewish writings_]\n\nSome of the Apocrypha and kindred books like the apocalypse of Enoch,\nwere quoted and recognized by New Testament scholars as having authority\nequal to that of the other Old Testament Scriptures. The rejection of I\nand II Maccabees and Ben Sira from the Palestinian canon because they\nwere written after the days of Ezra and not associated with the names\nof any early Old Testament worthies, was due to a narrow conception\nof divine revelation, directly contrary to that of Christianity which\nrecognized the latest as the noblest. These later Jewish writings\nalso bridge the two centuries which otherwise yawn between the two\nTestaments--two centuries of superlative importance both historically\nand religiously, witnessing as they do the final development of the life\nand thought of Judaism and the rise of those conditions and beliefs\nwhich loom so large in the New Testament.\n\n[Sidenote: _The larger working canon of the Old Testament_]\n\nWhile they will always be of great value in the study of later Jewish\nhistory, literature, and religion, the majority of the apocryphal books\nundoubtedly belong in the secondary group to which the Palestinian Jews\nand the Protestant reformers assigned them. Three or four, however,\ntested by the ultimate principles of canonicity, are equal, if not\nsuperior, to certain books like Chronicles, Esther, and Ecclesiastes.\nFirst Maccabees records one of the most important crises in Israelish\nhistory. As a faithful historical writing, it is hardly equalled in\nancient literature. Its spirit is also genuinely religious. The later\nbut parallel history of II Maccabees is not the equal of the first,\nalthough its religious purpose is more pronounced. Its historical\ncharacter, style, aim, and point of view are strikingly similar to those\nof the book of Chronicles. The proverbs of Ben Sira, while not all\nof the same value, yet abound in noble and practical teachings, very\nsimilar to those in the book of Proverbs. Not only does the Wisdom of\nSolomon contain many exalted and spiritual passages, but it is also of\nunique importance because it represents that wonderful fusion of the\nbest elements in Hebrew and Hellenic thought which formed the background\nof Christianity. Probably the Church, will ultimately restore to its\nlarger working Old Testament canon the beautiful Prayer of Manasses,\nalready largely adopted in the prayer-book of the Anglican Church.\n\n[Sidenote: _Conclusion_]\n\nOur rapid historical study has revealed the unity and the variety of\nteaching reflected in the Old Testament, and has suggested its real\nplace in the revelation of the past and its true place in the life of\nto-day. This older testament is the record of God's gradual revelation\nof himself through the history of the Israelitish race and the\nexperiences and minds of countless men and women whose spiritual eyes\nwere open and whose ears were attentive to divine truth. The same benign\nFather who has always spoken to his children has influenced them also to\nrecognize the writings that most faithfully and fully record the\nspiritual truth thus revealed. Had the task been entrusted to our own or\nlater generations, it is not probable that the result would have\ndiffered in any important essential. For a few brief centuries false\ntheories and traditions may partially obscure the truth, but these, like\nthe mists of morning, are sure in time to melt away and reveal the\neternal verities in their sublime beauty and grandeur.\n\n\n\n\nXIV\n\nTHE INTERPRETATION OF THE EARLY NARRATIVES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT\n\n[Sidenote: _Importance of regarding each story as a unit_]\n\nOf all the different groups of writings in the Old Testament,\nundoubtedly the early narratives found in the first seven books present\nthe most perplexing problems. This is primarily due to the fact that\nthey have been subject to a long process of editorial revision by which\nstories, some very old and others very late and written from a very\ndifferent point of view, have been closely joined together. While there\nis a distinct aim and unity in the whole, in approaching them it is\nsimplest to study each story as a unit in itself. Not only is this\npractical, but it is justified by the fact that almost every story was\nonce current in independent form. Often, as in the case of the accounts\nof creation and the flood, it is possible to recover the older versions\nand even to trace their origin and earlier history.\n\n[Sidenote: _Classification necessary to determine the point of view_]\n\nThe first essential, however, is to determine to the point of view and\npurpose of the biblical writer, who has taken the given story from the\nlips of his contemporaries and incorporated it in the cycle of stories\nin which it is now found, Here the language, literary style, theme, and\nconceptions of God and religion are the chief guides. If, as in the\nfirst chapter of Genesis, the Deity is always designated as _God_ or\n_Elohim;_ if the literary style is formal, repetitious, and generic; if\nthe theme is the origin of an institution like the Sabbath; and if\nthe Deity is conceived of as a spirit, accomplishing his purpose by\nprogressive stages through the agency of natural forces,--it is not\ndifficult to recognize at once the work of a late priestly writer. If,\non the contrary, as in Genesis ii. 4b to iii. 24, _Jehovah_ is the name\nof the Deity; if the style is vivid, picturesque, and flowing; if the\ninterest centres in certain individuals instead of species; if the\nthemes vitally concern the spiritual life of man; if the Deity is\nconceived of after human analogies, as intimately associating with\nmen, and as revealing himself directly to them by word and visible\npresence,--the work of an early prophetic writer is evidently before us.\nThe identification of the point of view of the author at once puts us\ninto appreciative sympathy with him.\n\n[Sidenote: _Value of knowing an author's point of view_]\n\nIt also enables us intelligently to interpret his words and figures.\nKnowing, for example, that the first chapter of Genesis was written by a\npriest who lived long after his race had ceased to think of God as\nhaving a body like a man, we cannot make the common mistake of\ninterpreting verse 26 as implying physical likeness. Rather, as his\nconception of God as a spirit demands and the latter part of the verse\nproves, his sublime teaching is that man, the end and culmination of the\nentire work of creation, is like his Creator, a spiritual being, endowed\nwith a mind and a will, and as God's viceregent, is divinely commanded\nto rule over all created things.\n\n[Sidenote: _Practical value of the critical analysis_]\n\nWhere two distinct versions of the same narrative have been amalgamated\nin the process of editorial revision, the analysis of the original\nsources is indispensable to a true understanding and interpretation of\nthe thought of the prophet and priest who have each utilized the\nancient story,--as, for example, that of the flood,--to illustrate the\ninevitable consequences of sin and God's personal interest in mankind.\nHere the culminating purpose of the prophet, however, is to proclaim\nJehovah's gracious promise that he will never thus again destroy man or\nliving things; that (viii. 21, 22):\n\n  While the earth remains,\n  Seedtime and harvest,\n  Cold and heat,\n  Summer and winter,\n  Day and night\n  Shall not cease.\n\nThe priest, on the other hand, is interested in the renewal of the\ncovenant which insures man's dominion over the natural world, and in the\nsanctity of blood, and in the primitive, divine origin of the command,\nThou shalt not kill (ix. 1-6).\n\n[Sidenote: _The necessary basis for intelligent interpretation_]\n\nFortunately the work of analysis has been so thoroughly carried out\nduring the last century that there is practical agreement among the\nChristian scholars of the world on the essential questions. These\nresults are now also available in popular form, so that, without wasting\ntime on technicalities, the pastor and teacher of to-day can utilize\nthem as the basis for more important study and teaching. The origin,\nthe literary form, and the scientific and historical accuracy of each\nnarrative all suggest definite and interesting lines of study, but, as\nhas been noted (p. 106), these are of secondary value compared with the\nreligious truths that each story is intended to illustrate.\n\n[Sidenote: _Principles of religious interpretation_]\n\nSince these stories were preserved because they conserve this higher\npurpose, it is always  safe to ask, What are their distinctive\ncontributions to the grand total of ethical and spiritual teaching found\nin the Old Testament? At the same time it is exceedingly important\nalways to be sure to read the teachings out of, and not into, a given\nnarrative. By unnatural and fanciful interpretation of these simple\nstories the friends of the Bible in the past have often wronged it more\nthan have its avowed foes. Each story, like the parables of Jesus, had\nits one or two central teachings, usually conveyed to the mind by\nimplication rather than by direct statement. The characters who figure\nin them by their words and deeds proclaim the practical truths and\nembody the ideals in the minds of the ancient prophets and priests.\n\n[Sidenote: _Theme of Genesis ii. and iii._]\n\nThe heterogeneous group of stories found in Genesis i.-xi. constitute\nthe general introduction to the succeeding narratives which gather about\nthe names of the traditional ancestors of the Hebrews. Each of these\noriginally independent stories illustrates its own peculiar religious\nteachings. None has taken a deeper hold on the imagination and made a\ndeeper impression on the thought and literature of the world than that\nwhich is found in the second and third chapters of Genesis. Its theme--\nthe origin and nature and consequences of sin--is of vital, personal\ninterest to every man of every age.\n\n[Sidenote: _The problem of presenting it in a form intelligible to\nearly man_]\n\nThe problem that confronted the early Judean prophet was to present in\nform intelligible to the minds of his primitive readers a subject that\nhas taxed to the utmost the resources of the world's greatest\nphilosophers and theologians. The task was comparable to that which fell\nto the Master when he sought to make clear to his untutored disciples\nthe real nature of the mighty tempest of temptation that raged in his\nsoul at the beginning, and, indeed, later in his ministry. The method\nadopted was strikingly similar in each case. If the language of modern\nphilosophy and psychology had been at the command of these great\nreligious teachers, it would have but obscured the great truths. These\ntruths must be made objective; they must be expressed in the familiar\nlanguage of the people. Even the inner struggle of conflicting motives\nmust be presented in words so simple that a child could understand.\n\n[Sidenote: _Pictorial elements drawn from popular tradition_]\n\nThe second and third chapters of Genesis record the effective way in\nwhich a great early prophet dealt with his difficult problem. From the\nlips of the people he took fragments of ancient Semitic traditions.\nAlmost all of the elements which enter into the story of man's fall have\nbeen traced to far earlier sources; but the narrative in its present\nunity and suggestiveness never has and never will be found outside the\nBible. How far the prophet adapted to his higher purpose the current\nHebrew version can not be absolutely determined. The fact alone remains\nthat it is one of the truest bits of history in the Old Testament, and\nthis not because it is a leaf from the diary of Adam and Eve, but\nbecause it concretely and faithfully portrays universal human\nexperience.\n\n[Sidenote: _Creation of man and the elements necessary for his\ndevelopment_]\n\nIn the simple language of popular tradition it proclaims, among other\ntruths, that Jehovah, Israel's God, created man, breathing into him from\nhis own nostrils the vital principle of life and making him the\ncommanding figure in the universe; then that the Creator graciously\nprovided all that was needful and best for his true physical and\nspiritual development. Incidentally the prophet calls attention to that\ninnate and divine basis of the marriage bond which Jesus re-emphasizes\n(Matt. xix. 4-6). Physical death, according to the story in its present\nform, was not a necessary part of Jehovah's plan; the implication is\nthat man would not die while he remained in the garden and ate of the\nlife-giving tree. Temptation is not in itself evil, but necessary, if\nman is to develop positive virtue, for beside the tree of life grows the\ntree of the knowledge of good and evil, with its attractive, alluring\nfruit guarded by the divine prohibition.\n\n[Sidenote: _The struggle in the woman's heart_]\n\nThe elements of the temptation are all presented in chapter ii., but the\nserpent, the craftiest of animals, in his conversation with the woman is\nrequired to make clear and objective the real nature of the conflict\nwithin her mind. The r\u00f4le of the serpent is the opposite of that of\nBalaam's ass, which figures in a story which comes from the same early\nJudean prophetic school. In the conversation between the woman and the\nserpent the true character of all temptation is revealed: it is the\nnecessity of choosing between two courses of conduct neither of which is\naltogether bad. Curiosity, which is the guide to all knowledge, the\nbeauty of the apple, which appeals to the aesthetic sense, and physical\nappetite, not in itself bad,--all these powerfully attracted the\nOriental woman of the ancient story. On the other side she felt the\ncompelling power of love and gratitude and the definite divine command.\n\n[Sidenote: _The essence of all temptation_]\n\nThe prophet saw clearly that all the elements of temptation are within\nman--a truth sometimes obscured in later Jewish thought. Milton has also\nled us astray in identifying the crafty serpent with the Satan of later\nJudaism. The prophet graphically presents another great fact of human\nexperience, namely, that what is one man's temptation is not another's,\nthat the temptation to be real must appeal to the one tested. The crafty\nserpent is not represented as speaking to the man; he would probably\nhave turned away in loathing. His wife, she who had already sinned, the\none whom Jehovah had given him as a helpmeet, herself appeals to the\nsense of chivalry within him. Hence the conflict rages in his soul\nbetween love and obligation to Jehovah and his natural affection and\napparent duty to his wife. Thus in all temptation the diviner impulses\nstruggle with those which are not in themselves necessarily wrong but\nonly baser by contrast. Duty is the call of the diviner, sin is the\nyielding to the baser, motives.\n\n[Sidenote: _The real nature of sin_]\n\nThe Hebrew word for sin, which means the missing of the mark set up\nbefore each individual, is the only altogether satisfactory definition\nof sin ever devised, for it absolutely fits the facts of human\nexperience. Deflection from the moral standard set up by each man's\nconscience, even though his resulting act seem in itself noble, is for\nhim a sin. Although the influences which led the man and woman of the\nstory to disobey were exceedingly strong, the higher standard had been\nset up, and in falling short of it they sinned. Thus sin is not God's\nbut man's creation, and results from the deliberate choice of what the\nsinner knows to be wrong.\n\n[Sidenote: _The effects of sin_]\n\nIn the same simple yet powerful way the prophet depicts the inevitable\nconsequences of sin. At every point the picture is true to universal\nexperience. The most appalling effect of a wrong act is that it destroys\npeace and purity of mind. It also makes cowards of brave men, and the\npresence and tender affection of the one wronged suddenly become\nintolerable. Sin also begets sin. To the cowering fugitives Jehovah\ncomes, as he always does, with a message intended to evoke a frank\nconfession which would tear down the hideous barrier that their sin had\nreared between himself and them; but, like most foolish, blind Adams and\nEves, they hug their crime to their breasts and raise the barrier heaven\nhigh by trying to excuse their guilt. Thus they pronounce their own\ndoom. For God himself only one course of action remains: it is to send\nthem forth from his presence and from the life-giving tree, out into the\nschool of hardship and bitter pain, that there they may learn the\nlessons which are necessary before they can again become citizens of the\ntrue Garden of Eden.\n\n[Sidenote: _The sequel to the story of man's fall_]\n\nTwo simple yet exceedingly significant touches lighten the gloom of this\nuniversal tragedy of human life. The one is that for the guilty,\nunrepentant pair, Jehovah himself made tunics of skins to protect them\nfrom the inclemency of their new life,--evidence that his love and care\nstill went with them. The other is the implication that the true garden\nof Eden was still to be found on earth, and was closed simply to the\nguilty and unrepentant. The Bible is the record of how men learned the\nall-important lessons in the painful school of experience. Israel's\nteachers, each in his characteristic way, led their race on toward the\ncommon goal. The Gospels tell of how _a man, tempted in all points as we\nare_ in a distant day and land found his way again into the abiding\npresence of God. He _was one with the Father_, not because he did not\nmeet temptation in all its power, but because, unlike the actors in the\nprimitive story, and all other participants in the drama of life, he\nyielded only to the guidance of divine impulses. Not content with\nachieving the goal himself, he gave his energies and his life to showing\nothers how they also might overcome the baser impulses within them and\nfind their way to God's presence and become one with him. Thus, because\nof what he did and said and was, he forever vindicated his title of\nSaviour of Mankind.\n\n[Sidenote: _The religious teachings of other early stories_]\n\nNo other early Old Testament narrative is perhaps so full of rich\nspiritual suggestion as the one just considered, and yet each has its\nvaluable contribution. Even such a story as that of the killing of Abel\nby Cain forcibly teaches the great prophetic truth that it is not the\nform of the offering, but the character and deeds back of the sacrifice,\nthat determine Jehovah's favor or disfavor (iv. 7). Graphically it sets\nforth the spirit that prompts the greatest of crimes. In contrast to\nCain, defiant yet pursued by haunting fear of vengeance, it also\npresents the divine tenderness and mercy in granting him a tribal mark\nto protect him from the hand of man. The similar story of Noah, the\nfirst vineyard-keeper, preaches the first temperance sermon in all\nliterature, and also suggests the inevitable consequences of moral\ndepravity so forcibly illustrated in the history of the ancient\nCanaanites. Even the prosaic table of the nations in Genesis x.\nemphasizes the conception of the unity of the human family which was\ndestined in time to become the basis of Israel's belated missionary\nactivity.\n\n[Sidenote: _Ideals presented in the early prophetic portrait of Abraham_]\n\nWhen we pass to the twelfth chapter of Genesis the independent stories\ncoalesce into cycles, and each cycle, as well as each narrative, has its\nown religious purpose. In definite outlines each successive group of\nteachers painted the character of Abraham, the traditional father of the\nIsraelitish race, and held it up before their own and succeeding\ngenerations as a perpetual example and inspiration. In the early Judean\nprophetic narratives he is pictured as the friend of Jehovah. His own\nmaterial interests are entirely secondary, as illustrated in his dealing\nwith Lot. Without hesitation he leaves home and kindred behind, for his\ndominating purpose in life is simply to know and do the will of Jehovah.\nTo this end he rears altars throughout the land of Canaan. His chief joy\nis in communion with God and in the promises to be realized in his\ndescendants. Through warring, hostile Canaan he passes unscathed, for\nhis eyes are fixed on things heavenly.\n\n[Sidenote: _Its significance_]\n\nIt matters little whether or not, far back in the primitive days of\nIsrael's history, a Bedouin sheik anticipated in actual character and\nlife all that was gradually revealed to the prophets of a much later\nage. The supremely significant fact is that the noble ideal of Israel's\nearliest teachers was thus vividly and concretely embodied in the\nportrait of him whom the Hebrews regarded with pride and adoration as\nthe founder of their race. In Hosea and Jeremiah, and less imperfectly\nin the nation as a whole, the ideal in time became an historical\nreality.\n\n[Sidenote: _Later portraits of Abraham_]\n\nThe early Ephraimite school of writers picture Abraham as a prophet\n(Gen. xx. 7), and therefore as an exemplification of their highest\nideal. In the remarkable fourteenth chapter of Genesis he is a\ncourageous, chivalrous knight, attacking with a handful of followers the\nallied armies of the most powerful kings of his day. Returning\nvictorious, he restores the spoil to the plundered and gives a princely\ngift to the priest of the local sanctuary. In the later priestly\nnarratives the picture suddenly changes, and Abraham figures as the\nfaithful servant of the law, with whom originates the rite of\ncircumcision, the seal of a new covenant (xvii). Later Jewish and Moslem\ntraditions each have their characteristic portrait. One, which pictures\nhim as in heaven the protector of the faithful, is reflected in the New\nTestament (Luke xvi. 23-30), Thus each succeeding age and group of\nteachers made him the embodiment and supreme illustration of its noblest\nideals, and it is this ideal element that gives the Old Testament\nstories their permanently practical value.\n\n[Sidenote: _Practical teachings of the Abraham stories_]\n\nHaving noted the teachings that each individual story and the cycle as a\nwhole conveyed to the minds of their first readers, it only remains for\nthe teacher of to-day to translate them into modern terms. Some of the\nmost important implications of the Abraham stories thus interpreted are,\nfor example: (1) God calls each man to a high mission. (2) He will guide\nand care for those who are responsive. (3) To those who seek to know him\nintimately, and to do his will, he will reveal himself in fullest\nmeasure, and for such he has in store his richest blessings. (4) _He\nthat findeth his life_ (Lot) _shall lose it, and he that loseth his\nlife_ (Abraham) _shall find it_.\n\n[Sidenote: _Significance of the character of Esau_]\n\nThe Jacob and Esau stories contain marvellously exact and realistic\nportraits of the two races (the Israelites and the Edomites) that they\nrespectively represent. Of the two brothers, Esau is in many ways the\nmore attractive. He suggests the open air and the fields, where he loved\nto hunt. He is easy-going, ingenuous, and impulsive. His faults are\nthose of not being or doing. As long as he had enough to eat and was\ncomfortable, he was contented. He is the type of the world's drifters.\nSince Aram was far distant he disregards the wishes of his parents and\nmarries one of the daughters of the land. No ambition stirred him and no\ndevotion to Jehovah or to the ideals of his race gave content and\ndirection to his life. Thus he remained a laggard, and the half-nomadic,\nrobber people that he represented became but a stagnant pool, compared\nwith the onrushing stream of Israel's life.\n\n[Sidenote: _Jacob's faults_]\n\nJacob's faults are also presented by the early prophets with an\nastonishing fidelity. Rarely does a race early in its history have a\nportrait of its weaknesses as well as its strength held up thus\nprominently before its eyes. Jacob is the antithesis of Esau. While his\nbrother was hunting care-free in the fields, he was at home plotting how\nhe could farther his own interests. When the opportunity offers, he\nmanifests a cold, calculating shrewdness. To make good the title to the\nbirthright thus acquired he does not hesitate to resort to fraud and\nlying. Then he flees, pursued by his own guilty conscience, and, tricked\nby Laban, he serves as a slave fourteen years to win the wife whom he\nloves. At last, again a fugitive from the consequences of his own\nquestionable dealing, he returns with quaking heart to face the brother\nthat he had wronged.\n\n[Sidenote: _The elements of strength in Israel's character_]\n\nThe character is far from a perfect one, and yet the ancient stories\nsuggest its elements of strength. By nature he was selfish and crafty;\nand yet he has what Esau fatally lacks: energy, persistency, and a\ncommanding ambition. From the first his ambition looks beyond himself to\nthe future of his descendants. Measured by our modern standards, his\nreligious professions seem only hypocrisy; but as we analyze his\ncharacter we find that a faith in Jehovah, narrow and selfish though it\nbe, was ever his guiding star. Out of the tortuous windings of his\nearlier years it ultimately led him to a calm old age. Imperfect though\nhis character was, like that of the race which he represented, the\nsignificant fact is that God ever cared for him and was able to utilize\nhim as an agent in divine revelation.\n\n[Sidenote: _The noble teachings of the Joseph stories_]\n\nEven more obvious and universal are the practical lessons illustrated by\nthe Joseph stories. In the early prophetic narratives, Abraham is the\nperfect servant of God, Jacob the type of the Israelitish race, but\nJoseph is the ideal man of affairs. Graphically the successive stories\npicture the man in his making and reveal his true character. He is\nsimple, affectionate, and yet strongly ambitious. His day-dreams make\nhim odious, as in the case of many a boy to-day, to his unimaginative\nbrothers. A seemingly hard fate rudely snatches him from the enervating\ninfluences of his childhood home and places him in the severe school of\nexperience, where he is tested and trained. It also opens wide the door\nof opportunity. Fidelity to every interest and an unselfish response to\nevery opportunity for service soon bring him into the presence of the\nPharaoh. His judicious counsels, diplomacy, and organizing ability win\nfor him the highest honors Egypt can confer. With modesty and fidelity\nhe endures this supreme test--success. Toward his brothers, who had\nbitterly wronged him, he is nobly magnanimous, and to his kinsmen, who\nbelong to the shepherd class especially despised as boors by the\ncultured Egyptians, he is loyal and considerate. Above all, not by\nprofessions, but by deeds, he reveals the true source of his strength,--\na natural faith in the God of his race and an unfailing loyalty to him.\n\n[Sidenote: _Conclusion_]\n\nIn the same way Moses, the exodus, and the great men and events of\nIsrael's dramatic history, all have a religious importance and\nsignificance far surpassing the merely historical. At the same time the\nmethods of modern literary and historical investigation reveal rather\nthan conceal the deeper spiritual truths that they illustrate. The more\nlight that can be turned upon them the more clearly will their essential\nteachings stand forth. Like the Old Testament as a whole, they grew up\nout of real life and truly reflect and interpret it, and therefore have\na living, vital message to life to-day. Any interpretation that does not\nring true to life may well be questioned. Finally, the authority of\nthese ancient narratives depends not upon the historical or scientific\naccuracy of the individual story that is used as an illustration, but\nupon the fact that through the experiences and hearts of those who\nemployed them God was seeking to make men free by the knowledge of the\ntruth.\n\n\n\n\nXV\n\nPRACTICAL METHODS OF STUDYING THE OLD TESTAMENT\n\n[Sidenote: _The various methods of approach_]\n\nThe Old Testament may be studied as literature, as history, as the\nrecord of an important stage in the evolution of religion, as the\nrevelation of God to the race, or as a practical aid to the individual\nin living the true life. Each angle of approach calls for different\nmethods and yields its correspondingly rich results. Studied in\naccordance with the canons of modern literary investigation, a\nliterature is disclosed of surpassing variety, beauty, and fascination.\nAfter the principles of historical criticism have been vigorously\napplied, the Old Testament is found to contain some of the most\nimportant and authentic historical data that have come down to us from\nantiquity. To the general student of religion there is no group of\nwritings that equals in value those included in these ancient\nScriptures. As a simple, clear revelation of the character and will of\nthe Divine Ruler, present and regnant in all life, the Old Testament is\nsurpassed by only one other volume, and that is its complement, the New.\n\n[Sidenote: _The supreme aim of Old Testament study_]\n\nIt is, however, as the guide to right thinking, and being, and acting,\n_that the man of God may be perfect, completely equipped for every good\nwork_, that the Old Testament is and always will be studied by the\nmajority of people. In so doing they will be realizing its primary and\nsupreme purpose. Like true religion, it is not an end in itself, but\nsimply an effective force, drawing and binding individual men to God and\nto the right. Any method of study that fails to attain this definite\nand practical end does not achieve the chief aim of the Old Testament\nwritings.\n\n[Sidenote: _Necessity of studying the Old Testament as an organic\nwhole_]\n\nThis practical and personal end, however, cannot be attained at a leap.\nIt is impossible to achieve the best results by taking a truth or a\npassage here and there and applying it at once to the individual. Both\nthe Old Testament and the individual are something organic. Each book\nhas a unity and a history that must be understood, if a given passage is\nto be fairly interpreted or its truths intelligently applied, Individual\nbooks are also related to others and to their historical background.\nAlso, as has already been shown, to appreciate fully the vital message\nof a given writer it is necessary, not to know his name, but his place\nin history, his point of view, his method of expression, and his\npurpose. The Old Testament and Israelitish history as a whole are the\nbest and most essential interpreters of individual books and passages.\nThe most serious handicap to the ordinary Bible teacher and scholar\nis the lack of this broader, systematic, constructive knowledge. Much\nearnest, devoted study, especially in the Old Testament fields, is\ndeficient in inspiration and results, because it is simply groping in an\nunknown land. It is all important, therefore, to ascend some height and\nspy out the land as a whole, to note the relation of different books and\nevents to each other, and to view broadly the great stream of divine\nrevelation which flows out of the prehistoric past on through the Old\nand New Testaments to the present.\n\n[Sidenote: _Remarkable adaptation of the Old Testament to different ages\nand degrees of moral culture._]\n\nIn order effectively to apply the truths of the Old Testament to life,\nit is also necessary to regard the point of view of the individual to\nbe taught. This fundamental principle of all education was fully\nappreciated and applied by Israel's great spiritual teachers. The result\nis that the Old Testament contains truths marvellously adapted to every\nage and type of mind. The importance of the religious culture of the\nchild is emphasized by the comparatively large proportion, of writings\nespecially fitted to hold the attention and arouse the imagination and\nshape the ideals even of the youngest. Nearly half of the Old Testament\nconsists simply of narratives. Those inimitable stories, which come from\nthe childhood of the race, have a perennial fascination for the child of\nto-day. They find him on his own mental and moral plane, as they did the\nprimitive child, and by natural stages lead him on and up to the higher\nstandards and broader faith of Israel's later prophets and sages, and\nthus prepare him to understand and appreciate the perfected life and\nteachings of Jesus.\n\n[Sidenote: _The prophetic stories the children's Bible_]\n\nIn the modern use of the Old Testament, the faithful application of this\nfundamental principle also leads to a most practical conclusion; the\nstories peculiarly adapted to children are not the mature, legalistic\nnarratives of the late priestly writers, but the early prophetic\nstories, which begin in the second chapter of Genesis. If children are\ntaught only these, they will not be disconcerted by widely variant\nversions of the same events. Above all, they will be delivered from the\ninconsistencies and erroneous impressions which are often the cause of\nstumbling to the child. The later process of unlearning, which is\nalways dangerous, will be avoided. If the problems presented by the\npriestly narratives be reserved until they can be studied from the\nbroader and truer point of view, they will be readily solved, and the\ngreat positive teachings of these later didactic stories will be fully\nappreciated.\n\n[Sidenote: _The prophets the best story-tellers_]\n\nThe subject-matter, therefore, supremely suitable for the earliest\nmoral and spiritual culture of the child, is clearly the simple and yet\nprofound prophetic stories of the Old Testament. It is very questionable\nwhether the many excellent paraphrases now current are a gain or a\nhindrance. The ancient prophets and the generations who have retold them\nwere inimitable story-tellers. To attempt to improve upon their work is\nfutile. A simple, clear translation is all that is required. [Footnote:\nA Children's Bible is now being prepared according to the plan suggested\nabove.] The interpretation and application of their practical teachings\ncan best be left to the intuition of the child and the direction of the\nintelligent parent and teacher.\n\n[Sidenote: _Their effective methods of presenting truths_]\n\nIt is also astonishing how readily even a little child appreciates the\nessential lessons, as, for example, those regarding the nature and\nconsequences of sin, presented by the story of the Garden of Eden. Under\nthe charm of the attractive personalities that figure in them, and\nthe stirring achievements, so dramatically presented that they command\nbreathless attention, the early prophetic narrations unconsciously and,\ntherefore, all the more effectively, instil into the mind of the child\nthe most essential truths regarding God and life and duty. At the same\ntime, as they study in order the deeds of the heroes and makers of\nIsrael's history, they are becoming familiar with the real background of\nthe earlier revelation recorded in the Old Testament.\n\n[Sidenote: _The present position of these stories_]\n\nTherefore scattered throughout Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, Judges,\nRuth, Samuel, Kings, and the older sections of Ezra, Nehemiah, and I\nMaccabees, are to be found in rich profusion the material for the\nearliest years of Bible study. These should naturally be supplemented by\nthe stories of the prophets, found in such books as Isaiah, Jeremiah,\nand Haggai. Their sequel and culmination are the corresponding stories\nin the Gospels and Acts.\n\n[Sidenote: _Study of the direct personal teachings of the Old\nTestament_]\n\nIn connection with the earliest study of the achievements of Israel's\nheroes and spiritual leaders, many of their greatest teachings would be\nappropriated and applied, but when the years of early adolescence are\nreached, the prophets in their sermons, the priests in their laws, the\nusages in their proverbs, and the psalmists in their psalms, each have\ncertain personal messages, superbly adapted to the critical, formative\nyears, when childhood begins to unfold into maturity. To make this\nmaterial available, judicious selection and interpretation are required.\nThe organism of each book and of the child must both be carefully\nregarded to make the adjustment perfect. Naturally this most vital line\nof study would be the introduction to a corresponding study of the\ndirect, personal teachings of Jesus and the apostles.\n\n[Sidenote: _Study of the origin and growth of the Old Testament_]\n\nThis intensely practical work could profitably be preceded or followed\nby a study of the origin and growth of the different books and groups of\nOld Testament writings and the gradual stages whereby these Scriptures\nattained their present form and authority. The guides in this\ninvestigation should not be the Jewish rabbis or even the traditions of\nthe Church Fathers. We have been misled too long by the pious guesses of\nthe medi\u00e6val saints; but rather the testimony of the Bible itself and\nthe evidence of contemporary writings should be the guides. The spirit\nshould also be frank and constructive. The results cannot fail to be\npractically helpful in a great variety of ways. Thus on the basis of\nfacts, in the light of history, and by the use of those methods of\nresearch which alone command respect and acceptance in other kindred\nlines of investigation, the questions which come to every thoughtful\nboy and girl will be fairly and truly answered. In this way those\nexperiences which are inevitable in this critical age will deepen and\nbroaden rather than destroy the foundations of individual faith.\n\n[Sidenote: _The historical method of approach_]\n\nWith this general introduction, many students and classes will find it\nprofitable to approach the Old and New Testaments from the distinctively\nhistorical point of view. Beginning with the unfolding of the\ncivilization and religion of ancient Babylonia, they will study in\nconjunction the history, the strong personalities, the literature, and\nthe thought of each successive period. The advantages of this method of\nstudy are many. Each book will be read and its messages interpreted\nin the light of the conditions and forces that constitute its true\nbackground. The different characters will live again, and the\nsignificance of their work and words will be fully appreciated as they\nare viewed in the clear perspective of history.\n\n[Sidenote: _Its practical aims and results_]\n\nAbove all, such a synthetic study of the unfolding of the supreme truths\nof revelation lays a foundation for the individual faith as broad as\nhuman experience. This is to attain one of the chief aims of all study,\nwhich is to put the individual into practical possession of all that is\nvital and best in the experiences and achievements of the past, that,\nthus equipped, he may go forth to fight the battle of life, valiantly\nand successfully.\n\n[Sidenote: _Its natural sequel_]\n\nThis last course of study would call for several years, and, more than\nthat, for enthusiasm, devotion, and real work. It would also take the\nstudent in time through the New Testament period, with its literature\nand commanding personalities and events, and perhaps beyond to the great\nepochs of Church history. Many would not stop until they had studied\nthe latest chapter in Church history, the noble missionary activity and\nachievement of the past and present century.\n\n[Sidenote: _Advances courses of study_]\n\nWhen the Bible had thus been studied, the scholars in our schools would\nnot be ready to graduate, but rather to enter upon that still deeper\nand more fundamental study which would mean an ultimate conquest of the\nbroad field that it represents. Then it might be safe and profitable to\nadopt the topical method and study some one of the vital themes that are\ntreated from many different points of view in the various parts of the\nBible.\n\n[Sidenote: _Study of Old Testament history_]\n\nIt will, however, probably be found easier and more natural next to\ntake up in succeeding years the detailed study of the nine or ten great\ngroups of writings which are found in the Bible. The natural and easiest\nmethod of approach to those of the Old Testament would be through a\ncareful, constructive study of the history of the Israelitish race,\nperhaps beginning with the definite historical period of Saul and Samuel\nand concluding with the advent of Rome. Far better than any modern\nhistory of Israel is that marvellous history written by its own\nhistorians, which begins with the book of Samuel and ends with I\nMaccabees. Analyzed and arranged in their chronological order, these\nnarratives tell the story with rare fascination and suggestiveness.\n[Footnote: Volume II of the \"Student's Old Testament\": contains the\nnarratives from Samuel through I Maccabees, thus arranged.]\n\n[Sidenote: _Study of the prophecies and earlier narratives_]\n\nOn the basis of this detailed study of the historical background, the\nwork and teachings of the prophets could next be traced in their true\nand chronological order. No Old Testament field is more neglected and\nnone is more intensely interesting, when once the student understands\nthe problems and aims of each great prophet. None has a more practical\nmessage for to-day, provided its supreme truths are interpreted into\nmodern terms and conditions. After becoming intimately acquainted with\nthe Hebrew prophets, it would be possible to go back and study with a\nnew understanding and appreciation the early narratives which gather\nabout the beginnings of Hebrew history. Then the intricate problems of\nthe first eight books of the Bible would vanish in the light of a fuller\nknowledge. Above all, that which is essential and permanent would stand\nout in clear relief.\n\n[Sidenote: _Study of the devotional literature_]\n\nFrom the earliest fruits of prophetic activity it would then be\nprofitable to turn to the later, represented by Lamentations and the\nPsalter. Here the best results require a classification of the different\npsalms according to their themes, so that their teachings can be studied\nsystematically and as a whole. In this field of study the student comes\nvery close to the heart of the Old Testament and the heart of the God\nwho speaks through it.\n\n[Sidenote: _Study of the wisdom literature_]\n\nLess spiritual and yet intensely interesting and practical is the great\ndepartment of the Old Testament known as the wisdom literature. _He that\nwalketh with the wise shall be wise_ (Prov. xiii. 20) is as true to-day\nas when first uttered. This literature is a great mine of truth, almost\nentirely neglected by the Christian world. Systematic classification\nis the first requisite for the profitable study of the Proverbs and the\nlater Wisdom of Ben Sira. From these the student may pass on to the\nfuller treatment of the omnipresent human problem, so sublimely\npresented in the book of Job, and to the many fundamental questions\nraised by Eccleslastes and the Wisdom of Solomon.\n\n[Sidenote: _Study of the Old Testament laws and institutions_]\n\nLast of all a year might well be spent in the study of the unfolding and\nconcrete application and illustration of Israel's ethical and religious\nprinciples in the legal codes and institutions of the Old Testament.\nMany of these have found a higher expression, some are but symbolic, but\nothers still have permanent authority and value. Studied as a whole and\non the basis of a logical classification, this little understood field\nwould also cease to be a jungle, and Instead would yield its own\npractical spiritual fruits.\n\n\n\n\nXVI\n\nRELIGIOUS EDUCATION--THE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM OF TO-DAY\n\n[Sidenote: _The practical realization of these possibilities_]\n\nThis very brief and fragmentary outline of methods and possibilities of\nOld Testament study is not an impossible dream. In colleges and in a few\nBible schools it is already being tried with the gratifying results\nthat might be anticipated. To put it at once into force in most of our\nSunday-schools would be absolutely impracticable. It is presented simply\nas a suggestion of a definite and practical goal toward which to work.\nWith careful adjustment, these courses, adapted to different ages,\ncould be arranged so that at least the intermediate grades in the\nSunday-school would be studying in the same field at the same time. This\nplan provides for no graduation from the school of the Bible. It assumes\nthat the Christian world is at last awakening to the real significance\nof religious education and to a recognition of the fact that the\nultimate solution of our gravest national and social problems is to be\nfound only in the inculcation of the true ethical ideals in the mind of\nthe individual. It also assumes the fundamental principle that no\nworthy ends can be attained without real work, enthusiastic devotion,\nsystematic methods, and above all a definite and worthy goal. It rests\non the belief that the sense of gradual conquest and the attainment\nof practical results will alone inspire permanent devotion and evoke\nfaithful work, and in the end prepare the individual scholar for the\nintelligent and loyal service of God.\n\n[Sidenote: _The overwhelming responsibility of the Sunday-schools_]\n\nFrank confessions are good for a cause as well as for the soul. We must\nadmit that most of our Sunday-schools, with their vast resources in\nopportunity, in financial support, and in the devotion of the teachers\nand officers, do not permanently hold their scholars, and in the great\nmajority of cases do not give them a thorough or systematic knowledge,\neven of the most vital teachings of the Bible. The ignorance of its\nliterature and history on the part of even, the more intelligent\nstudents who enter college, is almost past belief, as many of us can\ntestify from personal observation. The limitations in time and equipment\nof the Sunday-schools are undoubtedly great in comparison with those\nof the secular schools; and yet the responsibility now thrown upon the\nBible schools is even greater than upon the latter. Parents have ceased\nto instruct their children in spelling and the multiplication-table\nbecause they have found that the teachers can do this better. Without\njustification, but by analogy and because they are themselves often\nunacquainted with the Bible, or uncertain regarding its interpretation,\nthey are more and more leaving the religious education of their sons and\ndaughters to the Church and the Sunday-school.\n\n[Sidenote: _The transcendent importance of religious education_]\n\nIt is safe to say, and this without reservation, the most fundamental\nproblem in England and America to-day is the problem of religious\neducation, because this lies at the roots of all else--political,\nsocial, and theological. When the Christian world awakens to its\nprofound significance, and when its ideals and methods are raised, even\nto a level with those of the public schools, the other grave problems\nwill be near their solution. If the individual is thoroughly taught\nduring the impressionable years of childhood and youth, the fundamental\nprinciples of ethics and religion, society and the state will have no\ndifficulty in meeting their problems; but if not, these will perforce\ncontinue to remain unsolved.\n\n[Sidenote: _Important that the Old Testament be taught in the\npublic schools_]\n\nIt is a time for all earnest men of every denomination or creed to unite\nin meeting this need. In the Old Testament, Jew and Christian, Catholic\nand Protestant, stand on common ground. The modern inductive historical\nmethods of study have prepared the way for union; for they aim to\nsupport no denominational interpretation, but simply to attain the\ntruth. The last reasons, therefore, why the literature, history,\ngeography, and ethical teachings of the Old Testament should not be\ntaught in our public schools are rapidly disappearing, and the hundreds\nof reasons why any system of secular education is incomplete without it\nare coming to the front. With this fundamental basis of knowledge and\ninstruction, the work of the Sunday-schools could also at once be placed\non a far more effective plane. It is a consummation for which every\nintelligent citizen should earnestly work.\n\n[Sidenote: _The task of the Church in the present century_]\n\nThe achievement of the last century was to complete the work of the\nProtestant Reformation and rediscover the Bible. The task of the present\ncentury is to instil its essential teachings, thus revealed, into the\nmind of the individual, so that they will become controlling factors in\nhuman life. Here lies the great responsibility and opportunity of the\nChristian Church. If it is to renew its hold on modern men, it will be\nthrough the mind as well as the heart, and its most efficient method\nwill be--as it always has in reality been--religious education. Horace\nBushnell proclaimed the watchword of the Church triumphant: \"Christian\nculture.\"\n\n[Sidenote: _The examples of the prophets and Jesus_]\n\nHis, however, was no new discovery. The Hebrew prophets, priests, and\nsages were not primarily preachers, but teachers. The prophetic messages\nwhich fell on deaf ears, instilled into the minds of a few humble\ndisciples, in time won acceptance from the nation. Jesus himself was not\nso much the preacher as the Great Teacher. His earliest public preaching\nwas but the net cast to catch the few faithful disciples. When these had\nbeen secured, he turned his back upon a popular preaching ministry, and\ndevoted the best part of his brief public work to instructing a little\ngroup of disciples. History completely vindicates the wisdom of his\nmethod. Only by following closely on his footsteps can the Church hope\nto realize its true mission, especially in this age, when the heart and\nwill must be reached through the mind. In this respect, it must also\nbe confessed that the Catholic are far in advance of the Protestant\nchurches and Sunday-schools, where the preaching still overshadows the\nteaching.\n\n[Sidenote: _The call for a teaching ministry_]\n\nTo inspire and direct thorough religious instruction, carefully trained\nleaders are needed. The demand to-day is for a teaching as well as a\npreaching ministry, with an apostolic sense of a mission and a message.\nMen with natural gifts and the most thorough preparation are wanted to\nraise the standards and to organize and transform, as they alone can,\nby personal contact, the teaching corps of our Sunday-schools into\neffective forces. Such men and women certainly can be found. It is a\nconviction, based on a wide experience, that many of the ablest students\nin our colleges and universities, who for many valid reasons do not\nfeel the call to a preaching mission, would gladly and enthusiastically\ndevote themselves to the work of religious instruction, could they be\nsure of a field, when their preparation was complete. Our universities\nand seminaries already have the facilities and could readily assume this\nimportant responsibility. As soon as our large city churches and the\nfederated churches in our smaller towns, demand a teaching pastor as\nthe permanent director of their Sunday-schools, and of the religious\neducational work under their charge, they will enter upon a new career\nof permanent conquest. The needs are undoubtedly great, the volunteers\nare at hand, thorough preparation can be assured; but the call must\ncome from the Church, united and awake to its supreme opportunity and\nresponsibility.\n\n[Sidenote: _The antiquated methods of our Sunday-schools_]\n\nIt must also be confessed that our religious systems--if such they may\nbe called--are still in the experimental stage. They are far inferior in\nevery respect, except in the self-sacrificing devotion of the teachers\nand officers, to those of the secular schools. What is most vital to our\nnational and individual life is most neglected. Instead of the latest\nand best pedagogical methods, the most antiquated largely prevail.\nSaddest of all, the Bible which is being taught in the majority of our\nschools is the Bible of later Judaism and the Middle Ages, not the Book\nof Books which stands forth in the light of God's latest revelation, as\na message of beauty and life to the present age. It is not strange that\nthere is a growing distrust of the Sunday-school among many intelligent\npeople, and an appalling apathy or distaste for Bible study in the mind\nof the rising generation.\n\n[Sidenote: _The crying need for improved courses of study_]\n\nIf we shut our eyes to these facts, they will remain; but if we frankly\nface them, a decade of intelligent and devoted work will effect a great\ntransformation. The first step is obviously along the line of improved\ncourses and methods of study. Many different courses are at present in\nthe field. All have their merits, and to those who have developed them\nhighest praise and credit is due. Some have been prepared to meet\nimmediate and practical needs, but ignore the larger unities and the\nhistorical background, and in general neglect the results of modern\neducational and biblical knowledge. Some have been worked out in the\nstudy and have a strong academic flavor, but do not meet the needs of\nthe average scholar or teacher. Others are models of pedagogical\nperfection, but lack content. Progressive Sunday-schools are trying one\nsystem after another, and meantime the note of discontent is rapidly\nrising. The crisis is too serious to admit of personal rivalries or\nprejudices.\n\n[Sidenote: _How to meet this need_]\n\nThe moral of the situation is simple: that which will fully meet the\nneeds of the present must be a combination of all that is good in\nexisting courses, and embody what is best in the scholarship and methods\nof to-day. Like the most effective systems in the past, it must be\nwrought out in the laboratory of practical experience. It must be\nplanned from the point of view of actual needs and conditions. It\nmust also have a worthy and definite goal and a high ideal. It should\nemphasize the importance of fundamental religious instruction, as well\nas preaching. All that is practical and permanent in modern educational\nmethods should be utilized. It should preserve the existing superb\nSunday-school organization, and, as far as possible, the unity of the\nsplendid system now under the direction of the International Committee.\nFinally, it should incorporate the positive and illuminating results of\nmodern constructive biblical research. The task cannot be accomplished\nin a moment, nor by one man nor a small group of men. It is certainly\nimportant enough to command the best experience, the ripest scholarship,\nand the most unselfish devotion.\n\n[Sidenote: _The advent of a new era in the history of the kingdom of\nGod_]\n\nWhen this task has been thoroughly performed, and the ablest of our\neducated men and women have been enlisted in our Bible schools, the\ncause of religious education will command the respect of the world, not\nmerely because of the fundamental need which it aims to meet, but also\nbecause it is effectually meeting it. The Christian Church will also\nfind itself in sympathy and touch with that which is best and most\nsignificant in modern life and thought. Religious teachers and\nscientific investigators will work shoulder to shoulder in a common\nstudy and interpretation of God's many-sided revelation. Pastors will\nfeel the solid foundations of historical truth beneath their feet.\nLeaving behind the din and distractions of the transitional period, the\ndisciples of the Great Teacher will go forth with fresh zeal to make the\neternal truths of the Bible regnant in the lives of men, and the kingdom\nof God a reality in human history.","title":"The Origin and Permanent Value of the Old Testament","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":49946}