General introduction to the Old Testament; the canon

Front matter

BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME FROM THE

SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND

THE GIFT OF

Preface

Any one who addresses himself to the study of the Old Testament will desire first to know something of its character. It comes to us as a collection of books which have been and still are esteemed peculiarly sacred. How did they come to be so regarded? Is it due simply to a veneration for antiquity ? Is this a collection of the literature of ancient Israel, which later generations prized as a relic of early ages? Is it a body of Hebrew literature to which sanctity was attributed because of its being written in the sacred tongue? Is it a collection of the books containing the best thoughts of the most enlightened men of the Israelitish nation, embodying their religious faith and their conceptions of human duty ? Or is it more than all this? Is it the record of a divine revelation, made through duly authorized and accredited messengers sent of God for this purpose ?

The first topic which is considered in this volume is accordingly that of the Canon of the Old Testament, which is here treated not theologically but historically. We meet at the outset two opposing views of the growth of the canon : one contained in the statements of the Old Testament itself, the other in the theories of modern critics, based upon the conception that these books gradually acquired a sacredness which did not at first belong to them, and which did not enter into

VUX PREFACE

the purpose for which they were written. This is tested on the one hand by the claims which the various writers make for themselves, and on the other by the regard shown for these books by those to whom they were originally given. The various arguments urged by critics in defence of their position that the canon was not completed nor the collection made until several centuries after the time traditionally fixed and currently believed are considered ; and reasons are given to show that it might have been and probably was collected by Ezra and Nehemiah or in their time.

The question then arises as to the books of which the Old Testament properly consists. Can the books of which it was originally composed be certainly identified? And are they the same that are now in the Old Testament as we possess it, and neither more nor less? This is answered by tracing in succession the Old Testament as it was accepted by the Jews, as it was sanctioned by our Lord and the inspired writers of the New Testament, and as it has been received in the Christian Church from the beginning. The Apocrypha though declared to be canonical by the Council of Trent, and accepted as such by the Eoman Catholic Church, are excluded from the canon by its history traced in the manner just suggested as well as by the character of their contents, which is incompatible with the idea of their authors being divinely inspired.

Princeton, N. J., October 3, 1898.

Table Of Contents

PAGE

HISTORY OF INTRODUCTION TO THE OLD TESTA- MENT 1

Introduction, the term and the science modern ; the early Christians, Origen, Augustin, Jerome, 1 ; Adrian, Eucherius, Cassiodorus ; after the Reformation, Walther, Walton Hobbes, Spinoza, Richard Simon, Carpzov, 2 ; Eichhorn Jahn, Herbst, Welte, DeWette, 3 ; Hengstenberg, Haver nick, Home ;Keil, Kurtz, Nosgen, Bleek, Stahelin, 4 ; Reuss, "Wellhausen, Kuenen ; Strack, Konig ; A. Zahn, Rupprecht Hoedemaker, Stosch ; S. Davidson, Robertson Smith, Driver ; Douglas, Valpy French and his collaborators, 5.

II

Testimony of the Bible in regard to the Formation op the Canon 11

Directions by Moses respecting the law, 11 ; thenceforth divinely authoritative, 12, 13; addition by Joshua, 18; Samuel, 14 ; the law in the temple, other copies of the law, 15, 16 ; books of the prophets also canonical, recapitulation, 17, 18.

ix

X CONTENTS

III. Pa8b

The Cbitical Theoby of the Fobmation of the Canon . 19

Eichhorn admitted that the law was canonical from the time of Moses ; this denied by more recent critics, 19 ; Deuteronomy canonized under Josiah, the entire Pentateuch under Ezra as the first canon, 20 ; a second canon of the - . .,-. prophets much later, 21 ; the hagiographa, a third canon, later-Still, 22 ; argued, 1, from late origin of certain books ; 2, the. threefold division of the canon, 23 ; 3, the Samaritan canpn ; 4, the Synagogue lessons, 24 ; 5, the law, or the law and the prophets, used to denote the whole Old Testament ''i 6, order of books in 2d and 3d divisions ; 7, books disputed, 25.

/'":'■ v:7 .'■" IV.

THE ! DeTEEMTNING Pkinciple in the Fobmation of the CanoS : 26

Prime error of the critics, Ewald, Dillmann, 26, 27 ; Eichhorn, early national literature, 28 ; Hitzig, Hebrew literature,' 29 ', .religious character, Robertson Smith, 30,31; claim .made, by the books of the Old Testament, 32 ; the law regarded, from the first as a divine revelation, 33; so likewise the books of the prophets, 34 ; this not a theological speculation, but a historical fact, 35, 36.

V

■ Testimony of Josephus, 37 ; not merely his private opinion, 38 ; ■ his' mistake regarding the Persian kings, 39 ; he ascribes prophetic power to John Hyrcanus ; critical allegations, presumption against them from the common belief of the Jewish nation, 40 ; Chronicles, no proof of late date from its genealogies, 41 ; Ezra and Nehemiah, the title King of Persia, 42-44 ; Jaddua, Darius the Persian, 45-48 ; the days of Nehemiah; Ezra iv. 6-23, 49, 50; Ezra vii. 1-40,. 51, 52 ; long periods passed over in silence, 52; Ecclesiastes, governmental abuses, 53 ; its language and ideas, 54, 55 ; Esther, 55, 56 ; Daniel, statement of Delitzsch, 56 ; historical objections, a, put in the hagiographa, 57 ; b, not

CONTENTS XI

PASB

mentioned by the son of Sirach, 58 ; c, third year of Jehoiakim, i.l;d, Chaldeans, a caste of wise men, 59 ; «, Belshazzar, king and son of Nebuchadnezzar, 60-65 ; f, Darius the Mede, 66 ; g, the books, ix. 2 ; A, other indications of late date, 67 ; language of the book, 68-70 ; predictions of the remote future, 71, 72; specific predictions do not end with Antiochus Epiphanes, 73 ; blends with Messiah's reign as usual in prophecy, 74 ; the compromise attempted is futile, 75 ; genuine predictions admitted and traditional basis assumed, 76 ; Maccabean Psalms, 77 ; the statement of Josephus and the belief of the Jews not disproved, 78.

VL

The Thbeefold Division of thb Canon 79

The prologue to Ecclesiasticus, 79 ; fourfold division of the Septuagint ; the Hebrew division based, not on the character of the books, nor various grades of inspiration, but the official status of the writers, 80, 81; Dillmann's objection ; Moses Stuart, 82, 83 ; Ezra, Nehemiah, Chronicles, Daniel, 84-86 ; Lamentations, 87 ; Strack's objections, 88 ; origin of the number 22, views of critics, 89, 90 ; conclusion, 91, 92.

VII. When and by Whom Collected 93

Authority of the books not dependent on their collection ; Elias Levita ascribed the collection to Ezra and the Great Synagogue, 93 ; the passage from Baba Bathra, 94, 95 ; theory of modern critics, 96 ; its mistakes corrected, 97 ; critics urge, 1, Ezra only bound the people to obey the law, 98 ; 2, Samaritans only acknowledge the Pentateuch, 99 ; 3, Scriptures read in the Synagogue, 100 ; 4, usage of terms '•the law" and "the law and the prophets," 101, 102 ; 5, arguments based on certain critical conclusions : (1) discrepancies between Chronicles and Samuel or Kings ; (2) composite character of Isaiah, 103, 104 ; (3) Zech. ix.-xiv. ; (4) Daniel, 105 ; (5) books of prophets not canonical until prophecy had ceased, 106 ; it is alleged (1) that none of the k'thubhim were admitted until the second division was

Xll CONTENTS

PAOB

closed, 107 ; (2) late date of some books ; (3) Chronicles preceded by Ezra and Nehemiah, 108 ; (4) additions to Esther and Daniel; canonization not to be confounded with collection, Bellarmin, 109, 110; prologue to Ecclesiasticus, 111 ; attempts to weaken its force, 112 ; 2 Esdras xiv. 21 ff., 113 ; 2 Mace ii. 13, 114; 1, Ezra the scribe, 115 ; 2, needs of the period following the exile, 116 ; 3, private collections already existed ; 4, all the sacred books then written ; 5, the cessation of prophecy, 117, 118.

VIII. The Extent of the Canon— The Canon of the Jews . 119

Division of the subject; the Talmud, 119; Josephus, 120-122 ; the canon of the Samaritans^ 122 ; the Sadducees, 123 ; Essenes, Therapeutae, 124 ; Alexandrian Jews, 124- 126 ; the Septuagint, 127, 128 ; the notion that there was no defined canon in Alexandria, 129 ; Movers argues for an enlarged canon in Palestine, 130 ; disputations in the Talmud, 131-136 ; Baruch and Ecclesiasticus have no sanction in the Talmud, 137; critical perplexity respecting the admission of Daniel and rejection of Ecclesiasticus, 138; passages from the Talmud, 138-140.

IX

They sanction the Jewish canon negatively ; and positively, 1, by express statements, 141 ; 2, general references, 142 ; 3, direct citation, 143 ; this the highest possible proof of its correctness, 144 ; use of Septuagint, 1, not sanction its inaccuracies ; 2, not liable to be misunderstood ; 3, not quote the Apocrypha, 145 ; alleged traces of acquaintance with the Apocrypha, 146, 147 ; Jude vs. 14, 15 from Book of Enoch; Jude ver. 9, 148; James iv. 6 ; 1 Cor. ii. 9, 149; Eph. v. 14; John vii. 38, 150; Luke xi. 49; 2 Tim. iii. 8,

151 ; Mat. xxvii. 9 ; Wildeboer's extravagant conclusion,

152 ; sacred books of the Jews distinguished from all others,

153 ; allegation that some books were still disputed, 154 ; attitude of the New Testament to the Old, 155, 156.

CONTENTS Ml

X. Pass

Question between Roman Catholics and Protestants, 157 ; decision of Christ the supreme authority ; meaning of canonical, 158 ; and apocryphal, 159, 160 ; catalogue of Melito, 160, 161 ; Justin Martyr, Syriac version, 162 ; Origen, Tertullian, 163; Council of Laodicea, 164; fourth century catalogues, 165, 166; Augustin, Councils of Hippo and Carthage, 167-174 ; testimony of the first four centuries, 175 ; the Greek Church ; the Western Church, 176 ; Cardinals Ximenes and Cajetan, 177; Innocent I., Gelasius, 178 ; Council at Florence ; Council of Trent, 179 ; Apocrypha in popular usage, 180; included in early versions, 181, 182 ; read in the churches, 183-185 ; quoted by the fathers, 185, 186 ; under the same titles as the canonical books, 187-189 ; attributed to prophets or inspired men, 189, 190 ; proto-canonical, and deutero-canonical ; doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church ; the Greek Church, 191 ; Protestant Churches, 192 ; the apocryphal controversy, 193, 194.

XI. The Apocrypha Condemned by Internal Evidence . . 195

Value of internal evidence ; Tobit, Judith, 195, 196 ; "Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, 197, 198 ; Maccabees, 199 ; Additions to Esther and Daniel, 200.