Skip to main content

Full text of "The Bible : its structure and purpose /cwith an introduction by Arthur T. Pierson"

See other formats 


Division     £)SIZ'IS 


Section 


A  ,  V)!"] 


The  Bible:     ^^^^iS^ 
Its  Structure  and  Purpose 


JOHN     URQUHART 

Member  of  the  Society  of  Biblical  Archaeology 
and  Associate  of  the  Victoria  Institute. 


AUTHOR   OF 

'The  New  Biblical   Guide,"    "What  are  We  to   Believe?' 
'The    Inspiration  and   Accuracy   of    the    Holy  Scriptures.' 


WITH 

AN    INTRODUCTION  BY 

Dr.  ARTHUR    T.    PIERSON 


VOLUME   L 


New  York : 

GOSPEL    PUBLISHING    HOUSB 

D.  T.  Bass,  Mgr. 

54  West  22D  Street 


Copyright  1904  by 
Gospel  Pubushinq  House, 

NEW  YORK. 


Rights  of  Translation  reserved. 


INTRODUCTION. 


A  great  conflict  is  now  in  progress,  and  many 
think  it  is  the  last  great  decisive  battle  of  the  ages. 
A  gigantic  foe,  boastful  and  pretentious,  under  the 
guise  of  the  "higher  criticism,"  wearing  the  showy- 
armor  of  German  rationalistic  scholarship,  is  defying 
the  armies  of  the  living  God. 

Many  who  ought  to  have  proven  champions 
and  defenders  of  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the 
Saints,  and  to  the  Covenant  of  Christ,  are  faint- 
hearted and  flee  in  dismay. 

The  author  of  this  series  we  know ;  he  is  a 
man  of  strong  convictions  and  of  the  courage  of  his 
convictions,  and  he  shows  the  spirit  of  David,  and 
with  sling  and  smoath  stones  gathered  from  the 
brook  of  the  Word  of  God,  he  goes  forth  and 
meets  this  Philistine  boaster,  challenging  him  to 
battle  in  the  name  of  Jehovah. 

His  writings,  we  feel,  are  what  in  our  day 
meet  the  needs  of  the  great  crisis.  He  is  an 
intelligent  advocate  of  the  truth,  and  he  finds  and 
exposes  the  weak  points  of  the  foe  that  assails  the 
truth. 

The  value  of  his  work  is  acknowledged  every- 
where by  the  friends  of  God's  Word.  We  can 
safely  commend  his  books  to  the  careful  reading 
of  all  believers,  and  we  hope  that  they  may  have 
a  wide  circulation,  and  may  be  called  to  the  atten- 
tion of  many  whose  minds  have  been  disturbed 
as  to  the  foundation  of  their  faith. 


^  4rfL^^- 


^^y-tf'^^u — ' 


CONTENTS. 


THE   BIBLE  AND  CRITICISM:    IS  THE  BATTLE  ENDED? 

CHAP.  PAGE. 

I.    The  Present  State  of  the  Question 1 

II.    The  Limits  of  Critical  Ability 5 

III.  The  Morality  of  Ancient  Transcribers 10 

Appendix:   The  Babylonians  as  Transmitters  of  Ancient 

Documents.     By  Theophilus  G.  Pinches,  LL.D 14 

IV.  The  Higher  Criticism  based  upon  Impossible  Assumptions  ...  24 

HOW   DID  WE  GET  THE  BIBLE? 

I.    The  Question  stated 33 

•    II.    The  Councils  and  the  New  Testament. » 36 

III.  Is  the  Estimation,  in  which  the  Books  of  the  New  Testament 

were  held,  a  Developmeni  ? 4.^ 

IV.  Is  the  Estimation,  in  which  the  Books  of  the  New  Testament 

were  held,  a  Development  ?     ( Continued) 53 

V.  The  Claims  made  by  the  New  Testament  Writers 65 

VI.    How  the  New  Testament  Canon  was  formed 75 

VII.    Have  we  the  Original  New  Testament  ? 79 

VHI.    The  Jewish  Stewardship  of  the  Old  Testament :    How  it  was 

Discharged 88 

IX.    What  of  the  Apocrypha  ? 98 

X.    Is  the  Apocrypha  Quoted  in  the  New  Testament  ? 108 

XI.    Have  wo  to-day  the  very  Scriptures  possessed  by  our  Lord 

and  His  Apostles? 120 

XII.    The  Qne=tion  as  to  the  Old  Testament  settled  by  our  Lord  and 

His  Apostles 135 

WHY  HAS  GOD  GIVEN  US  THE  BIBLE? 

I.    The  Answer  of  the  Old  Testament 147 

II.    The  New  Testament  Reply 160 

III.    The  New  Testament  Reply.    ( Continued) 167 

THE  BIBLE  A  PLANNED  BOOK 178 

THE  HISTORICAL  BOOKS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT...  186 

GENESIS  TO  NUMBERS  :   ISRAEL  OUTSIDE  THE  LAND. 

I.    The  Plan  of  Genesis 1P5 

11.    The  Unity  of  Genesis 200. 

III.  The  Divine  Stamp  upon  Genesis 207 

IV.  The  Higher  Criticism  and  the  New  Testament  in  their  Attitude 

towards  Genesis 221 

V.    The  Antiquity  of  Genesis :   The  Samaritan  Pentateuch 234 

VI.    The  Antiquity  of  Genesis :    The  Witness  of  Language  and  of 

Research 245 


The  Bible: 
Its  Structure  and  Purpose 

THE  BIBLE  AND   CRITICISM: 
IS  THE  BATTLE  ENDED? 


CHAPTER   I. 

The  Present  State  of  the  Question. 


MUCH  is  said  at  the  present  time  of  the  over 
throw  of  traditional  beliefs,  and  of  the  necessity 
under  which  every  intelligent  man  now  lies  of  adapting 
himself  to  the  new  condition  of  things.  But  has 
criticism  already  and  finally  won  the  battle,  and  has 
the  time  really  come  to  divide  the  spoil  ?  That  is  a 
question  which  should  not  fail  to  be  asked  by  those 
who  are  seeking  to  adjust  their  theological  bearings. 
If  the  last  word  has  indeed  been  spoken,  and  if  that 
word  has  confirmed  the  critical  verdicft,  the  outlook 
is  one  which  we  can  hardly  contemplate  with  a  light 
heart.  The  Bible  has  made  our  country.  The  best 
manhood  and  womanhood  in  it  have  been  awed, 
warned,  changed,  and  cheered  by  its  words.  It  has 
repressed  what  we  thought  was  baser  in  us,   and 


2  The  Bible  :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

strengthened  what  we  thought  was  nobler.  It  has 
humanised  us.  It  has  laid  upon  us  the  bands  of 
brotherhood.  It  has  done  all  this  because  it  was 
received  as  God's  Book,  and  because  we  felt  that 
conviction  of  its  sacred  character  deepened  the  more 
we  studied  its  pages.  If  it  is  to  be  to  our  children 
all  that  it  has  been  to  us  and  to  our  ancestors,  we 
may  count  upon  the  same  national  strength  and 
honour,  the  same  quiet  reserve  of  power,  the  same 
hatred  of  wrong,  the  same  endurance  for  right.  But, 
if  that  belief  in  the  Bible  is  to  pass  away  like  a  dream, 
there  is  little  to  re-assure  us  in  the  usual  lofty  talk. 
The  ancient  world  had  its  philosophies  and  its  culture. 
But  the  multitude  was  dropped  as  a  weight  which  no 
philosophy  or  culture  was  able  to  carry;  and  the  best 
efforts  could  not  save  the  cultured  classes  themselves 
from  sinking  down  into  pollution  which  placed 
the  civilisation  of  the  time  infinitely  beneath  its 
barbarism. 

I  am  quite  aware  that  truth  has  its  sacrifices,  and 
that  no  regard  for  consequences  can  make  us  keep  on 
believing  that  two  and  two  make  five.  But  regard 
for  consequences  has  its  place.  It  enforces  caution. 
It  commends  sobriety  and  earnestness  in  judgment. 
Is  it  really  true  that  science  has  discredited  Scripture  ? 
I  know  that  this  is  confidently  asserted,  and  that  it  is 
still  oftener  assumed  as  being  as  much  beyond  argu- 
ment as  the  Copernican  theory.  But  I  happen  also 
to  know  that  the  science  which  is  supposed  to  have 
discredited  the  Bible  is  the  science  of  sixty  years  ago. 
I  know  that  its  indiftment  of  the  Creation  history 


7s  the  Battle  Ended?  .   3 

in  Genesis  cannot  be  sustained  by  the  science  of  to- 
day ;  that  authoritative  geology  has  recently  brought 
back  the  Flood  and  finds  in  it  the  great  dividing  line 
between  palaeolithic  and  neolithic  man ;  that,  in  the 
brighter  light  shed  by  recent  research,  supposed 
differences  between  Scripture  and  science  have  dis- 
appeared, and  left  an  agreement  apparent  which  is 
one  of  the  marvels  of  our  time.  The  man  who  begins 
to  settle  his  theological  bearings  under  the  belief  that 
science  has  hopelessly  discredited  the  Bible  will, 
therefore,  settle  them  under  an  unhappy  delusion. 

The  higher  criticism  has  worked  along  its  own 
lines  and  has  had  its  conclusions  summarised  for  the 
reading  public  in  a  Bible  Dicftionary,  in  a  couple  of 
Encyclopaedias,  and  in  the  Polychrome  Bible.  In 
this  last,  which  is  also  the  most  important  of  the 
critical  publications,  we  are  presented,  not  with  the 
results  of  a  discussion,  but  with  the  demands  of  a 
revolutionary  junto.  This  thing  of  many  colours  and 
shreds  and  patches,  which  is  really  the  reductio  ad 
abstirdicm  of  critical  methods,  is  the  only  Bible  which 
is  now  to  be  left  to  the  Churches,  the  Sunday-schools, 
the  educational  institutions,  and  the  homes  of  our 
country.  And  this  is  no  empty  threat.  This  **  Bible 
in  tatters  "  is  being  handed  to  ministers  and  teachers 
all  over  the  land  as  the  new  critical  Revelation.  It 
is  being  presented  and  accepted  as  "  the  truth 
about  the  Bible."  It  has  even  entered  the  Mission 
field.  It  is  easy  enough  to  calculate  the  results  of 
this  movement.  When  the  teacher's  place  is  taken, 
and  the  pulpit  is  filled,  by  honest  men  who  have  no 


4  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

longer  faith  in  a  God-given  Bible,  how  long  will  that 
faith  linger  among  the  people  ? 

An  important  decision  is  consequently  forced  upon 
us  as  a  nation.  What  is  to  be  our  attitude  toward 
the  new  propaganda  ?  Is  it  to  be  tame  submission  or 
stri(5t  inquiry  ?  It  may  be  asked,  however,  whether 
a  choice  is  possible  ?  Have  not  these  questions  been 
threshed  out  by  scholars  in  every  way  competent  to 
deal  with  them  ?  Is  not  the  discussion  closed,  and 
does  not  the  Polychrome  Bible  sim,ply  gather  up  the 
now  unchallenged  results  of  a  prolonged  contro- 
versy? No  representation  could  be  more  misleading 
than  that.  There  has  been,  properly  speaking,  no 
controversy.  The  critics  have  evaded  discussion. 
There  are  works  of  undoubted  scholarship  which 
have  traversed  their  findings,  exposed  their  unproved 
assumptions,  and  triumphantly  vindicated  the  uni- 
versal convictions  of  the  Christian  Church  with  regard 
to  the  Bible.  But  the  critics  have  not  replied  to  these 
assailants :  they  have  ignored  them.  What  need  is 
there  for  argument  when  you  can  quench  opposition 
by  applying  the  extinguisher  of  authority  ? 

The  lay  mind  knows  something  of  the  Shakespeare 
controversy,  and  has  a  lively  sense  of  its  inherent 
absurdity.  But  ridicule  has  not  killed  that  craze.  It 
has  increased  in  boldness,  and  now  questions  the 
reality  of  "  William  Shakespeare."  "  There  is  no 
such  historical  man,"  says  one,  "  no  individual  known 
who  bore  that  name."  It  is  quite  within  the  limits 
of  possibility  that  this  craze  may  become  fashionable, 
and  that  the  tradition  of  the  Shakespearian  authorship 


7s  the  Battle  Ended?  5 

may  be  given  to  the  winds.  There  is  an  infe(ftious 
exhilaration  in  paradox ;  and  this  is  not  without  a 
respectable  show  of  literary  research  and  seemingly 
forcible  arguments.  Let  us  suppose  that  one  professor 
of  English  Literature  after  another  is  won  over  to 
the  new  views  :  that,  by  well-diredted  influence,  those 
chairs  are  all  gradually  captured:  that  the  literary 
class  is  impregnated  with  the  new  notions ;  and  that 
by  Editors  and  Reviewers  the  question  is  regarded  as 
closed.  History  would  then  have  repeated  itself. 
For  such  has  been  the  story  of  the  critical  movement. 
It  has  won  its  supposed  triumph,  not  by  scholarship 
or  argument,  but  by  sheer  audacity  and  adroit 
manoeuvring. 

Yet  a  temporary  success  of  that  kindisnot  a  vicftory. 
If  the  views  maintained  rest  upon  solid  fa<5t,  then 
the  triumph,  however  achieved,  may  be  expefted  to 
endure ;  but  if  its  basis  is  only  empty  theory  and 
mere  assumption,  the  triumph  is  but  the  illusion  of  a 
moment.  How  much  the  imagined  vidtors  of  to-day 
have  to  fear  the  future  the  following  pages  will  reveal 
even  to  the  lay  mind. 


CHAPTER    II. 
The  Limits  of  Critical  Ability. 


THE^  critics  assume  that  they  are  able  to  dissect 
with  accuracy  manuscripts  which  are  made  up 
of  the  work  of  various  writers.     This  is  in  facft  their 


6  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

professed  business ;  and  it  is  in  the  exercise  of  it 
that  they  expecft  to  benefit  mankind.  They  are  so 
conscious  of  their  power  in  this  matter  that  they 
assume  the  name  of  "  experts."  By  attention  to  the 
subtleties  of  style,  and  to  the  peculiarities  which 
distinguish  the  writing  of  one  age  and  of  one  author 
from  that  of  another,  they  tell  us  that  they  are  able 
to  say  where  the  words  which  flowed  from  the  pen  of 
one  writer  stopped,  and  where  the  words  of  another 
w.riter  began.  It  is  this  power  yvhich  has  enabled 
them,  they  say,  to  separate  Isaiah,  not  merely  into 
two,  but  into  many,  portions;  to  break  up  the  Book 
of  Genesis — the  first  of  their  achievements ;  and  to 
partition  the  Book  of  Revelation — among  their  last. 
In  short,  they  fully  confess  that,  without  this  power 
of  what  I  may  call  literary  divination,  their  work 
would  never  have  been  done,  and  the  higher  criticism 
could  never  have  claimed  the  name  of  a  science. 

To  see  how  unquestioningly  they  believe  in  this 
ability  of  theirs,  we  have  only  to  open  their  "  Poly- 
chrome Bible,"  Bacon's  "  Genesis  of  Genesis,"  or 
Addis  on  "  The  Documents  of  the  Hexateuch."  Here 
are  some  of  the  results  gathered  in  this  fierce  light 
which  beats  upon  the  Bible.  In  a  single  page  of 
"Joshua,"  by  Professor  Bennett,  besides  the  main 
divisions,  I  find  the  following  instances  of  penetrating 
insight.  The  words :  "  And  all  Israel  stoned  him  " 
(Joshua  vii.  25)  are  separated  from  the  text,  and  are 
given  to  a  writer  who  is  supposed  to  have  lived  about 
500  B.C.  These  three  words :  **  Then  Jehovah  re- 
lented "  (ver.  26)  are  similarly  selecfled,  and  are  said  to 


7s  the  Battle  Ended?  7 

be  the  work  of  an  author  who  lived  about  fifty  years 
earlier.  This,  it  will  be  confessed,  is  delicate  work ;  but 
it  is  only  an  illustration  of  the  sharp  decisiveness  and 
the  firm — I  might  call  it  the  sublime — assurance  which 
marks  all  the  produaions  of  this  "expert"  school. 
Bacon's  work  is  equally  astonishing.  The  passage : 
"  In  the  day  that  the  Lord — God  made  the  earth  and 
the  heavens"  (see  Genesis  ii.  4)  is  dissecfted  as  follows. 
A  stop  is  made  after  the  word  Lord,  thus  dividing  the 
Divine  name  in  two.  The  words  :  "  In  the  day  that 
the  Lord — "  are  assigned  to  a  writer  of  800  B.C.  Those 
which  precede  are  said  to  have  been  written  three 
hundred  and  fifty  years  later  ;  and  those  which  follow, 
including  the  word  "  God,"  the  second  part  of  the 
amputated  Divine  name,  are  alleged  to  be  due  to  a 
third  writer,  an  editor,  about  whose  exaa  date  there  is 
still  some  difference  of  opinion  among  the  "experts." 
But  to  stop  even  here  would  give  the  general  public 
no  adequate  conception  of  critical  self-confidence. 
They  are  not  only  able  to  judge  of  what  they  see,  but 
they  can  with  equally  imaginary  infallibility  divine 
what  they  cannot  see.  We  used  to  be  told  that,  when 
the  Genesis  narrative  was  separated,  the  critical 
analysis  justified  itself  to  every  unbiassed  mind.  The 
two  accounts  were  said  to  be  so  beautifully  complete  ! 
That  superstition  still  lingers  in  many  quarters ;  but 
everybody  has  not  read  Bacon's  Genesis.  It  needs 
some  painful  but  pretty  patching  to  make  up  "the 
two  narratives."  There  we  find  that  "The  Judean 
Prophetic  Narrative"  opens  thus:  "When  as  yet  there 
was  neither  earth  nor  heaven  but  only  the  limitless 


8  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

abyss,  Yahweh  set  fast  the  foundations  of  the  earth, 
and  raised  up  its  pillars  in  the  midst  of  the  waters. 
And  over  its  surface  He  spread  out  the  dome  of  the 
heaven,  establishing  there  the  courses  of  the  sun  and 
the  moon  and  the  stars ;  but  upon  the  surface  of  the 
earth  beneath  there  was  neither  motion  nor  hfe :  all 
was  yet  a  solitude." 

The  reader  rubs  his  eyes.  He  thought  he  knew 
the  opening  chapters  of  Genesis.  He  casts  his  eye 
down  to  the  foot  of  the  page  and  finds  that  the  above 
is  a  critical  make-up  !  Here  is  the  note  which  meets 
his  glance  :  "  Conjedturally  restored  from  indications 

in  the  earlier  literature and  by  comparison 

with  the  Babylonian  cosmogonic  myths."  One  is  able 
to  comment  upon  many  things.  This  is  beyond  me. 
It  must  be  left  in  its  naked  effrontery.  Let  **  Con- 
JECTURALLY  RESTORED"  be  its  Only  inscription  and 
its  epitaph. 

It  will  be  clear,  however,  that  everything  is  based 
upon  the  assumed  possession  of  this  marvellous  power 
to  say  where  one  writer's  work  ends,  and  another's 
begins.  Without  this  there  would  have  been  no  dis- 
crimination of  "  sourc3S ; "  no  partition  of  documents ; 
and,  in  a  word,  no  higher  criticism.  Let  this  supposed 
ability  be  successfully  questioned,  and  the  painfully 
piled  up  edifice  is  not  merely  shaken  to  its  foundations 
— it  lies  in  irremediable  ruin.  But  it  is  already  de- 
monstrated that  there  are,  and  can  be,  no  "  experts  " 
of  this  sort.  The  assumed  possession  of  this  power  has . 
been  put  to  the  test  again  and  again,  and  the  results 
have  made  these  pretensions  utterly  incredible. 


7s  the  Battle  Ended?  9 

There  exists,  for  example,  a  confessedly  composite 
work  in  Finnish  literature.  Dr.  Lonnrot,  the  collecftor 
of  the  Finnic  Folk-poetry,  formed  a  great  epic — the 
Kalevala — by  fusing  together  a  large  colleftion  of 
those  ancient  songs.  He  bequeathed  his  manuscripts 
to  the  Society  of  Finnish  Literature,  so  that  what  he 
borrowed  and  what  he  added  are  made  perfecftly  clear. 
This  work  afforded  too  good  a  test  of  this  imaginary 
critical  power  to  be  left  unused.  The  critics  were 
set  to  work;  and  with  lamentable  results.  "While 
ignorant  of  the  acftual  facfts  of  the  surviving  songs," 
says  Andrew  Lang,  "  critical  ingenuity  could  only 
give  us,  at  many  hands  and  from  many  sides,  its 
usual  widely  discrepant  results."  And  he  adds : 
*•  We  cannot  trust  it  when  the  test  of  facTts,  of  docu- 
ments, cannot  be  applied."  Not  very  long  ago,  an 
enthusiastic  admirer  of  Thackeray  (every  charafter- 
istic  and  trick  of  whose  pen  he  believed  he  knew) 
engaged  in  a  search  for  papers  which  had  not  been 
embraced  in  that  writer's  colledted  works.  He  at  last 
discovered  a  number  in  some  early  volumes  of  Punch. 
He  had  no  doubt  whatever  as  to  the  authorship. 
The  mark  of  the  master-hand  was  everywhere ;  and 
he  was  certain  that,  to  any  man  who  knew  Thackeray's 
style,  doubt  was  impossible.  Arrangements  were  made 
for  the  re-issue  of  the  newly-discovered  writings  in 
a  leading  literary  organ  in  America.  Some  of  the 
papers  had  already  appeared,  when  a  communication 
was  received  from  the  Punch  Office,  saying  that  the 
treasurer's  books  made  it  plain  that  the  articles  were 
not  Thackeray's,  The  re-publication  was  immediately 


lo  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

stopped,  and  the  Editor  retired  from  an  ignominious 
position  with  as  much  grace  as  the  circumstances 
permitted.  The  history  of  literature  abounds  with 
such  fadls.  Critics,  who  can  be  trusted  to  divine  the 
authorship  of  documents,  have  never  existed.  They 
do  not  exist  now:  and  a  "science"  built  upon  that 
assumption  rests  upon  what  is  considerably  less  sub- 
stantial than  air.  I  say  nothing  of  the  professed 
ability  to  furnish  verbatim  copies  of  manuscripts  which 
no  man  has  ever  seen.  I  believe  that  the  records  of 
the  higher  criticism  contain  the  only  example  of  such 
a  pretension  outside  the  annals  of  a  lunatic  asylum. 


CHAPTER    III. 

The  Morality  of  Ancient  Transcribers. 


A  SECOND,  and  equally  vital,  assumption  is  that 
concealed,  composite  authorship  of  this  kind  is 
to  be  expefted  in  ancient  documents.  This  is  not 
usually  avowed  as  an  axiom  of  criticism.  For  a 
science,  it  frequently  exhibits  the  haziest  ideas  regard- 
ing its  postulates.  But  the  more  logical  minds  see 
something  of  the  necessity,  and  they  do  their  best  to 
meet  it.  For  example,  in  the  article  *'  Bible,"  in  the 
Encyclopedia  Britannica,  the  late  Prof.  W.  Robertson 
Smith  explains  how  this  early  Bible  history  was  put 
together.  "  It  is,"  he  says,  "  a  stratification  and  not 
an  organism.  This  process  was  facilitated  by  the 
habit  of  anonymous  writing,  and  the  accompanying 


7s  the  Battle  Ended?  n 

lack  of  all  notion  of  copyright.  If  a  man  copied  a 
book,  it  was  his  to  add  and  modify  as  he  pleased,  and 
he  was  not  in  the  least  bound  to  distinguish  the  old 
from  the  new.  If  he  had  two  books  before  him  to 
which  he  attached  equal  worth,  he  took  large  extra^s 
from  both,  and  harmonised  them  by  such  additions 
or  modifications  as  he  felt  to  be  necessary." 

That  in  Aberdeen  and  the  surrounding  districfls,  as 
in  many  a  place  besides,  there  was  anciently  a  chronic 
difficulty  in  distinguishing  between  meti,m  and  tiiiim, 
we  are  not  inclined  to  dispute.  But  we  have  not  the 
slightest  hesitation  in  describing  the  above  extracft  as 
an  unworthy  libel  upon  literary  antiquity.  There  is 
nothing  to  justify  it.  There  is  nothing  even  to 
suggest  it,  apart  from  the  necessities  of  the  higher 
criticism.  For  more  than  2,000  years  we  know 
that  the  Jew  would  have  regarded  such  manipu- 
lation of  the  sacred  text  as  the  most  fearful  of  all 
possible  crimes.  One  of  their  greatest  ancient  books, 
the  Massorah,  was  anciently  compiled  to  be  "  a  fence 
to  the  Law."  It  collefted  the  ancient  traditions 
concerning  the  sacred  text ;  and  it  enters  into  details 
regarding  the  text,  the  sole  objeft  of  which  is  to 
prevent  even  accidental  variation  in  the  produftion 
of  copies.  "The  Massorah,"  says  one  who  will  not 
be  suspe(5led  of  exaggeration,*  "indicates  the 
number  of  times  that  the  same  word  is  found  in 
the  beginning,  middle,  or  end  of  a  verse.  ....  The 
Massorah  to  the  Pentateuch  informs  us  which  is  the 
middle  htter  of  the  Law ;  and  the  Massorah  at  the 


*J.  Scott  Porter. 


12  The  Bible:    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

end  of  the  Bible  is  said  to  give  the  number  of  times 
that  each  letter  of  the  alphabet  occurs  from  the 
beginning  to  the  end  of  the  Old  Testament.  .  .  The 
obje(ft  of  the  Massorets,"  he  adds,  "in  devoting  so 
much  time  and  pains  to  these  minutiae  was  doubtless 
the  very  laudable  one  of  forming  a  correft  and  standard 
text  of  their  religious  code  and  of  preserving  it  in 
perpetuum  pure  from  every  corruption."  A  nation 
does  not  change  in  a  day.  It  does  not  change  com- 
pletely without  leaving  some  trace  or  echo  of  the 
revolution.  But  there  is  not  the'  slightest  evidence 
or  hint  to  be  found  anywhere  that  the  attitude  of  the 
Jew  towards  the  Scripture  ever  deviated  from  this 
reverence  and  this  scrupulous  care  that  it  should  be 
handed  down  to  after  times  without  the  alteration  of 
a  single  letter.  And  yet  this  is  the  people  whom  the 
critics  credit  with  these  huge  alterations  and  inter- 
polations; with  cutting  up,  piecing  together,  and 
issuing  in  such  a  shape  that  the  authors,  whose  works 
they  are  said  to  have  handled,  would  not  have  known 
their  own  produ(?tions ! 

But  it  may,  and  no  doubt  will,  be  suggested  that 
remoter  times  are  not  to  be  judged  by  what  comes 
within  the  view  of  even  ancient  history.  Now,  allow- 
ing this  suggestion  for  a  moment,  where  could  the  Jew 
have  learned  the  art  of  falsifying  documents  ?  We 
have  more  than  enough  evidence  to  show  that  it  was 
not  national ;  but  evil  communications  corrupt  good 
manners,  and — let  us  say — the  Jew  may  have  picked 
it  up  in  Babylon.  According  to  the  critics,  during  the 
captivity  and  the  times  which  immediately  followed 


Is  the  Battle  Ended  ?  13 

the  captivity,  the  Jews  were  more  than  usually  busy 
in   the   manufacturing,   and   patching,    and   piecing 
together  of  what  we  have  so  long  looked  upon  as  the 
ancient  Books  of  the  Bible.     Well,  then,  did  this 
literary  contamination  surround  them  in  Babylonia  ? 
Was  this  the  practice  of  the  Babylonian  scribes  in 
regard  to  ancient  books  ?    To  this  question  we  have  a 
full  reply  ;  and  that  is  a  most  emphatic  repudiation  of 
the  charge.    Transcription  was  in  constant  operation 
in  Babylonia,  but  it  was  carried  out  with  scrupulous 
fidelity.     Every  one  who  is  acquainted  with  the  in- 
scriptions has  been  furnished  with  sufficient  proof  of 
that.  A  closer  study  by  those  who  are  really  "  experts  " 
in  Babylonian  literature  entirely  confirms  our  first 
impressions.     In  an  elaborate,  though  brief,  paper 
upon  this  subject  by  Dr.  Pinches,  which  the  reader 
will  find  further  on,*  he  gives  proofs  of  the  care  with 
which  the  ancient  texts  were  handed  down  ;  while 
Dr.  Sayce,  in  a  letter  which  I  recently  received  from 
him,  writes  :  "  The  Assyrians  were  very  exact  in  their 
reproduction    of   ancient   texts,    reproducing   them, 
indeed,  with  Massoretic  fidelity,  a  point  which  is  of 
im.portance  when  we  remember  their  near  relation- 
ship to  the  Jews."    It  is  plain,  therefore,  that  even  if 
Israel  had  been  already  deep  in  those  alleged  pracftices 
of  literary  theft  and  forgery  which  the  critics  credit 
them  with,  their  conscience  must  have  been  stirred 
within  them  as  they  contemplated  the  nobler  fidelity 
of  the  heathen;     But  both  Babylon  and  Israel  repel 
the  charge.     The  praaice  in  the  ancient  East  was 

*  See  Appendix  to  this  chapter. 


14  The  Bible:    its  Striichire  and  Purpose. 

the  pracflice  of  the  West  of  to-day.  The  ancient  scribe 
kept  as  faithfully  to  the  letter  of  the  manuscript  which 
he  transcribed  as  the  modern  printer  keeps  to  his 
copy. 


APPENDIX   TO   CHAPTER   III. 
The    Babylonians   as    Transmitters    of    Ancient 
Documents.     By  Theophilus  G.  Pinches,  LL.D.* 


THERE  is  but  little  doubt  that  the  existence  of  such 
a  mass  of  literature  as  that  of  the  Babylonians 
and  Assyrians,  with  its  original  inscriptions  extending 
from,  say,  3000  b.c.  to  within  a  few  decades  of  the 
Christian  era,  is  of  considerable  importance  for  estim- 
ating the  value  of  the  documents  produced  by  the 
Semitic  race  in  general,  and  the  Babylonian  and  Hebrew 
nations,  who  were  so  closely  akin,  in  particular.  Natur- 
ally, scribes  and  copyists  differ  very  much  among 
themselves  in  every  nationality,  and  probably  the 
careless  always  greatly  outnumber  the  careful.  But 
the  carelessness  of  the  careless  may  be,  and  probably 
would  be,  modified  by  the  nature  of  the  text  which  he 
was  reproducing.  If  it  were  something  which  did  not 
interest  him,  we  might  expect  his  copy  to  be  very  bad. 
If  he  was  merely  interested  in  it,  we  might  expect  the 
correctness  or  incorrectness  of  his  copy  to  vary  in 
accordance  with  the  intensity  of  that  interest.  If,  on 
the  other  hand,  it  was  something  in  which  he  was  not 
merely  interested,  but  an  inscription  of  a  religious 
nature,  affecting,  perhaps,  his  life  and  his  prospects  in 

*  Author  of  The  Old  Testament  in  the  Light  0/  the  Legends,  &-c.,  &c. 


Is  the  Battle  Ended}  15 

this  world,  and  bearing  upon  the  position  of  his  soul 
hereafter,  we  might  expect  his  copy  to  be  unsurpassable 
in  correctness;  which,  in  fact,  would,  in  its  turn,  be 
limited  only  by  the  limit  of  his  intelligence — for  intelli- 
gence enters  largely  into  a  question  such  as  this. 

But  the  variants  in  an  inscription  do  not  originate,  as 
a  rule,  in  the  mistakes  which  a  scribe  might  make;  they 
arise  also  from  other  causes.  Thus,  where  there  is  no 
fixed  spelling,  two  or  more  ways  of  writing  a  word  may 
exist — indeed,  the  ways  of  writing  it  are  only  bounded 
by  the  limits  of  intelligibility.  Another  fruitful  source 
of  variants  is  the  substitution  of  a  word  of  similar 
sound  for  that  which  is  in  the  text — due,  probably,  to  its 
having  been  dictated.  Then,  there  is  the  substitution  of 
synonyms,  which  sometimes  gives  to  an  inscription  a 
value  which  it  would  not  otherwise  have,.  To  this 
section,  naturally,  belongs  the  substitution  of  one  form 
of  a  root  for  another,  caused  by  the  peculiarities  which 
characterise  all  Sem.itic  languages.  Finally,  there  is  the 
substitution  of  one  character  for  another,  due  either  to 
their  great  similarity  (a  frequent  cause  of  confusion  in 
the  case  of  the  Phoenician. alphabet  and  the  systems  of 
writing  derived  from  it,  Hebrew  being  one  of  those 
most  liable  to  this  disadvantage),  or  to  decay  in  the 
document,  which  can  work  havoc  with  texts  written  even 
in  the  clearest  and  best  system  of  writing  possible.  The 
individual  peculiarities  of  a  writer  are  also  a  fruitful 
source  of  error,  as  every  reader  of  modern  handwriting 
knows.  Mistakes  in  consequence  of  not  understanding 
ancient  forms  of  characters  are  exceedingly  rare. 

The  variants  in  ancient  inscriptions  may,  therefore, 
arise  from  : — 

I.  Mistakes  on  the  part  of  the  copyist. 


1 6  The  Bible  :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

2.  Different  ways  of  writing  a  word. 

3.  Substitution  of  a  word  of  similar  sound. 

4.  Substitution  of  a  word  of  similar  meaning. 

5.  Similarities  in  characters. 

6.  Damage  to  the  inscription. 

7.  Mannerisms  in  writing. 

Naturally,  it  is  difficult  to  bring  clear  examples  of  all 
these,  but  quotations  from  the  tablets  will  illustrate 
many  of  them,  and  enable  an  estimate  to  be  made  of 
the  general  accuracy  of  the  scribes  of  Babylonia  and 
Assyria. 

If  we  take  a  representative  book  of  Assyrian  and 
Babylonian  inscriptions — say  the  fourth  volume  of  the 
Cuneiform  Inscriptions  of  Western  Asia,  second  edition 
— we  shall  see  that,  out  of  a  total  of  seventy-three 
plates,  no  less  than  forty-four  have  variants ;  and  where 
these  are  absent,  it  is  probably  due  to  the  nature  of  the 
inscriptions,  the  originals  being  sometimes  letters,  of 
which  no  duplicates  are  likely  to  be  found,  or  copies  of 
boundary-stones,  &c.,  which  are  in  the  same  case. 

To  take  a  typical  example,  we  may  glance  for  a  short 
time  at  the  tablet  referring  to  the  Flood.  This  inscrip- 
tion has  no  less  than  200  variants  from  the  different 
duplicates,  divided  almost  equally  between  the  obverse 
and  the  reverse.  The  following  list  of  a  few  of  them 
will  give  an  idea  of  their  nature : — 

1.  The  addition  of  a  phonetic  complement  to  the 
name  of  the  Babylonian  Noah,  Ut-napistim. 

2.  Ya-a-ti  (the  full  form)  ior  ya-ti  (defective  writing). 

3.  Ya-si  (a  variant  form)  ior  ya-ti. 

4.  A-na,  "to,"  spelled  out  in  full. 

5.  -tani,  the  accusative  ending  (fem.)  with  "  mimma- 
tion,"  instead  of  the  genitive  -ti. 


Is  the  Battle  Ended?  i? 

6.  E-li,  instead  of  e-lu. 

7.  Tas-'-um  for  tas-u  (a  fuller  and  better  spelling). 

8.  Ana  written  ideographically  (the  reverse  of  four). 

9.  -ta,  the  accusative  (fern.)  ending,  for  -ti  (the  former 
is  the  more  correct). 

10.    [Su]  -u-ri-pak  for  Su-ri-ip-pak  (the  name  of  a  city). 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  the  variants  in  a  Babylonian  or 
Assyrian  text,  though  numerous,  do  not  affect  the  sense, 
and  are  often  valuable  as  illustrations  or  aids  to  the 
modern  student. 

Naturally,  the  ancient  nations  could  not  lay  claim  to 
the  critical  acumen  of  modern  science,  nor  to  the  painful 
exactitude  of  the  Hebrew  scribes  in  later  times,  which 
led  the  last-named  to  count  the  words  and  the  letters 
of  their  sacred  Scriptures,  and  made  them  resort  to 
various  devices  to  ensure  their  correct  transmission, 
even  in  cases  which  they  themselves  thought  to  be 
doubtful- — indeed,  reverence  for  the  text  had  brought 
about,  with  them,  something  like  the  critical  faculty 
which  modern  scholars  now  possess.  How  they  made 
up  for  this  strictness  by  extravagant  interpretations,  and 
exegetical  comments,  juggling  with  the  words  and  the 
phrases  of  the  sacred  text,  every  student  knows.  More- 
over, they  seem  not  to  have  taken  the  best  text  in  every 
case ;  nor  did  they,  to  all  appearance,  attempt  to  make 
up  a  standard  text  from  the  different  manuscripts  which 
undoubtedly  existed  in  ancient  times  (if  they  had  done 
this,  our  modern  versions  would  have  been  far  superior 
to  what  they  are) — they  simply  took  a  version  which 
they  regarded  as  the  right  one,  and  accepted  that  to  the 
exclusion' of  all  others,  for  better  or  for  worse.* 

*This  finds  a  simple  explanation  in  the  existence  of  the  Temple  copy  of  the 
Old  Testament  Scripture.  This  was  preserved  in  the  Sanctuary,  which,  Josephus 
tells  us,  was  carried  among  the  otherspoils  in  Vespasian's  Roman  triumph.— J. U. 

B 


i8  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

The  Assyro-Babylonians,  on  the  other  hand,  were  far 
from  being  exclusive  to  that  extent.  Whether  they 
would  have  ultimately  become  so  or  not  is  naturally 
doubtful.  They  died  out  as  a  nationality,  and  their 
religion  died  also — the  former  some  centuries  before,  the 
latter  some  centuries  after,  the  Christian  era,  and  their 
literature  ceased  to  exist.  The  result  is,  that  no  standard 
texts  were  ever  adopted  by  them. 

But  in  one  case  at  least  they  produced  something  far 
better  than  this,  namely,  a  bilingual  glossary  of  the  final 
tablet  of  the  Semitic  story  of  the'  Creation  ;  and  the 
remains  of  this,  which  are  extant,  not  only  prove  that  its 
origin  came  from  late  Sumerian  times,  but  also  set  the 
signification  of  all  the  words  of  which  it  is  composed 
beyond  a  doubt — that  is,  as  far  as  such  fleeting  things  as 
words  and  their  meanings  can  be  fixed.  Line  by  line, 
root  by  root,  the  words  are  taken,  and  explained  in  the 
Semitic  Babylonian  language.  The  following  specimen 
will  serve  to  show  the  system,  and  may  probably 
interest  the  reader.     We  will  take  the  line  : 

"  God  of  the  good  wind.  Lord  of  hearing  and 
obedience." 

This  is  explained,  taking  the  root-words  of  the 
Sumerian  original 


ned,   taking    the    root-word 

as  follows : 

Dimmer 

God. 

Tu 

Wind. 

Du 

Good. 

Dimmer 

Lord. 

Zi 

To  hear. 

Zi 

To  obey. 

To    all   appearance,  the   words    "God"    and    "Lord" 
were   expressed   by  the   same   word   in    the   Sumerian 


7s  the  Battle  Ended?  19 

text,  as  were  also   "to   hear"    and   "to   obey."     The 
following  is  another  example  : — 

*•  Father  Bel  called  his  name  '  lord  of  the  lands.'  " 
En  kurkura*      His  name. 


Ma 
Ma 
A 
En  kurkura 


Name. 
To  proclaim, 
Father. 
The  god  Bel. 


In  this  we  get  something  which  goes  beyond  the  state- 
ment of  the  text ;  for  we  see  that,  in  naming  Merodach 
En-kurkura,  ''lord  of  the  lands,"  father  Bel,  as  he  is 
called,  was  giving  to  Merodach  his  own  name,  which 
agrees  with  the  context.  We  have  here,  therefore,  one 
of  the  most  remarkable  documents  bearing  upon  Baby- 
lonian religious  beliefs,  showing,  moreover,  how  they 
ensured,  in  a  most  practical  way,  the  integrity  of  the 
text  of  their  great  epic  of  the  Creation  and  their  belief 
in  the  doctrine  that,  though  Merodach  was  not  the 
oldest  of  the  gods,  and  was  the  son  of  Ae  or  £a,  he  was 
nevertheless  to  be  identified  with  the  other  deities, 
regarded  as  the  creator  and  the  preserver  of  all  things, 
and  the  merciful  one  who  was  good  to  mankind. 

Quoting  from  the  same  text,  I  give  examples  of  the 
differences  which  are  to  be  found  therein.  After  the 
line,  "  G6d  of  the  good  wind,"  &c.,  quoted  above  (this 
line  has  no  variants),  the  text  proceeds  as  follpws  :— 
"Creator  of  fairness  and  plenty,  estabUsher  of 
abundance." 
(In  one  text  "  and  "  is  left  out,  and  the  last  word  has  a 
lengthening,  showing  that  the  non-Semitic  equivalent 
was  used). 

*  This  is  transcribed  in  Sutuenan,  like  the  other  words  in  this  columii,  but  a 
variant  in  the  legend  itself  suggests  that  it  was  read  Bil  matatt-th^t  is,  as  a 
Semitic  phrase— with  the  same  meaning,  "lord  of  the  lands. 


20  The  Bible :    its  Strtictiire  and  Purpose. 

"  He  who  turns  to  many  whatever  is  few." 
(The  word  for  "  few"  has  a  different  termination  in  one 
copy,  and  that  for  "  many  "  has  a  different  spelling  in 
another). 

"  In  (our)  dire  need  we  scented  his  sweet  breath." 
(The  word  for  "  dire  "  is  omitted  in  one  copy,  that  for 
"  breath  "  is  spelled  out  instead  of  being  represented  by 
an  ideograph,  that  for  "  we  scented "  has  a  different 
ending  in  one  copy,  and  that  for  '*  need "  a  different 
ending  in  each  of  the  two  duplicates). 

Such  are  the  variants  in  this  important  text ;  and 
throughout  the  inscription,  wherever  there  are  duplicates, 
similar  changes  in  the  words,  either  more  or  less  pro- 
nounced than  here,  are  to  be  found.  It  is  very  rarely, 
however,  that  there  is  a  real  change  in  the  sense,  even  so 
slight  as  the  omission  of  the  almost  needless  word  which 
I  have  translated  "  dire  "  (it  really  means  "  strong  "). 

It  is  needless  to  multiply  examples  of  the  variants  in 
Babylonian  and  Assyrian  inscriptions — they  are  of  value 
mainly  to  the  student — sometimes  of  considerable  value. 
As  has  already  been  remarked,  there  are  over  200 
variants  in  the  story  of  the  Flood  from  the  fragments 
of  duplicates  known,  but  of  all  those  referring  to  the 
obverse — 100  odd — comparatively  few,  as  far  we  are  able 
to  judge,  affect  the  sense  : — 

Text :  "  Istar  spake  like  a  mother." 
Variant :  "  Istar  spake  with  loud  voice." 
Text :  *'  Su'tu  called  out,  making  her  voice  resound." 
Variant :  "  The  lady  of  the  gods  called  out,"  &c. 
Other   variants   are,  "in   the   assembly"    for   "in   the 
presence ; "    "  torrent,    storm,    and    flood,"    instead    of 
"wind,  flood,  and  storm,"  &c. :    some  of  the  variants 


7s  the  Battle  Ended?  21 

apparently  changing  or  modifying  the  sense  of  the  whole 
line. 

The  reason  of  the  difference  in  the  first  line  of  the 
two  just  quoted  is  the  likeness  in  sound,  "  like  a  mother," 
being  kirna  alitti ;  and,  *'  with  loud  voice,"  vialiti.  This 
naturally  points  to  a  certain  amount  of  carelessness,  and 
which  of  the  two  readings  is  the  more  trustworthy  time 
alone  will  show.  The  scribe  who  gives  kbna  alitti, 
however,  has,  at  the  end  of  the  foregoing  paragraph, 
apparently  a  correction  of  the  text.  He  has  written  in 
the  margin  ina,  "in;"  but  gives  in  the  text  ana,  "to" 
or  "  for,"  the  sense  of  the  whole  being  : — 

"  For  the  guiding  of  the  ship,  I  gave  the  great  house 
[i.e.,  the  vessel),  with  its  goods,  to  Buzur-Kurgala, 
the  pilot." 

Whether  the  scribe's  marginal  reading  indicates  a 
variant,  or,  in  his  opinion,  an  erroneous  reading,  is  un- 
certain ;  but  it  indicates  that  he  took  pains  to  reproduce 
his  original  as  far  as  in  him  lay. 

The  Creation  and  the  Deluge  Legends  are  probably 
the  most  important  of  the  old  hterary  remains  of 
Babylonia  and  Assyria,  and  for  that  reason  they  have 
been  spoken  of  first.  Another  text  of  which  the  Baby- 
lonians thought  a  great  deal,  however,  is  "  the  Story  of 
Ludlul,  the  Sage."  This  inscription,  which  is  one  of 
extreme  difficulty,  speaks  of  the  evil  of  the  world  and 
the  necessity  of  piety,  and  is  of  a  more  or  less  philosoph- 
ical nature.  On  account  of  the  deptti  of  its  contents, 
apparently,  it  was  much  thought  of ;  and  duplicates  of 
four  or  five  copies,  both  from  Assyria  and  Babylonia,  are 
extant.  The  important  thing  about  this  inscription  is, 
that  many  of  the  words  were  obscure  to  the  Babylonians, 


22  The  Bible  :    iis  Structure  and  Purpose. 

notwithstanding  that  it  was  written  in  their  own  language, 
and  it  was  necessary  to  have  an  explanation  of  them. 
This  being  the  case,  a  list  of  the  lines  containing  the 
obscure  words  was  compiled,  and  translations  of  the 
unusual  words  contained  therein  were  given.  In  this 
we  have  likewise  an  excellent  example  of  an  inscription 
carefully  preserved  and  handed  down  to  posterity.  For 
the  modern  scholar,  explanations  of  a  few  more  words 
to  us  obscure  would  have  been  highly  appreciated,  but 
for  the  Babylonians  there  is  no  doubt  that  the  explana- 
tions given  were  all  that  was  needed ;  and  for  this, 
we,  too,  have  to  be  thankful.  The  variants  in  this 
inscription  and  in  the  lines  extracted  for  explanation  are 
few  ;  but  when  they  occur,  they  are  of  great  value  for 
the  phrases  which  they  explain. 

It  is  probably  in  the  non-Semitic  or  Sumero-Akkadian 
inscriptions  which  the  Semitic  Babylonians  translated, 
however,  that  the  most  diversified  variations  occur.  This 
is  due  to  the  fact  that  that  language  had  a  great  many 
homophones,  or  words  pronounced,  or  at  least  written, 
in  the  same  way,  but  varying  greatly  in  meaning,  and 
the  scribes  differed  as  to  the  best  way  of  reproducing 
them,  even  when  they  agreed  as  to  the  sense.  Another 
cause  of  variants  in  these  inscriptions  lies  in  the  fact, 
that  Sumero-Akkadian  was  an  agglutinative  tongue, 
using,  in  its  most  analytical  form,  numerous  prefixed, 
infixed,  and  suffixed  pronouns  and  postpositions ;  the 
omission  of  one  or  more  of  which  was  easy,  as  was  also 
the  substitution  of  one  synonymous  or  nearly  synonymous 
pronominal  or  prepositional  particle  for  another.  Unfor- 
tunately, we  have  not  enough  non-Semitic  inscriptions- 
with  duplicates  to  enable  a  decided  opinion  concerning 
their  accuracy  to  be  formed,  but  to  all  appearance  the 


7s  the  Battle  Ended?  23 

scribes  of  old  Kengi-Ura,  or  non-Semitic  Shinar,  were 
less  exact  than  those  of  the  Semitic  period,  either  in 
Assyria  or  Babylonia. 

Another  interesting  example  of  the  care  with  which 
an  inscription  was  copied  is  exhibited  by  the  explana- 
tory word-list  published  on  pi.  23  of  the  2nd  vol.  of  the 
Cuneiform  Inscriptions  of  Western  Asia.  The  obverse 
of  this  text  is  almost  entirely  lost,  but  the  reverse  (about 
185  lines)  is  fairly  well  preserved.  It  contains  lists  of 
unusual  and  foreign  synonyms  of  words  for  "  sprout  "  or 
"branch,"  "tree,"  various  well-known  trees,  "  forest," 
"  door,"  ♦'  lock,"  "  bolt,"  "  bed,"  "  couch,"  &c.,  followed 
by  the  colophon  stating  that  the  inscription  belonged  to 
Assur-bani-apli,  the  "  great  and  noble  Asnapar  "  of  the 
Book  of  Ezra.  Some  of  these  words  are  described  as 
Elamite,  and  others  as  belonging  to  the  language 
designated  by  the  character  Su.  The  interesting  thing 
about  this  inscription,  however,  is  that  it  bears  clear 
evidence  of  having  been  copied  from  a  defective  Baby- 
lonian original,  the  principal  word  for  this  being  one 
meaning  "  seat,"  or  "  throne,"  and  written  kistin,  or 
kishi,  it  being  only  in  the  Babylonian  style  of  writing 
that  the  characters  ^z«  and  hi  could  be  confounded  with 
each  other.  In  addition  to  this  we  have  the  variants 
appahnm  and  appari,  due  to  the  likeness  between  hu  and 
ri ;  huralbti  and  hurallum  (the  latter  apparently  the 
more  correct),  due  to  the  similarity  between  bii  and 
lum ;  and  seemingly  also  ikzit  an4  ikstt,  "door,"  due  to 
the  likeness  between  zu  and  su.  All  these  defects  the 
scribe  has  conscientiously  recorded,  and  the  whole  in- 
scription is  a  testimony  to  his  honesty  and  impartiality. 

In  the  three  inscriptions  which  have  been  examined 
above,  namely,  the  Creation,  the  Flood,  and  the  explana- 


24  The  Bible :    its  Structure  a7id  Purpose, 

tory  list,  it  may  be  taken  that  they  exhibit  in  each  case 
a  different  motive.  The  glossary  of  the  first  was  doubt- 
less compiled  to  preserve  the  original  text,  which,  as  has 
been  already  noted,  was  non-Semitic.  As  for  the  list, 
the  variants  in  that  are  such  as  ought  to  exist  in  a  work 
of  a  linguistic  nature.  There  is  no  doubt,  therefore,  that 
Babylonian  and  Assyrian  inscriptions  in  general  show 
considerable  care  in  their  transmission,  and  sometimes 
even  a  critical  mind. 

It  is  not  at  all  certain,  however,  that  the  glossary  to 
the  last  tablet  of  the  Creation  Legend  was  simply,  as 
above  stated,  to  preserve  the  original  text — it  may  have 
nad  a  deeper  motive,  namely,  to  keep  the  legend  in  its 
integrity,  and  get  rid  of  the  possibility  of  changes  being 
made  in  it.  If  this  be  the  case,  it  is  not  at  all  improbable 
that  the  Jews  of  the  Captivity  were  in  reality  the  pupils  of 
the  Babylonians  in  the  matter  of  the  correct  transmission 
of  manuscripts ;  and  having  once  realised  the  importance 
of  such  things,  development  and  improvements  in  the 
system  were  easy. 


CHAPTER    IV. 

The  Higher  Criticism  Based  upon  Impossible 
Assumptions. 


THE  reader  will  gather  from  the  above  how  faith- 
fully the  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  scribes  kept 
to  the  ancient  texts  which  they  handed  down  to 
posterity.  The  allegation  that  our  modern  practice 
of  faithful  adherence  to  "  copy  "  is  a  consequence  of 


7s  the  Battle  Ended?  25 

clearer  views  as  to  the  rights  of  authorship  finds  no 
support  in  the  .abounding  Hterature  of  Babylonia, 
nor  in  the  literature  of  any  other  people.  For  the 
Jews  to  have  interpolated  texts ;  to  have  mingled 
documents  together;  and,  in  a  word,  to  have  com- 
mitted the  forgeries  and  the  pious  frauds  attributed 
to  them  by  the  critics,  would  have  been  a  crime 
unparalleled,  and  as  shocking  to  the  national  and 
individual  conscience  of  the  East,  from  the  sixth  to 
the  second  century  B.C.,  as  it  would  be  to  the  national 
and  individual  conscience  in  the  Europe  of  to-day. 

Nothing,  indeed,  can  be  less  worthy  of  the  name 
of  **  criticism "  than  this  unfounded  suspicion  of 
antiquity.  Scholarship  has  already  had  some  object 
lessons  as  to  the  ultimate  fate  of  capricious  prejudice. 
It  is  natural  for  suspicious  ignorance  to  feel  that, 
since  all  the  originalsof  the  classic  works  of  antiquity 
have  perished,  our  confidence  in  the  copies  of  them 
which  have  come  down  to  us  has  now  no  solid 
ground  to  rest  upon.  "So  impressed,"  says  Dr. 
William  Forsyth,  "  was  the  Abbe  Hardouin,  born  in 
1646,  with  this  difficulty,  that  he  gravely  propounded 
the  theory  that  the  so-called  works  of  the  classic 
writers  of  Greece  and  Rome  were  nothing  but 
forgeries  of  the  monks.  .  .  .  The  Abbe  affected  to 
believe  that  the  so-called  ancient  classics  had  been 
composed  in  the  thirteenth  century,  by  the  help  of 
the  remains  of  Cicero  and  Pliny,  the  Georgics  of 
Virgil,  and  the  Satires  and  Epistles  of  Horace,  which 
he  declared  were  the  only  relics  of  antiquity  in  that 
period.     He  attributed  the  /Eneid  to  a  Benedidtine 


26  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

monk,  who  wished  to  describe  in  an  allegory  the 
journey  of  St.  Peter  to  Rome.  It  is,  indeed,  difficult 
to  believe  that  this  was  not  a  literary  joke ;  but  the 
Abbe  seems  to  have  been  thoroughly  in  earnest,  and, 
if  so,  it  appears  not  to  have  struck  him  that  there  is 
such  a  thing  as  internal  evidence  and  moral  impossi- 
bihty.  The  idea  of  mediaeval  monks  being  able  to 
compose  the  works  of  Homer  and  of  Plato ;  of  Cicero 
and  of  Virgil ;  does  not  deserve  repetition."  * 

It  is  well  known  that  the  transcribing  of  manu- 
scripts was  an  art  which  was  carefully  cultivated  in 
ancient  times.  And  recent  discoveries  are  correcting 
the  theories  even  of  sober  criticism  regarding  the 
suspected  unreliability  of  the  transcribers  of  manu- 
scripts. The  old  dust  heaps  of  Egypt  have  been 
turned  over  in  the  search  for  ancient  manuscripts, 
and  some  astonishing  discoveries  have  been  made. 
Among  others  some  extracts  from  the  Phaedo, 
Plato's  dialogue  on  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  have 
been  found.  This  precious  bit  of  papyrus  was 
written  about  a  century  after  the  death  of  Plato  for  a 
soldier  who  apparently  desired  to  carry  it  with  him 
while  upon  his  campaigns.  The  circumstances  were, 
consequently,  not  such  as  demanded  any  great  care 
in  copying ;  and  yet  the  comparison  of  this  papyrus, 
which  goes  back  at  least  to  200  B.C.,  with  one  of  the 
later  manuscripts  of  Plato's  works,  shows  with  what 
striking  fidelity  the  ancient  copyists  were  accustomed 
to  do  their  work.  It  has  also  shown  that  the 
carefully- weighed  corrections  which  were  suggested 

*  History  of  Ancient  Manuscripts,  William  Forsyth,  Q.C,  LL.D.,  pp.2,  3. 


7s  the  Battle  Ended?  27 

by  Greek  scholars,  have,  in  eighteen  out  of  nineteen 
instances,  been  wide  of  the  mark.  Professor  Lewis 
Campbell,  one  of  the  foremost  Greek  scholars  of  the 
time,  deals  at  considerable  length  with  this  papyrus 
and  its  lessons  for  textual  criticism.  After  referring 
to  those  eighteen  instances  of  the  powerlessness  even 
of  the  best-equipped  Hterary  conjecture,  he  says : 
"  Thus,  in  one  instance  only,  out  of  nineteen  selected 
by  Schanz,  or  in  two  at  most,  has  any  scholar 
anticipated  the  readings  here  discovered  ;  and,  in  the 
only  certain  instance — the  excision  of  words  supple- 
menting an  ellipsis — the  conjecture  was  withdrawn 
by  the  conjecturer  in  favour  of  another."  *  And  he 
concludes  :  "  As  compared  with  the  hypothesis  of 
modern  editors,  the  *  accretions '  proved  to  have 
accumulated  in  the  interval  of  1,200  years  between 
the  papyrus  and  the  Bodleian  MS.  are,  so  far,  not 
considerable.  ...  If  time  has  gathered  some  dross, 
time  has  also  taken  away  some  morsels  of  fine  gold. 
But  the  amount  both  of  incrustation  and  of  decay  is 
extremely  small.  Nor  are  the  corrections  of  the  MS. 
readings  which  the  papyrus  supplies  of  a  kind  which 
could  be  rismedied  by  conjecture,  as  the  facts  have 
proved."  t 

With  these  decisive  facts  before  us,  the  higher 
criticism  must  be  abandoned  as  a  delusion.  But 
there  are  also  other,  and  not  less'  cogent,  reasons  for 
repudiating  its  "ascertained  results."  It  began  with 
a  huge  blunder  which  can  only  be  explained  by 
rationalistic  haste  to  escape  from  the  trammels  of 

•  The  Classical  Review,  vol.  v.,  p.  365,     +  Page  435, 


28  The  Bible :   its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

Revelation.  Astruc  and  Eichhorn,  and  all  that 
followed,  declared  that  the  hands  of  two  distinct 
writers  could  be  traced  in  Genesis.  One  spoke  of 
God  as  Elohim,  the  other  as  Jehovah  (I  decline,  on 
stricftly  philological  grounds,  to  use  the  now  fashion- 
able reading  "Jahweh").  This  meant  that  these 
words  belonged  to  different  periods,  one  being  an 
older  name  for  the  Divine  Being,  the  other  a  later. 
It  implied  also  that  the  names  were  interchangeable  ; 
that  the  writer  who  used  the  name  Jehovah  could 
have  written  Elohim  instead,  and  vice  versa.  Both 
these  suppositions  must  now  be  abandoned.  Assyri- 
ology  has  proved  that  both  names  were  in  use  from 
the  earliest  times;  and  there  are  multitudes  of  places 
in  the  Hebrew  Bible  in  which  the  interchange  of 
these  names  is  impossible.  Throughout  the  whole 
Old  Testament  period  this  law  prevails,  making  the 
interchange  of  the  names  impracticable.  This  fact  is 
in  itself  sufficient  to  wreck  the  critical  theories.  The 
alleged  "facts"  by  which  they  have  justified  their 
conclusions  are  monuments  of  similar  haste  and 
untrustworthiness.  Nothing  is  more  common  than 
the  statement  that  there  are  two  accounts  of  the 
Creation  in  Genesis.  To  show  this,  the  fourth  verse 
of  the  second  chapter  is  divided,  and  its  opening 
words,  "These  are  the  generations  (Tholedoth)  of  the 
heavens  and  of  the  earth,"  are  taken  as  the  termi- 
nation of  the  alleged  "first  account  of  the  creation." 
But  in  this  way  Tholedoth,  "the  generations,"  would 
be  used  in  the  sense  of  "origin,"  a  sense  which  the 
word  never  has,  and  never  can  have  had.     "  The 


Is  the  Battle  Ended?  29 

Tholedoth  of  the  heavens  and  of  the  earth"  are  the 
things  which  came  from  these,  and  not  those  from 
which  the  heavens  and  the  earth  have  come.  In 
other  words,  every  Hebrew  scholar  must  admit  that 
Tholedoth  refers,  not  to  what  has  gone  before,  but  to 
what  comes  after— to  those  events,  namely,  for  which 
the  material  creation  prepared  the  way.  A  third 
example  of  the  fatuity  which  has  attended  the  higher 
criticism  will  suffice.  The  two  chief  writers  in 
Genesis  are  distinguished,  we  are  told,  by  another 
charafteristic.  One  writer  uses  the  name  **  Padan- 
Aram"  for  a  certain  district,  the  other  calls  it 
"Aram-Naharaim."  This  so-called  "fact"  has  had 
an  immense  effect.  But  it  is  not,  and  never  was,  a 
"fact."  It  is  now  what  it  was  at  first,  a  simple 
hallucination.  We  now  know  from  the  inscriptions 
that  the  names  are  those  of  entirely  different  places, 
and  were  never  marks  of  different  writers.  We  have 
only  to  take  up  seriatim  the  usual  proofs  advanced  for 
the  critical  hypothesis  to  add  to  this  catalogue  of 
blunders;  and  these,  let  it  be  remembered,  are  still 
actually  paraded  as  the  foundation  of  their  "science  "  ! 
I  shall  conclude  by  briefly  indicating  two  other 
.  important  points.  The  legendary  and  apocryphal 
character  of  the  Old  Testament  history  is  assumed 
as  self-evident.  But  the  discoveries  made  in  Egypt, 
Palestine,  Assyria,  and  Babylonia  "have  steadily  over- 
thrown the  critical  conclusions.  Daniel  and  Esther 
have  been  shown  to  be  so  accurate  in  their  references 
to  the  customs,  the  men,  the  places,  and  the  times  on 
which  they  touch,  that  no  one  acquainted  with  these 


30  The  Bible:    its  Structure  and  Purpose, 

recent  researches  can  continue  to  believe  in  the 
alleged  apocryphal  character  of  these  writings.  The 
Books  of  Chronicles  have  been  re-instated  as  history. 
Research  has  also  so  riddled  Wellhausen's  hypothesis 
that  archaeologists  hke  Sayce  and  Hommel  have  been 
compelled  to  abandon  his  school.  And  the  farther 
we  advance  in  the  knowledge  of  the  times  with  which 
the  Old  Testament  deals,  the  more  deeply  are  we 
convinced  of  its  historical  character,  and  of  its  Divine 
uniqueness. 

It  is  among  the  most  fundamental  assumptions 
of  the  higher  criticism  that  the  supernatural  origin 
of  the  Old  Testament  is  simply  inadmissible.  The 
supernatural  is  ruled  out.  Revelation,  in  the  honest, 
old-fashioned  sense  of  the  word,  is  to  the  critic  a 
myth  too  self-evident  to  require  even  a  passing  notice. 
I  might  ask  whether  an  attitude  of  that  kind  is  really 
scientific.  But  I  limit  myself  to  pointing  out  that  this 
assumption,  like  the  rest,  cannot  be  sustained.  I  know 
that  a  resolute  attempt  has  been  made  to  annihilate 
prophecy.  But  the  attempt  has  not  succeeded.  What 
am  I  to  make  of  the  following  undoubted  fact  ?  The 
whole  of  the  Old  Testament  is  alive  with  a  unique 
expectation.  There  are  reminiscences  of  this  in 
the  myths  and  legends  of  the  nations — self-evident 
wrecks  of  a  primeval  Revelation ;  but  in  Israel  it 
becomes  a  hope  round  which  gather  the  destinies  of 
the  people.  A  Deliverer  is  to  come,  whose  bruised 
heel  is  to  crush  the  serpent's  head.  He  is  to  be  of 
the  seed  of  Abraham,  that  is.  He  is  to  be  a  Jew  ;  and 
in  Him  all  nations  of  the  earth  are  to  be  blessed. 


Is  the  Battle  Ended?  31 

He  is  to  be  despised  and  rejected  by  the  very  people 
who  glory  in  the  hope  of  His  coming.  He  is  to  die 
the  death  of  a  malefactor ;  but  His  suffering  is  to  be 
an  expiation  for  the  sins  of  humanity.  After  His 
death  His  career  of  blessing  is  to  begin,  and  His 
great  and  enduring  triumph  is  to  be  won.  These 
are  by  no  means  all  the  features  which  are  found 
distinct  and  clear  in  this  wonderful  portraiture.  But, 
though  our  view  be  limited  to  these,  is  it  possible  to 
explain  how  every  one  of  these  prophetic  delineations 
is  an  accurate  description  of  what  has  become  history 
in  the  life  of  Christ,  and  in  the  career  of  the  Christian 
Church  ?  Where,  outside  the  Bible,  shall  we  find  a 
parallel  to  this  constellation  of  predictions  ?  And  if 
they  and  their  marvellous  accomplishment  do  not 
constitute  a  miracle,  and  demonstrate  the  interven- 
tion in  this  world's  affairs  of  a  Mind  that  has  read 
the  future — in  other  words,  an  Omniscient  Mind — 
what  would  do  so?  Professor  Reuss,  of  Strasburg, 
says  that  "the  present  generation,  casting  off  more 
and  more  its  Voltairean^ prejudices,  understands  that 
Christianity  is  the  most  momentous  fact  in  the 
history  of  mankind,  that  which  for  more  than  fifteen 
centuries  has  determined  the  religious,  moraly  social, 
and  intellectual  development  of  our  race,  and  which 
will  still  determine  it  in  an  ever-widening  future."* 
That  is  a  sufficiently  marvellous  fact.  If  we  ask 
whence  is  this  religion  that  has  swept  away  the 
hideous  idolatries  of  the  earth,  purified  the  fountains 
of  human  thought,  and  led  the  nations  into  light 
and   goodness,   what    answer    has    our    fashionable 


32  The  Bible :   its  Structure  ajid  Purpose. 

rationalism  to  give  ?  And  when  I  add  that  this  very 
renewal  of  the  world  was  undeniably  predicted,  are 
we  not  once  more  face  to  face  with  miracle  ? 

These  are  problems  which  the  higher  criticism  has 
ignored,  and  has  not  solved ;  but  so  long  as  they  are 
left  without  explanation,  the  basis  of  Christianity 
remains. 

*  History  of  Christian  Theology  in  the  Apostolic  Age.    Preface. 


HOW  DID  WE  GET  THE  BIBLE? 


CHAPTER   I. 
The  Question  Stated. 

IN  dealing  with  the  Books  of  the  Bible  it  is 
impossible  to  overlook  one  important  fadt.  We 
do  not  require  to  search  for  these  Books  and  to  pick 
them  up  here  and  there  as  explorers  may  chance  to 
light  upon  them.  They  are  presented  in  a  well-known 
and  deeply  venerated  colle(5tion.  There  are  various 
and  striking  features  in  that  collecftion  wliich  attradt 
notice  and  excite  inquiry.  The  Books  are  arranged 
in  a  certain  well-known  order,  and  that  order  betrays 
what  seems  to  be  a  well-defined  and  completed  plan. 
The  Books  do  not  resemble  stones  that  have  simply 
been  thrown  upon  a  heap.  They  are,  on  the  contrary, 
like  stones  which  have  been  built  into  a  well-planned 
and  completed  stru(?ture  ;  and  many,  if  not  all,  of  the 
stones  have  evidently  been  shaped  for  the  places  which 
they  occupy.  To  whom  do  we  owe  that  plan,  and 
the  collec5ling  and  the  building  of  the  stones  ?  This 
question  has  seldom  found  so  forcible  a  statement  as 
this  which  we  owe  to  the  pen  of  Professor  Hitchcock. 
"  That  so  many  books,"  he  says,  "  of  so  many  kinds, 
historic,  poetic,  dogmatic,  and  prophetic,  from  the 
pens  of  so  many  writers  of  such  various  culture  and 


34  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

so  far  apart  in  history,  should  yet  be  only  One  Book, 
with  a  unity  as  perfect  as  that  of  any  drama,  is  a 
phenomenon  which  no  infidel  theory  accounts  for. 
The  Apocryphal  books,  whether  of  the  Old  or  of  tha 
New  Testament,  do  not  trouble  us.  The  more  they 
are  studied,  the  more  clear  it  becomes  that  they 
deserve  no  place  in  the  Canon.  It  is  felt  to  have 
been  a  sure  instin(ft  that  ruled  them  out."  To  whose 
"  instin(?t,"  then,  do  we  owe  this  unerring  seledtion  ? 
A  more  learned  statement  of  our  question  would  be 
— to  whom  do  we  owe  "the  Canon  "  of  Scripture  ?  It 
will  be  well  not  to  encumber  ourselves  unnecessarily 
with  technical  terms,  but  this  has  so  long  had  a  place 
in  the  inquiry  upon  which  we  are  entering  that  we 
can  hardly  escape  using  the  word.  "  Canon "  is 
simply  a  Greek  word  (KanOn)  put  into  English  letters. 
It  originally  meant  "  a  straight  rod ;  "  then  a  rod  used 
in  measuring,  hke  our  "foot  rule;"  then  "a  rule" 
of  any  kind.  In  this  last  sense  it  is  used  in  the  New 
Testament.  In  Galatians  vi.  i6  we  read  :  "  As  many 
as  walk  according  to  this  rule  (Kanun),  peace  be  on 
them,  and  mercy,  and  upon  the  Israel  of  God."  The 
term,  as  used  in  ecclesiastical  literature,  points,  there- 
fore, to  the  Bible  as  the  one  law  of  the  believer  and 
of  the  Church  of  Christ.  It  is  our  "  rule  "  for  belief 
and  condu(?t.  Whatever  is  not  contained  therein  has 
no  claim  upon  our  faith  or  our  obedience.  This,  it 
may  be  remarked,  plainly  implies  Divine  origin. 
That,  which  had  proceeded  from  man  only,  would 
never  have  been  enthroned  as  the  supreme  law  of  the 
Church  of  God. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  35 

But  when  the  word  "  canon"  has  been  explained  and 
adopted,  it  does  not  answer  our  question.  On  the 
contrary,  it  makes  a  reply  still  more  necessary.  If 
these  Books  have  this  high  place  assigned  to  them ; 
if  they  supersede  all  others,  and  are  alone  to  be  the 
rule  of  our  thinking  and  the  guide  of  our  life,  we  wish 
to  know  how  they  have  come  to  us.  We  are,  indeed, 
aware  that  they  claim  this  high  place  because  they 
have  come  from  God.  They  carry  with  them,  wher- 
ever they  go,  the  credentials  of  their  great  mission 
and  unchallengeable  proofs  of  their  Divine  origin. 
These  are  things  whose  marvellousness  no  eagerness 
to  receive  the  Books  can  increase,  and  which  no 
negledt  of  them  can  impair.  But  we  nevertheless 
desire  to  know  whether  any  care  was  taken  for  their 
preservation,  and  how  it  happened  that  they  were 
gathered  together,  kept  separate  from  all  other  liter- 
ature of  their  own  and  of  after  times,  and  set  in  this 
seat  of  supreme  authority. 

To  this  important  question  we  are  happily  able  to 
obtain  a  satisfactory,  reply.  For,  one  part  of  the 
Canon  has  been  formed  in  times  to  which  we  are 
able  to  go  back.  We  shall,  therefore,  put  theories 
aside,  and  acquaint  ourselves  with  the  facts.  We 
shall  ask  what  history  has  to  say  regarding  the 
manner  in  which  the  New  Testament  Books  were 
received  and  collected  together.  Were  they  first  of 
all  received  as  ordinary  productions ;  and  then,  as 
time  rolled  on,  was  this  estimate  changed;  and  was 
everything  that  had  come  from  apostolic  hands 
regarded  more  and  more  as  a  sacred  possession  ?    And 


36  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

were  the  Books,  under  this  deepening  sense  of  their 
value,  sought  out  and  set  apart  by  themselves  as  the 
priceless  possession  of  the  Christian  Church  ?  If  that 
was  the  origin  of  our  New  Testament,  history  will 
tell  us;  and  we  now  proceed  to  ask  what  history  has 
to  say  regarding  it.  But  if,  on  the  other  hand,  there 
was  no  such  growth  of  reverence — if  the  Books  were 
received  from  the  first,  not  as  precious  mementos  of 
revered  men,  but  as  Divine — history  may  be  expected 
to  make  this  equally  plain. 


CHAPTER    II. 

The  Councils  and  the  New  Testament. 


AN  idea  that  was  largely  entertained,  and  of  which 
much  has  been  made  in  recent  discussions,  is 
that  we  owe  the  collection  of  the  New  Testament 
Books  to  the  early  Councils  of  the  Christian  Church. 
This  notion  has  been  fostered  by  the  Romish  Church, 
and,  perhaps,  also  encouraged  by  Protestant  appeals 
to  the  early  Councils  and  the  Fathers.  But  it  is  quite 
opposed  to  the  plain  testimony  of  history.  Even 
Professor  Eduard  Reuss,  of  Strasburg,  virtually 
admits,  in  his  rationalistic  book  on  "  The  History  of 
the  Canon  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,"  that  this  belief 
is  without  foundation.  Speaking  of  the  Council  of 
Trent,  held  in  1545,  he  says :  "  These  preliminary 
debates  were  long  and  interesting,  and  prove  more 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  37 

than  anything  else  how  much  reason  I  had  for  saying 
that  never  before  had  the  Canon  been  officially 
fixed."  *  The  reason  that  he  gives  for  this  opinion 
is  conclusive.  "  If  it  had  been  fixed"— that  is,  fixed 
by  the  decree  of  a  Council  — "the  prelates  and 
Canonists  assembled  at  Trent  would  not  have  failed 
to  make  appeal  purely  and  simply  to  the  authority  of 
the  former  decision ;  whereas  we  learn,  not  without 
some  agreeable  surprise,  that  the  question  was  treated 
as  if  it  were  still  untouched." 

The  striking  fact  that  the  early  Councils  had 
nothing  whatever  to  do  with  forming  the  Canon  of 
the  New  Testament,  has  been  so  emphasised  by  a 
number  of  writers  that  one  is  astonished  that  it  is  not 
more  widely  known.  I  give  a  few  of  these  testimonies. 
Dr.  George  Salmon,  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin,  writes, 
in  dealing  with  the  Gospels  f :  "  It  is  a  remarkable 
fact  that  we  have  no  early  interference  of  Church 
authority  in  the  making  of  a  Canon;  no  Council 
discussed  the  subject;  no  formal  decisions  were  made. 
The  Canon  seems  to  have  shaped  itself;  and  if,  when 
we  come  further  on,  you  are  disposed  to  complain  of 
this  because  of  the  vagueness  of  the  testimony  of 
antiquity  to  one  or  two  disputed  books,  Jet  us 
remember  that  this  non-interference  of  authority  is 
a  valuable  topic  of  evidence  to  the  genuineness  of 
our  Gospels;  for  it  thus  appears' that  it  was  owing 
to  no  adventitious  authority,  but  by  their  own  weight, 
that  they  crushed  all  rivals  out  of  existence.  Whence 
could  they  have  had  this  weight  except  from  its  being 

*Page  275.      \  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  p.  144, 


38  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

known  that  the  framers  of  these  Gospels  were  men 
of  superior  authority  to  the  others,  or  with  access  to 
fuller  information  ? " 

There  are  other  references  to  the  formation  of  the 
Canon  in  Dr.  Salmon's  work,  which  is  one  of  the 
most  valuable  books  of  its  kind.  The  reader  will 
appreciate  the  following  extract,  long  though  it  be. 
"Some  fifty  years  ago  or  more"  (Dr.  Salmon  is 
writing  in  1885),  "a  Mr.  Hone,  who  was  at  that 
time  an  opponent  of  orthodoxy,  if  not  of  Christianity 
(though  I  understand  he  afterwards  regretted  the 
line  he  had  taken),  published  what  he  called  the 
Apocryphal  New  Testament,  which  had  considerable 
sale  at  the  time,  and  which  may  still  be  picked  up  on 
stalls  or  at  auctions.  The  object  of  the  publication 
clearly  was  to  disparage  the  pre-eminent  authority 
which  we  ascribe  to  the  Books  of  our  New  Testament, 
by  making  it  appear  that  those  which  we  honour  had 
been  picked  out  of  a  number  of  books  with  tolerably 
equal  claims  to  our  acceptance,  the  selection  having 
been  made  by  persons  in  whom  we  have  no  reason 
to  feel  much  confidence.  The  work  professes  to  be  an 
answer  to  the  question,  'After  the  writings  contained  in 
the  New  Testament  were  selected  from  the  numerous 
Gospels  and  Epistles  then  in  existence,  what  became 
of  the  books  that  were  rejected  by  the  compilers?' 
The  epoch  of  the  compilation  is  apparently  assumed 
to  be  that  of  the  Council  of  Nicasa.  The  writer,  at 
least,  quotes  a  mediaeval  story,  that  the  selection  of 
Canonical  Books  was  then  made  by  miracle,  the  right 
Books  having  jumped  up  on  the  table,  and  the  worng 


how  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  39 

ones  remained  under  it ;  and  it  would  seem  as  if, 
though  rejecting  the  miracle,  he  received  the  fact 
that  the  Council  settled  the  Canon.  He  proceeds  to 
quote  some  remarks  from  Jortin  on  the  violence  of 
the  proceedings  at  the  Council,  and  we  are  given  to 
understand  that  if  the  selection  was  not  made  then, 
it  was  made  by  people  not  more  entitled  to  confidence. 
He  then  gives  a  selection  of  Apocryphal  Gospels, 
Acts,  and  Epistles  taken  from  works  of  orthodox 
writers,  but  divided  by  himself  into  verses  (and, 
where  that  had  not  been  done  before,  into  chapters), 
obviously  with  the  intention  of  giving  to  these  strange 
Gospels,  Epistles,  and  Acts  as  nearly  as  possible  the 
same  appearance  to  the  eye  of  the  English  reader  as 
that  presented  by  the  old  ones  with  which  he  was 
familiar. 

"  I  need  not  tell  you,"  Dr.  Salmon  continues,  "that 
the  Council  of  Nicsea  did  not  meddle  with  the  subject 
of  the  Canon,  and  so  we  need  not  trouble  ourselves  to 
discuss  the  proofs  that  the  members  of  that  venerable 
Synod  were  frail  and  fallible  men  like  ourselves. 
The  fact  is  that,  as  I  have  already  told  you,  authority 
did  not  meddle  with  the  question  of  the  Canon  until 
that  question  had  pretty  well  settled  itself?  and, 
instead  of  that  abstention  weakening  the  authority 
of  our  sacred  Books,  the  result  has  been  that  the 
great  majority  have  far  higher  authority  than  if  their 
claims  rested  on  the  decision  of  any  Council,  however 
venerable.  They  rest  on  the  spontaneous  consent  of 
the  whole  Christian  world.  Churches  the  most  remote 
agreeing  independently  to  do  honour  to  the  same 


40  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

Books.  Some  of  the  books  which  Mr.  Hone  printed, 
as  left  out  by  the  compilers  of  the  Canon,  were  not  in 
existence  at  the  time  when  that  Canon  established 
itself;  and  the  best  of  the  others  is  separated,  in  the 
judgment  of  any  sober  man,  by  a  very  wide  interval 
from  those  which  we  account  Canonical."* 

This  has  been  so  long  clearly  seen  and  stated  by 
the  best  writers  on  this  subject  that  one,  I  may  repeat, 
is  astonished  that  there  should  be  two  opinions  upon 
the  matter.  Dr.  William  Lee,  in  his  lecfture  on  "  The 
Immemorial  Doctrine  of  the  Church  of  God,"  says 
that  "even  the  most  relu(5tant  are  forced  to  admit 
that  the  reception  of  the  different  parts  of  the  New 
Testament  as  Scripture  took  place  without  external 
concert — from  an  inward  impulse,  as  it  were — at  the 
same  time  and  in  the  most  different  places ;  and  that, 
with  scarcely  an  exception,  each  writing  which  it 
contains  was  all  at  once,  and  without  a  word  of  doubt, 
placed  on  a  level  with  the  Old  Testament,  which  had 
hitherto  been  regarded  as  exclusively  Divine.  In 
short,  the  authority  conceded  to  this  new  component 
of  the  Scriptures,  seems  to  have  grown  up  without 
any  one  being  able  to  place  his  finger  upon  the  place, 
or  the  moment,  when  adhesion  to  it  was  first  yielded."t 

So  far  from  the  Councils  picking  out  a  number  of 
books  from  a  big  collection  of  early  Christian  literature 
and  decreeing  that  these  were  thenceforth  to  be 
regarded  as  sacred,  the  records  of  the  Councils  prove 
most  conclusively  that  the  collection  had  been  made 

*  Ibid.,  pp.  226-228. 
t  The  Inspiration  of  Holy  Scripture,  its  Nature  and  FrooJ,  pp.  48,  40. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  41 

long  before,  and  was  universally  accepted.  The  first 
of  the  general  Councils  was  summoned  by  Constan- 
tine.  In  this  Emperor  Christianity  had  conquered 
the  enmity  of  Rome  by  the  word  of  its  testimony  and 
its  Christlike  endurance.  He  had  declared  himself  a 
Christian;  and  the  power  which  had  so  long  persecuted 
the  Churches  became  their  defender  and  patron.  The 
Arian  controversy  had  sprung  up  in  Alexandria  and 
was  now  rolling  its  waves  over  all  lands.  Constantine 
resolved  to  give  peace  to  the  Church.  He  called  the 
bishops  of  the  Churches  to  assemble  at  Nicasa,  in 
Asia  Minor,  so  that  they  might  decide  this  controversy 
regarding  the  deity  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  The  great 
hall  of  the  imperial  palace  was  prepared  for  the 
meetings  of  this  first  (Ecumenical,  or  "Universal," 
Council.  Constantine,  though  the  master  of  the 
world,  recognised  his  position  as  a  disciple  of  these 
masters  in  Israel.  His  seat,  though  of  gold,  was 
placed  lower  than  those  of  the  venerable  men  who  were 
gathered  round  him.  There  was  a  lofty  and  gorgeous 
throne,  however,  in  the  midst  of  the  assembly ;  but 
it  was  a  throne  on  which  no  man  sat.  The  throne 
was  nevertheless  occupied.  The  opened  Gospels  rested 
on  it.  That  was  the  Council's  declaration  of  its 
allegiance  to  God.  They  rejoiced  in  the  presence 
among  them  of  the  world's  Master — the  first  Christian 
Cassar;  but  that  throne,  which  rose  on  high  above 
their  seats  and  his,  declared  that  he  and  they  bowed 
before  One  whose  authority  was  immeasurably  greater 
than  tHe  Caesar's.  It  was  God's  Word  that  was  to  rule, 
not  man's.     But  all  this  meant  that  they  had  God's 


42  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

Word,  and  that  the  New  Testament  was  universally 
acknowledged  as  God's  Word  long  before  the  first  of 
the  Councils  had  been  brought  together.  This  faft 
was  dwelt  upon  by  Constantine  himself.  In  his 
address  to  the  Council,  he  said :  we  "  have  the  do(5trine 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  writing,  for  the  Books  of  the 
Evangelists  and  Apostles,  and  the  oracles  of  the 
ancient  Prophets  teach  us  clearly  and  thoroughly 
what  we  ought  to  believe  concerning  God.  Where- 
fore let  us  lay  aside  all  hostile  contention,  and  let  us 
decide  our  controversies  from  the  Divinely  Inspired 
Books."* 

There  is  also  another  Imperial  witness  that  the 
Churches  possessed  the  New  Testament  before  any 
Council  had  been  summoned.  In  the  month  of  Feb- 
ruary, 303,  Diocletian,  one  of  Constantine's  immediate 
predecessors,  issued  the  following  decree:  "The  as- 
sembling of  the  Christians  for  the  purpose  of  religious 
worship  is  to  be  forbidden.  The  Christian  churches 
are  to  be  pulled  down  and  all  copies  of  the  Bible 
burned.  Those  who  hold  places  of  honour  and  rank 
must  either  abjure  the  faith  or  be  degraded.  In 
judicial  proceedings  the  torture  may  be  used  against 
Christians,  whatsoever  their  rank  may  be,"  etc.  The 
possession  of  the  New  Testament  Books  was  seen  to 
be  one  reason,  if  not  ihc  reason,  of  the  persistence  of 
the  Christian  Church.  From  all  this  it  is  abundantly 
clear  that  we  owe  neither  the  collecting  of  the  New 
Testament  Books,  nor  the  definition  of  their  authority, 
to  any  Council.    The  Councils  did  not  make  the  New 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  43 

Testament ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  the  New  Testament 
made  the  Councils.  It  was  because  the  New  Testa- 
ment Books  had  been  received,  and  because  they 
continued  to  be  regarded,  as  the  Word  of  God,  that 
Councils  were  summoned  to  enforce  the  Divine  law 
which  the  New  Testament  Books  declared. 


CHAPTER    III. 

Is  THE  Estimation,  in  which  the  Books  of  the 
New  Testament  were  held,  a  Development? 

THE  Council  of  Nicsea,  or  Nice,  met  in  the  year 
325,  or  two  centuries  and  a  quarter  after  the 
death  of  the  Apostle  John.  The  Gospel  had  been 
preached,  therefore,  for  nearly  300  years  before  the 
first  of  the  General  Councils  met.  It  must  be  admitted 
that  there  was  space  enough  in  that  long  interval  for 
a  development  of  belief,  and  even  for  the  rise  of 
superstition.  It  may  be  supposed,  therefore,  that, 
though  the  Christian  men,  who  assembled  at  Nice  to 
judge  the  Arian  heresy,  acknowledged  the  New  Testa- 
ment as  the  Word  of  God ;  and  though  they  did  not 
make  the  Canon,  yet  the  Canon  may  have  been  made 
by  some  who  preceded  them.  Leading  men,  in  some 
previous  age,  may  have  picked  out  those  Books  from 
a  multitude  of  others,  and,  having  placed  them 
together,  may  have  set  the  example  of  seeking  in 
them  instru(5tion  and  consolation.  This  example  may 
have  spread  over  the  Churches.  We  all  know  how 
veneration  deepens  as  time  rolls  on.     What,  then, 


44  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

could  be  more  natural  than  that  these  Books  should 
finally  be  regarded  as  Divine,  and  should  be  enthroned 
in  the  Nicaean  assembly  as  the  very  Word  of  God  ? 

But  the  testimony  of  history  is  equally  opposed  to 
that  explanation.  The  reverence  for  the  New  Testa- 
ment Books  is  not  a  development.  These  Books 
were  never  regarded  as  ordinary  productions.  They 
v^ere  received,  even  at  the  first,  as  they  were  accepted 
at  Nice,  and  as  they  have  been  accepted  in  the  ages 
that  followed  that  of  the  Council.  Let  me  ask  the 
reader  to  accompany  me  in  a  rapid  excursion  into 
that  remote  past,  and  to  listen  to  the  testimony  of  one 
and  of  another  in  the  early  Church.  We  shall  begin 
with  Pamphilus,  a  presbyter  in  the  Church  of  Csesarea 
who  suffered  martyrdom  in  the  year  309.  He  was 
one  of  the  scholars  of  the  early  Church,  and  had  a 
long,  useful,  and  distinguished  career  among  the 
Christians  in  Palestine.  His  testimony  is  that  of  the 
latter  half  of  the  third  century,  and  it  is  quite  as 
emphatic  as  that  which  meets  us  in  the  beginning  of 
the  fourth  century.  Eusebius,  the  historian,  so  close 
a  friend  of  his  that  the  two  were  said  to  form  but  one 
soul,  describes  him  as  "a  man  of  good  understanding, 
a  philosopher  in  word  and  deed,"  "  my  dearest  friend," 
and  "  on  account  of  his  eminent  virtue,  the  most 
renowned  martyr  of  our  age:"  "he  was  especially 
eminent  and  remarkable  above  all  men  of  cur  time," 
he  continues,  "  for  an  unfeigned  zeal  for  the  Holy 
Scriptures"  In  another  passage,  quoted  by  Jerome, 
Eusebius  says :  "  He  not  only  lent  out  copies  of  the 
sacred  Scriptures  to  be  read,  but  cheerfully  gave  them 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  45 

to  be  kept ;  and  that  not  only  to  men,  but  to  women 
likewise  whom  he  found  disposed  to  read.  For  which 
reason  he  took  care  to  have  by  him  many  copies  of 
the  Scriptures  that,  when  there  should  be  occasion, 
he  might  furnish  those  who  were  willing  to  make  use 
of  them."* 

Here  we  encounter  the  deepest  reverence  for  the 
New  Testament,  and  the  fullest  convidlion  of  its  value 
for  the  Christian  life.  It  is  placed  on  a  level  with 
the  Old  Testament,  being  plainly  regarded  as  from 
the  same  Divine  Author.  Another  writer,  Vicftorinus, 
Bishop  of  Pettav  in  Germany,  who  lived  a  few  years 
earlier  than  Pamphilus,  likens,  in  a  prolonged  com- 
parison, the  four  Gospels  to  the  four  forms  of  the 
cherubim  described  in  the  beginning  of  Ezekiel.  In 
concluding  his  account,  he  says  :  "  All  these,  though 
four,  are  but  one,  because  they  proceed  from  one 
mouth."  He  explains  some  words  in  the  Book  of 
Revelation,  and  adds  :  "  They  confute  those  who  say 
that  one  spake  in  the  prophets  and  another  in  the 
Gospel."  In  anotherpassage  he  writes  :"  The  teaching 
of  the  Old  Testament  is  linked  with  that  of  the  New 
Testament."  Here  the  two  parts  of  the  Scriptures 
are  declared  to  be  one  ;  and  the  "  one  mouth  ','  from 
which  the  four  Gospels  proceed  is,  of  course,  that  of 
the  Spirit  of  God. 

About  282,  Theonas,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  wrote 
a  letter  to  Lucian,  chief  chamberlain  to  the  Roman 
Emperor,  in  which  he  describes  the  Gospels  and 
Epistles'as  "the  Divine  Oracles  of  Christians,"  and 

*  For  these  and  further  testimonies  see  Lardner,  Works,  vols,  ii,  and  iii. 


46  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

advises  that  no  day  be  allowed  to  pass  without  reading 
"the  sacred  Scriptures"  and  meditating  upon  them. 
Commodian,  a  still  earlier  writer,  in  quoting  a  pas- 
sage from  one  of  Paul's  epistles,  writes :  "  Paul,  or 
rather  God  by  him,  says,"  etc.  In  referring  to  this 
writer,  Lardner  writes  :  "  It  is  pleasing  to  observe  the 
high  respect  for  Scripture  running  through  the  writing 
of  all  early  Christians  in  general."*  Another  early 
teacher  of  the  same  period,  Dionysius,  bishop  of 
Rome,  refers  to  the  New  Testament  and  to  the  Old 
in  language  whose  reverence  cannot  be  exceeded. 
He  says:  "The  true  disciples  of  Christ  know  very 
\^  ell  that  a  Trinity  is  taught  by  the  Divine  Scriptures, 
but  that  neither  the  Old  Testament  nor  the  New 
teaches  three  Gods."  For  him,  the  Old  Testament 
and  the  New  constitute  *' the  Divine  Scripttires." 
Going  back  another  thirty  or  forty  years,  and  coming 
to  Cyprian  of  Carthage  (who  died  in  258  a.d.),  we 
can  detect  no  change.  He  refers  to  Acts  xiii.  in  the 
following  terms:  "From  Joshua  the  son  of  Nun  to 
Samuel  the  judge  and  priest  of  God,  according  to 
the  blessed  apostle  Paul,  who  has  taught  by  the  Spirit 
0/  God,  were  filled  four  hundred  and  fifty  years ;  " 
and  again:  "All  things  which  are  delivered  by  the 
law  and  the  prophets,  the  apostles  and  evangelists, 
we  receive,  and  know,  and  reverence  ;  but  we  enquire 
not  further :  nothing  beyond  them."  We  find  Cyprian 
using  also  the  same  phrase  which  we  have  met  with  in 
these  later  writers:  "the  holy  and  Divine  Scriptures." 
Ascending  still  higher  along  the  stream  of  time, 

*  Works,  vol.  iii.,  p.  135. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  47 

we  come  to  Origen,  the  Egyptian  Catechist,  and  one 
of  the  greatest  scholars  of  Christian  antiquity.  This 
brings  us  to  the  opening  years  of  the  third  centur}', 
that  is,  to  a  period  about  a  century  after  the  death  of 
the  Apostle  John.  He  will  tell  us  what  his  own  con- 
victions and  the  convictions  of  the  Christians  of  his 
time  were  regarding  the  Books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. Speaking  of  the  variations  in  the  Gospels,  he 
describes  it  as  the  belief  of  the  Christian  Church 
"  that  the  Gospels  were  written  exactly  according  to 
truth,  with  the  assistance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and 
that  the  writers  had  made  no  mistakes."  In  the 
same  discourse  he  asks,  in  reference  to  the  statement 
in  Mark  x.  50,  that  the  blind  man  "cast  away  his 
garment  "  :  "  Shall  we  say  that  the  evangelist  wrote 
without  thought,  when  he  related  the  man's  casting 
away  his  garment  and  leaping  and  coming  to  Jesus  ? 
And  shall  we  dare  to  say  that  these  things  were 
inserted  in  the  Gospels  in  vain  ?  For  my  part,"  he 
adds,  "1  believe  that  not  one  jot  or  tittle  of  the 
Divine  instructions  is  in  vain." 

Here  are  some  other  testimonies  from  the  same 
pen.  **  We  are  never  to  say  that  there  is  anything 
impertinent  or  superfluous  in  the  Scriptures  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  though  to  some  they  may  seem  obscure  : 
but  we  are  to  turn  the  eyes  of  our  mind  to  Him  who 
commanded  these  things  to  be  written,  and  seek  of 
Him  the  interpretation  of  them."  He  speaks  of  the 
Christians  as  persuaded  "  that  the  sacred  books  are 
not  the  writings  of  men,  but  have  been  written  and 
delivered  to  us  from  the   inspiration   of  the   Holy 


48  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

Spirit,  by  the  will  of  the  Father  of  all,  through  Jesus 
Christ."  In  a  sermon  on  Jeremiah,  he  says  :  **  If 
the  oracles  of  God  are  contained  in  the  law  and  the 
prophets,  and  in  the  gospels  and  the  apostles,  it 
becomes  him  who  is  instructed  in  the  Divine  oracles 
to  own  God  for  his  teacher." t  He  thus  expresses 
their  unity  of  doctrine  :  "The  same  Spirit,  proceeding 
from  the  one  God,  teaches  the  like  things  in  the 
Scriptures  written  before  the  coming  of  Christ  and 
in  the  gospels  and  apostles." 

No  estimate  of  the  Scripture  has  ever  been  higher 
than  that  which  finds  its  expression  in  those  utter- 
ances; and  this  is  the  unvarying  estimate  of  the 
ancient  Church.  Tertullian,  who  was  born  not  later 
than  160  A.D.,  and  who  laboured  in  Africa  at  the  end 
of  the  second  and  the  beginning  of  the  third  centuries, 
speaks  in  like  fervent  manner  regarding  the  New 
Testament.  In  a  defence  of  the  Christians,  addressed 
to  their  Roman  persecutors,  he  says  :  "  Whoever  of 
you  .  .  .  think  that  we  have  no  concern  for  the 
safety  of  emperors,  look  into  the  words  of  God,  our 
Scriptures,  which  we  ourselves  do  not  conceal,  and 
many  accidents  bring  into  the  way  of  those  who  are 
not  of  our  religion.  Know,  then,  that  by  these  we 
are  commanded,  in  abundance  of  goodness,  to  pray 
to  God  even  for  enemies,  and  to  wish  well  to  our 
persecutors  (Matthew  v.  44).  And  who  are  more 
enemies  and  persecutors  of  Christians  than  they 
against  whom  we  are  accused  of  treasonable  practices  ? 
But,    beside  this,  it  is  expressly  and  plainly  said : 

*In  Jerem.    Homily  x. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  49 

*  Pray  for  kings  and  for  princes  and  powers  that  ye 
may  live  a  quiet  life'  (i  Timothy  ii.  i,  2)."*  Here 
Tertullian  appeals  to  a  collection  of  writings,  known 
as  the  Christian  Scriptures;  and  the  inference  seems 
to  be  irresistible  that  these  formed  then  one  well- 
known  Book,  and,  in  other  words,  that  the  New 
Testament  Canon  was  complete,  with  the  exception 
of  Hebrews,  about  which  there  was  then  temporary 
doubt  in  the  West.  This  conclusion  is  powerfully 
sustained  by  the  following :  "  Let  the  faction  of 
Hermogenes,"  he  writes,  "show  that  this  thing  is 
written.  If  it  be  not  written,  let  him  fear  the  woe 
pronounced  against  them  that  add  to  or  take  from 
Scripture."!  The  Scripture,  therefore,  had  long  been 
complete.  He  quotes  it,  as  we  ourselves  quote  it 
now ;  and  he  used  it  as  copiously  as  any  modern 
writer  has  done.  R5nsch,  a  recent  German  scholar, 
has  collected  Tertullian's  Scripture  quotations,  and 
the  result  is  a  goodly-sized  volume. 

In  the  third  century,  which  we  have  surveyed  from 
its  closing  to  its  opening  years,  we  have  not  found  the 
slightest  trace  of  development  in  the  estimation  in 
which  the  Scriptures  of  the  New  Testament  are  held. 
The  Divine  origin  of  the  New  Testament  ig  as  fer- 
vently admitted  at  the  commencement  as  at  the 
close.  Let  us  now  leave  this  age  behind  us  and  ask 
what  views  prevail  in  the  second  century  of  our  era. 
Theophilus,  bishop  of  Antioch,  flourished  about  181 
A.D.  Referring  to  i  Tim.  ii.  i,  2,  he  writes  :  "  The 
Divine' word  moreover  commands  us  to  be  subject  to 

*Apol.,  c.  30.        \  Contra  Hermog.,  22. 


50  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

principalities  and  powers,  and  to  pray  for  them,  that 
we  may  lead  a  quiet  and  peaceable  life."  He  also 
says  :  "  Christians  have  for  their  law-giver  the  true 
God,  who  teaches  us  to  act  righteously,  godly,  and 
honestly;  "  and  he  paraphrases  2  Peter  i.  20,  21  as 
follows  :  "  But  men  of  God,  filled  with  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  becoming  prophets,  inspired  by  God  Him- 
self, and  being  enlightened,  were  taught  of  God,  and 
were  holy  and  righteous.  Wherefore  they  obtained 
the  honour  to  become  the  instruments  of  God."* 

Irenasus,  bishop  of  Lyons,  a  still  earlier  witness, 
possesses  the  same  Scriptures,  and  regards  them  with 
the  like  veneration.  In  a  remarkable  passage  he 
emphasises  the  fact  that  in  the  New  Testament 
Books  we  have  all  the  light  we  possess  or  require 
regarding  the  way  of  life.  He  says  :  "  We  have  not 
received  the  knowledge  of  the  way  of  our  salvation 
by  any  others  than  those  by  whom  the  gospel  has 
been  brought  to  us  ;  which  gospel  they  first  preached, 
and  afterwards  by  the  will  of  God  committed  to 
writing,  that  it  might  be  for  time  to  come  the 
foundation  and  pillar  of  our  faith.  .  .  .  For  after 
that  our  Lord  rose  from  the  dead,  and  they  (the 
Apostles)  were  endued  from  above  with  the  power  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  coming  down  upon  them,  they 
received  a  perfect  knowledge  of  all  things."!  Dealing 
with  some  passages  in  Paul's  epistle  to  the  Romans, 
he  says  :  "  For  he,  foreseeing  by  the  Spirit,  that 
there  would  be  divisions  caused  by  evil  teachers.  .  . 
spake  after  this  manner."     Quoting  Matthew  i.  18, 

♦See  Lardner,  WofU%,  ii.,  pp.  211-214.       t  Aiv.  Hat.,  iii  ,  i. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  51 

he  argues  :  "  But  the  Holy  Spirit,  foreseeing  there 
would  be  deceivers,  and  guarding  beforehand  against 
their  deceit,  says  by  Matthew  :  'Now  the  birth  of 
Christ  was  on  this  wise  ; '  "  and  in  another  place  : 
"  Well  knowing  that  the  Scriptures  are  perfect,  as 
being  dictated  by  the  Word  of  God  and  His  Spirit." 
And  he  adds  :  "  A  heavy  punishment  awaits  those 
who  add  to,  or  take  from,  the  Scriptures." 

Here  also,  then,  we  look  in  vain  for  any  trace  of 
development  in  the  estimate  of  the  Books'  of  the 
New  Testament.  They  are  viewed  as  a  unity — as  a 
completed  statement  of  the  will  of  God ;  and  they 
are  received  as  God's  own  revelation  of  His  will.  A 
comparatively  recent  discovery  has  shown  how  com- 
pletely the  New  Testament  was  accepted  before  the 
middle  of  the  second  century.  It  was  known  that 
Tatian  had  compiled  a  harmony  of  the  Gospels  about 
the  year  160.  Those  who  maintained  that  the 
Gospel  of  John  was  not  written  by  the  Apostle,  but 
was  a  late  production,  endeavoured  to  explain  away 
this  awkward  fact.  But  the  book,  which  had  been 
long  lost,  was  recovered  some  years  ago.  Tatian's 
Diatessaron  ("  one  from  four  "),  or  Harmony,  begins 
with  the  opening  words  of  John's  Gospel.  Within  forty 
years,  therefore,  after  John's  death,  all  four  Gospels 
had  been  received  by  the  Churches  scattered  over  at 
least  the  eastern  portion  of  the  Roman  empire  ;  and 
Christians  had  been  even  then  so  fully  and  so  long 
acquainted  with  them  that  a  book,  which  would  blend 
their  testimony  into  one  continuous  narrative,  was 
felt  to  be  desirable. 


52  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 


CHAPTER   IV. 

Is  THE  Estimation,  in  which  the  Books  of  the 

New  Testament  were  held,  a   Development  ? 

(Continued.) 

SIMILAR  indications  of  the  early  existence  and 
use  of  the  New  Testament  Books  are  encoun- 
tered as  we  approach  still  nearer  the  commencement 
of  the  Christian  era.  Justin  Martyr,  a  native  of  the 
town  of  Sichem  in  Samaria,  after  having  studied  in 
various  schools  of  philosophy,  became  acquainted  with 
Christianity  and  embraced  it  as  "the  only  certain 
and  useful  philosophy."  He  was  known  as  a  writer 
on  Christianity  as  early  as  140  a.d.  He  tells  us  that 
the  Gospels  were  read  on  the  Lord's  Day  in  the 
Christian  gatherings.  These  Gospels  were  at  that 
time  not  only  in  the  hands  of  believers,  but  were 
also  read  by  unbelievers.  In  one  of  his  works — A 
Dialogue  with  Trypho,  a  Jew — Justin  represents 
Trypho  as  saying  :  "  I  am  sensible  that  the  precepts 
in  your  Gospel,  as  it  is  called,  are  so  great  and 
wonderful,  that  I  think  it  impossible  for  any  man  to 
keep  them.  For  I  have  been  at  the  pains  to  read 
them."  There  are  references  in  those  of  Justin's 
genuine  writings  which  have  come  down  to  us,  to  all 
the  four  Gospels,  to  the  Acts,  to  the  Epistles, 
including  that  to  the  Hebrews  and  2  Peter,  and  to 
the  Book  of  Revelation. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  53 

But  we  are  able,  in  the  providence  of  God,  to 
mount  still  higher  along  the  line  of  historic  testimony, 
and  to  plant  our  feet  on  the  very  border  line  between 
the  iVpostolic  age  and  after  times.  Eusebius  states 
that  in  his  time  five  books  were  in  existence,  which 
had  been  written  by  Papias,  who  flourished  about  the 
year  113  a.d.  Irenaeus  tells  us  that  Papias  was  a 
hearer  of  John  and  a  companion  of  Polycarp,  to 
whom  I  shall  refer  immediately.  Papias  himself 
informs  us  that  he  had  conversed  with  the  daughters 
of  Philip  the  Evangelist.  He  not  only  had  the  four 
Gospels,  but  even  gives  us  his  notions  as  to  how  these 
originated.  He  refers  also  to  i  Peter,  i  John,  and 
Revelation.  These  references  may  be  accepted  as  a 
plain  intimation  that  in  his  time  there  was  already  a 
collection  of  the  New  Testament  Books  of  which  he 
and  his  readers  were  diligent  students.  There  is  an 
expression  which  he  uses  in  speaking  of  the  Gospel 
of  Matthew,  which  has  been  strangely  misunderstood, 
but  which  is  an  eloquent  testimony  to  the  place  then 
assigned  to  the  New  Testament  Scripture  by  the' 
Christian  Church.  He  believed  that  this  Gospel  had 
been  origlhally  written  in  Hebrew  ;  but,  instead  of 
using  the  term  "  Gospel,"  so  familiar  to  the  Churches 
afterwards,  he  speaks  of  it  as  the  logia  of  Matthew.  The 
scholarship  of  our  time  shows  a  touching  reverence 
for  "authorities,"  and  even  the  blunders  of  a  leading 
scholar  are  accepted  and  repeated  with  unquestioning 
confidence.  In  this  way  only  is  one  able  to  explain 
how  the  logia  are  now  almost  universally  spoken  of 
as  "  the  sayings,"  or  "  the  discourses  "  of  IMatthew. 


54  The  Bible :    its  Stricchire  and  Purpose. 

The  word  has  no  such  meaning,  and  has  been  con- 
founded with  a  similar  Greek  term.  The  Logia  of 
Matthew  are  not  "the  discourses,*'  but  "the  divine 
oracles"  of  Matthew.  The  use  of  this  term  by 
Papias  is  a  confession  that  before  the  close  of  the 
first  century,  the  Gospels  were  universally  accepted 
by  the  Churches  as  "  the  Oracles  of  God." 

Eusebius,  speaking  of  the  Christian  Church  during 
the  reign  of  the  Emperor  Trajan,  and  basing  his 
remarks  upon  documents  which  have  not  come  down 
to  us,  says  :  "Among  those  who  were  illustrious  at 
that  time  was  Quadratus,  who,  together  with  the 
daughters  of  Philip,  is  said  to  have  enjoyed  the  gift 
of  prophecy.  And,  beside  these,  there  were  at  that 
time  many  other  eminent  persons,  who  had  the  first 
rank  in  the  succession  of  the  Apostles ;  who,  being 
the  worthy  disciples  of  such  men,  everywhere  built  up 
the  Churches,  the  foundations  of  which  had  been  laid 
by  the  Apostles  ;  extending  likewise  their  preaching 
yet  farther,  and  scattering  abroad  the  salutary  seeds 
of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  all  over  the  world.  For 
many  of  the  disciples  of  that  time,  whose  souls  the 
Divine  Word  had  inspired  with  an  ardent  love  of 
philosophy,  first  fulfilled  our  Saviour's  precept,  dis- 
tributing their  substance  to  the  necessitous;  then, 
travelling  abroad,  they  performed  the  work  of 
evangelists,  being  ambitious  to  preach  Christ,  and 
deliver  the  Scripture  of  the  Divine  Gospels."* 

The  reign  of  Trajan  extended  from  g8  a.d.  to 
117  A.D.     In  this  early  period,  therefore,  theGosjiels 

*  Hiit.  Eccl.,  iii.  37- 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  55 

were  in  existence  and  were  recognised  as  authoritative 
and  Divine.  "I  think  it  must  be  allowed,"  says 
Lardner,*  "  that  he  (Eusebius)  was  fully  persuaded 
that  before  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Trajan,  who  died 
in  117,  the  Gospels  were  well  known,  and  collected 
together  ;  and  they  who  preached  the  doctrine  of 
Christ  to  those  who  had  not  heard  it,  carried  the 
Gospels  with  them  and  delivered  them  to  their 
converts.  They  must,  therefore,  have  been  before 
this  for  some  time  in  use,  and  in  the  highest  esteem 
in  the  Churches  planted  by  the  Apostles.  It  must 
have  been  no  difficult  thing  at  that  time  to  know  the 
genuineness  of  writings  which  were  of  so  great 
authority  with  them.  And  certainly  they  were  well 
assured  of  it,  or  they  had  not  so  highly  esteemed 
them." 

Two  others,  whose  labours  and  steadfastness  as 
martyrs  left  enduring  memories  behind  them,  have 
shed  precious  Hght  upon  the  time  which  followed 
immediately  upon  the  days  of  the  Apostles.  In  a 
letter  which  Irenaeus  wrote  to  one  Florinus,  who  had 
turned  aside  from  the  truth,  he  makes  the  following 
reference  to  Polycarp.  "  I  saw  you,  when  I  was  very 
young,"  he  says,  "  in  the  Lower  Asia  with  Polycarp. 
For  I  better  remember  the  affairs  of  that  time  than 
those  which  have  lately  happened  ;  the  things  which 
we  learn  in  our  childhood  growing  up  with  the  soul, 
and  uniting  themselves  to  it.  Insomuch  that  I  can 
tell  the  place  in  which  the  blessed  Polycarp  sat  and 
taught,-  and  his  going  out  and  coming  in,  and  the 

*  Vol.  ii.,  p.  115. 


56  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

manner  of  his  life,  and  the  form  of  his  person,  and 
the  discourses  he  made  to  the  people ;  and  how  he 
related  his  conversation  with  John  and  others  who 
had  seen  the  Lord  ;  and  how  he  related  their 
sa3'ings,  and  what  he  had  heard  from  them  concern- 
ing the  Lord  ;  both  concerning  His  miracles  and  His 
doctrine,  as  he  had  received  them  from  the  eye- 
witnesses of  the  Word  of  Life,  all  which  Polycarp 
related  agreeably  to  the  Scriptures.  These  things  I 
then,  through  the  mercy  of  God  toward  me,  diligently 
heard  and  attended  to,  recording  them  not  on  paper, 
but  upon  my  heart.  And  through  the  grace  of  God 
I  continually  renew  the  remembrance  of  them." 

Polycarp's  martyrdom  is  now  believed  to  have 
taken  place  in  the  year  155  a.d.*  He  declared  before 
the  Roman  Proconsul  that  he  had  served  Christ 
eighty  and  six  years.  Some  have  supposed  that  this 
refers  to  the  period  during  which  he  had  been  bishop 
of  Smyrna,  others  to  the  time  which  had  elapsed 
since  his  conversion,  and  others  again  to  the  entire 
period  of  his  natural  life.  The  second  interpretation 
is  no  doubt  to  be  preferred  ;  but  even,  if  we  adopt 
the  last,  Polycarp's  birth  takes  us  back  to  the  year 
69  A.D.  He  was,  therefore,  at  the  lowest  calculation 
31  years  old  when  the  Apostle  John  died,  and  a 
dozen  years  or  more  of  his  Christian  life  must  have 
been  passed  before  the  end  of  the  first  century.  This 
takes  us  right  back  into  the  Apostolic  times.  What, 
then,  have  Polycarp  and  the  age  in  which  he  lives  to 
say  of  the  Scriptures  of  the  New  Testament  ? 

♦  Lightfoot,  Apostolic  Fathers,  Part  ii.,  vol.  i.,  p.  653. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  57 

He  refers  to  Books  of  the  New  Testament  as 
already  well  known.  He  asks  in  his  letter  to  the 
Church  at  Philippi :  "  Do  we  not  know  that  the 
saints  shall  judge  the  world,  as  Paul  teaches?" 
This  is  a  reference  to  i  Corinthians  vi.  3,  and  the 
manner  in  which  it  is  referred  to  plainly  implies  that 
this  epistle  was  received  as  part  of  the  Word  of  God. 
And  that  the  New  Testament  Books  ivere  received 
and  used  as  Scripture  even  then  is  abundantly  clear 
from  the  following  passage  in  the  same  letter  :  "  For 
I  trust  that  ye  are  well  exercised  in  the  Holy 
Scriptures— As  in  these  Scriptures  it  is  said  :  *  Be  ye 
angry  and  sin  not.'  And  '  Let  not  the  sun  go  down 
upon  your  wrath.'"  This  is  a  quotation  from 
Ephesians  iv.  26.  He  also  distinctly  sets  the 
Apostle  Paul  upon  a  level  that  is  far  above  his  own. 
Writing  still  to  the  same  Church,  he  says  :  "  For 
neither  I,  nor  any  one  like  me,  can  come  up  to  the 
wisdom  of  the  blessed  and  renowned  Paul,  who,  when 
absent,  wrote  to  you  an  epistle  into  which,  if  you 
look,  you  will  be  able  to  edify  yourselves  in  the  faith 
which  has  been  delivered  to  you." 

The  other  witness  who  takes  us  back  into  the 
Apostolic  times  is  Ignatius,  who  also  sealed  his 
testimony  with  his  blood.  His  martyrdom  took 
place  about  110  a.d.,  and  he  was  made  bishop  of 
Antioch  in  the  year  69,  that  is,  within  forty  years 
after  the  death  of  our  Lord.  In  his  letter  to  the 
Philadelphians  he  writes,  as  he  is  on  his  way  to  die  : 
"  I  cling  to  the  Gospel  as  the  flesh  of  Christ,  and  to 
the  Apostles  as  the  presbyters  of  the  Church,     Ye?, 


53  The  Bible :    its  Striidure  and  Purpose. 

and  we  love  the  prophets  also,  because  they  foretold 
the  Gospel  and  awaited  the  coming  of  Christ."* 
Here  the  New  Testament  is  referred  to  as  consisting 
of  two  parts — the  Gospel  and  the  Apostles.  Even 
in  the  time  of  Ignatius,  therefore,  the  New  Testament 
Books  were  received  as  Scripture,  were  collected 
together,  and  were  apparently  classified  as  we  have 
them  now. 

According  to  Lightfoott  there  are  references  in 
Polycarp's  epistle  to  eighteen  Book^  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, including  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  In  the 
genuine  letters  of  Ignatius,  every  Book  of  the  New 
Testament  is  referred  to  with  the  exception  of 
2  Thessalonians,  2  John,  Jude,  and  Revelation.  It 
might  well  have  been  concluded,  therefore,  that  the 
acceptance  of  the  New  Testament  as  God's  Word, 
even  in  apostolic  times,  is  fully  demonstrated.  Prof. 
Rendel  Harris,  speaking  of  the  totally  unexpected 
recovery  of  Tatian's  Diatessaron,  which  I  have  already 
mentioned,  writes:  "There  are  few  people,  as  yet, 
who  realise  how  revolutionary  this  discovery  has 
been  in  the  question  of  the  genuineness  and  authen- 
ticity of  the  New  Testament  records,  and  how  many 
idle  criticisms  it  has  silenced."  |  But,  as  if  to  meet 
the  confident  gainsaying  of  our  time,  recent  years 
have  furnished  still  ampler  testimony.  The  same 
writer  says :  "  Some  days  since,  as  I  was  examining 
a  list  of  patristic  authorities,  which  a  modern  scholar 
had  indicated  as  necessary  ground  to  be  worked  over 

♦  Lightfoot,  Apostolic  Fathers,  Part  ii.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  259.     +  Ibid.,  pp.  i, 107-1, lifl 
I  The  Newly  Recovered  Gospel  of  St.  Peter,  p.  8 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  59 

in  search  of  non-canonical  parallels  to  the  Christian 
Gospels,  my  attention  was  caught  by  the  large  pro- 
portion of  the  material  cited  which  had  become  known 
within  the  last  three  years  ;  for,  while  there  were  a 
number  of  authorities  referred  to  whose  contents  have 
been  known  from  very  early  times,  it  would  be  no 
exaggeration  to  say  that  more  than  half  the  books  in 
question  had  seen  the  light,  either  wholly  or  in  part, 
within  the  last  five-and-twenty  years."* 

For  these  results  we  are  largely  indebted  to  Prof. 
Rendel  Harris  himself,  and  to  his  industrious  fellow- 
labourers.  Eusebius  and  Jerome  mention  an  Apology 
for  the  Christians  presented  to  the  Emperor  Adrian 
by  Aristides,  an  Athenian  philosopher.  Jerome  adds 
that  Justin  Martyr  in  his  Apology  had  imitated  that 
of  Aristides.  This  is  important,  as  it  fixes  the  high 
antiquity  of  the  latter  work.  But  beyond  these 
references  there  was  no  further  information  regarding 
it  obtainable.  The  loss  of  this  work  was  naturally 
the  subject  of  deep  regret,  as  it  carried  us  back  to 
sometime  between  124  a.d.  and  140  a.d.  But,  thanks 
to  the  enterprise  of  the  Professor,  this  precious  rehc 
has  now  been  recovered.  He  found,  in  one  of  the 
seldom-visited  libraries  of  the  Convent  of  St. 
Catherine,  at  Mount  Sinai,  a  translation  of  this  long- 
lost  Apology.  It  has  often  been  said  that  the  doctrine 
of  the  Deity  of  our  Lord  is  a  'comparatively  late 
development.  That  will  no  longer  be  maintained  by 
any  honest  man  who  is  acquainted  with  this  new 
evidence.  "  The  Christians,"  says  Aristides,  "reckon 

*  Pages  3,  4. 


6o  The  Bible  :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

the  beginning  of  their  religion  from  Jesus  Christ,  who 
is  named  the  Son  of  God  most  High ;  and  it  is  said 
that  God  came  down  from  heaven,  and  from  a  Hebrew 
virgin  took  and  clad  Himself  with  flesh,  and  in  a 
daughter  of  man  there  dwelt  the  Son  of  God.  This 
is  taught,"  he  adds,  V  from  that  Gospel  which  a 
little  while  ago  was  spoken  among  them  as  being 
preached ;  wherein  if  ye  also  will  read,  ye  will  com- 
prehend the  power  that  is  upon  it." 

The  Gospels  were  accordingly  in  the  possession 
of  Aristides  and  of  the  Christian  Church,  and  they 
could  have  been  obtained  by  the  Emperor.  There  are 
other  and  similar  references  to  the  New  Testament. 
"  Now  the  Christians,  O  king,"  he  writes,  "  by  going 
about  and  seeking  have  found  the  truth ;  and  as  we 
have  comprehended  from  their  writings,  they  are 
nearer  to  the  truth  and  to  exact  knowledge  than  the 
rest  of  the  people."  '"Truly,"  he  says  in  another 
place,  "  this  is  a  new  people,  and  there  is  something 
Divine  mingled  with  it.  Take  now  their  writings  and 
read  in  them;  and  lo  !  ye  will  find  that  not  of  myself 
have  I  brought  these  things  forward,  nor  as  their 
advocate  have  I  said  them,  but  as  I  have  read  in  their 
writings,  these  things  I  firmly  believe,  and  those 
things  which  are  to  come."  And  again:  "Let  all 
those  then  approach  to  the  gateway  of  light  who  do 
not  know  God,  and  let  them  receive  incorruptible 
words,  those  which  are  so  always  and  from  eternity ;  let 
them,  therefore,  anticipate  the  dread  judgment  which 
is  to  come  by  Jesus  the  Messiah  upon  the  whole  race 
of  men."     Here  it  is  impossible  not  to  see  that  the 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  6i 

New  Testament  was  already  in  existence,  was  the 
acknowledged  source  of  enlightenment,  and  that  its 
words  were  then  commended  even  to  an  Emperor  as 
*'  incorruptible  words,  which  are  so  always  and  from 
eternity."  That  testimony  takes  us  back  to  the  very 
commencement  of  the  second  century.  It  proves 
that  the  canon  of  the  New  Testament  had  settled 
itself,  and  that  the  belief  in  the  absolute  incorruptible- 
ness  and  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures  is  no  develop- 
ment, but  was  the  doctrine  of  the  Apostolic  time. 

That  discovery  was  made  in  i88g.  In  1892,  Mrs. 
Lewis  and  her  sister,  Mrs.  Gibson,  visited  the  same 
convent,  and  made  a  further  discovery.  In  examining 
one  of  the  manuscripts,  she  noticed  that  underneath 
the  writing  there  lay  an  earlier  one  in  red  ink.  Some 
monk  in  the  eighth  century  had  used  this  ancient 
manuscript  to  write  upon  the  vellum  a  history  of 
some  female  saints.  The  older  writing,  which  was 
still  readable,  proved  to  be  an  early — the  earliest, 
indeed,  which  we  now  possess — Syriac  version  of  the 
Gospels.  Canon  Cureton  had  previously  discovered 
fragments  of  a  Syriac  translation  which  corresponded 
with  Tatian's  Harmony,  and  was  consequently  proved 
to  be  not  later  than  120  a.d.  But  a  closer  study  of 
Mrs.  Lewis's  version  shows  that  this  was  a  translation 
which  had  been  set  aside  by  the  Ciiretonian.  Cerinthus, 
a  heretic  who  lived  in  the  Apostolic  period,  and  who 
denied  the  Incarnation,  had  founded  a  sect,  which, 
like  every  other,  was  eager  to  propagate  its  special 
doctrines.  It  had  sought  to  do  this  by  corrupting 
the  Scripture.    There  is  evidence  that  the  Curetonian 


62  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

version  had  this  spurious  translation  in  view.  This 
attempt  to  adulterate  the  Word  of  God  must  conse- 
quently be  older  than  120  a.d.,  and  the  genuine 
Gospels  older  again  than  it.  This  takes  us  right  into 
the  first  century.  The  New  Testament  Canon  had 
made  itself  even  then,  and  was  esteemed  the  rule  of 
faith  and  life. 

A  discovery  made  in  Egypt  by  the  French  Arch^o- 
logical  Mission,  and  published  also  in  1892,  has 
yielded  equally  forcible  testimony  from  another  side. 
There  was  another  early  sect,  the  Docetae,  who 
denied  the  Lord's  true  humanity,  as  the  Cerinthians 
denied  His  true  Deity.  They  pursued  similar  tactics, 
and  published  a  Gospel  which  was  represented  as 
being  that  of  St.  Peter.  Among  the  manuscripts 
discovered  by  the  French  Mission  was  a  fragment 
of  this  long-lost  work.  It  embraces  the  latter  part 
of  the  Gospel  History,  from  the  washing  of  Pilate's 
hands  to  the  return  of  the  disciples  to  Galilee  after 
the  resurrection.  It  contains  about  1,600  words. 
It  is  really  a  harmony  of  the  Gospels,  with  slight 
alterations  and  additions  to  maintain  the  views  of 
the  sect.  It  quotes  from  the  Gospel  of  John  and  from 
each  of  the  other  three.  We  know,  from  a  state- 
ment by  Eusebius,  that  Serapion,  Bishop  of  Antioch, 
found  copies  of  this  work  extant  in  190  A.D.  Its 
composition  must  have  taken  place  before — probably 
long  before — that  time.  Justin  Martyr,  the  teacher 
and  friend  of  Tatian,  quotes  from  it.  This  takes  us 
probably  up  to  120  a.d.  The  four  Gospels  were, 
therefore,  already  in  the  possession  of  the  Churches 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  6^ 

by  the  end  of  the  first  century.  It  is  a  striking  fact 
that  all  these  discoveries,  without  exception,  have 
been  directly  opposed  to  the  theories  of  rationalism, 
and  have  confirmed  more  conclusively  the  correctness 
of  the  constant  belief  of  the  Christian  Church. 
Harnack  has  openly  acknow^ledged  the  defeat  of  his 
party.  *'  There  was,"  he  says,  "a  time— the  general 
pubhc  indeed  have  not  got  beyond  it  — in  which 
the  oldest  Christian  hterature,  including  the  New 
Testament,  was  looked  upon  as  a  tissue  of  deceptions 
and  forgeries.  That  time  is  passed.  For  science  it 
was  an  episode  in  which  it  learned  much,  and  after 
which  it  has  much  to  forget.  .  .  The  oldest  hterature 
of  the  Church  in  all  main  points  and  most  details,  is 
genuine  and  trustworthy,  from  the  standpoint  of 
literary  criticism.  .  .  .  The  chronological  succession 
in  which  tradition  has  arranged  the  original  docu- 
ments of  Christianity  is,  in  all  essential  points,  from 
the  epistles  of  St.  Paul  to  the  writings  of  Irensus, 
correct,  and  compels  the  historian  to  keep  clear  of  all 
hypotheses  concerning'  the  course  of  events  which 
conflict  with  this  succession." 

Summing  up  now  the  results  of  our  inquiry,  what  is 
our  finding  ?  We  have  seen  that  in  the  fourth  century 
the  New  Testament  was  enthroned  in  the  midst  of  the 
Council  of  Nic£ea  as  the  authority  to  which  emperor 
and  bishops  had  alike  to  bow.  We  have  gone  back 
into  the  third  century  and  have  inquired  whether 
this  collection  of  Books  is  regarded  with  less 
reverence  there  ;  and  the  reverence  is  as  deep  as  in 
;the  fourth.     We  passed  up  into  the  second  century 


64  The  Bible  :    Us  Siricchire  and  Purpose. 

and  looked  for  traces  of  growth  in  this  estimate  of 
the  New  Testament  Scriptures  ;  and  we  have  found 
none.  We  have,  last  of  all,  gone  right  up  into 
Apostolic  times  and  asked  whether  there,  before  the 
collection  is  completed,  and  while  the  ink,  so  to  say, 
is  scarcely  dry  upon  the  sacred  page,  there  is  any 
lessened  reverence.  We  have  listened  to  the  men 
who  knew  the  Apostles,  and  whose  estimate  is  the 
estimate  of  the  time  when  the  Books  were  written 
and  handed  to  the  Churches.  We  have  asked  ihem 
whether  these  Books  as  they  are  then  received  are 
regarded  as  ordinary  literature  ;  and  the  answer  has 
been  an  emphatic  "  No."  These  Books  were  never 
placed  on  a  level  with  the  other  books  of  their  time. 
They  were  received  from  the  very  first  day  of  their 
existence  as  a  fountain  of  heavenly  grace,  a  source 
of  Divine  light.  They  were  to  the  men  of  the 
Apostolic  times  what  they  have  been  to  Christian 
men  of  after  ages,  and  what  they  are  to  us  now — the 
Word  of  God.  In  other  words,  the  notion  that  the 
Books  of  the  New  Testament  were  first  of  all 
regarded  as  ordinary  literature,  and  then,  as 
advancing  time  encircled  the  memory  of  the 
Apostles  with  a  halo  of  glory,  were  reverenced  as 
sacred,  is  a  dream.  And,  if  we  are  to  tell  the  whole 
truth,  we  must  go  farther  and  say  that  it  is  worse 
than  a  dream.  It  is  a  baseless  slander  upon  that 
which  is  the  highest  of  all  God's  earthly  gifts,  save 
the  gift  of  His  Son. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  65 


CHAPTER    V. 

The  Claims  made  by  the  New  Testament 
Writers. 


IT  is  by  this  time  perfectly  clear  that  the  veneration 
of  the  New  Testament  as  the  Word  of  God  is 
not  a  late  growth.  It  was  the  conviction  of  the 
Apostolic  Church.  The  Books  were  received  from 
the  first  as  the  Divine  Oracles.  But  the  question 
which  has  occupied  us  throughout  the  last  two 
chapters  is  now  exchanged  for  another.  This 
estimation  in  which  these  Books  are  held  is  not 
a  development.  It  was  there  unchanged,  and  un- 
challenged, at  the  very  beginning.  How  are  we  to 
account  for  this  ?  If  this  position  was  claimed  for 
them  by  the  writers,  we  should  understand  the 
matter  at  once.  If  the  Books  were  handed  to  the 
Churches  by  Apostolic  hands  as  gifts  from  God  ;  if 
they  were  given  over  to  them,  not  as  men's  words, 
but  as  His,  then  the  very  faith  begotten  in  those 
behevers  by  the  Spirit  of  God  would  have  ensured 
the  devout  reception  of  these  writings  as  part  of  the 
Sacred  Scriptures.  Was  this  declaration  made  ? 
Were  the  Books  thus  handed  as  a  sacred  trust  to 
the  Churches  ? 

It  might  be  argued  from  the  reverence  with  which 
the  New  Testament  writings  were  received  in  the 
Apostolic  times  that  this  assurance  must  have  been 


56  The  Bible :   its  Striccticrc  and  Purpose. 

given.  How  else  could  it  be  there,  and  how  else- 
could  it  have  been  suffered  to  continue  there  without 
being  rebuked  ?  It  might  also  have  happened  that 
no  other  way  than  this  of  answering  our  question 
was  left  to  us.  For  the  assurance  might  very  well 
have  been  given  verbally  and  in  the  course  of  the 
personal  ministry  of  the  Apostles.  But  Providentially 
more  was  done  than  this.  The  claim  is  embedded  in 
the  Books.  Luke,  for  example,  gives  us  an  account 
of  the  origin  of  his  Gospel  in  a  passage  which  suffers 
from  an  unhappy  rendering.  His  opening  words  are 
these:  "  Forasmuch  as  many  have  taken  in  hand  to 
set  forth  in  order  a  declaration  of  those  things  which 
are  most  surely  believed  among  us,  even  as  they 
delivered  them  to  us  who  from  the  beginning  were 
eye-witnesses  and  ministers  of  the  word,  it  seemed 
good^to  me  also,  having  had  perfect  understanding 
of  all  things /row  the.  very  first  (anothen),  to  write  unto 
thee,  most  excellent  Theophilus,  that  thou  mightest 
know  the  certainty  of  those  things  wherein  thou  hast 
been  instructed." 

Reading  the  words  hastily,  we  might  conclude 
that  they  imply  that  the  third  Gospel  had  a  purely 
natural  origin.  The  thought,  we  might  imagine, 
occurred  to  Luke  that  he  too,  knowing  so  much, 
might  also  write  an  account  of  the  life  and  sayings  of 
the  Lord  Jesus.  But  that  is  an  interpretation  which 
will  not  bear  reflection.  Why  should  he  have  entered 
a  field  which  was  already  so  fully  and  so  well  occupied  ? 
The  narratives  already  in  existence,  he  tells  us,  were 
numerous.     And  they  were  orderly  histories — they 


How  did  w^  get  the  Bible  ?  67 

had  undertaken  "  to  set  forth  in  order  a  declaration 
of  those  things  which  are  most  surely  believed  among 
us."  They  were  also  accurate.  They  were  faithful 
reports  of  the  Apostolic  teaching— "  even  as  they 
delivered  them  unto  us  who  from  the  first  were  eye- 
witnesses and  ministers  of  the  Word." 

There  seems,  therefore,  to  have  been  no  reason  for 

disturbmg  these  accounts  which  had  already  occupied 

the  field  unless  Luke  was  charged  to  bring  something 

that  was  still  better  and  that  was  authoritative.     And 

that  this  is  what  he  brings,  we  shall  be  convinced  if 

we  read  on     He  has  knowledge  which  none  of  these 

unaided  writers  has  possessed.    He  describes  himself  i 

as  "  havmg  h'd.d perfect  understanding,"  and  as  "having  | 

had  perfea  understandmg  of  all  things."     This  is 

surely  an  immense  claim  1  There  is  absolutely  nothing 

which  Luke  does  not  know,  and  there  is  nothing  which 

he  does  not  know  accurately!    It  is  impossible  to  add 

to  his  information,  or  to  correft  him  in  the  smallest 

matter !     Notice,  too,  what  it  is  that  he  is  going  to 

give  to  Theophilus,  and  through  him  to  give  to  us  in 

common  with  all  behevers.    It  is  not  that  Theophilus 

is  to  be  made  acquainted  with  new  fa(5ts.     No  doubt 

there  would  be  some  things  in  this  Gospel  new  to  him ; 

but  these  are  not  referred  to.   Theophilus  hks  already 

had  information ;  but  there  was  one  important  question 

which  must  have  made  itself  heard  from  time  to  time. 

Were  those  things  certain  ?     Could  the  information 

which  he  had  received  be  absolutely  depended  upon  ? 

It  is  that  question  which  Luke  is  now  to  answer. 

**  It  seemed  good  to  me,"  he  says,  "  to  write  unto 


68  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

thee,  most  excellent  Theophilus,  in  order  that  thou 
mightest  know — with  the  intent  that  thou  mightest 
know — THE  CERTAINTY  of  those  things  wherein 
thou  hast  been  instru6ted." 

Let  the  reader  once  more  mark  the  words.  It  is  not 
so  much  information  which  Luke  is  going  to  give.  The 
others  had  already  given  that.  But  he  brings  what  the 
others  did  not  give,  and  could  not  give — assurance  of 
the  absolute  truth  of  the  things  already  made  known  to 
Theophilus.  Now,  if  Luke  is  going  to  be  the  medium 
through  whom  One  shall  speak  that  "cannot  lie,"  and 
to  Whom  no  frailty  of  misapprehension  clings — if  he 
is  going  to  give  the  words  of  One  whose  every  word  is 
truth — we  can  appreciate  the  value  of  the  gift  which 
he  brings;  and  we  can  understand  why,  at  the  very 
commencement  of  his  Gospel,  he  contrasts  this  record 
of  his  with  the  uninspired  accounts  already  in  exist- 
ence. And  that  this  is  the  meaning  of  his  words  would 
have  been  abundantly  plain  but  for  the  translation  to 
which  I  have  already  referred.  Luke  is  made  to  say 
both  in  the  Revised  and  in  the  Authorised  Versions 
that  he  has  "  had  perfect  understanding  of  all  things 
from  the  very  first;  "  whereas  what  he  does  really  say  is 
that  he  has  "  had  perfe(5t  understanding  of  all  things 
FROM  ON  HIGH."  Dr.  John  Lightfoot,  in  his 
"  Hebrew  and  Talmudical  Exercitations  upon  St. 
Luke,"  has,  two  and  a-half  centuries  ago,  shown  the 
superiority  of  the  rendering  given  here.  *  The  word 
anothen,  which  is  here  rendered  in  our  version,  "from 
the  very  first,"  is  used  in  the  sense  of  "from  above" 

*  Collected  IVorks  (Pitman's  Edition),  vol.  xii. 

: 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  69 

again  and  again  in  the  New  Testament  itself.  *'  Every 
good  gift  and  every  perfecft  gift,"  says  James  (i.  17), 
"  is  anothen,"  that  is,  *'  is  from  above."  Twice  again 
he  uses  the  word,  and  both  times  in  the  same  sense. 
He  speaks  of  "  the  wisdom  which  is  anothen,"  "  from 
above."  It  occurs  twice  in  John's  Gospel  with  the 
same  meaning:  "Hethatcomethawo^Aew — from  above 
— is  above  all  "  (iii.  31) ;  and  "Jesus  answered.  Thou 
couldest  have  no  power  at  all  against  Me,  except  it 
were  given  thee  anothen — from  above"  (xix.  11).  It 
is  quite  true  that  the  word  is  used  in  the  sense  of  "  from 
the  beginning  "  in  Aas  xxvi.  5,  but  why  should  we 
deny  to  it  its  more  usual  sense  here— a  sense  which 
is  demanded  by  the  plain  intention  of  the  words  ? 

But  even  apart  from  this  necessary  correction, 
the  reader  will  see  that  this  Gospel  is  lianded  to 
Theophilus  and  to  the  Churches  through  him  as 
containing — what  no  mere  human  composition  could 
contain— absolute  assurance  as  to  the  truth  of  the 
Gospel  history.  It,  therefore,  took  a  position  at  once 
as  an  authoritative  record  of  the  Lord's  life  and 
words.  It  has  surprised  some  that  none  of  those 
praiseworthy,  but  unaided,  attempts  to  inform  the 
Churches  regarding  the  Lord's  life  and  ministry  has 
survived.  But  their  disappearance  is  fully  explained 
by  this  preface  to  Luke's  Gospel.  When  the  Churches 
were  supplied  with  the  inspired  Gospels,  the  others 
would  at  once  be  dispensed  with.  No  believer  would 
think  of  putting  man's  book  on  a  level  with  the  gift 
of  the  Spirit-"  the  oracles  of  God." 

There   are   two  significant  statements    in    Paul's 


yo  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

epistles  regarding  the  character  of  the  inspired 
addresses  which  he  and  the  other  Apostles  delivered 
to  the  Churches.  Writing  to  the  Thessalonians  >^ 
(i  Thess.  ii.  13)  he  says  :  "  For  this  cause  also  thank 
we  God  without  ceasing,  because,  when  ye  received 
the  Word  of  God  which  ye  heard  of  us,  ye  received 
it  not  as  the  word  of  men,  but  as  it  is  in  truth,  the  ^ 
Word  of  God,  which  effectually  worketh  also  in  you  ' 
who  believe."  Here  the  claim  is  made  that  the 
word  delivered  to  them  was  not  '"  the  word  of 
men  " — and,  therefore,  not  the  word  of  Paul  or  Peter 
or  John — but  "  as  it  is  in  truth — the  Word  of 
God."  The  reader  will  also  note  that  this  was  the 
impression  which  Paul's  communication  made  at  the 
very  outset.  The  Christians  at  Thessalonica  did 
not  require  to  be  told  that  it  was  God's  Word  and 
not  man's  word.  They  recognised  and  owned  it  as 
God's  own  message  to  them. 

How  far  the  inspiration  of  God's  Spirit  extended, 
and  in  how  full  a  sense  the  message  was  God's  word, 
the  Apostle  shows  when  writing  to  the  Corinthians. 
**  Now  we  have  received,"  he  says,  "  not  the  spirit 
of  the  world,  but  the  Spirit  which  is  of  God ;  that  we 
might  know  the  things  which  are  freely  given  us  of 
God.  Which  things  also  we  speak,  not  in  the  words 
which  man's  wisdom  teacheth,  but  (in  the  words) 
which  the  Holy  Ghost  teacheth  ;  comparing  spiritual 
things  with  spiritual"  (that  is,  interpreting  spiritual 
things  with  spiritual  words)  [i  Cor.  ii.  12,  13] .  ■ 
Here  the  Apostle  ascribes  the  things  which  he  has 
communicated,  or,  as  we  should  say,  the  thoughts  or 


How  did  we  gel  the  Bible  ?  71 

the  ideas,  directly  to  the  inspiration  of  the  Spirit  of 
God.  But  he  also  does  more.  He  ascribes  the  very 
forms  of  statement  which  he  uses  to  the  inspiration  of 
the  Spirit.  And  he  adds  the  reason  for  this  extension 
of  the  Spirit's  influence.  The  Spirit's  thoughts,  he 
says,  have  to  be  clothed  with  the  Spirit's  words.  If 
that  were  not  done,  man  might  err  in  their  expression, 
and  the  communication  sent  to  us  from  God  would 
thus  be  marred.  He,  therefore,  conveys  the  truth 
given  to  him  by  the  Spirit,  he  says,  not  in  statements 
fashioned  by  human  wisdom,  but  in  the  statements 
taught  by  the  Spirit.  He  thus  interprets,  he  adds, 
the  things  of  the  Spirit  by  the  words  of  the  Spirit. 
Is  it  conceivable,  then,  that  writings  placed  in  the 
hands  of  believing  men  with  such  a  description  as 
that — writings  whose  very  language  is  Divine — could 
ever  have  been  placed  upon  the  level  of  the  ordinary 
literature  of  the  period  ?  They  must  necessarily 
have  been  accepted  as  Scripture  from  the  first. 

We  have  besides  two  indications  that  the  Books 
of  the  New  Testament  were  placed,  as  a  matter  of 
course,  by  the  side  of  the  Books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. The  term  Scripture  (gmphe)  occurs  about 
fifty  times  in  the  New  Testament,  and  in  every  case 
it  refers  to  the  acknowledged  oracles  of  God — the 
Divinely  inspired  writings.  Bearing  this  in  mind, 
the  significance  of  the  following  passage  will  at  once 
be  seen.  Peter,  in  his  second  Epistle  (iii.  15,  16), 
thus  exhorts  us :  "  Account  that  the  longsuft'ering 
of  our  Lord  is  salvation  ;  even  as  our  beloved  brother 
Paul  also,  according  to  the  wisdom  given  unto  him. 


72  TJlc  Bible :    its  Sfruchtre  ayid  Purpose. 

hath  written  unto  you.  As  also  in  all  his  epistles, 
speaking  in  them  of  these  things ;  in  which  are  some 
things  hard  to  be  understood,  which  they  that  are 
unlearned  and  unstable  wrest,  as  they  do  also  the 
OTHER  Scriptures,  to  their  own  destruction."  Here 
the  expression — "  According  to  the  wisdom  given 
unto  him "  will  be  noticed.  It  was  wisdom  which 
was  entrusted  to  him  that  he  communicated  to  the 
Churches.  It  will  also  be  observed  that,  when  Peter 
penned  these  words,  a  large  number  of  Epistles — 
*'  all  his  epistles  " — had  been  written  by  Paul,  and 
were  in  the  hands  of  the  Christian  community. 
But  the  special  point,  to  which  I  ask  the  reader's 
attention,  is  the  rank  which  Peter  assigns  to  these 
letters  of  the  Apostle  Paul.  He  classes  them  in  that 
expression,  "as  they  do  also  the  other  Scriptures,"  with 
the  Sacred  Oracles ;  or,  to  speak  more  correctly,  he 
places  the  Oracles  of  God  by  the  side  of  the  letters 
of  Paul,  his  own  contemporary  !  The  Books  of  the 
Old  Testament  and  such  others  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment as  were  then  in  existence — all  these  are  "  the 
other  Scriptures,"  having  an  equally  lofty  place,  but 
no  higher  place,  than  the  Epistles  of  Paul. 

This  immediate  recognition,  and  complete  accept- 
ance, of  the  New  Testament  Books  is  shown  also  in 
a  reference  by  Paul  to  a  passage  in  the  Gospel  of 
Luke.  In  i  Tim.  v.  i8,  after  commanding  that  the 
need  of  those  who  labour  in  word  and  doctrine 
should  be  generously  ministered  to,  he  adds :  "  For 
the  Scripture  saith.  Thou  shalt  not  muzzle  the  ox 
that   treadeth   out    the  corn,  and,  The  labourer  is 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  73 

worthy  of  his  reward."  Now,  the  only  place  in  the 
entire  Bible  in  which  these  last  words  occur  is  in 
Luke  X.  7.  That  Gospel  was,  therefore,  already  in 
use  among  the  Churches ;  and  it  was  recognised  by 
them  as  no  less  Scripture  than  the  Old  Testament 
from  which  the  first  quotation  is  made  (Deut.  xxv.  4). 
Paul  does  not  need  to  contend  that  the  statement  in 
Luke  is  part  of  the  Word  of  God.  It  is  universally 
admitted  to  be  so.  No  one  dreams  that  the  sugges- 
tion is  possible  that  its  position  as  Scripture  requires 
to  be  vindicated. 

Quite  in  keeping  with  this  high  claim  for  the 
Books  which  they  handed  to  the  Churches  was  the 
care  of  the  NewTestamentwriters  that  nothing  should 
enter  into  these  writings  that  was  not  the  Spirit's 
distinct  message.  An  illustration  of  this  fidelity  is 
found  in  the  seventh  chapter  of  i  Corinthians.  The 
Church  at  Corinth  had  written  to  the  Apostle  desiring 
special  directions  in  circumstances  which  they  speci- 
fied. It  was  not  God's  will  that  these  directions 
should  be  given  by  Divine  authority.  God  gives  great 
guiding  principles,  but  He  does  not  multiply  com- 
mandments. These  principles,  easily  grasped,  and 
increasingly  understood  and  admired  and  loved  as 
they  are  obeyed,  are  an  education  to  the  spirit  of 
man.  They  are  light  in  whose  growing  brightness 
the  heart  rejoices.  But  a  multiplicity  of  directions 
would  extinguish  the  light.  An  over-loaded  memory 
would  be  substituted  for  an  enlightened  and  free 
judgment. 

These  Corinthians  were  as  yet,  however,  but  babes 


74  The  Bible  :    its  Sti'jicture  and  Purpose. 

in  Christ.  They  had  just  escaped  from  Greek  pollution 
and  darkness,  and  they  needed  to  be  taken  by  the 
hand  and  led  along  until  their  eyes  should  become 
accustomed  to  the  light.  And  so,  while  he  has  no 
Divine  command  to  give  them,  Paul  is  permitted  to 
guide  them  by  his  own  judgment.  Btd  this  is  carefully 
explained.  Whatever  is  not  God's  Word  is  clearly 
marked  off  from  that  which  is  the  Word  of  God. 
In  verse  6  he  writes :  "  But  I  speak  this  by  per- 
rnission  and  not  of  commandment";  verse  lo : 
"And  unto  the  married  I  command,  yet  not  I,  but 
the  Lord  "  ;  verse  12  :  "  But  to  the  rest  speak  I,  not 
the  Lord  " ;  again  in  verse  25  :  "  Now  concerning 
virgins  I  have  no  commandment  of  the  Lord ;  yet  I 
give  my  judgment,  as  one  that  hath  obtained  mercy 
of  the  Lord  to  be  faithful  "  ;  and  the  whole  concludes 
(verse  40)  with  the  following :  "  But  she  is  happier 
if  she  so  abide,  after  my  judgment :  and  I  think  also 
that  I  have  the  Spirit  of  God."  The  reader  will 
observe  how  unusual  this  note  of  hesitancy  is  in  the 
Scripture.  It  stands  alone.  We  may  search  through 
Book  after  Book  and  not  find  a  like  passage.  A 
great  deal  is  said  to-day  about  "  the  human  element  " 
in  the  Scripture ;  and  what  the  phrase  is  intended  to 
convey  is  not  that  man  co-operated  with  God  in 
conveying  to  us  a  wholly  Divine  message ;  but  that 
part  of  the  Bible  is  man's  word,  and  some  other 
portion  of  it  is  God's  Word.  Now,  here  is  enough 
to  supply  correction  for  that  notion.  For,  while  we 
have  an  undoubted  "  human  element,"  the  human 
j)ortion  is  carefully  marked  off  from  the  other.     It  is 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  75 

limited  and  accurately  defined.  It  is  marked,  too, 
as  human  by  hesitation  and  timidity,  which  tell  us 
that  the  Divine  Spirit  is  temporarily  withdrawn, 
and  that  the  human  spirit  fears  and  trembles  as  it 
stands  alone  and  forsaken  for  the  moment  in  the 
holy  place.  When  the  Spirit  returns,  the  old,  full 
note  is  at  once  resumed,  and  every  trace  of  tremb- 
ling and  of  hesitation  has  vanished.  The  very } 
confidence  and  decision  which  are  so  strongly 
characteristic  of  the  Scriptures  are,  therefore,  another 
claim  to  Divine  authority;  and  it  is  one  which  per- 
vades the  Bible  from  Genesis  to  Revelation. 


CHAPTER  VI. 
How  THE  Canon  was  Formed. 


IT  will  now  be  understood  that  the  conclusion  to 
which  those  have  come,  who  have  investigated 
the  facts,  namely,  that  the  Canon  made  itself,  is 
abundantly  justified.  The  notion  that  the  adoption 
of  these  Books  was  the  result  of  ecclesiastical  in- 
trigue or  compulsion  cannot  be  entertained  by  any 
competent  investigator.  Speaking  of  the  latter  part 
of  the  second  century.  Dr.  Theodore  Zahn  says  : 
"  The  expressions  of  the  writers  of  this  generation 
render  it  impossible  to  hold  that  this  collection  of 
books  t>f  public  edification  had  only  arisen  in  the  life- 
time of  Irenseus,  and  put  an  end  to  some  previous 


76  The  Bible:    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

state  of  chaos.  The  Church  had  no  organs  or  modes 
of  administration  at  that  time  capable  of  dislodging 
books  introduced  into  Divine  worship  or  replacing 
them  in  the  autonomous  provincial  congregations 
with  such  uniform  effect.  Had  all  the  various  bishops 
united  in  the  conspiracy,  such  a  coup  d'  Stat  would, 
nevertheless,  have  foundered  on  the  stubborn  rock  of 
provincial  independence.  In  any  case,  a  conflict  would 
have  been  kindled  round  the  New  Testament  more 
lasting,  and  leaving  deeper  traces  on  ecclesiastical 
history,  than  any  battles  about  Easter  or  the  '  new 
prophets.'"  And,  he  adds,  that  "it  is  an  assured  fact 
that,  about  the  years  80 — no  a.d.,  both  the  four-fold 
Gospel  and  the  body  of  thirteen  Pauline  Epistles  were 
in  existence,  and  had  been  introduced  into  the  Divine 
worship  of  the  congregations  gathered  out  of  heathen- 
ism along  the  whole  line  from  Antioch  to  Rome."  * 

The  only  tenable  explanation  of  this  wide-spread 
and  unquestoning  acceptance  of  the  New  Testament 
Scripture  is,  that  the  Churches  treasured  it  from 
the  first  as  Divine.  As  the  Books  were  given,  they 
were  received,  "not  as  the  word  of  man,  but,  as 
they  are  in  truth,  the  Word  of  God."  The  New 
Testament  did  not  attain  its  high  place  because  a 
number  of  leading  men  among  the  early  Christians 
agreed  to  give  it  that  place.  The  place  was  assumed 
by  each  Book  as  it  was  handed  to  the  Churches  by 
the  inspired  writer.  "The  primitive  Church,"  says 
Gaussen,  "during  her  militant  and  triumphant  march 
through  the  first  half  century  of  her  existence,  saw 

♦  Grutiilriss  der  Geschichte  des  N.  T.  Kanons  (1901),  pp.  26,  40. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  77 

her  New  Testament  Canon  forming  in  her  hand,  as 
a  nosegay  is  formed  in  the  hand  of  a  lady  walking 
through  plots  of  flowers,  with  the  proprietor  of  the 
garden  by  her  side.  As  she  advances,  the  latter 
presents  to  her  flower  after  flower,  till  she  finds  her- 
self in  possession  of  an  entire  bunch.  And,  just  as 
the  nosegay  attracts  admiring  attention  before  it  is 
filled  up,  and  as  soon  as  the  first  few  flowers  have 
been  put  together,  so  the  New  Testament  Canon 
began  to  exist  for  the  Christian  Church  from  the 
moment  theearliest  portions  of  the  inspired  Scriptures 
had  been  put  into  her  hands."* 

A  fact,  which  has  been  a  source  of  trouble  to  some 
minds,  forms  a  striking  testimony  to  the  correctness 
of  what  has  just  been  said.  The  whole  of  the  New 
Testament  seems  to  have  been  written  within  the  last 
sixty  years  of  the  first  century.  At  the  commencement 
of  this  period  the  number  of  Churches  and  of  believers 
was  comparatively  small,  and  these  opening  years  of 
the  Church's  long  and  troubled  life  were,  on  the  whole, 
peaceful.  But  towards  the  end  of  the  first  century  the 
conditions  were  completely  changed.  The  Churches 
had  been  vastly  multiplied,  and  they  were  being  over- 
whelmed with  trouble.  The  Books  written  in  the 
earlier  part  of  the  period,  when  the  Churches  were 
fewer  and  were  in  quietness,  we  should  expect  to  have 
been  received  at  once  and  universally.  Those  written 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  time  would  have  greater 
difiiculty  in  obtaining  universal  recognition,  seeing 
that  the  Churches  were  more  widely  spread  abroad, 

*  The  Canon  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  p.  15. 


78  The  Bible :   its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

and  that  communication  between  them  must  have 
been  carried  on  with  difficulty.  Now  this  is  just  what 
happened.  The  Books,  which  were  written  at  the 
beginning,  were  universally  received.  These  were 
the  four  Gospels,  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  the 
thirteen  Epistles  of  Paul,  the  First  Epistle  of  Peter, 
and  the  First  Epistle  of  John.  The  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  and  the  Book  of  Revelation  (which,  though 
written  late,  and  probably  last  of  all,  came  from  the 
last  of  the  x\postles,  on  whom  all  eyes  w^re  fixed)  were 
universally  received  among  the  Eastern  Churches  at 
the  beginning,  and  were  only  questioned  afterwards 
in  certain  quarters,  because  of  the  use  made  of  them 
in  opposition  to  views  then  generally  entertained.  The 
other  epistles — James,  Jude,  2  Peter,  2  John,  and 
3  John  were  questioned.  That  they  were  questioned 
shows  with  what  jealous  care  the  sacred  oracles  were 
guarded  by  the  Churches.  And  it  proves  also,  as 
Zahn  has  pointed  out,  how  impossible  it  is  to  believe 
that  any  Council  had  settled  the  Canon.  "  Most 
incomprehensible  of  all  would  it  be,"  he  says,  "  that 
after  some  official  proceedings  had  settled  the  matter, 
the  several  Churches,  without  asking  or  knowing  any- 
thing about  one  another,  should  have,  in  some  cases, 
read  James  or  Hebrews  as  Scripture,  but  in  others 
fully  ignored  them."*  When, however,  the  represen- 
tatives of  the  Churches  met  at  Nicaea  and  elsewhere, 
after  the  long  storm  through  which  the  Churches  had 
passed,  all  questioning  ceased.  Those  Churches,  which 
had  received  these  letters  from  the  hands  of  the 

*  Grundriss  der  Geschichte  des  N.  T.  Kanons,  p.  27. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  79 

Apostles,  were  then  able  to  testify  to  their  genuineness, 
and  thus  every  doubt  was  stilled. 


CHAPTER   VII. 
Have  we  the  Original  New  Testament? 


WE  have  now  noted  how  the  Canon  of  the  New 
Testament  was  formed.  We  have  seen  that 
the  separation  of  these  Books  from  all  the  other 
literature  of  the  time  was  due  to  the  witness  borne 
to  them  at  the  first.  They  came  as  from  God's  own 
hand.  But  when  that  question  is  answered,  we  are 
confronted  by  another.  Do  we  now  possess  the 
Books  as  they  were  originally  given  ?  We  have  not 
a  single  autograph  of  evangelist  or  apostle.  Every 
letter  sent  to  the  Churches  by  Paul,  and  Peter,  and 
James,  and  Jude,  and  John,  has  perished:  not  a  single 
original  Gospel  has  survived.  We  have  only  copies 
of  them — or  rather  copies  of  copies  which  themselves 
had  been  transcribed  from  still  older  copies.  In  this 
repeated  copying,  mistakes  may  have  been,  or  rather 
must  have  been,  made  and  transmitted.  What  assur- 
ance, then,  have  we  that  the  New  Testament  of 
to-day  is  the  New  Testament  of  the  Apostolic  age  ? 

However  disquieting  this  question  may  be,  it  is  per- 
fectly natural  and  legitimate.  But,  like  many  another 
fear,  it  owes  its  force  to  ignorance.  We  have  already 
seen  how  carefully  even  the  ordinary  classics  have 
been  copied,  and  that  the  fears  of  scholars  themselves, 


8o  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

as  to  the  corruptions  which  were  supposed  to  have 
crept  in,  have  proved  to  be  largely  unfounded.  How 
exaggerated  the  fear  has  been,  in  the  case  of  the  New 
Testament,  has  been  shown  long  ago.  There  is  no 
other  book  in  the  world  of  which  so  many  copies 
have  been  written  out.  These  belong  to  many  ages 
and  to  many  countries.  We  have,  in  all,  about  4,000 
copies  of  gospels,  epistles,  &c.,  one  of  them  as  old  as  350 
A.D. ;  others  of  the  fifth  and  sixth  centuries;  and  the 
rest  extending  thence  to  the  time  when  the  printing- 
press  was  substituted  for  the  copyist's  pen.  Now, 
this  enormous  number  of  manuscripts,  made  by  so 
many  different  hands,  and  in  circumstances  which 
varied  so  greatly,  has  insured  the  safety  of  the 
original  text.  This  will  be  plain  if  I  borrow  an  apt 
illustration.  Let  me  suppose  that  a  merchant  has 
written  a  long  and  important  letter.  A  number  of 
his  correspondents  are  concerned  in  the  transaction, 
and  the  same  letter  has  to  be  sent  to  each.  As  time 
is  short,  one  of  his  clerks  reads  the  letter  aloud  in 
the  outer  office,  and  a  dozen  of  the  others  make  each 
a  copy  of  the  document. 

The  merchant  sends  his  own  letter  to  the  post  as 
soon  as  the  work  of  copying  is  finished.  But  before 
sending  off  the  others,  he  concludes  that  he  had 
better  glance  over  them  to  see  that  they  are  correct. 
His  attention  is  arrested  by  a  statement  which  he 
finds  in  the  first  which  he  has  taken  up.  A  certain 
class  of  goods  is  to  be  supplied,  says  this  letter,  at 
seven  pounds  a  ton.  He  had  meant  to  say  ten  pounds 
a  ton,  and  he  immediately  asks  himself  whether  the 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  8i 

mistake  was  his,  or  is  it  the  blunder  of  one  of  the 
copyists.  His  own  letter  is  gone  and  he  cannot 
consult  that.  But  he  snatches  up  another  copy.  It 
reads  "  ten  pounds  a  ton."  He  takes  up  a  third,  it 
also  reads  "ten  pounds  a  ton."  It  is  the  reading,  in 
short,  of  all  the  rest.  Can  we  wonder  that  he  at  once 
concludes  that  he  had  made  no  mistake  ?  He  knows 
that  any  man  may  make  a  mistake ;  but  he  is  also 
aware  that  it  is  improbable  that  two  men  will  make 
the  same  mistake,  still  more  improbable  that  three, 
and  quite  impossible  that  eleven,  will  unite  in  perpe- 
trating the  same  blunder.  Consequently,  he  is  quite 
at  rest  about  the  ten  pounds  a  ton.  He  knows  that 
this  must  have  been  in  the  original  letter,  and  that 
the  "  seven  pounds  a  ton"  is  the  mistake  of  the  clerk 
who  made  that  erroneous  copy. 

Such,  then,  is  the  security  given  to  us  by  these 
manuscripts,  to  which  we  have  to  add  quotations 
from  the  New  Testament  in  early  writers  fr^m  the 
early  years  of  the  second  century  downwards,  as  well 
as  early  translations  of  the  New  Testament  from  the 
Greek  into  Latin,  Syriac,  and  other  tongues.  There 
have  been  thousands  of  copyists,  and,  as  we  shall  see 
immediately,  there  have  been  hosts  of  variations. 
But,  nevertheless,  the  safety  of  the  original  Scrip- 
tures, which  they  all  united  to  hand  down  to  us,  lies 
in  the  very  multitude  of  these  manuscripts.  Every 
one  of  these  copyists  may  have  made — ^^we  may 
assuredly  go  farther  and  say,  he  has  made — some 
blunders.  But  they  will  be  his  own  blunders,  and 
not  the  blunders  of  another  copyist. 


82  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

There  is  also  another  fact,  a  knowledge  of  which 
at  once  allays  apprehension.  A  huge  proportion  of 
the  150,000  variations,  presented  by  this  array  of 
manuscripts,  is  so  plainly  the  result  of  individual 
mistakes  that  they  are  brushed  aside  without  the 
slightest  misgiving.  They  are  also,  besides,  of  the 
most  trivial  kind.  Isaac  Taylor,  in  his  History  oj 
the  Transmission  of  Ancient  Books,  says:  "Out  of  a 
hundred  thousand  various  readings  in  the  text  of 
the  New  Testament,  it  would  be, hard  to  select  100 
which  an  English  reader  would  think  important  to 
the  sense  of  the  passages  where  they  occur.  And  in 
that  100,  there  would  not  be  more  than  one  or  two 
which  can  in  any  way  affect  questions  of  fact,  of 
doctrine,  or  of  practice."  * 

Such  is  the  testimony  which  has  been  uniformly 
given  by  those  most  fully  acquainted  with  the  facts; 
and  it  is  testimony  which  ought  long  since  to  have 
swept  away  fear,  and  to  have  ended  misrepresenta- 
tion. Let  me  ask  the  reader's  attention  to  the 
assurances  of  other  competent  witnesses.  I  select 
three.  Speaking  of  the  growing  agreement  of  scholars, 
with  regard  to  the  original  text.  Dr.  Scrivener  writes: 
**  But  even  were  the  progress  of  the  science  less 
hopeful  than  we  believe  it  to  be,  one  great  truth 
is  admitted  on  all  hands — the  almost  complete 
freedom  of  Holy  Scripture  from  the  bare  suspicion 
of  wilful  corruption,  the  absolute  identity  of  every 
known  copy  in  respect  to  doctrine,  and  spirit,  and 
the  main  drift  of  every  argument  and  every  narrative 

♦Page  246. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  83 

through  the  entire  volume  of  Inspiration.  On  a 
point  of  such  vital  moment  I  am  glad  to  cite  the 
well-known  and  powerful  statement  of  the  great 
Bentley,  at  once  the  profoundest  and  the  most 
daring  of  English  critics  :  *  The  real  text  of  the 
sacred  writers  does  not  now  (since  the  originals  have 
been  so  long  lost)  lie  in  any  single  MS.  or  edition, 
but  is  dispersed  in  them  all.  'Tis  competently  exact, 
indeed,  in  the  worst  MS.  now  extant;  nor  is  one 
article  of  faith  or  moral  precept  either  perverted  or 
lost  in  them ;  choose  as  awkwardly  as  you  can, 
choose  the  worst  by  design,  out  of  the  whole  lump 
of  readings.'  And  again ;  *  Make  your  30,000 
[variations]  as  many  more,  if  numbers  of  copies  can 
ever  reach  that  sum ;  all  the  better  to  a  knowing 
and  serious  reader,  who  is  thereby  rnore  richly 
furnished  to  select  what  he  sees  genuine.  But  even 
put  them  into  the  hands  of  a  knave  or  a  fool,  and, 
yet  with  the  most  sinistrous  and  absurd  choice,  he 
shall  not  extinguish  the  light  of  any  one  chapter,  nor 
so  disguise  Christianity,  but  that  every  feature  of 
it  will  still  be  the  same.'  *  Thus,"  continues 
Scrivener,  "  hath  God's  Providence  kept  from  harm 
the  treasure  of  His  written  Word,  so  far  as  i?  needful 
for  the  quiet  assurance  of  His  Church  and  people."  t 
**  It  is  not  necessary,  at  the  present  day,"  he  says 
in  another  work,  "to  enter  upon  a  prolix  discussion 
respecting  the  sources  of  the  Textus  Receptus  [from 
which  our  English  Authorised  Version  was  made]. 

*  Remarks  upon  a  Discourse  of  Freethinking,  sect.  32. 
\  A   Plain  Introduction  to  the  Criticism  of  the  New  Testament  (Fourth  Edition), 
vol.i.,  pp.  6, 7. 


84  The  Bible :    its  Struchire  and  Pur-pose. 

It  will  now  be  admitted  on  all  hands  that  the  learned 
persons  who  superintended  the  earlier  editions  of  the 
New  Testament  both  possessed  a  very  limited  critical 
apparatus,  and  did  not  always  avail  themselves  as 
they  ought  of  the  resources  which  were  within  their 
reach.  It  is,  therefore,  most  satisfactory  to  discover 
that  the  text  which  they  formed  bears,  in  all  proba- 
bility, a  closer  resemblance  to  the  sacred  autographs 
than  that  of  some  critics  very  much  their  superiors 
in  Biblical  science;  who,  moreover,  had  access  to 
a  vast  treasure  of  materials,  which  was  entirely 
unknown  to  their  predecessors.  I  hope  it  is  no 
presumptuous  belief  that  the  Providence  of  God 
took  such  care  of  His  Church  in  the  vital  matter  of 
maintaining  His  Word  pure  and  uncorrupted,  that 
He  guided  the  minds  of  the  first  editors  in  the 
selection  of  the  authorities  on  which  they  rested."* 

Dr.  Kenyon,  of  the  British  Museum,  writes :  "  It 
cannot  be  too  strongly  asserted  that  in  substance  the 
text  of  the  Bible  is  certain.  Especially  is  this  the 
case  with  the  New  Testament.  The  number  of 
manuscripts  of  the  New  Testament,  of  early  transla- 
tions from  it,  and  of  quotations  from  it  in  the  oldest 
writers  in  the  Church  is  so  large  that  it  is  practically 
certain  that  the  true  reading  of  every  doubtful 
passage  is  preserved  in  some  one  or  other  of  these 
ancient  authorities.  This  can  be  said  of  no  other 
ancient  book  in  the  world.  Scholars  are  satisfied  that 
they  possess  substantially  the  true  text  of  the  principal 
Greek  and  Roman  writers  whose  works  have  come 

"A  Supplement  to  the  Authoriied  English  Version  of  the  New  Testament,  pp.  6,7- 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  85 

down  to  us,  of  Sophocles,  of  Thucydides,  of  Cicero, 
of  Virgil,  yet  our  knowledge  of  their  writings  depends 
on  a  mere  handful  of  manuscripts ;  whereas  the 
manuscripts  of  the  New  Testament  are  counted  by 
hundreds,  and  even  thousands."  * 

Westcott  and  Hort  present  us  with  the  like  assur- 
ance. "  With  regard,"  they  say,  "  to  the  great  bulk 
of  the  words  of  the  New  Testament,  as  of  most 
other  ancient  writings,  there  is  no  variation  or  other 
ground  of  doubt ;  and,  therefore,  no  room  for  textual 
criticism."  And  they  conclude  their  united  statement 
with  these  words  :  **  The  amount  of  what  can,  in  any 
sense,  be  called  substantial  variation,  is  but  a  small 
fraction  of  the  residuary  variation,  and  can  hardly 
form  more  than  a  thousandth  part  of  the  entire 
text."  t  In  other  words,  in  every  thousand  words 
there  is  practically  no  question  about  nine  hundred 
and  ninety-nine.  It  is  only  over  the  thousandth 
word  that  textual  critics  have,  by  laborious  com- 
parison of  the  manuscripts,  to  determine  the  reading 
ol  the  original  text. 

Dr.  Ezra  Abbot  impresses  the  same  fact  in  the 
following  teUing  fashion  :  "  The  number  of  the 
'various  readings'  frightens  some  innocent  people, 
and  figures  largely  in  the  writings  of  the  more 
ignorant  disbelievers  in  Christianity.  *  One  hundred 
and  fifty  thousand  various  readings ' !  Must  not 
these  render  the  text  of  the  New  Testament  wholly 
uncertain,  and  thus  destroy  the  foundation  of  our 
fafth  ? 

•  Our  Hible  and  the  Ancient  Manuscripts,  pp. lo,  ii. 
ilVie  New  Testament  in  the  Original  Gr«ft,  vol.  ii.,p.  2. 


86  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

"  The  true  state  of  the  case  is  something  like 
this.  Of  the  150,000  various  readings,  more  or  less, 
of  the  text  of  the  Greek  Testament,  we  may,  as 
Mr.  Norton  has  remarked,  dismiss  nineteen  twen- 
tieths from  consideration  at  once  as  being  obviously 
of  such  a  character,  or  supported  by  so  little 
authority,  that  no  critic  would  regard  them  as 
having  any  claim  to  reception.  This  leaves,  we  will 
say,  7,500.  But  of  these,  again,  it  will  appear,  on 
examination,  that  nineteen  out  of  twenty  are  of  no 
sort  of  consequence  as  affecting  the  sense ;  they  relate 
to  questions  of  orthography  or  grammatical  construc- 
tion, or  the  order  of  words,  or  such  other  matters  as 
have  been  mentioned  above,  in  speaking  of  unimpor- 
tant variations.  They  concern  only  the  form  of 
expression,  not  the  essential  meaning.  This  reduces 
the  number  to  perhaps  400  which  involve  a  difference 
of  meaning,  often  very  slight,  or  the  omission  or 
addition  of  a  few  words  sufficient  to  render  them 
objects  of  curiosity  and  interest ;  while  a  few 
exceptional  cases  among  them  may  relatively  be 
called  important.  But  our  critical  helps  are  now  so 
abundant  that  in  a  very  large  majority  of  these  more 
important  questions  of  reading  we  are  able  to  deter- 
mine the  true  text  with  a  good  degree  of  confidence. 
What  remains  doubtful  we  can  afford  to  leave 
doubtful."  * 

Thus,  even  though  we  should  have  had  to  leave  the 
whole  of  these  400  passages  uncertain,  we  have  the 
most  absolute  assurance,  through  those  very  uncertain- 

*  Critical  Essays,  i>p.2oB,2og. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  87 

ties,  that  all  the  rest  of  the  New  Testament  has  come 
to  us  as  it  left  the  hands  of  the  Evangelists  and  the 
Apostles.  If  we  had  possessed  only  one  manuscript, 
we  should  have  had  no  trouble  about  various  readings ; 
for  various  readings  could  not  have  existed  where 
there  was  no  variety  of  copies.  But  how  could  we  have 
known  that  our  one  copy  was  correct  ?  Our  small 
uncertainties  would  have  indeed  disappeared,  but  in 
their  place  we  should  have  had  one  huge  doubt. 
That  doubt,  thank  God,  has  been  swept  away. 
Translations  made  in  the  second  century — perhaps 
in  the  end  of  the  first  century — into  Syriac  and  into 
Latin,  tell  us  what  they  found  in  the  first  century 
copies  from  which  the  translations  were  made.  The 
copies  of  the  originals,  which  were  rapidly  multiplied 
at  the  very  first  and  carried  all  over  the  world,  have 
left  some  thousands  of  descendants.  These,  when 
examined,  tell  us  what  they  found  in  the  originals 
from  which  they  were  copied.  These  thousands  of 
witnesses  are  absolutely  unanimous  in  their  testimony 
that  these  are  the  very  words,  and  largely  that  this 
is  the  very  order  of  the  words,  penned  by  each  sacred 
writer.  They  are  absolutely  unanimous,  except  in 
regard  to  these  400  places — a  discord  which  proves 
their  independence  ;  and,  therefore,  their  value  as 
witnesses.  It  will  be  seen,  therefore,  that,  though 
the  questions  raised  by  these  406  differences  could 
never  be  settled,  they  have  infinitely  enriched  us,  by 
the  unquestionable  assurance  which  they  convey  that 
evefy  page  of  our  New  Testament,  that  every  Book, 
and  chapter,  and  verse  of  it  besides  have  come  down 


88  The  Bible:    its  Striccture  and  Purpose. 

CO  us  just  as  they  left  the  pen  of  inspiration.  There 
is  not  one  other  ancient  book,  however  prized,  to 
which  the  like  testimony,  or  a  tithe  of  it,  can  be 
borne.  The  Bible  is  the  one  supremely-attested 
Book  in  the  whole  world's  literature  ;  and  the  devout 
reader  will  not  fail  to  trace  here  the  hand  of  God 
and  to  read  His  purpose,  that  "  we  might  have  a 
strong  consolation,  who  have  fled  for  refuge  to  lay 
hold  upon  the  hope  set  before  us"  (Hebrews  vi.  i8). 


CHAPTER   VIII. 

The   Jewish    Stewardship    of   the    Old 
Testament:  How  it  was  Discharged. 


WE  now  enter  upon  the  second,  and  final, 
branch  of  our  inquiry.  We  have  seen  how 
the  New  Testament  originated,  and  how  it  at  once 
assumed  that  place  which  it  has  held  ever  since  in 
the  Christian  Church.  It  is  natural  to  conclude  that 
the  Divine  method,  which  was  pursued  in  the  bestowal 
of  the  New  Testament,  was  simply  a  continuation  of 
that  which  God  had  already  followed  in  bestowing 
the  Old  Testament.  In  other  words,  having  marked 
how  the  New  Testament  Canon  was  formed,  we  have 
anticipated  the  question  as  to  the  formation  of  the 
Canon  of  the  Old  Testament.  That  Canon  must  in  • 
the  same  way  have  formed  itself.  The  Law  was 
given  amid  manifestations  which  wrote  the  name  of 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  8g 

God  in  letters  of  fire  upon  that  great  foundation  of 
the  Scripture.  Each  subsequent  Book  came  with 
its  own  special  Divine  attestation ;  and,  as  it  came, 
it  was  added  (just  as  the  New  Testament  was  added) 
to  the  pre-existing  Bible. 

We  shall  find  that  this  conclusion  is  fully  justified 
by  the  facts  ;  but  our  first  duty  is  to  inquire  what  the 
facts  of  the  case  are.  In  the  forefront  of  these  we 
have  to  recognise  that  the  Jews  have  been,  and  still 
are,  the  custodians  of,  and  the  witnesses  to,  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures.  When  the  Scripture  asks 
the  question :  "  What  advantage,  then,  hath  the 
Jew  ?  "  the  answer  is  summed  up  in  these  words : 
"  Much  every  way  :  chiefly,  because  that  unto  them 
were  committed  the  Oracles  of  God  "  (Rom.  iii.  i,  2). 
Divine  arrangements  are  enduring ;  and,  though  the 
Jew  has  rejected  the  grace  of  God  in  Christ,  this 
custody  of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures  has  not 
been  taken  away  from  him.  Both  our  Authorised 
and  Revised  Versions  have  been  translated  from  the 
Hebrew  Bible  ;  that  is,  from  the  Bible  of  the  Jew. 
We  have  thus  recognised  that  people  as  the  cus- 
todians of  i-iC  Old  Testament;  and,  from  the  time 
when  Jerome  made  his  Latin  Version,  in  the  fifth 
century  of  our  era,  to  the  present  hour,  the  Christian 
Church  has  taken  these  "  Oracles  of  God  "  from  the 
hands  of  the  Israelite. 

Have  we  done  wisely  in  this  ?  Have  the  Jews 
been  faithful  to  the  trust?  Have  they  taken  pains 
to' hand  down  these  Scriptures  as  they  were  origin- 
ally committed  to  them,  so  that  we  can  accept  the 


go  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

copies  which  they  now  possess  as  containing  the 
very  words  which  the  prophets  placed  upon  the 
sacred  page?  To  that  question  modern  research  has 
furnished  an  unexpected  and  highly  gratifying  reply. 

More  than  a  century  ago,  considerable  attention 
was  attracted  to  the  condition  of  the  Old  Testament 
text.  This  new  field  was  being  then  explored  by 
Oriental  scholars.  Manuscripts  were  searched  for, 
and  were  compared  with  one  another.  Anticipations 
of  startling  revelations  were  aroused  in  the  learned 
World  by  the  labours  of  Walton,  of  Kennicott,  and  of 
De  Rossi.  It  was  confidently  expected,  in  some 
quarters,  that  reliance  upon  our  present  text  would 
be  greatly  shaken,  and,  indeed,  possibly  destroyed. 
The  various  readings  were  collected  and  published ; 
but  when  the  list  was  scanned,  the  hopes  of  the 
rationalists  sank  and  died.  From  that  death  there 
has  till  this  hour  been  no  resurrection.  The  labours 
of  these  scholars,  and  of  others  who  followed  them, 
have  amply  proved  that  no  Book  besides  has  ever 
been  handed  down  to  posterity  with  such  scrupulous 
fidelity  as  has  marked  the  transmission  of  this. 

The  following  full  admission  of  the  effect  of  these 
researches  comes  from  the  most  noted  leader  of  the 
critical  movement  in  Great  Britain,  the  late  Professor 
W.  Robertson  Smith:  "  What  is  the  state  of  things," 
he  asks,  "  as  regards  the  Old  Testament  ?  All 
manuscripts  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  (and  we  have  none 
older  than  the  ninth  century  after  Christ)  represent 
one  and  the  same  text.  There  are  slight  variations, 
9ut  these   are,  almost  without   exception,   such   as 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  gi 

might  have  been  made  by  a  careful  copyist  acting 
under  fixed  rules,  and  do  not  affect  the  general  state 
of  the  text.  But  we  can  go  farther.  We  may  say 
that  the  text  of  the  Hebrew  Old  Testament  which 
we  now  have  is  the  same  as  lay  before  Jerome 
400  years  after  Christ ;  the  same  as  underlies  certain 
translations  into  Chaldee  called  Targums,  which 
were  made  in  Babylonia  in  the  third  century  after 
Christ ;  indeed  the  same  text  as  was  received  by  the 
Jewish  doctors  of  the  second  century,  when  the 
Mishna  was  being  formed,  and  when  the  Jewish 
proselyte,  Aquila,  made  his  translation  into  Greek. 
I  do  not  affirm  that  there  were  no  various  readings 
in  the  copies  of  the  second,  or  even  of  the  fourth 
century;  but  the  variations  were  slight  and  easily 
controlled,  and  such  as  would  have  occurred  in 
manuscripts  carefully  transcribed  from  one  standard 
copy."  * 

In  a  note  to  this  passage  the  author  says :  "  In  the 
last  century,  great  hopes  were  entertained  of  the 
results  to  be  derived  from  a  collation  of  Hebrew 
manuscripts.  The  collections  of  Kennicott  (1776- 
1780)  and  De  Rossi  (1784-1788)  showed  that  all 
manuscripts  substantially  represent  one  text,  and,  so 
far  as  the  consonants  are  concerned,  recent  discoveries 
have  not  led  to  any  new  result."  +  The  words  which 
immediately  follow  those  quoted  above  form  so 
remarkable  a  confession  of  the  strength  of  this  part 
of  our  case  that  I  cannot  refrain  from  transcribing 

♦  W.  Robertson  Smith,  The  Old  Testament  in  the  Jewish  Church,  pp.  69,  70. 
t  Page  397- 


92  The  Bible :    its  Stniciure  and  Purpose. 

them  at  length.  **  The  Jews,  in  fact,"  he  proceeds, 
"  from  the  time  when  their  national  life  was  ex- 
tinguished, and  their  whole  soul  was  concentrated 
upon  the  preservation  of  the  monuments  of  the  past, 
devoted  the  most  strict  and  punctilious  attention  to 
the  exact  transmission  of  the  received  text,  down  to 
the  smallest  peculiarity  of  spelling,  and  even  to 
certain  irregularities  of  writing.  Let  me  explain  this 
last  point.  We  find  that  when  the  standard  manu- 
script had  a  letter  too  big,  or  a  letter  too  small,  the 
copies  made  from  it  imitated  even  this,  so  that  letters 
of  an  unusual  size  appear  in  the  same  place  in  every 
Hebrew  Bible.  Nay,  the  scrupulousness  of  the 
transcribers  went  still  further.  In  old  manuscripts, 
when  a  copyist  had  omitted  a  letter — there  was  no 
running  hand,  it  was  a  sort  of  printing  with  the  pen, 
so  that  a  letter  might  easily  fall  out — and,  when  the 
error  was  detected,  as  the  copy  was  revised,  the 
reviser  inserted  the  missing  letter  above  the  line,  as 
we  should  now  do,  with  a  caret.  If,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  reviser  found  that  any  superfluous  letter 
had  been  inserted,  he  cancelled  it  by  pricking  a  dot 
above  it.  Now,  when  such  corrections  occurred  in 
the  standard  manuscript  from  which  our  Hebrew 
Bibles  are  all  copied,  the  error  and  the  correction 
were  copied  together,  so  that  you  will  find,  even  in 
printed  Bibles  (for  the  system  has  been  carried  down 
into  the  printed  text),  letters  suspended  above  the 
line  to  show  that  they  had  been  inserted  with  a 
caret,  and  letters  *  pointed '  with  a  dot  over  them  to 
show  that  they  form  no  proper  part  of  the  text.  This 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  93 

shows  with  what  punctihous  accuracy  the  one 
standard  copy  was  followed.  In  a  few  cases,  how- 
ever, it  was  thought  necessary  to  suggest  a  correction 
on  the  reading  of  the  text.  There  were  some  words, 
for  example,  which  it  was  not  thought  decorous  to 
use  in  public  reading  in  the  synagogue,  and  for  this 
and  other  reasons,  a  few  modifications  were  pre- 
scribed in  the  reading  of  the  text.  But  the  rule  was 
laid  down  that  you  must  not  on  that  account  change 
the  text  itself.  The  reader  simply  learned  to  pro- 
nounce, in  reading  certain  passages,  a  different  word 
from  that  which  he  found  written  ;  and  in  many 
manuscripts  a  note  to  this  effect  was  placed  on  the 
margin.  These  notes  are  called  iCms,  the  word  Keri 
being  the  imperative  'read!'  while  the  expression 
actually  written  in  the  text,  but  not  uttered,  is  called 
Kethib  (written).  Now,  it  is  plain  that  such  a  system 
of  mechanical  transmission  could  not  have  been 
carried  out  with  precision  if  copying  had  been  left 
to  uninstructed  persons.  The  work  of  preserving 
and  transmitting  the  received  text  became  the 
specialty  of  a  guild  of  technically-trained  scholars, 
called  the  Massorets,  or  *  possessors  of  tradition ; ' 
that  is,  of  tradition  as  to  the  proper  way  of  writing 
the  Bible.  The  Massorets  laboured  for  centuries  ; 
their  work  was  not  completed  till  at  least  800  years 
after  the  time  of  Christ ;  and  they  collected  many 
orthographical  rules  and  great  lists  of  peculiarities  of 
writing  to  be  observed  in  passages  where  any  error 
was  to  be  feared,  which  are  still  preserved  either  as 
marginal  notes  or  appendices  to  manuscripts  of  the 


94 


The  Bible  :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 


Bible,  or  in  separate  works.  Besides  this,  the  scholars 
of  the  period  after  the  close  of  the  Talmud — that  is, 
after  the  sixth  century,  or  thereby — devoted  them- 
selves to  preserving  not  only  the  exact  vi^riting,  bit 
the  exact  reading  and  pronunciation  of  the  Bible, 
according  to  the  rules  of  the  synagogal  chanting. 
The  final  result  of  this  labour  v^'as  a  system  of  vowel 
points  and  musical  accents,  which  enable  the  trained 
reader  to  give  exactly  the  correct  pronunciation,  and 
even  the  correct  chanting  tone,  of  every  word  in  the 
Hebrew  Old  Testament."  * 

To  complete  the  story,  so  well  told  in  the  preceding 
extract,  it  may  be  added  that  those  Jewish  scholars, 
called  Massoretes,  owed  their  impulse  to  an  outbreak 
of  what  we  may  call  Jewish  Protestantism,  if  we  are 
to  believe  some  Jewish  writers.  Reinach  t  says  that 
the  sect  of  the  Karaites,  or  Caraites,  arose  in  the 
middle  of  the  seventh  century.  "  The  Karaites 
reje(fted,"  he  says,  "  in  its  entirety  the  oral  tradition, 
the  Talmud  which  is  its  organ,  and  all  the  institutions 
of  recent  origin,  such  as  the  Phyla(?leries,  the  per- 
manent Calendar,  the  ritual  prayers,  &c.  They 
maintained  that  only  the  prescriptions  of  the  written 
law  should  be  regarded,  which  they  observed  with  the 
most  extreme  rigour."  He  proceeds  to  show  that 
their  attachment  to  the  Law  provoked  the  Talmudic 
Jews  to  a  closer  study  of  the  sacred  text.  "  Karaites 
and  Rabbanites,"  he  says,  "  rivalled  each  other  from 
that  time  in  zeal  in  grammatical  and  critical  study  of 
the  sacred  Books.     To  render  them  accessible  to  the 

♦  Pages  70-72.        \  Hiitoire  des  Israelites,  p.  55. 


11  on.'  did  we  get  the  Bible?  95 

■great  majority  of  readers  little  versed  in  the  study  of 
Hebrew,  they  fixed  the  traditional  pronunciation  by 
■the  aid  of  a  system  of  vowel-points  and  of  accents, 
which  from  time  to  time  were  modified  and  improved. 
Then  they  sought  to  preserve  the  sacred  text  from  all 
alteration  by  comparing  the  various  readings,  by 
choosing  between  them,  by  counting  the  number  of 
the  verses,  of  the  words,  and  even  of  the  letters  in 
each  Book  of  the  Bible ;  this  gigantic  work,  called 
the  Massorah,  was  mainly  the  work  of  the  Karaite 
doctors  of  the  school  of  Tiberias."  * 

This  account  of  the  origin  of  the  Karaites  is  repudi- 
ated  by  the  sect  itself;  and  it  is  remarkable  that  they 
do  not  bear  the  name  of  that  founder  whom  Reinach 
assigns  to  them,  or  of  any  other.  Their  name  comes 
from  kara,  "  to  read."  Basnage,f  following  Buxtorf, 
points  out  that  the  word  kamh  ("  that  which  should 
be  read  ")  was  applied  to  the  Holy  Scripture,  and  that 
it  is  from  this  that  the  Karaites  derive  their  name. 
They  were  "  Scripturists,"  and  their  name  indicated 
their  position.  They  permitted  nothing  to  stand 
between  them  and  the  Word  of  God.  The  Karaite 
writers  claim  that  they  are  the  most  ancient  of , all  the 
Hebrew  sedts,  and  that  they  are  the  descendants  of 
Ezra.  In  proof  of  this  alleged  descent,  they  show  a 
long  list  of  their  leading  teachers,  from  Ezra's  time  to 
the  present.  Their  opponents,  the  Rabbins,  admit  their 
existence  in  the  times  of  Alexander  the  Great ;  "for," 
say,  they,  "when  that  prince  entered  Jerusalem, 
Jaddus,  the  chief  priest,  was  already  the  head  of  the 

*  Pa°es  57,  58.        f  Histoirf  Hes  Juifs,  I.  iii.,  ch.  xvi. 


95  The  Bible  :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

Rabbanists,  and  Ananus  and  Cascanatus  maintained 
with  distinction  the  part  of  the  Karaites.  God 
declared  Himself  in  favour  of  the  first ;  for  Jaddus 
worked  a  miracle  in  the  presence  of  Alexander  ;  but 
Ananus  and  Cascanatus  manifested  their  powerless- 

ness The.  mistake    is  evident,"    continues 

Basnage,  whose  words  I  quote.  "  For,"  says  he, 
"Ananus,  whom  they  make  a  contemporary  of 
Alexander  the  Great,  lived  only  in  the  eighth  century 
of  the  Christian  era."  * 

Reinach  repeats  the  assertion,  most  indignantly 
repudiated  by  the  Karaites,  that  they  are  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  ancient  Sadducees.  But  this  is 
an  accusation  which  the  moderate  Rabbins  have 
themselves  given  up.  Basnage  identifies  them  with 
"the  Doctors  of  the  Law"  who  are  mentioned  in 
the  Gospels.  In  Luke  v.  17  ("And  it  came  to  pass 
on  a  certain  day  that  there  were  Pharisees  and 
Do(ftors  of  the  Law  sitting  by,  who  were  come  out  of 
every  town  of  Galilee,  and  Judea,  and  Jerusalem  ") 
these  "  Do(ftors "  are  spoken  of  as  if  they  were 
distindt  from  the  Pharisees.  And,  as  the  suggestion 
cannot  be  entertained  that  they  were  Sadducees,  the 
conclusion,  though  somewhat  startling,  seems  to  have 
something  in  its  favour  that  these  were  the  Karaites, 
who,  as  we  have  seen,  were  noted  for  their  champion- 
ship of  the  Scripture. 

But,  whatever  may  have  been  their  origin,  there 
can  be  no  doubt  that,  under  the  Providence  of  God, 
we  are  largely  indebted  to  their  influence  and  work. 

*Histoire  des  Jui/s,  ii.  375  (Edition  1716). 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  gj 

These  Karaites  stemmed  the  tide  of  that  worship  of 
the  opinions  of  men  which  threatened  to  remove  the 
Scriptures  entirely  from  the  Jewish  people.  "  The 
labours  of  the  Massorites  maybe  regarded,"  says  Dr. 
Ginsburg,  "  as  a  later  development  and  continuation 
of  the  earlier  work  which  was  carried  on  by  the 
SopJierim  (the  Scribes)— the  do(5^ors  and  authorised 
interpreters  of  the  Law  soon  after  the  return  of  the 
Jews  from  the  Babylonish  captivity."*  They  (as 
well  as  their  opponents,  whom  they  stirred  up)  con- 
tinued the  work  of  the  Jewish  stewardship  with  what 
seems  to  have  been  a  consuming  zeal.  Not  only  did 
they  take  every  precaution  to  hand  down  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures  without  alteration  :  they  also 
devised  means  by  which  the  purity  of  the  text  might 
afterwards  be  tested.  They  counted  the  verses  of 
each  book  and  section,  and  placed  the  number  of 
them  at  the  end.  They  marked  the  middle  verse  of 
each  book.  They  pointed  out  the  middle  letter  of 
the  Pentateuch,  and  the  middle  clause  of  each  book 
of  it.  They  ascertained  how  often  each  letter  of  the 
Hebrew  alphabet  occurred  in  the  Old  Testament. 
They  attempted  no  correcftion  of  the  text,  but,  as  we 
have  seen,  they  marked  the  letters  which  they  sup- 
posed to  be  superfluous  and  other  features  of  the 
text  which  have  been  preserved  to  our  own  day. 

The  same  intense  sohcitude  is  seen  in  their  direc- 
tions for  copying  the  Scriptures.  "  The  rules  laid 
down  by  the  Jews  with  regard  to  their  manuscripts," 
says   Mr.  Forsyth,   **  are  curious.     They  are  to  be 

*  Introduction  to  the  Massotetico-Crilical  Edition  of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  p.  287. 

F 


98  The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

written  upon  parchment,  made  from  the  skin  of  ^ 
clean  animal,  and  tied  together  by  strings  of  a  similar 
substance.  Each  skin  is  to  contain  a  certain  number 
of  columns  of  a  precise  length  and  breadth,  with  a 
certain  number  of  words.  They  are  to  be  written 
with  the  purest  ink,  and  no  word  is  to  be  written  by 
heart,  or  with  points ;  and  they  are  first  to  be  orally 
pronounced  by  the  copyist.  Before  he  writes  the 
name  of  God,  he  is  to  wash  his  pen."  * 

On  no  other  book  in  the  whole,  world's  history  has 
such  labour  been  expended,  or  such  ingenuity  and 
care  been  lavished,  to  hand  it  on  from  generation  to 
generation  as  it  was  received.  Whatever  may  be  said 
of  the  Jew,  this  enormous  but  ungrudged  toil  ought 
to  be  perpetually  remembered.  As  if  prompted  by  a 
Divinely-implanted  instinrt,  the  nation  has  magnifi- 
cently fulfilled  the  duties  of  its  stewardship,  and  has 
handed  on  to  us  the  jealously-guarded  "  Oracles  of 
God."  It  has  had  to  abandon  much  in  the  fires  of 
persecution,  but  these  it  has  ever  preserved  unscathed. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

What  of  the  Apocrypha? 

WE  have  just  seen  with  what  extraordinary  care 
and  scrupulous  fidelity  the  Jews  have  handed 
down  to  us  the  Old  Testament  Books.  This  fact  has 
an  important  bearing  upon   present  controversies ; 

*  History  oj  A  ttcient  Manuscripts,  WiWizux  Forsyth,  p.  83. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  gg 

for,  if  we  can  show  that  the  Old  Testament  of  to-day 
is  the  very  Old  Testament  which  was  possessed  by 
our  Lord  and  the  apostles,  we  shall  have  ended  for 
believing  men  all  discussion  about  the  origin  and 
authority  of  the  Old  Testament  Books.  I  do  not 
wish  to  anticipate  our  inquiry  into  what  the  New 
Testament  has  said  of  the  Old ;  but  it  will  be  plain 
to  everyone  that,  if  we  are  certain  that  our  Hebrew 
Bible  is  the  very  Hebrew  Bible  that  lay  under  the 
eyes  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  of  Peter,  and  John,  and 
James,  and  Paul,  then  we  secure  testimony  of  enor- 
mous importance  in  the  present  discussion  as  to  the 
integrity  and  authenticity  of  the  Old  Testament. 

To  get  a  clear  answer  to  this  question  is  our  objecft 
in  this  chapter  and  in  that  which  follows  it.  We  have 
marked  the  care  which  was  taken  by  the  Jews  that 
no  error  should  enter  into  the  text.  One  other 
inquiry,  however,  has  to  be  made.  Have  they  handed 
on  to  us  all  the  Books  of  the  Old  Testament  ?  It  is 
well  known  that,  while  our  own  Authorised  Version 
agrees  with  the  Hebrew  Bible  as  to  the  number  of 
the  Old  Testament  Books,  the  Bible  accepted  by  the 
Romjsh  Church  differs  widely  from  both.  It  contains, 
in  addition  to  our  own  Books,  "The  Book  of 
Tobias,"  "  The  Book  of  Judith,"  certain  additions  to 
the  Book  of  Esther,  "  The  Book  of  Wisdom,"  "  The 
Book  of  Ecclesiasticus,"  "  The  Prophecy  of  Baruch," 
a  thirteenth  chapter  of  Daniel  (in  the  Douay  Bible), 
giving  the  story  of  Susannah,  and  a  fourteenth, 
.  containing  that  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon — while  "the 
song  of  the  three  children  "  is  inserted  in  the  third 


lOO         The  Bible  :    its  St r lecture  and  Purpose. 

chapter.  There  are  also  added  the  "First  and  Second 
Books  of  the  Maccabees."  Those  additions  are  found, 
too,  in  copies  of  the  early  Greek  translation  of  the 
Old  Testament  called  the  Septuagint.  In  refusing 
these  "  Apocryphal  "  books  a  place  among  the  Scrip- 
tures, have  the  Jews  shut  out  part  of  the  Oracles  of 
God  ?  Or,  have  they,  on  the  contrary,  proved,  in 
their  rigorous  exclusion  of  these  books,  their  fidelity 
to  the  trust  committed  to  them  ?  That  is  the 
question  to  which  we  have  now  to  find' an  answer. 

The  Greek  word,  "apocrypha,"  means  "  hidden." 
When  applied  to  books,  it  signifies  that  their  origin  is 
unknown.  When  the  Council  of  Trent  assembled  in 
1545,  the  Romish  Church  found  itself  in  a  position 
or  great  difficulty.  The  newly-recovered  knowledge 
of  Hebrew  and  Greek,  and  the  appeal  which  the 
Reformers  were  making  to  the  original  Scriptures, 
placed  the  monks,  and  priests,  and  bishops  generally 
in  a  position  of  great  embarrassment.  They  knew 
nothing  of  these  languages.  Augustine  had  said : 
"  Those  who  speak  Latin  require,  in  order  to  the 
understanding  of  the  Scriptures,  to  be  acquainted 
with  two  other  languages,  Hebrew  and  Greek,  so 
that  they  may  have  recourse  to  ancient  copies  when 
the  disagreement  of  Latin  interpreters  suggests  any 
doubt."*  But  the  Orders  of  monks  instituted  for  the 
advancement  of  Christian  knowledge  left  Greek  and 
Hebrew  manuscripts  in  undisturbed  slumber  upon 
their  shelves,  and  they  now  attempted  to  beat  down 
the  revival  of  learning  with  foolish  clamour.  One  monk 

*  Christian  Doctrine,  B.  ii. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  loi 

is  reported  to  have  declared  from  the  pulpit  that  "  a 
new  language  "  had  been  discovered,  "which,"  said 
he,  **  is  called  the  Greek.  It  must  be  carefully  avoided. 
This  language  is  the  mother  of  all  heresies.  I  see  in 
the  hands  of  many  a  book  written  in  that  tongue ;  it 
is  called  the  New  Testament.  It  is  a  book  full  of 
briars  and  vipers.  As  for  Hebrew,  those  who  learn 
it,  immediately  become  Jews."* 

These  and  similar  ta(ftics  were  powerless,  however, 
to  arrest  the  new  movement,  and  some  other  remedy 
was  loudly  called  for.  That  which  found  favour  with 
the  Council  was  to  decree  the  inspiration  and  absolute 
authority  of  the  then  current  Latin  Bible,  the  Vulgate, 
a  translation  largely  made  by  Jerome  and  by  earlier 
translators  whose  faulty  renderings  had  by  the  fourth 
century  obtained  too  strong  a  hold  to  be  easily  dis- 
placed. The  Council  ordained  "that  in  all  public 
lessons,  discussions,  preachings,  and  expositions,  this 
ancient  version  shall  be  held  as  authentic,  and  that 
no  one  shall  dare,  or  shall  presume,  to  reject  it 
under  any  pretext  whatever."  f 

But  the  Council  of  Trent  had  to  face  another 
difficulty.  In  this  Vulgate  Bible  the  above-named 
apocryphal  books  were  contained.  These  were  not 
in  the  Hebrew  Bible.  Scholars  knew  that  they  had 
been  allowed  a  place  even  in  the  Vulgate,  not 
because  they  were  part  of  Scripture,  but  solely  on 
account  of  their  suitableness  for  devotional  reading. 
But  the  multitude  were  not  aware  of  this.    "  Many," 


*  Sismondi,  History  of  the  French,  xvi. 
+  Bungener,  History  oj  the  Council  of  Trent,  p.  97. 


I02        The  Bible  :    its  Strttciure  and  Purpose. 

says  Pallavicini,  the  acknowledged  Church  historian- 
of  the  Council  of  Trent,  "  lived  in  the  most  distress- 
ing ignorance  with  regard  to  this;  the  same  book 
being  adored  by  some  as  the  expression  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  execrated  by  others  as  the  work  of  a 
sacrilegious  impostor."  The  Divines,  those  who  were 
really  scholars,  and  who  were  acquainted  with  the 
question,  were  asked  to  report.  These  were  unanimous 
in  declaring  the  inferiority  of  the  apocryphal  books. 
But  to  give  effect  to  that  opinion  would  be  a  surrender 
to  Protestantism  which  it  was  felt  the  Church  could 
not  afford.  They  were  therefore  declared  to  be 
canonical  for  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  the 
Christian  Church.  There  were  other  additions  in 
copies  of  the  Septuagint  which  were  not  in  the 
Vulgate,  and  which  were,  therefore,  still  left  to  rank 
as  apocryphal  and  uncanonical.  These  are  the  so- 
called  third  and  fourth  books  of  Esdras,  or  Ezra, 
the  third  book  of  Maccabees,  the  so-called  151st 
Psalm,  a  professed  appendix  to  Job,  and  a  preface  to 
Lamentations. 

It  may  be  well  to  remind  the  reader  that  the  books 
which  Rome  thus  canonised  are  quite  unworthy  of 
the  place  given  to  them.  They  are,  in  fact,  the  kind 
of  books  of  which  the  Old  Testament  would  have 
been  made  up  if  critical  theories  were  true.  They 
bear  abundant  marks  of  their  spurious  origin.  We 
find  in  them  the  crude  imaginations  of  an  ignorant 
and  superstitious  time,  and  the  chronological  confu- 
sion which  follows  a  romancer  like  his  shadow. 
Tobit,  the  father  of  Tobias,  loses  his  sight  from  the 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  103 

droppings  of  a  passing  bird  falling  into  his  eyes  as  he 
was  gazing  upward  into  heaven.  Tobias  sets  out,  like 
Jacob,  in  search  of  a  bride ;  and,  like  him,  has  to 
undertake  a  long  journey  eastward.  He  is  joined  by 
an  angel,  who  becomes  his  companion  for  about  300 
miles,  and  whose  notions  of  truthfulness  cannot  be 
described  as  exact  or  commendable.  Although  he 
afterwards  discloses  that  he  is  the  angel  Raphael,  he 
introduces  himself  to  Tobias  at  the  beginning  as 
Azarias,  a  son  of  one  of  the  acquaintances  of  Tobias's 
father,  which  leads  Tobias  to  reply,  "  Thou  art  of  an 
honest  and  good  stock."  The  bride  whom  Tobias 
goes  to  wed  is  unfortunate  enough  to  be  loved  by  a 
demon,  who  kills  every  bridegroom  (for  the  young 
woman  has  already  passed  through  the  marriage 
ceremony  several  times)  on  the  marriage  night.  The 
bridegroom  enters  the  bridal  chamber  a  living  man, 
and  is  carried  out  next  morning  a  corpse. 

But  this  prolonged  angel's  visit  is  to  save  Tobias 
from  a  like  fate,  and  that  important  purpose  was 
effe(fted  in  the  following  manner :  "  And  as  they 
went  on  their  journey  they  came  to  the  river  Tigris, 
and  they  lodged  there  ;  and  when  the  young  man 
went  down  to  wash  himself,  a  fish  leaped, out  of  the 
river,  and  would  have  drowned  him.  Then  the  angel 
said  unto  him,  Take  the  fish.  And  the  young  man 
laid  hold  of  the  fish  and  drew  it  to  land.  To  whom 
the  angel  said,  Open  the  fish,  and  take  the  heart,  and 
the  liver,  and  the  gall,  and  put  them  up  safely.  So 
.the  young  man  did  as  the  angel  commanded  him, 
and  when  they  had  roasted  the  fish,  they  did  eat  it. 


::cj.         The  Bible  :    its  Sirncinre  and  Purpose. 

Tlien  the  young  man  said  unto  the  angel,  Brother 
Azarias,  to  what  use  is  the  heart,  and  the  Hver,  and 
the  gall  of  the  fish  ?  And  he  said  unto  him,  touching 
the  heart  and  the  Hver,  if  a  devil,  or  an  evil  spirit, 
trouble  any,  we  must  make  a  smoke  thereof  before 
the  man  or  the  woman,  and  the  party  shall  be  no 
more  vexed.  As  for  the  gall,  it  is  good  to  anoint  a 
man  who  hath  whiteness  in  his  eyes ;  he  shall  be 
healed."  *  This  gall  is,  of  course,  what  is  needed  to 
restore  old  Tobit's  eyesight,  while  Tobias  finds  the 
heart  and  the  liver  equally  efficacious.  Possessed  of 
these,  he  confidently  passes  through  the  hitherto  fatal 
ceremony,  and  enters  the  bridal  chamber.  There  he 
set  the  heart  and  liver  on  fire  ;  and,  when  the  demon 
caught  the  odour  of  that  perfume,  it  proved  to  be 
too  much  for  him.  He  fled,  we  are  told,  "  into  the 
uttermost  parts  of  Egypt,"  and  troubled  Tobias's 
bride  no  more. 

The  book  is  not  less  extraordinary  in  its  chron- 
ology and  its  geography.  Tobit,  the  father  of  Tobias, 
the  hero  of  this  story,  is  said  to  have  been  a  youth 
when  the  ten  tribes  revolted  from  Rehoboam.  This 
compels  us  to  admit  that  he  must  have  been  270 
years  old  when  the  ten  tribes  were  carried  away  to 
Assyria.  But  he  survives  that  event,  and  neverthe- 
less dies  at  the  age  of  158  !  The  reader  will  have 
noticed  that  mention  is  made  of  the  river  Tigris. 
This  river  is  represented  as  being  nearer  to  Palestine 
than  the  Euphrates,  thus  exactly  reversing  the 
positions  of  these  two  important  streams. 

♦Chapter  vi. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  105 

The  book  of  Judith  forms  another  illustration  of 
the  Bible  as  it  would  have  been  had  critical  theories 
of  its  origin  been  true.  The  events  which  it  describes 
are  said  to  have  taken  place  at  "  Bethulia,"  a  place  of 
which  neither  ancient  records  nor  modern  discoveries 
know  anything.  A  like  difficulty  occurs  with  regard 
to  the  name  of  the  High  Priest.  It  can  be  found 
neither  in  the  Scripture  history  nor  in  the  list  given 
by  Josephus.  It  is  equally  impossible  to  assign  a  time 
to  the  events  mentioned.  According  to  the  book, 
the  temple  of  Solomon  is  still  standing,  so  that  a 
time  must  be  found  before  the  Jewish  captivity.  But 
how  shall  we,  then,  explain  the  presence  of  Holo- 
fernes,  "  a  Prince  of  Persia,"  at  the  head  of  a  mighty 
army,  at  a  time  when  the  field  was  occupied  either 
by  the  Assyrian  or  by  the  Babylonian  empire  ? 
Problems  of  the  same  kind  are  presented  by  that 
general's  ignorance  of  the  Israelites,  seeing  that  he 
has  to  make  the  inquiry,  "  Tell  me  now,  ye  sons  of 
Canaan,  who  this  people  is  that  dwelleth  in  the  hill 
country,  and  what  are  the  cities  they  inhabit."  We 
are  similarly  at  a  loss  to  find  a  place  for  the  great 
and  lasting  tranquiUty  which  resulted  from  Judith's 
slaying  of  the  Persian  general.  We  are  told  that 
"  she  waxed  old  in  her  husband's  house,  being  105 
years  old.  And  there  was  none  that  made  the 
children  of  Israel  any  more  afraid  in  the  days  of 
Judith ;  nor  a  long  time  after  her  dea;th."  She  is 
represented  as  a  young  woman  when  the  alleged 
deliverance  of  her  people  was  effected.  When  this 
is  borne  in  mind,  and  it  is  remembered  also  that 


io6        The  Bible:    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

there  was  no  troubler  of  Israel  for  "  a  long  time  after 
her  death,"  it  is  clear  that  this  tranquility  must  have 
endured  for  at  least  120  years.  As  everyone  is  aware, 
there  was  no  such  period  of  peace  during  those 
troublous  days  of  Israel's  history.  It  may  be  added 
that  Nebuchadnezzar  is  said  to  have  reigned  at 
Nineveh,  in  evident  ignorance  of  the  fa(5ls  that  in 
Nebuchadnezzar's  time  Nineveh  had  been  destroyed, 
and  that  this  great  king  dwelt  in  Babylon,  the  city 
which  he  loved,  and  which  he  had  re-buiit  and  adorned. 

The  only  books  for  which  a  good  word  can  be  said 
are  those  of  i  Maccabees,  The  Wisdom  of  Solomon, 
and  Ecclesiasticus.  The  first,  notwithstanding  some 
errors,  gives  us  reliable  history.  This,  and  the  others, 
•however,  though  they  contain  good  counsel,  are  on  a 
much  lower  level  than  that  of  the  Scriptures.  But  a 
complete  answer  to  the  Trent  Canon  is  its  novelty. 
The  mere  fadt  that  it  was  necessary  in  1545  to  decree 
that  those  books  should  be  received  as  part  of  the 
Word  of  God,  is  eloquent.  Through  all  those  past 
centuries,  these  books  had  in  vain  sought  general 
acceptance ;  and  they  were  canonized  now  only 
through  the  stress  and  strain  experienced  by  a  Church 
which  was  contending  for  its  old  pre-eminence,  if 
not  for  its  existence. 

The  a(5t  was  done  also  in  the  face  of  the  distinct 
and  persistent  testimony  of  the  Christian  Church. 
While  these  and  other  books  were  valued  as  helpful 
religious  literature,  and  were  even  occasionally  added 
to  Greek  manuscripts  of  the  Old  Testament,  it  was 
distincftly  confessed  that  they  did  not  belong  to  the 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  107 

number  of  the  Canonical  Books.  Eusebius,  the 
historian  of  the  early  Church  who  wrote  in  the 
fourth  century  of  our  era,  says :  "  After  the  return 
from  captivity  until  the  advent  of  our  Saviour  there 
is  no  book  which  can  be  esteemed  sacred."  And, 
when  speaking  of  the  Maccabees,  he  says :  "  These 
books  are  not  received  as  Divine  Scriptures."  In 
other  words,  the  Old  Testament  Canon  closed  with 
Malachi.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  after  giving  a  catalogue 
of  the  Canonical  Books,  says  :  "  Let  no  one  add  to 
these  Divine  books,  nor  take  away  anything  from 
them.  I  think  it  necessary  to  add  this,  that  there 
are  other  books  besides  those  which  I  have  enumerated 
as  constituting  the  Canon,  which,  however,  do  not 
belong  to  it,  but  were  set  forth  by  the  early  fathers, 
to  be  read  for  the  sake  of  the  instrucftion  which  they 
contain."  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  (348  a.d.)  writes  in 
his  Catechism  :  "  Read  nothing  which  is  Apocryphal. 
Read  the  Scriptures,  namely,  the  twenty-two  books 
of  the  Old  Testament,  which  were  translated  by  the 
seventy-two  interpreters."  Jeronie,  in  his  general 
preface  to  his  translation  of  the  Scriptures,  says,  after 
mentioning  the  Books  which  he  had  rendered  into 
Latin  from  the  Hebrew  :  "  All  besides  them  must  be 
placed  among  the  Apocryphal."  In  his  special  preface 
to  the  Books  of  Solomon,  he  refers  to  "  Wisdom  " 
and  "  Ecclesiasticus,"  and  remarks  :  "  As  the  Church 
reads  the  Books  of  Judith,  Tobit,  and  the  Maccabees, 
but  does  not  receive  them  among  the  Canonical 
Scriptures,  so  also  may  she  read  these  two  books  for 
-the  edification  of  the  common  people,  but  not  as 


io8         The  Bible  :    Us  StriicUire  and  Purpose. 

authorily  to   confirm   any  of  the  doctrines   of  the 
Church." 

Other  ancient  testimonies  are  equally  emphatic ; 
and  nothing  could  be  more  significant  than  the  fadt 
that  the  early  Syriac  Version  of  the  Old  Testament, 
named  the  Peshitto,  does  not  contain  the  apocryphal 
books.  This  means  either  that  the  translators  knew 
nothing  of  them  ;  or  that,  though  they  knew  of  their 
existence,  they  knew  of  no  title  they  possessed  to 
rank  with  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures. 


CHAPiER   X. 

Is  THE  Apocrypha  Quoted  in  the  New 
Testament  ? 


STRENUOUS  attempts  have  been  made  to  show 
that  an  affirmative  reply  must  be  given  to  the 
above  question.  Stier,  in  his  zeal  to  uphold  the 
apocrypha,  made  a  list  of  102  passages  in  which,  he 
claimed,  the  New  Testament  writers  either  referred 
to,  or  quoted  from,  the  apocryphal  books.  No  one 
has  been  bold  enough  to  adopt  that  list ;  but  a  few 
"  proof  passages  "  are  occasionally  produced.  Karl 
Budde  says  :  "  The  New  Testament  writers  show  no 
scruple  in  quoting  extra-canonical  books  as  sacred, 
and  we  find  ascribed  to  Jesus  some  expressions 
quoted  as  Holy  Writ  (Luke  xi.  49  ;  John  vii.  38) 
which  are  not  contained  in  the  Old  Testament. 
What   is  more,  examples  of   this    form  of  Jewish 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  log 

literature  fused  with  Christian  elements,  or  worked 
over  from  the  Christian  point  of  view,  have  found 
their  way  into  the  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament 
itself — a  fact  which  has  only  lately  begun  to  receive 
the  attention  it  deserves."  * 

The  unscholarly  extravagance  which  marks  that 
statement  is  specially  manifest  in  the  opening  sen- 
tence, which  informs  us  that  the  New  Testament 
writers  "  show  no  scruple  in  quoting  extra-canonical 
books  as  sacred."  This,  if  true,  would  have  been 
one  of  the  most  extraordinary  things  in  literature — 
sacred  or  profane.  For  men,  not  unacquainted  with 
the  apocrypha,  have  for  eighteen  centuries  been 
devoting  their  lives  to  the  study  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  are  not  only  ignorant  of  this  free  reference 
to,  and  sanction  of,  the  apocrypha,  but  also  repel 
the  suggestion  of  it  with  indignation.  The  second 
statement,  which  assumes  that  our  Lord  quoted 
apocryphal  books  as  Holy  Writ,  is  equally  reckless. 
The  words :  "Therefore  also  said  the  wisdom  of 
God,  I  will  send  them  prophets  and  apostles,  and 
some  of  them  they  shall  slay  and  persecute,"  &c. 
(Lukexi.  49-51);  and  those  other:  "He  that 
believeth  on  Me,  as  the  Scripture  hath  said,  out  of 
his  belly  shall  flow  rivers  of  living  water "  (John 
vii.  38),  are  confidently  asserted  to  be  from  books 
outside  the  Scriptures,  though  'no  one  has  ever  been 
able  to  find  them  in  any  apocryphal  writing !  A 
reference  to  the  Old  Testament,  however,  proves  that 
>^e  do  not  require  to  travel  outside  the  Scripture; 

* Encyclop<edia  Biblica,  Art.  "  Canon." 


no        The  Bible :    its  St7'ucture  a7id  Purpose. 

for  we  discover  the  importance  which  is  there 
assigned  to  figures  and  promises  embodying  the  very 
imagery  referred  to  by  our  Lord.  This  is  specially 
prominent  in  that  silently-surrendered  Book, 
Solomon's  Song.  The  Messiah  says  of  the  Church  : 
*'A  garden  enclosed  is  My  sister,  My  spouse ;  a 
spring  shut  up,  a  fountain  sealed  ...  A  fountain  of 
gardens,  a  well  of  living  waters  [the  very  phrase 
used  by  our  Lord] ,  and  streams  from  Lebanon." 
That  the  Church,  though  loved,  is  shown  as  *'  a 
spring  shut  up,"  "a  fountain  sealed,"  tells  her  need 
and  her  destiny.  The  description  is  an  imphed 
promise  that  the  day  will  come  when  the  fountain 
will  be  unsealed  and  when  the  spring  will  be  opened. 
It  may  be  safely  said  that  had  that  passage  been 
found  in  any  apocryphal  book,  the  rationalistic  camp 
would  have  rung  with  rejoicing.  The  assertion 
would  have  been  loudly  made  that  this  was  the  very 
passage  which  our  Lord  had  in  view.  But  it  does 
not  stand  alone.  Not  to  mention  the  references 
under  this  figure  to  the  coming  salvation  ;  the  smitten 
rock  in  the  desert ;  the  promise  that  in  the  day  of 
Israel's  redemption  they  shall  "draw  water  with  joy 
from  the  wells  of  salvation  "  (Isa.  xii.  3),  and  the  words 
in  Isaiah  xliv.  3,  Iv.  i,lviii.  11 ;  we  find  two  striking 
predictions  which  explain  our  Lord's  reference.  The 
first  is  Ezekiel  xlvii.  1-12.  The  prophet  sees  waters 
Streaming  out  of  the  temple.  They  are  pouring  out 
from  under  "  the  threshold  of  the  house  eastward." 
The  flood  covers  the  land  deeper  and  deeper,  until 
it   becomes  "waters  to  swim  in,"     By  that    East 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  in 

Gate  the  Lord  had  entered  !  He  had  passed  in  to 
His  Temple  there,  and  this  is  the  result.  The 
waters  are  also  described  as  coming  down  from  "the 
right  side  of  the  house,  at  the  south  side  of  the 
altar."  The  "  right  side  of  the  house,"  and  the 
south  side  of  the  altar,  was  God's  right  hand,  as 
from  the  Holy  of  Holies  He  looked  towards  the 
altar.  It  is  the  place  of  acceptance — of  acceptance 
at  the  altar — the  place  of  pardon  and  reconciliation 
and  peace  through  sacrifice.  It  is  thence  the  waters 
flow.  That  word  was  now  explained  and  applied  by 
the  Lord  Jesus.  From  the  depths  of  that  visited 
temple,  from  within  this  acceptance  with  God,  the 
blessing  would  flow  forth  to  refresh  and  fructify  the 
waiting  earth. 

The  second  passage  is  Zechariah  xiv.  8,  9:  "And 
it  shall  be  in  that  day,  that  living  waters  [here,  again, 
the  very  phrase  used  by  our  Lord]  shall  go  out  from 
Jerusalem ;  half  of  them  toward  the  former  sea,  and 
half  of  them  toward  the  hinder  sea  ;  in  summer  and 
in  winter  shall  it  be."  And  the  Lord  shall  be  king 
over  all  the  earth :  in  that  day  shall  there  be  one 
Lord,  and  His  name  one."  Recall  for  a  moment 
the  occasion  so  carefully  described  in  the  Gospel,  and 
the  whole  will  now  be  clear.  We  know  from  Jewish 
sources  that  on  each  day  of  the  feast  of  Tabernacles 
a  priest  went  down  to  the  pool  of  Siloam,  filled  a 
golden  vessel  with  water,  passed  up  with  it  to  the 
Temple  amidst  a  joyous  procession,  took  his  place 
by  the  altar  and  poured  it  out  there  together  with 
wine  while  the  priests  and  the  people  sang  the  Hallel 


112         The  Bible:    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

(Psalms  cxiii.-cxviii.)  On  the  eighth  day  the  Hallel 
was  sung,  but  the  water  was  not  brought.  It  was  on 
that  day,  "  the  last  day,  that  great  day  of  the  feast," 
when  the  omission  of  the  poured-out  water  had  made 
its  impression,  that  the  Lord,  with  a  voice  which 
commanded  the  attention  of  one  and  all  in  that 
immense  throng,  spoke  the  words  of  this  promise. 
The  time  will  come  when  living  waters  shall  not 
only  be  poured  out  upon  that  Temple,  but  shall  also 
flow  forth  from  it ;  and  the  time  had  even  then  come 
when  believing  men  could  receive  and  give  forth 
God's  great  salvation. 

The  quotation  ifrom  Luke  (xi.  49-51)  need  not 
detain  us.  The  words:  "Therefore  also  said  the 
WISDOM  OF  God,"  apparently  furnish  us  with  the 
reference,  and  indicate  how  full  the  Old  Testament 
is  of  prophecy.  We  should  not  think  of  the  Book 
of  Proverbs  as  one  that  told  beforehand  the  fate  of 
the  Gospel  message  and  of  the  Jewish  people.  And 
yet  it  is  to  it  that  this  phrase  directs  us.  There  we 
find  these  words :  *'  Wisdom  crieth  without ;  she 
uttereth  her  voice  in  the  streets :  she  crieth  in  the 
chief  place  of  concourse  .  .  in  the  city  she  uttereth 

her  words Turn  ye  at  My  reproof:  behold,  I 

will  pour  out  My  spirit  unto  you,  I  will  make  known 
My  words  unto  you"  (i.  20-23).  And  what  will  the 
result  be  ?  Rejection  ;  for  these  words  follow  im- 
mediately:  "  Because  I  have  called,  and  ye  refused  ; 
I  have  stretched  out  My  hand,  and  no  man  regarded  ; 
but  ye  have  set  at  nought  all  My  counsel,  and  would 
none  of  My  reproof:  I  also  will  laugh  at  your  calamity; 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  113 

I  will  mock  when  your  fear  cometh ;  when  your  fear 
Cometh  as  a  desolation,  and  your  destruction  cometh 
as  a  whirlwind.  .  .  .  Therefore  shall  they  eat  of  the 
fruit  of  their  own  way,  and  be  filled  with  their  own 
devices  "  (24-31).  The  words  of  our  Lord  not  only 
cite  the  prediction  :  they  also  interpret  and  apply  it. 
The  passage  in  Proverbs  indicates  a  time  of  mighty 
prophetic  activity :  this,  we  are  now  taught,  was  ful- 
filled in  the  sending  forth  of  prophets  and  apostles. 
The  Spirit  in  the  Proverbs  intimates  that  the  result 
will  be  determined  refusal ;  and  the  Lord  bids  the  Jews 
note  that  this  will  be  realised  in  their  slaying  some 
and  persecuting  others  of  His  messengers.  The  Spirit 
testifies  that  the  Divine  wrath  will  be  manifested  in 
God's  withdrawal  and  in  the  abandonment  of  His 
people  to  desolating  terror  and  fearful  destruction. 
This,  again,  our  Lord  interprets.  He  discloses  the 
truth  and  leaves  it  sounding  in  the  ears  of  the  multi- 
tude and  inscribed  upon  the  page  of  Scripture.  It  was 
interpretation  that  was  needed,  and  not  mere  repeti- 
tion. That  generation  required  to  know  that  it  was 
itself  that  had  stood  before  the  omniscient  eye  of  God. 
There  are  passages,  however,  which  are  frequently 
cited  as  distinct  New  Testament  quotations  from 
apocryphal  books.  Speaking  of  these,  Wildeboer 
says  :  "  The  facft  that  New  Testament  writers  quote 
from  Apocryphal  books  can  only  be  denied  by 
dogmatic  prejudice."*  Let  me  say  a  word  on  the 
^two  strongest  of  these  alleged  instances.  In  2  Tim. 
iii.  8  the  names  are  given  of  the  two  leading  opponents 

♦  The  On/;in  of  the  Cotton  of  the  Old  Testament,  p.  51. 

G 


114        ^''^^  Bible  :    its  S true  hire  and  Purpose. 

of  Moses  among  the  magicians  at  the  Court  of 
Pharaoh.  They  are  Jannes  and  Jambres.  Origen  tells 
us  of  an  apocryphal  work,  entitled  Jannes  and 
Mambres.  But  it  appears  to  have  been  one  of  the  least 
successful  of  these  forgeries.  It  was  condemned  by 
Pope  Gelasius,  and  afterwards  disappeared.  There  is 
no  proof  whatever  that  it  existed  in  the  apostle's  time; 
and,  even  though  it  had  existed  then,  the  form  Mambres 
would  have  indicated  that  the  names  were  not  taken 
from  it.  This  apocryphal  book,  however,  merely  em- 
bodied an  ancient  and  widespread  tradition.  Pliny, 
the  Roman  naturalist,  mentions  Jannes  in  connection 
with  Moses*;  and  the  names  appear  in  the  Targums 
and  in  the  Talmud.  The  common  opinion  has  been 
that  Paul  refers  to  the  old  tradition.  A  more  worthy 
belief  is  that  these  names  of  the  opposers  of  God's 
ancient  servant  are  here  revealed  to  us  by  the  Spirit. 
Recent  investigation  proves  that  Jannes,  at  least,  was 
an  Egyptian  name  of  that  very  time;  and,  in  any 
case,  the  assertion  that  this  is  a  quotation  from  an 
apocryphal  book  is  quite  unproved. 

The  only  instance  which  has  even  a  semblance  of 
strength  is  the  passage  in  Jude  (verses  14,  15)  : 
"And  Enoch  also,  the  seventh  from  Adam,  prophesied 
of  these,  saying.  Behold,  the  Lord  cometh  with  ten 
thousands  of  His  saints,  to  execute  judgment  upon 
all,  and  to  convince  all  that  are  ungodly  among  them 
of  all  their  ungodly  deeds  which  they  have  ungodly 
committed,  and  of  all  their  hard  speeches  which 
ungodly  sinners  have  spoken  against  Him."     Some 

*  Bk.  XXX.  ch.ii. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  115 

even  of  our  ablest  apologists  have  yielded  to  learned 
clamour,  and  have  given  way  here.  "  This  appears," 
writes  the  late  Dr.  Green,  of  Princeton,  "  to  be  taken 
from  the  Book  of  Enoch,  chapter  ii."*  But  the 
critics  have  built  here  upon  the  usual  sandy  founda- 
tion. There  is  absolutely  no  proof  that  the  apocryphal 
Book  of  Enoch  was  in  existence  in  the  first  century ; 
and  the  ordinary  reader  will  naturally  ask  how  the 
assertion  that  the  book  was  quoted  from  could  have 
been  ventured  until  it  was  certain  that  the  book  then 
existed.  The  forgery  which  goes  by  this  name  is 
marked  by  such  an  evident  knowledge  of  Christian 
docTtrine  that  the  critics  have  been  compelled  to  admit 
that  part  of  it  at  least  is  of  late  date.  Some  of  them, 
indeed,  have  contended  that  the  book  cannot  be  earlier 
than  132  A.D.  The  reader,  however,  will  be  able  to 
form  his  own  judgment  when  he  notes  the  following 
facts.  A  conspicuous  feature  of  the  work,  and  one 
which  must  have  been  due  to  the  original  writer,  is  the 
prominence  given  to  the  Messiah.  He  is  spoken  of  as 
"the  Son  of  God,"  as  He  "whose  name  was  named 
before  the  sun  was  made."  He  is  said  also  to  have 
"existed  aforetime  in  the  presence  of  God."  He  is 
spoken  of,  too,  as  "  the  Son  of  woman,"  and  "  the 
Son  of  Man."  That  this  conception  of  Him  who  was 
to  come  was  possible  to  any  uninspired  writer  before 
the  advent  of  Christ  is  simply  incredible.  We  have  in 
Philo  and  Josephus  a  distin(5t  revelation  of  the  thought 
even  of  our  Lord's  own  time,  and  there  is  nothing 
resembling  this  to  be  found  anywhere.     Who  knew, 

*  General  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  p.  148. 


Ii6         The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

for  instance,  that  the  Messiah  was  to  be  One  who 
had  existed  from  all  eternity ;  in  other  words,  was 
God  Himself?  And  yet  we  are  asked  by  those  men, 
who  themselves  can  believe  so  little,  to  believe  that  this 
was  a  conception  readily  attainable  before  the  coming 
of  Christ !  Here  is  the  passage  in  this  so-called  Book 
of  Enoch :  "  In  that  hour  was  this  Son  of  Man 
invoked  before  the  Lord  of  Spirits,  and  His  name  in 
the  presence  of  the  Ancient  of  days.  Before  the  sun 
and  the  signs  were  created,  before  the  stars  of  heaven 
were  formed.  His  name  was  invoked  in  the  presence 
of  the  Lord  of  Spirits.  Therefore  the  Elect  and  the 
Concealed  One  existed  in  His  presence,  before  the 
world  was  created  and  for  ever  "  (xlviii.  2,  3,  5).  That 
there  are  predictions  in  the  Old  Testament  which 
quite  bear  out  all  this,  we  frankly  admit.  But  these 
were  enigmas  to  the  Jews  then,  and  they  have  been 
enigmas  to  them  ever  since.  It  was  the  most 
unexpected  of  all  revelations  to  the  apostles  them- 
selves ;  and  it  is  simply  incredible  that  any  forger, 
writing  in  the  first  century  B.C.,  could  have  penetrated 
a  mystery  that  was  hid  from  that  generation  as  from 
preceding  generations. 

Still  more  extraordinary,  in  their  anticipation  of 
Christianity,  would  have  been  some  other  parts  of 
the  book.  The  Messiah,  it  tells  us,  will  be  the  objedl 
of  universal  faith  and  worship.  All  the  rulers  of  the 
earth  "  shall  fix  their  hopes  on  this  Son  of  Man,  shall 
pray  to  Him,  and  petition  Him  for  mercy  "  (Ixi. 10-13); 
"  All  who  dwell  on  earth  shall  fall  down  and  worship 
before  Him,  and  sing  praise  to  the  name  of  the  Lord 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  117 

of  Spirits  "  (xlviii.  4).  Ttie  Messiah  is  also  to  be  the 
Judge  of  men  and  angels  :  "  O  ye  kings,  O  ye  mighty 
who  inhabit  the  world,  you  shall  behold  My  Eledl 
One  sitting  upon  the  throne  of  My  glory.  And  He 
shall  judge  Azazeel,  all  his  associates  and  all  his 
hosts,  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  of  Spirits  "  (liv.  5) ; 
"  They  blessed,  glorified,  and  exulted,  because  the 
name  of  the  Son  of  Man  was  revealed  to  them.  He 
sat  upon  the  throne  of  His  glory  " — words  which  are 
plainly  taken  from  Matthew  xxv.  31  — "and  the 
principal  part  of  the  judgment  was  assigned  to  Him, 
the  Son  of  Man  "  (Ixviii.  39).  There  are  also  distinct 
allusions  to  the  Trinity.  We  read  of  "  all  the  angels 
of  the  Lords,  namely,  of  the  Eledt  One  and  of  the 
other  Power  who  was  upon  the  earth  over  the  water 
in  that  day"  (Ix.  13,  14).  The  Ele(5t  One  is,  as  we 
have  seen,  identified  with  the  Messiah,  and  "the 
other  Power  "  is  clearly  the  Spirit  of  God,  spoken  of 
in  Genesis  i.  2  as  moving  "upon  the  face  of  the 
waters."  That  the  Jews  before  Christ  believed  in  a 
dodtrine  which  they  have  abhorred  ever  since  His 
coming,  the  critics  will  have  difficulty  in  inducing 
anyone  to  credit.  But,  if  the  book  did  not  exist  in 
the  time  of  Jude,  it  is  clear  that  Jude  could  not  have 
quoted  from  it.  The  words  are  a  precious  revelation 
to  us  of  the  ministry  of  this  ancijent  servant  of  God,  and 
of  the  fadt  that  the  old  world  also  had  its  prophets  and 
its  witnesses.  That  Jude  should  be  used  to  show  us 
this  is  nothing  strange.  Hosea  conveys  to  us  a  fact, 
for  instance,  regarding  Jacob,  of  which  we  find  no 
account  in  Genesis.    Jacob,  he  tells  us,  in  his  wrest- 


ii8         The  Bible:    its  Struchire  and  Purpose. 

ling  with  the  angel,  "wept  and  made  supplication  unto 
him  "  (xii.  4).  Paul  communicates  a  saying  of  Jesus 
which  is  not  found  in  any  of  the  Gospels  (Acts  xx.  35). 
These  and  other  communications,  like  this  regarding 
Enoch's  prophetic  ministry,  were  given  as  they  were 
needed. 

Reuss,  who  has  cut  himself  loose  from  all  Scriptural 
authority,  has  no  scruple  in  admitting  that  the  attack 
From  this  side  has  failed.  "  In  all  the  New.Testament," 
he  says,  "  no  one  has  been  able  to  point  out  a  single 
dogmatic  passage  taken  from  the  Apocrypha  and 
quoted  as  proceeding  from  a  sacred  authority. 
Hence,  whatever  may  have  been  the  practice  followed 
in  the  various  Christian  communities,  it  must  be  said 
that  the  apostolic  teaching,  so  far  as  we  are  acquainted 
with  it,  adhered  to  the  Hebrew  canon."  *  But,  if 
there  is  no  proof  in  the  New  Testament  of  any 
acknowledgment  of  apocryphal  books,  there  is 
certainly  not  a  shadow  of  justification  for  the  state- 
ment that  they  ever  had  a  place  in  the  Jewish  Canon. 
They  were  never  at  any  time  received  as  sacred  by 
the  Jews.  "The  Apocrypha  .  .  which  were  vvholly 
foreign  to  the  use  of  the  Synagogue,"  says  "Wildeboer, 
"  had  never  been  thought  of  in  authoritative  Jewish 
schools  for  reading  in  the  Synagogue."  t  It  appears 
also  that  they  were  not  included  in  copies  of  the 
only  early  Greek  translation,  called  the  Septuagint, 
down  to  300  A.D.  For  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  says  • 
"  Read  the  Divine  Scriptures,  namely,  the  twenty- 

♦  The  Htstory  of  the  Canon  of  Holy  Scripture,  pp.  8, 9. 
+  The  Origin  of  the  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament,  p.  92. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  iig 

two  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  which  the  seventy- 
two  interpreters  translated."  Here  the  number  of 
the  Books  is  the  same  as  those  (as  we  shall  after- 
wards see)  which  are  contained  in  the  present  Hebrew 
Bible.  The  Greek  translator  of  the  Book  of  Ecclesi- 
asticus  (who  was  also  the  grandson  of  the  author) 
makes  no  claim  to  have  that  work  recognised  as 
canonical.  His  words  plainly  imply,  on  the  contrary, 
that  the  Scriptures  stand  entirely  apart  from  his  and 
all  other  books.  Josephus,  too,  a  contemporary  of 
the  apostles,  speaks  in  the  same  way.  He  intimates 
his  knowledge  of  the  existence  of  later  books,  written 
after  the  closing  of  the  Old  Testament  Canon;  "but," 
he  says,  these  have  "not  been  deemed  worthy  of 
like  credit  with  what  preceded,  because  the  exaft 
succession  of  the  prophets  ceased  ;"  and  he  adds 
that,  "though  so  long  a  time  has  now  passed,  no 
one  has  dared  either  to  add  anything  to  them,  or  to 
take  anything  from  them,  or  to  alter  anything  in 
them."*  Philo  of  Alexandria,  a  somewhat  earlier 
witness,  gives  the  same  testimony.  Speaking  of  the 
Jews  and  their  sacred  Scriptures,  he  says:  "They 
have  not  changed  so  much  as  a  single  word  in  them. 
They  would  rather  die  a  thousand  deaths  than  detract 
anything  from  these  laws  and  statutes."  t 


*  Cont.  Apion. ,i.8.     +  Eusebius,  DePrep.  Evang.,  viii. 


20         The  Bible :    its  Strjidure  and  Purpose. 

CHAPTER   XI. 

Have  we  To-day  the  very  Scriptures 
Possessed  by  our  Lord  and  His  Apostles? 


'"r^HE  importance  of  this  question  is  evident,  and 
J-     will  be  still  plainer  when  we  inquire  into  the 
New  Testament  witness  to  the  Old.     Happily  the 
question  admits  of  a  clear  and  satisfactory  reply. 

Let  us  divide  the  inquiry  into  two  parts,  and  ask, 
first  of  all,  whether  our  Old  Testament  contains  the 
same  number  of  Books  as  the  Jews  possessed  in  their 
Sacred  Scriptures  in  the  first  century  of  the  Christian 
era.  Have  no  Books  been  lost  ?  Have  any  been 
added?  Beginning  with  the  fourth  century  of  the 
Christian  era,  we  find  the  Christian  Church  then 
possessed  of  the  same  Old  Testament  Scriptures 
as  have  been  handed  down  to  us.  Rufinus,  who  was 
a  contemporary  and  a  friend  of  Jerome,  and  who 
flourished  about  390  a.d.,  gives  the  following  enumera- 
tion of  them  :  "  First  of  all,"  he  writes,  "  five  Books 
of  Moses  have  been  handed  down.  After  these, 
Joshua  and  Judges,  together  with  Ruth.  After  them, 
four  Books  of  Kings,  which  the  Jews  number  as  two; 
Chronicles,  which  are  called  '  the  Book  of  days  ;'  and 
Ezra  two  Books  .  .  .  and  Esther.  Of  the  prophets 
there  are  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  Daniel, 
besides  one  Book  of  the  twelve  Prophets.  Job  also, 
and  the  Psalms  of  David,  and  three  of  Solomon."  * 

*  Expos,  in  Symbol.  Apcst. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  121 

These  three  Books  of  Solomon  are  Proverbs, 
Ecclesiastes,  and  The  Song  of  Songs.  The  twelve 
Minor  Prophets  were  reckoned  as  one  Book.  Here, 
then,  we  have  all  the  Books  of  the  Old  Testament. 
There  are  none  wanting,  and  there  are  no  additions. 
Indeed,  this  writer  is  careful  to  define  the  position  of 
the  apocryphal  books.  After  adding  the  New  Testa- 
ment Books  to  the  above  list,  he  says :  "  These  are 
the  books  which  the  fathers  have  included  within 
the  Canon,  by  which  they  would  establish  the 
tenets  of  our  faith.  One  should  know,  however,  that 
there  are  other  books,  which  are  not  canonical,  but 
which  our  ancestors  called  ecclesiastical ;  for  example, 
the  Wisdom  of  Solomon,  [the  book]  of  Sirach,  called 
by  the  Latins  Ecclesiasticus.  ...  Of  the  same  order 
is  the  little  book  of  Tohit  and  Jndith,  and  the  books  ot 
the  Maccabees.'' 

This,  which  is  also  the  general  testimony  of  the 
fathers,  is  perfectly  clear.  It  is  specially  noteworthy 
also  in  regard  to  the  order  of  the  books,  as  we  shall 
have  occasion  to  remark  by-and-bye,  when  we  come 
to  speak  of  the  Historical  Books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment; Jerome,  in  his  Prologus  Galeattis,  gives  us 
the  arrangement  which  was  favoured  by  his  Jewish 
teachers.  The  Jews  divide  the  Books  into  three 
sections.  The  first  consists  of  the  five  Books  of  the 
Law — Genesis  to  Deuteronomy.  The  second  they 
call  "  the  Prophets,"  among  which  they  reckon  th-e 
historical  Books  from  Joshua  to  2  Kings-.  This  also 
'embraces  all  the  prophetical  Books  with  the  exception 
of  Daniel.     The  third,  and  last,  division,  is  named 


122         The  Bible  :    its  Structure  a7id  Purpose 

Kethnhim,  "  the  writings,"  called  in  Greek  the 
Hagiographa,  that  is,  the  "holy  writings."  This 
contains  the  Book  of  Job,  the  Psalms,  Proverbs,  and 
the  other  Books  which  Jerome  names.  He  first  of  all 
explains  the  Rabbinical  conceit  which  saw  a  striking 
analogy  between  the  number  of  letters  in  the  Hebrew 
alphabet  and  the  number  of  Books  in  the  Hebrew 
Bible.  This  resemblance  would  not  occur  to  us  ;  for, 
while  there  are  twenty-two  letters  in  that  alphabet, 
there  are  really  thirty-nine  Books  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. But  the  Jews,  by  putting  a  number  of  Books 
together,  managed  to  make  the  twenty-two ;  and 
when  they  had  accomplished  this,  they  noticed 
another  analogy.  Five  of  the  Hebrew  letters  have 
each  of  them  two  distinct  forms.  The  letter  has  one 
form  when  it  is  written  at  the  end  of  a  word,  and 
another  form  when  it  occupies  some  other  place  in 
a  word.  These  are  consequently  named  "  double 
letters."  It  seemed  to  the  Jews,  therefore,  a  remark- 
able fa(ft  that  there  should  be  five  double  Books  in 
their  Bible  just  as  there  are  five  double  letters  in  their 
alphabet.  These  are  Samuel  (I.  and  II.),  Kings  (I. 
and  II.),  Chronicles  (I.  and  II.),  Ezra  (with  which 
they  place  Nehemiah),  and  Jeremiah  (to  which 
Lamentations  is  added).  But,  like  many  other  eager 
theorists,  they  forgot  some  things.  There  was  a 
sixth  double-Book,  namely,  Judges-Ruth  ;  and  there 
was  a  twelve-fold  Book  (the  Minor  Prophets)  to 
which,  fortunately  for  the  learner  of  their  noble  and 
honoured  tongue,  their  alphabet  provides  no  analogy. 
Jerome   names   each   of   the    Books   both   by  its 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  123 

Hebrew  name  and  by  that  b}'  which  it  was  known  to 
the  Christian  Churches.  I  give  below  the  Books; 
the  names  and  the  order  of  which  he  has  thus  placed 
on  record  : 


The  Law 

The  Prophets 

The  Hagiographa 

(5  Books). 

(8  Books). 

(9  Books). 

(i)  Genesis. 

(i)  Joshua. 

(I)  Job. 

(2)  Exodus. 

(2)  Judges  (with  Ruth). 

(2)  Psalms. 

(3)  Leviticus. 

(3)  Samuel 

(ist  and  2nd  Books). 

{3)  Proverbs. 

(4)  Numbers. 

(4)  Kings 

(ist  and  2nd  Books). 

(4)  Ecclesiastes. 

(5)  Deuteronomy. 

(5)  Isaiah. 

(5)  Song  of  Songs. 

(6)  Jeremiah 

(6)  Daniel. 

(with  Lamentations). 

(7)  Ezekiel. 

(7)  Chronicles. 

(8)  The  12  Minor 

(8)  Ezra  (with 

Prophets. 

Nehemiah). 
(9)  Esther. 

If  we  add  together  the  numbers  of  the  Books  in 
each  division — five,  eight,  and  nine — we  find  that 
they  amount  to  twenty-two,  the  number  of  letters  in 
the  Hebrew  alphabet. 

He  adds  that  some  placed  Rtith  and  Lamentations 
among  the  Hagiographa,  and  thus  make  twenty-four 
Books  instead  of  twenty-two.  Those  who  did  this, 
however,  were  probably  desirous  to  make  the  number 
of  the  Books  agree  with  the  number  of  letters  in  the 
Greek  alphabet,  which  is  twenty-four. 

The  writing  in  which  Jerome  communicates  the 
above  information  he  named  Prologus  Galeatus,  that 
is,  "ahelmeted  Preface."  He  explains  the  meaning 
of  the  name.  He  says  that  the  above  list  will  be  an 
armed  fence  round  about  the  Canonical  Books  of  the 


124         The  Bible:    its  Striuhire  and  Purpose. 

Old  Testament;  "so  that,"  he  adds,  "we  may  be 
sure  that  whatsoever  is  outside  this  must  be  placed 
among  the  Apocrypha."  This  testimony  is  decisive. 
Jerome,  resident  at  that  time  in  Palestine,  took  special 
pains  to  inform  himself  as  to  what  the  Jews  believed 
concerning  the  sacred  Books  =  We  have,  therefore, 
in  the  catalogue  given  above,  the  Jewish  Canon  in 
the  year  380  of  our  era.  It  is,  so  far  as  the  number 
of  the  Books  is  concerned,  in  absolute  agreement  with 
our  English  Old  Testament.  No  Books  have  disap- 
peared since  380  a.d.  ;  and  no  Books  have  been  added. 
Passing  upward  now  to  the  second  century,  we  find 
Melito,  who  was  Bishop  of  Sardis  about  170  a.d., 
informing  us  what  the  Jewish  Canon  was  at  that 
time.  He  writes  to  one  Onesimus,  a  friend  of  his, 
who  is  apparently  deeply  interested  in  this  inquiry. 
The  letter  runs  as  follows  :  "  Melito,  to  Onesimus  his 
brother,  greeting.  Since  you  have  often  requested, 
from  the  earnest  desire  which  you  cherish  for  the 
Word,  that  you  might  have  a  selecftion  made  for  you 
from  the  Law  and  the  Prophets,  which  has  respe(ft 
to  our  Saviour  and  the  whole  of  our  faith  ;  and  since 
moreover  you  have  been  desirous  to  obtain  an  accurate 
account  of  the  ancient  Books,  both  as  to  their  number 
and  their  order,  I  have  taken  pains  to  accomplish 
this,  knowing  your  earnestness  in  respect  to  the  faith, 
and  your  desire  for  instrucftion  in  regard  to  the  Word  ; 
and  most  of  all,  that  you,  while  striving  after  eternal 
salvation,  through  desires  after  God,  give  a  preference 
to  these  things.  Making  a  journey  therefore  into  the 
East,  and  having  arrived  at  the  place  where  these 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  125 

things  were  proclaimed  and  transa(?ted,  I  there  learned 
accurately  the  Books  of  the  Old  Testament,  which  I 
arrange  and  transmit  to  you.  The  names  are  as 
follows  :  The  five  Books  of  Moses — Genesis,  Exodus, 
Leviticus,  Numbers,  Deuteronomy.  Then  Joshua 
(son)  of  Nun,  Judges,  Ruth,  four  Books  of  Kings 
[including  two  of  Samuel  and  two  of  Kings] ,  two  of 
Chronicles,  The  Psalms  of  David,  the  Proverbs  of 
Solomon  (also  called  Wisdom),  Ecclesiastes,  the 
Song  of  Songs,  Job.  Prophets :  Isaiah,  Jeremiah, 
the  twelve  in  one  Book,  Daniel,  Ezekiel,  Ezra.  From 
these  I  have  made  selections,  distributing  them  into 
six  Books." 

Melito  is  the  earliest  Christian  writer  who  has  left 
us  a  list  of  the  Old  Testament  Books.  He  was  held 
in  the  highest  esteem  by  the  early  Church.  TertuUian, 
who  was  a  contemporary  of  his,  says  that  most 
Christians  called  Melito  "  a  Prophet."  The  very 
fact,  too,  of  his  travelling  to  Palestine,  and  his  taking 
pains,  as  he  says,  to  learn  "  accurately  "  (akritos) 
the  number  and  the  order  of  the  Books  of  the  Old 
Testament,  invests  the  above  testimony  with  peculiar 
importance.  Nehemiah  is,  as  usual,  included  in  the 
name  Ezra.  But  there  is  one  Book  apparently 
omitted.  This  is  Esther.  This  is  almost  certainly 
due  to  a  mistake  made  by  Eusebius,  in  whose  pages 
alone  the  quotation  from  Melito  has  been  preserved. 
A  similar  slip  was  made  by  him  in  his  account  of  the 
testimony  of.  Origen  in  regard  to  the  Old  Testament 
Books.  Origen  distinctly  says  that  they  number 
twenty-two.     But  Eusebius,  in  copying  Origen's  Hst, 


126        The  Bible  :    Us  Structure  and  Purpose. 

only  gives  us  twenty-one.  In  this  instance,  the  Book 
of  the  Minor  Prophets  is  omitted,  a  Book  which 
Origen  can  by  no  possibihty  have  intended  to 
exclude.  Turning  to  Melito's  list,  we  find  that  the 
Books,  as  named  by  him,  number  only  twenty-one. 
The  twenty-second  has  been  omitted,  and  the  missinp 
Book  can  only  have  been  Esther. 

This  testimony  of  Mehto's  brings  us  to  the  second 
century  of  the  Christian  era.  We  have  now  to  listen 
to.  another,  not  now  from  a  Christian  source,  but 
from  a  Jewish,  which  takes  us  back  to  the  first 
century,  and  to  the  very  time  of  our  Lord.  Josephus 
was  born  in  the  year  37  of  our  era ;  and,  as  he  tells 
us  how  many  Books  formed  the  Holy  Scriptures  of 
the  Jews  at  that  time,  his  testimony  is  decisive.  The 
Bible  of  Josephus  was  the  Bible  of  his  childhood, 
the  Bible  of  his  parents,  and  of  their  contempor- 
aries ;  and,  consequently,  the  Bible  of  our  Lord.  It 
was  the  Bible  of  the  Synagogues  at  Nazareth  and 
Capernaum,  of  all  the  Synagogues  in  Judea  and  in 
Galilee.  It  was  the  Bible  of  the  Temple,  and  the 
Bible  whose  words  the  Lord  quoted  to  His  disciples 
when  He  opened  their  minds  that  they  might  under- 
stand its  sayings.  "  We  have  not,"  says  Josephus, 
"a  countless  number  of  books,  discordant  and 
arrayed  against  each  other,  but  only  two-and-twenty 
books,  containing  the  history  of  every  age,  which  are 
justly  accredited  as  Divine;  and  of  these,  five  belong 
to  Moses,  which  contain  both  the  laws  and  the  history 
of  the  generations  of  men  until  his  death.  This 
period  lacks  but  little  of  3,000  years.      From  the 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  127 

<3eath  of  Moses,  moreover,  until  the  reign  of  Arta- 
xerxes,  king  of  the  Persians  after  Xerxes,  the  prophets 
who  followed  Moses  have  described  the  things  that 
were  done  during  the  age  of  each  one  respectively, 
in  thirteen  books.  The  remaining /c>m>'  contain  hymns 
to  God,  and  rules  of  life  for  men.  From  the  time  of 
Artaxerxes,  moreover,  until  our  present  period,  all 
occurrences  have  been  written  down ;  but  they  are 
not  regarded  as  entitled  to  the  like  credit  with  those 
which  precede  them,  because  there  was  no  certain 
succession  of  prophets.  Fact  has  shown  what  con- 
fidence we  place  in  our  own  writings.  For,  although 
so  many  ages  have  passed  away,  no  one  has  dared  to 
add  to,  nor  to  take  anything  from  them,  nor  to  make 
alterations.  In  all  Jews  it  is  implanted,  even  from 
their  birth,  to  regard  them  as  being  the  instructions 
of  God,  and  to  abide  steadfastly  by  them  ;  and,  if  it 
be  necessary,  to  die  gladly  for  them."  * 

The  numbers  given  in  this  extract  enable  us  to 
determine  definitely  the  Books  which  formed  the  Bible 
of  Josephus  and  of  our  Lord.  He  indicates  the  three- 
fold division  in  our  present  Hebrew  Bibles — the  Law, 
the  Pr6phets,  and  the  Kethuhim — that  is,  the  Hagio- 
grapha,  or  "  holy  writings."  The  Books  were 
numbered  then,  as  afterwards,  in  accordance  with 
the  number  of  letters  in  the  Hebrew  alphabet. 
They  were,  in  all,  twenty-two — five  of  Moses,  thirteen 
of  the  Prophets,  and  four  of  the  Hagiographa.  Let 
us  arrange  them,  as  they  plainly  stood  before  the 
mmd  of  Josephus  : — 


128         The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

The  Books  of  The  Prophets  (13).  Those  containing 

Moses  (5).  /jN    Joshua.  Hymns  to  God  and 

/t\    f;pne<;i<?  ,  ,  rules  of  life  for 

(1)  Genesis.  ^^^  j^^^^^  ^^^  ^^^^  ^^^^  ^^^ 

(2)  Exodus.  ^^j  ^^^  ^^j  2nd  Samuel.  (i)  The  Psalms. 

(3)  Leviticus.  ^^j  jgj  ^j^^  2nd  Kings.  (2)  The  Proverbs. 

(4)  Numbers.  ^^^  ^^^  ^^^^  ^nd  Chronicles.  (3)  Ecclesiates. 

(5)  Deuteronomy.  ^^^  ^^^^  ^^^  Nehemiah.  (4)  Song  of  Songs. 

(7)  Esther. 

(8)  Isaiah. 

(9)  Jeremiah  and 

Lamentations. 

(10)  Ezekiel. 

(11)  Daniel. 

(12)  The  Minor  Prophets. 

(13)  Job. 

Job  is  here  included  among  the  historical  Books, 
aad  we  have  in  Josephus,  Book  for  Book,  the  very 
Bible  which  we  have  in  our  hands  to-day.  It  con- 
tained no  fewer  Books :  it  embraced  no  more.  No 
Book  has  been  lost  from  the  Old  Testament  Scrip- 
tures since  the  days  of  our  Lord ;  and  none  has 
been  added  to  them.  Attempts  have  been  made  to 
show  that  the  testimony  of  Josephus  and  of  the  rest 
is  not  to  be  received.  It  will  be  seen  that  there  is 
not  the  slightest  suggestion  of  uncertainty  as  to  the 
Divine  origin  and  authority  of  a  single  Book  in  the 
entire  collection.  They  are  all  "  accredited,"  says 
Josephus,  "as  Divine;"  and  he  further  indicates 
that  they  were  so  from  the  time  when  they  were 
given.  He  follows  this  up  by  showing  that  they  have 
a  unique  place  in  the  literature  of  his  people.  They 
have  other  histories,  he  tells  us,  but  "they  are  not 
entitled,"  he  adds,  "to  the  like  credit  with  those 
which  precede  them."     All  this,  the  critics  tell  us,  is 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  129 

unreliable.  The  Canon  was  not,  they  say,  so  firmly 
established  in  Josephus'  time.  They  maintain  that 
until  the  second  century  of  our  era  some  Books  of 
our  present  Old  Testament  were  still  under  discussion, 
and  had  not  been  finally  received  into  the  Canon. 
"  It  is  a  matter  of  fact,"  writes  Prof.  W.  Robertson 
Smith,  "  that  the  position  of  several  books  was  still 
subject  of  controversy  in  the  apostolic  age,  and  was 
not  finally  determined  till  after  the  fall  of  the  Temple 
and  the  Jewish  State."*  This  grave  assertion  is 
founded  upon  some  references  in  the  Talmud  to 
disputes  in  the  Jewish  Schools  as  to  whether  certain 
Books  "  defiled  the  hands."  These  are  understood  to 
imply  a  doubt  in  the  minds  of  those  who  raised  the 
questions  as  to  whether  those  Books  were  fully 
inspired.  But,  granting  that  the  critical  view  of  this 
matter  is  correct,  the  contention  does  not  help  their 
case  in  the  slightest  degree.  The  questions  were 
raised  because  those  Books  were  already  in  the  Canon.  It 
was  a  criticism  of  the  Canonical  position  of  the 
Books ;  but  in  order  to  have  that  position  criticised, 
the  position  had,  first  of  all,  to  be  occupied. 
These  questions  about  certain  Books  defiling,  or  not 
defiling,  the  hands  were  mere  Rabbinical  refinements, 
and  were  expressive  of  neither  national  nor  scholastic 
doubt  as  to  the  Divine  authority  of  the  Books.  "The 
discussions,"  says  Wildeboer,  "  make  altogether  the 
impression,  as  Noldeke  has  justly  remarked,  that  the 
disputed  books  were  in  use,  but  that  objections  had 
been    raised   against   their   use   in    the    synagogue. 

*  The  Old  Testament  in  the  J eit/ish  Church  (Second  Edition),  p.  187. 

H 


I30        The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

Accordingly  the  question  was  not,  shall  the  books 
be  accepted  ?  but  rather,  should  they  not  be  with- 
drawn ?"*  This  is  fully  borne  out  by  the  fact  that 
the  Jews  from  the  beginning  have  had  only  one 
Canon.  They  have  had  different  sects  and  schools, 
but  they  have  never  had  different  collections  of  the 
sacred  Books.  They  have  had  but  one  Bible  from 
the  days  of  our  Lord  to  the  present  hour;  and  that,^ 
in  respect  of  its  Books,  is  the  Old  Testament  which 
we  possess  to-day. 

After  prolonged  discussion,  this  is  now  admitted. 
"Wildeboer,  whose  book  on  the  Canon  of  the  Old 
Testament  is  very  frequently  marked  by  a  refreshing 
honesty,  as  well  as  learning,  says  :  "  It  must  be  noted 
that  in  the  Talmud,  both  in  the  Gemara  (about 
500  A.D.),  and  in  the  Mishna  (about  200  a.d.),  the 
existence  of  our  Canon  and  its  division  into  Tora, 
Nebiim,  and  Kethubim  are  everywhere  taken  for 
granted."  t  In  an  earlier  passage,  when  referring  to 
the  testimony  of  Josephus,  he  writes:  "My  im- 
pression  is   that  Josephus'  view contains 

important  elements  of  historic  truth.  These  elements 
are:  i.  That  the  line  between  Canonical  and  un- 
canonical  coincides,  in  the  thought  of  Josephus,  and 
the  circle  of  which  he  is  a  representative,  with  the 
cessation  of  prophecy;  and  2.  That  a  general  settled 
persuasion,  in  regard  to  canonicity,  precedes  the 
decision  of  the  schools.  We  shall  see,  in  fact,  that 
n  the  days  of  Josephus  the  schools  still  had  their 
doubts  about  certain  books  of   the   third  division. 

♦Page  92.        -l-PafeesS. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  131 

But  among  the  people  there  existed  in  his  days  such 
a  reverence  for  precisely  the  books  which  still  con- 
stitute our  Canon  (as  the  number  given  by  Josephus 
proves)  that  '  if  need  be  they  would  gladly  die  for 
them.'  "*  But  the  critics  will  have  to  abandon  this  last 
refuge  as  they  have  abandoned  the  rest.  There  could 
not  have  been  any  conflict  in  the  schools  concerning 
the  Canon.  Josephus  belonged  to  the  learned,  and 
he  speaks  for  them  as  for  the  rest  of  the  nation,  when 
he  declares  their  clear,  full,  and  reverent  acceptance 
of  these  and  of  no  other  Books. 

Another  question  remains.  We  have  seen  that  the 
Books  are  the  same ;  and  we  now  complete  our 
inquiry  by  asking  whether  the  contents  of  these 
Books  are  the  same  now  as  they  were  in  the  first 
century.  In  other  words,  has  the  Old  Testament 
text  been  faithfully  handed  down  to  us  ?  The  reply 
is  brief  and  satisfactory.  We  have  already  noted 
the  critical  confession  of  the  accuracy  with  which 
the  Hebrew  text  has  been  transmitted  from  the 
tenth  century  of  the  Christian  era  to  the  present 
hour.  The  most  ancient  manuscripts  which  we  now 
have  are  in  similar  striking  agreement.  This  indicates 
that  the  extreme  and  reverent  care  which  has  marked 
the  work  of  the  more  recent  scribes  also  marked 
that  of  more  ancient  times.  No  liberties  whatever 
were  taken  with  the  text.  No  additions  were  made 
to  it.  Nothing  was  taken  away  from  it.  So  thoroughly 
was  such  dishonest,  or  even  careless,  treatment  of  the 
'text  opposed  to  the  sentiments  of  the  transcribers, 

»  Page  46. 


132         The  Bible:    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

that  even  a  difference  in  size  of  the  letters  in  the 
more  ancient  manuscript,  which  they  were  copying, 
was  preserved.  They  did  not  know  why  the  letter 
should  be  different  in  size  or  in  position  from  the 
rest.  But  it  was  not  theirs  to  reason  :  it  was  theirs 
to  transcribe,  with  absolute  fidelity,  the  sacred  Book. 
The  letters  appeared  in  the  copy  just  as  they  were  in 
the  manuscript  from  which  the  copy  was  made. 

Another  remarkable  fact  has  been  discovered 
through  the  comparison  of  the  manuscripts  and  the 
ancient  versions  of  the  Old  Testament.  It  has  been 
made  quite  clear  (as  will  be  seen  from  the  words 
quoted  on  page  go  from  W.  Robertson  Smith)  that  one 
standard  copy  has  been  used,  from  which  the  others 
have  been  transcribed.  This  has  been  a  surprise  to 
scholars ;  and  the  fact  is  one  of  the  very  greatest 
significance.  When  a  scribe  took  it  in  hand  to  write 
out  a  copy  of  the  Old  Testament,  he  did  not  procure 
an  older  copy  from  one  place  and  several  others  from 
several  other  places,  compare  them  together,  and, 
where  they  might  happen  to  differ  from  each  other, 
follow  the  readings  of  the  majority  of  the  manu- 
scripts. On  the  contrary,  the  new  manuscript  was 
made  from,  and  corrected  by,  one  standard  copy.  It  is 
plain,  therefore,  that  the  Jews  had  one  standard 
manuscript,  which  was  regarded  as  settling  every 
question  about  the  text. 

Josephus  helps  us  to  understand  how  this  peculiarity 
originated.  In  referring  to  Moses'  bringing  water 
from  the  rock  in  the  wilderness,  he  says :  "  That 
God  had  foretold  this  to  Moses,  the  Scripture  laid  up 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  133 

in  the  temple  shows."  *  Josephus  was  a  priest,  and 
was  fully  acquainted  with  what  the  Temple  contained. 
We  learn  here,  therefore,  that  there  was  a  standard 
copy  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures,  containing  no  doubt 
some  at  least  of  the  original  documents,  preserved 
in  the  Temple.  He  makes  other  references  to  the  same 
fact.  Mentioning  the  prolonging  of  that  day  when 
Joshua  defeated  the  five  kings  who  had  come  to  fight 
against  the  Gideonites,  he  makes  a  like  appeal  to  the 
Temple  copy  of  the  Scriptures.  "  This  is  shown," 
he  says,  "  by  the  writings  laid  up  in  the  Temple."  t 
This  statement  of  Josephus  is  borne  out  by  the 
Talmud  {Kelim  xv.  6),  which  speaks  of  the  "  Temple 
court  copy,"  "  from  which  the  high  priest  read  on 
the  great  Day  of  Atonement."  %  This  copy  of  the 
Sacred  Scriptures  was  taken  away  by  the  Romans 
along  with  the  other  spoils  of  the  Temple,  and  was 
displayed  in  the  triumphal  procession  of  Vespasian 
and  Titus.  In  describing  these  objects,  Josephus 
writes :  "  Last  among  these  spoils  was  borne  the 
Law  of  the  Jews."  He  tells  us  also  that  the  Emperor 
Vespasian  built  a  Temple  of  Peace,  in  which  he 
placed  the  Temple  furniture ;  but  that  "  their  Law 
and  the  purple  veil  of  the  Temple  were  laid  up  in  the 
Emperor's  Palace."  §  The  place  which  was  given  to 
the  Sacred  Books  in  the  procession,  as  well  as  the 
directions  issued  as  to  their  custody,  show  that  they 
were  the  most  prized  of  all  the  contents  of  the 
Temple. 

*  Antiquities  of  the  Jews,  III.,  i.  7.     +V.,  i.  17.     :  Wildeboer,  pp.90,  91. 
§  The  Wars  of  thf  Jews.  VII.,  v.  5,  7. 


134         '^^^  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

There  was,  consequently,  a  standard  copy  of  the 
Old  Testament.  When  this  was  carried  away  by 
the  Romans,  the  Jews  would  undoubtedly  take 
measures  to  have  its  place  supplied  by  some  authen- 
ticated copy,  which  had  been  compared  with,  and 
corrected  by,  that  which  was  now  removed  to  Rome. 
The  fact  that  our  present  Hebrew  Bibles  show  still 
one  text,  and  one  text  only,  may  be  taken  as  proof 
that  the  Temple  copy  is  therein  preserved,  and  is 
still  in  our  hands.  In  this  way  we-  possess  the  very 
Old  Testament  which  was  in  the  hands  of  our  Lord 
and  of  His  apostles. 

The  fact,  too,  of  the  existence  of  that  Temple 
copy  indicates  how  the  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament 
was  formed.  For  here  also  the  Canon  was  made  auto- 
matically. The  central  place  of  worship — the  Temple 
at  Jerusalem — took  the  place  which  was  afterwards 
occupied  by  the  first  Christian  Churches ;  and  just 
as  evangelists  and  apostles  handed  the  New  Testa- 
ment Books  to  the  latter,  so  the  prophets  handed 
the  Books,  which  were  given  through  them  by  the 
Spirit  of  God,  to  the  High  Priest  of  the  Time.  The 
foundation  of  the  Temple  copy  was  made  by  Moses 
himself;*  and,  naturally,  that  course,  begun  with  the 
first  of  the  Sacred  Oracles  committed  to  Israel,  was 
followed  by  all  the  rest.  Ezra  and  the  Jews,  who 
returned  from  the  Babylonish  captivity,  had  as  little 
to  do  with  defining  the  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament 
as  the  Church  Councils  had  to  do  with  the  canon- 
izing of  the  New  Testament  Scriptures. 

*  Deuteronomy  xxsi.  26. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  135,, 

CHAPTER   XII. 

The   Question   as  to   the    Old   Testament 
Settled  by  our  Lord  and  His  Apostles. 

IT  IS  a  noteworthy  facft  that  the  critics  are  greatly 
troubled  lest  any  question  should  be  raised 
regarding  the  teaching  of  our  Lord  and  His  apostles 
as  to  the  nature  and  the  claims  of  the  Old  Testament 
Scriptures.  They  speak  and  write  as  if  it  were  a 
distin(5t  grievance  that  such  an  inquiry  should  be 
entered  upon,  or  even  suggested.  This  can  only  mean 
that  any  investigation  of  the  kind  will  show  that  the 
higher  criticism  and  our  Lord  are  not  at  one  on  this 
matter.  That  is  a  momentous  admission.  If  to  take 
part  with  the  higher  criticism  is  to  separate  from  the 
Son  of  God,  who  will  go  with  it  that  is  not  prepared 
to  abandon  Him?  There  is  surely  urgent  need  for 
this  inquiry,  lest  such  a  fatal  renunciation  as  that 
should  be  made  by  anyone  without  knowing  fully 
what  his  a6tion  means. 

We  have  seen,  in  the  preceding  chapter,  that  the 
Old  Testament  of  to-day  is  essentially  the  Bible  of 
the  Lord  Jesus,  and  of  every  New  Testament  writer. 
But  that  this  Old  Testament  is  accepted  by  the 
New  as  the  very  Word  of  God  will  be  admitted  by 
every  candid  reader  of  the  latter.  There  are  some 
500  quotations  from,  or  distin(5t  allusions  to,  the  Old 
Testament  in  the  New.     Fifty-eight  of  these  occur 


136        The  Bible :    its  Striuture  and  P^irpose. 

in  Matthew  alone  ;  and  among  them  are  references  to 
every  Book  of  the  Pentateuch,  to  i  Samuel  and  i 
Kings,  to  the  Psalms,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Daniel,  Hosea, 
Jonah,  Micah,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi. 

We  are  carried  beyond  even  this  general  impression 
when  we  ponder  the  references  themselves.  Let  us 
first  of  all  mark  a  few  which  define  our  Lord's 
position.  When  we  come  to  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount — that  new  Law  on  the  new  Mount  Sinai — we 
encounter  a  passage  which  has  a  v&ry  distinct  bearing 
upon  our  inquiry.  "  Think  not,"  said  our  Lord, 
"that  I  am  come  to  destroy  the  Law  or  the  Prophets. 
I  am  not  come  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil.  For  verily  I 
say  unto  you,  Till  heaven  and  earth  pass,  one  jot  or 
one  tittle  shall  in  no  wise  pass  from  the  Law,  till  all 
be  fulfilled  "  (Matt.  v.  17, 18).  It  was  a  not  unnatural 
thought  that  the  New  Law  was  to  be  henceforth 
enough  for  the  Church,  and  that  the  Old  might  be 
safely  negledled.  But  this,  says  our  Lord,  is  not  to 
be  imagined  for  a  moment.  The  whole  programme 
of  the  Gospel  era,  and  of  its  triumphant  consumma- 
tion, is  embalmed  in  the  Old  Testament.  It  maps  out 
the  Lord's  work ;  and  He  has  come  not  to  destroy, 
but  to  fulfil,  it.  So  fully  is  it  God's  Word  that  the 
smallest  letters,  yea,  the  marks,  which  distinguish  one 
from  another  the  letters  which  are  otherwise  alike, 
shall  not  pass  away  till  all  shall  be  fulfilled.  The 
tiniest  particle  of  that  writing  has  its  place  in  the  ex- 
pression of  God's  counsel  and  will,  and  it  shall  have 
its  accomplishment.  No  doctrine  of  inspiration  has 
ever  been  higher  or  more  truly  rational  than  that.  To 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  137 

Christ  every  letter  of  those  original  Scriptures  was 
sacred,  for  each  had  its  place  in  the  revelation  of  the 
Divine  mind. 

In  John  X.  35  we  meet  another  statement  which 
carries  us  quite  as  far.  Reasoning  with  the  Jews,  our 
Lord  reminds  them  of  an  expression  in  Psalm  Ixxxii. 
They  had  accused  Him  of  blasphemy  because  He  had 
called  Himself  the  Son  of  God.  In  Psa.  Ixxxii.,  princes 
and  rulers  are  called  "gods."  The  explanation  seems  to 
be  that  they  sat  in  God's  seat.  They  were  the  arbiters 
of  the  fate  of  their  fellow-men.  It  is  a  great  position  ; 
but  it  is  an  arrangement  that  is  necessary  for  the 
world's  best  interests,  and  so  God  calls  them  by  this 
name,  for  He  has  clothed  them  with  His  own 
authority.  Our  Lord  therefore  asks  why,  seeing  that 
this  mighty  name  is  given  to  those  "unto  whom  the 
Word  of  God  came,"  they  can  accuse  Him  of  blas- 
phemy, from  whom  that  Word  proceeds,  because 
He  named  Himself  the  Son  of  God?  Now,  that 
expression  might  seem  at  the  moment  an  awkward 
one  for  the  Jews.  And,  Hke  other  men  in  a  similar 
difficulty,  they  might  be  inclined  to  set  it  aside,  or  to 
explain  it  away.  Our  Lord  reminds  them  that  the 
expression  stands — that  it  stands  unalterable.  "The 
Scripture,"  He  says,  "cannot  be  broken."  That  is, 
it  cannot  be  "  loosed."  It  cannot  be  taken  down  and 
made  up  again.  It  cannot  be  remodelled,  or  re- 
touched to  suit  men's  changing  tastes,  or  a  Church's 
changing  position.  It  cannot  be  altered  in  any  way. 
'Thus  even  a  phrase  of  the  Scripture  is  sacred,  and 
must  retain  that  form  eternally  which  was  given  to  it 


138         The  Bible:    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

at  the  first.  From  whose  hand,  then,  did  that  phrase 
come  ?  Can  it  be  due  to  a  cunning  forger  ?  or  to  the 
adapting  touch  of  an  equally  dishonest  editor?  or 
even  to  a  perfedtly  pure,  but  merely  human,  intention  ? 
There  is  only  one  reply  possible.  The  Old  Testament 
of  our  Lord's  day,  which  is  the  Old  Testament  that 
is  in  our  hands  now,  was,  and  is,  to  Him,  in  every 
part  of  it,  the  Word  of  God.  I  am  quite  aware  that 
this  so-called  "high"  doctrine  of  inspiration  is  sup- 
posed to  have  been  put  out  of  court.  We  have  been 
told,  on  what  is  said  to  be  "authority,"  that  it  is 
now  quite  incredible  to  any  "intelligent"  man.  But, 
we  are  conducting  an  inquiry,  and  we  must  face  the 
facts.  There  we  seem  to  have  the  view  of  inspiration, 
handed  down  to  us  by  the  Authority  of  the  Lord 
Jesus,  clearly  defined. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  multiply  proofs.  The  very 
name  by  which  the  Lord  refers  to  the  Old  Testament — 
"The  Scripture,"  "The  Scriptures  " — separates  these 
Books  from  all  others.  His  recognition  of  the  duty 
to  fulfil  them  also  implies  that  they  are  the  inspired 
and  faultless  expression  of  the  Father's  will  (Mark 
xiv.  49,  &c.)  And  the  fact,  that  after  the  resurre(5tion 
our  Lord  led  the  disciples  back  to  the  Old  Testament, 
and  "opened  their  understanding  that  they  might 
understand  the  Scriptures"  (Luke  xxiv.  25),  shows 
what  those  Books  were  to  Him  ;  and  explains  alike  the 
ancient  Church's  power,  and  that  fatal  bankruptcy 
which  the  Church  of  to-day  is  being  invited  to  incur. 
All  the  light,  which  those  Teachers  of  the  future 
required  in  order  to  enable  them  to  understand  the 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  139 

things  which  had  been  done,  and  those  things  which 
were  yet  to  be  done,  was  there,  and  is  there  now. 
Whatever  critics  may  say,  or  Theological  Professors 
teach,  or  Clergymen  and  Ministers  think  and  suggest, 
our  Lord  commits  these  Old  Testament  Books  to  us 
as  a  sacred  treasure,  to  be  received  as  wholly  the 
Divine  Word,  the  source  to  us  of  highest  light  upon 
the  mind  and  will  of  God. 

Other  New  Testament  witness  is  not  less  clear  or 
less  emphatic.  The  apostle  asks  (Romans  iii.  i,  2) : 
"  What  advantage  then  hath  the  Jew,  or  what  profit 
is  there  in  circumcision  ?"  And  he  replies  :  "  Much 
every  way  :  chiefly,  because  that  unto  them  were 
committed  the  Oracles  of  God."  This  very  word, 
'*  committed,"  comes  into  forcible  collision  with  every 
theory  of  the  origin  of  the  Old  Testament  which 
ascribes  it  wholly  or  in  part  to  man.  It  distincftly 
asserts  that  these  Books  were  in  no  way  a  produdt  of 
Jewish  thought.  It  affirms  that  they  were  a  sacred 
trust.  For  the  statement  is  not  that  the  Jew  has 
this  advantage  over  other  nationalities  that  he 
produced  the  Old  Testament.  He  has  a  greater 
honour.  He  was  selected  by  God  to  become  its 
custodian.  We  see  why  that  word,  "  cornmitted," 
was  used  when  we  note  the  terms  in  which  the  Old 
Testament  Books  are  here  referred  to.  They  are 
"  THE  Oracles  (logia)  of  God."  The  word  logion 
had  a  well-known  sense  in  the  Greek  of  the  time.  It 
was  the  term  used  for  a  Divine  communication,  or  a 
revelation  from  heaven.  This  is  also  the  sense  in 
which  it  is  used  in  the  New  Testament  (see  A6ts 


I40        The  Bible :    its  StrucUire  and  Purpose. 

vii.  38:  "Who  received  the  living  Oracles  to  give 
unto  us.")  The  plural,  logia,  therefore  expresses  in  the 
strongest  possible  way  the  assurance  that  these  are 
Divine  revelations,  and  that  the  Old  Testament 
Scriptures  are  as  direcft  communications  from  God,  as 
the  Delphian  responses  were  supposed  to  be  from 
Apollo.  Moses  and  the  prophets,  the  intermediaries 
through  whom  these  Oracles  were  given,  were  highly 
honoured  men.  But  the  Jews  were  also  sharers  in 
that  honour.  They,  too,  were  intermediaries,  standing 
between  the  original  messengers  and  posterity.  In 
this  way — and  in  this  way  alone — are  we  able  to 
understand  the  words  of  the  apostle.  Behind  that 
question,  "  What  advantage,  then,  hath  the  Jew  ?" 
and  its  answer,  "  Much  every  way ;  chiefly,  because 
that  unto  them  were  committed  the  Oracles  of  God," 
there  lies  the  fad:  that  the  Jew,  alone  of  all  mankind, 
had  been  selected  as  the  medium  through  whom  God 
had  given  these  Books  of  the  Old  Testament. 

That  no  shadow  of  mistake  is  made  in  this 
interpretation  of  the  words  is  abundantly  plain  from 
other  statements.  The  Apostle  Peter,  referring  to 
Judas,  says  :  "  Men  and  brethren,  this  Scripture  must 
needs  have  been  fulfilled,  which  the  Holy  Ghost  by 
the  mouth  of  David  spake  before  concerning  Judas  ''' 
(A(5ts  i.  16).  The  words  to  which  he  refers  are  those 
of  Psalm  xli.  g  :  "  Yea,  Mine  own  familiar  friend,  in 
whom  I  trusted,  who  did  eat  of  My  bread,  hath  lifted 
up  his  heel  against  Me."  Here  a  Psalm,  which 
multitudes  have  taken  to  be  the  expression — and 
the  merely  human  expression,  too — of  David's  own 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  141 

experience,  is  declared  to  be  the  revelation  of  an 
experience  of  that  King  who  was  to  come — the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ.  We  are  told  that,  because  it  was  a 
revelation,  it  was  impossible  that  it  should  fail  to  be 
accomplished.  The  story  of  our  Redeemer  had  to 
read  in  that  way.  This  had  to  be  the  Christ's  cry : 
*•  Yea,  Mine  own  familiar  friend,  in  whom  I  trusted, 
who  did  eat  of  My  bread,  hath  lifted  up  his  heel  against 
Me."  It  does  not  surprise  us,  therefore,  receiving  this 
assurance,  to  learn  that  David  was  not  the  autJior  of 
the  statement.  How  could  he  have  foreseen,  and 
have  so  clearly  expressed,  the  experiences  of  One 
removed  from  his  own  time  by  nearly  eleven  centuries  ? 
The  statement  that  the  Holy  Ghost  spoke  the  words 
by  the  mouth  of  David  explains  this  necessity  for 
fulfilment.  The  Psalm  was  an  "Oracle,"  a  Divine 
revelation,  a  predidlion  of  what  was  yet  to  be,  and 
not  a  mere  description  of  an  experience  of  the 
Psalmist  himself. 

An  exadtly  parallel  statement  is  found  in  A(rts  iv.  25. 
The  disciples,  in  their  thanksgiving  to  God,  say: 
"  Who  by  the  mouth  of  Thy  servant  David  hast  said, 
Why  did  the  heathen  rage,  and  the  people  imagine 
vain  things  ?  "  In  this  instance,  the  reference  is  to 
Psalm  ii.,  a  still  more  evident  predication  of  "  The  Son 
of  David,"  but  the  expression  is  the  same.  Psalm  xli. 
and  Psalm  ii. — the  less  evident 'predi(5lion,  and  the 
prediction  whose  prophetic  claims  are  stamped  upon 
its  every  sentence — are  alike  the  Words  of  God. 
The  "  mouth  "  is  David's :  the  speaker  is  the  Holy 
Ghost. 


142         The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

Some  other  testimonies  will  come  before  us  in  the 
next  se(5tion,  and  we  therefore  limit  ourselves  now  to 
2  Timothy  iii.  15,  16.  Here  the  Scripture  takes  up 
the  whole  of  the  Old  Testament  Books,  and  describes 
and  commends  them.  "  Continue  thou  in  the  things 
which  thou  hast  learned  ....  knowing,"  writes  the 
apostle  to  Timothy,  "that  from  a  child  thou  hast 
known  the  Holy  Scriptures  which  are  able  to  make  thee 
wise  unto  salvation  through  faith  which  is  in  Christ 
Jesus.  All  Scripture  is  given  by  inspiration  of  God  " 
{theopneustos) .  The  reader  will  note  the  phrase,  "the 
Holy  Scriptures"  (ta  htera  grammata).  Grammata 
really  means  "  letters,"  "  written  charadlers."  One 
can  readily  understand  how  the  expression,  "written 
characters,"  came  to  be  used  in  the  sense  of  "  docu- 
ments," or  "  books,"  which  were  at  that  time,  as  in 
every  time  before  printing  was  invented,  collections 
of  "  written  characters."  The  word  is  the  very  one 
used  in  our  Lord's  question :  "  But  if  ye  believe  not 
his  (Moses')  writings,h.ow  shall  ye  believe  My  words?" 
(John  V.  47).  It  is  plainly  applied  here  to  the  whole 
of  the  Old  Testament  acknowledged  by  the  Jews  in 
the  first  century  of  the  Christian  era ;  and  these  are 
separated  from  all  other  documents,  for  they  are  ta 
hiera  grammata,  "  the  holy  writings."  "  The  holy 
of  holies  "  in  the  temple  was  described  as  to  hieron, 
"the  holy  place";  and  what  that  sacred  building  was 
to  the  dwellings  of  Jerusalem,  that  were  these  Old 
Testament  Scriptures  to  all  other  writings  in  posses- 
sion of  the  Jews  or  of  the  nations. 

The  position  of  high  and  unparalleled  sacredness 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible?  143 

assigned  to  the  Scriptures  by  this  expression,  is  not 
diminished  when  we  weigh  the  remainder  of  this 
important  statement.    Timothy  might  have  imagined 
that,  with  the  coming  of  the  Gospel  era,  the  use  of  the 
Old  Testament  was  at  an  end.     The  Old  Testament 
contained  the  shadow:    he  now  possessed  the  sub- 
stance.    It  set  forth  the  coming  salvation  in  figure : 
he  was  now  face  to  face  with  the  reality.    Why,  then, 
go  back  into  the  ancient  dimness,  instead  of  pressing 
forward   into    the   light  ?     Some   have    asked   such 
•questions,  and,  in  after  shipwreck,  have  presented  a 
sad  revelation  of  the  underlying  fallacy.     Some  are 
asking  them  to-day.    "What  does  it  matter,"  say 
they,  "whether  the  Old  Testament  be  faa  or  fidlion  ? 
Let  it  go:    we  have  Christ   and  the   Gospel   left." 
But  Timothy  is  not  to  be  so  led  away.     For  him,  to 
study  still,  as  a  converted  man,  this  same  Old  Testa- 
ment, which  he  rejoiced  in  as  a  child  in  a  Jewish 
home,  is  not  to  go  back  into  dimness :  it  is  to  press 
forward  into  the  light.     These  types,  and  shadows, 
and  references  to  a  coming  glory,  are  God's  own  ex- 
position of  the  Gospel.     The  Old  Testament  can  never 
be  left  behind,  for  the  sufficient  reason  that  it  deals 
with  the  things  which  are  around  us  and  before  us  as 
only  the  Word  of  God  can.     The  Gospel  has  not 
antiquated  these  words  written  for  our  learning:   it 
has  furnished  the  key  to  their  mysteries.     These  are 
now,  as  they  never  were  before,  "  the  holy  Scriptures 
which  are  able  to  make  thee  wise  unto   salvation, 
through  faith  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus."     To  let  the 
Old  Testament  go  is  to  surrender  that  very  light  and 


144        "^^^  Bible:    its  Stricchire  a?id  Purpose. 

power,  without  which  the  Church  of  Christ  upon  the 
earth  would  faint  and  die. 

A  word  remains  to  be  said  on  this  distin(ft  state- 
ment as  to  the  origin  and  nature  of  the  Old 
Testament  Books.  "All  Scripture,"  or  rather,  "every 
Scripture,"  that  is,  every  Book,  says  the  apostle, 
"is  inspired  of  God  (theopneustos),  and  is  profitable," 
etc.  Another  rendering  of  the  words,  which  has 
found  favour  with  some,  is,  "  Every  Scripture, 
inspired  of  God,  is  also  profitable,"  etc.  (see  the 
Revised  Version).  The  adoption  of  this  rendering 
by  the  Revisers  recalls  an  old  controversy.  The  two 
terms,  "inspired"  and  "profitable,"  are  connected 
by  "  and,"  and  even  to  an  unlearned  reader  seem 
plainly  meant  to  go  together,  and  not  to  be  rent 
asunder,  as  is  done  in  the  new  translation.  Bishop 
Middleton,  a  high  authority  upon  a  matter  of  this 
kind,  says :  "  I  do  not  recollect  any  passage  in  the 
New  Testament  in  which  two  adjectives,  apparently 
connected  by  the  copulative,  were  intended  by  the 
writer  to  be  so  unnaturally  disjoined."  *  But  there 
is  little  necessity  for  discussing  which  of  the  render- 
ings is  the  better.  The  latter  does  not  weaken  in 
any  way  the  New  Testament  witness  to  the  Old  ;  for 
the  words — unless  they  are  to  be  taken  as  a  mere 
platitude — would  plainly  mean:  "every  Scripture, 
seeing  that  it  is  inspired  of  God,  is  also  profitable," 
etc.  The  inspiration  of  the  Scripture  would  in  this 
way  be  mentioned  as  the  explanation  of  its  profit- 
ableness.    The     apostle    has    already    defined    the 

*  Dcctrtne  cj  the  Grtck  Article,  p.  20'. 


How  did  we  get  the  Bible  ?  145 

''writings"  to  which  he  refers.  They  are  the  Old 
Testament  of  the  first  century  of  the  Christian  era — 
the  Bible  of  the  Jew  then  and  now.  Instead  of 
repeating  the  plural,  "  the  Scriptures,"  he  uses  the 
singular,  "  every  Scripture,"  thus  referring  to  these 
writings  individually ;  and  he  tells  us  that  every  Book 
is  inspired  of  God.  There  is  nothing  superfluous  in 
the  Scripture.  Every  portion  of  it  has  been  given 
because  God's  eye  has  rested  upon  some  section  of 
the  vast  field  of  human  need.  He  has  placed  there 
the  answer  of  Divine  grace  and  wisdom  ;  and  hence 
every  part  of  it  is  profitable  for  the  discipline  and  the 
equipment  of  the  man  who  will  live  the  Christ-like 
life,  who  will  give  himself  to  God's  service  and  take 
his  part  in  God's  battle. 

All  this  is  driven  home  by  the  word  theopneustos, 
which  is  rendered  "inspired  of  God."  It  means, 
literally,  "  God-breathed."  It  is  an  unusual  word, 
and  is  evidently  chosen  to  express  the  utterly  unique 
character  of  the  Scripture.  As  God  "breathed  into 
man's  nostrils  the  breath  of  life,  and  man  became  a 
living  soul"  (Genesis  ii.  7),  so  God  breathed  into  the 
Scripture,  and  it  became  "  the  Word  of  God  which 
liveth  and  abideth  for  ever."  Man  cannot  be  con- 
founded with  the  creation  of  which  he  forms  part ; 
and  quite  as  little  can  this  Book  be  confounded  with 
the  literature  by  which  it  is  surrounded.  As  man 
became  "  a  living  soul  " — became  living  intellect  and 
all  that  we  indicate  by  mind  and  heart  and  will ; 
became  a  human  personality  with  wide  outlook, 
clear    insight,    and    regal    instincts — so    this    God- 


146        The  Bible :    its  Struchire  and  Purpose, 

breathed  Scripture  assumed  that  place  of  unap- 
proached  spiritual  purity,  and  grandeur,  and  power 
which  every  age  has  acknowledged.  Had  man  been 
all  that  God  made  him  at  the  first,  the  Scripture 
would  even  then  have  been  among  books,  what  man 
possessed  of  God's  image  would  have  been  in  the 
midst  of  creation. 

Such,  then,  is  the  decision  of  this  great  controversy. 
The  Old  Testament  of  to-day  is  the  very  Old  Testa- 
ment of  which  our  Lord  and  the  inspired  writers  of 
the  New  Testament  have  said  these  things.  To  him, 
who  accepts  the  New  Testament,  and  trusts  in  the 
Redeemer  whom  it  reveals,  there  is  but  one  side  in 
this  struggle.  He  has  no  choice  but  to  rank  himself 
with  those  who  believe  and  maintain  the  genuineness 
and  Divine  autbofitv  of  the  entire  Old  T^-s^^ainent 
Scrip  ture. 


WHY  HAS   GOD  GIVEN  US  THE 
BIBLE? 

CHAPTER   I. 

The  Answer  of  the  Old  Testament. 


WHY  has  God  given  us  the  Bible  ?  This  is  the 
question  which  meets  us  when  we  have  marked 
how,  and  from  whom,  the  Bible  has  come  to  us.  If 
God  has  in  very  truth  performed  this  miracle — if  holy 
men  of  God  spake  as  they  were  borne  along  by  the 
Holy  Spirit — then  we  may  rest  assured  that  the  Bible 
supplies  a  want  which  nothing  else  can  satisfy. 

The  exact  service  which  the  Bible  is  intended  to 
render,  and  our  consequent  interest  and  duty  to  avail 
ourselves  of  that  service,  will  be  best  understood  by 
turning  to  what  the  Bible  has  itself  said  upon  this 
matter.  It  seems  to  me  that  the  first  hint  of  an 
answer  was  given  in  the  Divine  directions  regarding 
that  nucleus  of  revelation,  the  Decalogue  written  with 
God's  own  finger  upon  the  two  tables  of  stone  (Exodus 
xxxi.  i8).  Moses  was  commanded  to  place  these  in 
the  ark  :  "And  thou  shalt  put- into  the  ark  the  testi- 
mony which  I  shall  give  thee "  (Exodus  xxv.  i6). 
That  was  spoken  regarding  the  destination  of  the  two 
'first  tables,  which  Moses  destroyed  when  he  was 
confronted  by  the  daring  idolatry  of  his  people.    The 


148        The  Bible :    its  Strvcture  and  Purpose. 

same  directions  were  renewed,  however,  when  the 
new  tables  were  written  :  "At  that  time  the  Lord  said 
unto  me,  Hew  thee  two  tables  of  stone  like  unto  the 
first,  and  come  up  unto  Me  into  the  Mount,  and  make 
thee  an  ark  of  wood.  And  I  will  write  on  the  tables  the 
words  that  were  in  the  first  tables  which  thou  brakest, 
and  thou  shalt  put  them  in  the  ark"  (Deut.  x.  i,  2). 
This  repeated  command,  we  are  also  informed,  was 
fulfilled;  "And  he  took  and  put  the  testimony  into 
the  ark  "  (Exodus  xl.  20). 

The  research,  which  has  shed  so  much  light  upon 
the  religion  of  ancient  Egypt,  has  now  helped  us  to 
understand  the  message  of  this  symbolism.  The 
Israelitish  worship  is  so  entirely  apart  from  and  above 
the  Egyptian  that  no  Egyptologist  can  entertain  the 
notion  for  a  moment  that  the  former  was  borrowed 
from  the  latter.  But  God  spoke  to  the  reflective 
Israelite  through  these  symbols  of  His  Law.  The 
ark  in  the  Egyptian  Temple  was  the  dwelling  place 
of  the  god.  It  was  the  place  of  its  presence  :  the  god 
was  enshrined  in  the  ark.  How  far  the  religion  of 
Israel  soared  above  the  religion  of  Egypt  is  indicated 
in  the  fact  that  God  was  not  represented  as  enshrined 
in  the  ark.  The  glory  of  the  living  God  rested  upon 
it.  But,  nevertheless,  the  putting  of  the  Law  in  this 
sacred  receptacle  had  its  significance;  for  the  act 
signified  to  these  Israelites,  with  their  Egyptian 
training,  that  here  was  the  central  glory  of  all  their 
sacred  endowments.  This  was  the  link  which  con- 
nected man  with  God.  It  proclaimed  that,  if  man 
would  meet  with  God,  here  was  the  meeting  place. 


Why  has  God  given  tis  the  Bible?  149 

For  this  Law,  it  seemed  to  say,  was  God  expressed 
and  revealed.  And  let  it  be  remembered  that  this 
place  of  revealing  is  a  Law.  To  meet  with  God  is 
to  meet  with  One  who  speaks  to  our  heart  and 
assumes  control  of  our  life — One  whose  "Thou  shalt 
not"  and  "Thou  shalt"  proclaim  Him  our  Creator 
and  our  Father.  The  place  of  converse  becomes  a 
place  of  obedience— rather  let  us  say  a  place  of 
fellowship,  a  taking  of  God's  way,  a  walking  with 
Him  in  the  path  of  His  commandments. 

That  is  the  first  indicated  answer  to  our  question  as 
to  the  use  of  the  Bible.  The  expression  of  this  truth 
becomes  fuller  as  we  read  on.  In  the  concluding 
chapters  of  Deuteronomy  we  find  the  words : 

"And  Moses  wrote  this  law,  and  delivered  it  unto 
the  priests  the  sons  of  Levi,  which  bare  the  ark  of 
the  covenant  of  the  Lord,  and  unto  all  the  elders  of 
Israel.  And  Moses  commanded  them,  saying.  At  the 
end  of  every  seven  years,  in  the  solemnity  of  the  year 
of  release,  in  the  feast  of  tabernacles,  when  all  Israel 
is  come  to  appear  before  the  Lord  thy  God  in  the 
place  which  He  shall  choose,  thou  shalt  read  this  law 
before  all  Israel  in  their  hearing.  Gather  the  people 
together,  men,  and  women,  and  children,  and  thy 
stranger  that  is  within  thy  gates,  that  they  may  hear, 
and  that  they  may  learn,  and  fear  the  Lord  your  God, 
and  observe  to  do  all  the  words  of  this  law  :  and  that 
their  children,  which  have  not  known  anything,  may 
hear,  and  learn  to  fear  the  Lord  your  God,  as  long  as 
ye  live  in  the  land  whither  ye  go  over  Jordan  to  possess 
it  "  (Deuteronomy  xxxi.9-13). 
The  reader  will  note  the  emphasis  that  is  thrown 


150        The  Bible:    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

upon  the  great  end  which  is  to  be  attained  in  this 
repeated  public  reading  of  the  Law.  It  will  conse- 
crate God's  people.  It  will  fill  them  with  that  holy 
fear  of  God  which  will  keep  the  wayward  heart  per- 
petually in  God's  presence.  "  Thou  shalt  read  this 
law  before  all  Israel  in  their  hearing  .  .  .  that  they 
may  hear,  and  may  learn,  and  fear  the  Lord  your  God, 
and  observe  to  do  all  the  words  of  this  law."  And 
their  children,  who  had  seen  nothing  of  the  marvels 
of  Sinai,  would  nevertheless  meet  God  here:  "And 
that  their  children,  who  have  not  known  anything, 
may  hear,  and  learn  to  fear  the  Lord  your  God,  as 
long  as  ye  live  in  the  land  whither  ye  go  over  Jordan 
to  possess  it."  This  last  intimation  is  specially  note- 
worthy. God  (it  seems  to  say)  is  revealed  in  His 
Word  as  marvellously  as  at  Sinai.  Man's  heart 
recognises  here  the  voice  of  his  Creator,  his  Judge, 
his  Father — the  God  of  unswerving  righteousness, 
yet  also  "  the  Father  of  mercies  and  the  God  of  all 
consolation."  The  Bible  thus  became  to  Israel  the 
cement  of  national  life,  and  of  all  relationships.  It 
linked  together  parent  and  child,  husband  and  wife, 
master  and  servant,  leaders  and  people.  And  it 
did  this  by  bringing  each  man,  woman,  and  child 
into  immediate  touch  with  God.  The  Israehtish 
religion  was  full  of  elaborate  ritual ;  but  this  hearing 
of  the  Law  brings  them  in  past  all  ceremonies.  The 
Israelite  is  brought  in  past  the  very  priesthood,  and 
is  set  in  the  immediate  presence  of  Jehovah.  Cere- 
monies and  priests  will  afterwards  minister  to  the 
people  ;  but  they  will  minister  to  them  because  the 


Why  has  God  given  us  the  Bible?  151 

people  have,  first  of  all,  received  that  which  neither 
ceremony  nor  priest  can  bestow.  The  Israelite  is  to 
hear  God's  voice  :  the  Lord  is  to  speak  with  him;  and 
this  personal  knowledge  and  fear  of  the  Lord  is  to  be 
the  light  in  which  the  Israelite  walks,  and  the  very  air 
which  he  breathes. 

Men  have  laughed  at  a  Book  religion.  They  have 
spoken  of  a  revelation  of  God  through  a  Book  as  one 
of  the  vainest  of  imaginations.  How  did  they  happen 
to  forget  the  facft  that  the  kmgs  of  literature  exert  their 
influence  and  perpetuate  their  reign  through  their 
books  ?  Still  more  strange  was  it  that  they  failed  to  take 
note  of  their  own  hope,  that  by  means  of  a  book  they 
would  possess  the  hearts  of  others  with  the  contempt 
and  the  passion  which  filled  their  own  !  God  is  in  His 
Word  ;  and  He  lives  and  rules  in  men  as  they  acquaint 
themselves  with  it.  We  have  glimpses  of  this  truth 
again  and  again  in  Israel's  history.  We  think  of  those 
heroic  men  who  crossed  the  Jordan — those  "  Iron- 
sides "  of  the  time.  We  remember  Samuel  and  David, 
and  prophets  and  kings  besides,  whose  record  is  only 
an  indication  of  many  an  unwritten  page  in  the 
nation's  history.  And  here  we  learn  from  the  words, 
inscribed  upon  the  very  foundation  of  Revelation,  that 
all  this  was  intended  from  the  first.  The  Book  was 
given  that  its  simple,  but  direct  and  living,  ministry 
might  bind  the  ages  together  in  the  Divine  fellowship. 
In  the  very  next  Book  of  Scripture— that  of  Joshua 
— we  encounter  a  word  concerning  the  Law  which 
carries  us  farther.  At  the  close  of  the  Divine  in- 
structions given  him  for  his  great  enterprise  are  these  : 


152         The  Bible :   its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

"Only  be  thou  strong  and  very  courageous,  that  thou 
mayest  observe  to  do  according  to  all  the  law  which 
Moses  My  servant  commanded  thee  :  turn  not  from  it 
to  the  right  hand  or  to  the  left,  that  thou  mayest 
prosper  whithersoever  thou  goest.  This  book  of  the 
law  shall  not  depart  out  of  thy  mouth :  but  thou 
shalt  meditate  therein  day  and  night,  that  thou  mayest 
observe  to  do  according  to  all  that  is  written  therein  : 
for  then  thou  shalt  make  thy  way  prosperous,  and  then 
thou  shalt  have  good  success"  (Joshua -i.  7,  8). 

This  conquest  of  the  land,  and  the  settlement  of 
Israel  in  it,  was  a  mighty  task.  And  here  one  is 
selected  for  it,  not  from  the  great  personalities  of  the 
time,  but,  as  we  may  say,  from  among  the  people.  The 
call  awakes  in  Joshua  a  crushing  sense  of  unfitness. 
But,  nevertheless,  he  stands  at  the  commencement 
of  a  career  which  is  not  to  be  marred  by  a  single 
failure.  Next  to  Moses,  his  departed  master,  this 
servant  of  his  will  be  the  greatest  figure  in  Israelitish 
history.  And  how  is  this  marvel  to  be  wrought  ?  What 
is  it  that  will  transform  this  man,  that  will  endow 
him  with  unfailing  wisdom,  and  clothe  him  with 
unchallengeable  pre-eminence?  Here  is  the  answer. 
Joshua  is  not  to  take  his  own  way.  He  is  not  to 
devise  and  to  follow  his  own  methods.  He  is  not  to 
meditate  upon  what  will  best  serve  the  interests  of 
Israel  and  to  seek  its  attainment.  His  is  a  humbler 
but  surer,  and,  in  the  end,  grander,  way.  He  is  to  be, 
in  very  truth,  what  he  is  named — God's  servant.  The 
Lord  has  cared  for  everything,  and  has  already 
laid  down  the  way  to  its  accomplishment.    Joshua's 


Why  has  Gud  given  us  the  Bible  ?  153 

one  duty  is  to  fall  into  line  with  God's  require- 
ments. 

In  other  words,  Joshua  is  to  be  possessed  by  the 
Divine  Law.  But  how  will  that  be  brought  about  ? 
God's  message  has  already  provided  the  reply.  The 
Law  is  not  to  depart  out  of  his  mouth.  This  does 
not  mean  that  he  is  to  be  always  speaking  about  it. 
It  means  rather  that  he  is  to  feed  upon  it  perpetually. 
It  is  to  be  the  bread  of  his  mind,  and  heart,  and  soul. 
The  next  words  explain  this  by  saying :  "Thou  shalt 
meditate  therein  day  and  night."  And  thus  we  are 
Indebted  for  the  Joshua  we  know  to  that  Bible. 
Without  it  everything  would  have  been  different. 
There  would  have  been  nothing  of  the  indwelling  of 
the  Spirit  of  God  which  manifested  itself  in  word 
and  act.  Bereft  of  the  felt  presence  of  God,  Joshua 
might  have  given  way  to  pleasure,  or  to  covetousness, 
or  to  the  masterfulness  and  caprice  so  natural  to  the 
consciousness  of  power.  But  this  Book  shut  him  in 
with  God.  He  fed  upon  it ;  the  Word  was  in  his 
mouth.  He  fed  upon  it  night  and  day.  When  the 
words  lay  no  longer  under  his  eye  they  were  in  his 
thoughts.  He  clung  to  the  Book,  and  the  Book 
gripped  him.  He  strove  to  get  into  the  heart  of  that 
wondrous  Law,  and  the  light  and  power  of  it  entered 
into  him  ;  and  there  lay  the  secret  of  that  noble  life, 
and  faithful  service,  and  wide,  enduring  influence. 
Joshua  used  the  Bible,  and  the  God  of  the  Bible  used 
and  ennobled  him. 

There  are  many  other  references  to  the  Scripture  in 
the  Old  Testament ;  but  I  confine  myself  to  two  which 


J 54        ^^^^  Bible:    its  Structure  ajid  Purpose. 

are  found  in  the  Psalms.  In  Psalm  i.  we  have  a 
description  of  the  man  of  God  which  recalls  the  word 
to  Joshua  : 

"  His  delight  is  in  the  law  of  the  Lord  ;  and  in  His 
law  doth  he  meditate  day  and  night.  And  he  shall 
be  like  a  tree  planted  by  the  rivers  of  water,  that 
bringeth  forth  his  fruit  in  his  season;  his  leaf  also  shall 
not  wither;  and  whatsoever  he  doeth  shall  prosper" 
(verses  2,  3). 

The  picture  is  full  of  suggestion.  The  tree  is 
planted  upon  "the  divisions  of  waters,"  that  is,  the 
small  rivulets  with  which  the  Eastern  husbandmen 
irrigate  those  portions  of  their  ground  which  require 
special  care.  The  neighbouring  river  has  been  used 
to  give  fruitfulness  to  this  spot.  Water  has  been  led 
to  it  from  the  higher  part  of  the  river's  course.  It  is 
dispersed  through  a  number  of  channels;  and,  then, 
having  run  through  these,  it  flows  gently  along  to 
join  the  river  again  in  a  lower  part  of  its  course.  As 
you  look  upon  the  place  you  feel  that  the  tree  has 
been  cared  for.  Someone  with  knowledge  and  skill 
has  planned,  and  toiled,  and  done  his  best  for  it. 
The  fittest  means  have  been  taken  to  fill  all  its  cells 
with  the  needful  sap.  The  soil  is  loosened,  too,  by 
the  moisture,  so  that  the  tender  rootlets  make  their 
way  in  the  darkness  beneath  to  the  things  from  which 
they  drink  in  strength,  sending  it  up  into  trunk,  and 
branch,  and  twig,  and  leaf  above.  The  best  of  which 
that  tree  is  capable  will  thus  be  attained.  The  ideal 
in  the  mind  of  its  Creator — the  purpose  for  which 
it  was   made — will  be  fulfilled.     And  so    the   great 


Why  has  God  given  us  the  Bible?  155 

Husbandman  has  made  provision  for  the  trees  of 
His  planting.  He  has  supplied  in  the  Scripture — 
even  in  the  Law — what  is  needed  for  ministering 
sap  to  expanding  spiritual  life,  and  for  extracting  new 
strength  even  from  those  dark  and  hard  surroundings 
in  which  that  life  is  set.  It  is  in  this  way  that  charac- 
ter is  built  up,  and  that  fitness  is  acquired  to  bear  fruit 
in  its  season — to  say  the  fitting  word  and  to  do  the 
fitting  deed. 

But  even  the  tree  has  to  reach  down  to  drink  of 
the  ministered  strength  ;  and  the  promise  here  is  not 
to  the  man  who  knows  about  the  Word,  or  who 
values  it,  and  withstands  its  assailants,  and  is  even 
ready  to  die  for  it.  Its  ministry  is  for  him  who  reads ' 
and  who  reads  to  purpose.  The  Scripture  spurns  any 
merely  liturgical  use  of  it,  private  or  other.  The 
promise  is  to  him  who  has  tasted  and  seen  that  this 
Word  is  good,  and  who  seeks  to  penetrate  still  more 
deeply  into  its  meaning.  Over  him  heaven  is  break- 
ing into  joy  even  now.  "  Oh  the  blessednesses  of  the 
man  .  .  .  whose  delight  is  in  the  law  of  the  Lord, 
and  who  meditates  in  His  law  day  and  night.  He 
shall  be  like  a  tree  planted  by  the  rivers  of  water, 
that  bringeth  forth  his  fruit  in  his  season;  his  leaf 
also  shall  not  wither,  and  whatsoever  he  doeth  shall 
prosper." 

The  other  Old  Testament  suggestion  of  the  purpose 
for  which  God  has  given  the  Scripture,  to  which  I 
ask  the  reader's  attention,  is  that  in  Psalm  xix.  One 
of  the  most  marvellous  things  in  connection  with  these 
indications  is  the  intensely  spiritual  use  which  the 


156        The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

Scripture  is  meant  to  serve.  That  characteristic  is 
specially  conspicuous  in  this  Psalm.  The  first  part 
(verses  1-6)  speaks  of  the  glory  of  God  manifested  in 
the  starry  host,  in  the  mighty  expanse — the  firmament 
— in  which  they  are  placed,  and  specially  in  the  sun, 
the  source  of  our  earth's  light,  and  heat,  and  vital 
influences.  The  latter  part  of  the  Psalm  (verses  7-11) 
sets  forth  what  we  owe  to  that  sun  of  the  Spiritual 
firmament — "  The  law  of  the  Lord."  A  comparison 
is  here  plainly  intended  between  the  realms  of  nature 
and  of  grace  ;  but  when  we  set  the  two  parts  of  the 
Psalm  side  by  side,  we  are  compelled  to  notice  the 
incompleteness  of  the  parallel.  In  the  second  part 
we  have  indeed  the  Sun  of  the  spiritual  firmament — 
the  Scripture  ;  but  where  are  those  things  which 
correspond  with  the  starry  host  and  the  firmament  ? 
There  is  absolute  silence  regarding  these  in  vers.  7-11. 
This  is  one  of  those  Scripture  difficulties  which 
arrest  thought  and  reward  reflection.  Will  the  reader 
note  that  it  is  the  eloquence  of  these  stars  which  repeat 
the  sun's  glory  and  of  that  firmament  which  it 
illumines,  to  which  our  attention  is  directed  ?  "The 
heavens  declare  the  glory  of  God;  and  the  firmament 
showeth  his  handywork."  Their  testimony  is  per- 
sistent and  eloquent.  "Day  unto  day  uttereth 
speech,  and  night  unto  night  sheweth  knowledge." 
But  the  testimony,  while  effective,  is  also  silent : 
"There  is  no  speech  nor  language,  their  voice  is  not 
heard;"  yet  "  their  line  is  gone  out  through  all  the 
earth,  and  their  words  to  the  end  of  the  world."  To 
this  there  seems  at  first,  as  has  just  been  said,  to  be 


Why  has  God  given  us  the  Bible?  157 

no  parallel  in  the  second  division  of  the  Psalm. 
But  what  have  we  in  its  last  three  verses?  There 
is  the  soul's  cry  for  hght~"  Who  can  understand  his 
errors  ?  cleanse  Thou  me  from  secret  faults.  Keep 
back  Thy  servant  also  from  presumptuous  sins ;  let 
them  not  have  dominion  over  me :  then  shall  I  be 
upright,  and  I  shall  be  innocent  from  the  great  trans- 
gression "  (12, 13).  And  when  weask  what  the  outcome 
of  that  fervent  desire  will  be,  who  can  fail  to  recall 
these  other  words  of  the  Old  Testament :  "And  they 
that  be  wise  shall  shine  as  the  brightness  of  the 
firmament ;  and  they  that  turn  many  to  righteousness 
as  the  stars  for  ever  and  ever  "  (Daniel  xii.  3)  ?  Is  it 
a  strained  interpretation  which  finds  this  missing 
parallel  in  ourselves,  and  that  we  are  the  firmament 
and  the  stars  which  are  enlightened  by  this  spiritual 
Sun — the  Bible  ?  If  not,  then  it  is  ours  to  declare 
God's  glory  and  to  show  His  handiwork,  so  that  day 
unto  day  will  utter  speech,  and  night  unto  night  will 
show  forth  knowledge.  And  when  the  earthly  service 
is  over,  our  glory,  unlike  that  of  the  material  universe, 
will  abide.  "They  that  be  wise  shall  shine  as  the 
brightness  of  the  firmament;  and  they  that  turn  many 
to  righteousness  as  the  stars  for  ever  and  ever.'"* 

This  analogy,  however,  though  it  is  suggested, 
does  not  disturb  in  any  way  the  description  of  the 
Law  which  follows.  "  The  law  of  the  Lord  is  per- 
fect, converting  the  soul  "  (ver.  7).  It  is  this  absolute 
perfectness  of  the  Scripture  which  makes  it  the  one 
Book  for  humanity.     It  judges  me.     I  see  my  im- 

*  Compare  Proverbs  iv.  18,  and  Matthew  xiii.  43. 


158         The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

perfections,  and  my  soul  is  smitten.  My  unconcern 
vanishes.  My  frivolous  indifference  is  at  an  end.  I  am 
bowed  down  at  God's  feet,  but  with  my  face  towards 
the  mercy-seat,  and  with  the  cry  on  my  lips :  "God 
be  merciful  to  me  a  sinner  ! "  That  is  the  beginning 
of  the  new  life.  I  am  separated  from  the  careless, 
unthinking  crowd,  and  I  am  set  in  the  presence  of 
God. 

Whom  the  Word  turns  it  also  leads.  "  The  testi- 
mony of  the  Lord  is  sure,  making  wise  the  simple  " 
(verse  7).  Eduth,  "testimony,"  comes  from  ild,  "to 
say  again  and  again."  It  is  the  repetition  of  the  counsels 
of  Scripture  that  is  here  emphasised.  Pethi  means 
"simple;"  but  also  "a  simpleton,  a  fool."  What 
case  to  an  instructor  seems  more  hopeless  than  his  ? 
Touched  for  the  moment,  the  impression  vanishes 
more  swiftly  than  it  was  made.  But  the  repeated 
testimony  of  the  Word  will  steady  even  him  ;  and 
thus  it  changes  the  simpleton  into  a  man  of  wisdom. 
In  that  setting  of  a  childlike  spirit,  the  wisdom  may 
have  more  of  the  Divine  glory  about  it  than  if  it  were 
enshrined  in  intellectual  greatness. 

We  need  not  now  study  the  words  minutely.  It 
is  enough  to  note  that  this  Word  not  only  converts 
and  establishes  :  it  also  meets  all  our  need : 

«'  The  statutes  of  the  Lord  are  right,  rejoicing  the 
heart:  the  commandment  of  the  Lord  is  pure,  en- 
lightening the  eyes.  The  fear  of  the  Lord  is  clean, 
enduring  for  ever  :  the  judgments  of  the  Lord  are 
true  and  righteous  altogether.  More  to  be  desired  are 
they  than  gold,  yea,  than  much  fine  gold  :   sweeter 


Why  has  God  given  us  the  Bible?  159 

alijo  than  honey  and  the  honeycomb.  Moreover  by 
them  is  Thy  servant  warned  :  and  in  keeping  of  them 
there  is  great  reward"  (Psalm  xix.  8-1 1). 

There  are  those  who  have  attempted  to  compare 
"Hinduism  with  Christianity  to  the  detriment  of  the 
latter.  There  is  one  thing  of  which  they  may  be 
reminded.  The  Hindu  Shasters  and  the  Scripture 
both  inculcate  meditation.  The  Brahmin  who  would 
attain  perfection  must  penetrate  beyond  the  letter  of 
the  Shasters  and  get  to  know  their  spiritual  meaning. 
He  must,  in  particular,  meditate  long  and  devoutly  on 
**  the  sacred  syllable  OM  in  each  of  its  three  letters 
and  their  meaning,  as  well  as  the  combined  meaning 
of  the  whole."  Here  are  the  directions  for  the 
aspirant  after  Hindu  bliss — the  annihilation  of  indi- 
vidual existence  :  "  Curbing  the  senses  and  appetites, 
and  breathing  gently  though  the  nostrils,  while  medi- 
tating, the  scholar  should  concentrate  his  thoughts. 
On  a  clean,  smooth  spot,  free  from  pebbles,  from 
gravel,  or  from  scorching  sand,  where  the  mind  is 
tranquilised  by  pleasant  sounds,  by  running  water 
and  grateful  shade,  with  nought  to  offend  his  eye,  let 
;him  apply  himself  to  his  task."* 

Of  such  mystical  irrationality  there  is  not  a  trace 
in  the  Scripture.  There  meditation  is  simply  the 
pondering  and  the  keeping  in  the  heart  of  words 
which  we  desire  to  yield  their  meaning  and  their 
guidance.  From  them  will  spring  light  upon  God's 
nature,  and  counsels,  and  direction  for  the  way.  And 
let  'it  be  remarked  how  fully  the  spiritual  service  of 

*  MuUeQS.    Religious  Aspects  of  Hindu  Philosophy,  pp.  I20,  I2i. 


l6o        The  Bible :    its  Struchire  and  Purpose. 

this  Law  of  the  Lord  is  grasped  from  the  very  begin- 
ning. The  Jew  used,  and  uses  still,  its  words  as  a 
charm.  With  some  of  these  sacred  sentences  written 
out  on  parchment  and  worn  about  his  person,  he 
imagines  himself  secure  against  misfortune.  There 
is  not  the  faintest  trace  here  of  superstition  of  that, 
or  of  any  other,  sort.  How  did  the  Scripture  escape 
a  yoke  under  which  every  people  of  the  time  was 
weighed  heavily  down,  and  whence  had  it  this  clear 
insight  into  the  spiritual  blessings  which  it  alone 
can  bestow  ?  How  comes  it  that  this  is  its  one  all- 
engrossing  theme  throughout  this  magnificent  des- 
cription ?  These  are  questions  to  which  the  higher 
criticism,  like  every  other  form  of  unbelief,  has  no 
answer.  There  is  really  only  one  reply — it  is  that  to 
which  right  reason  and  faith  alike  cordially  assent — 
that  the  Scripture  is  literally  "  the  Word  of  God." 


CHAPTER   IL 

The  New  Testament  Reply. 

WHEN  we  turn  to  the  New  Testament  statement 
of  the  purpose  for  which  the  Gospels  are 
given,  we  note  a  change,  which  is  quite  in  keeping 
with  the  altered  circumstances.  God  had  appeared 
at  Sinai  to  the  entire  Israelitish  people,  and  not  to 
Moses  only.  The  whole  nation  were,  consequently, 
God's  witnesses.  Hence  the  call  to  Israel  is  not  so 
much  io  believe,  as  to  read,  to  meditate,  and  to  obey. 


Why  has  God  given  us  the  Bible?  i6i 

Those,  however,  who  even  in  the  first  age  of  the 
Gospel  Dispensation  had  seen  the  Lord  Jesus,  and 
still  more  those  who  had  seen  and  heard  the  risen 
Christ,  formed  a  very  small  minority.  When  we  add 
to  this  that  the  Gospel  calls  us  to  receive  not  a  law 

merely,  but  a  full  salvation — a  gift  of  everlasting  life 

we  at  once  understand  how  the  call  to  believe  should 
be  added  and  emphasised.  The  stream  of  Gospel 
blessing  flows  on  now,  as  it  flowed  at  the  first,  "  from 
faith  to  faith." 

This  helps  us  to  appreciate  the  force  of  Luke's 
words  to  Theophilus  in  the  beginning  of  his  Gospel, 
The  purpose  of  his  writing  is,  he  says,  "that  thou 
mightest  know  the  certainty  of  those  things  wherein 
thou  hast  been  instructed."*  There  were  in  existence, 
as  he  has  just  before  told  us,  a  number  of  accurate, 
and  orderly,  accounts  of  what  the  apostles  had  taught 
about  the  sayings,  the  deeds,  the  death,  and  the 
resurrection  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  But  something  more 
was  needed  to  still  questioning,  to  banish  doubt,  and 
to  inspire  a  reader  with  the  strong,  joyous,  assurance 
of  faith.  And  so  Luke,  having  been  endowed  "  from 
on  high  "  with  a  "perfect  understanding  of  all  things," 
enters  this  field  to  give  an  absolutely  certain  testimony 
— the  testimony  of  God  regarding  His  Son.  Luke's 
Gospel  (and  in  this  it  is  but  the  type  of  all  of  the 
Gospels)  exists,  therefore,  not  to  satisfy  curiosity,  but 
to  form  a  basis  for  our  trust.  The  Book  is  not  a 
collection  of  human  impressions  about  Jesus:  it  is  a 
revelation  of  Him.     We  actually  company  with  Him 

*  See  p.  66. 


1 62         The  Bible  :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

here.  We  see  Him  :  we  hear  His  voice.  We  behold' 
Him  die :  we  gaze  on  Him  risen  from  the  dead  and 
ahve  for  evermore. 

The  same  note  is  struck  in  the  last  verse  of  the 
twentieth  chapter  of  John's  Gospel.  This  is  taken  by 
our  critical  friends  as  the  original  conclusion  of  the 
fourth  Gospel,  and  they  insist  upon  this  view  of  theirs 
in  spite  of  the  distinct  explanation  (ver.  30)  that  the 
evangelist  is  here  dealing  only  with  the  things  which 
Jesus  did  "  in  the  presence  of  His  "disciples."  These 
belong  to  the  record  of  the  risen  life  of  Jesus;  for  it 
was  only  after  His  resurrection  that  the  ministry  of 
Jesus  was  confined  to  the  circle  of  the  disciples.  The 
words  (verse  31):  "But  these  things  are  written, 
that  ye  might  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the 
Son  of  God;  and  that,  believing,  ye  might  have  life 
through  His  name,"  are  the  climax  of  the  chapter. 
We  have,  first  of  all,  Mary's  grief  changed  to  joy  by  the 
manifestation  of  the  Risen  Lord  (vers.  11-18).  Then 
we  have  the  despair  of  the  disciples  turned  into  rejoic- 
ing (19-23).  Last  of  all,  the  loving,  but  incredulous,. 
Thomas  enters  also  into  that  gladness  which  swallows 
up  his  unbelief  for  ever.  "  Then  saith  He  to  Thomas. 
Reach  hither  thy  finger,  and  behold  My  hands ;  and 
reach  hither  thy  hand,  and  thrust  it  into  My  side : 
and  be  not  faithless,  but  believing.  And  Thomas 
answered  and  said  unto  Him,  My  Lord,  and  my 
God !  Jesus  saith  unto  him,  Thomas,  because 
thou  hast  seen  Me,  thou  hast  believed:  blessed  are 
they  that  have  not  seen,  and  yet  have  believed" 
(verses  24-29).     And   now  come   the  words   which 


Why  has  God  given  us  the  Bible?  163 

address  us:  "And  many  other  signs  truly  did  Jesus 
in  the  presence  of  His  disciples,  which  are  not  written 
in  this  book:  but  these  are  written,  that  ye  might 
believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God ;  and 
that,  believing,  ye  might  have  life  through  His  name  " 
(verses  30,  31.)  The  joy  is  to  flow  on.  It  is  to  enter 
into  lis,  as  into  Mary  and  into  the  disciples,  and  even 
into  unbelieving  Thomas.  For  it  is  upon  us  that 
the  Lord's  eye  rested  when  He  said :  '*  Blessed  are 
they  that  have  not  seen  and  yet  have  believed;"  and, 
as  we  are  possessed  by  the  conviction  that  this  is 
indeed  the  Messiah  who  came  the  first  time  to  recon- 
cile us  unto  God  through  His  atonement  for  sin,  and 
who  will  by-and-bye  fulfil  the  promise  enshrined  in 
this  fourth  Gospel,  and  will  come  again  and  receive 
us  unto  Himself,  that  where  He  is  there  we  may  be 
also  (xiv.  1-3),  we  have  life  through  His  name.  To 
minister  that  faith  to  us,  who  have  not  seen  Jesus, 
the  Gospel  was  written.  If  it  fail  to  impart  this,  the 
Book  has  missed  its  end  :  its  purpose  is  frustrated. 
The  use  of  the  New  Testament  is  to  beget  the  assur- 
ance of  faith,  and  to  evoke  that  triumphant  joy 
which-  lifts  its  praise  to  heaven,  which  treads  the 
daily  path  with  firm  assurance,  and  which  looks  on 
with  eyes  aflame  with  the  heaven-lit  fire  of  hope. 

But  there  is  a  hint  in  this  fourth  gospel  which 
takes  us  farther.  The  Lord  Jesus  is  spoken  of  in  its 
commencement  as  "  The  Word."  This  striking  ex- 
pression has  had  less  attention  drawn  to  it  because  of 
'the  discussions  which  its  use  has  aroused  in  the 
learned  world.    Both  preachers  and  other  students  of 


164        The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

Scripture  have  felt  themselves  to  be  here  on  the  edge 
of  an  abyss  into  which  it  would  be  madness  for  them 
to  venture.  But  it  is  now  largely  admitted  that  the 
use  of  this  word  in  John  has  nothing  whatever  to  do 
with  the  speculations  of  Philo.  And  the  Scripture 
itself,  indeed,  gives  us  all  the  light  we  require.  In 
the  opening  of  Luke's  Gospel  the  term  is  used  in 
the  same  way.  That  evangehst  speaks  of  those  (the 
apostles)  "who  from  the  beginning  were  eye-witnesses 
and  ministers  of  the  Word  "  (i.  2).  Here  the  term 
is  plainly  used  to  denote  a  Person ;  for,  though  the 
apostles  could  easily  be,  and  were,  the  servants  or 
ministers  of  the  Scripture  or  the  Gospel  message, 
they  could  not  be  spoken  of  as  **  eye-witnesses  "  of 
either.  When  the  Lord  returns  to  execute  the  long- 
delayed  judgment  upon  the  nations,  we  read  that  He 
assumes  this  name  :  "  And  He  was  clothed  with  a 
vesture  dipped  in  blood :  and  His  name  is  called  the 
Word  of  God"  (Revelation  xix.  13).  This  evidently 
indicates  that  in  some  way  ]e%us  is  identified  with  the 
Scripture.  Coming  to  fulfil  the  Scripture,  the  Lord 
displays  it  invested  with  a  Divinity  that  even  the  best 
have  only  dimly  perceived.  The  Scripture  is  so  filled 
with  Christ,  and  is  so  much  His  instrument  in  Hi 
revealing,  redeeming,  sanctifying,  work  that  its  name 
becomes  His  own. 

Startling  as  this  thought  is,  it  seems  marvellous 
that  it  should  be  new  to  any  reader  of  the  Bible.  Is 
it  not  in  these  words  of  the  Apostle  Peter  :  "  Of  which 
salvation  the  prophets  have  inquired  and  searched  dili- 
eentlv,  who  orophesied  of  the  grace  that  should  come 


Why  has  God  given  tts  the  Bible?  165 

unto  you  :  searching  what,  or  what  manner  of  time 
THE  Spirit  of  Christ  which  was  in  them  did  signify, 
when  it  testified  beforehand  the  sufferings  of  Christ, 
and  the  glory  that  should  follow  "  (i  Peter  i.  10,  11)? 
It  was  the  Spirit  of  Christ  that  inspired  the  prophets. 
The  Spirit  of  God  was  communicating  to  them 
Christ's  message.  This  truth  removes  a  difficulty  in 
the  same  Epistle  over  which  many  have  stumbled  to 
the  injury  of  themselves  and  others :  "  For  Christ 
also  hath  once  suffered  for  sins  .  .  .  being  put  to 
death  in  the  flesh,  but  quickened  by  the  Spirit :  by 
w\^ich  also  He  went  and  preached  .  .  .  when  once 
the  long-suffering  of  God  waited  in  the  days  of 
Noah"  (iii.  18-20).  The  Lord  Jesus  spoI<e  through 
His  servant  Noah.  It  was  Christ  who,  by.  His  Spirit, 
was  pleading  in  mercy  with  men  then,  just  as,  by 
His  Spirit,  He  is  pleading  now  with  men  rushing 
madly  upon  a  like  judgment. 

There  are  yet  other  passages  which  have  the 
closest  bearing  upon  this  matter.  Those  which  we 
have  just  looked  at  identify  Christ  with  the  substance 
of  the  Scripture,  but  not  necessarily  perhaps  with  its 
present  form.  But  in  the  Book  of  Revelation  our 
Lord  describes  Himself  as  "Alpha  and  Omega,  the 
beginning  and  the  ending"  (i.  8  ;  see  also  ver.  11;  also 
xxi.  6,  and  xxii.  13).  It  has  been  supposed  that,  as 
Alpha  is  the  first  letter  of  the  Greek  alphabet,  and 
Omega  the  last  letter  of  it,  the  phrase  simply  means 
"  the  first  and  the  last."  But  this  it  can  hardly  mean, 
seeing  that  we  have  these  very  words  added,  as  in 
xxii.  13  :  "  I  am  Alpha  and  Omega,  the  beginning  and 


i66         The  Bible :    lis  Struchire  and  Purpose. 

the  end,  and  the  first  and  the  last."  These  letters  of 
the  Alphabet  have  to  do  with  writing.  Is  it  going  too 
far  to  suggest  that  our  Lord  here  underlines,  as  it 
were,  and  invests  with  startling  majesty  this  unheeded 
and  despised  written  Word  which  He  will  yet  descend 
from  heaven  to  fulfil?  But  whatever  may  be  our 
interpretation  of  the  words,  "  I  am  Alpha  and 
Omega,"  it  cannot  be  denied  that  Christ's  presence 
in,  and  perpetual  ministry  through,  the  Scripture  is 
the  teaching  of  the  New  Testament. 

When  John  speaks,  therefore,  in  the  beginning  of 
his  Gospel,  of  everything  with  which  Christ  has  had, 
and  has  now,  to  do,  how  could  he  omit  mention  of 
the  Scripture  ?  That  glorious  gift  of  God,  that  fount 
of  light,  and  blessing,  and  spiritual  strength,  could  not 
be  left  unnoticed.  Yes,  the  Word  could  not  be  passed 
over;  but  while  Christ  made  all  other  things,  this  is 
bound  up  with  Himself,  and  so  He  is  named  by  it.  That 
thought  was  grasped  by  the  men  of  the  early  Church. 
We  find  it  still  illuminating  the  days  of  Ambrose.  He 
says  :  "  Holy  Scripture  edifies  everyone  !  We  speak 
to  Christ  when  we  pray ;  we  listen  to  Him  when  we 
read  the  Scripture."  *  That,  then,  is  the  message 
hid  in  this  name  of  Jesus.  It  explains  that  mysterious, 
unique,  influence  which  the  lightest  word  of  the  Bible 
has  upon  our  spirits.  And  so,  when  we  ask  why  God 
has  given  us  the  Bible,  this  is  part  of  the  answer. 
The  Scripture  has  been  given  that  we  might  have 
fellowship  with  Christ — even  fellowship  like  theirs 
who  heard  Him,  and  beheld  Him  with  their  eyes,  and 

*  On  the  office  of  the  ministry.    B.I. 


Why  has  God  given  us  the  Bible?  1G7 

whose  hands  handled  Him  (i  John  i,  i).  Dost  thou 
wish  to  see  Jesus? — to  sit  hke  Mary  at  His  feet, 
hearing  His  Word? — to  lean  like  John  upon  His 
breast  ?  It  is  not  impossible  :  it  is  not  even  hard  of 
attainment.  "  The  Word  is  nigh  thee."  Here  is  the 
door :  here  is  the  presence  chamber.  It  is  in  thine 
opened  Bible ! 


CHAPTER   III. 

The  New  Testament  Reply. 

(Coiiiiniied.) 

THERE  are  statements  of  the  Scriptures  which 
give  a  startling  significance  to  that  surrender  of 
the  Bible  which  is  so  marked  a  feature  of  our  time. 
We  have  already  noted  the  words  of  Psalm  xix. : 
**  The  law  of  the  Lord  is  perfect,  converting  the 
soul."  The  New  Testament  emphasises  this  truth, 
indicating  repeatedly  that  the  Scripture  plays  a  vital 
part  in  the  very  commencement  of  the  Christian 
life.  "  For  though  ye  have  ten  thousand  instructers 
in  Christ,"  says  Paul  to  the  Corinthian  Church,. 
"  yet  have  ye  not  many  fathers  :  for  in  Christ  Jesus 
I  have  begotten  you  through  the  gospel"  (i  Cor. 
iv.  15).  In  James  we  read :  "  Of  His  own  will  begat 
He  us  WITH  the  word  of  truth"  (i.  18);  and  in 
I  Peter  the  same  truth  is  set  before  us  in  the  familiar 
words  :  "  Being  born  again,  not  of  corruptible  seed, 
but  of  incorruptible,  by  the  word  of  God,  which 


1 68         The  Bible  :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

liveth  and  abideth  for  ever  "  (i.  23).  It  would  appear 
as  if  the  Churches  were  placid  spectators  of  a  con- 
spiracy against  the  majesty  of  Divine  truth.  They 
witness  the  progress  of  the  attempt  to  substitute 
corruptible  seed  for  the  incorruptible,  and  make  no 
sign  that  they  apprehend  the  gravity  of  the  experi- 
ment. These  Scriptures  tell  us  that  their  action 
means  consent  to  the  abandonment  of  the  Church's 
service  in  the  work  of  regeneration.  It  is  this  despised 
and  surrendered  word  of  the  Bible  that  is  the  seed  of 
the  new  life.  If  that  seed  is  not  cast  into  the  field 
of  humanity,  whence  shall  we  expect  the  harvest  for 
which  God  and  the  world  wait  ? 

The  part  played  by  the  Scripture  in  the  regeneration 
of  mankind  is  further  described  in  the  exhortation  : 
"  Wherefore,  laying  aside  all  malice,  and  all  guile,  and 
hypocrisies,  and  envies,  and  all  evil  speakings,  as 
new-born  babes,  desire  the  sincere  milk  of  the  word, 
that  ye  may  grow  thereby  "  (i  Peter  ii.  i,  2).  The 
Scripture  is,  consequently,  as  necessary  for  the  growth 
of  the  higher  life  as  for  its  beginning.  The  apostle 
names  the  things  which  had  previously  been  the 
daily  food  of  the  mind  and  of  the  heart,  and  which 
had  been  turned  into  the  man's  life-blood,  as  it  were, 
and  been  built  into  his  character  and  being.  These 
are  to  be  put  aside.  Turning  away  from  all  badness, 
and  all  cunning,  and  hypocrisies — the  acting  of  a 
part,  the  pretending  to  be  w^hat  he  is  not — and  from 
envies,  and  every  kind  of  evilspeaking — a  vice  which 
seeks  to  cling  to  the  new  man  as  it  has  lorded  it  over 
the  old  man — he  is  to  take  the   food  specially  pre- 


Why  has  God  given  us  the  Bible  ?  1G9 

pared  for  the  infancy  of  the  new  life — the  undiluted, 
uncontaminated  "Word-milk."  This  will  impart 
satisfaction  and  strength  to  the  babes  in  Christ.  We 
think  out  and  we  adopt  many  schemes  to  interest 
and  attract  the  young,  to  attach  them  to  the  Church, 
and  to  prepare  them  to  take  their  part  by-and-bye  in 
church  service.  Will  anything  prove  more  attractive 
than  the  food  which  the  all-wise  Creator  has  furnished  ? 
Can  anything  appeal  to  them  more  strongly  than  that 
which  meets  the  deepest  need  of  the  new  nature  ? 
And  can  anything  be  devised  which  will  form  nobler 
or  more  Christlike  character  ?  Let  the  Churches 
loyally  give  themselves  to  the  simple  ministration 
of  the  Word  for  a  generation,  and  the  result  will  be 
such  an  army  as  the  world  has  not  seen  for  seventeen 
centuries. 

When  we  look  forward  to  the  maturer  days  of  the 
Christian  life,  and  ask  what  will  prepare  for  active 
work,  the  Scripture  has  but  one  reply.  It  is  still — 
**  the  Word."  This  has  not  only  milk  for  babes  :  it  has 
also  strong  meat  for  men.  We  recall  the  counsel 
given  to  Timothy:  "All  Scripture  is  given  by  inspira- 
tion of  God,  and  is  profitable  for  doctrine,  for  reproof, 
for  correction,  for  instruction  in  righteousness :  that 
the  man  of  God  may  be  perfect,  throughly  furnished 
unto  all  good  works"  (2  Timothy  iii.  16,  17).  Here 
the  Scriptures  are  commended  to  us  in  their  totality. 
"All  Scripture  is  inspired  of  God."  We  have  oui 
likings  and  our  preferences  in  regard  to  the  Scriptures 
as  in  regard  to  everything  besides.  Some  are  attracted 
to  the  Psalms ;   some  delight  in  the  Gospels.     But 


1 70        The  Bible  :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

God  leads  us  past  our  limitations;  and  so  He  has 
provided  what  will  awaken  our  slumbering  powers, 
and  endow  us  with  new  aptitudes.  Those  parts  of 
Scripture  which  are  dark  and  unattractive  to  us  are 
charged  to  convey  something  which  no  other  part  can 
supply ;  and  it  is  a  something  without  which  we  shall 
•be  poorer  than  God  desires  we  should  be. 

Glance  now  at  what  comes  to  us  through  this  use 
•of  "  all  Scripture."  It  is  profitable  first  for  "  doc- 
trine " — that  is,  for  instruction.  There  is  much  that 
we  need  to  know.  We  want  right  thought  about  God. 
We  desire  that  He,  in  whom  we  live  and  move  and 
have  our  being,  shall  be  more  than  a  name  to  us.  We 
want  to  know  what  shall  make  us  unable  to  forget 
Him,  a  joy  to  remember  Him,  a  delight  to  serve  Him, 
an  impossibility  not  to  trust  Him.  We  want  to  know 
man,  to  see  in  him  a  being  made  for  eternity.  We 
seek  to  realise  his  peril,  to  feel  the  grandeur  of  his 
possibilities.  We  need  to  know  the  past,  and  to  see 
the  issue  of  that  long  and  wide  experiment  in  living 
to  which  man  everywhere  has  given  himself.  Do  I 
ask  how  I  shall  attain  all  this,  and  serve  myself  heir 
to  the  ages  ?  Here  is  the  reply — all  I  want  is  in  the 
Scripture:  it  is  "profitable  for  instruction." 

But  many  things  instruct  which  carry  me  no 
farther.  I  require  more  than  instruction  if  the  lesson 
imparted  is  to  come  home  to  me,  if  the  truth  mani- 
fested is  to  abide  with  me  and  to  rule  over  me. 
But  this  need  also  is  met  by  the  Bible  as  I  find  it 
.met  nowhere  besides.  "  The  Scripture  is  profitable 
...  for  reproof;"  that  is,  for  conviction.     It  grips 


Why  has  God  given  us  the  Bible?  lyi 

■us.  When  it  has  caught  and  riveted  our  attention 
— when  it  has  uttered  its  parable — it  has  one  word 
more  to  add.  It  has  so  far  been  bending  its  bow; 
and  now  the  arrow  is  shot  home.  The  startled  soul 
hears  the  word  :  "  Thou  art  the  man;"  and  it  has  no 
reply  but  instant  submission  and  bitter  entreaty. 
But  even  now,  when  we  are  instructed  and  convicted, 
we  have  not  reached  the  end  of  our  necessity.  The 
penitent  does  not  seek  pardon  only :  he  must  have 
guidance  and  help.  But  for  this  he  must  still  have 
recourse  to  the  Scripture.  It  "  is  profitable  .  .  for 
correction."  The  word  means  "making-straight," 
and  the  statement  is  that  the  Scripture  is  profitable 
for  amendment,  for  rectification.  It  is  impossible  for 
the  man,  who  has  been  convicted  of  sin  by  the  Word 
of  God,  to  retain  that  sin  and  still  be  a  reader  of  the 
Scripture.  He  will  be  compelled  to  choose  between 
the  two  masters.  If  he  keeps  to  the  Bible,  the  sin 
must  go ;  if  he  retains  the  sin,  the  Bible  must  be  sur- 
rendered. Its  instruction  and  conviction  have  had 
this  very  thing  in  view.  It  cuts  us  out  from  the  old 
that  it  may  establish  us  in  the  new. 

To  this  it  is  added  that  "  the  Scripture  is  profit- 
able ....  for  instruction  (or  rather,  discipline)  in 
righteousness."  We  are  in  God's  school ;  we  are  sons 
and  daughters  in  God's  Home.  And  what  son  is  he 
whom  the  Father  chasteneth  not  ?  As  we  read  these 
Books  of  the  Bible,  the  chastisement  of  Him  who, 
like  the  compassionate  and  skilful  surgeon,  wounds 
that  He  may  heal,  will  be  felt  on  this  side  and  on 
that.     But  blessed   are   those   strokes;    for   this  is 


172        The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

*  discipline  in  righteousness."  Our  failure  is  disclosed 
and  we  are  smitten  that  we  may  be  perfected — "  that 
the  man  of  God  " — the  man  who  will  e.^ist  for  Him, 
who  will  bear  His  message,  who  will  live  to  assist  in 
His  work — "  may  be  perfect,  throughly  furnished 
unto  all  good  works."  Where  will  the  Churches 
find  a  substitute  for  the  Bible,  when  their  "experts" 
have  broken  the  faith  of  the  ministry  in  it,  and  when 
it  is  no  longer  expounded  and  enforced  as  the  Word 
of  the  living  God  ? 

But  there  is  another  aspect  of  the  Christian  life. 
We  have  entered  upon  a  campaign.  We  are  com- 
batants in  a  war  in  which  blows  have  to  be  received 
and  given.  The  reward  is  the  conquest  of  that 
enduring  possession  which  God  has  given  us.  What 
will  arm  us,  then,  for  this  warfare  ?  In  Hebrews  iv. 
we  have  an  answer  to  our  question.  In  the  former 
half  of  the  chapter  the  Scripture  proceeds  upon  an 
implied  parallel  between  us  and  the  Israelites,  who 
were  led  out  of  Egypt  by  Moses.  They  were  delivered 
from  bondage  and  wretchedness,  but  not  to  be  sent 
adrift  outside  the  borders  of  Egypt.  They  had  a 
special  destination  distinctly  in  view  from  the  first — 
the  land  promised  of  old  to  the  Fathers.  But  Canaan 
was  even  then  only  a  type  of  what  the  believer  in 
God  attained — namely,  God's  salvation.  For  as 
Israel  received  "  great  and  goodly  cities  "  which  it 
had  not  built,  "  and  houses  full  of  all  good  things  " 
which  it  did  not  fill,  and  wells  digged,  and  vineyards, 
and  olive-trees,  in  the  preparation  of  which  it  had 
taken  no  part,  so  we  enter  into  a  perfect  righteousness 


Why  has  God  given  us  the  Bible  ?  173 

for  which  we  have  not  worked,  and  into  pardon  of 
sins  for  which  no  sufferings  of  ours  have  presented 
an  atonement.  And  the  parallel  holds  throughout. 
Through  the  possession  of  the  land  with  the  revela- 
tion which  it  brought  of  God's  faithfulness,  and 
omnipotence,  and  abundant  graciousness,  they  were 
enabled  to  enter  into  God's  rest,  that  joy  in  attained 
purpose,  that  full  satisfaction  in  good  to  which 
nothing  has  to  be  added.  But,  to  attain  this  rest, 
Israel  had  to  conquer  the  land.  Step  by  step  they 
took  possession  by  overcoming  and  extirpating  those 
who  held  the  land  against  them ;  and  we,  too,  have  foes 
to  meet  and  slay  in  order  that  we  may  enter  upon  our 
possession  and  that  this  rest  in  God  may  be  ours. 

Our  question  recurs,  therefore — with  what  weapon 
shall  we  be  armed  that  we  may  triumph  in  this 
warfare  ?     The  Scripture  replies  : 

"  The  Word  of  God  is  quick  and  powerful,  and 
sharper  than  any  two-edged  sword,  piercing  even  to 
the  dividing  asunder  of  soul  and  spirit,  and  of  the 
joints  and  marrow,  and  is  a  discerner  of  the  thoughts 
and  intents  of  the  heart.  Neither  is  there  any  creature 
that  i^  not  manifest  in  His  sight :  but  all  things  are 
naked  and  opened  unto  the  eyes  of  Him  with  whom 
we  have  to  do"  (verses  12,  13). 

We  require  but  one  weapon.  It  was  that  used  by  the 
Lord  in  the  wilderness,  on  the  mountain,  and  on  the 
Temple  pinnacle.  The  instant  it  flashed  forth  there 
was  victory.  When  the  Word  of  God  is  grasped,  it 
is  discovered  to  be  "quick,"  that  is,  "alive."  The 
warrior's  sword  is  a  dead  thing.     His  strength  and 


174        "^he  Bible  :    its  Structure  and  Pzirpose. 

skill  have  to  impart  life  to  it.  But  this  sword  lives  ; 
and  it  is  not  only  "  living,"  it  is  "  powerful,"  or 
rather,  "  energising."  If  we  but  grasp  this  sure  and 
trusty  weapon,  it  will  put  life  into  «s.  We  shall  join 
the  battle-line,  and  this  blade  will  flash  and  smite. 
And  it  is  resistless.  "  It  is  sharper  than  any  two- 
edged  sword."  Whichever  side  falls  it  cuts,  and  cuts 
with  a  keenness  that  is  a  new  revelation  of  power. 
The  possessor  of  a  mighty  weapon  of  old  became  the 
hero  of  story  and  of  song ;  and  this  sword  makes 
grander  heroes.  It  pierces  "  to  the  dividing  asunder 
of  soul  and  spirit."  The  spirit-life  which,  like 
Lazarus,  has  made  answer  to  the  voice  of  the  Son  of 
God  and  come  forth  from  the  tomb,  is  caught,  and 
hampered,  and  hindered,  by  the  lusts  of  the  flesh  and 
of  the  mind — the  soul.  And,  like  Lazarus,  it  has  to 
be  loosed  and  set  free.  What  will  sever  its  bonds  ? 
The  Word  of  God— the  Sword  of  the  Spirit.  The 
next  words,  which  speak  of  the  separating  of  the 
joints  and  the  marrow,  seem  to  have  had  light  shed 
upon  them  by  recent  research.  Muelos,  the  word 
rendered  "  marrow,"  and  which  has  also  that  meaning 
in  Greek,  has  a  special  sense  besides.  It  was 
applied  to  the  brain  substance  and  the  spinal  chord. 
These  are  the  nerve  centres.  The  joints  are  "  the 
joinings,"  by  means  of  which  these  nerve  centres 
communicate  with  the  mind  and  will.  As  the  electric 
bell  keeps  ringing  while  the  connection  holds  between 
the  current  and  the  bell,  but  ceases  instantly  when 
the  connection  is  interrupted ;  so  desire  and  passion 
keep  ringing  in  the  soul,  urging  us  to  surrender.  We 


Why  has  God  given  us  the  Bible  ?  175 

know  that  surrender  is  wrq;ig;  is  deadly.  We  argue; 
we  resolve;  we  intrench  ourselves  behind  our  deter- 
mination. But  we  are  plied  with  fresh  representations. 
Compliance,  we  are  assured,  is  justifiable;  is  as 
innocent  as  it  is  pleasant.  We  waver;  our  resolution 
melts  away.  What  will  save  us  ?  One  sweep  of  this 
all-conquering  sword,  and  the  connection  is  cut.  It 
pierces  to  the  dividing  asunder  of  the  joinings  and 
the  nerve  centres.  The  urgent  solicitation,  the 
driving  force  of  sin,  ceases  instantly,  and  the  soul  is 
delivered  like  a  bird  from  the  snare  of  the  fowler. 
Let  the  tempted  one  but  open  his  Bible,  or  recall  the 
Scripture,  and  the  heart,  but  the  moment  before  fired 
with  passion,  becomes  as  cold  to  the  temptation  as 
the  dead. 

The  remaining  words  complete  the  marvellous 
picture  of  the  achievements  of  the  Scripture  in  this 
warfare  with  sin.  It  is  a  "  critic  "—a  discerner— of 
the  thoughts  and  intents  of  the  heart.  When  it  has 
saved  from  the  assault  of  the  foe,  it  will  cleanse  the 
habitation  within.  It  will  deal  now  with  the  well- 
springs  of  our  thought,  and  separate  between  the  good 
and  the  bad.  It  will  winnow  our  very  thoughts.  And 
nothing  can  escape  from  its  condemnation.  "  ^leither 
is  there  any  created  thing  that  is  not  manifest  in  His 
sight,  but  all  things  are  naked  and  with  outstretched 
neck  to  His  eyes  with  whom  we  have  to  do."  The 
figure  is  that  of  a  sacrifice  at  the  altar.  The  cord 
attached  to  the  horns  was  pulled  back;  the  ani- 
maVs  neck,  stretched  tight,  was  severed  at  the  first 
touch  of  the  sharp  priestly  knife,  and  the  life  stream 


176        The  Bible:    its  Siriuture  and  Purpose. 

was  poured  out  before  the  altar.  So  the  disguise  of 
every  wrong  and  base  thing  vanishes  away  as  this 
Word  of  God  confronts  it.  And  not  only  so,  but 
it  also  stands  with  outstretched  neck  ready  for  the 
death-stroke.  This  marvellous  deliverance  has  been, 
is,  and  will  be,  the  portion  of  those  who  hide  this 
word  in  their  heart  that  they  offend  not  against  Him, 
who  has  called  them  out  of  darkness  into  His  mar- 
vellous hght. 

Two  other  passages  will  complete  our  survey.  We 
find  in  2  Peter  i.  19,  that  the  Word  is  needed  for  the 
daily  pathway.  "We  have  also  a  more  sure  word  of 
prophecy,  unto  which  ye  do  well  that  ye  take  heed,  as 
unto  a  light  which  shineth  in  a  dark  place,  until  the 
day  dawn  and  the  day-star  arise  in  your  hearts."  The 
"dark"  place  is  "squalid"  or  "filthy,"  as  well  as 
"  dark."  We  are  passing  through  a  country  abounding 
in  pollutions.  On  every  hand  of  us,  and  right  in  front 
of  us,  there  lie  abominations.  One  unwary  step  and 
we  shall  put  our  foot  upon  them,  and  their  stench 
will  cling  to  us.  We  need  a  light  that  we  may  pick 
our  steps  ;  and  here  it  is :  "Thy  Word  is  a  lamp  unto 
my  feet,  and  a  light  unto  my  path  "  (Psa.  cxix.  105). 

The  other  is  Ephesians  v.  25,  26  :  "  Husbands,  love 
your  wives,  even  as  Christ  loved  the  Church,  and 
gave  Himself  for  it ;  that  He  might  sanctify  it  and 
cleanse  it  with  the  washing  of  water  by  the  Word  " 

literally — "that    He    might   cleanse   it,    having 

washed  it  in  the  laver  of  water  in  the  Word."  The 
mention  of  "the  laver"  takes  us  back  to  the  Taber- 
nacle.    There  the  laver  stood  between  the  altar  and 


Why  has  God  given  tis  the  Bible  ?  177 

the  Holy  Place ;  and  in  that  laver  the  priest  had  to 
wash  that  he  die  not  (Exodus  xxx.  20).  When  we 
recall  the  Scripture  which  tells  us  that  the  Church  is 
the  Lord's  body,  the  meaning  of  the  figure  is  clear. 
As  the  priest  washed  his  flesh  in  the  laver,  so  the 
Lord  cleanses  us,  His  flesh,  for  service  in  the  Taber- 
nacle, and  that  He  may  at  last  present  us  in  the 
presence  of  the  Father's  glory  without  blemish  and 
without  spot.  The  water  in  this  laver  is  "the  Word." 
It  is  by  opening  our  understanding  to  perceive  the 
meaning  of  the  Scripture,  and  by  applying  it,  thus  un- 
derstood, to  heart  and  conscience  that  we  are  purged 
from  spot  and  stain.  The  Lord  takes  us  thither: 
He  brings  us  to  the  Word;  and  with  His  own  hand 
the  water  is  cast  upon  the  things  that  offend,  until 
spot  and  stain  diminish  and  disappear.  Without  this 
Word,  as  we  have  seen,  the  appointed  means  of  re- 
generation is  wanting  to  the  world ;  and  if  the 
Church's  faith  in  it  be  destroyed,  then  the  means  are 
also  lacking  which  God  has  appointed  for  the  per- 
fecting of  His  saints'. 


THE  BIBLE  A  PLANNED  BOOK. 


AS  we  take  up  the  Bible  and  open  its  pages,  with 
a  view  to  its  more  thorough  study,  we  are 
arrested  by  one  striking  and  suggestive  fact.  The 
greatest  pains  are  being  taken  by  the  higher  critics  to 
break  down  the  old  conception  of  the  Scriptures, 
and  especially  to  make  an  end  of  the  notion  that 
the  Scriptures  form  a  unity.  The  very  title,  "  The 
Bible,"  is  strongly  objected  to,  on  the  ground  that  it 
suggests  that  these  sixty-six  Books  of  the  Old  and 
the  New  Testaments  are  really  one  Book,  containing 
the  beginning,  the  middle,  and  the  end,  of  a  con- 
tinuous and  completed  story.  How  vital  it  is  for  them 
to  abolish  that  notion  of  the  Scriptures  is  plain  to 
every  one.  A  Book  of  that  kind,  to  which  so  many 
pens  and  so  many  ages  have  contributed,  could  only 
be  a  unity  because  of  the  control  and  guidance  of  a 
Mind  which  retained  its  vigour,  and  steadily  pursued 
its  purpose,  over  the  enormous  space  of  1600  years, 
and,  even  according  to  critical  reckoning,  for  more 
than  800  years  !  In  other  words,  the  unity  of  the 
Bible  would  still  prove  its  full  Divine  inspiration  after 
criticism  had  done  its  worst. 

We  are  accordingly  told  that  the  Bible  is  a  collec- 
tion of  books,  but  not,  in  any  proper  sense  of  the 
term,  a  book.  In  that  work  of  Dr.  Driver's,  to  the 
seeming  moderation  of  which  we  owe  so  much  of  the 


The  Bible  a  Planned  Book.  jjg 

present  declension,  the  new  conception  is  quietly 
insinuated.  His  book,  instead  of  being  named,  as 
has  hitherto  been  customary  even  in  Germany :  "An 
Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,"  bears  the  title: 
An  Introduction  to  THE  LITERATURE  of  the  Old 
Testament.  But  this  attempt  to  sink  the  Bible  to  the 
level  of  other  books  is  confronted  by  enormous  diffi- 
culties. For  one  thing,  if  there  existed  other  Hebrew 
literature,  the  question  must  be  faced  why  this 
particular  portion  of  it  was  selected-,  why  it  remained 
separate  from  all  the  rest ;  and  why  it  was  elevated 
unchallenged  to  this  lofty  place.  And  that  other 
literature  did  exist  it  would  be  vain  to  deny.  The 
second  Book  of  the  Maccabees  is  a  confessed 
abridgement  of  an  older  and  more  voluminous  work. 
After  a  reference  to  the  nature  of  the  events  which 
he  is  about  to  record,  the  author  says :  "  All  such 
things,  as  have  been  comprised  in  five  books  by  Jason 
of  Cyrene,  we  will  attempt  to  abridge  in  one  book  " 
(2  Maccabees  ii.  23). 

There  is  a  similar  hint  of  the  existence  of  other 
"  Hebrew  literature"  given  by  the  earlier  writer  to 
whom  we  owe  the  Book  of  i  Maccabees.  It  closes 
with  these  words  :  "And  the  rest  of  the  acts  of  John, 
and  of  his  wars,  and  of  his  valiant  deeds  which  he  did, 
and  of  the  building  of  the  walls  which  he  built,  and 
of  his  doings,  behold  they  are  written  in  the  chronicles 
of  his  high-priesthood,  from  the  time  that  he  was 
made  high  priest  after  his  father  "  (i  Maccabees  xvi. 
23,  24).  We  have  a  still  earlier  writer  in  the  Greek 
translator  of  the  apocryphal  work,  Ecclesiasticus.  He 


i8o        The  Bible :    its  Structicre  and  Purpose. 

Indicates  that  many  pens  were  busy  in  the  time  of  his 
grandfather,  the  author  of  that  work.  "  Since,"  he 
says,  "  they  that  love  learning  must  be  able  to  profit 
them  who  are  without,  both  by  speaking  and  writing, 
my  grandfather  Jesus,  having  much  given  himself  to 
the  reading  of  the  Law,  and  the  prophets,  and  the 
other  books  of  our  fathers,  and  having  gained  great 
familiarity  therewith,  was  drawn  on  also  himself 
to  write  somewhat  pertaining  to  instruction  and 
wisdom." 

\Ve  discover  similar  indications  of  a  literary  ac- 
tivity all  thiough  Israel's  recorded  history.  It  appears 
to  have  been  the  custom  in  the  ancient  Eastern 
courts  to  keep  chronicles  of  the  events  of  each  king's 
reign.  It  was  so  in  Persia.  We  are  told  that  it  was 
the  reading  of  "  the  book  of  records  of  the  chronicles" 
before  Xerxes,  which  led  to  the  honouring  of  Mordecai 
(Esther  vi.  i).  The  custom  prevailed  also  at  the 
court  of  the  northern  kingdom  of  the  ten  tribes  and 
at  that  of  Judah.  We  read  in  2  Kings  xiv.  28  :  "Now 
the  rest  of  the  acts  of  Jeroboam,  and  all  that  he 
DID,  and  his  might,  how  he  warred,  and  how  he 
recovered  Damascus,  and  Hamath,  which  belonged 
to  Judah,  for  Israel,  are  they  not  written  in  the  books 
of  the  chronicles  of  the  kings  of  Israel?"  We  meet 
like  references  to  the  Judean  records,  as  in  2  Kings 
XV.  36  :  "  Now  the  rest  of  the  acts  of  Jotham,  and  all 
that  he  did,  are  they  not  written  in  the  book  of  the 
chronicles  of  the  kings  of  Judah  ?"  These  were, 
plainly,  records  which  were  accessible  to  the  people, 
and  which  did  not  belong  to  the  secret  archives  of  the 


The  Bible  a  Planned  Book.  i8i 

palace ;  for  otherwise  the  reader  could  hardly  have 
been  referred  to  them  in  this  fashion.  They  must  also 
have  been  of  a  very  copious  kind,  since  they  contained 
an  account  of  "  all "  that  a  king  did  from  the  day  of 
his  accession  till  the  day  of  his  death.  We  might 
imagine  that  the  statement,  "all  that  he  did,"  was  a 
figure  of  speech,  and  that  it  must  not  be  taken  liter- 
ally. But  a  reference  to  an  omission  made  in  the 
chronicles  of  David's  reign  is  sufficient  to  make  us 
doubt  the  wisdom  of  dismissing  the  words  in  that 
way.  In  the  record  in  i  Chronicles  xxvii,  of  David's 
unhappy  census,  we  read  :  "  Joab  the  son  of  Zeruiah 
began  to  number,  but  he  finished  not,  because  there 
fell  wrath  for  it  against  Israel ;  neither  was  the  number 
put  in  the  account  of  the  chronicles  of  king  David  " 
(verse  24).  The  suppression  of  the  number  was, 
therefore,  an  extraordinary  exception :  everything 
else  was  recorded,  and  this  also  would  have  been 
entered  but  for  the  wrath  which  fell  on  Israel  on 
account  of  the  numbering. 

One  can  understand  how  abundant  that  historic 
literature  must  have  become  in  the  course  of  ages. 
And  it  was  not  the  only  provision  made  for  the  infor- 
mation of  the  people.  It  was  impossible,  indeed, 
that  in  Israel  of  all  lands,  where  so  much  was  felt  to 
depend  upon  the  proper  instruction  of  the  people, 
these  means  of  information  and  appeal  should  not 
have  been  utilised.  Isaiah  seems  to  have  made  the 
history  of  Uzziah,  the  great  statesman-king  of 
Judah,  the  subject  of  a  special  book  :  "  Now  the  rest 
of  the  acts  of  Uzziah,  first  and  last,  did  Isaiah  the 


i82        The  Bible:    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

prophet,  the  son  of  Amoz,  write  "  (2  Chron.  xxvi.  22), 
It  will  be  noted  that  this  is  not  spoken  of  as  belonging 
to  "  the  chronicles  "  of  the  kings  of  Judah,  so  that  it 
appears  to  have  been  a  separate  work.  Three  prophets 
had  performed  a  like  service  for  Israel  in  recording 
the  eventful  life  of  David.  "  Now  the  acts  of  David 
the  king,  first  and  last,  behold,  they  are  written 
in  the  book  of  Samuel  the  seer,  and  in  the  book 
of  Nalhan  the  prophet,  and  in  the  book  of  Gad 
-the  seer  "  (i  Chronicles  xxix.  29).  Here,  again,  we 
miss  the  phrase,  "  the  chronicles  of  king  David,"  so 
that  these  also  appear  to  have  been  independent 
narratives.  The  Book  of  Jashar,  or  "  of  the  upright  '* 
(Joshua  X.  13,  &c.),  which  seems  to  have  been  a 
collection  enlarging  from  age  to  age — an  uninspired 
but  accurate  chronicle  of  instances  of  Divine  inter- 
vention and  of  heroic  deeds,  and  **  the  book  of  the 
wars  of  the  Lord"  (Numbers  xxi.  14)  show  that  a 
like  literary  activity  prevailed  in  a  still  earlier  time. 

It  is  quite  clear,  then,  that  the  Scriptures  existed, 
from  the  first,  in  the  midst  of  a  contemporaneous 
literature,  just  as  the  Bible  exists  still  as  a  Book 
among  books ;  and  it  is  also  certain  that  the  Scrip- 
tures were  never  confounded  with  the  other  books  of 
the  time.  We  read  of  Moses  placing  the  Law  by  the 
side  of  the  Ark ;  but  nothing  is  said  of  a  like  treatment 
of  "the  book  of  the  wars  of  the  Lord."  When  the 
translators  of  the  Septuagint  Version  set  to  work 
some  time  about  300  B.C.,  they  experienced  no  diffi- 
culty in  ascertaining  what  books  they  were  to  translate 
from  Hebrew  into  Greek.     The  distinction  between 


The  Bible  a  Planned  Book.  183 

the  Scriptures  and  other  Hebrew  literature  was  broad 
and  deep.  The  Old  Testament  was  translated  into 
Greek  for  the  sole  reason  that  it  occupied  this  unique 
and  sacred  position  among  the  Jewish  people.  When 
Jesus,  the  son  of  Sirah,  wrote  Ecclesiasticus,  within 
a  century  afterwards,  he  had  been  familiar  with  this 
very  Jewish  Bible  from  his  childhood  upwards.  It 
was  then  to  him  as  sacred  and  as  separate  from  all 
other  literature  as  it  now  is  to  us.  The  Psalms, 
many  of  which  the  critics  declare  did  not  come  into 
existence  till  long  after  Ben-Sirah's  time,  were  in  his 
Bible.  And  we  have  already  seen  that  in  the  time  of 
Josephus,  as  is  equally  plain  from  the  New  Testa- 
ment records,  there  was  no  trace  whatever  of  doubt 
as  to  what  was,  and  what  was  not,  Scripture. 

This  leaves  us  face  to  face  with  the  great  problem 
of  the  Bible.  Those  Books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
as  they  were  given,  were  set  apart  by  themselves. 
The  collection  was  put  together  slowly  from  about 
1500  B.C.  to  400  B.C.— from  Genesis  to  Malachi.  It 
then  stopped.  From  about  40  to  100  a.d.  the  Books  of 
the  New  Testament  were  given  to  the  Christian 
Church.  Book  after  Bookwas  put  intothe  hands  of  the 
Christian  community,  each  with  a  Divine  authe'ntica 
tion.  When  the  Book  of  Revelation  was  written  and 
handed  over,  at  the  very  close  of  the  first  century, 
those  gifts  ceased.  Nothing  has  been  added  since. 
And  when  we  mark  what  it  is  that  was  thus  placed  in 
the  world's  hands,  we  discover  that  the  Scripture  was 
not 'only  ended  :  it  was  also  completed.  Everyone 
will  admit  that  the  Old  Testament  is  a  preparation 


1 84        The  Bible  :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

for  the  New.  That  in  itself  is  marvellous  ;  for  who 
could  have  made  such  preparation  for  a  thing  which 
no  man  saw,  or  knew,  or  was  able  to  imagine  ?  But 
it  is  also  evident  that  the  Old  Testament  is  a  steady 
advance,  a  skilful  progress,  towards  what  is  presented 
in  the  New.  We  are  briefly  informed  in  Genesis  of 
man's  creation  and  fall  :  of  the  fearful  judgment 
which  swept  away  a  sinful  race  ;  of  the  lapse  of  the 
new  humanity  which  proceeded  from  the  house  of 
Noah;  and  of  the  choice  of  one,  man  who  shall  be 
the  founder  of  a  new  people,  and  to  whom  the  promise 
is  given  that  in  him  and  in  his  seed  all  the  nations  of 
the  earth  shall  be  blessed. 

We  have  next  the  story  of  God's  training  of  that 
people ;  of  God's  long  conflict  with  their  idolatry  ; 
and  of  the  judgments  and  the  mercy  which  ended  in 
the  final  emancipation  of  the  people  from  that  form  of 
sin.  The  Old  Testament  ends  there;  and  it  ends 
with  an  emphatic  re-statement  of  the  hope  given  to 
Abraham,  and  which  had  flamed  out  with  more  and 
more  splendour  as  the  ages  rolled  on.  The  hope  of 
the  Messiah  brought  brightness  to  every  Jewish  heart, 
Malachi  iii.  i,  2  reads :  "  Behold,  I  will  send  My 
messenger,  and  he  shall  prepare  the  way  before  Me  : 
and  the  Lord,  whom  ye  seek,  shall  suddenly  come  to 
His  temple,  even  the  messenger  of  the  covenant, 
whom  ye  delight  in:  behold,  He  shall  come,  saith  the 
Lord  of  hosts.  But  who  may  abide  the  day  of  His 
coming?  and  who  shall  stand  when  He  appeareth  ?" 
And  the  Old  Testament  concludes  apparently  in  full 
and  clear  consciousness  of  how  the  work  which  then 


The  Bible  a  Planned  Book,  1S5 

stopped  was  to  be  resumed  in  the  labours  of  John  the 
Baptist.  These  are  its  last  words  :  "  Behold,  I  will 
send  you  Elijah  the  prophet  before  the  coming  of 
that  great  and  dreadful  day  of  the  Lord  :  and  he  shall 
tirn  the  heart  of  the  fathers  to  the  children,  and  the 
h  ;art  of  the  children  to  the  fathers,  lest  I  come  and 
smite  the  earth  with  a  curse  "  (Malachi  iv.  5,  6). 

We  might  dwell  upon  the  unity  of  purpose  which 
runs  throughout  the  Scripture  ;  upon  its  prophecies  ; 
and  upon  the  Old  Testament  types  which  shed  such 
light  upon  the  facts  and  the  doctrines  of  the  New 
Testament.  But  enough  has  been  said  to  demonstrate 
that  the  Bible  is  a  planned  Book,  and  that,  in  opening 
its  pages  now,  and  studying  its  individual  Books,  we 
are  dealing  with  a  Divine  unity. 


THE  HISTORICAL  BOOKS   OF  THE 
OLD  TESTAMENT. 


THE  Old  Testament  is  largely  history.  The 
Historical  Books  form  nearly  three-fifths  of  the 
■whole,  and  the  other  Books  two-fifths.  But  the 
history  is  history  written  with  a  prophetic  purpose. 
This  was  fully  recognised  by  the  Jews,  who  named 
the  Historical  Books  "  the  Former  Prophets." 

These  Books,  which  tell,  as  we  have  just  seen,  one 
continuous  story,  have,  from  the  first,  been  divided 
into  groups  in  a  manner  not  hitherto  noticed.  This 
has  been  done  by  the  use  of  the  smallest  word  in  the 
Hebrew  language.  It  consists  of  only  one  letter,  and 
that,  next  to  the  letter  yod — the  proverbial  "jot''  — 
the  smallest  letter  in  the  Hebrew  alphabet.  This 
letter-word  vav  answers  to  our  conjunction  "  and." 
The  simple  rendering  of  it  has  not  been  constantly 
observed  in  our  Authorised  Version ;  and  the  Revised 
Version,  though  much  more  consistent  in  this  matter, 
has  also  failed  to  give  a  uniform  rendering.  The 
word  is  occasionally  translated  "now,"  and  some- 
times "  then." 

Before  pointing  out  the  divisions,  apparently  so 
carefully  marked,  an  important  question  presents 
itself.  It  is  well  known  that  the  order  of  these  Books 
in  the  Hebrew  Bible  differs  from  our  own.  Both 
agree,  down  to  2  Kings,  with  one  exception.     The 


The  Historical  Books  of  the  Old  Testament.      187 

Book  of  Ruth,  in  the  Hebrew  Bible,  is  not  found 
immediately  after  the  Book  of  Judges,  as  in  our 
Bible,  but  is  removed  from  "  the  Former  Prophets," 
and  placed  in  the  Hagiographa,  between  the  Song  of 
Songs  and  the  Book  of  Lamentations.  Five  more  of 
the  Historical  Books  are  treated  in  a  similar  fashion. 
Esther,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  i  Chronicles,  and  2  Chron- 
icles are  put  also  among  the  Hagiographa,  the  Books 
of  Chronicles  closing  the  Hebrew  printed  Bible. 

Though  otherwise  possibly  of  small  importance, 
the  question  as  to  which  of  these  is  the  ancient  and 
primal  order  is  not  immaterial,  in  view  of  the  divisions 
which  I  have  just  indicated.  Fortunately,  we  are 
able  to  settle  this  matter  by  the  evidence  which  Jewish 
records  afford  of  the  changes  made  in  the  order  of 
the  Books  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  Rabbis  seem 
to  have  busied  themselves  with  the  re-arrange- 
ment of  them,  though  the  most  daring  hand  left 
their  contents  untouched.  The  earliest  Rabbinical 
arrangement  is  given  in  the  Babylonian  Talmud,  but 
this  was,  apparently,  not  regarded  as  authoritative ; 
for,  in  the  earliest  dated  Hebrew  manuscript  at  present 
known  (916  a.d.),  that  order  is  not  observed.  There 
are  other  marks  that  the  traditional  order  had  been 
departed  from,  and  that  there  was  difficulty  in  coming 
to  an  agreement  as  to  the  order  which  should  replace 
it.  Nine  manuscripts,  now  in  the  British  Museum, 
place  five  Books  immediately  after  the  Pentateuch, 
which  are  now  set  among  the  Hagiographa  in  our 
printed  Hebrew  Bibles.  And,  what  is  even  more 
■significant,  these  manuscripts  vary  the  order  even  of 


i88        The  Bible :    its  Stniciiire  and  Purpose. 

these  Books,  and  present  us  with  the  four  following 
arransfements :  * 


1- 

2. 

3. 

4. 

Song  of  Songs. 

Esther. 

Ruth. 

Ruth. 

Ruth. 

Song  of  Songs. 

Song  of  Songs. 

Song  of  Songs. 

Lamentations. 

Ruth. 

Ecclesiastes. 

Lamentations. 

Ecclesiastes. 

Lamentations. 

Lamentations. 

Ecclesiastes. 

Esther. 

Ecclesiastes. 

Esther. 

Esther. 

'  The  variations  in  the  order  of  the  Hagiographa  are 
much  more  numerous.  Ginsburg  gives  eight  arrange- 
ments as  the  result  of  his  inspection  of  the  Talmud, 
a  number  of  leading  MSS.,  and  five  early  printed 
editions.  In  five  of  these  the  Books  of  Chronicles 
are  placed  last,  and  in  three  of  them  they  head  the 
list.     That  fact  is  eloquent. 

In  the  days  of  Josephus  the  Historical  Books  were 
all  in  the  division  of  the  Prophets,  t  On\y  four  Books 
which,  it  will  be  remembered,  he  describes  as  "con- 
taining hymns  to  God  and  rules  of  life  for  men,"  are 
placed  in  a  third  division.  Evidently  these  were  the 
Psalms,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  and  the  Song  of 
Songs.  It  is  possible,  too,  that  this  was  a  mere  matter 
of  classification,  and  not  a  description  of  sections  in 
the  canonical  order  of  the  Books.  What  we  have 
now  to  remark,  however,  is  that  in  the  time  of 
Josephus  there  was  no  wrenching  away  of  any  of  the 
Historical  Books  so  that  they  might  be  placed  in  some 
later  section.    The  Historical  Books  were  massed  to- 


'  See  Ginsburg,  Introduction  to  the  Hebrew  Bible,  pp.  : 


+  See  page  12 


The  Historical  Books  of  the  Old  Testament.      189 

gether.  When  we  note  that  the  order  in  our  English 
Bible  is  the  order  of  the  Septuagint,  which  represents 
the  Hebrew  text  as  it  existed  in  the  third  century  B.C., 
we  may  consider  that  this  question  is  set  at  rest,  and 
that  the  arrangement  of  the  Books,  to  which  we  have 
been  accustomed,  is  the  arrangement  of  the  original 
Scriptures. 

Let  us  now  recall  the  fact  that  very  many  of  these 
Books  are  prefaced  by  the  conjunction  ve,  "and." 
This  indicates  that  the  Books  which  thus  begin  are 
continuations  of  earlier  Books.  They  are  added  on  to 
something  which  has  gone  before.  If  we  turn  to 
Genesis,  we  find  no  "and  "  at  the  commencement  of 
it.  Its  opening  words  are:  "In  the  beginning  God 
created  the  heaven  and  the  earth."  But  Exodus  com- 
mences thus :  "Nowthese  are  the  namesof  the  children 
of  Israel;"  literally,  "And  these  are  the  names,"  etc. 
Leviticus  opens  with:  "And  the  Lord  called  unto 
Moses;"  and  Numbers':  "And  the  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses."  These  four  Books  are,  consequently,  con- 
nected together,  and  form  the  first  division  of  the 
Historical  Books. 

It  may  astonish  the  reader  to  discover  that  Deuter- 
onomy, which  is  supposed  to  be  the  completion  of  the 
four  former  Books,  is  in  reality  dissociated  from  them, 
and  made  the  beginning  of  a  new  series.  When  we  read 
its  opening  words  we  find  no  "a'nd."  The  Book  com- 
mences :  "These  be  the  words  which  Moses  spake  unto 
all  Israel."  It  is,  consequently,  not  a  supplement  to 
what  has  gone  before.  It  forms  a  new  departure.  It 
looks  onward,  not  backward.    Joshua  comes  next,  and 


190        The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

shows  the  usual  sign  of  addition.  It  opens:  "Now 
after  the  death  of  Moses,"  hterally,  "And  it  happened 
after  the  death  of  Moses,"  &c.  Every  subsequent  Book, 
till  we  reach  2  Kings,  commences  similarly.  Judges: 
**Now  [and]  after  the  death  of  Joshua";  Ruth: 
*'Now  [and]  it  came  to  pass  in  the  days  when  the 
Judges  ruled";  i  Samuel:  "Now  [and]  there  was  a 
certain  man";  2  Samuel:  "Now  [and]  it  came  to 
pass  after  the  death  of  Saul";  i  Kings:  "Now  [and] 
king  David  was  old  and  stricken  in  years";  2  Kings: 
**Then  [and]  Moab  rebelled  against  Israel  after  the 
death  of  Ahab."  And  there  the  additions  cease. 
Each  of  the  foregoing  Books  is  annexed  to  Deut- 
eronomy, and  the  whole  form  with  it  the  second  divi- 
sion of  the  Historical  Books. 

I  Chronicles  lacks  the  prefix  which  is  so  common 
a  feature  of  the  Historical  Books.  It  commences 
with  the  words:  "Adam,  Sheth,  Enosh,"  and  pro- 
ceeds to  give  us  the  genealogies  of  the  nations,  and 
next,  of  the  tribes  and  families  of  Israel.  The  Book, 
being  thus  without  "  and,"  is  not  added  on  to  anything 
which  has  preceded,  and  forms  the  first  of  a  new 
series.  2  Chronicles  i.  i,  however,  reads:  "And 
Solomon,  the  son  of  David,  was  strengthened  in  his 
kingdom."  This  is,  consequently,  a  sequel  to  the 
Book  which  goes  before.  Ezra  has  also  to  be  added, 
seeing  that  its  opening  words  are  :  "  Now  [and]  in 
the  first  year  of  Cyrus  king  of  Persia,"  etc.  And  here 
this  third  series  stops:  for  the  Book  of  Nehemiah 
wants  the  usual  sign  of  addition,  and  commences 
**  The  words  of   Nehemiah  the  son  of   Hachiliah.' 


The  Historical  Books  of  the  Old  Testament.      191 

This,  like  the  severance  of  Deuteronomy  from  the 
other  four  Books  of  Moses,  is  one  of  the  surprises 
of  the  arrangement.  The  Jewish  people  and  the 
Christian  Church  have  regarded  the  Books  of  Ezra 
and  Nehemiah  as  so  closely  connected  together  that 
they  have  been  thought  of  as  virtually  one.  The 
only  remaining  Historical  Book  is  Esther,  and  it  is 
appended  to  Nehemiah.  Its  first  words  are:  "  Now 
[and]  it  came  to  pass  in  the  days  of  Ahasuerus,"  etc. 
Is  there  any  inherent  fitness  in  this  arrangement  ? 
Does  the  separation  of  the  Books  into  these  four 
groups  enable  us  to  grasp  more  easily  the  history  of 
Israel?  A  brief  inspection  of  the  groups  will  suggest 
a  somewhat  remarkable  reply  to  these  questions. 
Genesis  to  Numbers  gives  us  the  history  of  Israel 
outside  the  land  promised  to  them  for  an  inheritance. 
Deuteronomy  to  2  Kings  deals  with  Israel  inside  the 
.land.  This  fully  confirms  what  has  been  felt  all  along, 
and  is,  indeed,  embalmed  in  the  name  "Deuteronomy" 
("  a  second  Law  ") :  It  rehearses  the  history  of  Israel, 
and  restates  the  Law,  in  view  of. the  approaching 
possession  of  Canaan.  It  is  the  Divine  commence- 
ment, therefore.,  of  the  after  history,  i  Chronicles  to 
Ezra  describes  Israel's  return  to  the  land,  ist  and  2nd 
Chronicles  being,  in  this  case,  the  Deuteronomy  of 
the  Return.  They  rehearse  the  history  of  Israel  in 
view  of  the  re-possession  of  the  inheritance,  while 
Ezra  tells  of  the  actual  occupation  of  the  recovered 
country.  This  also  accounts  fully  for  the  special 
characteristics  of  the  Chronicles.  Wellhausen  has 
exclaimed  against  what  he  calls  their  "  pragmatism," 


192         The  Bible  :    Us  Striicticre  a?id  Purpose. 

that  is,  their  "meddlesome,"  "officious"  inculcation 
of  the  lessons  of  the  history  which  they  recount. 
With  them  it  is  history  told  with  a  distinct,  deeply 
earnest,  and  ever-remembered,  purpose.  And  what 
else  could  have  been  the  character  of  "the  Deuter- 
onomy" of  the  new  era?  That  very  "pragmatism" 
discloses  the  reason  for  the  existence  of  these  gifts  of 
Divine  Inspiration,  and  their  fitness  for  their  peculiar 
service. 

The  last  group,  iNthemiah-psther,  deals  with 
what  has  been  so  notable  a  feature  of  Israel  from  that 
time  to  the  present  hour— the  diaspora,  the  Disper- 
sion. There  were  multitudes  of  Jews  who  did  not 
go  back,  and  who,  with  their  descendants,  remained 
scattered  among  the  nations.  These  Books  give  us 
a  two-fold  picture  of  them.  In  Nehemiah  we  see 
one  whose  heart  was  with  the  men  of  the  Return. 
He  is  so  filled  with  concern  for  their  condition,  and 
for  Jerusalem,  that  he  must  go  up  for  a  time  at 
least  and  strengthen  the  hands  of  his  brethren.  The 
Nehemiahs  have  thus  been  in  all  generations  exten- 
sions of  the  Jewish  brotherhood.  But  there  was 
another  and  huge  section  of  the  Dispersion,  which 
cared  little  for  these  things.  The  condition  of  the 
Holy  City  and  of  those,  who  were  toiling  amid  scorn 
and  hardship  to  replant  God's  people  in  the  land  of 
their  inhabitance,  was  no  matter  of  vital  concern  to 
them.  These  are  represented  in  Esther,  Mordecai, 
and  the  great  body  of  the  dispersed  Israelites  then 
scattered  over  the  Persian  Empire.  They  were  Jews  in 
name,  and  probably  also  in  customs,  though  the  latter 


The  Historical  Books  of  the  Old  Testament,      193 

seem  to  have  been  easily  dispensed  with.  Mordecai 
bears  a  heathen  name,  and  Esther  would  not  have 
been  able  to  conceal  her  nationality,  if  she  had  been 
a  devout  Jewess.  This,  as  I  have  elsewhere  pointed 
out,  *  explains  a  feature  of  the  Book  which  has  been 
a  long-standing  problem  for  Bible  students.  God's 
name  is  not  once  mentioned  in  it.  Neither  are  we 
once  told  that  the  Jews  prayed  to  God  in  their  dire 
distress,  or  praised  God  when  deliverance  came  to 
them,  though  it  is  quite  improbable  that  they  had  not 
done  so.  But  these  Jews  had  despised  the  work  which 
had  been  Divinely  assigned  to  them.  They  had  aban- 
doned the  great  position  which  God  had  given  to 
the  nation  of  co-operating  with  Him  in  the  world's 
salvation.  Therefore,  though  in  His  Providence  He 
will  chastise  and  deliver  them,  God  will  not  have  their 
names  mentioned  with  His.  Their  story  and  His 
shall  not  be  bound  up  together.t 

If  this  arrangement  of  the  Historical  Books  com- 
mends itself;  if  it  sheds  new  and  important  light  upon 
their  mission;  if  it  reveals  the  necessity  for  each  part, 
and  the  perfect  completeness  of  the  whole;  what  lesson 
underlies  it  all?  The  arrangement  is  effected,  as 
we  have  seen,  by  the  silent  use  of  the  smallfest  word 
of  the  Hebrew  speech,  and  svhat  is  well-nigh  also  its 
smallest  letter.  It  is  often  placed  as  the  first  word 
of  a  Book.  It  is  sometimes  withheld.  But  when  the 
work  is  finished,  we  have  this  light  shed  upon  the 
structure  of  the  larger  part  of  the  Old  Testament 

*  The  Inspiration  and  A  ccuracy  of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
+  Compare  Jereuiiah  xliv.  26-28  aod  Hosea  iv.  6. 

M 


194         The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

Scripture,  and  upon  the  special  purpose  of  each  of  its; 
Books.  The  doctrine  of  verbal  Inspiration — that  is^ 
the  doctrine  which  teaches  that  Inspiration  extends 
to  the  very  w^ords  of  the  original  Scriptures — is  sup- 
posed by  many  to  have  been  finally  discredited.  But 
what  shall  we  say  of  this?  Who  placed  and  withheld 
that  letter  vav  with  watchfulness  which  never  slum- 
bered for  the  long  period  of  eleven  centuries,  which 
separated  the  first  Books  of  the  series  from  the  last  ? 
We  may  dislike  doctrines;  but  we  must  not  refuse  to 
consider  facts. 


GENESIS  TO  NUMBERS. 


ISRAEL  OUTSIDE  THE  LAND. 


CHAPTER    I. 
The  Plan  of  Genesis. 

IT  might  seem  as  if  it  were  necessary  to  deal  with 
the  higher  criticism,  especially  in  view  of  its 
supposed  case  against  the  integrity  of  Genesis,  before 
commencing  the  exposition  of  the  Book.  A  few 
words  will  be  said  upon  the  critical  theories  in  a  later 
chapter ;  but  the  exposition  will  really  be  the  most 
effective  reply.  Gunkel,  in  his  recently-issued  second 
edition  of  his  book  on  Genesis,*  closes  his  introduc- 
tion with  a  singular,  but  eloquent,  table.  He  names 
it  "The  Succession  of  the  Fragments  of  Genesis  in 
the  Commentary."  From  this  table  we  learn  that  the 
critical  fiat  has  gone  forth  that  Genesis  is  no  longer 
to  commence  with  the  familiar  words  :  "  In  the  begin- 
ning God  created  the  heaven  and  the  earth."  These 
words  will  not  be  reached  till  the  reader  has  had  a 
number  of  other  fragments  served  up  to  him,  the  last 
of  which  consists  of  the  first  nine  verses  of  chap.  xi. 
These  form  the  twenty-fourth  fragment ;  and  then 
comes  the  ancient  comnjencement  of  the  Book  as 
fragment  twenty-five !  That  is  the  latest  result  reached 
by  the  higher  criticism  in  regard  to  those  opening 
chapters  of  the  Bible.   It  is  the  reconstruction  forced 

*  Handkummentar  zum  Alten  Testamtnt,  GottiogeD,  1902. 


196         The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

upon  the  critics  as  the  logical  outcome  of  the  prin- 
ciples which  they  have  adopted.  Now,  if  it  is  shown 
that  Genesis  is  not  a  collection  of  fragments,  but 
that  it  is,  on  the  contrary,  one  of  the  most  perfect 
unities  in  all  literature,  then  it  will  be  proved  that 
the  higher  criticism  is  a  gigantic  blunder,  and  that 
its  fundamental  principles  are  delusions. 

To  this  study,  then,  we  now  proceed,  in  the  full 
assurance  that  this  long-continued  assault  upon  the 
Christian  faith  will  find  here  its  Waterloo.  Kuenen 
confessed  long  ago  that  the  critic  has  nothing  more 
before  him  than  the  general  public  have.  He  has  no 
documents  to  consult,  other  than  this  Bible  which 
is  before  us  all.  If,  by  the  application  of  their  prin- 
ciples to  this,  they  discover  that  it  is  a  mere  bundle 
of  fragments  ;  and  if  we,  on  studying  the  same  Book, 
find  it  a  perfect  and  glorious  unity,  we  shall  form  our 
own  judgment  of  the  reliability  of  critical  theories. 
We  shall  also  examine  the  arguments  which  the 
critics  have  based  upon  certain  passages,  the  alleged 
double  narratives,  &c.,  as  they  come  before  us  in  the 
course  of  our  exposition.  The  reader  will  thus  be 
able  to  refer  to  these  replies  by  consulting  the  treat- 
ment of  the  passages  in  question  in  our  running 
commentary. 

Has  Genesis  a  plan  ?  That  the  Book  is  most 
methodically  arranged  is  now  becoming  clear,  even 
to  critical  eyes.  It  is  divided  into  eleven  great 
natural  chapters.  The  Introduction  ends  with  the 
third  verse  of  chapter  ii.  But  the  critics,  in  order  to 
manufacture  two  accounts  of  the  Creation,  carry  the 


The  Plan  of  Genesis.  197 

conclusion  of  this  first  division  to  the  opening  words 
of  the  fourth  verse  of  chapter  ii. :  "These  are  the 
generations  of  the  heavens  and  of  the  earth  when 
they  were  created."  Here  they  blunder  at  the  outset. 
The  Hebrew  word  Tholeddth,  translated  "genera- 
tions," comes  from  the  \woxd yalad,  "to  bring  forth," 
and  means  "  things  brought  forth."  That  this  is  the 
meaning  of  the'word  is  clear  from  its  use  in  Genesis. 
"The  generations  of  the  sons  of  Noah"  (x.  i),  for 
instance,  are  not  the  story  of  the  origin  of  these 
men.  The  section,  of  which  it  is  the  heading,  contains 
not  a  single  word  about  their  ancestry.  It  is  the  story 
of  their  descendants :  it  is  simply  and  purely  the  record 
of  the  families  which  sprang  from  them,  and  of  one 
great  event  in  which  these  families  all  participated, 
and  which  led  to  their  being  scattered  over  all  the 
earth.  "  The  generations  of  Shem  "  (xi.  10)  likewise 
preserve  absolute  silence  with  regard  to  Shem's  origin. 
They  give  an  account  of  the  descendants  of  Shem. 
So  in  the  next  section  (xi.  27)  we  read:  "These 
are  the  generations  ofTerah:  Terah  begat  Abram, 
Nahor,  and  Haran ;  and  Haran  begat  Lot,"  &c. 
It  is  the'  story  of  Terah's  descendants. 

Not  observing  this,  the  critics  have  made  "  the 
generations  of  the  heavens  and  of  the  earth  "  (ii.  4) 
refer  to  the  origin  of  the  material  universe — thus 
forcing  upon  the  word  Tholeddth  a  sense  which  the 
Scripture  use  of  it  repudiates.  It  refers  invariably  to 
what  comes  after,  never  to  what  goes  before  :  not  to 
what  has  produced,  but  to  that  which  has  been  pro- 
duced ;  never  to  ancestry,  but  always  to  posterity.  In 


198         The  Bible:    Us  Structure  and  Piirposc. 

wrenching  away  these  words,  therefore,  from  their 
connection,  and  making  them  conclude  the  first 
section  instead  of  introduce  the  second,  the  critics 
have  not  only  done  violence  to  the  Scripture  which 
they  undertake  to  explain  ;  they  have  also  misunder- 
stood the  Hebrew  which  they  profess  to  teach. 

The  second  division  of  the  Book  commences,  then, 
with  the  words  (ii.  4,  5) :  "  These  are  the  generations 
of  the  heavens  and  of  the  earth  when  they  were 
created,  in  the  day  that  the  Lord  God  made  the 
earth  and  the  heavens,  and  every  plant,"  &c.  What 
the  phrase  means  here  become  plain  on  a  moment's 
reflection.  The  creation  of  the  heavens  and  of  the 
earth  is  not  the  end  of  the  story  which  Genesis  has 
to  tell.  It  is  merely  its  beginning.  This  material 
universe  is  to  be  the  theatre  and  the  stage  of  a  mighty 
drama,  in  which  God,  and  man,  and  the  entire 
creation,  have  their  part.  In  other  words,  the  heavens 
and  the  earth  have  their  Tholedoth — scenes  and 
events  to  which  their  creation  is  the  prelude.  They 
introduce  a  fresh  chapter  in  the  history.  That  chapter 
is  the  commencement  of  the  story  of  man  ;  for  the  fate 
of  the  material  universe  is  now  bound  up  with  his. 
We  have,  consequently,  fresh  details  concerning  the 
first  man  and  woman,  and  of  the  creation  which  sur- 
rounds them  ;  we  are  told  of  the  home  which  God 
prepared  for  them  ;  of  His  intercourse  with  them 
there ;  of  the  command  which  He  lays  upon  them ; 
of  their  disobedience  and  fall ;  of  the  loss  of  Paradise ; 
and  of  the  first  dark  fruit  of  sin  in  the  murder  of 
Abel.     We  have,  then,  the  story  of  the  murderer  and 


The  Plan  of  Genesis.  199- 

of  his  posterity.  The  third  section  of  the  Book  opens 
with  the  words:  "This  is  the  book  of  the  genera- 
tions of  Adam  "  (v.  i).  It  follows  the  posterity  of 
Adam  in  the  line  of  Seth.  This  section  extends  to 
vi.  8.  In  vi.  9  we  meet  again  the  now  fam.iliar 
phrase,  "The  generations  of;"  and  this  is  hence- 
forth the  dividing-line  of  the  great  natural  chapters 
of  the  Book,  and  that  by  which  it  ought  to  have  been 
divided  from  the  first,  had  its  plan  been  perceived. 
The  following  table  shows  these  sections  at  a  glance: 

(i)  The  Beginning  (i.  i — ii.  3). 

The  Generations  of  the  heavens  and  the  earth 

(ii.4 — iv.  26). 
The  Book  of  the  Generations  of  Adam  (v.  i — vi.  8).- 
The  Generations  of  Noah  (vi.  9 — ix.  29). 

,,  the  sons  of  Noah  (x.  i — xi.  9). 

,,   Shem  (xi.  10 — 26). 

,,   Terah  (xi.  27 — xxv.  11). 

,,   Ishmael  (xxv.  12 — 18). 

,,   Isaac  (xxv.  19 — xxxv,  29). 

,,Esau  (xxxvi.  i — xxxvii.  i). 

,,  Jacob  (xxxvii.  2 — 1.  26). 

It  will  be  plain  from  the  above  Table  that  the 
writer  has  a  perfectly  distinct  and  consistent  rrtethod 
and  plan.  He  sets  out  with  the  creation  of  all  things, 
and  he  concludes  by  showing  us  the  chosen  people, 
with  which  the  rest  of  the  Old  Testament  is  to  be 
concerned,  resting  in  Egypt.  He  advances  steadily, 
step  by  step,  towards  this  goal,  neglecting  nothing,  yet 
keeping  the  main  purpose  of  the  Book  constantly  in 
view.     These  eleven  opening  chapters  of  Genesis  are 


200         The  Bible  :    its  St  met  lire  and  Purpose. 

stages  in  what  is  plainly  a  planned  journey,  each  of 
them  bringing  us  nearer  to  the  end.  Is  there  any 
composition,  either  in  the  Bible  or  outside  of  it,  which 
presents  more  conclusive  proof  that  it  is  the  work  of 
one  hand,  the  outcome  of  one  Mind  ?  And,  neverthe- 
less, this  is  the  Book  which  Gunkel  has  broken  up  into 
no  fewer  than  170  fragments !  He  has  been  forced 
to  do  this  by  the  principles  laid  down  by  his  pre- 
decessors and  accepted  by  himself.  Do  we  require 
anything  further  to  convince  us  that  Gunkel  has  run 
the  higher  criticism  to  its  death,  and  that,  in  these 
170  fragments,  contrasted  with  the  manifest  unity  of 
Genesis,  he  has  disclosed  the  utter  absurdity  of 
critical  methods  ? 


CHAPTER    n. 

The  Unity  of  Grj.:,'ESis. 

THE  method  pursued  in  the  composition  of 
Genesis  is  of  a  most  peculiar  kind.  It  is  found 
in  no  other  Book  of  the  Bible,  and  in  no  other  work 
which  I  am  aware  of  in  any  literature.  The  Book 
is  a  series  of  genealogies ;  and  yet  these  are  so  arranged 
as  to  form  a  continuous  and  deeply-interesting  history 
— a  history  which  has  ever  appealed  broadly  to  the 
mind  and  heart  of  humanity.  The  young,  the 
mature,  and  the  aged,  have  perused  its  pages  with 
perennial  interest  and  profit. 

This  is  the  more  astonishing,  seeing  that  the  genea- 
logical plan  is  rigorously  adhered  to.  Each  genealogy 
is  completed  before  the  next  begins.    The  break  in  the 


The  Unity  of  Genesis.  201 

Creation-History,  caused  by  the  unhappy  division 
into  chapters,  has  concealed  the  completeness  of  the 
first  section.  The  completion  of  chapter  i.  has  been 
cut  away,  and  made  into  the  first  three  verses  of 
chapter  ii.  We  read  there  :  "Thus  the  heavens  and 
he  earth  were  finished,  and  all  the  host  of  them. 
And  on  the  seventh  day  God  ended  His  work  which 
He  had  made ;  and  He  rested  on  the  seventh  day 
from  all  His  work  which  He  had  made.  And  God 
blessed  the  seventh  day,  and  sanctified  it  :  because 
that  in  it  He  had  rested  from  all  His  work  which  God 
created  and  made  "  (iii.  1-3).  The  account  of  God's 
creative  work  is  here  carried  to  its  termination  ;  and 
the  section  is  thus  completed  before  the  next  is  begun. 
The  second  section,  entitled  "  The  Generations  of 
the  heavens  and  of  the  earth,"  finishes  with  one  of 
those  suggestive  hints  so  characteristic  of  Scripture. 
It  has  been  a  tragic  story.  God's  work,  which 
He  declared  to  be  "very  good,"  has  brought  forth 
awful  fruit.  We  see  nothing  but  Divine  disappoint- 
ment and  man's  ruin;  and  the  question  rises  to  the 
lips  :  "  Wherefore  hast  Thou  made  all  men  in  vain  ?  " 
Like  an  answer  to  that  question  come  the  last  words 
of  this  second  division  of  the  Book.  They  are' these: 
**  Then  began  men  to  call  upon  the  name  of  the 
Lord"  (iv.  26).  There  has  been  another  birth  in 
Adam's  home.  To  Eve,  the  new  gift  has  brought 
with  it  consolation  and  hope.  It  was  a  break  in  the 
black  cloud  which  had  fallen  upon  her  and  her  house. 
She  "  called  his  name  Beth  :  For  God,  said  she,  hath 
appointed  me  another  seed  mstead  of  Abel,  whom 


202         The  Bible  :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

Cain  slew"  (iv.  25).  The  word  was  prophetic.  The 
darkness  was  breaking.  The  fruit  of  the  creation  of 
the  heavens  and  of  the  earth  is  not  to  be  utter  dis- 
appointment. This  is,  indeed,  a  worthy  substitute 
for  Abel  whom  Cain  slew ;  and,  for  that  one  seeker 
after  God  whose  blood  was  poured  out  upon  the 
earth,  there  now  sprang  up  many  ;  "  then  began  men 
to  call  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord." 

The  same  feature  characterises  all  the  divisions.  I 

,  take  two  more  sections,  one  brief,  the  other  long,  but 
both  showing  the  same  completeness.  "  The  genera- 
tions of  Ishmaei"  (xxv.  12)  concludes  with  the  death 
of  Ishmaei  and  the  settlement  of  his  descendants. 
"And  they  dwelt  from  Havilah  unto  Shur,  that  is 
before  Egypt,  as  thou  goest  toward  Assyria :  and  he 
died  in  the  presence  of  all  his  brethren  "  (verse  18). 
That  section,  xxv.  12-18,  it  will  be  noticed,  short 
though  it  be,  is  so  complete  that  it  might  have  stood 
alone.  The  same  thing  is  true  of  "  the  generations 
of  Jacob,"  one  of  the  very  longest  natural  chapters 
in  the  Book.  For  a  reason,  which  we  shall  inquire 
into  immediately,  Joseph's  name  is  bound  up  with 
Jacob's  at  the  outset,  so  that  this  part  is  really  the 
story  of  the  Patriarch's  well-loved  son.  It  begins 
(xxxvii.  2) :  *'  These  are  the  generations  of  Jacob. 
Joseph,  being  seventeen  years  old,  was  feeding  the 
flock  with  his  brethren,"  &c. ;  and  it  ends  with  these 
words  :  "  So  Joseph  died,  being  an  hundred  and  ten 
years  old :  and  they  embalmed  him,  and  he  was  put 
in  a  coffin  in  Egypt "  (1.  26).     It  might  have  been  a 

'  question  with  a  reader  of  the  Scripture,  why  the 


The   Unity  of  Genesis.  203 

Book  of  Genesis  should  have  closed  with  these  words. 
There  is  nothing  whatever  to  show  that  it  is  a  natural 
ending  of  the  Book,  until  we  turn  back  to  the  begin- 
ning of  the  closing  section.  There  we  find  the 
intimation  that  we  are  to  have,  in  this  last  natural 
chapter  of  Genesis,  the  story  mainly  of  this  one  son  ; 
and,  consequently,  the  section  having  to  be  completed 
and  the  story  finished,  Joseph's  death  required  to  be 
recorded. 

Nothing  can  be  more  certain,  then,  than  that  in 
the  Book  of  Genesis  we  have  one  method,  clearly 
conceived  and  consistently  followed  from  the  com- 
mencement to  the  close,  from  the  first  word  to  the 
last.  How  many  books  can  we  cite  which  will  display 
so  clear  and  conclusive  a  proof  of  unity  of  authorship  ? 
It  might  possibly  be  suggested  that  this  is  just  one 
of  those  things  which  an  interpolator  would  be  sure  to 
mark,  and  would  find  it  easy  to  copy.  But,  then,  that 
interpolator  would  have  to  be  credited  with  bigger 
brains  than  have  been  possessed  by  a  vast  army  of 
Jewish  rabbis  and  of  Christian  expositors  and  critics. 
For  this  division  into  sections,  though,  like  the  law  of 
gravitation,  apparently,  when  it  has  once  been  noted, 
among  the  most  obvious  of  all  things,  has  attracted 
attention  only  in  recent  times ;  and  is,  nevertheless, 
as  we  have  just  seen,  woven  into  the  very  fabric  of 
the  Book. 

But  the  unity  goes  deeper  than  even  this  arrange- 
ment. Genesis  is  history  told  with  a  purpose.  We 
can  generally  tell  what  the  intention  of  a  book  is  by 
noticing  what  it  is  to  which  most   space  is  given. 


204        The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

More  than  three-fourths  of  Genesis  is  devoted  to  the 
story  of  three  men — Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  ;  and 
less  than  one-fourth  to  the  history  of  the  creation  of 
the  material  universe,  the  story  of  primeval  humanity, 
of  the  Flood,  and  of  the  many  families  and  peoples 
touched  upon  in  the  Book.  The  emphasis,  then, 
clearly  rests  upon  those  three  men.  But  why  should 
their  career  be  detailed  at  such  length  that  they 
become  the  heroes  of  the  narrative  ?  What  is  it  that 
specially  marks  them  off  from  all  others  ?  The  Book 
itself  provides  the  answer.  To  Abraham  the  promise 
is  given :  "  In  thy  seed  shall  all  the  nations  of  the 
earth  be  blessed  "  (xxii.  i8).  Before  the  birth  of  Isaac, 
God  had  said:  "I  will  establish  My  covenant  with  him 
for  an  everlasting  covenant,  and  with  his  seed  after 
him  "  (xvii.  19).  To  Jacob  the  same  promise  was 
made  :  "  In  thee  and  in  thy  seed  shall  all  the  families 
of  the  earth  be  blessed"  (xxviii.  14).  These  men  are 
the  founders  of  the  people  whose  mission  it  is  to 
become  the  channel  of  salvation  to  the  whole  earth. 
That  this  view  is  not  foisted  upon  the  Book,  but  is 
a  well-grounded  inference  from  its  contents,  is  amply 
confirmed  by  other  characteristics.  There  is  a  dis- 
tinct progress  in  the  genealogies.  We  are  led  onward 
in  a  certain  direction  by  a  series  of  selections.  In  "the 
book  of  the  generations  of  Adam  "  we  read  only  of 
Seth  and  his  descendants.  Every  other  son  of  Adam 
is  set  aside.  When  we  ask  why  this  is  done,  the  reply 
at  once  presents  itself  that  Noah  was  Seth's  descend- 
ant. Every  other  branch  of  the  human  family  perished 
in  the  Deluge  but  that  of  Seth,  which  was  continued 


The  Unity  of  Genesis.  205 

in  Noah  and  his  sons.  Seth  is  chosen,  therefore, 
because  he  is  the  one  son  of  Adam  whose  hne  is  to 
be  perpetuated  ;  for  we,  and  the  men  of  our  time,  are 
all  Sethites.  Is  it  not  marvellous  to  find  this  course 
adopted  so  quietly,  without  one  word  of  explanation, 
and  yet  taken  so  decidedly,  and  with  such  a  depth  of 
intention  ?  Is  it  the  way  of  "  saga,"  of  legend,  and 
of  folklore  (as  the  critics  tell  us  we  must  now  believe 
Genesis  to  be)  to  treat  matters  with  such  a  touch  of 
quiet  and  perfect  mastery ;  with  such  a  far,  all- 
observant,  gaze  into  futurity  ? 

We  are  only  at  the  beginning,  however,  of  these 
marvels.  The  next  selection,  after  that  of  Noah,  is 
Shem  (xi.  10).  Here  a  family  of  nations  is  chosen 
whose  characteristics  are  still  deeply  marked,  and 
which  bears  the  name  to-day  of  their  common  father. 
Was  there  any  reason  for  thus  fixing  our  attention 
upon  the  Semitic  peoples,  and  leading  us  into  the  midst 
of  them  ?  The  Book  itself  explains  why  this  course 
is  taken.  We  recall  Noah's  blessing  and  the  words : 
"  Blessed  be  the  Lord  God  of  Shem "  (ix.  26). 
Jehovah-Elohim  is  to  be  revealed  to  the  Semite  as  to 
no  other  branch  of  the  human  race.  He  is  to  be  known 
as  "the  Lord-God  of  Shem."  Therefore  is, it,  then, 
that  we  are  led  hither.  The  next  selection  is  that  of 
Terah  (xi.27).  Every  other  branch  of  the  great  Semitic 
family  is  left  to  pursue  its  way,  and  this  one  house  is 
singled  out.  We  have  already  seen  why  this  is  done. 
It  is  the  home  of  Abraham  :  and  the  consciousness 
of  this  destiny  fills  the  man's  soul  and  consecrates 
him.  He  walks  with  God  :  he  is  "the  friend  of  God." 


2o6         The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

Then  Ishmael  is  set  aside,  and  Isaac  is  taken,  in 
Isaac's  household  a  similar  selection  is  made.  Esau 
is  set  aside :  Jacob  is  chosen  ;  and  the  last  fourteen 
chapters  of  the  Book — between  one-fourth  and  one- 
third  of  the  entire  contents  of  Genesis — are  devoted 
to  "the  generations  of  Jacob." 

Now,  let  us  mark  whither  this  line  leads.  Lay  it 
across  those  selected  points — Shem,  Terah  (including 
Abraham),  Isaac,  Jacob.  Prolong  it  down  the  ages, 
and  it  touches  at  last  upon  Bethlehem  and  Calvary ! 
Step  by  step  Genesis  leads  us  on  unhesitatingly, 
and  in  one  direct  line,  till  we  are  brought  to  the  house 
of  Israel.  This  is  done  with  the  reiterated  assurance 
that  in  this  chosen  people  there  will  at  last  be  found 
healing  for  the  nations.  Has  the  promise  been  ful- 
filled ?  Has  blessing  for  all  nations,  such  as  no  other 
family  of  mankind  has  provided,  been  met  with  there? 
If  so,  then  we  are  face  to  face  with  miracle.  For  how 
could  this  Genesis-writer  have  conceived  the  idea, 
and  have  been  so  fully  assured  that  it  would  be 
realised,  that  he  leads  us  straight  on  to  this  people  as 
the  world's  hope  ?  But  whatever  may  be  thought  as 
to  that,  one  thing  is  clear.  The  unity  of  Genesis  lies 
deeper  than  its  mere  genealogical  plan.  There  is  a 
glow  throughout  of  one  hope,  and  a  direction  chosen 
and  persistently  kept  to,  which  proclaim  the  pen  of 
one  writer.  A  collection  of  fragments  could  never 
have  assumed  this  perfect  shape,  even  with  the 
assistance  of  the  most  ingenious  editors. 


CHAPTER  III. 

The  Divine  Stamp  upon  Genesis. 

A  NOTICEABLE  feature  in  Genesis,  as  we  have 
already  hinted,  is  its  reticence.  There  is  no 
preaching  nor  moralising.  The  writer  never  pauses 
to  point  out  a  lesson,  though  dealing  with  the  origin 
of  sin,  the  judgment  of  the  Flood,  and  with  many  a 
tempting  theme  besides.  This  is  the  more  remarkable 
that  there  is  a  pervading  suggestiveness.  The  lessons 
are  there  ;  but,  like  fruit  hidden  by  leaves,  they  have 
to  be  looked  for.  For  example,  when  we  read  of 
Abram  and  his  company  that  "they  went  forth  (from 
Haran)  to  go  into  the  land  of  Canaan :  and  into  the 
land  of  Canaan  they  came,"  we  are  apt  to  imagine 
that  these  last  words  are  a  repetition  due  to  the 
simplicity  which  marked  the  literary  style  of  those 
ancient  times.  If  they  set  out  to  go  to  the  land  of 
Canaan,  of  course,  we  say,  they  must  have  come  to 
the  land  of  Canaan.  But  when  we  read  the  context 
carefully,  we  conclude  that  our  conception  of  the  case 
is  due  to  modern,  rather  than  to  ancient,  simplicity. 
We  are  told,  just  a  few  verses  before,  that  Abram  had 
once  before  "set  out  to  go  to  the  land  of  Canaan," 
but  that  into  the  land  of  Canaan  he  and  his  company 
had  not  come.  They  stopped  midway  at  Haran, 
where  the  old  idolatry  surrounded  them,  out  of  which 
God  had  called  His  servant.     Is  it  difficult  to  see 


2o8        The  Bible :    Us  Siruchire  and  Purpose. 

there  the  danger  of  a  half-obedience  ?  Abraham's 
second  call  is  as  necessary  and  imperative  as  the  first. 
Haran  was  not  Canaan,  though  it  lay  upon  the  way 
to  Canaan.  We  cannot  make  compromises  with 
God.  It  is  only  to  a  full  surrender  that  the  inheritance 
will  be  given. 

There  is  a  similar  suggestiveness  in  the  order 
observed  in  these  genealogies.  The  rejected  line  is 
always  Jiamed  first.  Thus  Cain's  posterity  are  placed 
before  the  posterity  of  Seth ;  "the  generations  of 
Ishmael  "  before  "the  generations  of  Isaac;"  "the 
generations  of  Esau"  before  "the  generations  of 
Jacob,"  &c.  There  is  no  explanation  given  as  to  why 
this  is  done.  We  only  note  that  the  law  is  never  once 
departed  from.  When  we  come  to  the  last  instance 
— "the  generations  of  Jacob" — the  suggestion, 
however,  is  more  apparent ;  so  apparent,  indeed, 
that  it  seems  almost  impossible  that  it  should  be 
overlooked.  We  are  told  (chapter  xxxvi.)  how  Esau's 
children  became  princes.  The  Dukes  are  enumerated, 
evidently  great  territorial  magnates.  They  elected 
kings,  united  in  this  way  their  forces,  and  became 
formidable  among  the  nationalities  of  Canaan.  The 
words  which  complete  the  section  are:  "These  be 
the  Dukes  of  Edom,  according  to  their  habitations 
in  the  land  of  their  possession  :  he  is  Esau  the  father 
of  the  Edomites.  And  Jacob  dwelt  in  the  land 
wherein  his  father  was  a  stranger,  in  the  land  o 
Canaan"  (xxxvi.  43 — xxxvii.  i).  Esau  and  his  children 
entered  at  once  upon  their  possession.  Greatness 
came  early,  and  it  came  abundantly.     Jacob,  on  the 


The  Divine  Stamp  upon  Genesis.  209 

other  hand,  had  to  wait.  Even  in  Canaan,  the  very 
land  that  is  his  by  promise,  he  is  merely  a  tolerated 
stranger.  The  chosen  have  to  wait.  That  is  the  lesson 
which  is  written  upon  all  these  genealogies,  and  which 
thus  challenges  our  attention  just  as  we  are  about  to 
enter  upon  the  last  of  them.  "  The  Lord  is  good  unto 
all."  If  Esau  despises  the  birthright,  God  will  give 
him  that  which  he  will  receive  willingly  and  gladly. 
He  will  give  it  to  him  fully,  and  He  will  give  it  to 
him  early.  They  who  are  reserved  for  the  better 
portion  have  to  tarry.  There  is  discipline  in  that 
which  they  must  not  miss ;  for  without  it,  they  shall 
not  possess  worthily.  In  addition  to  the  gift,  they 
are  to  have  a  still  better  thmg.  They  are  to  know, 
and  to  love,  the  Giver. 

I  do  not  know  of  any  book  outside  the  b.ole 
wherein  lessons,  so  plainly  intended,  are  left  in  this 
way  to  be  discovered  by  the  student.  To  teach  thus 
silently,  to  prepare  joy  for  the  discoverer  so  calmly 
and  yet  so  lovingly,  is  not  man's  way  :  but  it  is  often 
God's  way.  It  is  the  Divine  plan  for  the  education 
of  humanity.  The  student  of  nature  is,  by  this  very 
method,  filled  with  the  truest,  purest,  delight,  and 
invested  with  greatness  among  his  fellows.  Is  it 
fanciful,  then,  to  trace  in  Genesis  the  same  method  ? 
Is  it  rash  to  say  that  the  book  of  nature  and  the  Bible 
have  been  arranged  upon  the  same  plan,  and  by  the 
same  Hand  ? 

I  have  already  spoken  of  the  goal  of  the  Book.  It 
follows  a  special  line  down  through  the  whole  of  the 
primeval  history.     That  line  passes  on  through  one 

N 


2IO         The  Bible :    Us  Structure  a7id  Purpose. 

Divine  choice  after  another  till  the  selections  close 
with  Jacob  and  his  family.  In  the  former  part  of  the 
Book  the  promise  is  given  that  the  seed  of  the  w^oman 
shall  bruise  the  head  of  the  serpent.  The  reader  will 
judge  it  worthy  of  note  that  it  is  the  woman's  off- 
spring, and  not  the  man's,  of  which  this  destiny  is 
predicted.  It  may  impress  some,  at  least,  to  find 
here  an  intimation  already  given  of  the  miraculous 
conception  of  the  Deliverer  of  humanity.  This 
promise  is  repeated,  and  (as  we  have  just  noticed) 
thrice  secured  by  distinct  Divine  covenant  to  these 
men — Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob.  Then  the  promise 
passes  to  the  family  of  Jacob.  The  world's  hope  rests 
with  this  people  of  Israel — the  smallest  of  the  nations. 
Who,  even  in  the  fourth  century  B.C.,  could  have 
conceived  it  possible  that  a  Jew  should  arise  who 
should  rally  round  Him  the  nations,  undo  the  serpent's 
work,  and  bless  men  with  the  restored  fellowship  of 
God? 

That  there  is  no  way  of  explaining  this  feature, 
apart  from  the  Divine  origin  of  this  marvellously- 
planned  Book,  I  have  indicated  already  in  the  pre- 
ceding chapter.  The  impossibility  of  excluding  this 
explanation  will  become  more  apparent  as  we  proceed 
with  the  exposition — especially  of  the  first  chapter. 
Meanwhile,  I  limit  myself  to  minor,  but,  nevertheless, 
significant,  indications  of  the  Divine  hand.  If  the 
reader  will  examine  the  genealogies,  he  will  find  that 
the  chronology  of  Genesis  is  confined  to  the  selected  line.  In 
the  account  of  the  posterity  of  Cain,  the  genealogy 
runs  as  follows:  "And  unto  Enoch  was  born   Irad  : 


The  Divine  Stamp  upon  Genesis.  211 

and  Irad  begat  Mehujael :  and  Mehujael  begat 
Methusael :  and  Methusael  begat  Lamech  "  (ver.  18). 
Here  not  a  single  year  is  mentioned.  There  is  no 
reckoning  whatever.  But  when  we  proceed  to  the  next 
chapter  (which  records  the  posterity  of  Seth)  we  meet 
the  most  careful  chronology  to  be  found  in  any  litera- 
ture :  "  And  Adam  lived  an  hundred  and  thirty  years, 
and  begat  .  .  .  Seth.  And  the  days  of  Adam  after 
he  had  begotten  Seth  were  eight  hundred  years.  .  . 
And  all  the  days  that  Adam  lived  were  nine  hundred 
and  thirty  years :  and  he  died.  And  Seth  lived  an 
hundred  and  five  years,  and  begat  Enos.  And  Seth 
lived  after  he  begat  Enos  eight  hundred  and  seven 
years.  .  .  And  all  the  days  of  Seth  were  nine  hundred 
and  twelve  years"  (verses  3-8). 

There  could  not  be  a  more  careful  reckoning  than 
that.  It  is,  so  to  speak,  a  system  of  double  entry. 
We  are  told  first  the  age  of  the  father  at  the  birth  of 
the  son  who  is  named.  Then  we  learn  how  long  he 
lived  after  that  son's  birth.  The  matter  might  have 
been  left  there ;  for  we  could  easily  have  told  the  age 
of  the  patriarch  at  death  by  adding  together  these 
two  sums.  But  lest  any  error  should  be  made  in  the 
transmission  of  the  figures,  the  sum  of  the  two 
numbers  is  given  us  by  the  Scripture.  In  chapter  x. 
the  posterity  of  Japheth,  Ham,  and  Shem,  are  named 
without  the  mention  of  a  single  number.  It  might 
be  concluded,  however,  that  the  law  does  not  hold 
here,  seeing  that  Sham's  line  is  treated  in  the  same 
fashion.  But  it  will  be  observed  that  here  we  have 
all  Shem's  descendants,  and  not  merely  the  selected 


212         The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

line.  When  we  do  come  to  the  chosen  line,  the  same 
careful  enumeration  appears  again  (though  with  a 
difference) :  **  These  are  the  generations  of  Shem  : 
Shem  was  an  hundred  years  old,  and  begat  Arphaxad 
two  years  after  the  Flood :  and  Shem  lived  after  he 
begat  Arphaxad  five  hundred  years.  .  And  Arphaxad 
lived  five  and  thirty  years,  and  begat  Salah :  and 
Arphaxad  lived  after  he  begat  Salah  four  hundred  and 
three  years  "  (xi.  10-13).  In  the  subsequent  selections 
we  still  find  the  reckoning  given.  It  is  confined  to 
the  history  of  the  chosen  seed,  though  it  has  to  be 
searched  for.  We  meet  it  again  in  Exodus,  where 
we  are  told  the  exact  duration  of  the  sojourning  of 
the  Israelites ;  and  along  the  story  of  Israel  we  pick 
up  the  chronological  thread,  which  has  enabled 
scholars  to  make  a  beginning,  for  example,  with  the 
chronology  of  Egypt. 

What  does  it  mean  ?  Is  it  not  that  the  story  of 
those  alone,  who  bring  salvation  to  this  waiting  earth, 
is  history  in  the  sight  of  God  ?  Is  it  not  an  indica- 
tion that  this  alone  will  yet  be  reckoned  genuine  his- 
tory even  by  men?  What  is  the  worth  of  the  Chronicles 
of  Egypt,  or  of  Babylonia,  or  of  Assyria,  compared 
with  the  record  of  God's  dealings  with  the  poor, 
long-oppressed,  and  still-despised  Jew?  It  is  another 
indication  that  Genesis  is  pervaded  by  a  conscious- 
ness of  the  destiny  of  Israel — a  consciousness  of  a 
destiny  which  is  not  yet  exhausted.  The  sojourning 
of  the  Jew  is  the  measure  of  God's  grace  for  the 
Gentiles ;  and  the  ending  of  that  long  travail  will 
strike  the  hour  of  the  earth's  deliverance.     This  last 


The  Divine  Stamp  upon  Genesisi  213 

statement  may  not  carry  with  it  the  assent  of  all; 
but  the  reckoning  of  the  years  in  connection  with  the 
selected  lines,  and  with  them  only,  must  surely  be 
accepted  as  emphasising  the  anticipation  of  blessing 
from  the  race  towards  which  the  history  leads  us.  The 
marking  of  the  lapse  of  time  here  alone  clearly  tells 
us  that.  Expectation  sits  here  looking  onward,  open- 
eyed,  and  marking  how  much  of  the  allotted  span  is 
passed. 

We  have  already  noted  the  fact  that  Joseph  is 
closely  associated  with  Jacob  in  the  last  section  of 
the  Book.  "These  are  the  generations  of  Jacob," 
we  read  in  xxxvii.  2  : 

"Joseph,  being  seventeen  years  old,  was  feeding  the 
flock  with  his  brethren  ;  and  the  lad  was  with  the  sons 
of  Bilhah,  and  with  the  sons  of  Zilpah,  his  father's 
wives :  and  Joseph  brought  unto  his  father  their  evil 
report.  Now  Israel  loved  Joseph  more  than  all  his 
children,  because  he  was  the  son  of  his  old  age  :  and 
he  made  him  a  coat  of  many  colours,"  &c. 

The  section  proceeds  as  it  begins.  After  a  chapter 
concerning  Judah  (xxxviii.),  the  story  of  Joseph  is 
resumed,  and  he  becomes  the  hero  of  this  part  of  the 
sacred  history,  the  Book  ending  (as  we  have  seen) 
with  his  death  and  his  dying  charge  to  the  children 
of  Israel. 

When  we  ask  why  Joseph  should  be  associated  in 
this  way  with  Jacob,  a  reply  seems  hard  to  find.  It 
has  been  urged  as  a  likely  explanation,  that  Joseph 
was  the  son  of  Rachel,  the  beloved  wife  of  Jacob. 
But  this  appears  to  be  scarcely  sufficient,  for  Benjamin, 


214         The  Bible :    its  Siruchire  and  Purpose. 

the  youngest  child  of  all,  was  also  Rachel's  son.  We 
are  apparently  unable  also  to  fall  back  upon  what  we 
have  found  to  be  the  pervading  purpose,  which,  like 
a  golden  thread,  links  all  the  parts  of  the  Book 
together.  We  cannot  say  that  Joseph  is  in  the 
direct  line  from  which  the  Messiah  is  to  spring ;  for 
the  favoured  tribe  was  that  of  Judah,  and  not 
Manasseh  nor  Ephraim,  which  sprang  from  Joseph. 
And  yet  this  is,  after  all,  the  explanation.  Joseph  is 
a  type  of  Jesus;  and  he  is  the  sole  type  of  the 
Messiah  supplied  by  these  twelve  Patriarchs.  Not  one 
of  those  Old  Testament  types  of  Christ  repeats  the 
picture  given  in  another.  Each  tells  the  story  of 
Him  who  was  to  come  from  its  own  point  of  view. 
Note  (i)  the  relationship  between  this  father  and  son. 
They  are  bound  together  with  the  bands  of  deep  and 
strong  affection.  "  Israel  loved  Joseph  more  than  all 
his  children,"  and  that  love  is  returned  by  Joseph 
with  an  equal  intensity.  Is  it  fanciful  to  see  in  this 
a  shadowing  of  the  love  which  binds  God  and 
Christ  together? 

If  this  should  seem  to  be  due  to  fancy,  a  further 
study  of  the  type  may  dispel  that  notion.  We 
observe  (2)  that  Joseph  has  intimations  of  coming 
greatness.  We  are  immediately  told  of  his  two 
dreams.  These  dreams  did  not  come  at  his  bidding. 
They  were  prophecies  of  the  mighty  destiny  reserved 
for  this  well-loved  son ;  and  they  were  no  doubt 
intended  as  Divine  provision  for  heart  and  mind  in 
the  bitter  trials  which  were  to  follow.  Here,  again, 
in  the  glory  reserved   for  this  member  of   Israel's 


The  Divine   Stamp  upon  Genesis.  215 

family,  we  see  something  of  Him  whom  His  brethren 
will  yet  hail  as  Lord  of  all.  But  (3)  what  followed 
from  this  special  favour,  and  from  these  intimations 
of  future  greatness  ?  Bitter  hatred  !  "  When  his 
brethren  saw  that  their  father  loved  him  more  than 
all  his  brethren,  they  hated  him,  and  could  not  speak 
peaceably  unto  him  "  (verse  4).  When  the  dreams 
were  told  them,  "his  brethren  said  to  him,  Shalt 
thou  indeed  reign  over  us?  or  shalt  thou  have 
dominion  over  us?  And  they  hated  him  yet  the  more 
for  his  dreams,  and  for  his  words  "  (verse  8). 

It  will  be  admitted  that  we  have  here  what  is,  at 
least,  a  marvellous  illustration  of  our  Lord's  position 
among  His  brethren.  It  was  the  very  closeness  of 
the  bond  which  bound  God  and  Him  together  that 
awoke  the  envy  and  hostility  of  the  priests  and  the 
rulers,  the  Pharisees  and  the  Scribes.  Jesus  loved 
the  Father,  and  the  Father  loved  and  honoured 
Jesus.  Thepeople  recognised  instinctively  theposition 
given  to  the  Son.  They  felt  that  He  spoke  with 
authority  and  not  as  the  Scribes.  The  new  Teacher 
was  ousting  the  religious  leaders  from  their  place  in 
the  confidence  of  the  people.  And  the  old  harvest 
of  hate  sprang  up  again  in  Israel.  The  old  challenge 
rang  out  once  more  :  "  Shalt  thou  indeed  reign  over 
us  ?  or  shalt  thou  have  dominion  over  us  ?  "'  From 
hate  there  comes  (4)  murder  :  "  And  when  they  saw 
him  afar  off,  even  before  he  came  near  unto  them, 
they  conspired  to  slay  him  "  (verse  18).  It  was  the 
type  of  many  a  Jewish  council  in  those  days  when 
the  rulers  "sought  to  slay  "  Jesus  (John  v.  16-18), 


2i6        The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

though  they  imposed  upon  themselves  and  others  by 
cloaking  their  enmity  in  the  disguise  of  indignant 
virtue. 

The  parallel  still  goes  on.  (5)  Joseph  was  brought 
up  from  the  pit  which  was  intended  to  be  his  sepul- 
chre ;  and  Jesus  is  raised  from  the  dead.  And  now 
(6)  Joseph's  story  is  henceforth  bound  up  with  the 
story  of  a  foreign  people.  He  goes  down  into  Egypt, 
and  there  the  intimations  of  coming  greatness  find 
their  first  fulfilment.  We  trace  here  the  continuation 
of  our  Lord's  story.  He  is  preached  and  believed  on 
among  the  Gentiles.  His  story  is  hencefoi'th  bound 
up"  with  that  of  Gentile  peoples — the  Christian 
nations.  Egypt  (7)  honours  this  man,  rejected  and 
cast  out  by  his  brethren,  and  reaps  a  rich  harvest  of 
blessing.  Joseph  is  put  in  the  place  of  supreme 
power.  The  administration  of  Egypt  is  committed 
to  him,  with  the  result  that  the  people  have  abound- 
ing prosperity,  and  bread  to  eat  even  in  days  of 
famine;  while  the  king's  power  is  placed  upon  a 
broader  and  firmer  basis.  That  story  has  been 
repeated  in  many  a  land  since  then.  Jesus  has  never 
been  the  trusted  Counsellor  and  Lord  of  any  nation 
where  the  like,  and  also  greater,  blessings  have  not 
become  the  inheritance  of  both  sovereign  and  people. 

Two  other,  and  equally  striking,  traits  will  com- 
plete the  picture.  Joseph  (8)  enters  into  an  abiding 
alliance  with  the  people  which  has  put  its  trust  in 
him.  His  life  is,  in  a  manner,  identified  with  theirs. 
He  marries  an  Egyptian;  "and  Pharaoh  .  .  .  gave 
him  to  wife  Asenath  the  daughter   of  Potipherah 


The  Divine  Stamp  upon  Genesis.  2iy 

priest  of  On  "  (xli.  45).  And  the  Lord  has  not  dis- 
dained the  peoples  who  have  put  their  trust  in  Him. 
He  has  made  an  eternal  covenant  with  them.  He  has 
bound  up  his  life  with  theirs,  taking  to  Him  a  bride 
out  of  all  nations,  and  kindreds,  and  peoples,  and 
tongues.  But  (g)  it  was  Joseph's  destiny  to  rule 
among  the  very  brethren  who  had  cast  him  out.  This 
token  of  God's  favour,  though  by  no  means  the  least, 
came  last.  The  famine  is  also  in  the  land  of  Canaan. 
The  family  of  Israel  have  wealth,  but  they  have  not 
bread.  Driven  by  need,  and  attracted  by  Egypt's 
fulness,  they  come  down  to  the  Gentiles'  Deliverer 
that  they  and  their  little  ones  may  live  and  not  die. 
And  so  the  prophecies,  which  have  been  so  marvel- 
lously fulfilled  in  the  blessings  which  the  nations  have 
found  in  Christ,  tell  us  more.  The  days  are  coming, 
say  they,  when  the  word,  which  declared  of  old  that 
Jesus  should  be  set  as  King  upon  God's  holy  hill  of 
Zion,  shall  be  fulfilled.  The  Jew,  driven  by  bitter 
need,  will  seek  the  Gentiles'  Saviour;  and  then  they 
will  discover  their  long-lost  brother,  their  Joseph. 
This  Book  of  Genesis,  as  we  have  seen,  points  from 
the  first  to  Christ.  As  we  follow  the  line  of  these 
Divine  selections,  we  march  onward,  like  the  magi 
of  old,  towards  "the  Star  of  Bethlehem."  Does  it 
not  add  to  our  astonishment  to  note  here,  that  the 
Book,  in  this  last  section,  ends  with  a  typical  Saviour, 
and  with  a  typical  salvation,  first  for  the  Gentile,  and 
then  for  the  Jew  ? 

We  meet  with  a  statement  in  the  beginning  of 
chapter  v.  which  the  critics  seem  not  to  have  utilised. 


2i8        The  Bible :    its  Structure  ajid  Purpose. 

With  a  little  of  their  customary  audacity,  and  a 
few  unscrupulous  changes,  it  might  have  been  repre- 
sented as  a  third  account  of  the  creation.  We  read  : 
"In  the  day  that  God  created  man,  in  the  likeness  of 
God  made  he  him  ;  male  and  female  created  He 
them ;  and  blessed  them,  and  called  their  name  Adam, 
in  the  day  when  they  were  created  "  (verses  i,  2). 
But,  as  we  read  on,  we  discover  that  this  is  merely 
part  of  a  significant  contrast.  The  next  word, 
"  and,"  shows  that  the  statement  about  to  be  made  is 
closely  connected  with  that  which  has  gone  before : 
"And  Adam  lived  an  hundred  and  thirty  years,  and 
begat  a  son  in  his  own  likeness,  after  his  image ;  and 
called  his  name  Seth  "  (verse  3). 

Seth,  we  know,  was  born  (iv.  25)  after  the  expulsion 
from  paradise,  and  even  after  sin  had  borne  its  terrible 
fruit  in  the  murder  of  Abel.  When  we  are  told, 
therefore,  that,  while  the  first  parents  of  our  race 
were  created  in  God's  image,  after  God's  likeness, 
Seth  was  begotten  in  the  image  and  after  the  likeness 
of  Adam,  the  words  mean  that  Seth  was  formed  in 
the  likeness  and  the  image  of  a  fallen  being.  He 
inherited  a  sinful  nature.  This  concerns  us  closely ; 
for  all  of  us  are  Sethites.  Every  other  branch  of  the 
human  race  perished,  as  we  have  already  noted,  in 
the  Flood.  The  Sethite  family  of  Noah  alone  escaped, 
and  from  them  all  men  since  born  are  descended. 
Seth  handed  on  to  Noah,  and  through  him  to  us,  the 
nature  which  he  himself  had  received,  and  that  a 
nature  begotten  in  the  likeness  and  after  the  image 
of  a  ruined  man.     What,  then,  does  the  contrast, 


The  Divine  Stamp  upon  Genesis.  219 

which,  as  usual  in  Genesis,  is  merely  stated  and  not 
commented  upon,  mean  ?    The  two  origins  are  placed 
side  by  side.     With  what   intention  are  they  thus 
presented?     Is  it  too  much  to  conclude  that  this 
story  of  God's  preparation  for  the  earth's  salvation 
here   indicates    why   this    salvation   requires   to   be 
provided  ?    In  other  words,  that  this  early  chapter  of 
Genesis  teaches  the  doctrine  of  universal  depravity  ? 
I  might  again  press  the  question  as  to  Whose  touch 
this  is ;  but  this  is  only  part  of  the  striking  display 
of  the  combined  fulness,  earnest  purpose,  and  mar- 
vellous reticence  which  confront  us  here.    The  section 
commences  :  "  This  is  the  book  of  the  generations  of 
Adam."     As  we  have  seen,  the  phrase,  "  the  genera- 
tions of,"  is  repeated  again  and  again.    But  we  shall 
search  Genesis  in  vain   for  any  repetition  of  these 
words  :  "  The  book  of  the  generations  of."    We  do 
not  find  it  again  in  the  whole  of  the  Old  Testament. 
It  is  repeated  once  only  in  the  entire  Scripture.    The 
opening  words  of  the  New  Testament  are  these: 
*  The  book  of  the  generation  of  Jesus  Christ,  the 
Son  of  David,  the  Son  of  Abraham  "  (Matthew  i.  i). 
This  fact,  so  noticeable  in  itself,  acquires  immense 
significance  when  we  remember  other  Scripture  state- 
ments.    In  "  the  Book  of  the  generations  of  Adam  " 
all  our  names  are  written.     They  are  inscribed  there 
by  right  of  our  common  descent.  But  this  enrolment 
is  a  list  of  fallen  beings,  of  sinful  men.     We  are 
inheritors  of  a  polluted  nature  which  none  of  us  has 
been  able  to  purify.     To  answer,  therefore,  to  that 
roll-call  is  to  be  marshalled  for  condemnation. 


220        The  Bible:    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

But  the  Scripture  speaks  of  another  Book  in  which 
names  may  be,  and  are,  inscribed.  There  are  many, 
we  read  in  Revelation  xiii.,  who  will  be  drawn  away 
in  the  final  apostacy  and  revolt  against  God;  but 
they  are  those  "whose  names  are  not  written  in  the 
book  of  life  of  the  Lamb  slain  from  the  foundation 
of  the  world.  If  any  man  have  ears  to  hear  let  him 
hear"  (verses  8,  9).  In  chapter  xx.  we  are  told  of 
«'ithe  great  white  throne,"  and  the  final  judgment : 
"And  I  saw  the  dead,  small  and  great,  stand  before 
God ;  and  the  books  were  opened  :  and  another  book 
was  opened,  which  is  the  book  of  life.  .  .  -.  And  who- 
soever was  not  found  written  in  the  book  of  life  was 
cast  into  the  lake  of  fire  "  (verses  12-15).  In  xxi.  27, 
we  read  concerning  the  new  City,  the  eternal  home 
of  the  redeemed  :  "And  there  shall  in  no  wise  enter 
into  it  any  thing  that  defileth,  neither  whatsoever 
worketh  abomination,  or  maketh  a  He:  but  they 
which  are  written  in  the  Lamb's  book  of  life."  There 
is  a  last  reference  to  this  Book  in  the  closing  words  of 
Scripture,  which  have  a  special  message  for  the  pre- 
sent hour :  "  And  if  any  man  shall  take  away  from 
the  words  of  the  book  of  this  prophecy,  God  shall  take 
away  his  part  out  of  the  book  of  life,  and  out  of  the 
holy  city,  and  from  the  things  which  are  written  in 
this  book"  (xxii.  19). 

There  is  but  one  Book  for  the  saved.  It  is  the 
Book  of  the  Lamb — the  one  Divinely  appointed  and 
accepted  sacrifice  for  sin,  the  Book,  therefore,  of  life. 
Here  our  view  ceases  to  be  limited  to  Genesis.  We 
are  compelled  to  note  the  unity  of  Scripture.     Shall 


The  Higher  Criticism  and  the  New  Testament.   221 

we  say  that  it  is  quite  by  accident  that  these  phrases 
thus  answer  to  each  other— "The  Book  of  the 
generations  of  Adam  " — "  The  Book  of  the  generation 
of  Jesus  Christ,"  "the  Lamb's  Book  of  Life?"  Is 
there  no  arranging  hand  visible  in  thus  confining  the 
one — the  Book  of  condemnation — to  the  Law,  and 
in  making  the  other— the  Book  of  salvation— stand 
in  the  forefront,  and  amid  the  last  solemn  words, 
of  the  Gospel?  And  whose  arranging  hand  can  this 
be,  if  not  the  Hand  of  God? 


CHAPTER    IV. 


The  Higher  Criticism  and  the  New  Testament 
IN  THEIR  Attitude  toward  Genesis. 

IT  will  be  necessary  to  refer  here  to  the  critical 
theories  of  the  origin  of  Genesis;  but  a  few  words 
will  suffice.  For  one  thing,  it  would  be  well  nigh  as 
profitable  to  enter  upon  a  study  of  the  latest  Paris 
fashions.  Of  these  we  have  experience  enough  to 
know  that  this  book  would  hardly  be  in  the  market 
before  "the  latest  "  fashions  would  have  given  way  to 
others  still  more  recent.  The  much-spoken-of  agree- 
ment of  the  critics  is  a  myth,  and  their  "ascertained 
results  "  require  to  be  summed  up  in  a  very  tender 
fashion.  When  the  analysis  of  the  Pentateuch  began, 
the  public  was  told  that  Genesis  was  clearly  the  out- 
come of  a  two-fold  authorship.  There  was  one  writer 
who  only   knew  one  name  for    God — the    Hebrew 


222         The  Bible  :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

Elohitn ;  and  there  was  another  writer  who,  strangely 
enough,  was  afflicted  with  an  equally  limited  vocabu 
lary.  The  term  he  used  was  Jehovah  (both  these 
names  will  be  explained  in  our  brief  commentary). 
The  critics  were  quite  certain  that  E  (the  Elohist, 
who  used  the  word  Elohini)  was  the  older  writer,  and 
J  (the  Jehovist,  who  used  the  name  Jehovah)  was  the 
later  writer.  There  was  not,  perhaps,  very  much 
difference  between  their  dates;  but  still,  that  was 
the  order  in  which  they  had  appeared.  This  was 
*' proved"  by  a  long  array  of  arguments,  with  special 
appeal  to  the  older  language  and  style  of  5^.  It  was 
found,  however,  that  here  the  critics  had,  all  un- 
wittingly, delivered  themselves  into  the  hands  of 
the  enemy — the  orthodox  scholars  who  still  believed 
in  a  genuine  and  inspired  Bible ;  and  so  the  critics 
forthwith  discovered  that  J  was  the  older  writer,  and 
E  the  younger  of  the  two.  By-and-bye  E,  or  as 
much  of  him  as  would  hold  together,  was  re-baptised. 
A  new  name  was  clapped  upon  him.  He  was  called 
P  (the  Priestly  writer),  and  was  hustled  down  from 
the  ninth  century  B.C.  to  the  fourth  century  B.C.  Poor 
fellow,  it  has  fared  with  him  as  with  the  ass.  Though 
a  good  deal  is  laid  upon  him,  he  is  not  much  thought 
of  now. 

But  worse  troubles  befell  this  "sacred  science;" 
for  "  devout  scholarship  "  was  soon  plunged  into  a 
labouring  ocean  of  perplexities,  in  which,  indeed, 
some  big  reputations  went  to  the  bottom.  J  and  E 
were  discovered  to  be  most  provokingly  inconsis- 
tent.    Apparently  they  forgot  the  parts  which  they 


The  Higher  Criticism  and  the  New  Testament.    223 

were  expected  to  play.  J  was  found  to  be  using  the 
name  which  had  been  assigned  to  E ;  and,  not  to  be 
behind  his  friend,  E  was  using  the  name  which  the 
critics  had  assured  the  pubhc  was  J's  very  own.  The 
critics  had  to  bow  to  fate,  and  confess  the  facts.  But^ 
clearly,  it  would  not  do  now  to  speak  of  the  Elohist 
and  the  Jehovist;  so  E  has  since  stood  for  "the 
Ephraimitic  writer,"  and  J  for  "the  Judaic  writer," 
the  former  belonging  to  the  northern,  the  latter  to 
the  southern,  kingdom. 

It  was  cleverly  done.  But  the  trouble  was  not 
ended  :  it  was  only  commencing.  We  had  been  told 
that  we  had  merely  to  read  Genesis  with  these  new 
J  and  E  spectacles  to  find  ocular  demonstration  of 
the  truth  of  the  new  theories.  Just  as  an  old  seam 
parts  before  the  edge  of  a  sharp  knife,  so  parted,  we 
were  told,  the  two  old  documents.  The  J  document 
and  the  E  document  came  clean  away  from  each 
other,  and  each  made  a  continuous  and  beautiful 
history  by  itself.  But  the  enthusiasm  was  speedily 
damped.  There  were  outcries,  of  course,  against  the 
new  views.  It  was  said  that  no  separation  of  the 
Genesis  documents  was  possible ;  that  both  names 
were  used  by  only  one  writer;  and  that  the  Divine 
.names  and  the  two  alleged  styles  were  so  intermingled 
that  they  never  could  have  belonged  to  two  different 
writers.  The  worst  of  it  was  that,  when  the  critics 
looked  into  the  matter,  they  found  that  their  asser- 
tions could  not  really  be  maintained.  What  was  to  be 
done  in  this  new  trouble  ?  Why,  simply  to  admit  that 
large  portions  could  not  be  separated,  and  to  call  these 


224         The  Bible  :    ffs  Struct ure  and  Purpose. 

J  E  !  That  is  the  recognised  method  of  the  new 
unbelief.  Darwin,  in  his  Origin  of  Species,  after 
enumerating  facts  which  are  in  direct  conflict  with 
his  theory,  simply  says  that  he  nevertheless  clings  to 
his  theory.  That  facts  were  against  the  critics  made 
no  difference ;  the  theory  must  be  saved  at  any  cost. 
Facilis  descensus  Averni — easy  is  the  downward 
way.  Bigger  sacrifices  of  consistency  were  soon 
demanded,  and  the  demands  were  met  with  surprising 
readiness.  At  first  we  were  told  that  the  traditional 
order — 

The  Law, 

The  Psalms, 

The  Prophets 
— was  confirmed  by  critical  investigations.  But  it 
became  evident,  by-and-bye,  that  with  that  order  the 
critics  had  gained  nothing.  They  were  still  confronted 
by  the  miracle  of  Revelation.  These  Laws  could  not 
have  sprung  up  through  mere  evolution  at  so  early  a 
period.  The  order  must,  consequently,  be  reversed; 
and  it  now  stands  : 

The  Prophets, 

The  Law, 

The  Psalms. 
And  this  is  the  reason  why  no  Psalms  can  be  left  to 
David,  and  why  so  many  must  belong  to  the  times  of 
the  Maccabees.  They  are  so  full  of  references  to  the 
Law,  that,  of  course,  if  the  Law  is  late,  the  Psalms, 
which  refer  to  the  Law,  must  needs  have  been  later! 
But,  if  the  critics  have  thus  disagreed  with  them- 
selves, and  have  repudiated  what  they  had  announced 


The  Higher  Criticism  and  the  New  Testament.  225 

as  their  own  clearly-established  conclusions,  the  repre- 
sentation that  they  are  now  in  perfect  accord  with 
each  other  is  ludicrously  untrue.  Dillmann  has  said 
that  in  Wellhausen's  theory — that  each  of  the  so- 
called  documents  had  undergone  repeated  revisions 
before  they  were  united — he  could  only  see  **  a 
hypothesis  of  perplexity."  *  They  are  not  more  agreed 
now.  The  "  fine  vein  of  ethical  and  religious  reflec- 
tion, which  has  sometimes  been  attributed  to  J," 
writes  Dr.  Geo.  F.  Moore,  "  is  the  result  in  part  of 
an  erroneous  analysis."  f  Gunkel  describes  Budde, 
moreover,  as  often  hypercritical,  and  his  transposi- 
tion of  verses  and  inversions  of  the  text  as  "  quite 
capricious"  (recht  willkiirlich).  Gunkel's  own  theory, 
that  Genesis  is  composed  of  ancient  Sagas  or  mythical 
legends,  is  now  alarming  his  fellow-critics,  who  see  in 
it  the  commencement  of  a  new  revolution. 

But  we  are  specially  concerned  at  the  present 
moment  with  the  attitude  of  the  higher  criticism 
towards  Genesis.  That  attitude  is  one  of  distinct  and 
unanimous  repudiation.  According  to  Kuenen,  the 
Book  consists  of  legends,  which,  when  they  came  to 
be  written  down,  were  "  worked  up  in  one  way  by  one 
writer,  and  in  another  by  another,  according  to  the 
point  of  view  and  purpose  of  each  respectively,  so  as 
often  to  be  notably  modified,  or  even  completely 
transformed."  %  It  is  not  surprising,  therefore,  to 
learn  from  his  history  of  the  Israelitish  religion  that 
Genesis  is  entirely  set  aside.     "  Can  we  use  the  Old 

*Die  Bucher  Exodus  and  Leviticus,  p.  viii.      +  Art.  Genesis,  Encyclopaedia  Biblica . 
I  The  Hexateuch,  p.  38  (English  translation). 

O 


226        The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

Testament  accounts  of  the  history  of  Israel,"  he  asks^ 
"  as  a  foundation  for  our  review  of  its  religious 
development?"  "Our  answer,"  he  says,  "  must  be 
in  the  negative."  He  adds  :  "  The  oldest  accounts  of 
the  Mosaic  time  were  as  far  removed  from  Israel's 
lawgiver  as  we  Dutchmen  are  from  the  beginning  of 
the  Hoek  and  Kabel-jauw  quarrels.  Suppose  that 
we  knew  of  the  latter  only  by  traditions,  which  had 
never  been  committed  to  writing  up  to  this  time  : 
should  we  have  the  boldness  to  trust  ourselves  to  the 
historian,  who  now  wrote  them  for  the  first  time,  as 
a  safe  guide  ?  Surely  it  is  almost  inconceivable  that 
a  narrative,  which  was  not  written  down  until  after  so 
long  an  interval,  should  yet  entirely  accord  with  the 
reality.  We  find  by  experience  every  day  that 
accounts  which  have  been  current  but  for  a  short 
period  have  admitted  very  strange  elements,  and,  in 
some  cases,  have  become  unrecognisable.  Without  a 
perpetual  miracle,  the  oral  tradition  of  Israel  cannot 
have  remained  free  from  this  influence.  Even  before 
we  have  made  acquaintance  with  the  contents  of  the 
narratives,  we  take  it  for  granted  that  they  only  give 
us  half  the  truth,  if  even  so  much  as  that."  * 

This  is  the  conclusion  to  which  the  critical 
theories  inevitably  lead.  Let  it  once  be  granted  that 
Genesis  is  a  bundle  of  traditions,  which  some  one  put 
into  written  form  long  after  the  events,  and  every- 
thing which  Kuenen  here  contends  for  must  be 
conceded.  There  would  still  be  a  measure  of  truth 
in  his  argument  even  if  the  Scripture  history  gave 

»  The  Religion  of  Israel  (Englisli  translation),  vol.  i.,  pp.  17,  18. 


The  Higher  Criticism  and  the  New  Testament.  227 

us  contemporary,  but  merely  human,  records.  He 
proceeds  upon  the  critical  supposition  that  Revelation 
is  a  myth,  and  belief  in  the  full  inspiration  of  the 
Scripture  a  blind  superstition.  We  shall  soon  see  that 
facts  compel  us  to  acknowledge  the  inspiration  of  the 
Bible ;  but  what  we  have  now  to  notice  is  the 
repudiation  of  Genesis  even  as  trustworthy  history. 
To  the  critics  it  is  a  Book  upon  the  statements  of  which 
no  certain  reliance  can  be  placed.  Bishop  Ryle's 
estimate  of  its  worth  is  an  equally  sad  revelation  of 
what  this  disbelief  means.  To  him.  Genesis  is  merely 
just  such  a  compilation  as  Kuenen  assumes  it  to  be. 
It  is,  by  his  account,  a  collection  of  stories  which 
had  been  told  from  hearth  to  hearth  for  long  ages 
before  they  were  put  into  writing.  "  We  can  hardly 
doubt,"  he  says,  "that  the  brightness  and  vividness 
of  much  Hebrew  narrative  is  due  to  its  having  been 
derived  from  the  lips  of  practised  story-tellers.  To 
this  source  we  are  probably  indebted  for  those  portions 
in  the  Books  of  Judges  and  Samuel  which  are 
regarded  as  presenting  the  best  style  of  Hebrew 
prose.  With  them  we  must  associate  the  two  great 
collections  of  narrative,  called  by  critics  the  Elohist 
and  Jehovist  writings,  which  forms  so  large  a  portion 
of  the  compilation  of  the  Pentateuch.  They,  too, 
had  been  compilations;  they,  too,  incorporated  early 
written  records.  But  in  their  pure  and  simple  style, 
resembling  closely  the  best  portion  of  Judges  and 
Samuel,  we  trace  the  influence  of  oral  tradition.  It 
makes  itself  heard  and  felt  in  the  simple  conversa- 
tional prose,  in  the  vividness  of  the  description  of 


2  28         The  Bible  :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

scenes,  and  in  the  naturalness  and  ease  of  the 
dialogues."  * 

The  above  extract  proves  how  slender  a  logical 
equipment  suffices  to  make  a  critic.  The  narratives 
in  Genesis  are  written  vividly  and  in  clear  conversa- 
tional Hebrew.  Therefore  they  must  have  been 
stories  which  had  been  passing  for  ages  from  lip  to  lip 
among  the  people  !  We  tremble  for  the  fate  which 
awaits  poor  John  Bunyan  and  other  writers  of  "pure 
and  simple"  conversational  English.  The  very  excel- 
lence of  these  authors  will  prove  their  undoing.  For, 
as  soon  as  the  critics  have  ended  their  Biblical  unveil- 
ings  and  turned  to  this  new  field,  the  poor  authors 
will  be  abolished  as  myths,  or  branded  as  impostors, 
and  their  well-loved  pages  broken  up  into  the  stories 
which,  it  will  be  straightway  assumed,  they  had 
collected  and  published  as  original  matter !  But 
in  view  of  what  has  already  resulted  from  the  critical 
delusion,  will  Dr.  Ryle  tell  us  what  is  the  exact  worth 
of  such  a  precious  collection  ?  Can  he  accept  it  as 
history?  or  will  he  gravely  direct  his  clergy  to  it  as  the 
authoritative  Word  of  God  ? 

To  these  examples  let  me  add  another,  taken  from 
the  latest  fashion  worn  by  this  unbelief.  Gunkel's 
rule  for  distinguishing  the  mythical  from  the  historical 
is  frankly  rationalistic.  He  says  that  the  narratives  of 
Genesis,  for  the  most  part  of  a  religious  sort,  speak 
continually  of  God ;  and  this,  he  says,  is  one  of  the 
most  certain  tests  for  distinguishing  poetry  from 
history.     According    to    him,  God  is  never   visibly 

*  The  Canon  oj  the  Old  Testament,  p.  35. 


The  Higher  Criticism  and  the  New  Testament.  229 

manifested.  "  Quite  otherwise  "  is  it,  he  says,  "  in 
many  narratives  of  Genesis."  He  then  compares 
them  with  some  other  Old  Testament  narratives; 
"  for,"  he  writes,  "  these  offences  against  probabiHty, 
indeed  against  possibility,  are  not  met  with  every- 
where in  the  Old  Testament,  but  only  in  quite  well- 
defined  fragments  of  the  same  tone.  In  other 
fragments,  on  the  other  hand,  which  we  hold  to  be 
specially,  or  more  specially,  historical,  we  do  not 
observe  them.  We  think,  above  all,  of  the  middle 
portion  of  the  Book  of  2  Samuel,  the  history  of 
Absalom's  rebellion,  that  most  precious  piece  of 
ancient  historical  writing  in  Israel.  The  world,  which 
is  here  pictured,  is  that  which  we  know  well.  In  this 
world  there  swims  no  iron  in  the  water,  and  no 
serpents  talk.  No  God  nor  angel  appears  as  one 
person  among  the  others ;  but  everything  is  done  as 
we  are  accustomed  to  see  it."  * 

We  shall  find  abundant  answer,  by-and-bye,  to 
these  cheap  sneers.  I  quote  them  here  merely  to 
show  what  the  attitude  of  the  higher  criticism  to 
these  revelations  of  God  really  is.  It  is  that  of  open, 
and  now,  indeed,  scurrilous,  infidelity.  Wherever 
the  Scripture  tells  us  that  God  was  manifested,  or 
that  God  intervened,  we  have  only,  in  Gunkel's 
opinion,  "  faded  myths."  t  He  repudiates  this'  obvious 
conclusion,  but,  in  a  way  which  only  confirms  it.  "  It 
is  no  question,"  he  says,  "  of  belief  or  of  unbelief,  but 
only  a  question  of  fuller  knowledge  as  to  whether  the 
narratives  of  Genesis  are  history  or  legend.     It  is 

*  Genesis,  p.  15.     t  Page  xvii. 


2T,o        The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

objected,"  he  continues,  "  that  Jesus  and  the  apostles 
have  plainly  held  these  narratives  for  fact  and  not 
poetry.  Certainly.  But  the  men  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment have  no  special  position  in  such  questions,  but 
share  the  ideas  of  their  time."  *  So  perfect  is  the 
unity  of  the  Scripture,  and  so  completely  has  God 
bound  up  the  Bible  with  His  redeeming  work,  that 
we  cannot  cast  away  even  its  first  Book  without  at 
the  same  time  thus  tearing  up  the  very  foundations 
of  the  Christian  Church. 

But,  happily,  there  are  still  multitudes  with  whom 
the  testimony  of  our  Divine  Lord  and  His  inspired 
apostles  cannot  be  thus  brushed  aside.  Let  us  ask, 
then,  which  side  is  taken  by  those  who  will  ever  be 
the  highest  "Authorities"  for  the  Church  of  Christ. 
The  Creation-History  (Gen.  i.  i — ii.  3)  is  given  by  the 
critics  to  their  imaginary  writer,  P.  This  is  the  priestly 
writer,  who,  they  say,  fabricated  large  parts  of  the 
Scripture  to  obtain  for  the  Aaronic  family  the  control 
of  the  Jewish  ritual  after  the  return  from  Babylon. 
For  such  an  astute  conspirator  he  seems,  according 
to  the  critics,  to  have  been  poorly  endowed,  having 
neither  genius  nor  talent.  The  earlier  critics  gave 
him  both :  but  the  newer  critics  can  see  no  trace  of 
either.  Gunkel  speaks  of  his  "  insipidity  and  mono- 
tony," and  says  that  he  is  "  evidently  sufficiently 
painstaking,  and  exemplary  in  his  love  of  order; 
but  to  him,  as  to  many  another  learned  man,  the 
poetic  sense  was  not  given."  He  then  represents 
him    as   consulting  the    old    "  Sagas,"    the   popular 

*  Page  xii. 


The  Higher  Criticism  and  the  New  Testament.     231 

legends,  and  actually  treating  as  records  of  facts  what 
were  the  products  of  the  poetic  imagination.  So  he, 
in  his  simplicity,  put  down  the  results  of  his  researches 
as  the  Creation-History  !  *  Dr.  Moore  also  hints  that 
P  did  not  scruple  to  avail  himself  of  the  arts  of  the 
impostor,  for  he  talks  of  his  "  calculated  archaism."  f 
It  is  this  which  lies  behind  the  assurance,  so  con- 
stantly reiterated  by  our  professors  and  ambitious 
preachers,  that  we  must  look  for  neither  science  nor 
history  in  this  and  other  opening  chapters  of  Genesis. 
But  what  does  our  Lord  say  ?  We  read  in  Gen.  i.  27 
that  "God  created  man  in  His  own  image,  in  the  image 
of  God  created  He  him  :  male  and  female  created  He 
them."  In  Matthew  xix.  3-6  we  are  told  that  the 
Pharisees  came  tempting  Jesus,  "  and  saying  unto 
Him,  Is  it  lawful  for  a  man  to  put  away  his  wife  for 
every  cause  ?  And  He  answered  and  said  unto  them. 
Have  ye  not  read,  that  He  who  made  them  at  the 
beginning  made  them  male  and  female,  and  said,  For 
this  cause  shall  a  man  leave  father  and  mother,  and 
shall  cleave  to  his  wife :  and  they  twain  shall  be  one 
flesh  ?  Wherefore  they  are  no  more  twain,  but  one 
flesh.  What  therefore  God  hath  joined  together,  let 
not  man  put  asunder."  Here  the  first  and  second 
chapters  of  Genesis  are  ratified  by  our  Lord,  and  by 
Him  certified  to  us,  as  records  of  fact.  So  trlie  is  it 
that  God  did  create  man,  that  He  is  described  as 
"  He  who  made  them  at  the  first."  Our  Lord's  reply, 
too,  is  based  upon  the  absolute  veracity  of  the 
record  even  in  special  details — "  He  made  them  male 

♦  Kommeutar,.iip.  Ixxxi.,  Ixxxii.     i  Art.  Genesis,  Encydopadia  Biblica. 


232         The  Bible  :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

and  female."  Indeed,  the  words  in  the  end  of  chap,  ii., 
quoted  here  in  verse  5,  are  pointed  to  as  an  accurate 
report  of  the  words  of  God,  and  the  whole  is  taken  as 
fully-inspired  Scripture.  **  Have  ye  not  read  ?"  asks 
Jesus.  In  other  words,  Are  you  not  aware  that  the 
Word  of  God  has  already  answered  your  question, 
and  put  this  matter  beyond  dispute  ?  These  early 
chapters,  therefore,  are  science,  if  science  means 
perfect  acquaintance  with  fact.  And  they  are  history 
given  by  the  inspiration  of  God. 

A  striking  illustration  of  the  place  accorded  by  the 
New  Testament  to  these  early  chapters  .of  Genesis 
meets  us  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  The  apostle 
has  just  spoken  of  God's  declaration  that  the  Israel- 
ites should  not  enter  into  His  rest,  and  he  proceeds : 
"  For  He  spake  in  a  certain  place  of  the  seventh  day 
on  this  wise.  And  God  did  rest  the  seventh  day 
from  all  His  works  "  (Hebrews  iv.  4).  This  "  certain 
place  "  fnamed  indefinitely  as  a  hint,  no  doubt,  to 
these  Hebrew  Christians  that  they  ought  to  search 
the  Scriptcres)  is  Genesis  ii.  2.  The  Creation-History 
is,  therefore,  not  only  true ;  but  God  Himself  is  also 
the  narrator.  The  Author,  whom  the  critics  patronis- 
ingly  describe  as  a  patient  compiler  from  old  legends, 
or  as  an  unblushing  forger,  and  whom  they  name  P, 
is  no  other  than  their  and  our  Creator !  Again,  in 
Romans  ix.,  there  are  references  to  incidents  in  the 
history  of  the  three  Patriarchs — Abraham,  Isaac,  and 
Jacob.  By  the  critics  these  narratives  are  entirely  set 
aside  as  unhistorical.  Jacob  and  Isaac,  according  to 
them,  never  existed.  Their  names  are  names  of  tribes, 


The  Higher  Criticism  and  the  New  Testament.     233 

they  say,  which,  in  the  course  of  time,  were  supposed 
to  have  been,  at  the  first,  names  of  individuals ;  and 
then,  having  the  names  upon  their  hands,  an  ignorant 
but  inventive  age  imagined  a  history  for  them  !  As 
to  Abraham,  Professor  George  Adam  Smith  is  inclined 
to  think  that  he  did  actually  live ;  but  he  is  perfectly 
confident  that  he  never  had  the  history  attributed  to 
him  in  Genesis.* 

But  it  is  attributed  to  him,  not  in  Genesis  only, 
but  also  here  in  Romans  and  elsewhere  in  the  New 
Testament.  The  apostle  refers  (verse  9)  to  the  Divine 
interview  with  Abraham  on  the  plains  of  Mamre,  and 
to  the  promise  of  an  heir  then  given  to  him  by  God. 
Here,  therefore,  that  whole  incident,  so  utterly 
objectionable  to  the  men  who  believe  that  "  miracles 
do  not  happen,"  is  assumed  to  be  true.  In  the  earlier 
verses  (6-8)  the  subsequent  rejection  of  Ishmael  and 
the  selection  of  Isaac  are  also  referred  to  as  equally 
unquestionable.  Then  (verses  10-13)  we  have  the 
reahty  of  the  incident  of  the  birth  of  Esau  and  Jacob 
and  the  prophecy  which  preferred  the  younger  to  the 
elder,  discarded,  like  the  rest,  as  absolute  myths  by 
the  critics,  similarly  assumed  to  be  facts.  Our  atten- 
tion is  directed  to  all  these  by  the  apostle  as  to  God's 
own  action,  as  to  a  revelation  of  the  sovereign  choice 
and  appointment  of  the  Almighty.  For  he  immediately 
asks  :  "  What  shall  we  say,  then  ?  Is  there  unright- 
eousness with  God  ?  God  forbid.'.'  Is  New  Testament 
Inspiration,  then,  a  myth  ?  Is  there  no  Divine  Revela- 
tion of  a  way  of  escape  from  judgment  ?   Are  we  yet 

,  *  Modem  Criticism  and. he  I'l  caching  of  the  Old  Testament. 


234        ^'^'^  Bible  :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

in  our  sins,  and  are  we,  equally  with  the  atheist,  to  be 
henceforth  without  God  in  the  world  and  without 
hope  ?  They  who  stand  with  the  critics — that  Korah 
host — are  compelled  to  answer  "Yes"  to  each  of  these 
questions.  As  for  ourselves,  we  stand  with  Moses, 
and  our  reply  is,  "No." 

There  are  similar  references  to  other  parts  of  the 
Patriarchal  history  which  further  manifest  the  New 
Testament  witness  to  it,  and  lend  added  emphasis  to 
the  above  questions.  But  can  anything  make  it 
plainer  in  what  place  the  continuance  of  the  Christian 
faith,  of  Christian  service,  and  of  Christian  hope,  will 
alone  be  found  ?  These  have  flourished  where  the 
Scripture  has  been  received  as  the  Word  of  God. 
They  have  withered  everywhere  besides. 


CHAPTER   V. 

The  Antiquity  of  Genesis:  The  Samaritan 
Pentateuch. 


WE  are  not  without  indications,  as  we  have 
already  seen,  that  the  dates  which  the  critics 
have  assigned  to  the  various  so-called  "  sources  "  of 
Genesis  may  undergo  another  change.  As  our  posi- 
tion, however,  rests  upon  facts,  and  not  upon  ever- 
changing  theories,  this  does  not  trouble  us.  We  shall 
show,  first  of  all,  that  there  is  a  date  for  the  origin 
of  Genesis,  beneath  which  no  theory  can  rightly  take 


The  Samaritajt  Pentateuch. 


235 


us.    We  shall  then  mention  some  other  facts  which 
limit  its  composition  to  the  time  of  Moses. 

The  critics  have  long  attributed  the  Book  to  three 
authors— P,  the  priestly  writer;  J,  the  Jehovist,  and 
latterly  the  Judean  writer;  and  E,  the  Elohist,  whom 
it  is  now  found  more  convenient  to  speak  of  as  the 
Ephraimitic  writer.  Behind  thesethree  gather  spectral 
forms  of  other  writers ;  and  so  numerous  do  these 
sometimes  appear  to  the  disturbed  critical  vision  that 
they  are  spoken  of  as  "  strata."  Into  these  specula- 
tions it  would  serve  no  good  purpose  to  enter,  nor 
need  we  trouble  ourselves  with  the  ages  ascribed 
by  one  writer  and  another  to  the  various  critical 
phantoms.  Fortunately  the  reliability  of  their  dis- 
section of  the  Book,  and  of  the  dates  assigned  to  the 
various  parts,  admits  of  an  easy  test.  They  tell  us 
that  P  (to  whom  they  assign  the  first  chapter 
and  parts  of  many  other  sections)  contributed  his 
portion  about  450  or  400  b.c.  This  date  is  a  chief 
corner-stone  of  the  critical  edifice ;  and  we  now 
proceed  to  show  that  it  is  impossible,  and  that  the 
portions  of  Genesis,  and  of  the  rest  of  the  Pentateuch, 
assigned  to  P,  were  in  e:xistence  long  before  either  400 
or  450  B.C. 

.References  to  a  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  written  in 
the  ancient  Phoenician  and  Hebrew  character,  are 
frequent  both  in  the  early  Christian  writings  and  in 
the  Jewish  Talmud.  It  is  referred  to  by  Origen 
and  Jerome  among  others  ;  while  the  Rabbis  are 
represented  as  frequently  taunting  the  Samaritans 
with  ignorance  of  the  Law,  of  the  possession  of  which 


236         Tke  Bible  :    its  Strudiirc  a7?d  Purpose. 

they  were  evidently  proud.  For  long  centuries,  how- 
ever, all  knowledge  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  had 
perished  in  the  Christian  Church  ;  and,  on  the  revival 
of  learning,  it  came  to  be  regarded  by  European 
scholars  as  a  myth.  But,  in  1616,  Pietro  della  Valle, 
the  distinguished  Roman  traveller,  while  visiting 
Damascus,  was  introduced  to  a  small  colony  of 
Samaritans.  In  the  interesting  letter,  in  which  he 
describes  his  intercourse  with  them,  he  mentions 
some  details,  which  proved  how  rigorously  they 
observed  the  Mosaic  Law.  "  I  had  great  satisfac- 
tion," he  adds,  "  in  seeing  in  the  housQ  of  one  of 
their  Chacham,  or  Doctors  [of  the  Law] ,  four  copies 
of  the  Sefer-Thora,  that  is,  of  th«  Pentateuch  of  Moses, 
in  Samaritan  characters.  .  .  These  books  were  very 
ancient,  and  all  written  in  Samaritan  characters,  on 
large  leaves  of  parchment."  The  Samaritans,  like 
the  Jews,  had  apparently  exercised  great  care  in 
securing  faithful  copies  of  the  Sacred  Book,  as  will 
be  seen  from  the  following.  He  says  that,  at  a  small 
cost  and  with  the  help  of  a  Jewish  friend,  "  I  had 
from  the  Chacham  two  Sefer-Thora  in  this  writing,  one 
of  those  which  are  on  parchment  .  .  .  and  another, 
which  belonged  to  a  lady,  written  on  paper,  but  very 
ancient  and  very  correct,  as  four  or  five  Chacham  give 
their  testimony  at  the  end  of  the  book  in  Arabic,  in 
which  they,  each  individually  and  at  different  times, 
assure  all  that  they  have  perused  it  from  one  end  to 
the  other,  and  have  found  no  mistake." 

Della  Valle  presented  the  parchment  copy  to  the 
French  Ambassador,  by  whom  it  was  forwarded  to 


The  Samaritan  Pentateuch.  237 

Paris,  and  so  brought  to  the  knowledge  of  the 
learned.  The  result  was  a  heated  and  long-continued 
controversy.  Morinus,  a  Romanist  theologian,  pub- 
lished a  work,  in  1631,  in  which  he  declared  that  the 
Samaritan  Pentateuch  was  to  be  preferred  to  that 
which  has  been  handed  down  by  the  Jews.  Its  varia- 
tions, he  argued,  showed  a  "  superior  lucidity  and 
harmony,"  and  stated  that  they  were  supported  by  the 
early  Greek  translation,  the  Septuagint.  The  attempt 
of  Morinus  was,  no  doubt,  largely  due  to  the  Roman- 
ist irritation  caused  by  the  constant  appeal  of  the 
Protestants  to  the  original  Scriptures.  If  it  could  be 
shown  that  there  was  uncertainty  as  to  the  original 
text,  the  Protestants  would  be  deprived  of  their  con- 
fidence, and  their  appeals  of  their  force.  But  a  crowd 
of  disputants  joined  in  the  controversy  who  were  not 
influenced  by  that  motive,  but  who,  nevertheless, 
made  this  a  burning  question  for  two  centuries.  "  It 
would  now  appear,"  says  the  late  Emanuel  Deutsch, 
"  as  if  the  unquestioning  rapture  with  which  every 
new  literary  discovery  was  formerly  hailed,  the  innate 
animosity  against  the  Masoretic  (Jewish)  text,  the 
general  preference  for  the  LXX.  (the  Septuagint),  and 
the  defective  state  of  Semitic  studies  "  had  largely 
to  do  with  the  bitterness  and  the  long  continuance  of 
the  struggle.* 

But  the  strangest  circumstance  in  connection  with 
the  episode  is  the  fact  that  it  did  not  seem  to  occur 
to  anyone  that  it  was  necessary  to  make  a  thorough 
study  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  and  so  to  ascer- 

*  Literary  Remains  of  the  Late  EmanUel  Deutsch,  p.  408. 


238        The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

tain  Its  character.  When  this  was  done  by  Gesenius, 
the  controversy  died  without  hope  of  resurrection. 
It  occurred  to  that  great  Orientalist  to  classify  the 
variations,  and  so  to  ascertain  what  had  led  to  them. 
It  was  then  seen  that,  with  the  exception  of  two 
exceedingly  slight  changes,  "  the  Mosaic  laws  and 
ordinances  had  nowhere  been  tampered  with."  * 
That  this  is  a  most  important  fact,  in  view  of  present 
assertions,  will  be  apparent  by-and-bye.  There  are, 
however,  systematic  changes,  the  evident  object  of 
which  was  to  prove  that  Gerizim,  and  not  Jerusalem, 
was  the  Divinely-selected  Temple  site.  But  the  great 
body  of  the  variations  is  plainly  due  to  a  desire  to 
make  the  Book  intelligible  to  the  Samaritans.  Com- 
paratively modern  are  substituted  for  ancient  gram- 
matical forms,  words,  and  phrases.  Obscurities  are 
removed,  and  additions  are  made,  the  object  of  which 
is  to  explain  and  to  enforce  the  statements  of  the 
original  text.  Few  things  have  been  so  complete  as 
this  vindication  of  the  Hebrew  text.  Gesenius 
selected  four  readings,  which  he  judged  to  be  prefer- 
able to  those  of  the  Old  Testament  as  possessed  by 
the  Jews  and  by  ourselves.  "  The  reader  will  find," 
says  Deutsch,  "  that  they,  too,  have  been  all  but 
unanimously  rejected."  These  results  formed  an  over- 
whelming demonstration  that  those  who  attacked  the 
Hebrew  text  on  this  ground  had  no  case  whatever. 
That  text  had  clearly  been  in  the  hands  of  the  man, 
or  the  men,  from  whom  the  Samaritans  had  received 
the  sacred  Book. 

*  Page  410. 


The  Samaritan  Pentateuch.  239 

But  when,  and  how,  did  it  come  into  their  posses- 
sion ?  That  these  non-Israelites  should  possess  this 
Law,  and  should  cherish  it  as  their  own  most  sacred 
possession,  is  a  most  peculiar  circumstance.  There 
is  absolutely  no  parallel  to  it.  We  might  have 
expected  the  Moabites  and  the  Ammonites,  and  more 
especially  the  Edomites  who  were  so  closely  con- 
nected in  origin  with  the  Israelites,  to  have  welcomed 
the  Mosaic  institutions.  But  they  never  had  them, 
nor  did  they  ever  display  the  slightest  desire  to 
possess  them.  We  discover  no  trace,  indeed,  of 
approaches  of  this  kind  on  the  part  of  any  neigh- 
bouring nationality.  We  find,  instead,  deep-rooted 
antipathy,  and  almost  incessant  hostility;  and  that 
hostility  and  antipathy  were  nowhere  more  pro- 
nounced than  among  the  Samaritans  themselves. 

It  must,  therefore,  have  been  some  very  special,  if 
not  extraordinary,  occasion  which  led  to  this  cordial 
adoption,  and  persistent  retention,  of  the  Mosaic  Law 
by  the  Samaritans.  Have  we  any  explanation  of 
what  caused  this  reUgious  revolution  ?  There  is  one 
answer,  and  one  only.  We  are  told,  in  the  Book  of 
2  Kings  which  was  written  before  the  return  from 
the  Babylonian  Exile,  that  the  king  of  Assyria,  after 
the  conquest  of  Samaria  in  722  B.C.,  re-peopled  the 
cities  of  Samaria.  Large  numbers  of  colonists  were 
drawn  from  various  parts  of  the  extended  Assyrian 
Empire  and  planted  in  the  conquered  and  desolated 
territory.  But  God  would  still  be  honoured  in  the 
land  destined  from  eternity  to  be  the  inheritance  of 
His  people,  and  a  judgment  was  inflicted  upon  the 


240        The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

heathen  settlers,  which  was  immediately  recognised 
as  coming  from  His  hand.  "  And  so  it  was  at  the 
beginning  of  their  dwelling  there,"  says  the  Scrip- 
ture, "  that  they  feared  not  the  Lord :  therefore  the 
Lord  sent  lions  among  them,  which  slew  some  of 
them.  Wherefore  they  spake  to  the  king  of  Assyria, 
saying.  The  nations  which  thou  hast  removed,  and 
placed  in  the  cities  of  Samaria,  know  not  the 
manner  of  the  God  of  the  land :  therefore  He  hath 
sent  lions  among  them,  and,  behold,  they  slay  them, 
because  they  know  not  the  manner  of  the  God  of  the 
land.  Then  the  king  of  Assyria  commanded,  saying, 
Carry  thither  one  of  the  priests  whom  ye  brought 
from  thence ;  and  let  them  go  and  dwell  there,  and 
let  him  teach  them  the  manner  of  the  God  of  the 
land.  Then  one  of  the  priests  whom  they  had  carried 
away  from  Samaria  came  and  dwelt  in  Bethel,  and 
taught  them  how  they  should  fear  the  Lord " 
(xvii.  25-28).  They  seem  to  have  become  attentive 
and  diligent  pupils.  They  learned  "  the  manner  of 
the  God  of  the  land,"  and  "  feared  the  Lord."  But 
there  was  one  fatal  defect  in  this  coming  to  the  God 
of  Israel :  they  still  clung  to  their  old  idolatries.  The 
new  service  was  not  put  in  the  place  of  their  former 
worship :  it  was  merely  added  to  it.  "  So  these 
nations  feared  the  Lord,  and  served  their  graven 
images,  both  their  children,  and  their  children's 
children  :  as  did  their  fathers,  so  do  they  unto  this 
day"  (verse  41). 

We  learn  here,  therefore,  that  a  priest  and  his  family 
were  sent  back  to  northern  Israel.     These  settled  at 


The  Samaritan  Pentateuch.  241 

Bethel,  and  the  work  of  instruction  in  **  the  manner 
of  the  God  of  the  land  "  was  begun  and  continued. 
It  was  done,  too,  with  evident  thoroughness.  A  new 
priesthood  was  created  for  the  special  work  of  per- 
forming and  perpetuating  among  the  Samaritans  the 
service  of  Jehovah  ;  but  as  it  was  impossible  to  obtain 
the  services  of  Aaronic  priests  and  Levites,  they  fell 
back  upon  the  plan,  adopted  long  before  by  Jeroboam 
at  the  founding  of  the  Israelitish  kingdom.  They 
selected  for  the  service  the  men  who  resembled  the 
Levites  in  this  one  respect  that  they  had  no  inherit- 
ance among  their  brethren.  **  So  they  feared  the  Lord, 
and  made  unto  themselves  of  the  lowest  of  them 
priests  of  the  high  places,  who  sacrificed  for  them  in 
the  houses  of  the  high  places"  (verse  32).  Now,  in 
preparing  a  priesthood  and  establishing  the  worship 
of  Jehovah  among  the  new  colonists,  the  possession 
of  the  Law  was  plainly  a  necessity.  We  know,  for 
example,  that  the  Samaritans  celebrated  the  Passover ; 
for  this  is  still  one  of  their  national  institutions.  To 
do  this,  however,  they  required  the  Passover  ritual — 
those  minute  directions  given  in  the  Pentateuch  for 
the  observance  of  the  rite  according  to  "  the  manner 
of  the  God  of  the  land."  The  like  demand  was 
necessarily  made  in  regard  to  each  of  the  sacrifices, 
for  the  Day  of  Atonement,  for  the  great  feasts,  for 
the  consecration  of  priests,  for  the  restoration  of  the 
leper,  and  the  other  rites  and  observances.  This  was 
the  more  necessary  that  the  temper  of  the  time  must 
have  insisted  upon  the  greatest  possible  exactitude ; 
for  it  was  felt  that  the  lives  of  the  settlers  depended 


242        The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

upon  minute  and  strict  obedience,  and  that  everything 
must  be  had  which  would  inform  them  as  to  "  the 
manner  of  the  God  of  the  land." 

Putting,  then,  other  considerations  aside  for  the 
moment,  is  it  not  the  natural  conclusion  that  the 
Samaritans  must  have  received  the  Pentateuch  at 
this  time  when  its  possession  was  so  urgently  re- 
quired ?  This  conclusion  will  be  confirmed  as  other 
facts  are  considered.  When  the  Jews  had  returned 
to  Jerusalem,  at  the  close  of  the  Exile,  and  had  laid 
the  foundation  of  the  Temple,  "  the  people  of  the 
land"  immediately  sent  a  deputation  tcwait  upon 
"Zerubbabel  and  the  chief  of  the  fathers"  with  the 
request :  "  Let  us  build  with  you  :  for  we  seek  your 
God,  as  ye  do;  and  we  do  sacrifice  unto  Him  since 
the  days  of  Esar-haddon  king  of  Assyria,  who 
brought  us  up  hither  "  (Ezra  iv.  2).  The  request,  as 
we  know,  was  refused,  and  the  beginning  was  thereby 
made  of  that  long-enduring  hostility  between  the 
Samaritan  and  the  Jew.  But  what  has  to  be  specially 
noted  is  that,  in  the  sixth  century  B.C.,  the  Samari- 
tans believe  themselves  to  be  practically  Israelites. 
"  We  seek  your  God,"  said  they,  "  as  ye  do."  The 
worship  of  Jehovah  they  affirm  to  be  a  national 
feature  with  them  as  it  is  with  the  Jews.  This  is  not 
denied  in  the  reply  that  is  given  to  them ;  for  the 
refusal  of  their  offer  is  based  upon  the  fact  that  they 
have  no  natural  right — no  right  based  upon  descent 
— to  participate  in  the  building  of  the  Temple.  Is  it 
to  be  believed,  then,  that  the  elaborate  Israelitish 
worship  was  being  carried  on,  and  had  been  carried 


The  Samaritan  Pentateuch.  243 

on  for  more  than  100  years,  by  a  people  who  had  no 
copy  of  the  Scripture  containing  the  due  order  and 
the  details  of  the  Jewish  worship  ? 

I  do  not  insist  upon  the  difficulties  attending  the 
supposition  that  the  Pentateuch  was  adopted  by  the 
Samaritans  at  a  later  time.  In  the  way  of  that 
theory  there  lies  not  only  the  fact  that  the  hostility 
between  the  two  peoples  makes  the  later  adoption  of 
the  Pentateuch  extremely  improbable,  but  there  is 
also  the  very  natural  inquiry  why  they  should  have 
adopted  the  Law  after  they  had  long  had  in  operation 
all  that  the  Law  could  teach  them.  There  are  two 
other  facts  which  point  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
Samaritans  had  obtained  the  Law  at  the  time  spoken 
of  in  2  Kings.  First  of  all,  they  have  never  had  more 
than  the  Pentateuch — the  five  Books  of  the  Torah,  the 
Mosaic  Law.  This  is  perfectly  intelligible,  when  we 
learn  that  they  received  it  for  the  special  purpose  of 
instruction  in  "the  manner  of  the  God  of  the  land." 
For  that  specific  purpose  they  required  nothing  more. 
Additional  Books  would,  indeed,  have  been  an  in- 
cumbrance, with  which  they  would  not  have  burdened 
themselves  at  such  a  time.  There  was  no  call  for 
them,  and  they  would  have  constituted  the  proverbial 
.embarrassment  of  riches — a  thing  which  an  instructor 
in  such  circumstances  is  most  careful  to  avoi,d.  It  was 
the  Law  alone  that  was  then  needed ;  and  the  fact, 
that  with  the  Samaritans  the  Law  alone  has  been 
their  sacred  Book,  accords  fully  with  the  circum- 
stances of  the  period.  On  the  other  hand,  if  it  had 
been  a  question  of  adopting  the  Jewish  Scriptures, 


244        '^^^^  Bible :    its  Structure  a7id  Purpose. 

either  then  or  at  a  later  time,  it  would  be  inexplic- 
able that  not  a  single  Book  of  the  other  Scriptures 
was  ever  included  in  their  collection. 

The  second  fact  is,  that  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch 
is  written  in  what  we  know  to  have  been  the  ancient 
Hebrew  alphabet.  When  the  Jews  returned,  after 
the  seventy  years'  captivity,  they  had  forgotten  much. 
They  appear  to  have  become  so  accustomed  to  the 
square  letters,  which  now  form  the  Hebrew  writing, 
that  copies  of  the  Scripture  intended  for  their  use  had 
to  be  written  in  that  character.  The  fact  of  this 
change  is  attested  by  the  Jews  themselves.  The 
Samaritan  Pentateuch,  on  the  other  hand,  retains  the 
ancient  Phoenician  and  Hebrew  letters.  These  are 
the  same  as  those  which  have  been  found  upon  the 
Moabite  stone,  belonging  to  the  ninth  century  B.C. 
This  monument  has  another  peculiarity  in  common 
with  the  Samaritan  Scripture.  The  letters  which  go 
to  form  a  word  are  enclosed  between  two  circular  dots, 
like  the  period  with  which  we  close  our  sentences. 

All  these  facts  distinctly  favour  the  early  date  of 
the  Samaritan  Code.  But  if  the  Samaritans  were  in 
possession  of  the  Law  in  the  seventh  century  B.C., 
what  becomes  of  the  critical  theory  of  the  date  of 
P,  and  of  the  origin  of  Genesis  and  the  rest  of  the 
Pentateuch  as  we  have  them  now  ?  The  portions  of 
Genesis  and  the  legislation  of  the  Pentateuch,  which 
critics  ascribe  to  the  imaginary  P,  are  all  in  the 
Samaritan  Bible  two  centuries  before  P  was  in  exist- 
ence !  I  have  already  mentioned  the  important  fact, 
that,  with  two  slight  variations  of  letters,  there  is  no 


The  Test  of  Language  and  of  Archceology.      245 

difference  between  the  Samaritan  and  the  Hebrew  in 
regard  to  the  Mosaic  legislation.  P's  work  was  already 
embodied,  therefore,  in  both  Codes  hundreds  of  years 
before  the  critics  believe  and  teach  that  the  Law  was 
forged.  It  also  existed  as  we  have  it  to-day ;  for  in 
this  respect  the  Samaritan  testifies  that  there  has  been 
no  change.  No  demonstration  could  show  more  com- 
pletely that  Genesis  and  the  rest  of  the  Pentateuch 
have  never  undergone  this  degrading  manipulation, 
and  that  P,  J,  and  E  are  themselves  myths. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

The  Age  of  Genesis:   The  Test  of  Language 
AND  OF  Archeology. 


THE  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  as  we  have  just  seen, 
shows  no  trace  of  the  various  "  sources  "  which 
figure  so  largely  in  critical  dreams.  We  have  now  to 
note  that  archaeology  and  sober  scholarship  find  the 
Book  to  be  a  unity  with  a  distinct  character,  in  which 
high  antiquity  is  a  marked  feature.  The  critics  annex 
the  Book  of  Joshua  to  the  Pentateuch,  and  name  the 
new  collection  "  the  Hexateuch."  But  the  Penta- 
teuch is  distinguished  from  Joshua  by  characteristics 
which  make  the  union  impossible.  The  Books  plainly 
belong  to  different  ages.  The  language  which  the 
Israelites  brought  back  to  Palestine  was,  with  the 
exception  of  its  Egyptian  ingredients,  the  speech  of 


246        The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

Canaan  two  centuries  before.  In  that  interval,  how- 
ever, the  language  had  been  modified.  The  Hebrew 
of  the  new  settlers  had  necessarily,  therefore,  to  adapt 
itself  to  their  changed  surroundings.  The  result  is 
seen  in  the  Books  written  after  the  conquest  as  com- 
pared with  those  which  were  written  before  it. 

The  student  of  Hebrew  will  find  a  selection  of  these 
differences  in  the  Rev.  F.  E.  Spencer's  Did  Moses 
write  the  Pentateuch  after  all  ?  (pp.  224-240)*  ;  and  in 
Keil's  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament.  The  follow- 
ing facts,  though  they  form  but  a  very  srnall  part  of 
the  available  evidence,  are  more  than-  enough  to 
establish  the  antiquity  of  Genesis  and  of  the  other 
Books  of  the  Pentateuch.  When  two  nouns  are 
united  together,  they  are  joined  by  means  of  the  letter 
yod.  This  custom  entirely  disappears  in  the  later 
Books.  The  masculine  form  of  the  third  personal 
pronoun  singular,  hu'  ("  he  "),  is  used  instead  of  the 
feminine  hi'  ("  she  ")  in  195  places  of  the  Pentateuch. 
This  occurs  only  in  the  Pentateuch,  and  is  a  strong 
testimony  to  its  antiquity.  The  feminine  pronoun 
begins  to  appear — it  is  found  in  eleven  passages — but 
it  had  then  only  commenced  to  make  its  way,  and 
the  masculine  was  still  in  almost  constant  use  as  a 
common  term.  A  similar  feature  is  the  employment 
of  the  word  na'ar  ("  a  youth  "),  for  both  a  young  man 
and  a  maiden.  The  feminine  na'arahis  met  with  only 
once,  and  in  its  place  we  find  the  masculine  na'ar 
twenty-one  times.  Here,  again,  the  separate  form  for 
the  feminine  has  merely  begun  to  enter  an  appear- 

*  Elliot  Stock,  London. 


The  Test  of  Language  and  of  A  rchcEology.      247 

ance;  but,  when  we  come  to  Joshua  and  the  later 
Books,  it  has  asserted  its  rights  and  assumed  its 
place. 

Another   mark    of  high    antiquity  occurs   in   the 
demonstrative  pronouns,  hallazeh  and  Ha'el.     These 
forms  are  found  only  in  the  Pentateuch.  The  verb  zabad 
(*•  to  endue  "),  and  the  noun  zebed  ("  a  gift  ")  are  used 
in  Genesis,  but  appear  in  later  Books  only  in  proper 
names.   Kibshan  ("a  furnace")  occurs  only  in  Genesis 
and  Exodus.   The  reader  is  familiar  with  the  striking 
phrase, "  to  be  gathered  to  his  fathers, ' '  as  a  description 
of  death;  but  he  will  discover  it  only  in  the  Pentateuch 
and  once  in  Judges.    It  was  extremely  natural  for  the 
Patriarchal  period,  with  its  strong  family  ties,  to  con- 
ceive of  death  in  that  way;  but,  with  altered  customs, 
there  came  also  changed  notions  and  expressions. 
The  phrase  is  consequently  a  sure  mark  that  Genesis 
belongs  to  the  older  time.     To  these  a  large  number 
of  words  and  phrases  might  be  added.     The  above, 
however,  is  sufficient  to  indicate  their  nature.     Let 
me  now  mention  an  equally  conclusive  proof,  which 
bears  upon  all  the  so-called  "  documents,"  and  which 
shows  how  impossible  are  the  late  critical  dates.     As 
the  reader  is  aware,  a  great  deal  is  said  in  Genesis 
about  Egypt.     How  these  references  strike  Egypt- 
ologists the  following  extract  will  show.     In  closing 
a  series  of  valuable  papers  on    "Ancient    Egypt" 
in    The  Contemporary  Review,  the   late   R.  S.   Poole 
of    the    British    Museum,    the    well-known    Egypt- 
ologist, thus  makes  reference  to  the  great  question  of 
the  time— the  age  of  the  Pentateuch.    "  The  date  of 


24S        The  Bible :    its  Structure  and  Ptirpose. 

the  Hebrew  documents  in  general,"  he  says,  "  has 
been  here  assumed  to  be  that  assigned  to  them  by 
the  older  scholars.  This  position  is  justified  by  the 
Egyptian  evidence.  German  and  Dutch  critics  have 
laboured  with  extraordinary  acuteness  and  skill  upon 
the  Mosaic  documents  alone,  with  such  illustrations 
as  they  could  obtain -from  collateral  records,  using 
such  records  as  all  the  older,  and  too  many  of  the 
later,  classical  scholars  out  of  Germany  and  France 
have  used,  coins  and  inscriptions,  not  as  independent 
sources,  but  as  mere  illustrations.  The  work  has  been 
that  of  great  literary  critics,  not  of  archaeologists.  The 
result  has  been  to  reduce  the  date  of  the  documents, 
except  a  few  fragments,  by  many  centuries. 

"  The  Egyptian  documents  emphatically  call  for  a 
reconsideration  of  the  whole  question  of  the  date  of 
the  Pentateuch.  It  is  now  certain  that  the  narrative 
of  the  history  of  Joseph,  and  the  sojourn  and  exodus 
of  the  Israelites,  that  is  to  say,  the  portion  from 
Genesis  xxxix.  to  Exodus  xv.,  so  far  as  it  relates  to 
Egypt,  is  substantially  not  much  later  than  B.C.  1300; 
in  other  words,  was  written  while  the  memory  of  the 
events  was  fresh.  The  minute  accuracy  of  the  text  is 
inconsistent  with  any  later  date.  It  is  not  merely  that 
it  shows  knowledge  of  Egypt,  but  knowledge  of  Egypt 
under  the  Ramessides,  and  yet  earlier.  The  condition 
of  the  country,  the  chief  cities  on  the  frontier,  the 
composition  of  the  army,  are  true  of  the  age  of  the 
Ramessides,  and  not  true  of  the  age  of  the  Pharaohs 
contemporary  with  Solomon  and  his  successors.  If 
the  Hebrew  documents  are  of  the  close  of  the  period 


The  Test  of  Language  and  of  A  rchaology.      249 

of  the  Icings  of  Judah,  how  is  it  that  they  are  true  of 
the  earHer  condition,  not  of  that  which  was  contem- 
porary with  those  kings  ?  Why  is  the  Egypt  of  the 
Law  markedly  different  from  the  Egypt  of  the 
prophets,  each  condition  being  described  consistently 
with  its  Egyptian  records,  themselves  contemporary 
with  the  events  ?  Why  is  Egypt  described  in  the  Law 
as  one  kingdom,  and  no  hint  given  of  the  break-up 
of  the  empire  into  the  small  principalities  mentioned 
by  Isaiah  (xix.  2)  ?  Why  do  the  proper  names  belong 
to  the  Ramesside  and  earlier  age,  without  a  single 
instance  of  these  Semitic  names  which  came  into 
fashion  with  the  Bubastite  line  in  Solomon's  time  ? 
Why  do  Zoan-Rameses  and  Zoar  take  the  places  of 
Migdol  and  Tahpanhes  ?  Why  are  the  foreign  mer- 
cenaries, such  as  the  Lubim,  spoken  of  in  the  consti- 
tution of  the  Egyptian  armies  in  the  time  of  the 
kingdom  of  Judah,  wholly  unmentioned?  The  rela- 
tions of  Egypt  with  foreign  countries  are  not  less 
characteristic.  The  kingdom  of  Ethiopia,  which 
overshadowed  Egypt  from  before  Hezekiah's  time 
and  throughout  his  reign,  is  unmentioned  in  the 
earlier  documents.  ■  The  earlier  Assyrian  Empire, 
which  rose  for  a  time  on  the  fall  of  the  Egyptian, 
nowhere  appears. 

"These  agreements  have  not  failed  to  strike  foreign 
Egyptologists,  who  have  no  theological  bias.  These 
independent  scholars,  without  actually  formulating 
any  view  of  the  date  of  the  greater  part  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, appear,  uniformly,  to  treat  its  text  as  an 
authority  to  be  cited  side  by  side  with  the  Egyptian 


250        The  Bible  :    its  Structure  and  Purpose. 

monuments.  So  Lepsius  in  his  researches  on  the  date 
of  the  Exodus,  and  Brugsch  in  his  discussion  of  the 
route,  Chabas  in  his  paper  on  Rameses  and  Pithom. 
Of  course,  it  would  be  unfair  to  imphcate  any  one  of 
these  scholars  in  the  inferences  expressed  above,  but 
at  the  same  time  it  is  impossible  that  they  can,  for 
instance,  hold  Kuenen's  theories  of  the  date  of  the 
Pentateuch,  so  far  as  the  part  relating  to  Egypt  is 
concerned.  They  have  taken  the  two  sets  of  docu- 
ments, Hebrew  and  Egyptian,  side  by  side,  and  in 
the  working  of  elaborate  problems  found  everything 
consistent  with  accuracy  on  both  sides.;  and,  of 
course,  accuracy  would  not  be  maintained  in  a  tradi- 
tion handed  down  through  several  centuries."* 

The  last  statement  commends  itself  to  everyone. 
Kuenen,  Gunkel,  and  the  rest  of  the  critics,  have  not 
only  admitted  that  tradition  cannot  be  accepted  as 
transmitting  to  us  accurate  historic  details,  but  they 
have  also  put  their  rejection  of  Genesis  on  that  very 
basis.  The  converse,  however,  is  equally  true.  If  a 
document  is  distinguished  by  this  accuracy  in  details, 
it  cannot  he  a  late  tradition.  That  is  the  serious  position 
in  which  the  higher  criticism  is  placed  by  the  discover- 
ies in  Egypt.  Its  conclusion,  that  Genesis  is  tradition, 
is  repudiated  by  those  who  know  the  things  of  which 
Genesis  speaks.  Another  fact,  which  I  have  dealt  with 
in  The  New  Biblical  Guide, \  may  be  said  to  complete 
the  demonstration.  It  is  assumed  by  the  writer  of 
Genesis  that  his  first  readers  understand  Egyptian  as 
well  as  Hebrew.  Thus,  when  he  tells  us  that  Pharaoh 

*  Vol.  xxxiv.,  pp.  757-759.     tVol.  iv.,  170,  etc. 


The  Test  of  Language  and  of  Archceology.      251 

named  Joseph  Zaphnath-paaneah  (or,  rather,  pa-anch) 
[Genesis  xli.  45]  he  does  not  explain  that  the  name 
means  "  Bread  of  Hfe."  It  clearly  does  not  occur  to 
him  that  there  is  the  slightest  reason  for  his  doing  so. 
These  readers  of  his  understand  the  words  as  fully 
as  if  he  gave  their  meaning  in  Hebrew.  There  are 
other  Egyptian  terms,  too,  which  have  entered  into 
their  every-day  speech,  which  are  not  explained,  and 
evidently  for  the  same  reason.  When  we  ask  what 
generation  that  was,  the  only  rational  reply  is  that  it 
could  not  be  later  than  that  of  the  Exodus,  to  which 
Jewish  tradition  has  always  assigned  the  origin  of 
Genesis,  as  of  the  rest  of  the  Pentateuch.  In  other 
words,  Genesis  first  saw  the  light  in  the  days  of  the 
leader,  and  of  the  people,  of  the  Exodus. 


OTHER     WORKS 


5obn  XHrqubart, 


PAMPHLETS. 

TRogcr'e  TReasons. 

An  interesting  debate  on  Science  and 

the  Bible.    Per  dozen    .    .    .    .    ,    '40c. 

TKHbat  Ha  tbc  mUc  ? 

A  succinct  Proof  of  its  full  Inspira- 
tion.   Each Co. 

BOOKS. 

•^bat  are  Wic  to  Believe  ? 
or,  tbe  c:estimons  of  jfuIfilleD 
Scripture.  2.30  pp.  cioth,  $1.00 

trbe  Inspiration  anO  accuracy  of 
tbe  Ibolg  Scriptures. 

1.576  pp.    Cloth.    $2.00 

^be  mew  JBlbllcal  ©ul&e. 

6  vols.,  each  430  pp.    Ready.     Each    $1.25 
The  set,  $6.00 

©ospcl  iPubUsbtn*}  Ibouse, 

D.T.  Bass,Mgr., 

54  West  22d   Street,  New  York. 


Date  Due                        i 

•■^V  \  9  *48 

^ 

BS1225.4.U79V.1 

The  Bible  :  its  structure  and  purpose 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Librar 


1    1012  00040  9948 


ainiililillil 


mm 


mmmm 


m 


iii:j!iiHj!m|iiim|j!!!i!!!!ililii!!i 


i