Essays in Biblical interpretation

Cbe ambet0t 15ook0

ESSAYS IN BIBLICAL
INTERPRETATION

ESSAYS IN BIBLICAL
INTERPRETATION

BY

HENRY PRESERVED SMITH

DAVENPORT PROFESSOR OF HEBREW AND THE COGNATE
LANGUAGES IN UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

BOSTON

MARSHALL JONES COMPANY
1921

^

€>

5'

Si'

COPYRIGHT-I92I-By
MARSHALL JONES COMPANY

M

THE PLIMPTON P E E S S • N 0 R W 0 0 D • M A S S • U • S • A

PREFACE

THIS book does not claim to be a history of Biblical inter-
pretation. It is an attempt to illustrate certain ways in
which the Old Testament part of our Bible has been treated
in the course of the Christian centuries. Since almost every
theologian, Jewish or Christian, has directly or indirectly com-
mented on the Scriptures, a complete history of this branch of
science would seem to be beyond the powers of any one man.
The index to Diestel's work, a work to which I have often
referred, shows that he consulted nearly fourteen hundred differ-
ent authors. The result is to bewilder rather than to help the
inquirer. Some account of the main currents of thought in
this department can be gathered, I venture to hope, from the
following pages.

^-51209

CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

I. Hebrew Literary Methods 3

II. Legalistic Interpretation 14

HI. The Triumph of Allegory 33

IV. Scholasticism Dominant ^g

V. Luther's Appeal ^3

VI. Protest and Reaction 84

VII. Attempt of the Federal School 94

VIII. Rise of a More Historical View 102

IX. The Influence of Pietism 112

X. Endeavors after a Biblical Theology 120

XI. The Bishop's Problem 128

XII. The Significance of Wellhausen 136

XIII. Historical Interpretation 143

I. THE PLACE of WORSHIP I44

II. sacrificial WORSHIP 1 49

m. THE priesthood 153

IV. ORIGINALITY OF THE PROPHETS 1 58

V. Sm AND ATONEMENT 161

XTV.-SoME Survivals i68

XV. Apocalyptic Vagaries 176

Bibliographical Note 193

Index 195

ESSAYS IN BIBLICAL
INTERPRETATION

ESSAYS IN ^
BIBLIGAL iNTEkPRETATION

ITERARY METHODS

^th an ancient book we need to enter into

^authorXtnind. This means that we must know his

ei^iromarent, his habits of thought, and his purpose h

fing. ywhere the object of our study is a collecjiern of

dtings, like the/one we know as the Old TestameaO^^Tnust

eiji^avor to understand each of the contribj

"^tand the whole movement of which this^jg^ltection is tnjg monu-

■ ment wemust bring the

tion> '6f time and sp^Ggr-^'^'^^ process thus iddicated
^.--efiticism.^

These truism^^ plai^V i»it*lv LluMieed^f criti(5rsm for a

the necessity
Ranted. As^-gc^jnatter of fact, however,
Eion, has been made to critical
investigation bi this Book, and this on two grounds. In the
first place a tesidition has attached itself to it, and this tradi-
tion is interwoven with certain religious experiences. To dis-
turb the tradition seems to threaten religion, and religion is
rightly regarded as one of man's most precious possessions. In
the second place, Hebrew literary methods are so unlike those
to which we are accustomed that when described by the critic
they are met with incredulity. It is thought to be absurd to
affirm that men made books in the way in which the critics

^ Criticism of the text of an ancient document, which aims to recover its
original wording is of course of primary importance, but it is not here under
discussion.

3

4 ESSJX^ .mM:BUCAL INTERPRETATION

discover the Hebrew books to have been made. What this
is is now a matter of common knowledge. For one thing it
is pointed out that the ancient author was so careless of his
reputation that he took no pains to attach his name to his
work. Unless Ezekiel be an exception, no one of the Old
Testament writers is known to us by name. To us, to whom
the fame of authorship is dear, this is almost incomprehensible.
We should place the crown of laurel on the head of the poet
of the book of Job as readily as we place it on the brow of
the poet of the Iliad. He has cheated us of the opportunity,
and himself of a monument more enduring than bronze, by
preserving his anonymity. Moreover, when the Bible is pre-
sented to us as an authoritative code we are tempted to think
that its authorship should be certified in some official way.
A Protestant theologian advanced the theory that the various
books of the Old Testament as soon as they were written were
posted in a conspicuous place in the temple that all the people
might take knowledge of them, and that when sufficient oppor-
tunity had been given they were taken down by the priests
and carefully preserved in the archives. Needless to say, the
theory has no support in the documents themselves, which are
as careless about notarial authorization as they are about
authorship.

In answer to the not unnatural demand for some sort of
security on this head a tradition early arose which endeavored
to assign the Biblical books to certain men whose names are
made known to us in the books themselves. A post-biblical
Jewish document'- affirms that Moses wrote his own book,
the section concerning Balaam, and Job; Joshua wrote his own
book, and the last eight verses of the Pentateuch, which relate
Moses' death, though some of the Rabbis thought that
Moses wrote this also at the divine dictation; Samuel wrote
his own book, Ruth, and Judges; David wrote the book of
Psalms at the hands of the ten elders — Adam the first, Mel-
chizedek, Abraham, Moses, Heman, Jeduthun, Asaph, and
the three sons of Korah ; Jeremiah wrote his own book, Kings,

- Babylonian Talmud, Baba Bathra, 14b and isa.

HEBREIV LITERART METHODS 5

and Lamentations; Hezekiah and his company wrote Isaiah,
Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Koheleth; the men of the Great
Assembly wrote Ezekiel, the Twelve (Minor Prophets), Daniel,
and Esther; Ezra wrote the genealogies in Chronicles down to
his own time.

It is obvious from the date of this document, as well as
from the absurdity of some of its statements, that it rests on no
historical data. What could be less rational than to say that
David wrote Psalms 'at the hands' of Adam, Abraham, Mel-
chizedek, and Moses, all of whom lived long before his own
time? The absurdity is a little less if we suppose the Rabbis
meant that the books were edited rather than written by these
worthies, and something of the kind may have been in their
thought. In any case the tradition is simply the product of a
desire to give the Hebrew books authority by attaching them
to the names of men prominent in the history of their own
people. The only result of our study of it is to throw us back
onto the internal evidence of the books themselves.

Examination of the books and their comparison with each
other brings one fact to light almost at a glance. This is that
at least some of the books are the result of a compilatory
process. Putting the two parallel narratives of Kings and
Chronicles side by side we see that the later author has bor-
rowed freely from his predecessor. He did not do what a mod-
ern writer would have done — work up the material taken from
his sources into a homogeneous story. He took considerable
blocks of the history of Kings, copying word for word. Be-
tween these sections he inserted other material, the most of it
quite different in style and tone from the earlier matter. In
other words, the Chronicler follows the method which the critics
think they discover in other Old Testament books, the method
which has met with objurgation and ridicule as if no sensible
man would use it. Undoubtedly it is difficult for a modern
author to recognize this method as legitimate. But we must
remember that the idea of literary property was unknown,
that is, it had not dawned on men's minds that the originator
of a book had a right to forbid any one's making what use of

6 ESSATS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

it he pleased. The book was the property of the man who
bought it, and it never occurred to the Chronicler that any
objection could be raised to his treating the earlier narrative
as he thought fit. What he actually did is visualized in the
Polychrome edition of the Hebrew text, where the blocks of
red color show the material taken from the earlier source, the
Chronicler's additions being left white. Any one can produce
the same effect by using a red pencil on the passages parallel to
the book of Kings.

The question naturally suggests itself whether if the book
of Kings had perished we could still be sure that the Chron-
icler had followed this method of compilation. The answer
cannot be doubtful. The sections inserted by him differ
markedly from those which he borrowed. The rule is the
general rule of literary criticism, namely, that difference of
style indicates different authors. It is indeed true that in
some cases a single writer uses different styles. But it is also
true that each of his styles has the marks of his own person-
ality. We can think of no reason why the Chronicler should
use two different styles in adjacent paragraphs of his narra-
tive. Had the book of Kings perished we should have been
able to point out with certainty the material taken from it.

Any one who has doubts on this head should look carefully
at the concluding chapters of the book of Judges, and compare
the story in chapters xvii and xviii with the one that follows in
xix and xx. The whole tone and atmosphere of the first is un-
like what we find in the second. In each case there is a
wrong committed. But Micah when he loses his sacred
objects has no recourse. A few friends and kinsmen are all
that he can rally to his aid. In the other case the whole na-
tion rises as one man to punish the wrong-doer. Four hun-
dred thousand warriors assemble, lose twenty-two thousand
in one battle and eighteen thousand in another without being
discouraged, and in their turn kill twenty-five thousand Ben-
jamites. In the story of Micah on the other hand a band of
six hundred warriors are all that one of the tribes can muster
for a foray. With the historicity of either account we are not

HEBREW LITERARr METHODS 7

now concerned. The sole point is that the contrast in tone is
sufficient to convince us that the two narratives were written
by different men.

Moreover a little consideration will show that neither one
of these stories fits into the scheme of the book to which they
are appended. The author or rather compiler of the book of
Judges had a very distinct motive in putting his book into
shape. He was teaching his people a lesson of loyalty to their
God. His theory of history is that as long as Israel was faith-
ful to its God it was prospered, but that when it fell away
to the worship of the local Baals and Astartes the people were
delivered into the hand of the oppressors. Deliverance came
when they repented, and it came in the person of a divinely
commissioned leader and hero. The hero-stories in the book
are the examples to prove the thesis. But whatever we may
think of the force of these hero-stories, it is clear that the
two incidents we have been considering do not fit into the
scheme. Neither in the case of Micah nor in that of the Levite
and his concubine is there any question of the Baals and
Astartes, nor is there any mention of backsliding and de-
liverance.

What we have discovered, without any special bias towards
the higher criticism, is that at least four hands have been at
work in this book of Judges. There was first the collector of
the original hero-stories. Then came the theologian who made
the stories tributary to his theory of backsliding and revival.
Two appendices were added, each of which had its peculiar
point of view. The book of Judges is not an isolated case.
Most of the Hebrew books which have come down to us show
similar phenomena. Even in the latest period we find that
editors or copyists did not hesitate to treat the texts in their
hands with great freedom. The books of Daniel, Esther, and
Ezra, had sections inserted in them which are preserved in
the Greek version, but which the Hebrew texts escaped. And
lest we suppose that the Old Testament is peculiar in this
respect we may notice that Arabic literatures gives conspicu-
ous examples of exactly the same procedure. We are told

8 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

also that in Europe in the Middle Age "authors borrowed lit-
erally with great freedom and embodied fragments of other
writers or whole books in their own works." Further we read
that they did not scrutinize closely the statements of their
predecessors; what had once been handed down they usually
accepted as good.^

That the books of the Old Testament were treated with
great freedom, even after they were regarded as in some
sense authoritative, may be illustrated by later writings. A
book which is entitled Biblical Antiquities of Philo, though
not by Philo Judseus, is composed in the way illustrated by
Chronicles. The author rewrites the history from Adam to
the death of Saul, and in doing so he takes paragraphs from
the Biblical text and fills in between them with other matter,
either derived from tradition or the product of his own imagi-
nation. The process is visualized for us in the translation, by
printing the Biblical material in italics, and the additional
matter in Roman type.* The result is quite similar to what we
observe in the Polychrome edition of Chronicles. Equally
striking is the lesson taught by the so-called Book of Jubilees.
The author of this book was not satisfied with the history of the
earlier times recorded in the book of Genesis, though doubt-
less he regarded that book as divinely given. For one thing
he wanted a more exact chronology, and he carefully reckoned
the Jubilee periods (of forty-nine years each) from the cre-
ation onwards, dating each event of the narrative by the
years within its Jubilee period. In the second place, he sup-
plied information which he thought ought to be given in con-
nection with the events recorded by the Biblical writer. Thus
he tells us that the angels were created on the first day of the
creative week, Moses having neglected this item. He knows the
names of Adam's daughters as well as of his sons, gives Abra-
ham's dying address, and a legend about his boyhood. He
even goes so far as to justify those actions of the Patriarchs

3 Vincent, J. M., Historical Research (N. Y., 1911), p. iii.
* Biblical Antiquities of Philo, translated from the Latin by M. R. James,
London, 1917.

HEBREW LITERARY METHODS 9

which the earlier narrative condemns. The slaughter of the
men of Shechem now appears as a praiseworthy act, ordained
in heaven, and it is made the occasion for enforcing the
strictest prohibition of intermarriage with gentiles. The book
in fact traces Levi's claim to the priesthood to his zeal in
this matter, thus antedating a Mosaic ordinance. Pure Judaism
is further favored by the statement that the two highest
classes of angels were created circumcised. The Sabbath was
observed by the Creator — so much we learn from the earlier
narrative; but Jubilees makes the more definite declaration:
"He gave us (the angels) the Sabbath as a sign that we should
labor six days and rest from all labor on the seventh; and He
enjoined upon all the angels of the Presence and all the angels
of sanctity that they should observe the Sabbath with Him,
both in heaven and on the earth." The post-exilic Jewish
interest in the observance of the Law comes out in the recon-
struction of the lives of the Patriarchs. Since the author
cannot think these fathers of the race less pious than their
descendants he carries the Mosaic ordinances back into the
earlier time. Noah observes Pentecost; Abraham keeps both
this feast and Tabernacles ; the Day of Atonement is known to
the sons of Jacob. Most significant is the introduction of the
evil spirit Mastema to relieve God of responsibility when Abra-
ham's faith is to be put to the test. The evil one, we read,
came before God and said: "Abraham loves his son Isaac and
delights in him above all things; command him to offer him
as a burnt-offering and thou wilt see whether he will carry out
thy command." The tendency is the same which induced the
author of Chronicles to make Satan incite David to sin, instead
of attributing the temptation to the God of Israel.^

Other examples might easily be found to show the Hebrew
method even down to the Christian era. Note also that the
authors of this period do not hesitate to attribute their writ-
ings to ancient worthies. Thus the book of Enoch claims to

5 The Book of Jubilees, translated from the Ethiopic text by R. H. Charles,
London, 1917. Although the complete book is preserved only in Ethiopic there
is no doubt that it was originally written in Hebrew.

lo ESSjrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

have an antediluvian patriarch as its author, and the book of
Jubilees claims to have been revealed to Moses by an angel.
Our judgment of the writers may easily be too severe. The
underlying motive was sincerely religious. This is true both
of the post-biblical writings and of the Biblical books them-
selves. Interest in history as history was unknown. The aim
was to edify the reader. But the religious motive has two
sides. For one thing, it seeks its justification in the past, and
on this side it is conservative. But on the other hand religion
cannot exempt itself from the law of change. Perhaps it would
be more exact to say that the forms of thought with which
religion associates itself change from generation to generation.
Abraham was a sincere worshipper of God. But the idea which
he had of God was certainly different from that of a twen-
tieth century Christian or Jew. The religious teacher has a
double task; he wishes to preserve the monuments in Vv^hich
religion has expressed itself in the past, and at the same time
to make them teach lessons appropriate to the present. The
Chronicler, to whom we may return for a moment, is an illus-
tration. He wished to preserve the history of his nation be-
cause it was the nation favored by God. The part favored by
God, however, was Judah alone. He therefore preserved the
earlier narrative so far as it related the story of Judah, but
left out all that concerned the northern kingdom alone. At the
same time he found the history defective in that it did not
bring out more clearly the matter which was to him of prime
importance. This was the temple and its services. The most
significant of the insertions which he makes in the narrative
are those which tell of the Levites. In contrast with the book
of Kings he emphasizes the presence of this guild at the re-
moval of the Ark. He describes at length their complicated
organization, and ascribes it to David — something of which
the earlier narrative is ignorant. He makes Jehoshaphat send
them out as teachers of the Law, and they even furnish the
army of the priest Jehoiada when he secures the coronation of
the young king Jehoash and the death of Athaliah — in this
case in flat contradiction to the earlier narrative.

HEBREW LITERART METHODS ii

The Chronicler is adduced here not because he was an ex-
ception to the rule, but because he illustrates a tendency which
we can trace in almost, if not quite all, the historical books,
We have already seen that the author of Judges has his own re-
ligious thesis to establish, and that he did it by using earlier
material which came to his hand. In some cases it is plain
that a story has been rewritten to correct what the author
regards as an erroneous view. Thus in the books of Samuel
we have two accounts of the coronation of Saul. In one we
read that the king was a gift of God's grace for the deliverance
of the people (I Sam. ix and x). But another writer judged
that this could not be, since Saul turned out to be a failure.
He therefore wrote another account and represented the
demand for a king as evidence of the incurable waywardness
of the people (I Sam. viii and xii). Any one who will com-
pare the two sections will convince himself that they cannot
come from the same hand. And if it be said that, if the con-
tradiction in point of view is as clear as it seems to us, an
editor would not have combined the stories, we reply that this
is where religious conservatism comes in. A devout man who
possessed both documents could not bring himself to let either
one be lost and therefore combined them. Probably if he
reflected on the discrepancies he was able to satisfy himself
with harmonistic h3^otheses such as commentators delight in
to the present day.

Another example would seem to be even more convincing,
were it not for the spell laid upon us by traditional views.
This is the story of the creation. We can hardly doubt that
an early writer began his story with the statement: "In the
day that Yahweh made earth and heaven no plant of the field
was yet in the earth, and no herb of the field had yet sprung
up, for Yahweh had not caused it to rain on the earth, and
there was no man to till the ground" (Gen. ii:4b, 5). He
then went on with the delightful account of the Garden. To
him there was nothing unworthy of the divinity in supposing
Him to plant a garden, to mold man of clay, to experiment with
the animals before discovering the right companion for man,

12 ESSAYS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

to walk in His garden in the cool of evening, to cross-question
the man to find out what he had done, and to be jealous of the
man's becoming "like God" in knowing good and evil. But
in later times this anthropomorphic God was not appreciated,
and the work of creation had to be represented differently.
For this reason we have the account which we now read in
the first chapter of the Bible. According to this the divine
fiat is enough to bring the light into being, to separate land
and water, to make the land produce plants, and the sea bring
forth its swarming inhabitants. It is altogether probable that
the writer of this cosmogony would have been willing to see
his account displace the other. But again religious conserva-
tism, for which we cannot be too grateful, refused to let either
one perish, and combined them in the form in which they have
been read for more than two thousand years.

It is not the purpose of the present essay to trace this process
through the Old Testament. The delicate work of analysis
has, however, been done by many scholars, and although they
differ in detail, the results are in their main lines well estab-
lished. What is of present interest to us is that the Old Testa-
ment literature was up to a certain point of time in a fluid
state. Editors and copyists did not hesitate to supplement
and revise their text in order to suit it to the time in which
they lived. But there did come a date when this rewriting of
ancient material and compilation from the various elements
stopped. Apparently it was only after the fall of Jerusalem
in the first century of our era that the scribes awoke to the
danger of having the sacred volumes treated in the old irrespon-
sible way. The Canon was then closed; that is, the collection
of books was set apart as something sacred, which could not be
increased or diminished^' To prevent contamination, rules
were drawn up for the copyists so that at least the copies
officially authorized for use in the public service should con-
tain the text handed down by the fathers. But although the
conservative tendency seemed thus to triumph, religious ideas
continued to change under the influence of the spirit of the
age. How then could the ancient document continue to edify

HEBREW LITERART METHODS 13

^ the new generation? The answer is given by the commentaries.
The text of the Book is sacrosanct. It must be handed on in
the^form which it has assumed. But it can be explained in a
new sense so as to^t the Jdeas„of.a_ new time. The history of
interpretation shows the interplay of the two forces which
wrought in the compilation of the books. Conservatism at-
tempts to hold onto the tradition embodied in the text, and
progressive thought endeavors to read new meanings into the _
old words. The process had already begun in the Biblical
period, for the Chronicler refers to the Midrash of the book of
Kings. But Midrash, as we shall see, was the technical term
for a commentary. To give some illustrations of the method
in which the commentators have done their work is the pur-
pose of these essays.

The »esult of our study will undoubtedly be to show that
many attempts to explain the sense of an old Testament pass-
age have really explained it away; and we may be tempted to

Taccept the statement sometimes made that the Church has
' never really understood its Bible. In this sweeping form the
declaration goes too far. Since the interest of Jewish and
Christian scholars has not been primarily in history, in the
sense in which we understand the word, it is not surprising
that they have not taken our point of view. Their interest
has been in religion, and religion has a permanent element
which is above the considerations of time and space on which
the historian dwells. The twenty-third Psalm appeals directly
to the devout soul, and whether it was written by David in
the tenth century B. C, or by an unknown believer in the
fifth, is a matter of subordinate importance. A large part of
the Old Testament appeals directly to the religious sense in
this way, and it is this part which gives the Book its hold on
Christians down to the present time. But it remains true
that the historic process by which the great movement which
we know as Judaism came to be what it was in itself, and
what it was as a preparation for Christianity, has been clearly
apprehended only in recent times.

II

LEGALISTIC INTERPRETATION

A S EARLY as the Maccabean period there existed
/-\ among the Jews a party called the Asideans, or in the
y \^ Hebrew form Hasidim, the Pious. Their principle
was to obey the Law at all costs, but not to meddle with
political affairs. Under great provocation indeed, when their
religion was threatened, they took up arms. But as soon as
they were allowed the free exercise of their customs they with-
drew from the conflict, thus separating themselves from the
nationalists who fought for the independence of their coun-
try. Their belief was that in His own good time their God
would introduce His rule on earth. Until then the faithful
had only to obey His will as laid down in the Law. The
party which we know as Pharisees agreed with them in ob-
servance of the Law and for the most part in submission
(though with no good will) to the gentile power.

The fall of Jerusalem in the year 70, and the failure of the
desperate effort made in the next century under Bar Kochba,
convinced the remnant of the people that the Asidean prin-
ciple was right. Henceforth the energies of the Jew were
directed to the observance of the Law. No doubt the motive
was the belief, expressed in fact by some of their authorities,
that if the Law were perfectly observed for a single day the
Messiah would come. It is to be remembered also that the
Law was the only thing to which the patriotism of the Jew
could rally. His temple was destroyed and access even to its
site was denied him; his sacred city was in the hands of
strangers; his land was no longer his; the nation was scat-
tered to all parts of the known world. One thing was com-
mon to all who remained loyal — the sacred Book. And in

14

LEGALISTIC INTERPRETATION 15

this Book the fundamental part was the Pentateuch, the Tora
given to Moses at Mount Sinai. Its own claim is that it is
the final and perfect direction for those who would live
so as to obtain the favor of God. The other books of the
Hebrew Bible were valued indeed, but they were looked upon
as commentaries on the Law, rather than as co-ordinate sources
for the religion of Israel.

An elaborate Law (613 precepts are contained in the Penta-
teuch according to rabbinical computation) needs study and
interpretation, all the more when, as in this case, it is in a
language no longer commonly spoken by the people. The
synagogue, which was a well-established institution in New
Testament times, was organized to give the people instruction
in the meaning of the Code, for obedience to the Code in every
detail was obligatory on every Israelite as soon as he reached
years of discretion. Even as early as the time of Nehemiah,
we are told that when the Law was read in the public assembly,
the Levites caused the people to understand the sense. The
testimony is good at least for the time of the Chronicler to
whom we owe the notice (Neh. viiiiyf.), that is for the third
century B.C. Whether at so early a date translation of the
Hebrew text into Aramaic was customary we do not know.
Aramaic was the language of common life to the Jews in
Asia as Greek was to those in Egypt. In Egypt the Jews had
a translation of their sacred Book into Greek certainly as early
as 150 B.C., and it would not be strange if the Aramaic-speaking
section of the nation had their need met in a similar way. The
tradition is that at a later time translators were appointed for
the synagogue and that when a small section of the Hebrew
text was read, from one to three verses, the translator gave
the sense in Aramaic. A prejudice existed against writing
down these versions, so that in their earliest form they are
not preserved to us. But after a time the Targums, as they
are called, were put into v/ritten form. Their value for our
present purpose is the testimony they give to the law of
religious change working on a fixed text. They are in fact the
earliest commentaries. Even the one which adheres most

i6 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

closely to the original, that of Onkelos, does not hesitate to
read the ideas of its own time into the text. It avoids anthro-
pomorphisms, softens expressions which in the view of the
translator give an unworthy idea of the Patriarchs, and intro-
duces matter not thought of by the sacred writer. For example,
it refuses to allow that man by his disobedience became "like
one of us" (divine beings, that is), and only declares that man
has become a being unique in kind in that he knows good and
evil. According to the Hebrew text Abraham says on one
occasion: "When God made me wander from the house of my
father." The Targum expands: "When the people went astray
after the works of their hands, and the Lord brought me near
to Him from the house of my father." Evidently the translator
has in mind the tradition known to us later in its fuller form,
and which has passed over to the Muslims. According to
this story Abraham was obliged to flee from Mesopotamia be-
cause his family were idolaters. Where the Hebrew Law
gives the prohibition, somewhat difficult for us to understand,
against boiling a kid in its mother's milk, the Targum replaces
it by the traditional formula: "Thou shalt not eat flesh and
milk together."

The other Targums are much more free in their treatment of
the text. A single example must suffice. In the Song of
Deborah we have the verses rendered in our version: "They
chose new gods; then was there war in the gates: was there
shield or spear seen among forty thousand in Israel? My
heart is towards the governors of Israel that offered themselves
willingly among the people. Bless ye Jehovah." ^ The Targum
has the following: "When the Sons of Israel were willing
to serve new idols that were worshipped by their neighbors,
with which their fathers had had no dealings, there came
upon them the nations and drove them from their cities, but
when they turned to the Law they had no power over them,
until Sisera, the enemy and oppressor, came with forty thou-
sand captains, fifty thousand swordsmen, sixty thousand lance-

^ Judge v; 8f. Whether the Hebrew text is sound does not concern us. It
was certainly the text which the translator had before him.

LEGALISTIC INTERPRETATION 17

men, seventy thousand bearers of shields, eighty thousand
archers, besides the nine hundred chariots of iron which he
had, and his own chariot. All these thousands and all these
troops were not able to stand before Barak and the ten thou-
sand men with him. Deborah said in her prophesying: I am
sent to praise the scribes of Israel who, when that trouble came,
did not cease from interpreting the Law. And how beautiful
of them that they sit in the synagogues with uncovered heads,
and teach the people the words of the Law, blessing and prais-
ing the Lord."

Comment is almost unnecessary. The homiletic aim has
outweighed every thought of accurate adherence to the text.
The fondness for exaggerated numbers which we have reason
to suspect led to some of the statements of the Chronicler is
here distinctly in evidence. The Rabbinical point of view has
changed the heroes of Israel from warlike leaders, who threw
themselves into the fight on behalf of their people, into scribes
whose virtue consisted in continuing their work even in times
of persecution. Doubtless this sort of heroism has been often
enough exemplified in the long period of persecution through
which the scattered nation has gone, and we need not under-
value it. But that it is of a different sort from that praised
by Deborah is clear. The change in point of view between
pre-exilic and post-exilic times is what interests us here. But
let us look a little more closely at the situation.

The theory of the final redactor of the Pentateuch was that
he had compiled a complete code for the regulation of life —
for the Jew, that is; the gentile did not concern him. But a
complete code of ethics cannot be put down in black and
white. The exigencies of life are too manifold, and changed
conditions must be met by new rules, or new interpretations
of the old ones. Every written law gives rise to casuistry.
Some one must decide whether a given case comes within the
meaning of the law. Moreover the ethos of a community
contains more and also less than is specified in the statute.
Along two lines therefore Jewish anxiety to conform to the
divinely given code gave rise to a tradition which grew in bulk

i8 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

as the centuries rolled on. The immediate task was to define
what came under a specific rule. The Law strenuously for-
bids work on the Sabbath. The question at once arises: What
is work? Is writing work? Is it work to carry a parcel from
one house to another? The earnestness with which such ques-
tions were discussed led often to what we consider trivialities,
but it attests the sincerity of the motive. Doubtless the desire
to display intellectual acuteness led to the posing of questions
in thesi, but that is inevitable where an ancient document is
made the object of study.

Besides the necessity of defining what the Law requires,
there arose new conditions not foreseen by the legislator. The
growth of law may be observed in any community, and this
growth often takes place by a fictitious assumption that the new
case can be brought under an already existing statute. The
exigency laid upon the Jews was more exacting than in the
case of other communities. Their legislator was providing for
a state of things which no longer existed. He had in mind a
priestly nation with its temple as its capital. His main in-
terest was in having that temple kept from pollution, and its
services carried on without interruption. But the Jews had
lost their temple and their land. How difficult was the adjust-
ment to life in the dispersion may be illustrated by an anecdote
preserved in the Talmud. This relates that after the destruc-
tion of Jerusalem many Jews refused to eat flesh or drink wine.
The reason was that the flesh could not be consecrated by sac-
rifice, nor the wine by libation. In other words, the meat and
drink were unclean — a point of view already expressed in
the earlier time (Hos. ix:3). The Rabbi who convinced these
men of their error did it by a reductio ad absurdum. He
showed that the same reasoning would apply to bread, for the
grain could not be consecrated by the offering of the first
sheaf, and also to fruits, because in this case also it was im-
possible to bring the first fruits, as was commanded.^ The
result would be suicide by starvation which was not only a
crime in itself, but which would result in the extermination

2 Baba Bathra, 6ob.

LEGALISTIC INTERPRETATION 19

of the nation, and of course the frustration of all their hopes
of a restoration.

Compelled to live in conditions which the Law did not con-
template, and yet constrained by their religious faith to hold
fast to the Law, it is not strange that the people used all their
ingenuity to apply the old rules to the new situation. The
belief was that every verse of Scripture was of direct divine
authorship, and not only the literal affirmation of the text was
binding, but all that it logically implied. It is in fact difficult
to put limits to the meaning of an inspired Scripture. As a
loyal Jew states it: There is no science and no knowledge
whatever thafls not~contained in the Tora.^ The result in
lateT speculation, according to which every word of the Law
has seventy faces or meanings, does not now concern us.
Legalistic interpretation scanned the sacred text to find justi-
fication for customs which were not directly commanded.
Thirteen rules were formulated by which this could be done.
They attempt to classify the various methods of arguing a
minori ad ma jus, a majori ad minus, from analogy, from the
special case to the general rule.* But one limitation was
insisted on; no deduction must conflict with the established
tradition of the schools. A Rabbi says: He who interprets a
verse of Scripture contrary to the Halaka has no part in the
world to come.

Halaka, be it noted, is the technical term for a rule of con-
duct, that by which one should walk, regulate his life. These
rules, the discussions concerning them, anecdotes in illustration
and other material more or less related, make up the body of
tradition called the Talmud. What is not directly contained
in the Pentateuch is called the Oral Law, and it is legitimated
by the theory that at Sinai Moses received not only the written
Code but the whole body of traditions as well. These were
handed down through faithful transmitters until they reached
the Rabbis, who wrote them down. The specific assertion is

^ Manasseh ben Israel, The Conciliator, p. 213.

* Friedlander, Geschichtsbilder aus der Zeit der Tannaiten und Amorder
(1879), P- 76f.

20 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

made that everything that a Rabbi was to inculcate in the
future was contained in the revelation to Moses,' and the
reason is given that Moses himself declared that he received
all the words that the Lord had spoken to him (Deut. ix:io).
That this really makes the tradition superior to the written
Law needs no demonstration, but this is a phenomenon that
recurs in the whole history of Biblical study. And on this
ground we can understand, if we cannot wholly justify, the
saying recorded in another Midrash that the words of the wise
> are more precious than the words of Scripture. The Rabbi
bases his declaration on the text 'Tor thy love is better than
wine." (Cant. i:2). The Scripture is wine, but there is
something better and this must be the words of the teacher.®
As a single illustration of legalistic treatment let us take the
opening of the Talmud. It begins with the question: At what
time does one recite the Shema of evening? The question
assumes that it is the duty of every loyal Israelite to recite the
profession of faith, known from its opening word as the
Shema, and that this should be done morning and evening.
The text is the familiar verse in Deuteronomy: "Hear {Shema)
O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord. And thou shalt love
the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul
and with all thy might. And these words which I command
thee shall be in thy heart, and thou shalt teach them diligently
to thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thy
house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou
liest down and when thou risest up." ^ The Biblical author in
his rhetorical way, is urging his readers or hearers to keep
constantly in mind the exhortations and commands contained
in his book. There is no indication that he expects these par-
ticular verses to be singled out for daily recitation. To inter-
pret the paragraph as a law is to put more upon it than
it was intended to bear — and also less, for it is conceivable

^ Midrasck Koheleth (in Bibliotheca Rabbinica, 1880), p. 18.
® Midrasch Schir-ha-Schirim {Ibid.), p. 18.

'^ Deut. vi: 4-7. I have translated according to the Jewish understanding,
and have not thought it necessary to give the complete text of the formula.

LEGALISTIC INTERPRETATION 21

that the recitation of the formula might become a mere exer-
cise of the memory, satisfying the conscience as an opus opera-
tum, and interfering with the whole-souled devotion to the
Law which the author was endeavoring to secure. It is easy
to say of course that the danger of formalism is not confined
to any one religion, and that the Jews are not sinners above
others in this respect. We are not bringing an accusation, but
making an historical study, and the example is cited simply
to show how a particular command is derived from a particular
text.

The sequel shows what is meant by casuistry, for the obliga-
tion to recite the formula being recognized, it is necessary to
define what is meant by morning and evening. How late does
the duty last, and how early does it begin? Rabbi Gamaliel's
sons were at a banquet which kept them to the small hours.
On coming home they asked whether it was too late to recite
the evening Shema. His reply was: If the dawn does not yet
show itself you are under obligation. Similarly, a decision on
the morning hour is given; Morning begins as soon as one is
able to distinguish a white thread from a colored one. The
subsequent discussion turns on the words of the Biblical text:
When thou liest down and when thou risest up. Since kings
and wealthy men sleep late, the time for the morning exercise
is extended to the third hour of the day.

This simple example illustrates what the Rabbis mean by
putting a hedge about the Law. It was their duty, as they
conceived it, to provide for all possible cases, and prevent the
least infringement of the command. Much more elaborate
examples might be cited. Especially where there was the
slightest risk of defilement by contact with gentiles and gentile
objects of worship, or with the things classed as abominations,
all conceivable exigencies were considered. This is undoubt-
edly in line with the intention of the Law, for a large part of
the Pentateuch is devoted to the subject of ritual defilement.
According to the early distinction between sacred and profane,
contamination of the two spheres must be prevented. The
sacred building, the sacred persons, the sacred implements,

^-'

22 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

and the sacred community, must be protected. Since the
world, especially the gentile world in which the Jews now
live, is full of objects which, being in no connection with
the God of Israel, are counted as profane, the number of
problems with which the faithful Jew is confronted may be
imagined. While the Talmud faithfully adopts the Penta-
teuchal point of view, it goes more into detail. It classifies
the objects which are to be avoided, and defines the degree of
uncleanness that adheres to each. Some are not only taboo
in themselves but the source of taboo in others, while some
only contract uncleanness. It is not necessary to give ex-
amples, as we are concerned with the method of Biblical
interpretation which in this matter offers few peculiarities.

As has been said, the Halaka deals with practical exigen-
cies, defining the rules by which the faithful Jew must live.
But legalism could not absorb all the energies of the race.
The synagogue was primarily a school of ethics, but it was
also a place of worship and a social centre. The public
speaker must interest and entertain as well as instruct. Hence
there arose a literature which is not directly legalistic or
casuistic. This is called Haggada, and the documents in
which it is embodied bears the name Midrash. The name
itself testifies to the claim that the material is derived from
the Scripture, for the verbal root from which the noun is
derived means to search out, and it is applied specifically to
searching the Scriptures for their' hidden meaning.; The
Talmud contains both Halaka and Haggada, but the books
which are entitled Midrash consist almost entirely of Hag-
gada. The material is really homiletic, and represents the
method of the preacher who ostensibly bases his sermon on
a text, but often enough departs far from his starting point.
Here we see the play of fancy, willing to draw the attention
by far-fetched or paradoxical deductions.

Allegory, to which the next essay is devoted, comes into
play in the endeavor thus to edify the hearer, and in its fully
developed form will be discussed later. But the premise from
which it starts, namely that there must be more in the text

LEGALISTIC INTERPRETATION 23

than appears on the surface, is exemplified in almost every
chapterjof the Midrash. For example, when Jacob is said
to pray for bread to eat and clothing to wear, the religiously
minded reader feels that the ancestor of the chosen people
could not be thinking of mere material things. He must have
meant the Tora (spiritual nourishment) and the sacred
Prayer-shawl (the tallith). Since in a divinely given book
there can be nothing superfluous or accidental, any deviation
from the ordinarv must have meaning. The word translated
and He formed (nii5''''1 Gen. ii: 7), is written, contrary to
analogy, with two yodhs; this points to the fact that man is
composed of two elements, earthly and heavenly. Eccle-
siastes (ix:i4) writes of a little city with few men in it. He
means the world of Noah's time; the great king who besieges
it is God, the poor wise man who delivers it is Noah. The
four streams of Eden represent the four world empires. Ja-
cob's meeting with the shepherds is thus expounded: The
well in the field is Zion; the three flocks are the three sacred
festivals; the great stone is the joy in the temple when the
water is drawn for the feast of Tabernacles. The ground for
such expositions (if we concede that name to them) is par-
allelism of a sort, though to our apprehension remote. The
number jour of one passage is brought into connection with
the same number in the other, and play with numbers is
alvyays attractive to the imaginative mystic. So in the second
case just cited the number three gives the clue. Similarly the
three branches of the vine which Pharoah's butler saw in his
dream allude to the three characters prominent in the story
of the exodus — Moses, Aaron, and Miriam. The vine there-
fore typifies Israel. This identification is doubtless fortified
by the figure of the vine applied to Israel in Psalm Ixxx. More
remote, and to our taste, grotesque, is the assertion that the
'little sister' of Canticles (viii: 8) means Abraham.

The play on numbers is facilitated by thp fart ihai-thp;
letter^jof the Hebrew alphabet were used as numerals, as
was the case also with the Greek. What welcome aid this
afforded- this ChrtstiaiTT^athers we shall see later. Among the

24 ESS/irS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

Hebrews a whole science or pseudo-science is based on the
numerical value of- the letters* The rfunTeirical^vaTue of "tEe
letters in the name of Shem amounts to 340, the years from
the deluge' to the confusion of tongues. The theory is that
the correspondence cannot be accidental. The account of
the creation begins with the second letter of the alphabet
whereas we might have expected the first letter (aleph) to
stand at the beginning. The reason is that two worlds were
created instead of one, either the earthly and heavenly, or
the two aeons, the present and the one to come. Or as an
alternative we may suppose that there is an allusion to the
two Laws written and oral. In fact the number of hypoth-
eses of this kind has no limit. This same letter opens the
account of the creation, because it is, in Hebrew as in Eng-
lish, the initial of the word Blessing, whereas aleph is the
initial of the word meaning cursed. An apparently super-
fluous H in the word meaning created is an indication that
the world was created for the sake of Abraham. The anagram
is taken seriously (QSlDHD = Dm^KD)- ^^ Genesis i: 24
we read that the earth is to bring forth living beings, cattle,
reptiles and beasts of the earth — four kinds. But the next
verse, which relates the carrying out of the command men-
tions only three. The reason is (according to the Midrash)
that the fourth kind is the demons. God had got so far as
to create their souls and was about to give them bodies when
the Sabbath intervened and they were left disembodied
spirits.

Further examples of this play with numbers are easily
found. The seven lambs of Abraham's covenant (Gen. xxi:
28) represent either seven generations of Abraham's descend-
ants, or the seven Israelites slain by the Philistines, or again
the seven sanctuaries mentioned in Scripture, or finally the
seven months that the Ark was in the land of the Philistines.
The only reason for grouping these incongruous data together
is the recurrence of the number seven. The 127 years of
Sarah's life correspond to the 127 provinces ruled over by
Esther. From David's sixfold lament over his son Absalom

LEGALISTIC INTERPRETATION 25

the Targum concludes that the unhappy young men went
through the seven gates that lead to the lowest hell. The
first word of the Bible consists of six letters. What better
reason can be found than that it contains a hidden allusion
to the six classes of beings that were to be created? By ana-
gram this same word can be made to read "on the first of
(the month) Tishri." This proves that this, the Jewish New
Year, is the birthday of the world. A word in the account of
Jacob's dream (Gen. xxviiiiiy), the sum of whose letters is
eighteen, tells us of the distance between earth and sky.**
In Genesis xiv we read that Abraham armed 318 servants
born in his house. But elsewhere we read that his house-
born servant was Eliezer. Curiously enough the letters of
Eliezer's name sum up to 318. The inference is that Abra-
ham's army consisted of this one man. Whether in fact the
writer of Genesis xiv had this equation in mind we need not
stop to inquire; our business is with the haggadic exegesis.
By the same method every letter of Isaac's name is signifi-
cant because of its numerical value. The first means ten —
the ten commandments; the second, ninety, gives the age of
Sarah at the boy's birth; the third, eight, alludes to the eighth
day on which he was circumcised, and the last letter has the
value of Abraham's age at the time. Doubtless it would be
a mistake to give much weight to material of this kind. The
Bible was the student's textbook and every correspondence
that could be pointed out not only stimulated interest but
aided the memory. Theologically it might be well to notice
that an apparently superfluous waw in Gen. ii:4, had the
value of six, and this was the precise number of things which
Adam lost by his fall, but which will be restored to him in
the coming age.^ They are: his glory (Judg v: 31), his hfe
(Is. lxv:2 2), his stature (Lev. xxvi:i3), the fruits of the earth,
the fruit of the tree of life (Zech. viii:i2), and the luminaries
(Is. xxx:26).

The literal or historical sense is lost out of sight when the
text is treated in tliis^ way. The theory of direct divine

'^ Bereschith Rabba {Bibliotheca Rabbinka), p. 336. ~ ^ Ibid., p. 53.

26 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

authorship seemed to authorize the student to take each
sentence by itself as. an oracle. That the Jews were
not sinners above other men in this atomizing treatment
of the sacred Book we shall have occasion to notice.
What results from taking each sentence or each frag-
ment as an oracle is to make every sort of deduction
legkimaXe. In Job we read of the mountain falling and
the rock removed from its place (Ch. xiv:i8). The falling
mountain is Lot whose disastrous experiences account for the
adjective, whereas the rock removed from its place is Abra-
ham who removed from his native land. The identification
is helped by the fact that in one passage Abraham is referred
to as the rock whence Israel was hewn (Is. li:i). The Song
of Songs found a place in the Canon because it was expounded
allegorically. We are not surprised therefore to learn that
the sixty queens and eighty concubines of Solomon are not
meant to tell us of the king's harem. The sixty queens are
Abraham and his descendants as enumerated in one of the
genealogies, and the eighty concubines are Noah and his
descendants. The next verse in this same chapter says: "My
dove, my undefiled, is one." This means Israel who pre-
serves his fidelity to God. As an alternative we are allowed
to suppose that the dove means Abraham; the only child of
her mother is Isaac; the choice one of her that bare her is
Jacob; the daughters who saw her, are the twelve tribes of
Israel; and she whom the queens and concubines praise is
Joseph.^"

The skeptical book of Ecclesiastes gave special opportunity
for this sort of exegesis. Where the author recommends an
epicurean philosophy: "There is nothing better for a man
than that he should eat and drink and make himself enjoy
good in his labor," the Midrash assures us that by eating
and drinking the Scripture means increase in learning and
good works. Where Solomon speaks of his great works, his
houses, his vineyards, his gardens, and his trees, he means the
tables of the Law, the synagogues, the rows of scholars, the

10 Bereschith Rabba (Bibliotheca Rabbinica), p. 439.

LEGALISTIC INTERPRETATION 27

Mishna, and the Gemara. The Biblical author in his pessi-
mism declares that the crooked cannot be made straight.
The Commentator hastens to limit the dictum to the present
world, and actually finds in the verse assurance of a future
life where all will be made straight. The poor but wise
youth of iv:i3 is identified with the good impulse of the
heart."

Since all Scripture is the word of God, there can be no
contradictions in it — an assumption that underlies the ex-
ggesis of Christians as well as Jews. Since, however, there are
apparent discrepancies, the labor of the expositor must be
directed to their harmonization. The Rabbis were not negli-
gent of this department of study. Two large volumes con-
taining their endeavors were compiled by Manasseh ben
Israel in the seventeenth century, and are accessible in an
English translation. Examination shows that the discrepan-
cies discussed are due in reality to the fact, first brought into
clear light by the higher criticism, namely that two or more
different documents are combined in the Biblical books. Thus
several of the instances endeavor to harmonize the two ac-
counts of creation contained in the early chapters of Genesis.
Where one account dates the creation of the plants on the
third day and that of man on the sixth, the other places the
creation of man at the beginning and the plants are not made
to grow until there is a man to take care of the garden. The
Rabbis are compelled to suppose that the plants were really
created on the third day, but remained hidden below the sur-
face of the soil until man appeared and prayed for rain. A
crux was the verse: "Let us make man," since it was used by
the Christians as an argument for the Trinity. It was there-
fore explained to mean that God took counsel with the heavens
and the earth. The anthropomorphisms naturally gave
trouble, being irreconcilable, if taken literally, with the more
spiritual declarations of Scripture itself. One passage affirms
that Yahweh came down to see what was going on in Sodom,

11 The examples are taken from the Midrasch Koheleth in the Bibliotheca
Rabbinica translated by Wiinsche.

28 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

whereas Jeremiah declares that He fills heaven and earth.
Or contrast Yahweh's own statement that He will pass over
the houses of the Israelites and when He sees the Passover
blood on the doors will not suffer the destroyer to enter, with
Daniel's thanksgiving that God knows what is in the dark-
ness. Of course it was easy for the Rabbis, as it has been
for later commentators, to say that such expressions were
metaphorical, but the diffuse attempts at explanation make
us suspect that this was not always found to be satisfactory.
Even in the legislative portions of the Pentateuch it is not
always possible to assert that the statutes are harmonious.
The differences between Deuteronomy and the Priestcode
therefore receive special attention. In the historical books
the oft-debated problem of Saul's ignorance of David, whom
nevertheless he has had as his trusty adjutant, strikes the
reader, and the attempts at harmonizing what are really two
accounts are much like those we read in later apologies. The
ingenuity goes so far as to demonstrate, at least to the satis-
faction of the expositor himself, that Reuben did not commit
incest, that the sons of Eli were not guilty of fornication, and
that David was not an adulterer.^-

These examples might be added to indefinitely and per-
haps they have already tried the reader's patience. What
they show is that the ostensible explanation of the sacred
text is in many cases only a way of reading into it the ideas
of the expositor. Some sort of a curb to extravagant fancies
was however found to be necessary, and it was declared that
no one should expound Scripture contrary to the Halaka, that
is, the tradition accepted in the schools.'' That this made,
tradition and not Scripture the rule is of course clear, but
ought not to surprise us. In fact, as we have seen, the oral
Law was quite on a level with the written Word. And when
this is realized we are less astonished than we otherwise
should be to find that the commentators venture on occasion

12 The Conciliator of Manasseh ben Israel, translated by E. H. Lindo, Lon-
don, 1842.

13 This seems to be the meaning of Aboth 3: 12, repeated in Synedrin 99a.

LEGALISTIC INTERPRETATION 29

to change the reading of their text. The unvocalized text,
which was in the hands of the Rabbis, invites speculation, for
the consonants may be read in more than one way. But even
the consonantal text was not exempt from tampering. Thus
the Midrash suggests that by substituting a waw for a yodh
in a word used in Psalm xlviii:i4, we get the information that
God will lead the dance of His people. It must not be sup-
posed that the new reading was intended to displace the old.
Both were accepted and the theory of inspiration was broad
enough to cover both.

In the great mass of material .contained in the Talmud
and the related books it is easy to pick out portions that seem
to us trivial, absurd, or even immoral. Abundant use has
been made of this opportunity by Antisemites to blacken the
character of the Jewish community. Attacks upon the "hard-
ened and obstinate Jews" have been based on the Talmud
from the time of Eisenmenger ^* down to the present day.
Probably the judgment of Christian scholars would assent
to Farrar's rhetorical peroration:

The methods radically untenable, the results all but absolutely valueless,
the letter-worship and traditionalism which date their origin from the days
of Ezra, the idolatry of the Law, the exaltation of ceremonial, the quenching
of the living and mighty spirit of prophecy, the pedantry, the exclusiveness,
the haughty self-exaltation of Rabbinism, the growth of an extravagant rev-
erence for the oral rules which form a hedge about the Law, are results in
themselves deplorable. But they become still more deplorable when we see
that meanwhile all that was essential, divine, and spiritual, was set at naught
by human invention.^s

These are very bitter words, and they show the danger we
run in fastening our attention on one aspect of the great
codex we are studying. We forget that Biblical exposition is
not the main interest of the Rabbis. They were redactors of
the traditions of their people. Their religious earnestness,

1* Entdecktes Judentiim, 1711. The subtitle claims that the book is a
thorough and truthful account of the way in which the stubborn Jews blas-
pheme and dishonor the Holy Trinity, insult the Holy Mother of Christ, and
scoff at the Christian religion.

1'' F. W. Farrar, History of Interpretation (Bampton Lectures, 1886),
p. 105.

30 ESSATS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

their almost desperate determination to preserve the heritage
of the fathers, and their constant faith that only by obedience
to the oral as well as the written Law could they serve God,
deserve to be kept in mind. Were pedantry, exclusiveness,
and self-exaltation the characteristic notes of this literature,
it is hard to believe that it could have kept its place in the
affection of the Jews down to our own time. In fact there is
in the Talmud much that breathes the spirit of religious trust
and moral earnestness, Jewish apologists have gone so far
as to claim that it is the original from which the Gospel de-
rives all that Christians value. So much we can hardly con-
cede. But to be fair we should recognize that if the Rabbis
read into the Bible what was not there, they did no more
than many Christian scholars have done. Even now it is
difficult for many Christians to think of Abraham as in any
way different from the men whom we of the twentieth cen-
tury regard as models. If the Jewish wise men supposed
Adam, who was in direct communion with his Creator, to
have been the wisest of men, similar theories have been enter-
tained and uttered by Christian commentators. The Jewish
demonstration may not commend itself to us sober literalists,
for it is based on one of those fanciful interpretations that
we have already become acquainted with. The Rabbis say
that Adam's work, which is described as dressing the garden
and keeping it, was really to study the Tora and keep the
commandments, since the text says "to keep the way of the
tree of life." The Tora is the true tree of life, as we are told
by Solomon (Prov. iii:i8), and this makes the demonstration
complete.

That high moral earnestness lies behind many of these
strange interpretations of the written word may be illustrated
by the benediction pronounced on those who sow beside all
waters and send forth the feet of ox and ass (Is. xxxii: 20).
This means (says the Talmud) : Blessed are you, Israel, that
you study the Tora, and show kindness, for then you subdue
(send forth) your evil passions, and not they you.^** The

1^ Aboda Zara, sb.

LEGALISTIC INTERPRETATION 31

interpretation is suggested, as in so many cases, by the re-
currence of the word sow in the phrase 'sow righteousness'
(Hos. x:i2). Archdeacon Farrar's charge of self-exalta-
tion of the Rabbis is based on passages which are intended to
emphasize the study of the Law. Since the real work of
Israel is the observance of the commandments, and since hap-
piness in this world and the next depends on the observance,
the importance of the teacher follows as a matter of course.
God Himself, we are told, spends three hours a day in the
study of His own Law,^' and even asks the help of leading
Rabbis. The three pillars on which the world rests are the
Tora, the ritual, and kindness.^^ One should live on bread
and water, sleep on the bare ground, live a life of self-denial
and devote one's self to the study of the Law. Then it will
be well with him in this world and in the one to come. He
who learns a single paragraph, a single verse, a single letter
of the sacred book from his neighbor must hold him in honor.^^
If one's father and his teacher are both in captivity and he
can ransom only one, the teacher should be the one chosen,
for the father gives physical life only, while the teacher fos-
ters the spirit.-" A Jewish scholar of the nineteenth century
gives the orthodox point of view: "A sacred Book, any mis-
take about which involves temporal and eternal ruin, demands
exposition more than any work of antiquity, especially when,
as in this case, new conditions of political and social life
modify men's convictions." From this point of view the
honor in which the Rabbi is held in every Jewish community
is intelligible.

Since the Law has this value, in the sight of God as well as
in the minds of men, its gift to Israel is a sign of God's love.
Far from being a burden, as Christians regard it, it is the
glory of the chosen people. A question arises in the gentile
mind just here: If the boon is so great why is it given to one
small fraction of the race only and withheld from the mass
of mankind? The Rabbis could of course take refuge in the

^'' Aboda Zara, 3b. " Qinyan Tora, 4.

^8 Pirqe Aboth, 1,2. -•' Baba Mezia, 33a.

32 ESS/jrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

incomprehensible decree of the Maker. But they were not
all content with this as a sufficient answer. They assumed
that the Law had actually been offered to all nations, but
Israel was the only one that accepted it. When the nations
are arraigned at the bar of God at the Judgment they will
say: Lord of the worlds, has thou given us a Tora and did
we refuse it? But, says the Talmud, how can they say this?
It is written: The Lord came from Sinai, is gone forth from
Seir, and shined out from Mount Paran; and again: God
came from Teman and the Holy One from Mount Paran
(Hab. iii:3, cf. Deut. xxxiii:2). Rabbi Johanan says that
from these passages we see that God offered the Law to all peo-
ples and tongues, but all except Israel refused. Even Israel
accepted on compulsion, for God lifted the mountain over
them and threatened to crush them with it unless they would
accept the Law. This statement is a deduction from the
verse (Ex. xix:i7): They stood under the Mount. The tra-
dition that the mountain was lifted over the people passed
over into Islam. "^

With this final example of exegesis we confirm our ob-
servation that Rabbinical ingenuity is a means of deducing
from the sacred text that which the expositor wishes to find
there.

21 Aboda Zara, 2b, and Quran, 2: 60.

Ill

THE TRIUMPH OF ALLEGORY

UNDER the successors of Alexander, Greek language
and Greek culture made their way into Egypt and the
East. The Jews could not remain unaffected. The
sharp conflict in the Maccabean period shows how near the
Jewish religion came to extinction. The conflict ended in
establishing the right of the Jew to live according to his own
customs, but the all-pervading western influence made itself
felt nevertheless. Jews were already settled in the Greek
cities of Europe, Asia, and Africa, and the Jewish community
outside Palestine was larger than that in the land which
Israel thought to be peculiarly its own. The Jewish quarter
of Alexandria had more inhabitants than Jerusalem, and in
this centre of Greek culture no one, African or Semite, could
escape acquaintance with Greek thought. The result on
those studies of the ancestral Law to which the loyal Jew
devoted himself can be imagined, and is attested by the docu-
ments which have come down to us. In the first place the
Scriptures were made accessible in something like a Greek
dress. At what date the so-called Septuagint translation was
made we do not know, but it is clear that the greater part ol
the Old Testament was translated before the beginning of our
era, and the part most important to the Jew — the Penta-
teuch— circulated in Alexandria as early as 150 B.C.

The version, as we see, adheres closely to the Hebrew
original — so closely in fact that parts of it would scarcely be
intelligible to one using the language which we call classic. But
being made for the Jewish community which still thought more
or less in Semitic forms, it would there be intelligible. The
difficulty to the man educated in the school 3f Plato would
be quite as much in the thought as in what we may call the

33

34 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

jargon. Anthropomorphism is writ large in the Hebrew Bible.
The writers do not hesitate to say that God appeared in hu-
man form, that He ate and drank, that He had a local habi-
tation, that He led his people to victory over their enemies,
that He repented of things that He had done, that He became
angry and was jealous. But to the Greek philosopher this
would be strange, even repellent, for he thought of the Di-
vinity as without body, parts, or passions. The educated Jew
who attempted to hold fast to the ancestral religion, and who
at the same time was trained to think in Greek forms, would
find himself in a strait betwixt two. Fortunately for him a
way of reconciliation had been pointed out to him by the
Greeks themselves.

The problem which confronted him was not unlike the
one which the Greek thinker had encountered in his own
religion. Early religion clothed itself in myths, in Greece as
elsewhere. Anthropomorphism was here in evidence, and in
a form even cruder than among the Hebrews. But refine-
ment had advanced to a point at which the crudeness and
immorality of the stories of the gods shocked the more re-
flective, or the more sensitive, minds. The loves and hates,
the quarrels and f eastings, ascribed to the gods could not be
true if taken literally. Yet the documents in which they
were embodied had something of the sacred character which
the Hebrew attached to his Bible. It may be an exaggera-
tion to call Homer the Bible of the Greeks, and yet the rev-
erence paid to his poems was only one remove from that with
which the Jew regarded the Pentateuch. Antiquity has
always, until our own iconoclastic age, carried weight, as is
evidenced by the respect with which Plato, for example, men-
tions the Egyptians. It is plain that Greek thinkers argued
in this way: The Egyptian nation is older than our own; the
people must have learned more than we have, or even have
drunk of the superior knowledge communicated to men in
the golden age. Yet this wisdom is not openly revealed to
us; there must be an esoteric teaching concealed in their
mythology.

THE TRIUMPH OF ALLEGORY 35

It was evident that the Egyptian mythology, in the forms in
which it was current, was puerile enough. There was all the
more reason to suppose that it presented enigmas which the
thoughtful student could solve. Some confirmation may have
been found in the fact that the Greek oracles gave their
responses in obscure or figurative language. What the theory
led to is made evident by Plutarch and he will serve as ouiT
example, although he lived somewhat later than the period
with which we are immediately concerned. In his well-known
tract on Isis and Osiris he takes an Egyptian myth as his
subject. The myth relates that Osiris and Isis were brother
and sister, and also husband and wife. Their half-brother
Typhon slew Osiris and tore his body into sixteen pieces,
whereupon Isis sought the pieces throughout the land of Egypt
and put them together. After recounting the story, Plutarch
expressly warns his readers that they must not suppose these
things to have happened as they are related, but must inter-
pret then symbolically. Just as the Greeks, he says, declare
that Kronos is an allegorical symbol of time, Hera of air, and
that the birth of Hephaistos is a picturesque representation of
the transformation of air into fire, so also among the Egyptians
are those who maintain that Osiris symbolizes the Nile, Isis
the earth, and Typhon the sea into which the Nile falls to
disappear and be scattered except such parts as have been ab-
stracted by the earth to make her fruitful.

Be it noted that even if Osiris was originally the spirit of
the Nile, or the Nile itself considered as a divinity, Plutarch
had no knowledge of the fact. The story as it came to him
was a myth pure and simple, abstracted from its naturalistic
basis, if such it had, and his attempt to rationalize it was an"
effort to harmonize it with his own philosophy or theology."
To his thought the Egyptian priests "concealed a philosophy
in myths and narratives containing dim hints and suggestions
of truth."^ Another example is his treatment of the Egyptian
worship of the crocodile. The crocodile he finds to be an
apt symbol of the divinity, because alone of all animals it

1 Oakesmith, Religion of Plutarch (1902), p. 190.

36 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

has no tongue — the divine word has no need of the organ of
speech to make itself understood. Again, the Egyptians do not
really name the dog Hermes (he has in mind the jackal,
Anubis), but they bring the animal's watchfulness, untiring-
ness, and intelligence into relation with the most intelligent
of the gods.- The fact that the Egyptians make sun and
moon (divinities) travel across the sky in boats is explained
not by the obvious fact that, the Nile being the Egyptian
highway, boats naturally suggested themselves to the imagi-
nation rather than chariots; but by the alleged dogma that
water is the primal element from which sun and moon, like
all other things, take their rise. The taboo of onions is made
the occasion of the following explanation: 'Tn the sacred
customs there is nothing irrational, fabulous, or superstitious,
as some imagine. Some are founded on ethical or utilitarian
reasons, others are not without historical or scientific subtlety,
as is the case with the onion. For that Diktus, the foster-
child of Isis, when picking onions fell into the river and per-
ished is unbelievable. The priests abhor and reject onions,
because they grow and flourish only when the moon is waning.
Moreover the use of the onion is good neither for those who
fast nor for those who feast, in one case because it causes
thirst, in the other because it induces weeping."" Similar
reasons for the taboo of swine are given, but need not be re-
produced here.

I have cited Plutarch because of the directness with which
he asserts the validity of the allegorical method. But the
method is earlier, as we gather from some allusions of Plato.
It is not too bold to assume that when philosophy had ad-
vanced as far as it had when Socrates was questioning every-
body about the nature of man and of virtue, there were
already three types of thought developed. On the one side
conservative minds held onto the myths which had come down
from antiquity, and accepted them in their literal sense. To
criticize these venerable stories seemed to them to under-
mine religion and the social order. At the other extreme were

- his and Osiris, ii. ^ Ibid., 8.

V

THE TRIUMPH OF ALLEGORT 37

the radicals, who would reject the traditions and with them
religion itself. These said: It is not possible that the gods,
if gods there be, should be pleased with festivals and sacri-
fices, with victims torn in pieces, fastings and loud lamenta-
tions, even foul language, shrieks and dishevelled hair. Xeno-
phanes asserted that the poets attribute to the gods all that
is shameful and blameworthy among men. The disciples of
Pythagoras related that their master had been admitted to
Hades before his death, and had there seen Hesiod chained
to a brass pillar and gnashing his teeth in pain; Homer also
hung on a tree and surrounded with serpents. This was the
punishment of the poets for what they had said concerning
the gods. Plato, as we know, would exclude the poets from
his ideal commonwealth for the same reason.

Between the two parties were the allegorists. They could
not believe that authors so venerable could mean to attribute
to the divinities the actions which they related. The sages,
they thought, in order to keep their wisdom from the common
herd had concealed it under figurative narratives. Children,
the unlearned, the frivolous, could find delight in the story
as it was told, but men of mature understanding would dis-
cover the deeper meaning, even the laws which govern nature
and mankind. The theory was encouraged by the fact that
certain religious rites were observed in secrecy, and partici-
pated in only by the initiated. Allegory was used at least
as early as the time of Anaxagoras, and by the date of Philo
was well established. The thorough-going way in which the
method was applied to Homer may be illustrated from a
treatise on the subject which has come down to us and from
which I quote:

"The battle in which the gods took part — Poseidon against Apollo, Hermes
and Athene confronting Artemis and Ares — could not be reconciled with
any elevated idea of the gods. What the poet designed was to give us a theory
of physics. Poseidon represents the element of water, Apollo that of fire.
These two are opposed to each other and the battle is a symbolical represen-
tation of this fact." *

* Heraclidis Pontici Allegoriae Homeri, edidit Gale {Opuscula Mythologka,
1688).

38 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

According to another hypothesis, Apollo is the sun, his
arrows are the sun's rays, Hera is the air, Hephaistos the
fire, the god Scamander the river of that name. Athene is
prudence opposed to Ares, unrestrained passion. When the
poet tells us that Athene descended from heaven at Hera's
command and restrained Achilles from attacking Agamemnon,
he means that the prudent brain of the hero checked the anger
rising in his breast.

One of the myths which gave the most offence was the one
alluded to in the first book of the Iliad, where Achilles re-
minds his mother Thetis, a sea-nymph, how at one time Hera
and Pallas Athene with the help of Poseidon overcame Zeus
and bound him. From his humiliating situation he was re-
leased by Thetis, who called to her help the hundred-armed
Briareus. Doubtless the poet took the myth as he found it,
without inquiring for any deeper meaning. To him it was a
picturesque and welcome embellishment of his narrative. But
to later thinkers it was inconceivable that Zeus, chief of the
gods and ruler of Olympus, should have suffered such an in-
dignity. Hence the attempt to interpret it which found in it
a picture of the conflict of the elements in nature. Poseidon,
as we have seen, represents water, and Hera air; Zeus is now
fire, and Athene earth. If fire prevailed over the other elements
the world would be destroyed. Hence the other three con-
spire to hold it in check. They would, however, extinguish it
altogether, did not Harmony (Thetis) call upon Force (Bria-
reus) to restrain the three and free fire from its bonds.

How forced and unnatural, and, we may say, unpoetic also,
this exposition is, needs hardly to be pointed out. Another
example is the attempt to interpret the well-known story of
Prometheus, chained to the Caucasus and tortured by a vulture
which constantly devours his liver, which as constantly grows
again. This lasts until the sufferer is delivered by Heracles.
Diodorus gets rid of the improbabilities of the myth by sup-
posing that Prometheus was governor of one of the provinces
of Egypt. The Nile, violent as an eagle, broke through the
dykes and devastated the country. Prometheus in despair

THE TRIUMPH OF ALLEGORY 39

would have killed himself had not Heracles repaired the dykes
and driven the river back to its bed. Thus the historian re-
'moved the myth, and the poetry also.

The logical necessity of giving a symbolical interpretation
to a sacred literature when its literal sense no longer meets
the needs of its readers is thus illustrated in the history of
Greek thought. The line between symbol, type, and allegory,
is not always easy to draw. In its actual application the
word type designates something which points forward to the
f^ture^ The allegory is usually a narrative whose real mean-
ing is not that which appears on the surface. Bunyan's great
work might be read by a child as the story of a man who
travelled through the world and met various adventures. In the
author's intent the experiences are those of the human soul, and
the adventures are its trials and temptations. Our concern
here is with the application of the method to the Hebrew Scrip-
tures. In fact it is used by the later Biblical authors. Thus the
author of Daniel tells us of the four beasts he saw in a vision
and of their combats. The interpretation which he receives
shows that the history of the four world-empires is repre-
sented in this way. The same writer interprets Jeremiah
allegorically, we may say, when he makes the prophet's seventy
years mean seventy periods of seven years each. In the book
of Enoch we have an extended allegory in the animal vision.
The history of the world down to the author's own time is
here recounted, only the human characters are represented by
bulls, sheep and various ravenous beasts. The prevalence of
picturesque embodiments of religious ideas in both the Greek
and the Jewish community naturally led to the application of
the method to the Old Testament.

The man who did this most thoroughly was Philo of Alex-
andria^ whose life began a little before our era and extended
well into the first century. That he was a loyal Jew admits
of no doubt. He seems to have had no adequate knowledge
of Hebrew, but was familiar with the Greek version, to which
he ascribed the authority which the original possessed for the
Palestinian schools. He repeatedly emphasizes the priestly

A/-'

40 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

character of the Hebrew people, a people called by God to
be priest and prophet for the whole human race, to pray and
sacrifice for all men. The Mosaic Tora he regards as of
perpetual obligation. Moses is to him the only lawgiver
whose laws remain permanent, unchanged, and unshaken, as
though sealed by nature. Moses "combined in his person
the qualities of king and philosopher not only, but also those
of lawgiver, chief priest and prophet."^ He was inspired in
the fullest sense of the word, and his laws are really divine.
Holding these opinions Philo was yet thoroughly educated in
the Greek learning of his time. He was prepared to mediate
between two 'apparently opposed types of thought, not only by
the allegorical method already in vogue, but by the Platonic
view of inspiration. According to this "no man when in his
wits attains prophetic truth and inspiration; but when he re-
ceives the inspired word either his intelligence is enthralled,
in sleep or he is demented by some distemper or possession.
. . . And for this reason it is customary to appoint interpre-
ters to be judges of true inspiration. Some call them prophets,
quite unaware that they are not to be called prophets at all,
but only interpreters of prophecy.'"' Since according to the
Hebrew view also the prophet may be so "possessed" by the
Spirit as to be beside himself — though this is not affirmed
of the prophets whose books are included in the Canon —
here was common ground. We may in fact say that Philo
regarded himself as the interpreter of the divine oracles, such
an one as Plato has in mind.

The task of reconciling the facts with the theory was not
easy. Two problems presented themselves. The Hebrew
Scriptures, that is the Pentateuch, to which Philo gives al-
most all his attention, contain a law, a rule of life with many
specific injunctions for daily conduct. To justify these in a
community which observed other customs came first. In the
second place the Hebrew affirmations concerning God, anthro-
pomorphic as we have seen, must be reconciled with the

5 De Vita Mosis, ii, 2f.

c Plato, Timceus, 494 (Jowett's translation).

THE TRIUMPH OF ALLEGORY 41

Platonic theology, according to which the divinity is removed
from the material world. Philo, like Plato, is sure that God
exists. But His true nature is so far above our own that He
is really incomprehensible. Fortunately for Philo the ear-
lier thinkers had posited a mediating being, the Logos. At
the very outset of his discussions of the Law we find him
having recourse to this h3qDothesis. The text says that man
was made in the image of God. To Philo this cannot be true
in the natural or material sense. The difficulty is overcome by
supposing that man was actually made in the image of the
mediating Logos. Even then the image is not corporeal but
in the soul. The same difficulty occurred to the Rabbis, for
they affirmed that what was meant was that man was made in
the image of an angel. ^ Similarly, the ideas which play so
large a part in the theology of Plato are welcome to Philo.
He affirms that at the creation first an incorporeal heaven and
earth were made, and the idea of air and space, followed by
the incorporeal substance of water.® The way had been
opened for such a statement by the author of Proverbs, to
whom Wisdom is already a demiurge, active in the work of
creation.

Philo nowhere denies the historicity of the narrative given
in the sacred book, but his interest is altogether in the spir-
itual application. In fact he is a teacher of ethics and it is
not unreasonable to suppose that his works represent the kind
of sermon he was accustomed to preach to the cultivated Jews
of Alexandria. Examples meet us on every page. Eden is to
him the divine garden in which all the plants are gifted with
reason and soul, for the fruits they bear are the virtues. The
three Patriachs are types of Stoic ideals — Abraham, the man
who learns virtue; Isaac, the one born virtuous; Jacob, the one
who attains virtue by exercise. Enoch, Noah, and Enosh form
a similar triad. The altar is the thankful soul of the wise man,
compacted of perfect, uninjured, and undivided virtues — the
altar it will be remembered is to be built of unhewn stones.

"^ Bereschith Rabba p. 96. How far Philo's speculations have influenced
Christian dogmatic teaching it is not now our purpose to-fiiquire.
^ De Opificio Mundi, 29, cf. 36 and 129.

42 ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

On it burns the inextinguishable flame of wisdom, for wisdom
is the Hght of the soul. According to the literal meaning of
Scripture Abraham's migrations were made by a wise man,
but according to the rules of allegory by the virtue-loving and
God-seeking soul. The king of Egypt in the Joseph story is
the human spirit, his officers are bread, dainties, and drink.
These are eunuchs because the voluptuary devoted to them is
unable to beget reflection, self-control, or any virtue. Isaac
sacrificed by his father represents cheerfulness of soul (his
name means Laughter) which the wise man sacrifices to God.
The four kings who came against Sodom are desire, concu-
piscence, fear and melancholy. The five who resist them are
the five senses. The four affections rule over the senses, but
when age comes the senses can no longer pay tribute to the
affections — the eyes become dim, the ears dull, and so with
the others. But the wise man drives away the affections as
Abraham conquered the invading kings, for when reason arms
itself with the virtues and with the maxims of wise conduct it
overcomes the desires and appetites.

Most far-fetched from our point of view is the interpreta-
tion of the garments of the Highpriest as a symbol of the uni-
verse. His tunic of blue which reaches from his neck to his
feet represents the atmosphere, which also is blue and reaches
from the heights to the depths. Over this is the breastplate,
which has on the shoulders two jewels hemispherical in form;
the two jewels are the two hemispheres of the sky, and the
twelve precious stones on the breast are the twelve signs of
the Zodiac. They are in four rows to represent the four seasons
of the year. The whole is called in the Greek version Logeion,
the Reasonable, because everything in heaven is arranged ac-
cording to reason, and mathematics. In connection with the
breastplate the lawgiver ordered the Revelation and Truth
(Urim and Thummim). By Truth he indicates that false-
hood cannot enter heaven, that in fact it is banished to earth
and dwells in the soul of wicked men; by Revelation he in-
dicates that the heavenly bodies reveal to us events of earth
which are in themselves unintelligible.

THE TRIUMPH OF ALLEGORT 43

These examples sufficiently show how the theology of the
Greeks was read into the Hebrew Book. The other problem
— the justification of the observance of the Law in all its de-
tails, was quite as urgent and perhaps more difficult. The
peculiar social customs of the Jews, especially their segrega-
tion from their gentile neighbors, had early attracted the
attention, and also the ridicule, of these same gentiles. Their
refusal to eat many of the things which men of other faiths
found both nutritious and enjoyable was a constant cause of
remark. But to Philo, as we have seen, all the regulations
of the Law were of divine origin, and however they might be
spiritualized they must be obeyed in their literal sense. Not
only was Moses inspired in the fullest meaning of the word,
but the Law was the law of nature. Abraham obeyed the
commands of God, not only those made known in word and
writing, but also those revealed by nature in distinct signs;
for he who considers the order which rules in nature learns to
live a life conformed to the Law (the Hebrew Law is undoubt-
edly meant ).^ Naturally the author is glad when he finds
support for his theory in the customs of other nations, — the
Sabbath for example, the universal festival and birthday of
the world-, is thought to be confirmed by the fact that in
Greece the seventh day of every month is consecrated to
Apollo. The sacredness of the number seven was in fact
widely recognized by gentiles as well as Jews, and with this
as a starting point Philo was able to introduce Pythagorean
speculation concerning numbers into his system.

Evidence of a desire to justify those parts of the Law
which to the gentile seemed irrational, is given by Philo in
his discussion of clean and unclean fish, flesh, and fowl. He
was not alone in this desire, as is evidenced by a pseudepi-
graphic book which was apparently written by a contemporary
of his. It is a sample of a considerable literature by which
in this period the Jews sought to concihate their gentile neigh-
bors. This book is the Letter of Aristeas, in which a Jew
poseS" as a Greek officer at the court of Ptolemy Philadelphus.

9 De Abrahamo, XIII.

44 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

In this disguise he gives an account of the origin of the
Greek version of the Law, and takes occasion, not onjy to
magnify the merits of that work, but to glorify the Jewish
Temple and the Jewish religion as well. What now interests
us is his explanation of the Mosaic law of meats. Writing to
an alleged brother officer, he gives us the following:

You must not fall into the degrading notion that it was out of regard to
mice and weasels that Moses drew up his Law with such exceeding care. All
these ordinances were made for the sake of righteousness, to aid the quest for
virtue and the perfecting of character. For all the birds we use are tame
and distinguished by cleanliness, feeding on various kinds of grain and pulse,
such as pigeons, turtle doves, locusts, partridges, geese also and birds of this
class. But the birds that are forbidden you will find to be wild and car-
nivorous, tyrannizing over others. . . . And so by naming them unclean he
(Moses) gave a sign by means of them that those for whom the Law was or-
dained must practice righteousness in their hearts and not tyrannize over others.
. . . Wherefore all the rules he has laid down ... are enacted with the
object of teaching us a moral lesson. For the division of the hoof and the
separation of the claws are intended to teach us that we must discriminate
between our actions, with a view to the practice of virtue. ... All animals
which are cloven-footed and chew the cud represent to the initiated the sym-
bol of memory. For the act of chewing the cud is nothing else than medi-
tating on life and existence." ^°

The citation is only one evidence of the prevalence of the
allegorical method in this period. The book of Wisdom,
like Philo, allegorizes the robe of the Highpriest, affirming
that in the long garment was the whole world (xviii:24), and
Josephus takes the Mosaic tabernacle to be symbolical, its
three divisions corresponding to the three divisions — sea,
land, and sky. The twelve loaves of Shewbread indicate the
months of the year, and the seven lamps of the candelabrum
are the seven planets. The materials of the curtains are
significant as well as the garments of the Highpriest.^^ In
this company of expositors, however, Philo was easily the
chief, because of the thoroughness with which he carried out
the principle. For this reason his influence on Christian
scholars is of the first importance. The Christians brought

^° Epistle of Aristeas, 145-154, translated in Charles, Apocrypha and
Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament (1913), 11, p. 108.
11 Antiquities, III, 7.

THE TRIUMPH OF ALLEGORY 45

their sacred Book with them from Judaism, but their pur-
pose in studying it was not the same which we have found
among the Jews. They believed the Law as law to be no
longer binding. But as prediction it was important. With
tlie faith that this was the main purpose of the sacred oracles
they scrutinized every passage for adumbrations of the Christ.
That the allegorical method gave them welcome help needs
no demonstration. To a moderate extent it is discoverable
in the New Testament. In the rock which, according to
Rabbinical exegesis, followed the Israelites in their wander-
ings Paul finds a type of Christ, and the Apostle asserts in so
many words that the story of Hagar and Sarah is an allegory
of the two dispensations, Jewish and Christian. More
thorough-going is the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews.
By an elaborate argument he proves that Jesus, though not
of priestly stock, was yet the true Highpriest, antitype of the
one described in the Pentateuch, and that he was in fact
speciiically predicted by the Psalmist who brings him into
the line of Melchizedek. The sacrifices of the Old Testa-
ment are therefore only shadows of the true sacrifice, that by
which Jesus offered himself to God. The way to this appre-
hension had been already opened by the theory, made known
to us by Josephus, that the tabernacle erected by Moses was
a copy of the universe. The true Holy of Holies was there-
fore the heaven where God resides, and the Highpriest's en-
trance into the earthly sanctuary was an allegorical foreshad-
owing of Jesus' return to his heavenly Father. This has
become so fully a part of Christian tradition that we do not
readily see how startling it must have been to the strict Jew;
for to him the sacrificial system was the appointed way of
serving God, and was intended to be perpetual. On the other
hand it undoubtedly gave relief to those believers who had a
wider view, and who were already reconciling themselves to
the fact that the destruction of the temple made the sacrifices
no longer possible.

The allegorical system thus introduced to the Church be-
came the recognized method of dealing with the older Scrip-

46 ESSATS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

tures. Justin Martyr, for example, denies that the literal
sense of the Old Testament is valid; otherwise polygamy
would be lawful. The cases where the Patriarchs are said to
have more wives than one are intended to be interpreted
allegorically. His exegesis enables him to find Christ where
we should hesitate to look for him. He sees in the two goats
which are brought into the sanctuary on the Day of Atone-
ment, t5^es of the two advents of Christ. An Old Testament
poet describes Judah as one who washes his garments in wine
(Gen. xlix:ii). To Justin this means that Jesus purifies his
people by his blood. ^^ The Paschal lamb when prepared for
roasting is pierced by two skewers at right angles with each
other. This is taken to be a type of the cross on which Jesus
suffered — naturally, we may say, for Paul had already called
Christ our Passover. Jacob served Laban for sheep; so Jesus
became a servant that he might purchase his flock. The ass
and its foal used by Jesus at his triumphal entry into Jeru-
salem are symbols, one of the Jews under the yoke of the
Law, the other of gentile Christians freed from it.^^

That the sacrifices of the Old Testament point forward to
Christ is a commonplace of these writers. But it is somewhat
surprising to find the one which from its sex we should sup-
pose least typical applied in detail as it is by Barnabas. This
is the sacrifice of a red heifer, and the use of its ashes to
purify those unclean from contact with a dead body. The
application deserves quotation and is as follows:

But what think you means the type where the commandment is given to
Israel that those men whose sins are full-grown offer a heifer and slaughter
and burn it, and that then childreni* take up the ashes and cast them into
vessels and twist the scarlet wool on a tree (see here again is a type of the
cross and the scarlet wool) and the hyssop, and that, this done, the children
should sprinkle the people one by one that they may be puriiied from their

^2 Dialogue with Trypho, 54:1.

13 The examples are from the Dialogue with Trypho, and I have not at-
tempted to distinguish between allegory, type, and symbol. Further citations
may be found in Fullerton, Prophecy and Authority {1919), a valuable dis-
cussion of the attitude of Christian expositors towards the Old Testament.
The application of allegory to the New Testament is not here entered upon.

1* The children are not in the text, and must be taken from oral tradition.

THE TRIUMPH OF ALLEGORY 47

sins? Understand how in all plainness it is spoken to you. The calfi^ is
Jesus; the men that offer it, being sinners are they that offered him for
slaughter. . . . The children who sprinkle are they who preach to us the
forgiveness of sins and purity of heart, they to whom he gave power to preach
the Gospel; and they are twelve as a testimony to the tribes, because there
are twelve tribes of Israel. But wherefore are the children who sprinkle three?
For a testimony to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, because these three are mighty
before God. And why the wool on the wood? Because the kingdom of Jesus
is on the wood,^^ and because they who hope in him shall live forever. And
why wool and hyssop at the same time? Because in his kingdom there shall
be evil and foul days in which we shall be saved; for he who suffers in the
flesh is healed by the foulness of hyssop.^^

The same author finds significance in the number of Abra-
ham's servants (318). By a play on the numerical signifi-
cance of the letters, quite similar to what we have found
among the Rabbis, he finds that they point to the cross and
to the name of Jesus/* This interpretation of the mystical
number passed over to the Fathers and recurs in Clement of
Alexandria, Ambrose, Augustine and later. With reference
to the animals forbidden for food, Barnabas follows the line
marked out by Aristeas, but is more elaborate. According to
him swine are prohibited because they are ungrateful, crying
out for food when hungry, but silent when satisfied. The
rule against birds of prey is to teach us to avoid robbers and
violent men. Certain fish which lurk in the depths are t5T3es
of wicked men who work in concealment. The hare and
hyena are lascivious, according to popular natural history,
and are to be avoided on this account, "Concerning meats
then Moses received three decrees and uttered them in the
spiritual sense. But they (the Jews) accepted them according
to the lust of the flesh, as though they referred to eating. But
David received knowledge of the same three decrees and
says: ''Blessed is the man who has not gone in the counsel of
the ungodly — as the fishes go in the darkness into the
depths; and has not stood in the way of sinners — like those

1' It has changed its gender to meet the exigency of the interpretation.
1^ Allusion to the cross.
" Epistle of Barnabas, VIII.
18 Ibid., IK, 8.

^

48 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

who pretend to fear the Lord, but sin like swine; and has not
sat in the seat of the scorners — like the birds who sit and
watch for prey." After this we are not surprised to learn
that Moses holding up his hands in the battle with Amalek is
a type of Jesus on the cross, and that the declaration of God:
"All the day long have I held out my hands to a disobedient
and gainsaying people," is directly prophetic of the crucified
Christ.

We should err if we emphasized these passages in such
a way as to shut out of view many others in which the text
of Scripture is rationally treated. There is no reason to doubt
that in this period the greater part of the Bible was accepted
in its natural sense. But this refers especially to the New
Testament. The Gospels were studied as containing the
correct account of the life and death of Jesus, and the
ethical portions of the Old Testament were helpful for right
1— living. The teachers of the Church were in fact more mod-
erate in the use of allegory than were the Gnostics. From
the account of these sectaries which Irenaeus gives, we see
how easy it was by allegory to make the Scriptures teach heresy
instead of orthodox doctrine. Perhaps it would not be too
much to say that the Gnostics gave the perfect example of
the use of allegory, showing how to discover preconceived
opinions in documents whose literal meaning was not accept-
able to the expositor. The Gnostic system attempted to
combine elements drav/n from Greek mythology, oriental
speculation, and various mystic doctrines which were current
in the Roman world. Its leaders were impressed by the
Hebrew and Christian Scriptures and found themselves
obliged to take some position with reference to them. The
allegorical method was a tool which they found ready to
their hand. We learn from Irenaeus that they interpreted
the thirty years of Jesus' life as types of the thirty Aeons
posited by their system. An alleged failure on the part of the
eighth Aeon was foreshadowed by Judas' betrayal of his
Master. The healing of the woman who had an issue of blood,
however, showed the recovery of this same Aeon. The thirty

THE TRIUMPH OF ALLEGORT 49

are divided into two groups, one of twelve, the other of
eighteen members. The first group corresponds to the twelve
years of Jesus' age when he disputed with the doctors in the
temple, also to the number of the Apostles. The second group
is indicated by the eighteen months of Jesus' sojourn after
his resurrection. The chief Tetrad is mentioned in the first
verse of Genesis, God, Beginning, Heaven, Earth. It is in-
dictated by the fourth day, on which the sun was created, by
the fourfold material of which the Tabernacle was constructed,
and by the four rows of precious stones on the Highpriest's
breastplate — " and if there are other things in Scripture which
can be dragged into the number four, they declare that these
had their being with reference to the Tetrad." Similarly the
Ogdoad is foreshadowed by the eight persons saved in the
ark, by the eighth day, on which circumcision is performed,
and by David's being the eighth son. This sort of play on
numbers is already familiar and we need not multiply
examples.

What is significant is that the Gnostics instead of rejecting
the idea of revelation extended it so as to include their own
cosmological speculations, as well as the traditions and myths
of other religions. Allegory enabled them to overcome the
discrepancies of these various elements, and they applied it
thoroughly to the New Testament. Jesus is the Redeemer,
because he is the supreme revealer of the mysteries, knowledge
of which brings salvation. On this all the various sects
could unite. But with reference to the Old Testament differ-
ences soon arose. Since knowledge brings salvation, or is
salvation, the serpent which brought man the knowledge of
good and evil must be regarded as a benefactor. He was so
regarded by the Ophites, who found support for their view
in the brazen serpent made by Moses. This sharp contra-
diction to the Hebrew view was carried further by the Cain-
ites, who honored Cain, Esau, Korah, and others just because
they opposed the Old Testament heroes. Marcion was logi-
cal in that he rejected the whole Old Testament. His ground
was objection to the anthropomorphisms, for which he could

50 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

account only by supposing that the God revealed by the He-
brew writers was not the one made known by Jesus. He even
believed that the sinners of the Old Testament record were
delivered from Hades by Jesus, whereas the Patriarchs were
left in limbo.

The debate with the Gnostics should have taught the Fathers
the danger of allegory. A method which lent itself to specu-
lations so diverse could hardly be relied upon to demonstrate
what the Christians had most at heart. But it was not
easy to discard the interpretation which many thinkers had
already attached to Old Testament passages. What Irenaeus
did was to look around for some check to heretical exposition.
This he found in the Apostolic tradition. His word is: 'The
true Gnosis is the teaching of the Apostles and the doctrine
of the Church for the whole world. The body of Christ is
known in the succession of Bishops whom the Apostles gave
to the Church." This of course made tradition and not Scrip-
ture the authority, and it did not diminish confidence in
allegory. Irenaeus is himself the proof. Although he val-
ued the literal sense and refused to allegorize passages which
he regarded as directly Messianic, he does on occasion make
use of the method. Elisha's miracle with the axe, for ex-
ample, is made to show that the sure word of God which we
had negligently lost by means of a tree, and were not in the
way of finding again, we should receive again by the dispen-
sation of a tree (the cross). He believed that 'the treasure
hid in a field,' of the Gospel parable meant Jesus hidden in
the Old Testament. He found the resurrection of Christ pre-
dicted in the Psalm (Ixxxv: ii): "Truth is sprung out of the
earth." He compares the four Evangelists to the four Cheru-
bim of the Old Testament, and finds the calling of the gentiles
announced in Noah's blessing on Shem (Gen. ix:2 7). Moses'
Ethiopian wife is a type of the gentile Church, chosen by
Christ; and Lot's daughters foreshadow the two Churches
(Jewish and gentile). Lot's wife, left behind by her husband
and turned into a pillar of salt, prefigures the Church left
on the earth by Jesus but still the incorruptible salt of man-

THE TRIUMPH OF ALLEGORY 51

kind. It is unnecessary to multiply examples/'' Some of
those cited were already current tradition, and as we shall
see became stock examples throughout the whole history of
±eology. The underlying theory is that the Son of God is
the revealer who appeared to the Old Testament saints, spoke
to Noah, was Abraham's guest, pronounced judgment on
Sodom, and directed Jacob on his journey. Christians are
the true Israel, the seed of Abraham by faith, as had been
in fact affirmed by Paul. To enter into the history of Mes-
sianic prophecy as thus developed, helped no doubt by the
Greek rendering of the name Yahweh by Lord, is beyond the
scope of the present essay.'"

Since every Christian writer gave some attention to the Old
Testament, and the difference between them was not one of
method, but simply of the degree to which the method was
applied, it would be burdensome to attempt a complete sur-
vey of their activity. Some attention, however, should be
given to the school of Alexandria, where we may say allegory
came to full flower. Since Philo had lived there and since he
was regarded as almost a Christian, if not in fact a disciple
of the Apostles, it is not surprising that his method was there
thoroughly carried out. Clement of Alexandria frankly
adopted it, and his assertion that Plato borrowed from Moses
simply put into Christian literature a belief already cher-
ished in Jewish circles. His explanation of the reason for
the Mosaic prohibitions of certain foods is borrowed from
Aristeas, turning it against the Jews, however, and asserting
that those animals which chew the cud without dividing the
hoof signify the Jews, who have the oracles of God in their
mouth but have not the firm footing of faith.-^ He claims for
his ecclesiastical gnosis that it is the tradition of the Church,
and even that it is esoteric teaching communicated by Christ

19 All that I have given are taken from the treatise "Against Heresies"
translated in the Antenicene Christian Library.

20 The early Christian argument from the Old Testament is discussed by
Ungern- Sternberg in Theologische Studien Theodor Zahn zum lo Oktober 1908
dargebracht (1908).

21 Stromateis, VII, 18.

52 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

after his resurrection. He says that for many reasons the
Scriptures conceal their meaning "primarily with the aim of
making us diligent and unresting in our study of the words
of salvation. . . . For this reason the sacred mysteries of
prophecy are veiled in parables and so reserved for chosen
men, and for those who are selected for higher knowledge."
On this theory the way is open for allegory and we find its
application in such assertions as that the land of Egypt and the
people of Canaan are types of passions and vices, and that
when it is said: "The horse and his rider hath He thrown into
the sea," the real meaning is that the impulsive passions bring
man's nature into the turbulent waves of worldly disorder."
The culmination of the allegorical method is universally
acknowledged to be found in the works of Origen. Undoubt-
edly the impression made by emphasizing this element of his
teaching is unjust to the greatest scholar of the ancient
Church. Before dwelling on the allegories we should bear
in mind that, in the words of Bishop Lightfoot, "in spite of
very patent faults which it costs nothing to denounce, a very
considerable part of what is valuable in subsequent commen-
taries, whether ancient .or modern, is due to him. A deep
thinker, an accurate grammarian, a most laborious worker
and a most earnest Christian, he not only laid the foundation,
but to a very great extent built up the fabric, of Biblical
interpretation."-^ This is of course especially true of his
work on the New Testament. In expounding the Old Testa-
ment he was thoroughly under the influence of Philo. His
debate with the Gnostics ^eems to have made him cling even
more closely to allegory, if we may trust the statement that
he borrowed from Heracleon's thoroughly allegorical com-
mentary on the Gospel of John, in which for example the
story of the Samaritan woman was interpreted as a drama of
the creation.^* With reference to the Old Testament he has
no hesitation in confessing that the literal meaning is often

22 TolUnton, Clement of Alexandria (1914), H, pp. 302 and 213.
-3 Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians, p. 375.
24 E. de Faye, Gnostiques et Cnostkhme (1913), pp. 57 and 62.

THE TRIUMPH OF ALLEGORY 53

obscure, or absurd, or unworthy of a divine author. The
Jewish Law as law is inferior to the laws ot other nations.^'
We must therefore search for an underlying spiritual sense.
As the body has little worth, when compared with the spirit,
so the literal sense is inferior to the spiritual. This he finds
intimated in Scripture itself. In the Levitical law we read
that the meal-offering may be baked in an oven, or fried in
a pan, or toasted on a plate (Lev. 11:4-7). We cannot sup-
pose that God cares for such trifles. What the text intimates
is that the meal which is offered is the Scripture itself; the
oven in which it is prepared is the heart of man; and since
the passage specifies an oven and a plate and a pan, the mean-
ing is that Scripture has a three-fold sense. Similarly the
flaying of the sacrifice by the priest is intended to teach us
that we must strip off the external husk of Scripture in order
to discover the nourishment which it conceals. Thus allegory
is made to justify the allegorical method.

On the Christian principle the divine and spiritual in the
Old Testament came to light with the advent of Jesus. The
reason why the Jews do not believe is because they look only
at the literal sense and do not see the spiritual side. Certain
stumbling blocks in Scripture are a part of the divine plan
"so that we may not be borne hither and thither by the mere
attractiveness of the style, and thus either forsake the doc-
trinal part because we receive no instruction worthy of God,
or else cleave to the letter and learn nothing more divine. "^^
Here is an example of his application of the method. In Exo-
dus i:4 we read: Joseph died and his brothers, and the chil-
dren of Israel multiplied exceedingly. The comment is: If Jo-
seph dies in thee, that is if thou receive into thyself the death of

25 Contrast with this frank confession the statement of a twentieth cen-
tury theologian: "They (the Scriptures) are free from the puerilities and espe-
cially from the abominations of the world-religions, because they were written
by 'holy men of God who spake' not out of their own divinely created and
sustained and directed religious nature even, but as they were moved by the
Holy Ghost."

28 Philocalia, translated by Lewis (1911), p. 17. Cf. the strong expressions
about the unreason of some laws and the impossibility of obeying others, p. 21.

54 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

Christ, then the children of Israel, that is the spiritual graces,
will be multiplied in thee. Further confirmation of the theory
of a threefold sense is found in Plato's psychojogy, according
to which man consists of body, soul, and spirit; so Scripture
has a triple sense, literal, moral, and spiritual. This he finds
confirmed by Prov. xxii:2i, which in the Greek version reads:
Have I not written unto thee triply, in counsel and knowledge?
The homily on Genesis i discovers the waters above the
firmament to be the spiritual nature, the firmament itself
our bodily substance, and the waters below are the sins and
vices which we should separate from ourselves. The story
of Noah teaches us that when evils rise like a flood, if one
turns and hears the Word of God he constructs an ark of
safety within himself. Rebecca coming to the well daily
to draw water and being found there by Abraham's servant,
thus to be betrothed to Isaac, is a lesson — we should come
daily to the wells of Scripture, since Christ wishes us for
his bride. These examples are taken from homilies, and per-
haps, like other preachers, the Father felt at liberty to use
his imagination in a way to edify his hearers. We have
found something of the kind in Philo. Yet the genuinely
exegetical works of Origen sufficiently show his principles.
From the book of Wisdom he takes the explanation of the
Highpriest's garments which we have already considered, and
he finds confirmation of his method in the declaration of
Isaiah that to his hearers all vision has become like a sealed
book. This he extends to cover all Scripture, which he finds
to be full of riddles and parables and other obscurities, hard
to be understood by men whose ears catch no more than
faint echoes of the divine World.^^

The method did not prevail without protest, and Origen.
himself alludes to some objectors. So far as these were
heretics, he was of course prejudiced against them from
the first. The Gnostics as we have seen allegorized the New
Testament in such a way as to do away with the historic
ground for the Christian faith. On the other hand by taking

2^ Philocalia (translated by Lewis), p. 31.

THE TRIUMPH OF ALLEGORY 55

the Old Testament literally they found reason for rejecting
it, or for reversing the Christian judgment concerning its
heroes and villains. On both counts they would be anti-
pathetic to Origen. The precarious nature of the allegorical
argument from the Old Testament was evident to the author
of the Clementine Recognitions also, which plainly assert
that there are many things in Scripture which can be drawn
to that sense which every one has preconceived for himself.
This, the author affirms, ought not to be done, and he bases
his argument on the literal sense, although he allows a cer-
tain force to tradition.^^ The Clementine documents, however,
lie outside the main stream of Christian literature, and this pro-
test, if such it was, had no appreciable effect. An interesting
anticipation of later views is found in their statement that
animal sacrifice was ordained by accommodation; the people
being accustomed to it in Egypt could not have been induced
to break with it at once.'^ This indication that the author
did not allegorize the Old Testament may be brought into
contrast with Origen's argument that if we insist on the
literal sense we must continue to sacrifice animals. He is
therefore driven to the conclusion that while all Scripture has
the mystical sense, not all of it has the literal meaning. This
he confirms by the New Testament verse which speaks of
the water-pots containing two or three firkins apiece, for the
purifying of the Jews. "The expression darkly intimates
that those who are called Jews secretly are to be purified by
the word of Scripture, receiving sometimes two firkins, that
is the physical and spiritual sense, sometimes three firkins,
since some have also the corporeal, that is, the literal sense."^*'
The examples might be multiplied but enough has been said
to verify Professor Fullerton's remark that Origen attempted
to give the method of allegory scientific elaboration. At
the same time he too recognized the need of some check to
the imagination of the expositor and he found this, as

28 Recognitions of Clement, X, 42 (Antenicene Fathers, Volume VIII,
p. 203).

29 Ibid., I, 36 (p. 87). 30 Dg PrincipHs, IV, i, 12.

56 ESS^JrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETJTION

Irenaeus did, in the tradition received in the Church. The
spiritual sense, he says, belongs to the praedicatio apostolica
manifeste tradita.^^ This loyalty to tradition did not prevent
his being regarded with suspicion at a later time.

Philo, Origen and Plutarch certainly attest the allegorical
method as something which met the needs of Jew, Christian,
and Greek. It was not due to the influence of any one man,
and having established itself its use in the Church was almost
a matter of course. In the Western Church the outstanding
figure is Augustine, and his position is made clear by his own
statement: 'T often rejoiced to hear Ambrose say: The let-
ter kills, the Spirit gives life, for that which in its literal
sense seemed absurd he expounded spiritually, lifting from it
the veil of secrecy." Ambrose, as we know, was a practical
administrator rather than a competent expounder of Scrip-
ture, and what he gave was drawn from others. A large num-
ber of parallels have been pointed out between his expositions
and those of Philo.^- It is not likely, however, that he usually
borrowed directly from the Jewish author, for he was ac-
quainted with the works of Clement and Origen, and is thought
to have taken material from Hippolytus and Basil. That
neither he nor Augustine knew any Hebrew need not be urged
against them, although it is to us somewhat strange that the
greatest of the Fathers should have scruples against Jerome's
more accurate version of the Old Testament based on the
Hebrew text. His attitude is one more evidence of the
strength of tradition.

With reference to Scripture, however, the fundamental prin-
ciple is that whatever in the divine Word does not, when taken
in the literal sense, contribute to morality of life or rightness
of belief, must be taken allegorically, since the Scriptures,
being the Word of God, can have nothing superfluous or un- ,
considered.

31 De Principiis, Preface, §2.

32 Siegfried, Philo von Alexandria als Ausleger des Alien Testaments
(187s), pp. 372-390. Siegfried's Book is still the most thorough discussion of
Philo's exegesis that we have.

THE TRIUMPH OF ALLEGORT 57

To Augustine, as it seems, we owe the first clear declaration
that each passage of Scripture has a four-fold sense. These
are: the literal, the allegorical, the moral, and the anagogic.
Thus the word Jerusalem is in the literal sense a city in
Palestine; allegorically it designates the Church; morally it
may mean the order of civil society; whereas anagogically it
points to eternal life. Yet it is fair to say that Augustine's
historical sense is superior to that of many of the Fathers, as
is shown by his great work on the City of God. In it he at-
tempts to construct a history of the world on the basis of the
literal sense of the Biblical narrative. His two common-
wealths— cities, according to the Roman conception — are
the earthly and the heavenly. Cain, the first murderer, is the
head of the earthly, Abel represents the other. In the family
of Abraham, Ishmael, child of the flesh and of the bondwoman,
carries on the one line, Isaac, the other: "Fitly, therefore, does
Isaac typify the children of grace, citizens of the free city
who dwell together in everlasting peace, in which self-love
and self-will have no place, but a ministering love that re-
joices in the common joy of all, of many hearts made one,
that secures perfect concord." This sentence shows as well as
any that although he desired to construct an historical narra-
tive, the author was yet dominated by a theory. And it does
not surprise us that to carry out the theory he must have re-
course to allegory. For many parts of the Old Testament, if
interpreted literally, would have slight bearing on the theme.

Examples are not hard to find. The sons of Abraham by
Ketura are said to have received gifts from their father. This
means that the Jews and heretics, carnally minded, receive the
ordinary gifts of God's providence, whereas Isaac, who is
heir of the promise, represents the Church. The Church
again is really meant by the verse which praises the bride in
Canticles: "Thy teeth are like a flock of sheep that are shorn,
which came up from the washing, whereof every one bears
twins and none is barren among them." Holy men are the
teeth of the Church, tearing men away from their errors and
bringing them into the body of the Church with all their

58 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

harshness softened down. Where it is said that the elder
(Esau) shall serve the younger (Jacob) the Scripture means
that the Jewish will serve the gentile Church. It is an un-
worthy solicitude in Jacob when he directs the disposition of
his dead body. The dead body is therefore sin, and its burial
signifies forgiveness. The recurrence of certain words is
thought to be significant. Thus the word 'remnants' in Gen.
xlv:7 points to Romans xi:5, where we find the 'remnant'
spoken of. Hence there is a mysterium. In the Tabernacle
the Holy of Holies means the New Testament, the anteroom
is the Old Testament.^^

As in other cases, we must beware of the impression that
the allegory was the leading thought of the theologian. The
intense earnestness of Augustine in inculcating a Christian
life of love and self-denial must impress every one who reads
his works. "Whoever thinks that he understands Scripture
or any part of it, but puts such an interpretation on it as
does not tend to build up the two-fold love, does not under-
stand it as he ought." He even goes so far as to say
that the interpretation which builds us up in love even if
faulty is not pernicious. Along with the inspiration of Scrip-
ture there was the equally important inspiration of the
Church. This it was which settled the Canon of Scripture:
"With regard to the canonical Scripture we must follow the
judgment of the greater number of catholic Churches, espe-
cially such as have been thought worthy to be the seat of
an Apostle and to receive epistles." Scripture, therefore,
asserts nothing but the catholic faith in regard to things
past, present, and future. With this principle we see how in-
evitable was the use of allegory in the study of the Old
Testament.

By common consent Augustine is the most influential
thinker for Western Christianity between St. Paul and Luther.
With his endorsement allegory may fairly be said to have
triumphed.

33 The examples are taken from the treatise De doctrina Christiana, and
the Questiones in Heptateuchum.

IV
SCHOLASTICISM DOMINANT

THERE is no contradiction in speaking of allegory as
triumphant and then of scholasticism as dominant.
Allegory was the method of exposition which had es-
tablished itself in the Church's treatment of the Old Testa-
ment, and even to a considerable extent in its treatment of
the New Testament. Scholasticism is the system of thought
which used allegory as its tool. In the earlier period the ques-
tion discussed between Jews and Christians was whether
Jesus was the expected Messiah. The Old Testament was
viewed as a conglomerate of predictions, and where they,
when literally construed, appeared to be something quite dif-
ferent, allegory was used to make the verses or the incidents
point forward to Christ. But by the time of Augustine Mes-
sianism was taken for granted. This Father had a much
larger conception, namely that of a divinely established com-
monwealth, the City of God, which it was easy to identify
with the Church. Here was a visible organization, having
the sacraments in its charge, and the successor of St. Peter
at its head. It had its sacred Book which Jerome had put
into intelligible, almost classic, Latin. The whole stream of
Christian tradition affirmed that what was patent in the
New Testament was latent in the Old Testament.

But an organized body, such as the Church had become,
was confronted with a multitude of questions to which the
simple congregations of earlier days were strangers. These
problems became acute when western society seemed to be
breaking up in the storms of barbarian invasion. Men clung
to the organization which gave the promise of civil order, all

59

6o ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

the more that it claimed divine sanction. But the New Testa-
ment gave little light on questions of discipline, whereas the
Old Testament presented a picture of an ecclesiastical com-
monwealth, completely organized from top to bottom. The
ideal presented in the middle books of the Pentateuch was
regarded as the divinely revealed pattern of what the City
of God should be. In fact the authors, or compilers, of that
code were wholly possessed by the ritual idea. According
to this idea God was to take up his residence on earth in
some visible form — His Shekina, or His Name; and the na-
tion of Israel was to be organized so as to serve Him in the
most perfect manner. In the strictest sense of the word
Israel was to be a priestly nation. Something of a sacred
character will then inhere in every member of the community.
But this sacred character is intensified in the servants of the
sanctuary, one grade higher in each of the classes — Levites,
Singers, Priests, and Highpriest. The necessity of preserving
the sacred community from contamination required discipline,
and the frequent threat that any transgression of the sacred
Law would be followed by excommunication, or death, showed
the severity visited upon sinners or scoffers.

In the Church from the time of Cyprian, the requirement
of obedience to the duly consecrated bishop was emphasized,
and the orders of Christian ministers were more and more
assimilated to those of the Hebrew priesthood. In the one case
there were bishops, priests, and deacons as in the other there
were Levites, priests, and Highpriest. The equation of Pope
and Highpriest naturally followed. The enemies of the
Church were identified with the Canaanites and idolaters, and
the severity of Deuteronomy was quoted as authority for their
extermination. Even Augustine found in the Old Testament
justification for compulsion in matters of faith. On the ritual
side the idea of sacrifice was emphasized. The New Tes-
tament, to be sure, had asserted that the one sacrifice had
been offered by Jesus, and that all believers had access to the
Father through him. But this one offering seemed too far
away to be effective, and the Church, as steward of the mys-

SCHOLASTICISM DOMINANT 6i

teries of God, assumed the right of perpetually repeating the
sacrifice. The Presbyter thus became the sacrificing priest.

Economic questions force themselves upon the attention
of every human society. They are treated in detail in the
Pentateuchal legislation, and ample provision is there made
for the support of the servants of the sanctuary. A tithe of
the gross income of the Israelite is to be paid to the Levites,
and from it a tenth is set apart for the priests. First-fruits,
freewill offerings, and certain fines which inure to the benefit
of the priests are added. The influence of this system on the
development of the Canon Law cannot here be traced in detail.
But we can see how the religio-political system set forth
in the Old Testament would be used for the temporal advan-
tage of the clergy. Even the vestments of the priesthood were
to a certain extent identified with those of the Levitical system,
though the parallel is not exact. Undoubtedly the Church
seriously undertook to instruct the people in faith and morals.
Precedent would be found in the teaching of priests and
Levites, alluded to in the Old Testament, and for casuistry
there was abundant material in the Levitical food and police
regulations. Where it suited the Church to interpret literally
this method was used; where this did not meet the exigency
resort was had to allegory. The threefold or fourfold sense
recognized by Augustine was now fully established.

The extent to which exegesis was subordinated to the inter-
est of the Church may be illustrated by the rules of Tychonius,
formulated by a Donatist writer, but fully approved by Au-
gustine. The specifications are as follows: Of the Lord and
his body (that is, the church); of the twofold body of the
Lord (that is, of true and false Christians); of the promises
and the law (developing the theory that all the promises of
the Old Testament have the Christians in mind); of species
and genus (that is, what is said of particular cities, lands, or
persons, in the Old Testament may be applied in a wider
sense) ; of the times (opening the door to all sorts of play on
the numerical data of Scripture); of recapitulation (the
theory seems to be that of a double sense, so that a predictive

62 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

passage may have its fulfilment at one time and yet point for-
ward to a second and larger fulfilment still to come); of the
devil and his body (that is, the reprobate or wicked).^ The
rules show plainly enough how the literal and historical sense
is submerged, according to the demands of ecclesiasticism.
Not content with the fourfold sense some expositors posited
a sevenfold, typified by the seven seals of the Apocalypse.
They are: i, Literal or historical; 2, Allegorical; 3, Combi-
nation of both — the example is David's adultery, which com-
bines a warning against that sin, with an allegorical condem-
nation of the Jewish people, personified in Uriah; 4, Teach-
ing of the Trinity; 5, Parabolic, when the Scripture speaks of
the same thing in different language in two passages (as where
Abimelech is named, though from the parallel we find that
Achish is meant); 6, Of the two advents of the Saviour; 7,
In which we are instructed by the divine precepts.^ The arti-
ficial nature of this classification is plain and it only shows
the tendency of the times.

Devotees of the mystical sense find the literal meaning hum-
drum, as is illustrated by theosophy in all its forms, including
the Jewish Kabbala, which reached its highest development in
the Middle Age. Allegorists are prone moreover to dwell on
the more obscure passages rather than those which are clear.
This is illustrated by the endeavor to discover a meaning in
the Hebrew proper names; the alleged etymologies would
reveal mysteries hidden from the unlearned. Amram, father
of Moses, was interpreted Exalted-Father, and applied to
Christ. Jochebed, Moses' Mother, was Grace-oj-God, and
signified the Church. From Christ and the Church was born
Moses (the spiritual law) and Aaron (the true priesthood)."
The fact that Scripture has both plain and obscure passages
was defended as the divine purpose — the plain passages for
the unlearned, the obscure to stimulate the ingenuity of

1 Burkitt, "Rules of Tychonius" {Texts and Studies edited by J. Arm-
itage Robinson, III, No. i, 1894).

2 Angelomus, "Enarrationes in Libros Regum," Praefatio (Migne, Patrolo-
gi(e Cursus Cotnpletiis, Vol. 115, col. 24Sf.).

3 Walafrid Strabo, Glossa Ordinaria ad Ex. vi: 20.

SCHOLASTICISM DOMINANT 63

scholars. Bede asks: What does it profit us to know that
Elkana had two wives, us who now live the celibate life,
unless we can find the allegorical sense which edifies and
gives us comfort?* Subordination of exegesis to the demand
for edification has never been more distinctly set forth. Al-
though not confined to the Middle Age, it appears more prom-
inently there than later. Tradition and dependence on the
Fathers were the order of the day. This may be illustrated
by Isidore of Seville, who wrote a treatise on etymologies
which is really a sort of encyclopedia of science as it was then
taught. What interests us now is his treatment of the Old
Testament, which is thoroughly allegorical. In fact he gathers
up the allegories of earlier authors and gives us a condensed
summary of what had been done or thought along that line.
From his De Allegoriis we may note that Laban is a type
of the Mosaic Law, since Jacob (Christ) took his two daugh-
ters (the Jewish and the gentile Church). Leah, the weak-
eyed, is type of the Jews, Rachel the beloved, type of the
gentile Church. Lot again is the Law, and his two daughters
are Samaria and Jerusalem. Pharaoh, Sisera, Goliath, repre-
sent the devil. Pharaoh's daughter, Moses' foreign wife,
the queen of Sheba, and Ruth, typify the Church. Going
farther back we may note that Adam is a type, figura, of
Christ, since he was created on the sixth day, and Christ took
the form of a servant in the sixth world-period (this accord-
ing to the chronology of the Greek version), that he might
re-create man into the image of God. Eve, made of the rib
of the sleeping Adam, is a type of the Church created by the
mystery of the blood and water which flowed from the side
of the dying Christ. Abel, the good shepherd, Seth, whose
name means Resurrection, Melchizedek, who gives bread and
wine, Jacob as we have already seen, Job, Moses, Jephthah,
Samson taking honey from the lion, as Jesus took his converts
from the jaws of the devil, David — all these are types of
Christ. On the other hand, the devil is represented among
others by poor Uriah, the Hittite, whose wife (the Church)

* Cited by Diestel from Bede's In Samuelem Prophetam.

64 ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

was desired by David (Christ). The boys who mocked
Elisha are the Jews who derided Christ and were punished
by the two bears — Vespasian and Titus. In the Old Testa-
ment no less than a hundred and twenty-nine personages are
found to be figures of Christ, the Church, the Jews, or Satan.

This author has also a work entitled Questiones in Vetus
Testamentum, from which a specimen may be given. It is
in the form of a commentary, giving a few words of the text
and then the alleged exposition, for example: "In the Begin-
ning: — The beginning is Christ, as he said to the Jews (John
viii:25). In this beginning therefore, God made the heavens,
that is spiritual beings, spirituales, who meditate on and seek
celestial things, and also carnal beings who have not yet
stripped off the earthly man. The earth was empty and void;
— The earth of our flesh was empty and void before it re-
ceived the form of doctrine. And darkness was on the face
of the deep; — because the blindness of sin and the obscurity
of ignorance covered our hearts. And the Spirit of God was
borne, ferebatur, upon the waters; — The Spirit of God hovers
over, super ferebatur, our dark and fluid heart, as over water,
in whom we rest, by whose breath we are revived, and by
whose waves we are washed." ^ After this we are not sur-
prised to learn that the live coal of Isaiah signifies the hypo-
static union of two natures in Christ, and that Jacob disguised
by the skin of a kid is a type of Christ clothed with human
nature.

Augustine and Isidore were the authorities relied upon in
this period, and the strength of tradition is seen in the num-
ber of catenae that were compiled. The endeavor was to con-
serve the thought of earlier expositors. Even so original a
thinker as Thomas Aquinas published a Catena Aurea on the
Gospels, the nature of which is sufficiently indicated by its
title. The interest of the age was turned to monastic piety,
the sacraments, and the system of doctrine formulated in the
creeds. The Old Testament was important so far as it could

^ Isidori Hispalensis, Quoestiones in Vetus Testamentum (Migne, Vol. 83,
col. 2ogi.).

SCHOLASTICISM DOMINANT 6$

be made to confirm the accepted beliefs on these topics. Hugo
of St. Victor will serve as an example. In his chapter on the
allegories he cautions the student that he must be firmly
established in the literal sense before proceeding to the allego-
ries which are strong meat. He compares the literal sense to
the foundations of a building. On this foundation must be
built up the structure of Faith. The first row of stones is
belief in the Trinity; next the freedom of the will, then sin
and penalty, followed by the sacraments instituted under the
law of nature, and these by the sacraments of the Old Testa-
ment. The sixth row is the incarnation; the seventh the sac-
raments of the New Testament; eighth is the doctrine of the
resurrection.*' In order to have a true understanding, there
must also be humility of mind, docility, and retirement from
the world. In the current evaluation of the monastic life it
is not strange that the monk was held to be the best expounder
of Scripture.

This is not the place to discuss the great intellectual move-
ment known as Scholasticism. Our concern is with its influ-
ence on the interpretation of Scripture, especially on the in-
terpretation of the Old Testament. We recognize at once
that the Bible was only one of the sources for philosophy or
theology — these two are in fact one. The fundamental
principle was that the Church is the visible Kingdom of God.
Its authority was already imprinted on the Augustinian the-
ology. The immediate task was to develop that theology in
the light of the Aristotelian philosophy, rediscovered through
translations from the Arabic. St. Thomas Aquinas is the
one in whom the system came to full flov/er, and the extent of
his influence down to the present day is known to every se-
rious student of history. His attitude towards Scripture is
sufficiently set forth in the opening chapter of his Summa,
where he says: "So far as the things of the Old Law signify
the things of the New Law, there is the allegorical interpre-
tation. So far as the things done in Christ, or so far as the
things which signify Christ, are types of what we ought to

6 Eruditionis Didascalicas Libri Septem, VI. 4 (Migne, Vol. 176, col. 8o2f.).

66 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

do, there is the moral interpretation. So far as they signify
what relates to eternal glory, there is the anagogical inter-
pretation." And again: "The multiphcity of these interpre-
tations does not produce ambiguity or any kind of equivoca-
tion." '

The passages make clear that in this, as in other respects,
the Saint adopts the current theory of a threefold sense,
although he is more sober in applying it than were some of the
doctors of the Church, That he was thoroughly familiar with
the Bible in the Latin is evident; that he knew no Hebrew
and little Greek need not be urged against him. Where he
alludes to the Hebrew he depends upon Jerome, and his idea
of a commentary as we have seen is an anthology of the
Fathers. His own commentaries on Job, Song of Songs, and
Psalms 1-50 present little that is new. In truth his interest
was elsewhere than in the Old Testament. The Bible was
one of the sources of his system, and in the Bible the more
important part was the New Testament. But as he himself
says, the Church has summed up the contents of revelation
in the Creed. His task is to explain the articles of the faith
according to the current philosophy. All science is tributary
to theology, and theology confirms the Catholic faith. The
need of allegory if the Old Testament is made subservient to
this end must be self-evident. So much is implied also in the
declaration that the Church had deduced the truth of the
creed from Scripture, for this means that the exposition of the
Fathers is authoritative; and that they made abundant use of
allegory we have already discovered. The complete identity
of creed and Scripture has become an axiom.

No doubt the thought of Thomas appeals to the Christian
mind. All of us would be glad to think that theology, that
/ is the knowledge of God and His ways with men, is really
the scientia scientiarum to which all philosophy is tributary.
The endeavor to realize this ideal must command our admira-
tion. It is only when we come to the logical deductions of
the theory that we hesitate. What Thomas means is quite

"^ Summa, Qu. I, i, 10.

SCHOLASTICISM DOMINANT 67

clear. In order to have a right view of the universe we must
be persuaded of all the items of the creed. These he enu-
merates in one of his minor works. As they are the several
articles of the accepted creed, they need not be repeated
here; though we should notice that he affirms the seven sacra-
ments as equally important with the articles of faith. In
connection with each item he enumerates the various heresies
that have been entertained concerning that particular item.
This faith he believes to have been held by the Old Testa-
ment saints, beginning with Adam. Moreover, it has been
revealed to some among the heathen, Job being one and the
Sibyl another. In this connection he relates a legend about
a sepulchre opened in the time of Constantine. In it was
found the body of a man on whose breast was a golden tablet
with the inscription: "Christus nascetur ex Virgine, et ego
credo in eum. O Sol, sub Irenae et Constantini temporibus
iterum me videbis."^ He would have had no hesitation in
attributing divine inspiration to Virgil, as was done by some
of his contemporaries. In order to establish the belief, resprt
was had to allegory in his case also. One Fulgentius wrote a
book in which he makes Virgil appear to him in a dream and
reveal the hidden sense of his poems, beginning with the first
line of the Mneid in which arma refers to what is physical,
virum to what is intellectual, and primus to what is ornamental
and artistic. No less an authority than John of Salisbury
takes up the thought, and declaring that under the guise of
legend Virgil expressed the truths of all philosophy, he traces
the successive steps in the development of the human soul
through the first six books of the Mneid.^

Further discussion of the application of this method to
other literature does not belong here. So far as the Old Tes-
tament is concerned we may say that the doctors of the
Church were agreed in using the three-fold or four-fold sense.
The prominent names of Abelard, Albertus Magnus, Duns
Scotus, and Bonaventura may be added to those of Hugo of

^ Cited by Werner, Thomas von Aquino (i8sq), II, p. 146.
^ Comparetti, Vergil in the Middle Ages (1895), p. 117.

68 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

St. Victor and Thomas Aquinas as adepts in this art. From
the Roman Catholic point of view it is a merit that these
writers buttress the doctrinal system of the Church with'
Scripture texts. Among them Thomas Aquinas is facile prin-
ceps because of the thoroughly systematic manner in which
he has carried out the theory. "Pope Clement XII in a Bull
beginning with the words 'By the Word of God' makes men-
tion of fourteen Sovereign Pontiffs who in solemn decrees
have passed magnificent eulogiums on the Angel of the
schools," ^° and the number has been added to by Leo XIII,
whose encyclical of 1879 urged the restoration of Christian
philosophy according to the mind of St. Thomas, and who
pointed out that at the Council of Trent "the Summa of
Thomas Aquinas lay open on the altar with the Holy Scrip-
tures and the decrees of the Sovereign Pontiffs, that from it
might be sought counsel and reasons and answers." ^^ From
the modern point of view it is of course no merit that Scrip-
ture should be interpreted according to a doctrinal system
assumed at the outset. Our purpose is not to praise nor to
blame, but to understand. That Thomas was thoroughly
conscientious in defending the system of doctrine which was
to him the most important thing in the world, all must recog-
nize. And if this system of doctrine is the most important
thing in the world, heresy is the thing most to be dreaded.
St. Thomas indicates the state of mind when in the introduc-
tion to his commentary on the Psalms he mentions the con-
demnation of Theodore of Mopsuestia by the fifth General
Council. Theodore had offended by insisting on the literal
interpretation of the Messianic Psalms, and this was the
heresy which Thomas warned against. In the dedicatory
epistle prefaced to the Catena Aurea, he informs Pope Urban
that he intends to give not only the literal sense of the Gospel
but also the mystical sense, also to destroy error and to con-

1° Vaughan, Life and Labors of St. Thomas of Aquin (1890), p. 340.

1^ Cited from the English translation prefixed to the Summa Theologica
of St. Thomas Aquinas, literally translated by the Fathers of the English Do-
minican Province, Volume I (1911).

SCHOLASTICISM DOMINANT 69

firm the Catholic faith." If this was the common opinion we
can understand the conclusion which the Church drew as to the
need of suppressing heresy by the strong arm of the civil power.
Enough has now been said to show in what sense we may
speak of scholasticism as dominant. In the Roman Church
the authors we have adduced are authoritative. When the^
Council of Trent affirmed the true doctrine to be derived
from tradition as well as Scripture, and that Scripture itself,
is to be accepted in the sense in which the Church interprets
it, the meaning is that these mediaeval authors have given
IQie true exposition of the Bible. Allegory, therefore, is not
only authorized, but we may say enjoined. The theory was ^
temporarily shaken, though not overthrown, by the revival
of learning, for the attention paid to ancient literature in its_
natural sense made the artificial method of treating the Scrip-
tures ridiculous. The attitude of the Humanists may be
judged by the Epistoloe Obscurorum Virorum, in one of which
Magister Andreas Delitzsch is satirized as the man who lec-
tures on the Metamorphoses of Ovid "and explains all the.
fables allegorically and literally." Details are given in an-
other letter showing how the same book can be expounded
quadruply, that is naturally, historically, literally, and spiritu-
ally. Thus the nine Muses allegorically signify the seven
choirs of angels; Diana is the Virgin Mary, who goes hither 1
and thither accompanied by her virgin nymphs; Cadmus |
seeking for his sister is Christ seeking the soul of man, and
he builds a city, that is the Church. "Not without cause is
it written that Bacchus was twice born, for by him is de-
noted Christ, who was born once before all worlds and a sec-
ond time humanly and carnally. Furthermore, the story of
Pyramus and Thisbe is to be expounded allegorically and
spiritually, thus: Pyramus signifies the Son of God, and Thisbe
the soul of man which Christ loves, and concerning which it is
written in the Gospel: 'a sword shall pierce thine own soul';
for in like manner Thisbe slew herself with her lover's sword." ^^

12 Divi Thomce Aquinatis Opera (i77S), Tomus IV, p. 2.

13 Epistola XXVIII.

r

70 ESSy^rS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

Although, as we shall see, Luther protested against the use
of allegory, and Calvin even more emphatically, yet the
method is so attractive to those who seek for mysteries in a
sacred Book that its influence can be traced outside the
bounds of the Catholic Church. Many Protestant theologians
allow a typology which is not far removed from that of the
Schoolmen. The most striking example is the exposition
of the Song of Songs, for even to the present day this book
is described as an allegory of the love of Christ and his
Church. Whether this collection of love songs found its
way into the Canon because it was interpreted allegorically,
is not quite clear. In view of the prophetic representation of
the relation between Yahweh and Israel under the figure of a
marriage, this is not improbable, and both Targum and Mid-
rash assume that the book is an allegory. From Origen down
to the editors of our Authorized Version, the Christian inter-
pretation has seen in the bridegroom the t3TDe of Christ, and
in the bride either the Church or the individual soul. That
St. Bernard preached eighty-six sermons on texts from this
book is a matter of common knowledge. That religious affec-
tion often uses the language of human affection is proved
here again as it is by the whole history of mysticism. The
matter is of interest in connection with our present discussion
only because it shows the measures which the believer finds
necessary in adapting a changed religious experience to a
Book which took form in an earlier time. The sufficiency of
Scripture was hotly debated between Protestants and Cath-
olics at a later date. A curious monument of the controversy
f is the pamphlet of Francis Hare on "the difficulties and dis-
couragements which attend the study of the Scriptures in the
way of private judgment." ^* Whether this essay was pub-
, lished in good faith is still a question. It certainly gives the
Catholic argument though it was written by an Anglican
bishop, for it roundly asserts that "the orthodox faith does not
depend upon the Scriptures considered absolutely in them-
usely^s, but as explained by Catholick Tradition." A more

^* First published in 1714; eighth edition in 1721.

SCHOLASTICISM DOMINANT 71

modern statement is that of Newman that the doctrines of
the Church "have never been learned merely from Scrip-
ture," ^^ and the "Tracts for the Times" defend the Catholic
interpretation at length.

As a supplement to this discussion, we may notice briefly
some modern instances. One appears where we should least
look for it, that is, in India. Among the myths of the Hindoos
none is less acceptable to the western mind than that of
Krishna. The career of this incarnation of Vishnu is a long
series of murders, thefts, and adulteries. The god is the
impersonation of unbridled sexual passion, having 180,000
wives and indulging himself immoderately with the women
or goddesses whom he meets. Yet modern Hindooism is able
to accept and worship Krishna and he has many warm ad-
herents among educated Hindoos. "Many regard him as the
Supreme Being who in his wondrous condescension mingled
in the affairs of human life, and naturally their one endeavor
is to explain away and account for the stories of sensuality
which stain the fair name of their deity." ^® This they do
in the manner now familiar to us; the loves of Krishna and
the milkmaids are represented as allegories of divine love.
It is unnecessary to give details. The case only shows that
we are dealing with a phenomenon common to more than one
reHgion. It is even applied in justification of the recital of the
Creed, as though the mystical interpretation, which really
sublimates the historical statements of the ancient document
into symbols of the believer's inner experiences, were con-
sistent with the intention of the Church. What is meant may
be shown by a single paragraph: "Born of the Virgin Mary
means that the dweller in the kingdom must be born of water
as well as of the Spirit, not of the Spirit alone nor of the soul
alone for Spirit is the life, soul supplies the form and body,
and under this present dispensation all things are double, one
against another, and the end will come when the man is as

15 The Arians of the Fourth Century, p. 29. There also we find a defence
of the allegorical method (p. 33 f.).

16 Martin, The Gods of India (1914), p. 140.

72 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

the woman and the woman as the man, neither male nor fe-
male." A little later in the same chapter we read: "When the
soul, figured as Eve, listens to the seductions of sense, that is
of life seeking to act apart from the whole, she becomes from
generate degenerate, and must become regenerate, that is she
must become purified or single-pointed and then perfect her
purification by giving birth to the Christ through the Spirit,
which is the true husband. Eve must become Mary, and her
Son the St. George bruising the serpent's head. The soul
is first the daughter, then the spouse, then the Mother of
God." ''

The book from which the above is quoted reproduces also
the elaborate symbolism of numbers which goes back to
Pythagoras or earlier, another evidence, if any were needed,
of the tendency we have been discussing. So far as our in-
vestigation has gone, we have found the art of exegesis to con-
sist in reading into the sacred text that which the expositor
wishes to find there.

1'' W. F. Cobb, Mysticism and the Creed (1914).

LUTHER'S APPEAL

IT HAS become a commonplace of Church History that
there were Reformers before the Reformation. The fact
is that a highly organized community, such as the Roman
Church had become, will always have critics among its more
thoughtful subjects. Equally true is it that a complicated
system of doctrine like that which had official sanction in the
Middle Age will provoke opposition in some minds. The
crusade against the Albigenses shows how formidable opposi-
tion to the received social order and to the dominant theology
might become. As early as the twelfth century Joachim of
Floris had advanced the theory that the Pope is Antichrist.
Whatever knowledge of Scripture there was must have sug-
gested to pious believers that the Gospel was something dif-
ferent from the theology of the Schoolmen. The revival of
learning, as we have seen, gave men a new sense of literary,
values, and while Scripture was sometimes undervalued in
comparison with the classic authors of Greece and Rome tjie
importance of going back to the sources (in this case the He-
brew text of the Old Testament) was appreciated. Among
the Jews there had come a reaction against the refinements of.
Rabbinical exegesis, and a more sober method of studying
the text. Rashi became the standard commentator just be-
cause iie gave attention to the literal meaning of the Bible.
His influence on Christian exegesis has been considerable,
mediated as it has been by Nicholas of Lyra.

That Nicholas had no intention of being an innovator is
evident from his affirmation of the fourfold sense, and from
his expressed willingness to submit his conclusions to the

73

74 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

judgment of the Church. But he does emphasize the literal
sense, and in this almost slavishly follows Rashi. Even when
Christian exposition differs from that of the Jews, he often
gives the preference to the latter. His influence on Luther
has become proverbial. Increasing interest in the Bible in
the fourteenth century is indicated by Wycliffe's translation.
Wycliffe indeed is the most important of Luther's forerun-
ners, because of his desire to give the people the Bible in
their own language. His emphasis was laid on the literal sense,
and he warned against reading into the text that which the
Holy Spirit does not mean. In Germany also there were
editions in the vernacular before Luther's epoch-making work.
Scholarly interest in the original text is indicated by the Com-
plutensian Polyglot published just before Luther posted his
Theses. Reuchlin's efforts to promote the study of Hebrew
had given rise to an animated controversy in which the igno-
rance of the monkish agitators was ridiculed by men of learn-
ing. The careful observer must have seen signs of a new spirit
in the universities and, in some of them at least, a revolt from
the current scholasticism. Luther's hatred of Aristotle was
probably not an isolated phenomenon. On the economic side
the unrest was marked, and contributed to the desire for a
change.

In Luther we can trace the gradual change which went on
in the man trained in the scholastic theology, one who would
like to have remained a loyal son of the Church, but who was
driven to take one step after another away from tradition and
into opposition to the organization with which he had been so
closely connected. That he was trained in the scholastic
theology is indicated by the fact that when first appointed
to his professorship he was expected to lecture on Aristotle.
Against this, however, he soon revolted, and then began his
exposition of the Bible. His theology was still that which he
had learned, and he was moved to anger when Eck accused
him of being a heretic. His later attitude towards Aristotle
is indicated by his declaration that there is more wisdom in
one verse of the Psalms than Aristotle would express if he

LUTHER'S APPEAL 75

had written a thousand books of Metaphysics. And later:
"In scholasticism I learned nothing of what sin, righteousness,
jjace and Christjan life are. I lost Christ there, but found
him in Paul." Here we have the criterion which he applied
to AristofliTand the Schoolmen not only, but to the Bible
itself. The Fathers also lost their standing with him as in-
fallible teachers, although he always valued Augustine. Here
also we understand the motive, Luther was primarily a re-
ligious genius. He went through an experience similar to that
of St. Paul, and among the Fathers none so nearly reproduced
that experience as did Augustine. In his lectures he first
gave a course on the Psalms and next took the Epistle to the
Romans, the two books in which he found his religion most
fully expressed.

It must be remembered also that he was pastor and preacher
as well as professor, and it was here that the issue was joined.
The sale of indulgences gave his confessants a false confi-
dence, and thus cut at the roots of a real religious experience.
The famous theses were posted in order that by an academic
discussion men's ideas concerning sin, repentance, and the
power of the Church might be clarified. And it is noticeable
that the first one of the series goes back to the text of the Gos-
pels in their literal meaning, as distinguished from the in-
terpretation which the Church authorities were putting upon
the words. It reads: When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ
says 'act penitence' {penitentiam agite, according to the Latin
version) he means that all the life of the faithful should be
penitent. And the next thesis carries out the thought: This
word cannot be understood of sacramental penance, that is of
the confession and satisfaction which are secured by the min-
istry of the priest. We see that the official interpretation of
the Church, which found in the Gospel word 'repent' author-
ization for its demand of penance under the direction of the
priest, is distinctly disavowed, because the text of the Gospel,
taken in its literal sense, does not mean what the Church
affirms. Almost more distinct is the declaration: Every
truly penitent (compunctus) Christian has remission of pun-

76 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETJTION

ishment and guilt without letters of indulgence. And the
ecclesiastical theory of a treasury of merits upon which the
Pope could draw in favor of the purchaser of indulgences is
contradicted in the sentence: The true treasure of the Church
is the Holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

While an academic debate on abstract questions of doctrine
might have been allowed to pass without hostile criticism, an
attack upon the traffic in indulgences was a different matter.
Tetzel saw the danger to his trade, and scented heresy at
once. His claim was that the Pope who had authorized the
indulgences had a right to interpret Scripture, and to decide
questions of faith. The principle of leading Churchmen was
that the customs of the Church were divine truth because they

f' were the customs of the Church. "If a tradition, a text of
Scripture or a dogmatic affirmation was inconvenient, the
Church, that is Rome, had the right of interpreting." ^ Where
the sources of the Papal income were endangered it is easy
to see what line the interpretation would take. The Reformer,
however, did not realize the full meaning of the step he had
taken until the debate with Eck. It was the determination
of his opponent there to prove him a heretic — to Luther's
indignation, as has been said. But the debate showed that
if the Pope or the Canon Law, or the Councils, or even the
Fathers were accepted as infallible authorities, Luther was in
danger of the judgment. His appeal must therefore be to the
Scriptures, and this came to him with full force at Worms.
Reflecting on his experiences at the Diet, he began at once
his translation of the Bible. It was his appeal from the
Church authorities to the common people. It is sometimes
affirmed that he gave the Bible to his people, and the sen-
tence is understood as if the Book had not been accessible to

f' them before. But as we have seen, there were earlier versions
in German and the printing press had sent forth several edi-
tions of the Latin. The truth is that the Bible had been known
for the most part in the form in which the Church authorities
had presented it — overlaid with legendary and allegorical

1 Hamack, Lehrbuch der Dogtnengeschichte, III (1910), p. 665.

LUTHER'S APPEAL 77

material. Luther's own statement is that so many legends
of the saints, passionals, edifying examples, and story-Bibles,
had been circulated that the Psalter had been quite "thrown
under the bench." But the Psalms are superior to the best of
the legends, no matter how many they may be. What the
legends tell us is what the saints have done; but the Psalms
show us how they talked with God and prayed — so that the
other examples appear as mere dumb saints, but those of
the Psalms right active and living. "There you see into the
heart of the saints, as into a beautiful, pleasant garden, nay
into heaven, what beautiful flowers spring up out of all sorts
of joyful thoughts of God on account of his goodness." -
That the man who could write thus knew how to reach the
hearts of the people is evident, and we are not surprised to
learn that his New Testament went through twenty-two edi-
tions in Wittenberg alone during his lifetime, and that in
the same period there were eleven editions of the complete
Bible.

Like many another genius, Luther was little concerned about
consistency, and a little reflection will show why different
and even apparently contradictory utterances can be cited
from his numerous works. The most of those works were
called out by special emergencies, each forced from him by
a new crisis. He says himself that whether he wills it or not
he is compelled to learn something new every day "since so
many eminent men press upon me as though for a wager, and
give me something to do." In this connection he regrets his
earlier position concerning indulgences because at that time
he judged too mildly. When Prierias took up the defence
"I discovered that indulgences are a mere deception of the
Roman flatterers by which they take away the people's money
and at the same time their faith in God." Then came Eck
and Emser, and began to instruct him about the Pope — "and
not to be ungrateful to such learned men, let me confess that
their writings brought me forward. For though I denied that
the Papacy had divine right, yet I was willing to confess its

2 Vorrede zum Psalter (1528).

r

78 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

human right; but when I read the hairsplitting refinements
of these coxcombs with which they support their idol^ I realize
that the Papacy is the kingdom of Babylon and the power
of Nimrod the mighty hunter." ^ Later he might have in-
cluded among his teachers the Anabaptists who compelled
him to face another class of problems.

Our interest is in the Reformer's attitude towards the
Bible, and we have seen how he was driven back to it as the
infallible source of faith. His final position was that the
Bible is superior not only to St. Peter and St. Paul, but even
to all angels and to the humanity of Christ himself, because
he declares that the word he speaks is not his own but His
that sent him. But the question of interpreting the Word still
confronted the inquirer. Or even more fundamental was the
question of the Canon: What books are to be recognized as
the Word of God? To this Luther's reply is well known.
Starting from his religious experiences he gave the rule:
What urges Christ (was Christum treibt) is Scripture, though
written by a Judas; what does not stand this test is not Scrip-
ture though written by an Apostle. From this point of view
it must be clear that not all parts of the Bible are of equal
value. The New Testament is the primary source, and in the
New Testament the Epistles of Paul and the Gospel of John
have the preeminence. The oft quoted characterization of
the Epistle of James is sufficient evidence of the freedom with
which he approached what we should call questions of criti-
cism. What about the Old Testament?

Here we note first of all that in principle Luther rejected
the allegorical method. In his introduction to his translation
he says that some seek a spiritual sense in the Old Testament
as Origen, Jerome and other prominent men have done. This he
does not approve, but cites Jesus' word: Search the Scriptures
for they are they which testify of me, and uses this as the touch-
stone for the reader. This he develops more at length, say-
ing: "If you will interpret well and securely, take Christ with
you, for he is the man whom everything concerns." Whether

3 Von der Babylonischen Gefangenschajt der Kirche (preface).

LUTHER'S APPEAL 79

the rule could be applied without some use of allegory we may
doubt, but there is no doubt of Luther's intention. He says
for example, that allegory is a dangerous thing, though the
words read so smoothly, for there is nothing behind them. It
may do for the preachers who have not studied much, and who
do not know how to expound the history and the text — they
resort to allegory by which nothing definite is taught. In
his own commentaries he follows Nicholas of Lyra closely,
and commends him because he does not allegorize but holds
to the history, that is the literal sense. On the other hand,
he criticizes this writer for too close dependence on the Jewish
exegetes. In practice, moreover, he is not able to avoid
allegory altogether — the Epistle to the Hebrews gives him
the example, and to that extent authorization. But the cases
are not very numerous. Correct principles of Bible study are
set forth in the preface to his translation of Isaiah, where he
urges the reader to study the history recorded in the books
of Kings in order to understand the situation in which the
prophet uttered his discourses. It is necessary, he says, to
know how it stands in the land, what events transpired, what
the people thought, what were the relations which they sus-
tained to their neighbors, friends or foes, especially their
attitude towards their God and His prophets.

That the Reformer had his limitations is true, but it is not
too much to say that he opened the way to a better under-
standing of the Bible. A really historical treatment must
come later. But the germ of such treatment may be discov-
ered in Luther's affirmation of the difference between the two
Testaments which he defines as the difference between Law
and Gospel. Here the Apostle Paul had shown the way, for
according to him the function of the Old Testament (here,
as among the Jews generally, the Pentateuch was the im-
portant part) was to show the real nature of sin. This was
the way in which it prepared for the Gospel, the message of
deliverance. The theory fell in with Luther's own experience,
for in the cloister his struggle against fleshly desire had con-
vinced him of the impotence of legalism, whereas the revela-

V

8o ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

tion of grace in Christ gave the sense of forgiveness and led
to newness of Hfe. The application of the theory may be read in
his introduction to the Pentateuch where he points out that the
book of Genesis gives us fine examples of faith, but that
Moses is the instrument for promulgating the Law. The mul-
titudinous commands in the Levitical Code serve to burden the
conscience with a multitude of sins, and convince the man
of his impotence to all good.

The Old Testament therefore was viewed in two aspects.
It contained the Messianic prophecies, which were still inter-
preted according to the tradition of the Church, and it con-
tained the Law which was intended to convince men of sin.
Melanchthon's Loci, which became the standard theological
textbook for the new reformed Christian community, was
based on the Epistle to the Romans and treated the Old Tes-
tament from this double point of view. The dawn of an
historical understanding may be found in this instrument,
especially in the Reformer's insisting on the original text as
against the Roman exaltation of the Latin version. The
reaction against this version extended to Jerome, its author,
whom Luther criticizes severely, declaring that he says noth-
ing of Christ — ''he writes only of fasting, meats, virginity."
Jerome's emphasis on monasticism would naturally offend
Luther, but his judgment on the Father seems justo durius
as Rosenmiiller says. Further evidence of the Reformer's
historical sense may be found in his recognition of the fact
that Moses included in his Law many things which had been
held by his forefathers, such as sacrifices, circumcision, dis-
crimination between clean and unclean meats, some of these
being even borrowed from heathenism. He boldly asserts
that the Law of Moses does not concern us; the Gospel does
not impose laws but teaches of the Spirit.

Although therefore Luther marks an advance, yet we are
compelled to say that to approach the Old Testament with the
determination to interpret it in the sense of the Reformers is
similar to what we have found in the earlier period. That is,
the temptation of the expositor is to read into his text what he

LUTHER'S APPEAL 8i

desires to find there. The fundamental assumption that the
sense of Scripture is one and that the obscure sentences must
be interpreted by those that are clear — by the analogy of
faith as the phrase was — put bonds upon the expositor. All
that we are concerned to show is that Luther was far freer
than his predecessors. His impatience with earlier commen-
tators was such that at times he was willing to throw away all
commentaries and trust the common sense of the reader. He
holds that the Holy Spirit is the clearest writer and speaker in
heaven or on earth, and his words can have but one meaning,
that which we call the literal testimony. This does not mean
that there are no figures of speech discovered by the same
common sense that we use in studying other books.

If from our point of view we find that history was very im-
perfectly apprehended by this great leader we may still agree
that he opened the road to a sound historical exegesis "but
his century and he lacked the means to follow the path." *
The strength of tradition showed itself more distinctly in
his followers. They had the more mechanical view of faith
which regards it as acceptance of a philosophic system, a
view of the universe, resting on an infallible authority. The
infallible authority was now no longer the scholastic tradi-
tion, but it was the Bible. The position accepted by the
Lutheran theologians may be stated in the words of Melanch-
thon's disciple, George Major, who in 1550 published an essay
on the origin and authority of the Word of God. His state-
ment is: "One and the same doctrine had been in the Church
from the beginning of the world to the present time; there is
perfect agreement between prophets and Apostles, one voice
in all." ^ Melanchthon himself affirmed a continuous suc-
cession of prophets, the first one being Adam. A certain
gradation in rank was allowed, some being greater than
others; but this made no essential difference in their teaching.
How much must be supplied by the imagination if this theory

* Harnack, Lehrbiich der Dogmengeschichte, III, p. 867.
5 I owe the citation to Diestel (p. 233), not being able to consult Major's
book.

y

82 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

is to be carried through is made clear when we read the list
of names of the prophets; it includes Adam, Seth, Enoch,
Methuselah, Noah, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph,
Moses and so on." Whether such a theory did not really play
into the hands of the Roman Catholics was a question, for it
is evident that the revelations granted to some of these earlier
chosen men had not come down in writing. The polemic as
to the sufficiency of Scripture, however, does not seem to have
considered this point.

An issue raised by the Council of Trent (besides the one
on the necessity of tradition) concerned the extent of the
Canon. Chemnitz, whose Examen became a standard work
on the Protestant side, took occasion to discuss the origin
of the Old Testament. His argument was that the revelation
given to Adam was soon corrupted, just because oral tradition
could not long remain true. This question, however, became
acute a little later. The theory that orthodoxy was neces-
sary, was held by Protestants as well as Catholics, and if
Scripture was the source of correct doctrine, this doctrine must
be found in the Old Testament as well as the New. Melanch-
thon set an example which was followed for a century, by
demonstrating all the articles of the faith from the book of
Isaiah. They are: The unity of God, the divine and human
nature of the Messiah, as well as his birth from a virgin, his
death and resurrection, the call of gentiles into the Church,
the remission of sins, eternal life and future reward and pun-
ishment. He even finds numerical basis for a prediction of the^
time of the advent.^ The example only shows how far the
leading theologian of the Reformation was from a really his-
,toric view.

Perhaps the name of leading theologian of the Reformation
belongs rather to Calvin. His clear and logical mind and his
thorough scholarship enabled him to formulate a system which
has not yet lost its power. As to Scripture, with which we are

8 Argumentnm in Esaiant Prophetam (Corpus Reformatorum, XIII,
Col. 794).

'^ Ibid., col. 799f.

LUTHER'S APPEAL 83.

here concerned, his position is quite clear. He energetically "^
rejected all allegory, declaring it a commentum Satance, and
adding that it is something like sacrilege to turn Scripture one
way and another and to indulge our fancies as in sport.* He
declares that God cannot be reconciled by sacrifice, basing his
opinion on utterances of the prophets. The difficulty of ac-
counting for the elaborate legislation of Leviticus is met by the
assertion that the ritual laws are a commentary on the Deca-
logue, which Calvin regards as of binding force.® He even
departed from the current of Protestant thought when he
refused to find Messianic predictions in many passages, and in
the Psalms seeks the historical background of those which
had been referred to Christ. In his time the miraculous ele-
ment was no stumbling block, and the Copernican view of
the universe had hardly begun to attract the attention of the
more daring spirits. In exegesis Calvin was distinctly in ad-
vance of his time, freer than Luther in the rejection of alle-
gory and typology. But it was Luther who opened the road
to a sound exegesis and the merit of leadership belongs to _j
him.

8 De Optimo Methodo {Corpus Reformatorum, XXXVIII, 2, col. 405).
* Corpus Reformatorum, LIT, p. 7.

VI
PROTEST AND REACTION

THE REFORMATION was a protest against the
Roman system. But the Reformers brought with
them the idea of faith as the acceptance of a system
of doctrine divinely taught. In the two centuries after Lu-
ther's death, the burning question with the theologians was
how this system could be certified as in fact divine. Even in
Luther's lifetime there were those who drew radical con-
clusions from his premises. He had shown the common man
that the conscience has its rights, and that Scripture is so
plain that private interpretation is justified. Since we can-
not have the blessings of liberty without having some risk
of its abuse, it is not strange that individual vagaries soon
showed themselves. How the peasants interpreted the new
doctrine is well known, and among Luther's colleagues ideas
which he regarded as heretical were held and published. The
Old Testament gave occasion for difference of opinion. Since
Moses allowed polygamy Miinzer practised it. The Old Tes-
tament commended heroes like Gideon who slew the enemies
of the chosen people. But these new sectaries claimed to be the
true Israel, and wielded the sword against the Canaanites,
\that is against all who refused to accept their doctrine. From
the affirmation that the Law was no longer binding on the
Christian it was easy also to infer the same antinomian prin-
ciples which gave the Apostle Paul trouble in some of his
churches. Heresy was no new thing, but the Roman Church
had been able to check it by calling in the help of the civil
arm. It was difficult for the Protestants to defend the right
of private judgment and at the same time punish those who
exercised the right.

84

PROTEST AND REACTION 85

However, the leaders of the various churches were in the
orthodox tradition, that is, they had brought with them a
system in many respects identical with that taught by Thomas
Aquinas. The Catholics could of course prove the system
by tradition, and at the Council of Trent this was officially de-
clared to be binding. The same council made the Latin
version, current in the Church, the authentic text in all con-
troversies. On these two points — the validity of tradition
as against the sole authority of Scripture, and the accuracy of
the Vulgate, as contrasted with the original Hebrew of the Old
Testament and the Greek of the New Testament — the issue
was joined. The Protestant creeds make strong affirmations
on both points. In theory also, the allegorical method was
rejected, although when the emphasis was laid on preaching,
as the most important part of the public service, and when
this preaching was avowedly based on Scripture, some lati-
tude was allowed, at least by way of illustration, and, as
Luther said, of ornament. To prove the system of doctrine
from the Old Testament was a matter of some difficulty, and
it was not made easier when differences arose between the.
two Protestant communions, Lutheran and Reformed.

It is not a part of the present task to enter into the history
of controversy. The Odium theologicum has never been more
unedifyingly displayed than in the centuries we now have in
mind. Common to the Protestant parties was the belief that
the Pope was Antichrist, and that the Roman Church was the
Whore of Babylon. As to the attitude of Lutherans on points
on which they differed from Calvinists it will be enough to
cite the title of one work: Absurda absurdorum absurdissitna,
Calvinistica absurda, hoc est invicta demonstratio logica,
philosophica, theologica, aliquot horrendorum paradoxorum
Calviniani dogmatis. The same doughty fighter who con-
cocted this is said to have published a pamphlet, Bellum
Jesu Chris ti et Jo. Calvini} The Socinians came in

1 The title of the Absurda Absurdorum is taken from Weber, Einfluss der
Protestantischen Schulphilosophie (1908), p. 9, and of the other work from
an article on Grawer, the author, in the Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie. I
have not seen the publications.

86 ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

for their share of objurgation and later the Arminians
were treated in the same way. Doubtless our age is
unable to appreciate the earnestness with which such dis-
cussions were carried on. The temper of the English Puri-
tans may give us some light. Moreover, we should not for-
get that a practical interest underlay the polemic. The pro-
fessors of theology were training men for the ministry in the
several Churches. It was necessary to instruct them so that
they would be sound in the faith. This faith was the faith of
Luther or of Calvin, as the case might be. Melanchthon's
Loci, which was the theological textbook of Germany for many
years, was intended to explain and defend the simple faith of
the Gospel. Its aim was to this extent practical. Men, sinners,
must be brought to repentance and salvation. This Gospel
was, to be sure, the Gospel of Paul, for the experience of the
Reformers was distinctly Pauline, and Melanchthon's book
originated in a course of lectures on the Epistle to the Romans.
The examination of candidates for the ministry must be based
on some such compendium. But as time went on and the"'^
polemic of which we have learned became more animated, the
need of a metaphysical basis for theology made itself felt.
The professors of theology in this period were also teachers^
of philosophy. Thus the Aristotelian system which was so
energetically repudiated by Luther, came again into honoFr-
We are here concerned with the influence of these move-
ments on the exposition of the Old Testament. The task of
the exegete was a double one. He must prove the harmony
of Scripture, for ex hypothesi, God being its author, there
could be no inconsistencies. He must also bring out the dis-
tinction between Law and Gospel, for this also was an axiom
of the Protestant leaders. Titles can be quoted on both
topics, on the one side Althamer's Conciliationes Locorum
Scripturae qui Specie tenus inter se pugnare videntur (1597),
and on the other Artopaeus' Discretio locorum Legis et Evan-
gelii (1534)." A more elaborate Conciliation was Pfeiffer's

2 Artopaeus is cited from Heppe, Dogmatik des Deutschen Protestantismus
im sechzehnten Jahrhundert (1857).

PROTEST AND REACTION 87

Dubia Vexata Scripturae Sacrae (1699), which marked the
culmination of Harmonistic efforts. The Jews had set the
example as we saw in discussing Manasseh ben Israel. All
parties — Catholics, Lutherans and Reformed — would agree
in the principle underlying such attempts, that is that God
cannot contradict Himself. What the Catholics asserted was
that the Scripture needed the interpretation of the Church
embodied in tradition, whereas the Protestants affirmed the
perspicuity of both Old and New Testaments. The question
still remained : What is it that proves Scripture to be the '
Word of God? To this the Catholic had a ready answer — the
Church has authoritatively declared it. The Protestant found
a triple ansvv^er. First was the Testimony of the Holy Spirit,
and this is affirmed in the creeds. What it means is that the
religiously minded man finds religion expressed in Scripture.
As it was afterwards put by Coleridge: What finds me is in-
spired. Only the doubt might arise whether all parts of the
Old Testament do actually appeal to the Christian believer
in such measure that he can accept the whole volume as being,
or even as containing, the Word of God.

A second line of argument was found in the testimony of ^
the early Church, and on this ground the so-called Apocrypha
were rejected, or at least pronounced to be of secondary impor-
tance by the Protestants. Thirdly, it was held that the ^
authors of the Biblical books were attested as prophets by
the miracles wrought in their favor. This again would not
be objected to by the Catholics, only they claimed that the
miracles were not confined to the early age. In the first period
of Reformation thought there seems not to have been a dis-
tinct theory of inspiration, that is a theory of the inspiration
of the writers of the Books, as distinct from that of the
prophets whose words they recorded. In fact, Luther's free-
dom in acknowledging that some wood, hay, and stubble
might have come into some of the Books along with the gold,
silver, and precious stones, would seem to preclude such a
theory. The lengths to which some theologians were willing
to go is indicated by the controversy whether there were

88 ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

solecisms in the New Testament. The stricter party denied
that there could be any, since the Holy Spirit could not be
supposed to make a mistake. Those who affirmed the con-
trary were accused of blasphemy. The final formulation was
the theory of verbal inspiration, and, as if this were not enough
to insure the authority so much desired, the hypothesis of
Chemnitz was taken up and expanded. It was supposed that
the prophets when they had pronounced their discourses posted
up copies of the revelations at the door of the temple, and that
when the people had had sufficient time to take cognizance of
them the temple servants took them down and laid them away
with the earlier parts of the sacred Book.^ The trouble with
the hypothesis is that there is not the slightest historical evi-
dence for it, and that it goes directly against all that we know
of the relations between prophets and priests throughout the
preexilic period.

This theory, that an official sanction must have been given
to the revelation, may be illustrated again from Carpzov,
whose introduction to the Old Testament had a wide vogue.
He maintains that in order that a book should be canonical,
it was not enough that it be divinely inspired. There should
be some certificate that it was divinely ordered and conse-
crated and handed to the Church as the rule of faith and
morals.* Undoubtedly the great folio volumes of commen-
taries published in this period prove that these scholars took
themselves seriously, and there is no need to minimize their
scholarship. The emphasis laid on the original languages of
Scripture led to a minute examination of grammar and lexi-
con, and the controversy with opponents, whether liberals hke
Grotius, or Roman Catholics like Richard Simon, compelled
careful attention to the meaning of each verse. All the
scholarship, however, was made subservient to orthodoxy^
and this was the orthodoxy of the particular communion to

3 Marloratus, Prophetia Esaim cum catholica Expositione ecdesiastica
(1610), Argumentum.

* J. G. Carpzov, Introductio ad Libros Historicos Bibliorum Veteris Tes-
tamenti (Editio Secunda, 1727), p. 24.

PROTEST AND REACTION 89

which the scholar belonged. A new scholasticism seems to
have mastered the Churches. Quenstedt's definition may be
quoted to show the point of view. The Old Testament, he
says, is the collection of books which by inspiration of God
were written by prophets predicting the advent of the Mes-
siah, in the Hebrew language, were received by the Jewish
Church, approved by Christ and the Apostles, and recognized
by the primitive Church to be the perpetual rule of faith and
life in the Church Universal. The prophets have become
writers instead of speakers — the pens of the Holy Spirit.
Differences of style in the different books are due to a gra-
cious accommodation on the part of the divine Author,

Since an authentic text was a need of the theologian, it was
assumed that the original had been kept pure in all ages, and
that the Hebrew vowel points were of equal antiquity with
the consonants. The opposite opinion was the occasion of
an animated debate in which the two BuxtQrfs, father and
son, took the leading part. The more historical view was
broached by Ludovicus Cappellus, professor at Saumur, The
Buxtorfs were soundly orthodox and defended the antiquity
of the punctuation — a view now thoroughly discredited. De-
tails cannot be given here. The incident is interesting as a
symptom of a dawning realization of the problems presented
by the Old Testament. The Roman Catholic defence of the
Vulgate as the authentic recension led scholars of this school
to affirm the corruption of the Hebrew. It was easy to say
that the malice of the Jews had led them to conceal originally
Messianic passages in order to refute Christian claims. The
best known exponent of this view is John Morin, who held
that it would be shameful for the Church to be in bondage to
the synagogue. The polemic motive in his discussion is
evident, but his careful examination of the text at least
compelled the Protestants to take account of the facts. On
this account Morin has been called the father of textual
criticism.

Perhaps this honor belongs rather to Cappellus, v/hom we
have already met as an innovator on the subject of the vowel

90 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

points. His Critica Sacra gives a systematic discussion of the
various readings found in parallel passages of the Hebrew, or
suggested by the versions. A comparison of Kings and Chron-
icles brought to light a number of such variants, and in many
cases the Greek version revealed an underlying Hebrew bet-
ter than the one preserved by the Jews. The book was bit-
terly attacked by the Buxtorfs and others, but again the facts
were called to the attention of many thoughtful persons. Cap-
pellus, it should be remarked, was a loyal Protestant and had
no motive except recognition of the truth. In fact he took
pains to show that the recognition of various readings in no
way endangered faith and morals. British scholars kept in
touch with those on the continent, and so conservative a
scholar as Usher was candid enough to recognize that a
sacred text was subject to the same laws of transmission as
were other ancient documents. Dogmatic theologians were
disquieted, however, by the suggestion, and the publication of
various readings in Walton's Polyglot caused John Owen to
utter a sharp attack on the editor, under the title "Of the
Integrity and Purity of the Hebrew and Greek Text of the
Scripture, with Considerations on the Prolegomena and Ap-
pendix to the late Biblia Polyglotta." ^ Walton replied in an
equally animated publication. The Considerator Considered.
Party feeling no doubt had something to do with this debate,
but the cause of truth was advanced.

In the leading ecclesiastical circles the orthodox view still
prevailed, and the subservience of exegesis to dogma is indi-
cated by the fact that almost every Biblical scholar was also
professor of dogmatics. An example is the Lutheran Calovius
(Calov) whose chief exegetical work was called out by his
opposition to Grotius. Grotius, as we shall see, published
Annotations to the Bible in which he emphasized the literal
sense, illustrating it by parallels from secular writers, many
of them heathen. Calovius, to counteract the dangerous ten-
dency of such a work, published a Biblia Illustra, in which he
took up Grotius' Annotations one by one, and gave the cor-

5 Owen's Works, Vol. IV. The Epistle Dedicatory is dated 1658.

PROTEST AND REACTION 91

rective. His scholarship is indisputable, and his knowledge
of Hterature extensive. Moreover, he insists on the literal
sense. But the literal sense is everywhere made to support
the dogmatic tradition. His title page, which is too long to
quote, boasts that he has examined the readings of the ver-
sions and vindicated the purity of the Hebrew text, that he
refutes the errors of Jews and heretics, and that he submits
the depravations and false interpretations of Grotius to ex-
amination and explodes them.*^ His prejudice against Cal-
vinists, Catholics, and Socinians led him to deny the merits
of all, and he declared that the Jews can teach us nothing
concerning their own sacred Book. The work is prefaced by
an elaborate discussion of Old Testament chronology, and by
a treatise on weights and measures. In this period it became
the fashion to supplement the notes on the Hebrew text by
elaborate essays on questions that might arise. For exam-
ple, Pfeiffer, in the Dubia Vexata already referred to, takes
occasion to discourse at length on Cain's dialogue with
Abel.

The theory of perspicuity could not altogether hide the fact
that there were some passages in the Old Testament not
altogether plain. Why else should such elaborate commen-
taries be necessary? The answer given was the same that we
have met before — that God was pleased at times to speak
obscurely because if all were too easy the reader would feel
a fastidium for the Book. John Gerhard, the greatest the-
ologian of the seventeenth century, gives this reason, and
adds that the obscurity drives us to more earnest prayer, in-
cites our zeal for study, humbles our pride, keeps the profane
from knowing the truth, and increases men's reverence for
the ministry.'^ The corollary of this emphasis on the more
perspicuous passages was the selection of these passages as
the basis for dogmatic treatises. Sebastian Schmidt of Strass-
burg, one of the ablest Biblical scholars of the seventeenth
century, gave a course of lectures on the Dicta Probantia,
and these lectures were afterwards published with the title

« Biblia Illustrata (1672). ' Cited from Diestel, p. 375.

92 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

Collegium Biblicum!' The result, which was not foreseen
by those who followed the method, was that the conception of
a Biblical dogmatic, distinct from the philosophical dogmatic
on which the chief stress was laid, came into men's minds and
prepared the way for a more historical understanding of the
Scripture. It might indeed occur to some that if this part
of the Bible was the important part, the rest might safely be
neglected. This conclusion was hindered by the necessity of
studying Church history, for the Roman Church must be
shown to have departed from the primitive faith. Church
history, however, began, as was held by all parties, in the
earliest period. And until recent times a connected presen-
tation of Hebrew story was made the introductory portion of
the history of the Church. To a certain extent, therefore, a
corrective was applied to the atomizing method of the the-
ologians. But that the interest was not what we should call
historical is evident. An example is the "Impartial Church
History of Old and New Testaments from the Creation of the
World down to the Year 1730.'"' This work, published in
two thick quartos, divides the whole history of the world be-
tween Old and New Testaments, the Old Testament being
given 564 pages, the New Testament part covering all the rest
of the time.

The theological interest of such works is indicated by the
space allotted to the earliest ages, and the discussion of such
questions as whether Adam knew of the Trinity. Since all
three Persons took part in the creation, it was argued that
Adam must have had knowledge of them. Heidegger's His-
toria Sacra Patriarcharum devotes its first volume to the An-
tediluvians, and the second ends with the death of Jacob.
One chapter is devoted to the Church and Theology of the
Patriarchs, one to the polygamy of Lamech, another to the
theology and idolatry of the Cainites. These are cited simply

^ The title is taken from Von Coelln, Biblische Theologie (1836), p. 19,
where some other works of the same kind are mentioned.

^ Written by various authors but edited by Heinsius. Two supplementary
volumes brought the history down to 1760.

PROTEST AND REACTION 93

as specimens. One author published a history of the Noachian
Church; another gave a history of Paradise. A literary his-
tory of the antediluvian age was written by still another.^"
Much attention was given to recondite questions, such as the
date of the creation, whether the nineteenth or the twenty-
sixth of October. The Rabbis as we know had settled the
day to their satisfaction. Similarly: How long were Adam
and Eve in Paradise? Was Abel married? Did Enoch go
to heaven in his earthly body? Doubtless many of these
discussions took the place of modern doctors' dissertations,
and were simply tests of scholarship or of ingenuity. And
we must recognize that important contributions to Biblical
science were made by these students. Biblical geography,
Biblical natural science, and Biblical antiquities were made
to throw light on the sacred text, and some of the essays
in these departments are still valuable. But it remains true
of the professed expositors that they found in the text the
ideas that they brought with them. In the eighteenth century
a Swiss theologian put into an epigram the results of his obser-
vation, characterizing the Bible as the book in which each one'
sought and in which each one found his own dogmata.

1° Statements of Diestel, p. 461. Heidegger's Historia Patriarcharum
(1683) is the only one of the group that I have seen.

VII

ATTEMPT OF THE FEDERAL SCHOOL

IN THE multitude of theological parties which contended
with each other in the seventeenth century, it seems im-
possible to choose one as more important than another.
But the influence of what is known as the Federal School on
Protestant thought has been so marked that it deserves some
attention. We have seen that polemic was the order of the
day, the official teachers in each branch of the Church claim-
ing to have the true doctrine and branding the others as here-
tics. All parties appealed to Scripture, and all agreed in the
view that Scripture was a divinely given system of truth, a
philosophy which was substantially the same in the Old
Testament and in the New. No department of inquiry was
allowed to escape from the bonds of dogma, and even the
sciences which we should call secular were subordinate lo
the crown of the sciences, theology. Whether in fact a super-
natural revelation was necessary to establish the propositions
which were fundamental in any religious system was a ques-
tion which was raised later. For the period we now have in
mind so radical a departure as would be implied in the denial
of the fact of revelation had not appeared in the theological
world.

It is a recurrent phenomenon, however, in the history of
human thought that sharp polemic leads to examination of
the adversary's opinion, and usually to some concession.
Rigid orthodoxy confronting heterodoxy may give way to a
mediating school. Such a school arose in Holland, the coun-
try where there was the largest freedom of discussion. It
was in Holland that the Arminians attempted to modify the

94

ATTEMPT OF THE FEDERAL SCHOOL 95

rigid doctrine of Calvin concerning an absolute predestina-
tion, and it was here that Grotius approached the Old Testa-
ment from a more liberal point of view, arousing the wrath of
Calovius as we have seen. The merit of his work is that
it emphasized the historical element in the Bible by bringing
it^ affirmations into comparison with those of other literatures.
Among Dutch scholars of this period there were others who
contributed to the release of Old Testament science from the
bondage of dogma and prepared the way for an independent
Biblical scholarship.

The Federal School takes its name from the emphasis which
it laid on the idea of a covenant as the foundation of theolog-
ical theory. In a sense the idea of a covenant between God
and man was not new. It is found in the Bible and in fact
in early society the covenant relation forms the only social
bond except that of blood. It is not strange, therefore, that
the Israelites regarded the relation between themselves and
their divinity as the result of such a covenant as the one
which bound their separate clans together in the larger social
unit. The picturesque embodiment of this idea is the story
of the agreement with Abraham, in which the two parties,
God and the Patriarch, pass between the pieces of a slain
animal, thus invoking on themselves blood revenge if they
are unfaithful (Genesis xv). Later in the narrative we have
the more important agreement between Yahweh and Israel
at Sinai. In the mind of the narrator this was no doubt a
confirmation and renewal of the pledge made to the Fathers
of the nation. Jeremiah, or one of his disciples, believes that
a new and regenerated society will be based on a new cove-
nant, more spiritual and more effective than the old. Among
the Fathers of the Church we find that Irenaeus, at least, em-
phasized the idea, for he speaks of the covenants with Adam,
Noah, Moses, and Christ, or according to another text, with
Noah, Abraham. Moses and Christ.^

Apparently the idea was not followed up until Reformation
times, when we find it in Calvin, though his doctrine of elec-

^ Adversus Hoereses, III, xi, ii (edition of W. W. Han'ey, 1857).

96 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

tion did not allow him to extend the covenant to the whole
human race. In his mind the covenants became something
different from treaties or agreements between parties. They
were promises of grace on the part of the divinity who alone
has perfect freedom, promises fortified by sacraments, circum-
cision under the Old Testament, baptism under the New,
which were pledges for the fulfilment of the promise. In this
form they appealed to the Reformer, because they were spe-
cifically described in the Bible itself — the stories of Abra-
ham and Moses. Later, however, the covenant was carried
back to the beginning of human history. Olevian, a Swiss
theologian, developed the idea somewhat more fully in a work
published in 1585, strictly Calvinistic in that it emphasizes
the covenant with the elect.^ That the subject was in the air,
as we say, is indicated by another author, Eglin, whose work,
De Feeder e Gratice was published at Marbung in 1613.^ The
real founder of the school was Cocceius (Koch), professor at
Leyden from 1650 to 1669. His life came at a time when the
High Calvinists and the Remonstrants were carrying on their
debate. He had no wish to favor the liberal party, but rather
to give the orthodox a more rational basis for their interpreta-
tion of the Old Testament. To a very moderate extent he at-
tempted an historical interpretation by carrying the idea of the
covenant back to the beginnings of the race.

According to the narrative in Genesis, God gave a command
to the first man. This was now interpreted as a covenant, as
though the Creator had said: Obey the commandment, and
I on my part will give you eternal life. The disobedience which
followed was therefore a breach of the covenant, and a new
device must be found if men were to be saved. This was
the covenant of grace, primarily between God the Father
and His Son, according to which the Father pledged Himself

2 De Substantia Foederis Gratuiti inter Deum et Electos cited by Diestel,
p. 288. The only work of Olevian accessible to me is his Expositio Symboli
Apostolici, in qua summa Gratuiti Foederis ^terni inter Deum et Fideles trac-
tatur (Frankfurt, 1576).

3 Not accessible to me, but discussed by Diestel in the JahrbUcher fiir
deutsche Theologie, X, 214.

ATTEMPT OF THE FEDERAL SCHOOL 97

to redeem the elect because of the Son's self-sacrifice. In the
Old Testament this covenant is effective as well as in the New,
the only difference being that the Old Testament saints were
saved by hope in a coming Redeemer, Christians by faith in
one who has come. It is difficult to overestimate the influ-
ence which this theory has had on the Protestant Churches,
both in Germany and Great Britain. Evidence is given by
the Westminster Confession, in which the theory is dis-
tinctly set forth.

Criticism of the doctrine is easy. For one thing it reads
into the Biblical narrative what is not there. In the mind of
the narrator, the command to Adam is not conceived of as an
agreement between parties, but simply as an act of the divine
Ruler, who has a right to impose His will as He may choose.
Even the alleged covenant with Noah is so called only by
courtesy, for in form it is simply a promise, confirmed by a
sign given. No condition is imposed, and there is no promise
of a salvation to come. The covenant at Sinai indeed is for-
mally correct — it is an agreement between two parties, by
which Israel is pledged to do certain things, and in return
Yahweh will give the people possession of Canaan. But to
read into the account a promise of the Messianic time is to
abandon the literal interpretation, which is supposed by the
Protestant principle to be the only correct method of treating
the Scripture. At first sight therefore the alleged advance
made by this school seems to be an illusion. But that there
was some advance is made by the attitude of the orthodox
party which at first denounced Cocceius as a Judaizer and a
heretic. More clearly than had been done before he recog-
nized certain imperfections (defectus) in the Old Testament.
One of these is the promise of earthly prosperity given to the
Israelites, for this encouraged the desire for material goods.
The forgiveness of sins also is less complete under the Old
Covenant, and on this account Old Testament believers could
have less perfect assurance of salvation. Their spirit was one
of fear rather than the confidence of sonship. In this direc-
tion there was an approach to a more historical apprehension.

98 ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

Successive steps in the relations of God and men were discov-
ered— a rudimentary theory of evolution.

The idea thus broached was carried into more detail by
the disciples of the great theologian. The covenant of grace
was traced through three stages — that of the family in Abra-
ham, Isaac, and Jacob, that of the theocracy from Moses on-
ward through the history of Israel — and that of the universal
Church from the time of Christ. One scholar finds it possible
to divide each of the three periods into seven sections, and he
discovers a certain correspondence in the three sets. This is
of course over-refinement, but it remains true that the idea of
a Biblical theology distinct from dogmatics was brought to
view by these discussions. But that dogma still has much
to say is made evident by a work which we may call the cul-
mination of the Federal system. This is the Oeconomia
Foederum Dei cum Hominibiis of Witsius, first published in
1677, translated into English in 1771, in which language it
went through several editions. After an introductory dis-
course in which the author treats the nature of the divine
covenants in general he takes up the covenant of works and
describes the contracting parties, the condition of obedience,
the promises, the penal sanction and the sacraments. Of
these the Sabbath is the chief. He then narrates the violation
of the covenant on the part of man and its consequent abroga-
tion by God. The second book introduces the covenant of
grace, tracing it to the earliest age, and making the agree-
ment between Father and Son the basis of the doctrine of the
atonement. The third book is entitled: The Covenant of God
with the Elect, and includes the dogmatic loci of election, vo-
cation, justification, and sanctification. The fourth book
traces the historical development from the time of Adam to
Moses. The doctrine of the prophets is dismissed in few
words, on the ground that it has been treated elsewhere, but
so much the more space is given to the types.

Here we come upon what is really a recrudescence of scholas-
ticism. The allegorical method had been rejected, but the Old
Testament believers were dependent on the promises, and it

ATTEMPT OF THE FEDERAL SCHOOL 99

was necessary to find these promises in their Bible. Cocceius
set the example, and his contemporaries commended him be- /

cause he found Christ everywhere in the Old Testament,
whereas Grotius was accused of finding him nowhere. Where
direct predictions of the Messiah were not uttered, adumbra-
tions of him must be found. The resulting typology is not
as extravagant as the old allegory, but points in the same di-
rection. It is not true, as has sometimes been said, that Coc-
ceius affirmed every text of Scripture to mean all that it can
be made to mean, for he qualified his declaration by consid-
eration of the intention of the writer and the agreement of
the context. Yet to us the artificial nature of an exposition
which makes Adam and David types of Christ, the slain Abel
a type of Christ in his death, Enoch a type of Christ in his
exaltation, must be evident. The panegyric of Farrar, there-
fore, which says that "this theologian, almost for the first
time, developed the fruitful conception of the progressiveness
of revelation," cannot be taken at its full value. But it re-
mains true that when Cocceius' environment is considered
we must give him the credit of attempting to break away
from the bonds of dogma, or at least from the stereotyped
vocabulary of the dogmaticians.

Cocceius was a thorough Hebrew scholar, and his lexicon
was useful to several generations of students. His commen-
tary on the Psalms is accounted one of the best published
in the seventeenth century. In treating the Apocalypse he
was less happy, being influenced by the tradition which has
not yet died out and which sees in that book a prediction of
all future Christian history. His axiom that Scripture can
contain nothing unworthy of God, that is, nothing which the
expositor thinks unworthy of God, was the one universally
accepted in that period. Yet his influence in promoting sound
scholarship should be recognized. Among members of his
school Vitringa takes high rank in the estimation of Old Tes-
tament scholars even at the present day. Other names might
be mentioned to show the activity of the leaders of the Re-
formed Church of Holland in this period. One only should

lOO ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

have a little attention because of his opposition to one of
Cocceius' aberrations, even thus showing his influence. This
man is Balthazar Bekker, pastor first at Franeker and after-
wards at Amsterdam. He drew the unfavorable attention
of the theologians first by defending the right of teaching
when the attempt was made to prohibit the philosophy of
Descartes in the university of Franeker. The appearance of
a comet in the heavens in 1680 aroused men's fear of im-
pending disaster or of the end of the world. Bekker preached
against the superstition, and published the sermon. His at-
tention being thus turned to apocalyptic expectations, he pub-
lished also a commentary on the book of Daniel, in which he
controverted the view of Cocceius. Cocceius, although he
had a more historical view than the stricter Calvinists, showed
himself under the influence of tradition in his interpretation
of Daniel. He interpreted the vision of the four beasts as
a prediction of events that came after the advent of Christ.
Bekker saw that expectations of a miraculous intervention
of God led to neglect of genuine Christian living. Hence his
commentary, which at least discouraged these fanciful inter-
pretations.

Bekker's most important work, however, was his attack
on the belief in witchcraft. This was made in a book entitled
The Bewitched World. * Like the others, this originated in a
series of sermons. Some early pastoral experiences had con-
vinced him that the phenomena then attributed to demonic
influence were simply cases of disease, and this led him to
examine the Scripture passages which were adduced to con-
firm the popular belief. He soon came to the conclusion
that the alleged magicians of Babylon were powerless, and
the parallel account in Exodus fixed this belief more firmly
in mind. The resulting inquiry into the power of the devil
need not be reproduced here. The case is cited to show
that there was a growing appreciation of the nature of the
Old Testament, and something like an historical interpre-
tation. His conclusion, after examination of the Biblical evi-

* De Betovered Weereld (1691).

ATTEMPT OF THE FEDERAL SCHOOL loi

dence, was that the popular belief was not derived from the
Scriptures but from heathenism, because "those who have
least understanding of Scripture have the most of this super-
stition."

Like other men who are ahead of their time Bekker suffered
for his opinions. The ecclesiastical authorities took up his
case and not only deposed him from the ministry, but ex-
cluded him from the communion. That he was not a ration-
alist, but a thoroughly orthodox believer, was made evident
by the volume of his sermons on the faith of the Reformed
Church of the Free Netherlands which he published in 1696.
He was a man just enough ahead of his time to call forth
the odium theologicum, always more violent against inno-
vators within the Church than against unbelievers outside.
Grieved at the attitude of his brethren, he yet had the satis-
faction of seeing that he had advanced the cause he had at
heart. His work was translated into German, French, and
English, and contributed to a more healthy opinion through-
out Europe.

VIII
RISE OF A MORE HISTORICAL VIEW

H

ITHERTO we have followed the stream of orthodox
exposition, tempered at times by some slight appre-
hension of the historical process by which the Old
Testament came into being. Protestant and Catholic teachers
agreed in asserting that the Bible was wholly divine, in taking
its history for an exact statement of what went on in the
earliest ages, and in regarding it as the inerrant philosophy
which all Christian men must accept. But outside the Church
tradition, whether Catholic or Protestant, there were always
thinkers who refused to take this view. Among these we
may place the Socinians, whose antitrinitarian views were the
constant object of attack on the part of the orthodox. Since
the orthodox theory was that the expositor should come to the
Bible with his mind already firmly fixed on the main points
of the accepted creed, it is not strange that readers who had
doubts about the creed should take a view different from the
traditional one. We are here concerned only with the atti-
tude of the 'heretical' sect concerning the Old Testament. It
seems clear first of all that they did not reject the older rev-
elation. In fact Faustus Socinus published a defence of the
authority of Scripture avowedly in contradiction to some who
doubted. His main argument concerns the New Testament,
but he asserts that the Old Testament is to be accepted on
the authority of the New, and he denies that the Jews have
corrupted the text of their Bible.

While the Old Testament was thus ostensibly recognized,
it was placed in subordination to the New, in contrast to the
orthodox view which made both parties of the Bible teach
the same doctrine. A sound historical sense showed itself in

I02

RISE Of A MORE HISTORICAL FIEIV 103

the affirmation that the Old Testament does <not teach a fu-
ture hfe, that it emphasizes work-righteousness, that it laid
stress on worldly goods, and that it allowed polygamy. The
exhortation to love one's neighbor is there found, to be sure,
but the neighbor is the kinsman or fellow-Israelite. All this
might be best for Israel in its puerile state, but was done away
in Christ. Against the orthodox interpretation which saw in
the animal offerings of the Law a substitutionary propitia-
tion, it was urged that an animal could not be a substitute for
a man, and that the Law allowed sin-offerings only for un-
witting offences. Because of this really historical apprehen-
sion of the defects of the earlier revelation, it came about that
Socinian writers published no important commentaries on the
Old Testament. This is not to throw doubt on the religious
earnestness of the sect, for its members held firmly to the
belief that the Christian religion is the way to eternal life
shown by Jesus Christ. The affirmation has been made that
their system by insisting on the complete harmony of reason
and Scripture, set up a dogma which was scarcely less a hin-
drance to the understanding of Scripture than was the ortho-
dox claim that the whole Bible taught the same doctrine. But
this is an exaggeration, though the emphasis laid upon the
reason did, to a certain extent free exegesis from the chains
of dogmatic tradition.

The bitterness of the orthodox protest need not be dwelt
upon, but we have already had occasion to note that discus-
sion of an opponent's view often leads to some modification
of our own. Grotius has been mentioned as a scholar who
had a sounder view than many of his contemporaries. He
was assailed as a Socinian, and yet one of his books was an
argument against the Socinian position. This was on a doc-
trinal question and did not directly affect his Old Testament
work, though the closer examination of the Biblical text to
which he was led in the course of his discussion may have
helped to his more historical view. In fact the more his-
torical view was coming to the front even in the Roman
Church. It was in this communion that Jean Morin did his

104 I^SSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

work on the Old Testament text. It was as editor of the
Paris Polyglot that he discovered the differences between the
Masoretic recension of the Old Testament and the Samaritan
copy, and also between the Hebrew text and the versions. The
publication of his conclusions led to a sharp polemic which
cannot be described here, and it is no part of our task to de-
termine how far he was moved by a desire to discredit the
Protestant affirmation of the integrity of the Hebrew original
and thereby strengthen the Catholic appeal to tradition.

Of Richard Simon, who next took up the examination of the
text, we are certain, for he himself avows that he is seeking to
establish the Roman Catholic tradition. Nevertheless, his
Critical History of the Old Testament is rightly named one
of the epoch-making books in Biblical science.^ In the matter
of textual criticism he had a predecessor in Cappellus as well as
in Morin. Spinoza also had discussed questions of author-
ship. Simon treated the subjects as part of the literary his-
tory of the Hebrew Bible. In other words, he recognized the
important fact of compilation. His theory is that there was
a guild of scribes, first appointed by Moses, but continuing
throughout the history of Israel, and that they wrote down
what was important to be preserved. Moses was the author
of the laws which these men recorded, but they took the nar-
rative portions from other sources. During the exile the
material they had gathered fell into disorder, and members of
Ezra's synagogue rearranged it as best they could, but often
had imperfect copies on which to rely. The authority of the
books is saved, at least in appearance, by asserting that the
scribes who put the material into shape were inspired. In this
respect we see the influence of traditional views, but it re-
mains true that two facts of importance were clearly recog-
nized. One was the compilatory nature of the books, the
other was the nature of manuscript transmission, which sub-
jected the books to the same influences which we find in other
literature. Simon is said to have fortified his position by
adducing the Jesuits of Louvain, who had asserted that a

1 Histoire Critique du Vieux Testament (1678).

RISE OF A MORE HISTORICAL VIEW 105

verbal inspiration of the whole Old Testament need not be
assumed. It is evident that there was a tendency in various
quarters to take a more historical view.

This tendency was accelerated by discussion in the field of
philosophy. Descartes had opened a new view by his start-
ling proposition to begin his system with doubt. This was
precisely the opposite of the theological principle, and the
innovator was assailed on all sides. A little later one Lud-
wig Meyer published a work, Philosophia, Sacrae Scripturae
Interpres.' The author, who was a physician, maintained
that philosophy gives the certain and indubitable knowledge
of things, to which the theologians must pay heed in their
exegesis. The application was left to others, but the ten-
dency of the work must have been obvious. Perhaps it may
be worth while to mention here the essay of Isaac Peyrere
entitled PrcB-AdamitoB (1655), which maintained that there
were men before Adam. The book is a S3miptom of the spec-
ulation in which men were indulging in order to do justice to
the new knowledge of the world and history, and at the same
time to hold to the data of the Old Testament.

Into the field of Old Testament exposition now entered the
philosopher Spinoza with his Tractatus Theologico-politicus.^
As a Jew, the author was of course familiar with the Hebrew
Bible and with the Jewish commentators, and as a philosopher
he was free from the prejudgments of the dogmatic theo-
logians. His treatise was written primarily to defend the
right of free inquiry, something the ecclesiastical authorities
would have suppressed. The Jewish scholar Aben Ezra had
obscurely hinted that certain passages in the Pentateuch in-
dicate post-Mosaic authorship. Spinoza takes up the broader
question whether a connected history, like that which ex-
tends from Genesis through Second Kings, was not necessarily
the work of a man who lived in or after the exile. He con-

- The work which was published anonymously is rare, and I have not
seen a copy. See the sketch in Allgevieme Deutsche Biographk, Vol. XXI,

p. 60Qf.

3 Published anonymously in 1650, a little before the work of Simon and
Peyrere.

r

io6 ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

dudes that the only character known to us who could have
written the books is Ezra. He finds evidence of compilation
also in the two recensions of the Decalogue, and in the incon-
sistent chronological data. In accordance with his philo-
sophical principles he recognizes the inspiration of the Biblical
writers in so far as they inculcate right living, and the things
necessary to salvation. As soon as the authorship of this
work was known its influence was discounted, for Spinoza the
pantheist was abhorred both by Jews and by gentiles. The
unfavorable verdict of the Synod in 1671 was followed by
an interdict of the States General in 1674. In the long
run, however, Spinoza's method of approach must make an
impression.

It was in this same century that a beginning was made in
the comparative study of religion by the work of John Spencer
on the Hebrew laws.* Spencer was not a rationalist but a
loyal member of the Church of England. What led him to
his discussion was the resemblance between many institutions
of the Jewish Law on one hand, and rites practised in the so-
called heathen religions on the other. Even slight acquain-
tance with the religions of Egypt, Greece, and Rome, revealed
parallel phenomena. Inquiry into the reason of this could not
always be satisfied with the theory that other nations had
borrowed from Israel; the chronology was in the way, for
one thing. Nor was it altogether clear that Satan as the *ape
of God' had induced his followers to caricature the Law
divinely given. It was indeed possible for the simple be-
liever to rest in the faith that God had sufficient reasons for
His actions, reasons which He has not chosen to reveal. It
might even be thought an impertinence to ask for any reason
except that the command was given. Timid souls have taken
refuge in such a faith whenever the demand has been made
for a rational faith. So it was in medieval Judaism when
Maimonides attempted to discover reasons for the Law. He
was sharply attacked by those who would adhere to the old

* De Legibus Hebroeorum Ritualibus, first published in 1685. I use the
second edition published at The Hague, 1686.

RISE OF A MORE HISTORICAL VIEW 107

paths witJiout intruding into the mysteries which the letter of
Scripture did not discuss.

But there was now a new spirit in the air. The philosophers
were demanding that the rights of the human reason should be
respected. Spencer found that the apparent unreason of some
of the laws was a stumbling block to Christians, even as it
had led some Jews to renounce their religion and become Mus-
lims. In a sense the questions raised had already confronted
the early Fathers, on whom the task had fallen to defend the
Old Testament revelation while condemning the heathenism
which in some respects was so like it. Their refuge was the
allegorical interpretation, but this was now discredited, and
a new attempt must be made. Spencer asks us to put our-
selves in the place of the Israelites just emerging from Egypt,
and then see why they needed just such laws as were actually
given. The reason is two-fold. First, they must be weaned
from idolatry by prohibitions of customs which they had
adopted from their gentile neighbors; but since they were not
advanced enough to understand a purely spiritual religion
they must be allowed, in the second place, to retain some
things to which they were attached, lest the break with the
past should be too severe for them to undertake. It is un-
necessary, therefore, says Spencer, to resort to excessive
allegorizing in order to defend the laws, especially since the
Biblical text itself gives no ground for such treatment. Sym-
bols and types indeed we must allow, since these are found in
all religions, and were especially agreeable to people ac-
quainted with Egyptian thought; and this is the more prob-
able since the revelation given to Moses must be expressed in
forms of speech familiar to him.

The author is not always clear in his division between the
prohibited rites and those which, because the people were
attached to them, were still allowed, but he does bring for-
ward a number of resemblances which the comparative study
of religion has confirmed.^ Thus: pollution by contact with
the dead, or with the mother of a new-born child, is certified in
many quarters of the globe, and the Israelites sharing this

io8 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

belief, had provision made for it in their system. Perhaps
it was not for this reason alone, for all the laws of clean and
unclean were intended to make access to the sanctuary more
difficult, and so to enhance the reverence in which the sacred
place was held. For this reason purifications before an act
of worship were enjoined or practised among many nations,
Greeks and Romans, for example, as well as Egyptians.
Again, animal sacrifice was the accepted mode of worship and
was continued as a concession to the rudeness of the people.
Jacob's unction of a sacred stone has its parallels outside
of Palestine. Firstfruits were offered to Jehovah by Israelites,
as they were to Isis by the Egyptians, to Demeter and Ceres
by Greeks and Romans. The joyous festivals of the gentiles,
accompanied by sacrificial meals, were likely to seduce the
people from their allegiance to their own God, unless similar
attractions were offered them in their own religion. The
scope of all these institutions, therefore, is to wean the people
from idolatry. Circumcision they already regarded as a charm
or talisman defending men from the demons. They were
allowed to continue it, only having a new interpretation placed
upon it, by which it became the sign of the covenant with
their God, who was thus in fact certified as their protector.

Further similarities were easily found. The high-places at
which the Israelites worshipped remind us of the mountain
shrines of Greece. Linen garments prescribed for the priests
were the same that were required also in Egypt. The ton-
sure of the Nazirite is in line with gentile custom. The Ark of
the Covenant is similar to the sacred chests which we find
in use in Egj^t, in the Eleusinian mysteries also, and among
Etruscans and Phoenicians. The sacredness of the Ark was
fatal to Uzzah; not unlike was the experience of Eurypylus,
who was made insane by looking into the chest which con-
tained the image of Dionysus. Even the temple was a con-
cession to the rudeness of the people. Why should God, or
an angel bearing His name, inhabit a temple made with
hands unless to accommodate Himself to the mood of a peurile
and unbelieving people, a people who demanded a God near

RISE OF A MORE HISTORICAL VIEW 109

at hand and present to their prayers in a sensible manner?
The Cherubim with their animal faces are quite like the lions
on which the Syrian Goddess (Hera according to Lucian) was
seated, or like the bulls of Zeus. The Urim and Thummin
were instruments of the oracle, such as we find elsewhere, and
the ordeal of jealousy, commanded in Numbers v, was a cus-
tom long in use among the gentiles, one which God conceded
to Israel lest any miracle or privilege known to other nations
should seem to be lacking to His people. The promises of
temporal rewards for obedience were adapted to a nation just
out of Egypt, as we see in their demand for onions and garlic,
whose custom was to pray to various gods for temporal bless-
ings, especially for rain and fruitful seasons.

This formidable array of parallels was adduced to show
what God in His condescension allowed the people to retain.^
On the other hand many apparently unimportant regulations
can be explained as due to the desire to separate the people
from their old idolatry. Swine were unclean to the Israelite
because they were sacred among the Syrians. Similar pro-
hibitions in other religions are due to the sacredness, taboo, of
the animals — ram and cow in Egypt, fish in Syria, doves
among the Phoenicians, hare and fowl among the early Britons.
The lamb was chosen for the Passover sacrifice just because
the ram was worshipped by the Egyptians; and the prohibi-
tion of boiling the sacrifice was distinctly contradictory to
heathen custom. The command not to boil a kid in its mother's
milk was given because the Sabeans thus treated a kid in one
of their magical rites. The sacrifice of a red cow was en-
joined to emphasize Israelite opposition to Egyptian cow-
worship. Mixture of seeds, plowing with ox and ass yoked
together, interchange of garments by men and women, shaving
the head in time of mourning, were forbidden because these
things were done in heathendom. The golden calf, borrowed
from Egypt, was made an object lesson to teach God's ab-
horrence of idolatry.

5 On a similar theory of condescension held by the Fathers see an article
by Pinard in the Reckerches de Science Religieuse, Vol. IX, p. i97ff.

no £SSArS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

While not all Spencer's affirmations bear the test of time,
the majority of them are still regarded as valid evidence of
resemblance between Israel's religion and that found else-
where. Acute as were many of his observations, they were
not, in his mind, material for what we now call the compara-
tive study of religions. His purpose was to defend the ration-
ality of the divine legislation in matters which some of his
contemporaries were affirming to be absurd. Yet when all
is said, his performance is a remarkable one. It was so re-
garded by the theologians, several of whom undertook to con-
vict him of infidelity. The relation of revelation to reason
was in fact coming into discussion as we shall see.

What we have discovered concerning the seventeenth cen-
tury is that, although orthodox scholasticism in the most
stringent terms affirmed that the Old Testament is the direct
work of God, who employed the human authors as his pens,
yet in many quarters questions were raised about the human
element in Scripture. The Mosaic authorship of the Penta-
teuch was questioned by Spinoza, and something like a liter-
ary history of the Old Testament books was attempted by
Simon. The next step in advance came considerably later,
when As true published his Conjectures.'^ Astruc, Hke Simon,
was a Roman Catholic, but he seems to have no thought of
the controversy about tradition and Scripture which so
affected the work of his predecessor. In fact, as his title in-
dicates, he was interested in defending the Mosaic author-
ship of the Pentateuch. What had impressed him was that
Moses could not have had personal knowledge of what went
on before his birth, and it is unnecessary to suppose that
everything he wrote came to him by direct revelation. The
conclusion is that he drew upon tradition or upon written
sources, and the evidence that it was the latter seemed clear.
It was in finding this clue that Astruc showed his originality.
He was apparently the first to notice the difference between
the divine names used in different strata of the narrative, and

* Conjectures sur les Memoires Originaux dont il paroit que Moyse s'est
servi pour composer le Livre de la Genese (a Bruxelles, 17S3).

RISE OF A MORE HISTORICAL VIEW in

he thus gave an impetus to the documentary analysis which
has been used by the critics ever since, and which, in spite of
many attempts to discredit it, is still valid. In the Conjec-
tures he separated the sources and discovered that two sub-
stantially complete narratives have been combined by a
redactor whom of course he supposed to be Moses. He as-
sumed indeed more than two sources, but the one thing which
came sharply to view in his analysis was the difference be-
tween Jehovist and Elohist. Since he carried his analysis only
through the book of Genesis and the early chapters of Exodus,
it seems that he was willing to concede that Moses wrote the
rest of the five books, but his successors soon discovered that
the process of distinguishing the documents could be extended
much farther. But without exaggeration, Astruc may be
called the founder of modern Biblical criticism.

IX

THE INFLUENCE OF PIETISM

IT IS impossible to follow a strictly chronological order in
writing a history of Biblical interpretation. Many and
various forces were at work in the period we have been
reviewing, and we have not by any means exhausted the list.
Spencer was not the only man to call attention to the parallels
between the religion of Israel and the religions of other na-
tions. Voss, with his elaborate discussion of the origin of
idolatry, showed that attention was given to the subject, and
later Alexander Ross issued his Pansebeia. The connection
of sacred and profane history was treated by Shuckford, who
was able to carry his work only down to the time of Moses, and
Prideaux, a more profound scholar, published a work with
the same title for the later period. One can form some idea
of the number of discussions of Biblical questions by exam-
ining the great Thesaurus of Ugolino.^ The interest of the
orthodox continued to be in such questions as the faith of the
antediluvians. The religion of Adam was proved to be the
pure doctrine of the Lutheran Church, though in eating the
forbidden fruit he broke all the commandments at once.
Cain, on the other hand, was shown up as a hypocrite, and all
his descendants were stigmatized as atheists. We can hardly
wonder that a reaction against discussions of this kind set in.
There are pessimists in all ages, and the complaint that
piety is at a low ebb occurs in the seventeenth century as else-
where. There was perhaps more basis for it then, since the
thirty years' war was followed by general depression. The
testimony is that the professors of Biblical literature were in-
different to their work, and that the students did not attend

1 Thesaurus Antiquitatum Sacrarum, 34 volumes folio (1744-69).

THE INFLUENCE OF PIETISM 113

such lectures as were given. New interest was aroused by
the movement known as Pietism, which sought to revive the
religion of the people as distinct from mere dogmatic cor-
rectness. It is not necessary to suppose that vital piety had
been altogether lacking. Where the Ten Commandments and
the Lord's Prayer were taught to the people, there must have
been some genuine Christianity. But in the universities at
least, it was a minus quantity. A change was brought about
largely through the influence of Spener, a genuinely religious
nature, whose Pia Desideria was published in 1675. That his
emphasis on heart-religion was not something new is evident.
Luther was a man of religion rather than a man of theology,
and Arndt's Wahres Christentum, published in 1606, on which
Spener delighted to dwell in his youth, was a real book of
devotion. We are told also that Baxter's works were much
read in Germany in this period, and they, too, are mentioned
among those by which Spener was influenced. Such books
instead of insisting upon a theological theory of Christ's na-
ture, and the precise effect of his death in propitiating an
angry God, dwell rather on the mystical union of the believer
with the Saviour, and the consequent life of Christ in the
soul. The question of the means by which this life in the
soul is kindled is answered by the mystics in different ways,
some depreciating all outward means. But Spener was clear
that the Bible is the true instrument, in God's hands, of
effecting this work. This it does by stimulating the emotion
which leads to right conduct, for the test of true Christianity
is Christian living. Hence the prime requirement is that the
knowledge of the Bible be widely diffused among the people.
To this end the training of the clergy must include the stim-
ulation of personal piety, and acquaintance with books of
edification.

To carry out his ideas Spener, now pastor in Frankfort,
organized private assemblies, at first in his own house, after-
wards, when the attendance increased, in the church, similar
to what we know as prayer meetings. The purpose of these
Collegia Pietatis was that believers might provoke each other

114 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

to love and good works, for it is the duty of all Christians, not
of the clergy alone, to instruct others in the Christian life so
far as they have opportunity. Opposition to these 'conven-
ticles' soon developed among the ministers, who felt that these
irregular assemblies were an intrusion into their own sphere.
In some cases they were prohibited by the civil authorities. In
the universities the intimation that the orthodox professors
were not doing their full duty was of course resented, and
at Leipzig, where Spener was in 1689, the opposition became
open conflict. At Halle, however, the faculty was in sym-
pathy with the new movement, the leading member being
A. H. Francke. Here were organized the Collegia Biblica,
the purpose of which was to give an edifying interpretation
of the Bible as a whole. "An unprecedented zeal to read the
Bible in the original was kindled by their exertions, which in
combination with practical piety did much to break the dog-
matic spell." - The method was to translate a passage, give
a simple explanation of the sense, and add practical applica-
tions. The method was not altogether new, but when taken up
with earnestness by men with the requisite gift it gained in
importance.

This is not the place to give further details of the general
movement. What interests us is the fact that a new impulse
was given to the study of the whole Bible, not primarily as
a textbook for dogma, but as the expression of the religious
life. The aim of the leaders may be illustrated by a little
book published by Francke and afterwards translated into
English where it bears the title Guide to the Reading and
Study of the Holy Scriptures.^ This work was commended by
the well-known Dr. Doddridge as containing the best rules
for studying the Scriptures that he had ever seen. It be-
gins by urging that the Bible be read in the original, and the
author thinks that a sufficient knowledge of both Greek and
Hebrew can be acquired in a short time. What he has at

' Diestel, p. 409.

3 Manuductio ad Lectionem Scripturm Sacrcp (1700)- I know only the
English translation (American edition, Philadelphia, 1828).

THE INFLUENCE OF PIETISM 115

heart is that the student should read the whole Bible through,
and do this at frequent intervals. Evidently he is deprecating
the method of the dogmatic theologians who deal with isolated
proof -texts and neglect the scope and connection of the verses.
Compendiums and manuals, he says, may respectively possess
merit; but they must never preclude the learner from the
Scriptures, which should constitute the main object of his
attention. Many have erred greatly on this point, and after
consuming their time over compendiums, their advancement
has been considerably impeded, and they have frequently
been prevented from studying the whole of the sacred writ-
ings. Elsewhere he warns against depending on the com-
mentaries, though he recommends the judicious use of some J
that he names. He quotes with approval the saying of Chem-
nitz: "Let the Scriptures explain themselves, and let their--
genuine force and native emphasis be carefully collected from
the grammatical significance of the words, in order that the
sacred testimonies may carry with them their full weight."

It is evident that the author is no rationalist, and the same
is true of the immediate circle to which he belonged. He
assumes that the Bible is all divine and that its sense is one.
He nowhere intimates that there is any difference between
Old Testament and New. His doctrine of inspiration would
seem to be of the most rigid type, and he expressly asserts in
one of his treatises that Christ is the nucleus of the whole
Scripture. In these respects it seems almost absurd to sup-
pose that Pietism had any influence on the interpretation of
the Bible. Such influence it had nevertheless, for it called
attention anew to the fact that the Bible is a book of religion,
rather than a book of theology. This comes out in the dis-
cussion of this very question of inspiration. Francke says:
"There are persons perhaps who think the Holy Spirit is
wronged when we attribute to the sacred writers affections
which are in reality the fruit of His influence, and who think
that the Scriptures are not to be referred to these holy men,
but to the Holy Ghost who spoke by them. To this we answer
that the fact of their being divinely inspired so far from

ii6 ESSATS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

militating against our position tends itself to convince us that
the Holy Spirit kindled sacred affections in the writers' souls.
For it is absurd to suppose that in penning the Scriptures
they regarded themselves in the light of mere machines, or
that they wrote without any feeling or perception that which
we read with so great a degree of both." The meaning of
the passage is plain — the Bible is the fruit of religious ex-
perience, not of a mechanical dictation, and the religious
experience is not an intellectual apprehension of certain alleged
truths, but a movement of the heart toward God and our fel-
low men. But an emotional experience is understood only
by the man who has its like. In this respect the Pietists were
right in declaring that they were reviving the religion of
Luther. The deductions they made, however, were put more
distinctly than in the earlier time. Taking the Apostle's dec-
laration that the natural man receives not the things of the
spirit because they are spiritually discerned, and giving it its
face value, thesfi-authors^ affirmed -Ihat, only the regenerate^
really understand the Bible. -The possibility of erratic and
extravagant exegesis was not slow to reveal itself.
"~Francke lays emphasis on the New Testament rather than
the Old. His view of the prophets is that they were primarily
predicters — the historical books describe what is past, the
prophetical describe what is yet to come. The analogy of faith
is emphasized, the agreement and harmony of the divine
oracles taken for granted. Where it is not easy to discover
the direct bearing of a passage upon the Christian life the
reader is advised to pass it over until he attains greater pro-
ficiency in spiritual wisdom. The jtemptatipntq force an

edifying meaning out of or into all parts of Scripture must
come inevitably, and the door must be opened to allegory
and typology. In emphasizing the analogy of faith, however,
Francke was in line with the Reformers and with accepted
Protestant doctrine. Spener, as has been said, was no ration-
alist, and his first dissertation was a refutation of Hobbes.
It was blind prejudice which moved his orthodox opponents
to set forth 264 doctrinal errors discoverable in his writings.

THE INFLUENCE OF PIETISM 117

The undue emphasis laid upon the apocalyptic books by some
of his followers is not peculiar to this school, but recurs in
every period of history. When all is said we must recognize
that the movement gave a healthy impetus to Biblical study.
The Puritan party in England presents a phenomenon not
unlike the rise of the Pietists in Germany. But as their
activity is largely political, we need not attempt to write their
history over again. We are more interested in the opposite
tendency, which showed itself in this period. We have seen
that the orthodox theory regarded the Bible as a divinely
revealed system of philosophy. Since the Author of the Book
is also the Author of nature, it was necessary to affirm that
the truth revealed in the Bible is one with the truth revealed
by a study of nature. Whether in fact they are one began
to be questioned as physical science advanced and changed
men's view of the universe. At the same time the broadening
knowledge of the world of men raised the inquiry whether
the Divinity had revealed His philosophy only to the insignifi-
cant people of Israel. Spencer's hypothesis concerning the re-
semblances between the institutions of Israel and those of the
heathen could not satisfy all minds. Lord Herbert of Cher-
bury doubted the damnation of the heathen, and Hobbes ques-
tioned the Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch. Confidence in
the data of reason led to the rejection of allegory and typology,
and the plain and literal meaning of the Old Testament
revealed shortcomings which were regarded with disdain by
the enlightened thinkers of a more advanced age. The
reasonableness of Christianity as set f orth m the New Testa-
ment was indeed conceded. Tindal expressed his conviction
in the title of his work: Christianity as old as the Creation or
the Gospel a Republication of the Religion of Nature. It
is easy to show that just as in the older discussion the Bible
was interpreted by the dogmatic system to which the exposi-
tor had given his allegiance, so now it was judged by an alleged
religion of nature, a dogma like the others. On the other
hand, the view of the identity of the revelation in the Old
Testament and that in the New was shattered, and the de-

ii8 ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

fenders of tradition were compelled to make some concessions.
Evidence is given by Warburton's well known work, The
Divine Legation of Moses, which defends the inspiration of
the Lawgiver precisely on the ground that he did not teach
the doctrine of a future life.

Lord Herbert had formulated the creed of the religion of
nature under five heads: That there is a God; that He ought
to be worshipped; that virtue and piety are essential to wor-
ship; that a man ought to repent of his sins; and that there
are rewards and punishments in a future life. These beliefs
he supposed to be innate in every human being, and to be the
basis common to all religions. What was more than these,
was the addition of designing priests. The debate with the
defenders of revelation does not concern us here. All that
we care to notice is that the Old Testament bore the brunt
of the attack, and thus negatively the way was prepared for
a more historical view. In Germany the Wolfenbilttel Frag-
ments affirmed the impossibility of the narrative in Exodus,
and here also the religion of nature had its advocates.

We seem to have got away from the subject of Pietism,
Yet the influence of this movement in emphasizing the need
of studying the Scriptures for edification rather than for
dogma is in evidence throughout this period. Semler, who has
been called the father of German rationalism, was of pietistic
training, and in fact a truly religious man. He had expe-
rienced in himself the edifying effect of reading the Bible,
but being of an inquiring mind, he observed in his experience
that not all parts of the Book are of equal power. It was
natural to ask, and he did ask, why these books were all in-
cluded in the collection marked off as sacred. In answer he
published his essay on the free investigation of the Canon, in
which he showed that the process by which the collection
called the Old Testament was made must be investigated by
the historical method. His later works indicate a broad mind,
since he is not unwilling to concede the merits of Simon,
Grotius, and Cappellus. In the application of the historical
method he undertook an examination of the alleged prooftexts

THE INFLUENCE OF PIETISM 119

from the Old Testament, tliose which were adduced to sup-
port the doctrine of the Trinity. This was destructive criti-
cism in the eyes of the dogmatic theologians, and even the
pietists must have been distressed by it, but it prepared the
way still further for a really historical view.

Our discussion will not be complete unless we notice that
the movement known as Pietism has not yet spent itself.
Count Zinzendorf was under Spener's influence, and his Mo-
ravian Brotherhood carried Pietistic ideas into practice. The
Moravians in their turn gave an impulse to John and Charles
Wesley, so that the Evangelical revival in England might
truthfully be called a Pietistic movement. Not only were the
Methodists affected, but other Churches felt the influence.
In all denominations the Bible is read for edification. What
finds the reader is assimilated as spiritual nourishment,
whether in the New Testament (which, however, is really
normative) or in the Old. The Psalms and portions of the
prophetical books are most highly valued, though the legal
sections are made profitable by typological interpretation.
The organization of great Bible Societies to circulate the Word
of God "without note or comment" may be called a result of
Pietism. Other influences are at work, however, and we
must give them also some attention.

X

ENDEAVORS AFTER A BIBLICAL THEOLOGY

IN THE year 1787 Johann Philip Gabler entered on his
work as professor at Altdorf with an oration on The Right
Distinction between Biblical and Dogmatic Theology,
and of defining the limits of each} This address was the
clearest enunciation that had yet been made of what men
had been approaching — the idea of a distinct science of Bib-
lical Theology. The way had been prepared by the critical
work which had preceded. The name Biblical Theology was
suggested by the Pietists. They, as we have seen, laid empha-
sis on the reading of the Bible as the source of edification, and
distrusted the "dead orthodoxy" which they too often found in
the professors at the universities. Since the Bible was pro-
fessedly the source of doctrine for all Protestants, every sys-
tem of Protestant theology might claim to be Biblical. The
trouble was that so many systems, often at war with each
other, had resulted from study professedly based on the Bible.
The Pietists, by insisting on the Word of God without philo-
sophical admixture, suggested the idea that there was such a
Biblical theology as might claim the allegiance of all believers.
Gabler, however, was not a Pietist, and he looked with dis-
trust on the claim of that sect to have superior enlightenment.
He was a moderate rationalist and believed fully in the scien-
tific study of the Scriptures. He was a pupil of Griesbach in
the New Testament and of Eichorn in the Old, and accepted
Scripture and reason as coordinate sources of the same divine
revelation. What he insists on in his oration is that Dog-

^ De justo discrtmine theologice biblicce et dogmaticm, regundisque recte
utriusque finibus, published in the collection of his minor theological works
(1831), Vol. II.

120

ENDEAVORS AFTER BIBLICAL Til EG LOG T 121

matics should ascertain the universal truths contained in the
Bible, arranging them and putting them on a philosophic
basis. On the other hand, Biblical Theology must aim to
discover the religious ideas contained in the Bible in their
original form with all their local and individual characteristics.
To this end the chronological order must be rightly observed
so that the successive stages may stand out clearly. This is an
intimation that there was something like development in
revelation.

It is evident that Gabler had advanced a long way from the
time when men could discover Adam to have been a thor-
oughly orthodox believer of the Lutheran or the Reformed
type. The human element in Scripture was coming to its
own, and the intellectual effort, both of Pietists and of Ra-
tionalists, was bearing fruit. Among the influences to which
Gabler had been subjected, we should also count Herder and
his esthetic evaluation of the Old Testament. For the eigh-
teenth century discovered that the resources of the Bible were
not exhausted by Pietism, nor yet by either the old orthodoxy
or the new rationalism. Herder as a theological student had
made the acquaintance of the systems of both parties, Ration-
alists and Pietists, but as a man of letters, he found little satis-
faction in their treatment of their text. This he shows in his
first important work, entitled The Oldest Document of the
Human Race.^ In this book he takes up the account of the
creation as recorded in the first chapter of Genesis, and pays
his respects to the theologians in this fashion: "From the
time of Descartes, Kepler, and Newton, every philosopher has
felt it necessary to make a new world, and every philosopho-
theologian has made Moses a teacher of this new teaching, a
childlike, anxious-to-learn boy in the school of all sorts of
metaphysics and recent science." He goes on to show how
the brief text of Genesis appears as a little island floating in
a deluge of notes, explanations, and expositions, so that the
text is lost to view and to understanding. To understand
this outburst we must recall to mind that the reconciliation of

2 Aelteste Urkunde des Menschengeschlechts, 1774.

122 ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

the Bible and astronomy was at that time much what the
reconciliation of the Bible and geology was in the middle of
the nineteenth century and later. It reads like the modern
affirmation that the Bible is not a text-book of natural sci-
ence when our author, indignant at all the hypotheses for
which Moses is made responsible by the commentators, says:
"Moses makes no claim to be a physicist or metaphysician of
the eighteenth century. "In the beginning God created" —
Moses has no need to speculate on beginnings, on creation out
of nothing. He turns his back on all such speculations and
yet men insist on hanging them on his words. And if he can
go his way without the help of the metaphysicians why may
not they go their way without his? Let them discover what
they can and make it known. God's way may be different,
as in fact it is. His revelation presents us with a picture in
the language of humanity, a picture such as every human
being can understand. His ways are different from our ways;
may it not be that His ways are higher than ours?"

Recent exposition has emphasized the literary study of the
Bible. The point of view is, however, as old as Herder, and
in fact older, for he had a predecessor in Lowth who in 1753
published his lectures on the Sacred Poetry of the Hebrews.
The importance of this work is that it treated the Hebrew
poetry as poetry, examining it by the standards applied to
other poetry, especially that of the Greek and Latin classics.
This book was republished in Germany and undoubtedly in-
fluenced Herder's next work, that on the Spirit of the Hebrew
Poetry. In this book, which was intended for intelligent lay-
men as well as for clergymen, the author endeavors to set
forth the real beauty of the Old Testament books, especially
the Psalms and Job. It is a succession of dialogues in which
one of the interlocutors is a young man who has been com-
pelled to study Hebrew in the dry grammatical method then
in vogue in the class-room, and has been disgusted with what
he calls its barbarity. The other character represents Herder's
own view, leads his friend to look with unprejudiced view
on these monuments of ancient thought, and reveals to him

ENDEAFORS AFTER BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 123

unsuspected beauties. The scornful criticism of the imperfec-
tions of the Bible in which the older rationalism had indulged
was thus counteracted and at least it was shown that the Book
was not negligible.

In some of his later works Herder lays more stress on the
organic nature of Biblical thought, that is, the idea of
progressive revelation was coming to the front. Evi-
dence is the brief but important essay of Lessing entitled
The Education of the Human Race. Account is here taken
of the rudimentary condition of a nation of slaves escaping
from Egypt, where, if there was any spiritual religion, it was
hidden from the common people. To such a people God must
reveal Himself gradually, giving them only what they were
able to comprehend. Warburton's theory, that the silence of
Moses concerning a future life was a proof of divine wisdom
rather than an objection to the revelation, is here taken up.
The claim of the rationalist was recognized in the assertion
that revelation only gave men that which they could discover
by reason, but the author held that it gave the ideas sooner
than they would otherwise be apprehended. The view of
revelation as progressive was taken up again by Herder in
his Letters on the Study of Theology,^ addressed to students.
He begins here by saying that the best study for the theolo-
gians is the study of the Bible, and he insists that the Bible
must be studied as a human book. Especially in the use of
the so-called prooftexts, one must always be careful to get
the words in their connection, and must understand the
author from his own time and circumstances. As he puts it
elsewhere: The Bible is an oriental book; to understand it we
must leave the stuffy room of the German student and walk
out into the clear air of the East, and look at the picture as it
here reveals itself. There we do not reason out the nature
of God; we feel His presence near us and are glad.

One who follows the course of Biblical science during this
period must see that men were feeling their way to a more
adequate treatment of the Hebrew literature. The very va-

3 Brief e das Studittm der Theologie Betreffend (1780).

124 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

riety of treatises which were pubHshed — discordant and hos-
tile to each other as they often were — shows that no one
treatment exhausted the richness of the material. The Bible
is the source of doctrine to the theologian, of edification to
the believer, of history to the student of human affairs, of
inspiration and enjoyment to the literary man. To the pro-
fessed interpreters of the text, that is, to the teachers of
theology, this variety of view was confusing. The inquiry
forced itself upon the attention: What after all is the essential
thing in the Book, the secret of its power? The endeavor to
answer this question led to the development of the distinct
study which Gabler had so well defined in his address already
mentioned, that is. Biblical Theology. Some time before
Gabler's attempt a book under this title had been published
by Zachariae, one now forgotten, but which in its time went
through at least three editions.* The author realizes that his
title may surprise some of his readers, the term Biblical The-
ology being interpreted as though it insinuated that other
theologians were unbiblical. He goes on to explain that at
first he thought only of publishing an exposition of the dicta
probantia. But the plan had grown under his hand, chiefly
because his experience in lecturing on the Bible had shown him
that often the meaning of a word or passage was not that
which theology had attached to it. The Hebrew way of think-
ing and speaking, he goes on to say, is so different from ours
that we often have difficulty in apprehending the exact sense
of an author, and even in the New Testament Hebrew forms
of thought are often discoverable, and the authors being Jews,
the same reasoning will apply to them as to the writers of the
Old Testament. The ideas, therefore, which we from our child-
hood have been accustomed to attach to the words of Scrip-
ture, need to be revised in the light of Scripture itself, inter-
preted by the best Hebrew scholarship. Self-evident as these
considerations may seem to us, they were in fact the attempt
to take the new point of view. What the author is proposing

* Biblische Theologie, oder Untersuchung des Biblischen Grundes der
Vornehmsten Theologischen Lehren (i775)- '■

ENDEAVORS AFTER BIBLICAL THEOLOGT 125

is a re-examination of the whole BibHcal basis of dogmatic
theology, with the desire to learn what the Bible itself teaches;
for as Christians, we are obliged to accept what the Bible
teaches. He even adds that as a teacher in the Lutheran
Church he must keep within the bounds set by the creeds of
the Church. He has not therefore escaped from the bonds of
dogma, and to this extent cannot be said to have attained a
really historical point of view. His definition shows this
plainly enough: "By a Biblical Theology I mean an exact
definition of all theological doctrines with the formulae
(Lehrsatzen) belonging to them, and the correct understand-
ing of these formulae according to their proofs in Holy Scrip-
ture." At the same time, however, he admits that each Bibli-
cal book has its particular aim, different from that of other
books, and that this aim is directed primarily at the state of
things existing when the book was written. This he qualifies
by saying that the divine aim in giving the whole Scripture
does not interfere with the particular design of the human
author. In his carrying out of his plan he further shows his
limitations by mingling texts from both parts of the Bible,
so that we may agree with one of his critics who says that he
has no idea of historical development. His attempt is one of
those endeavors of which we have so many in the history of
our science, which concede something to the new views while
holding on to as much as possible of the old. In fact down
to more recent times the dogmatic theologians have thought
of Biblical Theology as the science which puts into systematic
form the results of Biblical study, and then presents them to
the other and higher science, /'. e., Dogmatics.

It is unnecessary to describe the various treatises which
came from the press under the title of Biblical theologies dur-
ing the period now under review. The most of them appeared
in Germany because Germany had a large number of uni-
versities, each with its faculty of theology, because Germany
encouraged research in its professors, and because in Germany
there was freedom of teaching. One book may be mentioned,
however, on account of the eminence of its author. This is

126 ESSATS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

De Wette's Biblical Dogmatics,^ first published in 1813. It
is perhaps significant that the book is dedicated to Schleier-
macher, and no less so that it begins with a discussion of the
nature of religion. The traditional orthodoxy, as we have
seen, was wholly possessed by the idea that all the statements
of the Bible were intended to give divine sanction to certain
creed statements, and on the other hand the current rational-
ism stigmatized as fraud, or as wholly unworthy of God, every-
thing in the Bible which did not agree with an alleged system
of reason. De Wette, who was a competent Hebrew scholar,
saw that both parties do wrong to the Bible. The Bible is a
book of religion, and religion is more than a creed and differ-
ent from a metaphysic. This point of view had already been
taken by Herder, but is now more distinctly formulated.
Three distinct stages of Biblical religion are named — Hebra-
ism, Judaism and early Christianity. Considering the state
of criticism in De Wette's time it is not strange that he retains
the idea of Moses as founder of the theocracy, though he sees
that we have no really historical documents from the Mosaic
age. He thinks of Samuel as the restorer of the theocracy, a
theory which it is now easy to criticize. But when all is said,
his work has an honorable place in the history of Old Testa-
ment science.

One other work may be mentioned here because of its clear
enunciation of the proper method of study. This is the Bibli-
cal Theology of von Colin, pubhshed in 1836. This author
demands: First, careful distinction of the periods and of the
sources, and separation of direct and indirect testimony; sec-
ondly, strict adherence to the view and conception of the
several writers; thirdly, recognition of the symbolical and
mythical forms in which the ideas are clothed, and their
relation to the pure ideas as well as to the teacher's own con-
victions; fourthly, explanation of the relation between the
teachings and the outward circumstances of the people at the
various epochs ; lastly, the tracing of the origin of the ideas in

'■ Bibliscke Dogmatik alien und neuen Testaments, oder kritische Darstel-
lunf, der Religionslehren des Hebraismus, des Judentums und Urchristentutns.

ENDEAVORS AFTER BIBLICAL THEOLOGT 127

the very earliest sources. We can find little fault with this
program even at the present day. Our main advance has been
in the clearer analysis of the sources and their more exact ar-
rangement in chronological order. In this respect Vatke's
work, which was published a year before that of von Colin,
marks an epoch, but discussion of its importance must be
postponed for the present. The result of the various works
we have discussed in this chapter was to establish the idea of
a Biblical Theology as a distinct science, an idea not yet
everywhere accepted, but one which is making its way even in
conservative circles.

XI

THE BISHOP'S PROBLEM

FEW MEN now living can recall the sensation produced
in the English-speaking world by the publication of
Colenso's book: The Pentateuch and Book of Joshua
Examined.^ The sensation is evidence that critical questions
had not attracted much attention in England and this coun-
try. It shows also that the charge frequently made, that the
critics are mere imitators or echoes of German rationalists, is
without foundation, for Colenso was innocent of any taint of
rationalism. He was brought face to face with the question
concerning the Pentateuch by incidents entirely foreign to
Germany or indeed to Europe. His story is so interesting
that it may be repeated here.

J. W. Colenso was Bishop of Natal in South Africa, and
interested himself in giving the Bible to the native Zulus. In
translating the Old Testament he had the help of an intelli-
gent native, "one with the docility of a child but the reason-
ing powers of a man of mature age." When they came to the
story of the flood the helper asked whether it was true that
Noah had gathered the beasts from all countries and carried
them in the ark. The Bishop had some knowledge of geology
and had had some misgivings about an universal deluge; but
he had contented himself with the explanations or hypotheses
of the commentators. Now brought face to face with an in-
quiring mind the difficulties in the way of a literal acceptance
of the narrative recurred with new force, and he was obliged
to confess that the story was not, in the proper sense of the
word, history. This was only the beginning. When they came

^ The first part was published in 1862, and later volumes appeared at in-
tervals down to 1879.

128

THE BISHOP'S PROBLEM 129

to the book of Exodus the translator's attention was called to
the law: *'If a man smite his slave or his maid with a rod and
he die under his hand he shall surely be punished; notwith-
standing if he continue a day or two he shall not be pun-
ished: for he is his money" (Ex. xxi:2of.). The Zulu, who
knew of the lot of the black man when in the power of a white
master, was quick to feel the injustice of such a law, and
asked whether it was true that God had given such a law by
direct revelation. This opened up the whole question of the
divine and infallible inspiration of this part of the Bible, and
the Bishop, without knowledge of what the critics had been
doing, set out to examine the phenomena of the books. This
he did in his own way. Being an expert in mathematics
(several text-books in arithmetic and algebra had been pub-
lished by him) his attention was naturally directed to the
mechanical difficulties of the narrative as it stands.

The point of departure was of course the statement that
Israel went out of Egypt with a force of six hundred thousand
fighting men, which would imply a total population of at least
two million human beings. That this number was taken se-
riously by the author or compiler is proved by its repetition
in more than one place, and by the detailed census and its
summation as recorded in the early chapters of Numbers.
Various attempts to explain away the data — such as the sug-
gestion that tents should be read in place of thousands —
were unknown to Colenso and need not have influenced him
in any case. The text is plain, and the difficulty is equally
plain. Think of miracle as we may, we must still hold that a
narrative of fact must be consistent with the known condi-
tions of space and time. What now is implied in the sojourn
of two million people in a single encampment, or rather in a
series of encampments, in an arid desert such as we know the
desert of Sinai to have been? That the desert then was what
the desert is now, is evident from the Biblical writer's own
description — a waste howling wilderness. That Colenso had
no objection to miracle as miracle seems evident, for the sup-
position that a whole nation was fed by manna, a substance

I30 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

which was found on the ground six days out of every week,
for the space of forty years, does not seem to have shocked
him. In fact he says that he does not find insuperable difficul-
ties with regard to the miracles or supernatural revelations
recorded in the book, "but solely that I cannot as a true man
consent any longer to shut my eyes to the absolute palpable
self-contradictions of the narrative." One of these concerned
the priest and his duties. Making a reasonable allowance of
space for each family, we find that the camp must have been
twelve miles across in each direction. In its centre was the
sanctuary served by three priests, Aaron and his two sons.
But there was a specific direction that the priest should daily
carry out the ashes from the altar to a place outside the camp,
and also, in the case of the prescribed sin-offering, that he
should carry out the skin, flesh, and offal of the victim, a
bullock, to the place where the ashes were thrown and there
burn them. The amount of labor thus thrown upon the
priests, in addition to their other duties can be imagined, or
rather will be seen to be beyond human strength. To this add
the difficulty of sanitation for such a camp, and the allegation
that the water-supply came from a single spring and we shall
agree with the Bishop.

For another instance look at the matter of sacrifice (I am
giving Colenso's argument). A number of offerings are en-
joined which for so great a number of people and so small a
number of priests must be burdensome. For example, the
Passover must be observed every year by the sacrifice of a
lamb or kid for each family or each group of ten people.
This implies of course the provision of two hundred thousand
animals for this occasion. But, according to experienced
sheep-masters, this would imply a total of two million sheep,
for the sojourners in the desert. How could such a multitude
find sustenance in the desert? Allowing that the people were
miraculously fed, can we suppose that the cattle were simi-
larly provided for? The narrative nowhere intimates anything
of the kind. Another numerical calculation, which need not
here be reproduced in detail, shows the inconsistency of the

THE BISHOP'S PROBLEM 131

number of firstborn males according to the census, when com-
pared with the number of the people as a whole, and the
probable number of births in a community of the size alleged.
In addition there is the often urged difficulty of supposing the
seventy men of Jacob's clan who came into Egypt to have
increased to a great nation in the time which had elapsed. In
short, wherever we turn, the narrative as it stands presents
difficulties of the most serious kind.

It does not help us much to assert, as the conservative
scholars are inclined to do, that these are the oft-refuted ob-
jections of infidel enemies of Scripture. The striking thing
is that, however often refuted, the objections recur to every
new investigator who takes his task seriously; and that Co-
lenso was not an infidel we are quite sure. From the modern
point of view we are able to account for the phenomena which
gave him so much trouble. The inconsistencies of the narra-
tive are due to the combination of documents of different
dates, embodying different points of view. The genealogical
and chronological data are for the most part taken from the
Priestly writer who was fully dominated by a theory. Accord-
ing to this theory Israel came out of Egypt a full-grown
nation, such a nation as afterwards dwelt in Palestine under
the rule of David. The author projected his ideal back into
the desert period, sublimely indifferent to considerations of time
and space. His work is not history, but apocalypse, apocalypse
reversed, that is, dating the golden age in the past instead
of in the future.

It is unnecessary to analyze Colenso's continuation of his
work. The attacks made upon him led him to examine the
essays of continental scholars, and the most of their results
he was willing to accept. His hypothesis that Samuel was
the author of the priestly document, and that Jeremiah wrote
Deuteronomy has found no advocates. The significance of
his work is, as already intimated, its demonstration of what an
unbiased observer who takes up the Hebrew story will find
there. That he may still hold to the religious value of the
Old Testament Colenso attests. The incident suggests that

132 ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

it is unfortunate that the question most earnestly, not to say
bitterly, debated in his time and afterwards, has turned about
the 'authenticity' or 'genuineness' of the Pentateuch. Had
critical inquiry begun with the other books, so that the stu-
dent could get some acquaintance with Hebrew historical
methods, the shock in discovering the composite nature of
the Pentateuch would have been less. But theological opin-
ion in England was still dwelling on the inerrancy of Scrip-
ture, and an attack on the credibility of any part of the nar-
rative contradicted that doctrine. Colenso points out that
theological teachers in the Church of England were committed
to this doctrine, and he quotes from the Bishop of Ripon the
declaration that the Bible is the infallible record of the mind
and will of God — "The Bible like its Author is pure un-
changeable truth, truth without admixture of error." That a
Bishop of the Church should deny this made the scandal.

The ecclesiastical remedy for heresy is not argument, but
legal process. An indictment was soon found against Colenso
and presented to the Metropolitan Bishop at Capetown. The
case was complicated by the fact that Colenso had published
a commentary on the Epistle to the Romans "from a mission-
ary point of view," in which he departed from the accepted
teaching of the Church concerning the substitutionary nature
of the atonement. This commentary was made the basis of
the first charge, but as it lies outside our province, we need
give it no attention. The charge based on the inquiry into
the historicity of the Pentateuch is: "That in the book The
Pentateuch and Book of Joshua Critically Examined the
Holy Scriptures are spoken of as a merely human book, that
the genuineness, authenticity, and truth of certain books of
Scripture in whole or in part are denied, and that the writer
maintains that our Blessed Lord was ignorant and in error
on the subject of the authorship and age of the different por-
tions of the Pentateuch." The argument on the charges fol-
lowed the line familiar to us in other cases of ecclesiastical
process. In such cases the prosecutor points out that the
question before the court is not the truth or falsity of the

THE BISHOP'S PROBLEM 133

statements made by the accused, but their consistency with
the law of the Church. Since the law of the Church con-
tained in her formularies took shape some centuries ago, when
critical inquiry was still in its infancy, it is easy to show that
new theories are inconsistent with it. The law cited in this
case is contained in the Nicene and Athanasian creeds, in the
catechism of the Church of England and in the Thirty-nine
Articles of Religion. The Articles quoted do not in so many
words affirm the inerrancy of Scripture, but may validly be
held to imply it since they forbid the ordaining of anything
contrary to God's Word Written, or the expounding of one
place of Scripture so as to make it repugnant to another.
Since Colenso's work had pointed out the inconsistencies in
various parts of the narrative, the court held that he was
condemned by the Article, and gave judgment accordingly.

Bishop Gray, before whom the charges were brought, pro-
nounced his decision to the effect that the opinions set forth
in the books of Colenso contravened and subverted the Cath-
olic faith as set forth in the Articles of Religion. His sen-
tence was that the Bishop of Natal be deposed from his office
and forbidden to exercise any divine office within the metro-
politan province of Capetown. Opportunity was, however,
given to the Bishop to retract his errors within a term of four
months from the date of sentence, within which period the
full, unconditional, and absolute retraction must be made in
writing and deposited with the Registrar of the diocese. As
Colenso refused to recognize the jurisdiction of the court, and
of course the validity of the sentence, the Metropolitan went
so far as to pronounce the greater excommunication.

Colenso was not present at the trial, having sailed for
England. His protest against the jurisdiction of the court
was presented by one of his friends, who also gave notice that
the sentence would be disregarded as being null and void.
The Church of England being established, an appeal to the
Crown could be taken, and this course was followed. The
result was that the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
pronounced the proceedings of the alleged court at Cape-

134 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETJTION

town null and void. Colenso returned to his diocese, where
he was warmly welcomed, and where he continued to preach.
He suffered, however, from the almost unanimous hostile
criticism of the bishops of his own church, as well as from
the action of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel
and the Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge.
Both these organizations had given aid to his missionary work,
and both now withdrew their support. More personal pain
we may suppose him to have suffered by the loss of the friend-
ship of F. D. Maurice. Maurice was well known as leader of
the more liberal party in the Church, and might have been
expected to plead for toleration. But his action showed what
has often been observed elsewhere, namely that those most
tenacious in defending their own liberty may be unwilling to
grant liberty to others.

The incident which I have related at some length bears on
the history of Old Testament interpretation simply because
it shows how a mind innocent of German or other rationalism
is driven to take the critical position as soon as it makes a
careful examination of the facts of Scripture. As Colenso
himself observes, he advanced nothing new. This is perhaps
too strong a statement, for his exact presentation of the
mathematical difficulties was more striking than any that had
preceded. And they are convincing. It would be interesting
to know how many of the Bishops of the Church of England
in this twentieth century would assent to the judgment of
the Bishop of Capetown,

It must not be thought that English opinion was entirely in
the dark concerning critical opinion until Colenso so emphati-
cally called attention to its problems. Essays and Reviews
had been published two years before his book appeared, and
had aroused uneasiness in conservative minds. One of these
essays reproduced Lessing's thought of the education of the
race as a gradual process, so that the earliest stages of revela-
tion would appear imperfect when viewed in the light of more
advanced ages. Another discussed at length Bunsen's Bib-
lical Researches, which certainly departed from the traditional

THE BISHOP'S PROBLEM 135

views. Finally Jowett's discussion of the interpretation of
Scripture took broad ground, although it did not enter specifi-
cally upon questions of Old Testament criticism. It may be
that the uneasiness caused by these essays gave strength to
the agitation against Colenso. Before leaving the subject,
we may notice a predecessor whose words gave comfort and
encouragement to our Bishop, and whose case was even more
remarkable than his. This man was Alexander Geddes, a
Scottish priest of the Roman Catholic Church. He made a
new translation of the Bible into English, and added a volume
of Critical Remarks.^ Their significance is the same that we
have remarked in the case of Colenso; they show how a mind
not inclined to rationalism, but candid and reflective, is led
by an unbiased examination of the phenomena to take the
critical position. Colenso quotes the passage in which he found
encouragement, as follows:

May I blameless examine the works of Christian doctors and historians by
the common rules of criticism, explode their sophistry, combat their rash as-
sertions, arraign them of credulity, and even sometimes question their veracity
— and yet be obliged to consider every fragment of Hebrew Scripture for a
series of a thousand years, from Moses to Malachi, every scrap of prophecy,
poesy, minstrelsy, history, biography, as the infallible communications of
heaven, oracles of divine truth? Truly this is to require too much from cre-
dulity itself.

That Geddes suffered the penalty of his rashness, and was
condemned by his ecclesiastical superiors, will cause us no
surprise. The cases of Loisy and Tyrrell are fresh in our
minds, and are parallel enough to need no elucidation.

2 The Holy Bible or the Books Accounted Sacred by Jews and Christians,
two volumes containing the historical books (i 792-1 797). The Critical Re-
marks published in 1800 are on the Pentateuch.

XII
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF WELLHAUSEN

HISTORICAL research proceeds on the hypothesis,
first that from such remains as have come down to
us it is possible to discover, to a certain extent, what
actually happened in the past; and secondly, that the events
of the past can be traced in their orderly sequence, so as to
show us the law of human progress. In order to accomplish
his task, therefore, it is of the first importance that the his-
torian arrange the documents that he studies in their proper
order of time. The higher criticism which has been so much
objected to when applied to the Bible, is simply the method
by which the literature is brought into this proper order. The
length of time which it has taken the critics to reach this end
is due in part to the complicated process which the Hebrew
Hterature has gone through, and which is described in out-
line in the first of these essays, in part to the Jewish tradition
which in an uncritical age insisted that the Mosaic Code was
really the foundation of the Hebrew commonwealth, and
therefore the most important part of divine revelation. This
tradition passed over to the Church and became one of its
accepted beliefs to interfere with which was regarded with
horror, as if it were sacrilege. Spinoza's doubts concerning
the authorship of the books ascribed to Moses was attributed
to his 'atheistic' prejudice against all revealed religion. Si-
mon's demonstration that the books had been subject to the
same accidents of transmission as other ancient writings was
discounted, at least among Protestants, by the fact that he was
a Roman Catholic. Astruc at last found a key which was
apparently allowed to pass because it only proved (as applied
by him, that is) that Moses made use of written sources older

136

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF WELLHAUSEN 137

than his own time. But his hypothesis was taken up by
Eichhorn, who with German thoroughness carried the analysis
through the Pentateuch/

Eichhorn seems to have been the first to point out that the
'higher criticism' that is, literary as distinguished from textual
criticism, is an established method of investigating ancient
writings. It is unnecessary to give details of his analysis.
The two main streams of narrative pointed out by Astruc
were readily separated, and the method so commended itself
to contemporary scholars that they at once threw themselves
into the work of analysis. Ingenuity was in fact so applied
that the books under review threatened to disintegrate into
a number of heterogeneous fragments. This phase passed,
however, and there came to be substantial agreement as to
the Pentateuchal sources. IMeanwhile the chasm which opened
between Dogmatic and Biblical Theology was bridged by
the specific definition of Gabler as already related. Here
the question of the age of the different elements which have
been combined in our Old Testament is fundamental and it is
on this point that the critics were long in reaching an agree-
ment. It came to be admitted that four sources are traceable
in the Pentateuch, the most important, at least to Jewish
thinking, being the one known as P, that is the priestly code
contained in the books of Leviticus and Numbers. Since this
document furnished the framework into which the others had
been fitted, it was natural to suppose that it was the earliest in
point of time. Ewald's important History of the People of
Israel was vitiated by this assumption. Reflection shows,
however, that genealogical and statistical material, such as
characterizes the Priestcode, is a comparatively late develop-
ment, whereas folklore, such as we find in the patriarchal
stories of Genesis, is more primitive.

The merit of pointing out the true order of the documents

1 Emleitung ins Alte Testament. The first edition which I have not seen
was published in 1780, second edition 1790. It is perhaps significant that the
only work of Eichhorn which was translated into English was an essay in
which he argues that the authors of the Old Testament were not impostors
(in Essays and Dissertations in Biblical Literature, New York, 1829).

138 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

belongs to Vatke, whose book "Religion of the Old Testament
developed according to the Canonical Books" ^ appeared in
1835. Vatke was a thoroughgoing disciple of Hegel, and his
work is saturated with that philosopher's view of the course
of human history, so much so that it is hardly intelligible to
one unacquainted with the system. The significance of the
author does not lie in his philosophy, but in his view of Israel's
development. Two books are emphasized by him as decisive.
These are Deuteronomy and Ezekiel. First of all, both books
are later than the time of the great Prophets, Deuteronomy
belonging to the age of Josiah, Ezekiel of course to the Exile.
Deuteronomy had been correctly dated before, but the bear-
ing of Ezekiel on the question had been overlooked. On
reflection it is seen that this prophet's work is unintelligible
if there was a ritual law already in existence. What he does
is to give a fully developed scheme for Israel's future. But,
priest as he is, he could not have done this had there been in
existence an elaborate legislation such as is contained in
Leviticus and Numbers. What he would have done in that
case is clear — he would have referred his people to the Law
already in their hands. To do anything else would have been
sacrilegious. So far from knowing anything of such a law, he
asserts that the law given in the desert was not good. The
conclusion of Vatke is that the true order of Israel's legisla-
tion is Deuteronomy, then Ezekiel, and last of all the Priest-
code. This conclusion however was ignored for thirty years
and more, mainly because it was accompanied by specula-
tion on the idea of history and the self-realization of the Ab-
solute, couched in the technical language of the Hegelian
philosophy. Moreover, the attention of conservative theolo-
gians having been called to the progress of critical inquiry,
an attempt was made to stem the tide, and for some time re-
actionary literature held the centre of the stage.

The protagonist of the conservative school was Hengsten-
berg, an able scholar thoroughly trained in the orthodox tra-
dition, and one of those logical natures which when they have

2 The first volume was never followed by a second.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF WELLHAUSEN 139

adopted a system, cannot allow a single point in it to be ques-
tioned, lest the whole structure fall to pieces. His Beitrdge
were directed against all the assertions of the critics, affirming
the whole of the Pentateuch to be the work of Moses, the
whole of Isaiah to be by the author whose name comes at
the head of the book, Daniel to have been written by Daniel
himself, and the whole of Zechariah by one author. To
doubt any of these propositions was held to be a denial of the
Christian faith. Moreover, the Old Testament he held to be
primarily and chiefly a book of prophecies of the coming of
Christ. To prove this was the purpose of his best known
work, the Christology of the Old Testament.^ The presup-
position of this work is indicated by the title and is set forth
with all desirable distinctness in the introduction. It is
wholly dogmatic, asserting that the incarnation is the centre
of all divine institutions for the salvation of fallen man, and
that the Old Testament is a succession of revelations designed
to keep the expectation of believers fixed on that event still in
the future. In other words, the Old Testament is made a
textbook of orthodox Protestant theology.

The influence of Hengstenberg was considerable, perhaps
more marked in England and America than in Germany. For
some decades the German literature made accessible to readers
in these two countries was that of the conservative school, and
the hope was entertained that the Churches might be protected
by this literature from the inroads of rationalism. In fact,
as we have seen, the tone in both countries was conservative,
and this may be illustrated by the fact that a standard work
for nearly three-quarters of the nineteenth century was Home's
Introduction, and that Samuel Davidson, who attempted to
introduce some of the critical views into a new edition of that
work was stigmatized as a heretic, and removed from his pro-
fessorship in the Independent College, Manchester. The
prominence of Franz Delitzsch in Germany, and the preva-

3 Christologie des Alten Testaments und Commentar iiber die Messianischen
Weissagtingen der Propheten, 1829. An English translation appeared in 1836,
and another in 1871.

I40 ESS^rS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

Icnce of conservative views in Great Britain and this country
seemed ominous for any advance in Old Testament scholar-
ship. It is for this reason that the importance of Wellhausen
should be borne in mind. This importance consists in his
forceful and lucid presentation of the view advanced by
Vatke forty years earlier. Not that he was directly dependent
on Vatke, for he was a pupil of Ewald. But not satisfied with
his teacher's solution of the problem of Old Testament history,
he worked over the material afresh. The first volume of his
History of Israel* was the result. This book begins at once
with the statement of the problem to be solved, which is
whether the Law contained in the Pentateuch is the point of
departure for the history of ancient Israel or for the history
of Judaism, that is of the religious community which sur-
vived the Babylonian catastrophe. Various lines of argu-
ment are then taken up and are found to converge upon the
position already stated by Vatke.

One striking example must impress every reader. This is
the account of the crowning of the young king Joash as related
in Kings, and also in Chronicles. The two narratives are
printed in parallel columns and the lesson is plain — the
Chronicler has allowed his preference for the Levites and
his scrupulosity as to the defilement of the temple to color
his version, so as to make the incident something quite dif-
ferent from that related by the earlier author. In one case
the young king is placed upon the throne by the royal body-
guard, acting under the direction of the priest of the temple.
In the Chronicler's version, the body-guard does not appear,
but all is done by the Levites, and special care is taken that
none but consecrated persons shall enter the sacred building.
The significance of the comparison is the demonstration it
gives that between the composition of the two books the
priestly point of view has come into force. But this point of
view is exactly that of the Levitical legislation, contained in
the middle books of the Pentateuch. In the third century

* As it first appeared (1878), the book bore the title Geschichte Israels.
Later issues changed this to Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF WELLHAUSEN 141

B.C. (the date of Chronicles) a Jewish writer could not con-
ceive that the royal body-guard, made up of laymen and prob-
ably of foreigners, could be admitted to the temple, or (what
he would regard as worse) that the chief priest could make
use of them when he had a large number of Levites at his com-
mand. The conclusion is that in his time the priestly legis-
lation was fully recognized, but that when the account in
Kings was written, which could not have been much before
750 B.C., the chief priest had no scruples about admitting un-
consecrated persons to the temple. The bearing of Ezekiel's
regulation on the question is obvious, for he it was who de-
nounced the pre-exilic practice.

This is only one of several lines of evidence which are more
distinctly brought out in Wellhausen's work, more distinctly
than in any previous discussion. The reception of the book
was twofold: conservative scholars accused the author of an
evolutionary bias which vitiated his discussion. The charge
is not likely to weigh very heavily in these days, when evo-
lution is widely accepted as the process which is discoverable
in history as well as in nature. In the second place, the alter-
native between the traditional theory of the authorship of
the sacred books was put in this form: Either Moses (for the
crucial point was still the authenticity of the Pentateuch)
wrote the books attributed to him, or else they are a fraud
and a forgery. Similarly the demonstration that the work of
more than one author was contained in the book of Isaiah was
met with the same alternative. The answer is of course that
the books being the result of a complicated historical process,
the main thing is to apprehend the process. Doubtless all the
authors, editors, and compilers acted in good faith, although
their methods were not those of our own day. The charge of
approaching their subject with a preconceived bias could be
brought against the conservatives as we have already seen
illustrated in Hengstenberg. But recrimination is not argu-
ment.

Wellhausen generously declines to claim originality for him-
self. That he had a predecessor in Vatke we have noticed,

142 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

although Vatke's presentation was in such form that it did
not appeal even to scholars. The correct order of the docu-
ments had been suspected by Reuss, though he had not ven-
tured to publish his view because it differed from the one
generally accepted. Graf also had had an inkling of the same
thing, and Kuenen had felt his way to the Wellhausen position
about the same time with his German contemporary. When
the position was clearly and forcibly presented by Wellhausen,
nearly all scholars who recognized the legitimacy of applying
critical methods to the Old Testament were convinced. Not
only in Germany, but in France, Holland, Great Britain, and
America, the theory made its way. So cautious a scholar
as Driver, and so thoughtful a one as W. Robertson Smith
adopted it. At the present day it is as nearly the established
theory of Old Testament history as can be expected in a field
where many men are at work. Boasts that it has been refuted
are heard every now and then, but the unprejudiced observer
will discover that they are at least premature. The only
attack which needs to be considered affirms that he has not
given due weight to the evidence from Babylonia and Assyria.
The claim made by these opponents is that monotheism is
not the exclusive possession of Israel, but is found in Meso-
potamia and also in Egypt. In reply, it is enough to say
that, allowing the more advanced thinkers in both countries
to have attained something like a monotheistic belief, such
a belief had no influence on the religion of the people; whereas
in Israel the striking thing is that after a long evolution the
whole nation had arrived at a point where they insisted that
loyalty to the one God meant rejection of all polytheistic and
idolatrous rites. Wellhausen's merit was that on the basis of
the literature of Israel he traced the process by which this
stage of religion was reached. Thus and thus alone, certainly
not by a shadowy Babylonian or Egyptian monotheism, was
the way prepared for Christianity.

XIII

HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION

WITHOUT claiming that Biblical science has no
more to learn, we may pause here to see exactly
what may now be fairly regarded as the assured
results of the process we have been tracing. The men whose
labors we have examined cannot be accused of being obsessed
])y a godless evolutionary theory. They include loyal members
of many Christian Churches — Simon, Astruc, Geddes and
Loisy (Roman Catholics), Kuenen and Oort (Dutch Re-
formed), Wellhausen, Kautzsch and Kittel (German Protes-
tants), Colenso and Driver (Episcopalians), W. Robertson
Smith, Briggs and Francis Brown (Presbyterians) — not to
mention many now living. The outline of Israel's religious
history (for this is our main concern) on which these men
would agree, is as follows:

Something over three thousand years ago a few Bedawin
clans sojourned in the desert south of Canaan. Moved by
a religious as well as an economical impulse, they attacked
the inhabitants of Palestine. The conquest was made gradu-
ally, sometimes by open warfare, but to a considerable extent
by peaceful penetration, in which the newcomers amalgamated
with the older inhabitants. The religion which they brought
with them was the worship of their tribal God, but in Canaan
they learned the way of the divinities of the land, adopting the
sanctuaries and ritual of the older inhabitants. Protest
against this syncretism was made by the prophets, some of
whom were uncompromising adherents of the old nomadic
religion, some were moved by patriotism and a desire to pre-
serve Israel's individuality, some were social reformers who
saw that the will of God is ethical rather than ritualistic. At

143

144 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

a favorable moment the prophetic party secured the aid of
Josiah, king of Judah, in putting through a reform of religion,
which, however, was followed by a reaction. The calamity
which came with the Babylonian supremacy was construed
as punishment for this reaction. In the exile, therefore, the
religious leaders devoted their efforts to a more thorough
reconstruction of the ritual, with the idea of thus protecting
the religion from contamination. The result was post-exilic
Judaism, which was confirmed in its triumph by the events
of the Maccabean struggle.

This presentation of the history is based on the critical
examination of the documents, which shows that the literature
is correctly arranged in the following order: (i) The folk-
stories of the Patriarchs; (2) The works of the early prophets,
Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah; (3) Deuteronomy; (4) Ezekiel;
(5) the Priestly stratum of the Pentateuch. To test the theory
we may try several lines of inquiry.

I. THE PLACE OF V^^GRSHIP

In the book of Kings we find a recurrent phrase: "The
people still sacrificed at the highplaces." These highplaces
(bama, plural bamoth, is the technical name) are regarded
by the author as illegitimate sanctuaries, for to him the one
authorized place of worship is the temple at Jerusalem. How
many of these shrines there were is indicated by Jeremiah,
who complains that they were on every high hill and under
every green tree. But the idea of Jeremiah and the author of
Kings that the worship at these places was a sign of apostasy,
the people having received a specific command against any
but the one sanctuary, is untenable. There are in fact indi-
cations that the highplaces were at one time recognized as
legitimate. When Elijah accuses the people of defection he
says to Yahweh, the God of Israel: The sons of Israel have
forsaken thy covenant, thrown down thme altars, and slain
thy prophets. The passage implies that there were many
such altars and shows that the defection was not abandon-

HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION 145

ment of the one altar at Jerusalem, but neglect of the many
shrines throughout the country. Even in this case the accusa-
tion is too sweeping, for the prophet is informed that seven
thousand of his people are still faithful. Had Elijah supposed
that the Law insisted upon one place of worship, he would
have used very different language. Moreover, when the test
came, instead of exhorting the people to seek Yahweh at
Jerusalem, he rebuilt one of these very local altars and in-
voked the presence of the divinity there. When Solomon
would inquire the will of God he went to Gibeon and sacri-
ficed at the great bama a thousand burnt offerings. Since he
received the revelation that he desired, no doubt he and the
people were confirmed in their belief that this at any rate
was a place at which God could be worshipped. The author
of Kings endeavors to excuse the act, which, on his principle,
was unjustified, by saying that the temple had not yet been
built. But this is a mere harmonistic attempt, for the Jerusa-
lem sanctuary had been chosen and consecrated by David.
The incident confirms what has been said about the legitimacy
of the highplaces certainly down to the- time of Solomon.
Further confirmation is given by the historical books. David
impaled Saul's descendants "before Yahweh" in Gideon; Sam-
uel sacrificed at the bama of his native village; in the time of
the Judges there were altars at Ophra, at Zorah, at Shiloh, at
Bethel and at Mizpah, not to speak of the sanctuary at Dan
which was served by a descendant of Moses. And the patri-
archal stories of Genesis show that many of these shrines
were consecrated by the fathers of the nation. Abraham
built altars and worshipped at Shechem, at Bethel, at the oak
of Mamre, and at Moriah. Jacob sacrificed at Beersheba, at
Mizpah, at Shechem and at Bethel, where he consecrated a
stone pillar, dedicating it to the divinity. The only reason
why the narrator has preserved the account of these various
acts is that in the mind of the people these shrines possessed
special sanctity on account of their association with these
venerable names.

If we now inquire when the view was first entertained that

146 ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

only one place of worship was sanctioned by the divine law,
we inevitably recall to mind the dramatic event in the reign
of King Josiah, the detailed account of which is contained in
II Kings, xxii and xxiii. Here we read that in accordance with
the Book of Instruction found in the temple, all the highplaces
in the towns of Judah were desecrated, and king and people
took a solemn engagement to obey the commandments of the
Book. What the Book was is tolerably evident from the
description of what took place. Deuteronomy alone, and
probably Deuteronomy in a shorter form than the one in
which we now read it, answers the requirements of the text.
The revolution which took place under the influence of this
book, however, was too drastic to last, especially after the
tragic death of the king who led in it. There was, therefore,
a reaction, and it is probable that the popular reverence for
the local sanctuaries would have given them permanence had
not the Babylonian siege and conquest of Jerusalem inter-
vened. This startling event was accounted for as punish-
ment for disobedience to the Book.

It was on this ground that the author of Kings condemned
the worship at the highplaces, as is abundantly clear from
his narrative. And Ezekiel agrees with him. The program
of the prophet provides for a single sanctuary, and for its
protection from defilement. His list of sins, those for which
Israel was punished, includes worship on the highplaces. Eze-
kiel, therefore, strengthens the position taken by Deuteronomy.
That he knew nothing of a specific regulation of the sacrifices,
dating back to Moses, has already been remarked. And the
Priestly stratum of the Pentateuch elaborates the plan of
Ezekiel, only transferring it to the Mosaic age. The priestly
writer makes the work of Moses consist in the construction
of a sanctuary with the same sort of regulations as those
enacted by Ezekiel, only more detailed. In other words, he
assumes that the priestly scheme, the hierocracy, dates from
the beginning of the national life — something of which all
the early literature is profoundly ignorant. The earliest legis-
lation, contained in the Covenant Code (Ex. xx:22-xxiii:33),

HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION 147

specifically authorizes the multitude of shrines by its enact-
ment: "An altar of earth shalt thou make for me, and shalt
sacrifice thereon thy burnt-offerings and thy peace-offerings,
thy sheep and thine oxen; in every place where I bring my
name to remembrance I will come to thee and bless thee. And
if thou make me an altar of stones thou shalt not make it of
hewn stones, for if thou Hft thy tool upon it thou pollutest it."
It is difficult to conceive a more distinct confirmation of the
patriarchal custom. When Abraham had a theophany at the
Oak of Moreh he built an altar to the Yahweh who appeared
to him. When Jacob had his dream at Bethel, he not only set
up a pillar for the divinity, but also erected an altar.

What the law of Exodus has in mind is the recurrence of
such indications of the divine presence in particular spots,
each of which will become sacred because of the act of reve-
lation. To the Israelite God was not a God afar off, and He
might indicate His presence by a remarkable dream of some
unusual event — a waking vision perhaps, such as Gideon
enjoyed. After receiving the commission to free his people
this hero erected an altar and called it Yahweh-Shalom, and
the writer adds: To this day it is in Ophra. Where a man
was favored with such a vision the proper acknowledgment
was a sacrifice, and this required an altar. No elaborate
structure could be raised — a heap of earth or a pile of stones
was sufficient, and such an altar is authorized by the Covenant
Code. But a place once made sacred by a theophany remained
sacred for succeeding generations. The resemblance to present-
day custom in Syria strikes the observer at once, for there also
a local shrine may originate in the vision of a saint or fairy.

The practice of earlier times is therefore recognized by this
legislation, and there was no objection to the multiplicity of
sanctuaries until the time of Deuteronomy. The prophets,
indeed, objected to the whole popular worship, but not on the
ground that one place alone was authorized. Masters of
language as they were, they would have had no difficulty in
making their position clear, Isaiah and Micah denounce the
ritual of the temple in no measured terms, and imply that

148 ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

Jerusalem is no better — rather worse if anything — than the
other sacred places. The reason why Deuteronomy wished
the temple to be the one place of worship was that the multi-
plicity of local highplaces confused the minds of the people
as to the One National God. The emphasis with which this
author declares that the Yahweh who is the God of Israel is
One Yahweh is evidence enough of his main interest. There
was also in his mind the suspicion that in many cases the lo-
cal sanctuaries had been taken over from the Canaanites, and
this was in fact the case. In his zeal for pure Hebraism he
would have everything Canaanite exterminated. To a certain
extent we must sympathize with him, not to the extent of
massacring the early inhabitants, but in the interest of a purer
morality. The Canaanite gods whose features, in some cases
at least, Yahweh had taken on were patrons of agriculture,
and therefore of animal and vegetable fruitfulness. The
prosperity of the crops was thought to be due to them, as we
see when Hosea represents the personified Israel saying: ''I
will go after my lovers who give me my bread and my wine,
my wool and my flax." The kind of worship which was sup-
posed to be grateful to these divinities is too well known to
be described here, and it was the license connected with the
festivals of the harvest and the vintage which caused the
prophetic reaction. The Deuteronomist thought that by re-
stricting the worship to the one chief sanctuary, not only would
the uniqueness of Yahweh be emphasized, but under super-
vision of the royal police abuses could be held in check. The
reform introduced by Deuteronomy was simply carried further
by Ezekiel, and elaborated by the Priestcode.

This is one line which confirms the results of the critical
analysis, and it will not do to say that the critics started out
with a preconceived conception of Israel's religious develop-
ment and made their analysis of the documents conform to
that. No one of the many critics who occupied themselves
in separating the sources had any clear idea of the significance
of the highplaces, or of the bearing of the Covenant Code on
the questions they were discussing, until the analysis being

HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION 149

completed, the religious development stood out with the dis-
tinctness which I have tried to describe.

II. SACRIFICIAL WORSHIP

To cut the throat of a lamb, catch the blood in a bowl,
sprinkle it on a mound of earth or a pile of stones, then burn
part or all of the flesh on that same mound does not seem to
the modern man an appropriate way of approaching the di-
vinity. His ancestors thought differently, as is shown by the
prevalence of animal sacrifice all over the world. So far as
the Old Testament is concerned it is clear that this is the
established form of worship. The question with which we are
immediately concerned is whether the order of the documents
indicated by the critical analysis enables us to trace any de-
velopment in the sacrificial ritual. Our answer will in this
case depend somewhat on our theory of development. Does
ritual begin by being complex and then become simple, or does
the simple stage come first? Observation of Christian his-
tory seems to favor the second alternative. The unpretend-
ing Eucharist of the Apostles has grown into the elaborate
sacrifice of the Mass. Without insisting that this case is de-
cisive, let us follow the history of sacrifice as it reveals itself
in the documents at our command.

The author to whom we attribute the earliest stratum of the
Pentateuchal narrative (the Yahwist, J) assumes that sacri-
fice dates from the beginnings of human history. Cain
brought of the fruits of the ground and Abel brought of the
firstlings of the flock and of their fat, an offering to Yahweh.
The word here used for offering (minha) means simply a
gift, and all that we can gather from the passage is that the
sons of Adam paid their respects to the divinity as the oriental
pays his respects to a superior, that is by bringing a present.
The noteworthy thing is that Abel's gift was acceptable and
Cain's was not. No reason is given for the preference, but it
may be allowable to conclude that the author means to assert
that the animal offering is the one most proper for a religious

150 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

ceremony. Underlying this may be the feeling that the
shepherd is favored by the God of Israel, rather than the cul-
tivator of the ground. The next mention of sacrifice occurs
in the story of the deluge where Noah provides an extra
number of clean animals (that is animals fit for sacrifice),
and offers a burnt-offering from them as soon as he leaves the
ark. Here we read that the divinity inhaled the sweet savor
and resolved no more to curse the soil. The fire-offering being
sublimated into vapor is grateful to the god, doubtless be-
cause it is his food. Very late authors found it necessary to
combat the idea that God drank the blood and ate the flesh of
the sacrifice. In the early stages of belief this must have been
the current conception.

While the idea of a gift underlies the offering, it is probable
that another conception was soon combined with it. In tribal
society every man's hand is against every other man except
those of his kin or, as he would say, of his blood. But where
the natural tie of blood does not exist, an artificial one may
be created. In the most primitive stage this is done by ming-
ling the blood of the parties. At a more advanced stage the
same end was accomplished by sprinkling the parties with the
blood of a sacrificial animal. At this stage we find our nar-
rative, for the covenant at Sinai is solemnized by sprinkling
the blood of the sacrifice on the altar (representative of the
divinity) and on the people. In all this there is no thought
of statutory regulation of worship, though the obligation to
observe the three agricultural festivals was taken as part of
the covenant. How these were observed is made known by
the story of Elkanah. He brought his offering to Shiloh, the
tribal sanctuary, and after the portion of Yahweh had been
duly burned, used the rest of the flesh in a banquet at which
the members of his family received each his portion. Other
worshippers did the same and that the bounds of sobriety
were often passed is indicated by the suspicion of the priest
that a woman who prayed inaudibly was intoxicated. The
whole narrative indicates that there had been no rigorous
regulation of the sacrifices such as we read in the priestly

HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION 151

literature. This impression is confirmed by the greater
prophets. Amos denies that sacrifice had been offered in the
wilderness, and Jeremiah specifically asserts that the divine
commands did not concern matters of this kind. Had Isaiah
known of a ritual law, he would certainly have called atten-
tion to it, instead of inquiring: Who has required this at your
hands? Plainly the whole sacrificial system, if system it can
be called, was based on usage and not on a revealed law.

Deuteronomy, as we have seen, was exercised in mind by
the abuses that went on at the country sanctuaries. Here the
holy days had degenerated into holidays, and the eating and
drinking before Yahweh was simply an occasion for gross
licentiousness. The same thing was true in Jerusalem to be
sure, but in Jerusalem there was some hope that things could
be kept more decent. To do away with the forms of worship
to which the people were accustomed was impracticable. The
people were still to eat and drink and rejoice before Yahweh,
bringing their offerings, tithes, and firstlings. But one signifi-
cant concession is made. If the people desire to eat flesh
and cannot conveniently take the journey to the central sanc-
tuary, they are given permission to slay an animal at home.
The plain implication is that hitherto all slaying of animals
for food had been sacrificial. When there was an altar in
every village it would be no hardship to bring the animal
there, give Yahweh the blood and fat, and take the flesh
home. But when the one sanctuary was at Jerusalem it was
too much to expect that every animal should be brought to
the altar. Hence the innovation.

The third step was taken by Ezekiel, and his view of sac-
rifice shows an entirely new feature. We can reproduce the
thought of the prophet by remembering the denunciations of
the earlier seers, according to which the exile was punishment,
inflicted by an angry God. But Ezekiel was a priest, and to
the priestly mind the sin for which the people were punished
was violation of the ritual. His accusation is that the land had
been defiled. The underlying thought is that the sanctity of
Yahweh and His land must be guarded from profanation. The

152 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETJTION

things which trespass on this divine attribute are in our view
either violations of morahty, Hke oppression of the poor, or of
ritual, like eating things sacrificed to idols. To Ezekiel they are
all ritual, for he makes no distinction between profaning the
Sabbath and eating at the highplaces, on one hand, and dis-
obedience to the commands given in Deuteronomy on the
other. But the sanctity thus violated may be restored by
ritual means, and once restored must be protected by the same
means. What these means are is made known by the sketch
of the restored commonwealth. This is in the fullest sense an
ecclesiastical organization. The nation will find its reason
for existence in the service of the sanctuary. Its central point
is the temple, the inner room in which possesses the highest
degree of the mysterious quality which separates the divine
from the human. Into this room, therefore, only the most
sacred person, the Highpriest, may enter, and that only on
rare occasions and with elaborate precautions. The anteroom
is open only to the priests, the inner court only to the Levites,
and the outer court to the people, on condition that they are
ritually pure.

But since the world is full of things that may interfere with
the sacred quality of the building and its implements, regular
purifications must be made. It is here that the sacrifices take
their part in Ezekiel's scheme. In the earlier literature we
have learned of burnt-offerings and peace-offerings, joyous
in their nature. In Ezekiel these are to be continued, but
they take the second place, whereas much prominence is given
to the sin-offering of which the preexilic writers say very little.
The reason of the new emphasis is the importance which
blood plays in the ritual. Always the portion of the divinity,
it possessed the power of counteracting impurity. Hence its
use to remove defilement. Sprinkled on the walls of the
temple, on the implements of service, and even on the Ark of
the Covenant, it would restore their lost or impaired sanctity.
The sin-offerings are so called, because the blood taken from
them removes sin, that is, ritual defilement, unsins we might
say, the objects or persons to which it is applied.

HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION 153

The ideas of Ezekiel were taken up and elaborated by the
compilers of the priestly literature. What these writers did
was to gather up everything which the priestly tradition had
preserved concerning this matter of clean and unclean, and
combine the various data into a single code. These authors
no doubt believed that the traditions dated back to the
earliest period, and since Moses was the founder of Israel's
reUgion, they thought themselves justified in attributing them
to him. The Talmudists, as we saw, were similarly convinced
that the Oral Law dated from Sinai. Probably it is intentional
that the Priestly narrative makes no mention of sacrifice until
the time of Moses. If true worship means presentation of
sacrifice at the one legitimate sanctuary, it could not be
offered until that sanctuary was erected, and if the sacrifice
must be presented by duly consecrated persons, these persons
must first be chosen and set apart. According to the account
in the priestly document, Moses' chief work was to erect the
tabernacle, then to consecrate Aaron and his sons, and, after
this was done, to receive and promulgate the regulations con-
cerning the sacrifices.

Such, according to the critical theory, was the order of de-
velopment of Israel's ritual. The reader must judge whether
it confirms what has already been said in connection with the
place of worship.

III. THE PRIESTHOOD

In examining the third line of argument we will reverse
the order and begin with the priestly document which we
have just been discussing. The picture it presents is as fol-
lows: When Moses went up to the Mount he received specific
directions to make a sanctuary, in order that the divinity
might dwell among the people. A plan of the building was
shown him and elaborate directions concerning the materials
and dimensions were given. The appropriate furniture and
the dress of the priests were also described, as well as the rite
of consecration by which the priests were to be inducted into
office. The command was duly communicated to the people

154 ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

and the work was carried out. When the sanctuary and its
servants were ready the law of sacrifice was given, as we have
seen. It will be remembered that in the theory of this writer,
Israel came out of Egypt a full grown nation numbering two
millions of people. We are not now concerned with the me-
chanical difficulties of the situation except in one respect. We
read that a census was taken, and the Levites were selected
for the service of the sanctuary, twenty-two thousand in num-
ber. The discrepancy between the three or five priests and
the twenty thousand assistants, need not be dwelt upon. What
is of interest is the sharp distinction made between priests and
Levites. The story of Korah points the lesson that members
of the inferior order must not aspire to priestly prerogatives,
for Korah and his companions being Levites, trespassed by
claiming the right to act as priests. The test was made by
allowing them to use the censers, whereupon fire from heaven
destroyed them.^ Moreover, the Levites are denied access to
the tabernacle and are not allowed to see its furniture. When
camp is broken the priests are to cover the Ark, the table, and
the implements of service, and the Levites who carry the
vessels take charge of them only when this has been done.
Otherwise the sight of them will be fatal (Num. iv:i5). In
line with this is the exact regulation of the service in other
particulars, enforced again by an object lesson, for Nadab and
Abihu, though legitimate priests, perish because their incense
is not correctly presented. The incident is made the occa-
sion of cautioning the father and brothers of the dead men
not to mourn for them, lest thus they defile themselves.

An ecclesiastical establishment of some thousands of per-
sons must have adequate material support, and we are not
surprised when this author provides for this need. He enacts
that every Israelite shall give to the clergy a tenth of his gross
income, as well as the first-fruits of field and orchard and
firstlings of the flock. Certain parts of the sacrifices go to

1 Numbers xvi. The account is now confused with another in which
Dathan and Abiram are the leaders, but the priestly sections are easily dis-
coverer*

HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION 155

the priests as do the freewill offerings. It is ordained further
that forty-eight cities to be taken from the Canaanites are to
be assigned to the sacred clan. If the plan can be carried out,
the clergy will have no reason to complain of insufficient sup-
port. The historians of priestly inclination suppose that this
elaborate scheme was actually promulgated by Moses, and so
far as was in his power, was actually put into effect by him.
The historical difficulty comes when we discover that the
whole elaborate organization appears nowhere in the rest of
the literature until we come to the time of the Chronicler.
Aside from a few allusions to Levites, some of which are evi-
dent interpolations in the text, the narratives of Judges, Sam-
uel, and Kings betray no knowledge of this alleged church-
state. No distinction between priests and Levites is indi-
cated. The Highpriest is conspicuous by his absence. The
cities theoretically given to the Levites are found to be in
possession of other tribes, and no protest or rebuke is re-
corded. The crucial point, however, is not that priests are
altogether unknown to the narrative, or that Levites do not
occasionally appear. It is that no such sharp line of distinc-
tion is drawn as is enforced by the Priestcode. Only when we
come to Ezekiel do we find intimations of such a line. He
indeed is specific enough. Speaking in the name of Yahweh,
he says: "House of Israel, many are your abominations in
that you brought foreigners, uncircumcised in heart and un-
circumcised in flesh, into my house to profane it when you
offered my bread, the fat and the blood, and you thus nullified
my covenant by all your abominations." The sequel com-
mands that henceforth no uncircumcised person shall enter
the sanctuary, but the Levites who had been unfaithful to
Yahweh in that they had served at the highplaces, are now
to undertake the menial offices of the temple. Further, it is
enjoined that the sons of Zadok shall be priests in possession
of the higher offices. All this is promulgated as something
entirely new. But in fact it puts the stamp of approval on
an arrangement already in existence in the Jerusalem temple
when the city fell. The exigency came when Deuteronomy

156 ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

was made the law of the land. At that time the country sanc-
tuaries were desecrated and their priests were thrown out of
their employment. The Deuteronomists endeavored to pro-
vide for them by enacting that they should come to Jerusa-
lem and be attached to the temple. But the descendants of
Zadok were already in office there, and were not minded to
take colleagues who must share the emoluments of the great
sanctuary. The result was that the country priests, Levites,
were admitted to the minor offices as door-keepers and sextons.
This Ezekiel was willing to see continued, for after all is said,
the Levites were consecrated persons, better than foreign
slaves. The Deuteronomist, however, knew no distinction
between classes of temple servants. He says in so many words
that the whole tribe of Levi was chosen to carry the Ark, to
stand before Yahweh, to bless in His name, and to serve Him.
But this is just the duty and privilege of the priests.

The testimony of Deuteronomy is significant in another
direction. It knows nothing of the elaborate taxes by which
the priestly clan was to receive its support. It regards the
whole caste as dependent on the charity of the community.
The author exhorts his readers to remember the widow, the
orphan, and the Levite in the distribution of the tithes. The
assumption is that the tithe is at the discretion of the owner
so long as he does not selfishly appropriate it to his own use.
Even this he might do if he brought it to the sanctuary and
there made it the material for his festival banquet. There is
no question of a tax levied for the support of the clergy.
All that they can claim is a share (left undefined) in the good
things. And in the same connection we are told that the
reason for the poverty of the clan is that they have not re-
ceived any landed property — a direct contradiction to what
the Priestcode ordains. The inference forces itself upon us —
the regulations of the Priestcode were unknown to the Deu-
teronomist. And if we go back to the Covenant Code we shall
find that priests are not mentioned at all.

It may be said indeed, that the mention in this document

HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION 1 57

of first fruits and festival offerings implies a priesthood of
some kind. But this is far from obvious. The mention of
tithes in the account of Jacob's dream might at first sight be
construed in the same way. But knowledge of oriental custom
shows that an attendant at the shrine is not necessary. The
offering is brought before the divinity, represented by the
sacred stone or a monument of some kind, and there con-
sumed in a feast at which the sacrifice is eaten by the offerer,
his family, and his guests, the god receiving his share. It is
implied in Jacob's experience that there was no priest at
Bethel; for the sacredness of the spot was not known until
he discovered it by his vision. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob
erected altars and offered sacrifice without the intervention
of a priest. At the covenant offering at Sinai the sacrificers
are the young men of the tribes, although both Moses and
Aaron are present. One passage indeed in the patriarchal
narratives seems to imply the presence of a priest. This is
the one where Rebecca 'inquired of God.' The phrase is the
one used elsewhere of inquiring by means of the oracle, and
the oracle was manipulated by an expert, that is a priest. This
is abundantly confirmed by the Biblical texts; for the business
of the priest is to impart Tora, that is instruction as to what
is pleasing to the divinity or the reverse, and this he does by
means of the oracle.

Our conclusion is that in the earliest period the institution
of the priesthood was spontaneous and loosely organized; that
in the Deuteronomic period an attempt was made to bring
it into connection with the sole legitimate sanctuary, the one
at Jerusalem; that Ezekiel sanctioned the closer organization,
enjoining the division of the guild into two classes; that the
Priestcode carried the organization still further and endeav-
ored to make the clergy economically independent. In other
words the order of the documents ascertained by the critical
process gives us an intelligible account of the growth of this
institution. This third line of inquiry, therefore, confirms the
conclusions already reached as to the reliability of the analysis.

158 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

IV. ORIGINALITY OF THE PROPHETS

Hitherto we have considered only incidentally the group of
books which bear the names of Prophets. That these books
present problems similar to those we have been discussing is
evident at a glance. The Book of the Twelve, Minor Prophets
we call them, is made up of a number of compositions of widely
different dates. Isaiah is the name given to a similar complex
of discourses and poems. For our present purpose we need
note only that by common consent Amos is the oldest of the
group, Hosea coming next, followed by Isaiah and Micah.
Jeremiah's synchronism with the Babylonian troubles is suffi-
ciently attested by his book, and that Ezekiel lived in the
exile he himself tells us. The Jewish theory, which has not
altogether died out, is that these preachers were expounders
of the Mosaic Law, that is, of the Pentateuch. This view is a
part of the tradition which holds that a complete and final
code, moral and ritual, was delivered to Moses and written
down by him, promulgated also with the most solemn sanc-
tions. This code is of perpetual obligation and all that the
faithful Jew has to do to obtain the favor of God is to study it
and make clear to himself what it enjoins, then to obey its in-
junctions. The only literary activity for which such an
elaborate code leaves room is the activity of the scribe, the
man who studies the statute and teaches others what it re-
quires. Such activity we have already found in our discus-
sion of legalistic interpretation. That it differs from what we
find in the books of the prophets is clear. No more striking
contrast can be imagined than the contrast between these
books and the collection which we know as the Talmud.

We have found that the point of view of the Priestcode and
that of the author of Chronicles are similar. The Chronicler
can give us some idea of what the prophets would have said
had they had the authentic code of the Pentateuch in their
hands. His judgment on the northern tribes is that their
sin consisted in forsaking the one legitimate sanctuary at
Jerusalem. To enforce the lesson he introduces the prophet

HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION 159

Abijah rebuking Jeroboam for this sin. The charge is that
this king has driven out the priests, the sons of Aaron, and the
Levites, whereas in Jerusalem the legitimate priests conduct
the service according to the Law (II Chron. xiiiig-ii). On
the other hand Jehoshaphat of Judah is commended because
he sent priests and Levites throughout the cities of Judah with
the Book of the Law in their hands to teach the people
(xvii:7-9). This is of course what should have been done in
case there were a divinely sanctioned code in existence; and
the neglect of such action should have been the subject of the
rebuke of the prophets. But the outstanding fact about the
prophets is that they utter no such rebuke. They never ap-
peal to the Mosaic standard, and the name of Moses occurs
only once in the book of a preexilic prophet. The English
reader does not quite realize the state of the case, because where
he finds the word law in his Bible he instinctively thinks of the
Pentateuch. But the Hebrew word tora which is rendered in
this way would better be translated instruction or decision.
In what is probably the earliest account of Moses which we
have we find him giving decisions on questions submitted to
him. This was before he had received any code properly
so called, although the narrative assumes that questions will
arise on which the people need instruction. All our documents
assume that one of the duties of the priest is the giving of
tora, that is instruction, on matters of ritual. The nature of
such questions is made clear by Haggai, who is commanded to
put to the priest this inquiry: "If one carry sacred (that is,
sacrificial) flesh in the skirt of his garment, and then with his
skirt touch bread or broth or wine or oil or any food, will it
(the food) become sacred?" The point of inquiry is the con-
tagion of the sacred things; is it so strong that it will render
taboo what comes into contact with that which is itself sacred
by contact with sacrificial flesh? There is here no reference
to a code; the priest is supposed to know the boundaries
which separate clean and unclean. Ezekiel's description of
the priest's function is just this: They shall teach my people
the difference between the sacred and the common, and cause

i6o ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

them to discriminate the clean from the unclean; and in a
controversy they shall judge; according to my decisions
shall they judge (Ezek. xliv:23f.). Neither here nor
in the earlier prophets is there any intimation that the priest
had a book according to which he must give his sentence.
What a change was wrought when the Priestcode had actually
been published is indicated by such a composition as the one
hundred and nineteenth Psalm, in which the author delights
to set forth his appreciation of the Word, the Command-
ments, the Statutes, the Judgments, the Testimonies and the
Precepts of God. Such meditation on a book is nowhere com-
mended by earlier writers, and when Ezekiel threatens that tora
shall perish from the priest and counsel from the ancient, how
easy it would be for him to say that the Book of God would be
destroyed, or withheld or ignored, if he had such a book in
mind. But nothing of the kind is found in the record.

Moreover, when the earlier prophets allude to the tora it is
evident that they do not refer to the Mosaic code. That code
as we have abundantly shown, was ritual in its main purpose.
But when Isaiah invites or rather summons the people to
hear the tora of their God it is to denounce the ritual in un-
sparing terms: "To what purpose is the number of your sac-
rifices to me? . . . Who has required this at your hands, to
trample my courts?" The prophet is speaking in the name of
his God, but he does not derive his tora from any written
source. Amos thinks that the more sacrifices are offered, the
greater the sin, and if any one maintains that this is because
they were offered at Bethel and Gilgal instead of at Jerusa-
lem, all we can say is that the prophet was strangely derelict
in not telling the people so in so many words. What the
prophets required was something quite different from the
punctilious observance of a ritual code. As Amos puts it:
"Let justice roll on as waters and righteousness as a perennial
stream." Hosea has the root of the matter: "I desire loyalty
rather than sacrifice, and the knowledge of God rather than
burnt-offerings."

That the prophets were great moral teachers is trite enough.

HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION i6i

What I am trying to show is that only on the modern view of
the Book, according to which they were not dependent on any
alleged ritual Law, do we appreciate their originality. Of
course there may have been in existence some collection of
legal precedents such as the Covenant Code of Exodus. If so
it was not regarded by these preachers of righteousness as
the authoritative voice of God. The conception of a complete
system of ethics, ritual, economics, and science of govern-
ment, such as the Pentateuch claims to be, was entirely for-
eign to their thought. Think what force they might have
given their exhortations if they could have quoted as inspired
revelation the verse which Jesus regarded as the summing up
of Law and Prophets, the verse found in the Priestcode: Thou
shalt love thy neighbor as thine own soul ! Their silence con-
cerning any such divine command is certainly more con-
vincing than words.

V. SIN, AND ATONEMENT

If the reader will turn to the twenty-sixth chapter of Leviti-
cus he will find a series of threats, designed to enforce obedi-
ence to the commands embodied in the preceding chapters.
The concluding verse reads: These are the statutes and judg-
ments and instructions which Yahweh gave between Himself
and the sons of Israel at Mount Sinai. A similar verse is
found at the end of the next chapter and another closes the
book of Numbers. In each case it looks as if the verse was
the subscription to what was once a separate document.
Again at the conclusion of what we call the Covenant Code
we find a series of promises conditioned on observance of
the provisions of the Code, and in Deuteronomy we have an
elaborate series of threats and promises, apparently the con-
clusion of the book in its original form. The only way of
accounting for these similar sections is to suppose that in
each case they belong to collections of laws or precedents,
once separate but now combined in the Pentateuch.

We have already found confirmation of this hypothesis in

i62 ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

the difference in tone noticeable when we pass from one to
the other. In the matter of sin (a fundamental religious con-
ception, of course) we see that the Covenant Code deals with
it as a matter of trespass on a neighbor's rights. The Code
describes the crime and specifies the penalty. In Deuteronomy
we have a hortatory work which, however, deals with matters
of civil law, adding ecclesiastical regulations. In the code
which ends with Leviticus xxvi, we have a distinctly ritual book,
one which forms part of the priestly stratum, but which at
one time circulated independently. This (Lev. xvii-xxvi) we
know as the Holiness Code, because of its leading motive
which is expressed in the words: Be holy unto me, for I am
holy and have separated you from the nations, that you may
be mine. The translation is indeed misleading, for we under-
stand by the word holiness moral perfection. The Hebrew
had a different idea. He was in agreement with other people,
of a certain stage of thought, by whom everything in the world
of men and things was put into one of two classes known as
sacred and common. On one side of the sharp line of division
was the divinity and what belonged to Him; on the other was
the world and things not set apart for religious uses. Sacred
and profane are the words we use to designate the two
classes, though we do not think of the gods as sacred. Yet
the idea is in the Hebrew word, and the nearest we can come
to the meaning of the verse just quoted is to translate: Be
separate from all that is common, because I, Yahweh, am
thus separate. Another writer has expressed the thought in
the words: Now therefore if you will obey my voice and keep
my covenant you shall be my own possession . . . and shall
be a kingdom of priests, a sacred (consecrated) nation. This
certainly is the idea which Ezekiel had. Israel's function
in the world is to be guardian of the temple and its service;
and to this end the nation must be kept pure from defilement,
'in a state of grace' to use later theological language, though
the state of grace was conceived of physically rather than
morally.

For the logical effect of this conception is to reveal a num-

HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION 163

ber of dangers against which a man must guard. The intru-
sion of that which is common into the sphere of the sacred
will be destructive to the intruder. If an unconsecrated per-
son should come into the sanctuary he would fall a victim to
the divine anger. On the other hand if the priest wearing the
sacred vestments should go about among the people he would
infect persons and things with his own character, and thus
make them unfit for common life and common use. The con-
trast between the two classes is expressed also by the words
clean and unclean. Unclean in the highest degree is all that
is connected with the worship of other divinities than Yah-
weh, including in this class the spirits of the dead and all
local spirits, fairies, or cobolds. It is not without reason
therefore that the Holiness Code requires every animal slain
for food to be brought to the sanctuary, that the people should
cease sacrificing to the satyrs with which their imagination
peopled the open country. This is a reversal of the Deu-
teronomic permission to slay at a distance from the sanctuary.
It looks as though the people could not rid themselves of the
idea that every act of slaughter must concern some divinity,
and that when they poured the blood on the ground, as was
enjoined by Deuteronomy, they were actually sacrificing to
the genius loci.

The scrupulosity of this Code is explicable then on its
theory that the sanctity of the people is necessary if Yahweh
is to dwell among them. The presence of anything unclean
is abhorrent to Him, causes His anger to flame out, and de-
stroys the offender. If the nation is infected He will desert
His dwelling, and the people will be left without their Pro-
tector. It must be clear that this idea was the result of the
experiences of the exile. Ezekiel drove it home when in
vision he saw Yahweh leaving the temple because of the
abominations of the people of Jerusalem. In other words the
point of view of the Holiness Code is that of Ezekiel, and the
redaction must have taken place at about the date of the
prophet's activity. His view of sin we have found to be
ritual. Offences against the moral law and violations of rit-

i64 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

ual purity alike offended the divinity. This also is the view
of the Holiness Code. But in one respect it is more specific.
It is careful to distinguish unwitting from intentional trans-
gressions, and to provide separate treatment for the two
classes. For sin committed "with a high hand," that is with
full knowledge, this author has only penalty: That soul shall
be cut off from its people. Whether he meant that execution
was to be done by the authorities, or whether the offender was
to be left to an act of God is not made clear, and this is another
evidence of the late date of this Code, for in the exile, and
for the most part afterwards, the civil law was not in the
hands of the Jews. Probably the excommunication of the
offender was in the writer's mind, for his primary interest, as
we have seen, is in keeping the sacred area free from pollu-
tion. The purity of the camp (here put for the city of Jeru-
salem which he had really in mind) must be preserved by the
exclusion of the leper, every one that had an issue, and every
one unclean by contact with the dead (Num. v:i-4), lest they
defile the camp. Certain diseases, here classed as leprosy,
certain physiological conditions, and contact with dead bodies
are named together, because they are all attributed to the same
cause, that is, influence of demons. Most surprising to us is
the precaution taken in case of childbirth. There underlies
it no thought of the sinfulness of sexual desire, and no desire
to minimize the importance of continuance of the race. The
Hebrew did not exalt asceticism, and the gift of children is
regarded by the Biblical writers as one of the best evidences
of the divine favor. Why, then, should a woman who has
borne a son be shut out of the camp forty days, or, if it were
a daughter that was given her, eighty days? And why should
she require a special purification at the end of the period?
The answer is that traditionally the sexual life was regarded
as something under the care of special divinities. Therefore,
everything connected with it is taboo in the religion of Yahweh,
and precautions must be taken accordingly.

It is interesting to note that the purification in these cases
is effected by an offering called a sin-offering, although in our

HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION 165

apprehension no sin has been committed. The priest who offi-
ciates is said to make atonement for the offender. The word
translated 'make atonement,' has a history however, and we
must not read into it more than the early writer understood by
it. The mother of a new-born babe has committed no sin, and
needs no atonement in our sense of the word. What has been
said about the prominence of the sin-offering in the postexilic
literature makes clear what is meant. The offering takes
away the taboo under which the mother, because of supposed
uncanny influences, suffers, and when this is removed she can
again enter the sanctuary.

This idea of purification is somewhat more elaborately set
forth in the regulations concerning the leper. When it is cer-
tified that he is healed of his disease he must still submit to
certain rites before he is admitted to the community. In this
case the priest takes two birds, also cedar wood, scarlet stuff
and hyssop — substances which were supposed to counteract
ritual uncleanness. One of the birds is slain and its blood
is sprinkled on the convalescent, after the red substances have
been dipped in the blood, apparently to heighten the prophy-
lactic power. The living bird is then dipped in the blood and
allowed to go free. This is a preliminary rite and the patient
is kept apart seven days longer. Then by a ceremony of con-
secration, quite similar to that by which the priests are in-
ducted into office, he is qualified to enter the sanctuary. The
bird let loose is supposed to carry away any lurking infection,
thus reducing the uncleaness by one degree, but what re-
mains is sufficient to keep the man away from the sanctuary
seven days longer. After this period has elapsed, the cere-
mony of consecration is necessary before he is rectus in
ecclesia. It may not be out of place to point out here that
in all this there is no idea of a substitutionary atonement;
the sin-offering is not slain in place of the guilty man. The
idea that it is so slain has been prominent in Christian exposi-
tion, and is found also in Judaism. Manasseh ben Israel says
that, as Isaac was to be sacrificed and the Lord was satisfied
with a ram, so he who brings a sacrifice should consider that for

i66 ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

his offences he merited the death which the animal suffers.
Christian commentators have gone so far as to interpret the
altar fire by which the victim is consumed as a type of the fire
of hell which awaits the evil-doer. The misapprehension
could hardly be more extreme. The altar and all that is on
it is most sacred, while the fire of hell is most accursed. More-
over, Isaac was not under sentence on account of his sin, but
was brought as a burnt-offering because he was the most
precious gift which his father could bring. The lesson of
the story is of course that Yahweh is willing to accept the
gift of an animal instead of the first-born son on which he had
a traditional claim. But nothing is said of sin or a sin-offer-
ing in the narrative. Even in the case of the leper, the offer-
ing is not a substitute for the man. The man in fact is not
guilty in any sense in which we use that word. If, as has
.sometimes been supposed, his disease was sent as a punish-
ment for sin, the guilt no longer rests upon him for by hypoth-
esis he has been cured before the offering is brought. Whether
substitutionary atonement is anywhere exemplified in the Old
Testament is another question. All that we are here con-
cerned to notice is that it does not come into view in connec-
tion with the sin-offerings.

That this whole matter of clean and unclean, sacred and
common, consecrated and taboo, is one of the primitive re-
ligious conceptions which are found at all stages of human
development, needs no demonstration. It does not follow that,
because to our view it is primitive, therefore the document
in which it is most emphasized is of very ancient date. The
tenacity of this idea enabled it to hold the place it holds in
the post-exilic literature of the Jews. Its prominence there
is due to the experience of the exile. The long delay of God
in bringing back the glories of Solomon's kingdom impressed
the Jews with the sense of guilt. This sense is made evident
by such prayers as that of Nehemiah, and by the touching
expostulations of some of the Psalms. The scrupulosity of
the Priestcode in providing for the purification of people,

HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION 167

land, temple, and altar, is evidence of the postexilic frame of
mind. Its resemblance to what we find in Ezekiel has al-
ready been remarked upon. The Priestly view of sin and
its remedy, therefore, confirms the critical view of Israel's
literature.

XIV
SOME SURVIVALS

IN THE first of these essays it was shown that Hebrew
literature is the result of a complicated process in which
early material went through the hands of various editors
before it assumed the shape in which it has come to us. It
may be interesting to note some erratic blocks which attest
the reality of this process. Vv^e will not dwell upon the Baby-
lonian material, such as the story of the great deluge^ because
that is common property of the expositors. Some minor in-
sertions in the narrative are equally significant. In the book
of Exodus, for example, we have an anecdote which on exami-
nation shows itself to be of different tone from the narrative
in which it is imbedded. It tells that w^hen Moses and his
family were journeying through the desert their God, Yahweh,
met them and was about to kill the prophet. Zipporah, his
wife, with great presence of mind, took a sharp stone and
circumcised her infant son, then smeared the blood on her
husband's body, whereupon the angry divinity spared him
(Ex. iv: 24-26). The more we look at the story the more we
are puzzled by it. Moses was the chosen instrument of Yah-
v/eh for the deliverance of Israel from bondage; he was re-
turning to Egypt to obey the divine command; no oversight
is charged against him or against his wife; neglect to cir-
cumcise his child, which is traditionally made the occasion of
the anger, is nowhere mentioned in the narrative. To crown
all, there is no parallel for the use of circumcision blood in
the way indicated in the text.

On the other hand, parallels can be pointed out in primitive
religions, so-called. It is a common belief that the genius loci
must be placated whenever a new location for tent or house is
chosen. For this reason the custom of making a foundation

168

SOME SURVIVALS 169

sacrifice for every new building is wide-spread. The anec-
dote we are considering is apparently a local saga which has
been transferred to Moses and Yahweh. Blood being a power-
ful charm it is used to ward off hostile spirits, and while human
blood is not employed for this purpose in Hebrew ritual, there
is no reason why it should not be so applied. Circum-
cision brings the boy into the fellowship of the clan, and so
with the God of the clan. In fact circumcision is the seal of
the covenant by which Yahweh and Israel are bound to-
gether. The application of the blood would thus remind the
God of His relations with His people, and so the charm would
be doubly effective. We might remind ourselves here that in
the account of Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac, the boy is bound
and laid on the wood of the altar, evidently in order that
the blood may flow directly onto the altar, another instance
contrary to the usual custom showing that the human blood is
effective with the divinity.

A similar survival is preserved in the book of Joshua. There
we read that at the invasion of Canaan, Joshua had a vision.
He saw a man with a drawn sword, and on asking his errand
was informed that the visitant had come as prince of the army
of Yahweh. Moreover, Joshua was commanded to put off
his shoes because he was on sacred ground. Joshua did so —
and then the narrative breaks off. Evidently we have a mu-
tilated fragment of a local saga, according to which the divin-
ity agreed to help the Israelites in their war — on certain
conditions. That it was a divinity and not merely an angel
who spoke is clear, for the ground was sacred — always evi-
dence of the presence of a god. What the conditions stated
were we can no longer discover, but we may conjecture that the
local Baal (to use the name current among the natives) agreed
to the Israelite conquest on the understanding that he was to
receive tithes, first-fruits, and offerings as before.

The two stories thus considered belong to the earlier strata
of the Pentateuch, but that the priestly document also pre-
serves material of primitive cast is evident. The critical
theory in dating the code in the exile does not mean to assert

I/O ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

that all its content originated at that time. In fact, being
a codification of priestly tradition, it must contain elements of
different dates. In other communities the common law pre-
serves statutes and decisions of very widely separated periods.
That case law preceded statute law in Israel seems evident
from the wording of some of the regulations. In the Covenant
Code, for example, we read: If a man do thus and so such a
penalty will follow. The implication is that a judgment to
this effect had been pronounced in some historic instance.
The use of the word judgments in connection with the words
statutes and commandments is proof of the historic process.
In the priestly document we find some regulations promulgated
in connection with particular instances. Thus the man who
blasphemed the Name was arrested and held until the oracle
could pronounce judgment (Lev. xxiv:io-i6). Similarly, the
sentence on the man who gathered sticks on the sabbath cre-
ated a precedent (Num. xv:32-36).

The codes now combined in the Pentateuch must therefore
be regarded as the result of successive codifications of prece-
dents handed on from one generation to another by tradi-
tion. Deuteronomy might be thought to be an exception,
since it is the program of the prophetic party. But even it
embodies much customary law. Ezekiel's legislation again,
though put into shape by the prophet, derives its substance
from priestly usage. Its temple is a reproduction of that of
Solomon, only fortified with stronger walls and increased in
area, and its regulations concerning the priesthood were ap-
parently the carrying out of the practice of the stricter party
before the exile. In the priestly stratum also, we discover
certain elements which we can account for only as survivals.
They were part of folk-custom so tenaciously held that they
could not be safely disregarded. One of them has strayed
into Deuteronomy, although apparently not a part of the book
as originally published. This is the section which provides
for a case of murder, the author of the crime being unknown
(Deut. xxiii-g). In case a man is found slain in the open
country with no clue to the murderer, the sheikhs of the nearest

SOME SURVIVALS 171

village are to bring a heifer which has not known the yoke,
taking it to a valley in which there is a stream of running
water, but which is not under cultivation. There in the pres-
ence of the priests they are to disavow any connection with the
crime, washing their hands as a token. The victim then has
its neck broken, and apparently the carcass is left on the spot.
The whole ceremony is so foreign to Hebrew notions, as re-
corded in the Law, that we must suppose it a relic of early
religion. The most plausible supposition is that it is a sac-
rifice to the spirit of the murdered man. The ghost of a man
who has met a violent death is believed to wreak his vengeance
on the living, and it must be placated in some way. Worship
of the dead is an element common to all early religion. The
point we now have in mind is that a sacrifice of this kind is
foreign to the official Hebrew religion. Everything connected
with the dead is unclean to the worshippers of Yahweh. This
particular rite therefore is discordant to the document in
which we find it. It is a true survival.

The same may be said of a curious ceremony now enjoined
in the book of Numbers (v:ii-3i). It provides that if a
man suspects his wife of unfaithfulness he may bring her
before the priest, and also provide a meal-offering. The
priest is then to take 'holy water' — the only mention of such
a substance in Hebrew literature — and put into it some dust
from the floor of the sanctuary. He then writes certain
curses and washes off the ink into the cup of water and this
is given the woman to drink. At the opening of the ceremony
the woman has been adjured as to her innocence, and the
solemn assurance is given her that if she is guilty the magical
water will cause her body to swell, and her thigh to fall away,
that is, will cause an abortion.

Obviously, we have here a case of ordeal. The divinity is
appealed to to discover guilt by a magical test. The sacred
water and the dust from the floor of the sanctuary have un-
canny power, being taboo to the layman. This power is mag-
nified by the curses written on the paper and washed off into
the water. The solemn adjuration by the priest impresses

172 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

this fact on the suspected woman. Whether the ceremony
will affect her imagination so as to produce the effect threat-
ened, we need not inquire. The belief of the people that the
detection of guilt may be accomplished in this way is of
course evident on the surface. But no other case of applica-
tion of the ordeal is found in the Law, and we must suppose
this to be a true instance of survival.

A third instance is the case of the red heifer (Num. 19),
the only one in which the color of the victim is specified. This
animal is to be brought outside the camp, a requirement
without parallel in other parts of the Law, for all offerings
must be brought to the door of the sanctuary. The ceremony
is, to be sure, directed towards the tabernacle, and a priest
is to be present. When the animal is slain this priest takes
of the blood and sprinkles it seven times in the direction of
the sacred Dwelling. This again is a departure from priestly
custom, for in every other case the blood is applied directly to
the altar and, in the sin-offerings, applied also to the person
or things to be purified. Although this is called a sin-offering,
it is peculiar in that a female victim is chosen, whereas in
all other cases it must be a male animal. When the sprinkling
of blood has been accomplished the rest of the blood and the
whole carcass, including the skin and the contents of the in-
testines, are to be burned, and into the fire the priest is to
throw cedar wood, scarlet stuff, and hyssop. After the burn-
ing, the ashes are to be collected and kept in a clean place.
They are to be used for ritual cleansing, that is when a person
is levitically defiled by the presence of a human corpse, or by
contact with human remains or with a grave, he must be
purified by being sprinkled with water in which some of the
ashes have been mingled. This is to be done on the third
and also on the seventh day after the defilement has been
contracted. Further, the tent in which a death has taken
place is to be cleansed in like manner. The statute closes
with a severe threat against any neglect of the rite; the guilty
man is to be cut off from the assembly. Curiously enough,
the persons who are concerned in the rite, the priest, the man

SOME SURVIVALS 173

who does the burning, the one who collects the ashes, and the
one who does the sprinkling, are made 'unclean' by participa-
tion in the ceremony.

In spite of the importance which the recorder of the law
attaches to it, there is in the whole Old Testament only one
instance in which the observance of this law is narrated, and
that one seems to be a story designed simply to show how the
rite is to be made effective. This instance is the slaughter of the
Midianites (Num. xxxi). Here we read that the warriors who
had been active in the massacre were kept outside the camp
for seven days, and purified themselves the third day and the
seventh day. The plunder also, consisting of metal, was
purified first by fire and then by the 'water of impurity.' No-
where else in the numerous wars of Israel did the soldiers,
so far as our knowledge goes, take pains to conform to the
law.

The perplexity into which we are brought by careful con-
sideration of this chapter is not relieved by the efforts of the
expositors, whether Jewish or Christian. The Rabbis confess
that they can give no reason for the law, and suppose that
Solomon had this legislation in mind when he wrote: I said
I will be wise, but it was far from me. Some say that the
explanation was vouchsafed to Moses alone, and others affirm
that the Almighty Himself found it a worthy subject for study
and that Moses found Him engaged upon it when he ascended
the Mount. Attempts to connect the heifer of the text with
other cows mentioned in the Old Testament, or even with
the golden calf are merely evidences of the straits to which
the commentators are reduced. Christian interpretation is
no more helpful. The attempt of Barnabas to find Christ
typified in the section, was noticed in the first of these essays.
It is obviously discredited by the violence it does to the text,
and later Christian efforts are no more convincing. Our only
recourse is to suppose that we have here a piece of early re-
ligious ritual, discordant to the general tone of Judaism, but
which was preserved because of the firmness with which the
people held to it.

174 ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

What this early religious rite was, seems clear from the
parallels that we are able to point out. The distinctive marks
of this ceremony, and the ones which have given us perplex-
ity, are precisely those which in other religions characterize
sacrifices to the dead. First of all the red color of the victim
is the color associated with death or with the disposal of a
corpse. Red coffins, red banners at funerals, red objects de-
posited with the dead man, red pigment applied to the corpse
are attested in different regions. The choice of this color is
explicable, since being the color of the blood it is associated
with life. Among the Greeks it was believed that the blood
of a victim gave some semblance of life to the shade in Hades.
The red victim would be doubly effective because of its color.
These same Greeks offered red victims to the underworld
deities, and the spirits of the dead are associated or confused
with these deities in the minds of many worshippers. The
Archon of Plataea, who at other times wore white garments,
wore crimson when invoking the spirits of dead warriors. A
further parallel is the sacrifice of a female victim, and when we
read that a barren cow was offered by Ulysses to a dead friend,
we are irresistibly reminded of the red heifer which according
to Talmudic tradition must be a virgin. The most remark-
able thing about the heifer is that her blood Avas shed away
from the sanctuary. Jewish tradition forbids the priest who
sprinkles the blood to use a vessel; he must catch it in his
hand and then wipe off his hand on the carcass. We must
conclude that originally the blood was allowed to flow to
the ground, and that the sprinkling of a little of it towards
the sanctuary is a superficial attempt to conceal the original
method. But in sacrifice for the dead the blood was absorbed
by the ground. Again, the burning in this case is more
thorough than in other sacrifices, just as in Greek religion
victims for the dead are wholly, consumed, either on very low
altars or on the ground. We may even suspect that the place
specified in this rite is not without significance. It is 'before
the sanctuary.' But as the sanctuary which the Priestcode
has in mind is the Jerusalem temple this means on the Mount

SOME SURVIFALS 175

of Olives, and this Mount was a place of sepulture for Jeru-
salem from early times.

The number of parallels thus discoverable can hardly be
accidental, in which case we have before us a veritable sur-
vival from the animistic stage of rehgion, a sacrifice for the
departed souls, something against which the religion of Yah-
weh reacted strongly, but which was apparently too firmly
entrenched in the popular belief to be wholly discarded. The
defilement of those who took part in the rite now becomes in-
telligible. Every one concerned in a sacrifice of this kind
necessarily became unfit for the sanctuary of Yahweh — just
as the Greek who took part in the worship of a hero could
not enter the temple of Zeus until purified. Consecration to
one divinity was antipathetic to another. Doubtless popular
belief among the Hebrews held that the ghost of a dead man
was likely to work harm to the living unless placated. The
kings of Judah were honored after their death by what is
called a burning, apparently a sacrifice of some kind, and
that Yahweh regarded the presence of their tombs in the
vicinity of His sanctuary as an insult shows that some sort of
divine honors were paid to them. It was safer, the compilers
of the Priestcode thought, to retain this rite on account of
this popular prejudice. All that remains to explain is the
fact that the ashes were used in lustration, and had a purifying
effect, although they defiled those who handled them. The
only hypothesis which fits the case is that originally the
sprinkling at the end of seven days marked the termination
of the period for which the mourners consecrated themselves
to the departed. It was still necessary for those who had been
sprinkled to take the ritual bath before being admitted to the
sanctuary.

The cases of survival which we have now considered are
taken from different strata of the Pentateuch. They serve
to strengthen the critical contention that the five books
ascribed to Moses are the result of a complicated process in
which elements of different date and different origin have
been brought into juxtaposition.

T

XV
APOCALYPTIC VAGARIES

HE STRENGTH of certain expectations ostensibly
based on exegesis of the Bible is attested by the num-
ber of religious communities which are correctly
classed as Adventists. Besides those which use that name
as their official title, we may count here the Plymouth
Brethren, the Shakers, the Mormons, the Christadelphians,
and the Bible Students Association organized under the lead
of the late Pastor Russell. The recent world-war also brought
to public notice various expounders of prophecy who endeav-
ored to interpret the war in the light of Adventist expecta-
tions. To say that so large a number of Christian people are
mistaken may seem presumptuous, but the historical study
which their doctrine suggests, can hardly lead to any other
conclusion. Without prejudgment, let us endeavor to make
/ such a study.

The presuppositions on which all these bodies are based
are two: first, that the main office of the Old Testament
prophets was prediction of the future; and secondly, that one
book in the Old Testament and one in the New contain and,
to him who is able to interpret them, set forth a complete
scheme of the world's history, an outline, that is, of what
may be expected to come to pass until the consummation of
all things and the creation of a new state of society. For
the first-named of these beliefs, the word prophet is perhaps
to blame, for on the surface it seems to mean a foreteller. The
Hebrew word, however, seems not to have had this connota-
tion, but to have designated one who speaks for another,
specifically one who brings the message of God, whether

176

APOCALYPriC VAGARIES 177

the message concerns the past, the present, or the future. To
the unbiased reader it must be clear that whatever predictions
the earlier prophets uttered were conditional. Like all other
preachers, they warned men of the consequences of their evil
deeds, and promised happiness in case they would repent.
Until the exile the message was generally pessimistic, as Jer-
emiah intimates when he says to Hananiah: The prophets
that were before me and thee prophesied against many coun-
tries and against great kingdoms, of war and of evil and of
pestilence. The prophet who prophesies of peace — when
the word of prophet comes to pass then shall the prophet be
known, that Yahweh has in fact sent him (Jer. xxviii:8f.).
That is to say, all the presumption is against the prophet who
predicts anything but calamity.

To trace the history of Messianic prophecy is beyond the
scope of this essay. Our immediate business is with the
apocalyptic form which this hope took in such times of deep
depression as those in which the true believers often found
themselves. At such times the desire to read the future be-
comes acute as we have reason to know from our observations
during the late war. We must remember that the ancient
world was full of portents and prognostications. Every un-
usual event in sky or earth was supposed to presage some
other event about to come to pass. Since the conception of
natural law had not arisen, everything was attributed to the
direct action of the gods. Hope, therefore, taught men to
expect supernatural intervention whenever human help seemed
inadequate. Evidence is given by the book of Ezekiel which,
in this as in some other respects, marks an epoch. This
prophet, pessimistic as he was during the early years of his
exile, became more hopeful when the predicted calamity of
Jerusalem actually took place. Whatever Messianic expec-
tation existed before his time was adopted by him and made
more specific. His detailed program forms the basis for
those who followed. That program includes the defeat of
the hostile world-powers, represented by Gog; the return of
Israel to its own land; the erection of a new temple in which

178 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

God will reside; and an era of undisturbed peace and pros-
perity, at least for the people of God.

In the Maccabean period, when Antiochus attempted to
crush out the rehgion of faithful Jews, it was natural that the
hope of deliverance should again find expression. This it
did in the book of Daniel, the first of the apocalypses. This
book differs from Ezekiel in that it attempts to set a date for
the divine intervention. The author's view takes in the his-
tory of the world so far as it affects the fortunes of Israel.
Four great world-empires are to pass in succession over the
stage, beginning with that of Babylon in which the author
makes his hero, Daniel, take his stand. The last of these
is to be miraculously destroyed by the kingdom of God, which
will then fill the earth. This event the author expects to take
place in three years and a half from the time of his writing.
To fix this date he makes an elaborate calculation based on a
saying of Jeremiah, That prophet had named seventy years
as the time of exile, not to encourage hope of an early return,
but to insist that the exiles shall reconcile themselves to the
situation in which they find themselves and not expect an
early deliverance. But the apocalyptical writer who takes
the name of Daniel knowing that the seventy years had brought
very little, if any, relief to the Jews of the dispersion con-
cluded that the seventy years were not meant to be taken
literally, but stood for seventy year-weeks. His calculation
is given in detail, and culminates in the assertion that all but
half of the last week has passed and therefore that endurance
through the remaining half is what is required, after which
the new state of things will come about. The martyrs for
their faith will then be raised from the dead to share the
blessedness of the kingdom, and the persecutors will also be
raised to receive the penalty of their misdeeds.

This apocalypse we now know to be only one of a number
of such works which have many features in common. Products
of times of affliction, they seek to keep alive the hope of be-
lievers by promising early deliverance. The faith of the
authors in the rule of God makes them confident that He

APOCALYPTIC VAGARIES 179

cannot delay His mercy, and that He will act in the imme-
diate future. The relief is pictured either as the setting up
of the Messianic kingdom, the throne to be occupied by a
Son of David, or as the rule of God in person, or again as the
hierocracy in which the people of Israel will act as priest for
the whole world. Its seat will be Jerusalem, but a Jerusalem
transformed into something quite different from the city we
know. In the more transcendental forms of the expectation
we find this New Jerusalem already prepared in heaven, only
waiting for the right moment to descend and take its place on
earth. Its coming will be preceded by convulsions of nature,
and the oppressive nations will be called before the bar of
God to be judged for their sins. And all this is to take place
in the near future, reckoned from the time when each author
puts his expectations into written form.

What concerns us now is to note that the Jewish expecta-
tion of the Messianic time passed over into the Church. The
belief that the Messiah had already come in the person of
Jesus could not make men think that all the glories of the
Messianic kingdom were present — the little flock which pro-
fessed allegiance to Jesus was poor and afflicted, often perse-
cuted for its faith. In such circumstances the hope took the
form of expectation of a second advent. The New Testa-
ment Apocalypse simply adapts the Jewish program to this
form of the expectation. The author sees convulsions in na-
ture and in the world of man. Then comes the sudden revela-
tion of the Lord from heaven, the drastic overthrow of the
hostile powers, the rebuilding of Jerusalem or the descent of
the heavenly city which is to take its place, the presence of
the Messiah as universal ruler, and peace and happiness
throughout the ages. All this the author assures us is shortly
to come to pass. This, as we have seen, is a feature com-
mon to these compositions, and as if to leave us in no
doubt the transfigured Jesus of the Apocalypse assures us:
Behold I come quickly. That in fact the Christians of the
first generation expected to see the return of Jesus in their
own time is evident from the tone of other New Testament

i8o ESSJTS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

writings. Jewish parallels are easily found. The defenders
of Jerusalem against the assaults of Titus were animated
by a belief that God would suddenly reveal Himself and
deliver His city. After the fall of Jerusalem into the hands
of the Romans, the author of Fourth Ezra comforts himself
with the thought that the great overturning must still come,
and at no long interval. The Sibylline books expect the Mes-
siah soon after the Roman triumph, and that the standard of
revolt was raised in the second century of our era because the
Jews believed the Messiah to have come in the person of Bar
Kochba is well known.

In every age the inappeasable desire to know the future
has produced attempts to date the consummation of all things.
Two possibilities at once suggest themselves; the date of the
Advent may be known by direct revelation, or it may be dis-
covered by examination of Scripture, in which it is, by hy-
pothesis, contained, though not obvious to the careless or
unbelieving reader. Both these ways are in evidence in the
history of the Church. In every age there have been enthusi-
asts who thought themselves inspired to reveal the future.
With them we are not now concerned, for we are studying the
history of interpretation. We say with Jeremiah: He that
hath a dream let him tell his dream; what has the straw to
do with the wheat? As to those who deduce their theories from
Scripture we are at once struck with their divergence
from each other. A monograph on this subject which does not
profess to be exhaustive enumerates no less than twenty-
seven different dates which were fixed as the time of the end
between the years 557 and 1734 of our era, and the calculations
have gone on down to our own day. The question naturally
arises : How can so many divergent results be drawn from the
same Scriptures?

Examination of the postulates underlying the calculations
shows that they are only two in number. One is that the di-
vine plan of the ages, that is, the whole scheme of human his-
tory, can be deduced from the numerical data of the Bible.
The second asserts that the date of the Coming is stated in

APOCALTPriC VAGARIES i8i

certain passages in Daniel and Revelation, but in enigmatical
language, the purpose being to conceal the real meaning from
the superficial reader. The two theories are not mutually
exclusive. In fact they are usually held in conjunction. The
former gives prominence to the numbers seven and twelve in
the sacred writings, and suggests that the history of the world
is arranged on the scale of one of these numbers. One of
the widely accepted beliefs has been that as God created the
world in six days and rested on the seventh, so the course of
the world would run in six thousand years at the end of which
the great world-sabbath of a thousand years would come.
Less prominent but still discoverable is the theory that eleven
periods of five hundred years each will elapse before the final
consummation, the twelfth being the time of bliss. Another
number which plays a part in ancient symbolism is four, and
this may have been in the mind of some, since the Old Testa-
ment chronology (that of the priestly writer) makes about
four thousand years to have elapsed between the creation and
the Roman period. A Rabbinic tradition based on this num-
ber affirms that the Messiah is to live four hundred years.
Daniel's four periods dominated by four great empires have
already been mentioned, and may have been suggested by the
Hesiodic four ages. The prominence of the number seven
in the book of Daniel has also been remarked upon, and re-
appears in the Revelation of John, where the forty-two
months are equivalent to the three and a half years of the
older book, half of a seven-year period, this again being the
twelve hundred and sixty days which have so large a part in
later expectation.

To go back a little, we may notice that the book of Enoch,
pre-Christian apparently, calculates seventy generations from
the date of the assumed author. During this period the fallen
angels are to be imprisoned under the earth, and at its termina-
tion are to be brought to the final judgment.^ Later Jewish
calculations fixed various dates from the creation for the
coming of the Messiah, ranging from the year 51 18 a.m. (a.d.

1 Enoch 10:12.

i82 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

1358) to 5700. Among Christians we find as early as Barn-
abas the calculation of the world-sabbath at the end of six
thousand years, and this passed over to Tertullian and Ire-
naeus. Hippolytus adopts the six thousand years, but di-
vides the sum into twelve periods as already indicated. This
was easy according to the chronology of the Greek version of
the Old Testament, for it makes the Christian era begin about
5500 years after the creation. This Father, therefore, names
the year 500 a.d. as the termination of the present world-
order. The conclusion follows logically from the premises.

A distinct exception to the current belief was made by
Augustine. His view of the two commonwealths practically
identified the Church with the Kingdom of God, and he had
no use for a catastrophic overturning of things. Apparently
he expected the gradual triumph of the Christian system as
organized in the Catholic Church. Although this view would
naturally commend itself to highchurchmen, the identifica-
tion fell into discredit among thoughtful men when corrup-
tion invaded the Church itself, and when also wars, famines,
and pestilences made it evident that the golden age had not
yet dawned. As the year 1000 approached, men reminded
themselves of the Apocalyptic statement that Satan would be
bound for a thousand years and then be loosed for a brief
period. This is in line with the Jewish scheme of the Messianic
era, according to which the advent of the Deliverer would be
preceded by a time of trouble — the birth-woes of the new
order of things. The hostile world-powers, hj^ostatized by
Ezekiel in the name of Gog, had become a standing eschato-
logical figure, the Antichrist. He was the incarnation of all
that is evil, the exact opposite of the returning Christ. His-
torically, he owes his origin to the Nero of the apostolic age
who is apparently meant by the enigmatical number 666
(Rev. xiii:i8), given as the number of the beast. Since Nero
had not returned, as the apocalyptic writer expected, it was
held that the prophecy was still to be fulfilled. Irenaeus, for
example, anticipates the coming of a tyrant whose name will
have the numerical value of 666, and that he will reign three

APOCALTPTIC VAGARIES 183

years and six months before being overthrown.' It would be
unprofitable to follow the attempts which have been made all
along the course of history to interpret this mysterious number,
the latest finding it in the name of the German Kaiser.

The year 1000 passed without any especially notable in-
terference of Providence, and although isolated thinkers still
tried their hand at the interpretation of prophecy, no general
expectation of the end of the world seems to have been enter-
tained until the time of Joachim of Floris, who was born in
1 145 and died in 12 01. His impulse came from his convic-
tion of the decadence of the Church, its efforts after worldly
power, its impotence to secure peace in the world, the prev-
alence of heresy, and the rapid advance of the Moslem power.
He must have bieen a man of unusual gifts, for he had many
devoted followers who saw in him a worker of miracles, as well
as an inspired prophet. He did not claim to be a prophet in
the sense that he received new revelations, but was convinced
that he had the gift of interpreting Scripture. He was, how-
ever, the child of his age, in that he accepted the allegorical
and typical interpretations, and also in that he believed the
monastic orders to be the predestined saviours of the Church.
His general theory was that the world's history would fill
three periods. The first, that of married people, was repre-
sented by the Old Testament. The second, that of the clergy,
was represented by the New Testament. The third, yet to
come, would be that of the monks, and would have the true
spiritual interpretation of the Bible. In each period he dis-
covered forty-two generations corresponding to each other,
although the Old Testament generations covered more time
than the others because of the greater age of the antediluvian
Patriarchs. In the first period Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are
the counterparts of Zacharias, John, and Jesus in the second.
The twelve sons of Jacob represent the twelve Apostles of
Jesus. Moses and Aaron are renewed in Paul and Barnabas.
The three great periods are assigned to Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit, respectively. The forty-two generations of the second

2 Contra Hoereses, V, 30.

i84 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

era would end in the year 1260, and the new heavens and new
earth would then appear. This climax would be preceded by
the appearance of the traditional Antichrist. Joachim went
so far as to declare in the year 1190 that the Antichrist was
already born though he had not yet manifested his power.
A similar announcement had been made a century earlier by
Archbishop Ranieri of Florence.'' We are here in the region
of unfulfilled prophecy, but it may be interesting to note that
the identification of the Pope with Antichrist, which we have
probably supposed to be a Protestant notion, is much older
than the Reformation. It is found at least as early as the
year 991, and was then openly made by an Archbishop in a
Synod at Rheims. It reappears at different intervals, and was
of course welcome to the Protestants, in whose polemic it
became a staple charge. Millennial expectations revived at
the Reformation, and Luther is said to have remarked that
the world would come to an end before the year 1548. This
is a recurrent phenomenon in the history of attempted reforms.
When the leader in any movement is disappointed at the
lethargy of his followers and the opposition of the mass of
men, he looks for an act of God to accomplish what seems
beyond human power. Protestant revival of the study of
Scripture contributed to millenarian anticipations. Cocceius,
whose general principles we studied in connection with the
Federal Theology, interpreted the book of Daniel as con-
taining a scheme of the world's history down to his own time.
He interpreted the vision of the four beasts in this way: The
lion is the kingdom of Constantine, the bear represents the
Goths and Vandals, the leopard is identified with the Muham-
madan power, and the fourth beast is the empire of Charle-
magne. On this basis the Papal power of course becomes the
Antichrist who will be overcome by Jesus at his second com-
ing, and this the commentator thought could not be far away.
The disturbances in England in the seventeenth century
gave rise to apocalyptic expectations. Since the great world-

3 Doellinger, The Prophetic Spirit and Prophecies of the Christian Era
(1872), p. 290.

APOCALTPTIC FAGARIES 185

empires of Daniel were four in number, the Messianic king-
dom which was to replace them was called the Fifth Mon-
archy. Hence the movement of certain revolutionists is known
as that of the Fifth Monarchy Men. Their readiness to re-
volt was based on the belief that the three and a half years
of Daniel were now at an end and their exhortation was:
Therefore up, O ye saints, to take the kingdom and to possess
it, for the gentiles have possessed the outer court for this
forty-two months and 'tis now time to arise, yea high time
to deliver thyself, O Sion, and shake off the dust, to lay waste
the land of Nimrod with the sword.* The declaration of one
of these sectaries to Cromwell that the next vial to be poured
out is a scorching hot one, and must fall upon the apostate
professors that have forsaken the cause of Christ, and the
same man's prediction of the third woe now at hand, shows
how the Book of Revelation had taken hold of men's imagi-
nations. In spite of Cromwell's services to the Puritan cause,
there were not wanting those who identified him with Anti-
christ, or with the Beast which is in essence the same thing.
The interpretation of the little horn in Daniel as William the
Conqueror and his descendants, finally cut off in the person
of Charles I, does not surprise us, nor does the expectation
of the revolutionists that they will carry their arms as far
as Rome, which they expected to reach in 1660. Six years
later their movement would be so triumphant (they thought)
that all the world would be convinced, and then Christ would
reign in person, destroying all those kings, priests, and law-
yers, who were usurping the powers that belong to him alone.
Then the saints would rule the earth, executing vengeance on
all his enemies.

It may be thought superfluous to describe these discredited
expectations, yet they have their use in showing us how men,
possessed of an erroneous idea of what the Bible is, may be
mistaken in the deductions they make. Not long after the
failure of the Fifth Monarchy Men, Robert Fleming pub-

* Rogers, Some Account of the Life and Opinions of a Fifth Monarchy
Man (1867), p. 301.

i86 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETJTION

lished an Apocalyptical Key which has had considerable in-
fluence on later speculation. This book, published in 1701,
gives the postulates upon which the author supposes all ex-
positors of the Apocalypse to agree. They are: That the
Revelation contains the series of all the remarkable events
and changes of the Christian Church until the end of the
world; that the mystical Babylon doth signify Rome in an
antichristian Church; that this, therefore, cannot be Rome
pagan, but Rome Papal; and that the seven heads of the
beast are the seven forms of government which obtained
among the Romans. A further postulate, perhaps the one
most important in its influence, although not original with
Fleming, is that where days are spoken of in the Apocalypse,
years are meant. The scheme of the Apocalypse, as every
reader knows, is based on the number seven. There are seven
seals, seven trumpets, and seven vials, arranged in that order.
Fleming finds that the seven seals indicate events which took
place between the writing of Revelation and the year 337. He
then traces the seven trumpets, making them show the history
down to the Reformation, which he dates in 1516. The seven
vials will then cover the period from that time down to the
year 2000. According to this, Fleming himself was living in
the time of the fifth vial, and he was more modest than most
Millenarians in that he did not expect the great crisis to
come in his own lifetime. He believed that the 1260 years
of the traditional exegesis, however, would come to an end
in 1789, or rather he gives his readers the choice between that
date and either 1848 or 1866.

We found among Fleming's postulates the one which inter-
preted the days of the Apocalyptic writers as years. The
way in which this axiom, as I may call it, is applied by the
interpreters, may be illustrated from a work now forgotten
which was written in the years 1793, 1794, and 1795, and
published immediately afterwards.^ Four of the numerical

5 Bicheno, Explanation of Scripture Prophecy. The Signs of the Times,
or the Dark Prophecies of Scripture illustrated by the Application of Present
Important Events. The American edition is dated 1796.

APOCALYPTIC FAG ARIES 187

data of Daniel and Revelation are made the basis of the
author's identification. It is significant that the book or
pamphlet was written when minds were agitated by the events
of the French Revolution. It is in times of political upheaval
that attention is called to apocalyptical programs. The four
numbers which concern us are: first, 2300 found in Daniel
viii:i4. There we read that the angel assured Daniel that the
time during which the sanctuary should be desecrated
amounted to 2300 evening-mornings. The interest of the in-
quirer in the daily morning and evening sacrifice of the temple
accounts for the form of the answer. What distressed him
was that the regular worship of God, which consisted in the
bringing of these two sacrifices, was no longer offered. The
suspension then was to last so many mornings and evenings,
or 1 1 50 days. Later the writer gives us another terminus
for the persecution in the words *'a time, times and a half"
(xii:7, also in vii:25). Revelation borrows this figure, but
gives the equivalent as forty-two months or 1 2 60 days.
Daniel again gives us 1290 days, and in immediate sequence
1335 (xii:ii and 12). Critical conjectures concerning the
reason for these apparently discordant statements need not
now be developed. The interpreters whom we have in mind
take all of them as part of the infallible revelation, and make
all of them mean years instead of days.

Now it is obvious that by making any given year the ter-
minus of the alleged period and reckoning backwards a
terminus a quo can be found. This seems to be the method
of Bicheno. Assuming that the events of the French Revo-
lution were predicted in Scripture, he reckoned backward to
find the starting point of the predicted period. Thus, from
the year 1789 we subtract 1260, one of the revealed figures,
and we come to 529. In this year the Code of Justinian was
published, "the stronghold of clerical tyranny," and about the
same time, we are assured, the Bishop of Rome was recognized
by the Emperor as having supreme judicial power. Taking
the next figure (1290), which is just thirty years more,
we assume that the conflict with the Antichrist which began

i88 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

in 1789, will last thirty years. Therefore, the Millennium
will dawn in 181 9. And this is confirmed by another cal-
culation based on the number 2300, taken again to mean so
many years. In the year 481 b.c Xerxes set out to invade
Greece. From this date the 2300 years bring us again to
1819 A.D.

It may seem unprofitable to dwell longer on these aber-
rations as we must call them, but two more may be briefly
mentioned because they are of American origin. One of these
is the calculation of William Miller, which had considerable
vogue in the first half of the nineteenth century. Miller's
book consists of a series of lectures published in collected
form in 1842. But the lectures had been delivered at differ-
ent times as far back as the year 1833. The title sufficiently
indicates the author's belief: Evidence from Scripture and
History, of the Second Coming of Christ about the Year 1843.
The calculation is similar to that of Fleming. The terminus
a quo of the 2300 years is assumed to be the time of the decree
for the rebuilding of Jerusalem (457 b.c. according to Miller),
and the end will then come in 1843. "Or take 70 weeks of
years, being 490 years, from 2300 and it will leave 1810
after Christ's death. Add his life (because we begin to
reckon our time at his birth), which is 33 years, and we come
to the same a.d 1843." ^

The second American calculation is that of Pastor Russell,
already alluded to. His reckoning is like the others, that is,
it is based on the theory that days are put for years. Taking
the seven times mentioned by Daniel, he supposes them to
mean seven periods of 360 years each. These 2520 years
would bring us, beginning with Zedekiah (606 e.g.), to 1914?
which is, therefore, the year of the Second Coming. The
Pastor was consistent in that he supposed Christ actually to
have come to earth again, but to be hidden from view until
he shall choose to reveal himself. It is perhaps superfluous
to point out that according to the best authorities Zedekiah
did not come to the throne until 597, and that we have no

6 Evidence, p. 54.

APOCALYPTIC VAC ARIES 189

trace of a Hebrew year of 360 days. The Hebrew year was
a lunar year brought into accord with the solar by the inter-
calation of a month whenever necessary. Seven years on this
system would not differ greatly from seven of our years, so
that if Daniel meant seven great years, the end would not
come as was calculated, but would still be some fifty years
away. Interest in an event fifty years away would be much
less acute than in one which is expected at once.

Applying this to the situation of the apocalj^Dtic writers,
whether Daniel or John, we can see the fallacy of supposing
them to have any interest in that which, by hypothesis, was
to happen two thousand years in the future. As we have
seen, the apocalypses were the agonizing cry of men under per-
secution, looking for an immediate intervention of God on
behalf of His Church. On the Millennarian hypothesis they
were told that the conflicts, trials and persecutions of the
saints will last nineteen hundred, or twenty-three hundred,
years. It is hard to imagine more cruel mockery than such
a revelation would be. We have already seen that the effect
of the books was in fact to raise the courage of those under
trial. It would be impious to suppose that the divine purpose
was to deceive the sufferers by raising false expectations.
Moreover, the fundamental postulate of this whole series of
interpretations, namely, that where days are mentioned in
the documents, years are intended, is false. There is no
reason to suppose that when Daniel names 2300 evenings and
mornings, he means anything but literal evenings and morn-
ings, for his interest was in the daily acts of worship
offered at those periods. In the same way, when the New Tes-
tament writer says he is telling what is shortly to come to
pass, and gives forty-two months as the time of tribulation
we must take him at his word. And this is confirmed by his
statement that the seven heads of the beast are seven kings,
of whom five are fallen, one is, and one is yet to come. This
can only mean that there are to be seven Roman emperors in
all; only one more reign before the grand consummation.

The result of such an inquiry as we have now made (and

I90 ESSJrS IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

the number of false calculations might have been increased
almost indefinitely) should be to show the need of a really
historical treatment of the apocal5^tic literature. That lit-
erature has a well defined place in the history of human
thought. Among Jews, Zoroastrians, Christians and Muham-
madans, it has developed along similar lines. It is the product
of religious hope in times of despondency. It has no con-
ception of the working of natural law in the world of nature or
of man. It looks for a catastrophic interference of God in
the affairs of the nations. It doubts the efficacy of human
effort, and the reality of human progress. And if the objector
says: If Daniel expected the Messiah in the near future, or if
John thought the Second Coming was near at hand, they were
not inspired — we can only reply: If by inspired you mean
supernaturally informed of any exact dates for supernatural
interference in human affairs, the objection holds good. The
repeated attempts to make these authors tell us of the course
of history, show the fallacy of expecting that sort of revela-
tion. What the Apocalyptic John did was to set forth in
glowing imagery the faith that even in the darkest hours God
is caring for His own, and that at the last all will be well
with them. That he did this in imagery that came to him
from Jewish tradition, and that he made use of language and
figures which were of his time and his race, shows only that he
was a man. This is what the expositor needs to learn.

Reviewing the ground gone over in these essays, we are
tempted to say that we have simply noted certain forms of
human error. But this would be a narrow view. It is indeed
clear to us at this more advanced stage of thought that in
the Pentateuch the Jew has not a complete and final code of
ethics unchangeable for all time. But on the other hand
there are in the Book lessons for him and for all mankind.
Think what the Decalogue has been through the centuries or
that summing up of the Law and the Prophets which Jesus
urged in the two great commandments! Again, from our

APOCALTPTIC VAGARIES 191

point of view, it is plain that the dogmatic theologian is
wrong in forcing from Scripture by allegory and type a re-
vealed philosophy, a faith once for all delivered to the saints.
But if the Bible is not this, it is much more — it is the record
of the religious experience of men terribly in earnest in seeking
for God. And this record is one of struggle and conflict.
Rightly interpreted, these books show us how the higher
and purer religion overcame the lower and partial conceptions
of God and of His will. Further, from our point of view we
are convinced that the Millennarian is wrong in supposing
that he can from these documents discover when the present
world-order will be ended by a special revelation of the Lord
from heaven. But it still remains true that these documents
are forward-looking, that the men who wrote them had an
unconquerable faith in the righteousness of God, and an
abiding hope that His rule would become a reality, and the
kingdoms of the world would acknowledge His sway. In fine,
the Bible is a book of religion. Reflecting the experience of
believers in earlier ages, it makes its appeal to all who seek
for God in the time now present.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

The titles of most of the works cited in the essays are
given in the notes. The following works treat more or less
fully of the history of exegesis.

Simon (Richard), Histoire Critique du Vieux Testament. The first edition
was suppressed. The second appeared at Amsterdam in 1685. The third
part of the work discusses the best method of translating the Bible, and
criticizes the principal commentators. This part was translated into Ger-
man and published under the title: Richardi Simonii Historia Critica Cotn-
mentatorum prmcipuorum V. ^ N. T. in 1713. It was prefaced by an
extended Historia Theologice Exegeticce bey den Juden, Christen, Mukatn-
medaner und Heyden, the work of J. F. Reimmans.

RosENiruLLER (J. G.), Historia Interpretationis Librorum Sacrorum in Ecclesia
Christiana, five volumes (179S to 1814). Preliminary studies for this
work seem to have been published in the five university programs trans-
lated into German under the title: Herrn D. J. G. Rosenmiillers Abhand-
lung von den Schicksalen der Schrijterkldrung in der Christlichen Kirche

(1791)-

Meyer (G. W.), Geschichte der Schrijterkldrung seit der Wiederherstellung
der Wissenschaften, three volumes (1802 to 1804).

DiESTEL (LuDwiG), Geschichtc des Alien Testaments in der Christlichen Kirche
(1869). Still the most complete work for the period it covers.

Farrar (F. W.), History of Interpretation, Eight Lectures Preached before
the University of Oxford in the Year MDCCCLXXXV. The book is a
plea for a moderately liberal doctrine of inspiration. It ignores the ad-
vance made by Wellhausen and defended by W. Robertson Smith.

WoGUE (L.), Histoire de la Bible et de I'exegese Biblique jusqu'a nos Jours
(1881). This work is devoted to Jewish exegesis.

Gilbert (George Holley), Interpretation of the Bible, a Short History
(1908). An excellent introduction to the subject, treating both Old Tes-
tament and New.

FuLLERTON (Kemper), Prophccy and Authority, a Study in the History of the
Doctrine and Interpretation of Scripture (19x9). The latest and one of
the best discussions of the subject.

193

INDEX

Abel's Sacrifice, 149
Abijah's Rebuke, 159
Abraham, a type, 42
Adam's religion, 112
Adventists, 176
Allegory, Jewish, 22
Allegory among the Greeks, 35
Allegory in the Bible, 39
Altars, Local, 147
Ambrose, 56
Analogy of Faith, 81
Anthropomorphism, 11
Antichrist, The, 182
Antinomianism, 84
Apocalypse of John, 179
Apocalypses, 178
Apocr3T)ha, 87
Aristeas, Letter of, 43 f .
Asideans, The, 14
Astruc, no
Atonement, 165
Augustine, 56, 182
Authenticity, Question of, 132

Barnabas, Epistle of, 46
Bekker, Baltazar, 100
Bible and Astronomy, 122
Biblical History, 92
Bible-reading, 114
Biblical Dogmatics, 126
Biblical Theology, 1 20
Biblical Theology, Books on, 125
Bicheno, 186
Bird-victim, 165
Blood, The, 152
Blood, Use of the, 150

Canaanite Religion, 148
Canon, The, 118
Cappellus, 89
Casuistry, Jewish, 18, 21
Catena Aurea, 64
Cherubim, 109

Christ in the Old Testament, 50
Christology, 139
Chronicler, Motive of the, 10
Church, Corruption of the, 182
Church Organization, 59
Circvuncision Blood, 168
Clean and Unclean, 43, 47, 159
Clement of Alexandria, 51
Clementine Recognitions, 55
Cocceius, 96

Cocceius' Millenarianism, 184
Colenso, 128
Colenso, Trial of, 132
Colenso condemned, 133
Collegia Biblica, 114
Collegia Pietatis, 113
Commentators, Method of, 13
Comparative Study, 107
Compilation of Books, 5
Conservation of the Text, 12
Controversy, Protestant, 85
Council of Trent, 82, 85
Covenant at Sinai, 150
Covenant Code, The, 161
Covenant of Grace, 96
Covenants, Doctrine of, 95
Creation, Story of the, 11
Creed Allegorized, The, 71
Criticism, 3
Customary Law, 170

Cainites, The, 49
Calovius, 90
Calvin, 82

Danger of Defilement, 163
Daniel, Book of, 178
Date of the Advent, 180

195

196

INDEX

Davidson, Samuel, 139

Days for Years, 187

Defilement, 163

Defilement by a Corpse, 172

Desert Sojourn, The, 129

Deuteronomy, 151

Deuteronomy and the Priests, 156

Development of the Priesthood, 157

De Wette, 126

Dicta Probantia, gi

Difl&culties of the Pentateuch, 129

Disease, Defilement of, 164

Divine Plan of History, 180

Documents, Order of the, 144

Ecclesiastes, Jewish Comments on, 26

Ecclesiastical Revenues, 154

Egyptian Parallels, 108

Egyptian Religion, 35 f.

Eichhorn, 137

Eisenmenger, 29

Eliezer, 25

Elijah, 144

Enoch, Book of, 181

Epistolae Obscurorum Virorum, 69

Essays and Reviews, 134

Excommunication, 164

Ezekiel, 146

Ezekiel, Importance of, 138

Ezekiel's Point of View, 151

Ezekiel's Program, 177

Farrar's Judgment, 29
Federal School, The, 94
Festival Offerings, 150
Fifth Monarchy, The, 185
Fleming, Robert, 185
Fourfold Sense, 57
Francke, A. H., 114

Gabler, 120
Geddes, 135

Genesis, Sources of, no
Genesis xv, 95
Genius Loci, 168
Guilt, Sense of, 166
Gibeon, Sanctuary at, 145
Gideon's Altar, 147

Gnostic Interpretation, 48
Greek Influence, a
Greek Version, 15, 33

Haggada, 22
Haggai's Question, 159
Halaka, 19
Hare, Francis, 70
Harmonistics, 27 f.
Harmonistics, Protestant, 86
Hero-stories, 7
Higher Criticism, 136
Highplaces, 144
Highpriest's Garments, 42
Historical Outline, 143
Hengstenberg, 138
Herbert of Cherbury, 118
Herder, 121
Holiness Code, 162
Homer allegorized, 37
Home's Introduction, 139
Hugo of St. Victor, 65

Impurity of Childbirth, 164
Indulgences, 76
Inerrancy AflSrmed, 132
Inspiration, 88, 115
Irenaeus, 50

Isaiah and the Ritual, 160
Isidore, 63

Jealousy Ordeal, 171
Jerusalem, The New, 179
Jewish Customs Defended, 43
Joachim of Floris, 183
Josiah, 146
Joshua's Vision, 169
Jubilees, Book of, 8
Judaism, Postexilic, 144
Judges, Book of, 7
Judges 17 and 18, 6
Justin Mart5T, 46

Kings and Chronicles, 5

Korah, 154

Krishna Allegorized, 71

Law, The Jewish, 14

Law and the Gospel, 79, 86

INDEX

igy

Law of the Church, 133

Law offered to the Nations, 32

Leper, The, 165

Lessing, 123

Levites, Ezekiel's Plan, 155

Levites, Restrictions on, 154

Levites in Chronicles, The, 140

Literary Study of the Bible, 122

Logos, The, 41

Lowth, 122

Luther, 74

Luther and Allegory, 78

Luther's Bible, 76

Luther's Criterion, 78

Luther's Theses, 75

Marcion, 49

Mastema, The Evil Spirit, 9

Mathematical DiflSculties, 1 29

Melanchthon, 80, 82

Midianites, Slaughter of the, 173

Midrash, 20, 22

Miller, WilUam, 188

Monotheism, 142

Morin, 89, 103

Mosaic Authorship, 141

Myths, Greek, 34

Nature and the Bible, 117
Nero, 182
Newman, 71
Nicholas of Lyra, 73
Noah's Sacrifice, 150
Numerical Clues, 23 f.

Obscurities of the Bible, 91
Oracle, The, 157
Origen, 52
Ovid, Allegories in, 69

Passover in the Desert, 130
Patriarchal Altars, 145
Patriarchs, Theology of the, 92
Pentateuchal Code, The, 17
Periods of History, 183
Philo, Biblical Antiquities of, 8
Philo Judaeus, 39
Pietism, 113

Place of Worship, The, 144

Plato's Influence, 41

Plutarch, 35

Pope as Antichrist, The, 184

Prediction in the Old Testament, 45

Priesthood, The, 153

Priestly Ideal, 60

Priestly Traditions, 153

Priestly Writer, The, 131

Predictive Prophecy, 176

Process, Ecclesiastical, 132

Prometheus, 38

Proper Names Allegorized, 62

Prophet, Meaning of the Word, 176

Prophetic Denunciation, 147

Prophets, The Earlier, 158

Prophets, Teaching of the, 160

Purification of the Leper, 165

Quenstedt, 89

Rabbi, Honor of the, 31
Rabbinical Point of View, 17
Red Color, 174
Red Heifer, The, 46, 172
Reformers, 73
Religious Motive, 10
Ritual Offenses, 152
Russell, Pastor, 188

Sabbath, The, 43

Sabbath Observed in Heaven, 9

Sacredness (Sanctity), 152, 162

Sacrifice to the Dead, 171, 174

Sacrificial Worship, 149

Scholasticism, Protestant, 98

Second Advent, The, 179

Semler, 118

Seven, The Nimiber, 181

Sevenfold Sense, 62

Seventy Years of Exile, 1 78

Sexual Taboo, 164

Shema, The, 20

Simon, Richard, 104

Sin and Atonement, 161

Sinai, Covenant at, 95, 97

Sin-offering, The, 164

Slaying of Animals, 151

198

INDEX

Socinians, 102

Solomon at Gibeon, 145

Song of Songs, The, 70

Sources of the Pentateuch, 137

Spencer, John, 106

Spener, 113

Spinoza, 105

Study of the Law, 30

Substitution, 165

Synagogue, The, 15

Taboo of Animals, 109

Talmud, The, 19

Targums, 15

Testimony of the Holy Spirit, 87

Text, Purity of the, 89

Textual Criticism, 90

Thomas Aquinas, 65, 68

Tindal, 117

Tithes, The, 156

Tora, 159

Tradition, Catholic, 66

Tradition, Jewish, 4, 17 f.

Tradition and Scripture, 28

Twelve, The Number, 181
Tychonius, Rules of, 61
Types of Christ, 63
Typology, 99

Uncleanness, 21
Unwitting Sins, 164

Vatke, 138

Virgil Allegorized, 67

Von Coelln, 126

Wellhausen, 140
Witchcraft, 100
Witchcraft Attacked, 141
Witsius, 98
World-Sabbath, The, 181

Zachariae, 124

Zadok, Family of, 156

Zeus, Myth of, 38

Zinzendorf, 119

Zulu's Objections, The, 12J

U.C.BERKELEY LIBRARIES

CDMb7aEflfl7