Skip to main content

Full text of "The Expositor"

See other formats 


X.i  A)^  L,tn- ^f: 


Ctltnnint  itf 


iUi^Ibsbu 


€itllti]r. 


|JiT5itu(rii  tu   ^TfVxA,^.  ^AffejeJc 


XV  41b -^-^^ 


THE    EXPOSITOR. 

VOL.  y. 


I^ist  0f  ContributiDrs  ia  llolumt   V. 

Vernon  Bartlet,  M.A. 

Rev.  Prof.  Joseph  Agar  Beet,  D.D. 

Very  Rev.  G.  A.  Chadwick,  D.D. 

Rev.  Pkof.  T.  K.  Cheyne,  D.D. 

Rev.  Prof.  A.  B.  Davidson,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

Rev.  J.  Llewelyn  Davies,  M.A. 

Rev.  Prof.  Marcus  Dods,  D.D. 

Rev.  Prof.  S.  R.  Driver,  D.D. 

Rev.  Prof.  W.  G.  Elmslie,  D.D.  (the  late). 

Rev.  Principal  Rainy,  D.D. 

Rev.  Prof.  W.  M.  Ramsay,  D.D. 

Rev.  Prof.  W.  Sanday,  D.D. 

Rev.  George  Adam  Smith,  M.A. 

Rev.  James  Stalker,  D.D. 

Rkv.  Arthur  Wright,  M.A.    , 


THE 


EXPOSITOR. 


EDITED    BY    THE    REV. 


W.   ROBERTSON    NICOLL,   M.A.,    LL.D. 


FOURTH  SERIES. 


Volume  V. 


HODDER    AND     STOUGHTON, 

27,    PATERNOSTER   ROW. 


MDCCCXCII. 


Butler  &  Tanner. 

TiiE  Sei.woou  Phinting  Works, 

Fkome,  and  London. 


6") 


\  / 


AT   MIDNIGHT. 

The  voice  of  all  the  hollow,  desolate  sky 

On  this  wild  wind  is  blown  ; 
The  wail  of  earth's  desire  and  agony 

Sobs  in  this  wild  wind's  moan  ; 
And  there  is  yet  another  heavier  sigh, 

Heard  of  the  heart  alone. 

This  echoed  through  the  midmost  core  of  mirth 

Since  mortal  mirth  began ; 
Hearing,  we  know  that  all  the  feast  is  dearth, 

And  all  red  roses  wan. 
0  God  !  for  the  new  heavens,  and  the  new  earth, 

And  the  new  heart  of  man  ! 

G.  A.  Chadwick. 


THE  D  OCT  BINE   OF  THE  ATONEMENT   IN  THE 
NEW  TESTAMENT. 

I.  The  Synoptist  Gospels. 

The  purpose  of  these  papers  is  to  reproduce  from  the  docu- 
ments preserved  for  us  in  the  New  Testament  the  concep- 
tion or  conceptions  of  their  various  writers  about  the  death 
of  Christ  and  its  relation  to  His  work  and  to  the  kingdom 
of  God;  in  order  thus  to  determine  as  accurately  and  as 
fully  as  possible  the  position  of  the  Death  of  Christ  in  God's 
eternal  purpose  of  salvation. 

With  this  aim  I  shall  in  this  first  paper  endeavour  to 
reproduce  Christ's  own  thoughts  about  His  own  death  as 
these  found  expression  in  the  discourses  recorded  in  the 
Synoptist  Gospels.  This  will  give  us  one  definite  type  of 
tradition  about  the  teaching  of  Christ.  In  a  second  paper 
I  shall  attempt  to  reproduce  the  very  different  type  con- 
tained in  the  Fourth  Gospel.  We  shall  thus  obtain,  from 
two  independent  sources,  the  conception  of  the  purpose  of 
His  own  approaching  death  which  was  attributed  to  Christ 
by  His  early  followers.  In  a  third  paper  I  shall  consider 
the  teaching  of  the  Galilcean  Apostles  as  expounded  by 
them  in  their  discourses  recorded  in  the  Book  of  Acts  and 
as  set  forth  in  other  documents  of  the  Nev/  Testament. 
This  will  give  us  Christ's  teaching  as  reflected  in  the 
thought  of  His  earliest  disciples  after  He  had  risen  from 
the  dead. 

We  shall  then  pass  to  the  teaching  embodied  in  the 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  a  very  marked  type  of  teaching  much 
more  developed,  in  reference  to  the  matter  before  us,  than 
that  contained  in  the  rest  of  the  New  Testament,  and  evi- 
dently moulded  by  the  writer's  mental  constitution  and 
social  surroundings.  This  conception  of  the  purpose  and 
effect  of  the  Death  of  Christ  we  must  carefully  study,  and 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT.  3 

endeavour  to  comprehend  as  a  whole.  The  abundant  and 
important  teaching  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  will  next 
claim  our  attention.  These  various  types  of  teaching  we 
shall  compare  as  we  pass  along.  And  we  shall  find  that 
the  teaching  peculiar  to  St.  Paul  is  the  key  to  all  the  other 
teaching  in  the  New  Testament  about  the  Death  of  Christ, 
giving  to  it  unity  and  making  it  intelligible.  This  peculiar 
teaching  of  St.  Paul  we  shall  then  study  in  its  relation  to 
whatever  else  we  know  about  sin,  about  God's  moral 
government  of  the  world,  and  about  the  future  destiny  of 
man.  We  shall  thus  follow  the  teaching  of  the  New 
Testament  so  far  as  it  will  guide  us  ;  and  from  that  point 
we  will  look  for  a  moment  at  the  great  problems  which  the 
writers  of  the  New  Testament  have  left  unsolved  for  the 
reverent  study  of  the  servants  of  Christ  in  future  ages. 

AVe  shall  afterwards  say  a  few  words  about  certain 
modern  opinions  on  this  all-important  subject ;  and  con- 
clude this  series  of  papers  by  a  review  of  the  results 
attained. 

It  will  not  be  needfal  to  assume  either  the  Divine  authority 
of  the  New  Testament  or  the  correctness  of  the  accounts 
therein  given  of  the  teaching  of  Christ.  We  shall  test  and 
use  the  documents  of  the  New  Testament  as  we  should  any 
other  similar  writings.  This  method  will  enable  us  to 
meet  on  common  ground  some  who  are  not  prepared  to 
accept  as  decisive  the  teaching  of  the  Bible.  Moreover,  our 
research  will  discover  valuable  evidence  of  the  correctness 
of  the  picture  of  the  teaching  of  Christ  contained  in  the 
New  Testament.  Thus  our  study  of  the  Death  of  Christ 
will  strengthen  our  proof  of  the  truth  of  the  Gospel  wdiich 
He  died  to  proclaim. 

Of  the  Four  Gospels,  the  First  and  Fourth  are  by  all 
early  Christian  writers  attributed  to  Apostles  of  Christ,  and 
to  the  same  two  Apostles ;  and  the  Second  and  Third 
Gospels  to  known    companions  of  Apostles.     So  expressly 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 


Irenoeus,  who  in  a.d.  ISO  became  bishop  of  Lyons,  in  bk. 
iii.  9-11  of  his  great  work  Against  Heresies.  Abundant 
quotations  prove  that  he  had  the  Gospels  in  a  form  practi- 
cally the  same  as  that  which  we  now  possess.  This  tra- 
ditional authorship  is  accepted  by  all  early  Christian  writers 
in  all  parts  of  the  world  from  the  second  century  onwards. 
Their  agreement  proves  that  the  Gospels  were  then  ancient. 
And  that  these  four  accounts  of  the  life  of  Christ  and  no 
others  were  everywhere  accepted  as  authoritative  and  in 
some  sense  official,  and  that  without  a  trace  of  difference 
of  opinion  the  same  authors'  names  were  always  attached 
to  them,  reveals  their  unique  position  in  early  Christian 
literature.  This  proof  is  strengthened  by  many  quotations 
in  the  writings  of  Justin,  who  lived  in  the  middle  of  the 
second  century,  which  show  that  he  and  his  contemporaries 
had  an  account  of  the  teaching  of  Christ  practically  iden- 
tical with  that  contained  in  the  Synoptist  Gospels. 

"We  now  turn  to  these  early  records  of  the  teaching  of 
Christ. 

Very  conspicuous  in  each  of  the  Synoptist  Gospels  is  the 
incident  narrated  in  Matthew  xvi.  13-28,  Mark  viii.  27-ix. 
1,  Luke  ix.  18-27.  Christ  has  drawn  His  disciples  far  away 
from  the  temple  courts  at  Jerusalem  and  from  the  crowded 
shores  of  the  Lake  of  Gennesaret  in  order,  amid  the  soli- 
tudes overshadowed  by  the  snows  of  Hermon,  to  reveal  to 
them  truths  not  yet  made  known.  But  before  doing  this 
He  inquires  whether  the  truths  already  taught  have  been 
learnt.  The  Master  asks,  *'  Whom  do  men  say  that  I 
am?"  Peter's  answer  is  ready:  and  he  does  but  express 
the  thought  of  all.  "  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the 
living  God."  His  reply  proclaims  that,  although  the  sig- 
nificance of  the  wonderful  works  of  Christ  has  not  been 
recognised  by  the  mass  of  the  nation,  it  has  been  recog- 
nised by  the  group  of  disciples  around  Him  to-day. 

This  satisfactory  answer  is  at  once  followed  by  a  new 


IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


revelation.  "  From  that  time  began  Jesus  to  show  to  His 
disciples  that  He  must  needs  go  away  to  Jerusalem,  and 
suffer  many  things  from  the  elders  and  chief-priests  and 
scribes,  and  be  put  to  death,  and  the  third  day  be  raised." 
Our  Lord  goes  on  to  say  that,  not  only  must  He  be  cruci- 
fied, but  "  if  any  one  wishes  to  come  after  Me,  let  him 
deny  himself,  and  take  up  his  cross,  and  follow  Me." 

Here  is  a  Man  who  has  not  yet  reached  His  prime,  and 
is  apparently  in  health  and  strength,  saying  that  necessity 
compels  Him  to  go  away  from  Galilee,  where  He  has  many 
friends,  to  Jerusalem,  and  there  be  put  to  death  by  the 
leaders  of  His  nation.  In  other  words,  Christ  not  only 
foresees  His  own  violent  death  but  is  resolved  to  make  a 
long  journey,  and  to  put  Himself  in  the  hands  of  those 
who,  as  He  knows,  will  kill  Him.  He  thus  sets  aside  as 
inapplicable  to  Himself  a  command  given  (Matt.  x.  23)  to 
His  disciples,  "  When  they  persecute  you  in  this  city,  flee 
to  another."  He  did  so  under  a  special  necessity,  conspi- 
cuously asserted  in  each  of  the  Synoptist  Gospels  :  8et  avrov 
uTrfkOelu     .      .      .      Kal  airoiCTavdt)vaL. 

We  ask  with  reverence,  Wherein  lay  the  necessity  which 
compelled  the  great  Teacher  to  throw  away,  apparently,  the 
most  valuable  life  on  earth,  thus  setting  an  example  which 
He,  Himself  the  great  Example,  forbids  His  disciples  to 
imitate  ?  To  answer  this  question,  so  far  as  He  who  gave 
His  Son  to  die  for  us  may  shed  light  upon  the  purpose  of 
His  own  gift,  is  the  difficult  task  now  before  us. 

The  words  just  quoted  cannot  be  explained  by  the  young 
Teacher's  own  foresight  of  the  deadly  hostility  which  He 
knew  that  His  teaching  would  arouse.  For  this  would  not 
account  for  His  going  to  Jerusalem,  the  city  of  His  foes. 
By  going  where  He  knows  that  men  will  kill  Him,  He 
deliberately  laid  down  His  life.  And  He  tells  us  that  all 
this  was  needful.  AVe  notice  also  that  in  each  of  the 
Synoptist  Gospels  Christ's  death  is,  in  His  own  thought, 


6  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 

to  be  followed  by  resurrection.  This  suggests  irresistibly 
that  to  Him  death  and  resurrection  were  means  needful  to 
attain  some  further  end.     We  ask  what  it  is. 

In  Matthew  xvii.  12,  Mark  ix.  12  Christ  again  announces 
that  suffering  awaits  Him.  Similarly  in  Matthew  xvii.  22, 
23,  Mark  ix.  31,  and  less  fully  in  Luke  ix.  44,  He  foretells 
that  He  will  be  surrendered  into  the  hands  of  men,  and  that 
they  will  kill  Him,  and  that  He  will  rise  from  the  dead.  In 
Matthew  xx.  IS,  19,  Mark  x.  33,  34,  Luke  xviii.  31,  32,  He 
repeats  the  announcement.  This  repetition  throws  into 
conspicuous  prominence  His  approaching  death.  It  is  the 
more  remarkable,  because  up  to  this  point  we  have  no  indi- 
cation of  hostility  so  deadly  and  so  powerful  as  to  close  up, 
even  to  a  young  and  popular  teacher,  all  hope  of  escape. 

Immediately  after  the  words  just  quoted  Christ  says,  in 
reply  to  an  ambitious  request  from  the  sons  of  Zebedee  or 
from  their  mother,  in  Matthew  xx.  21  and  Mark  x.  38, 
"Are  ye  able  to  drink  the  cup  which  I  am  about  to  drink?" 
Mark  adds,  "  and  to  be  baptized  with  the  Baptism  with 
which  I  am  to  be  baptized."  These  words  imply  that  to 
Christ  and  to  those  to  wliom  He  speaks  there  is  no  way 
to  the  throne  except  by  drinking  "  the  cup  "  and  receiving 
"  the  Baptism."  They  are  followed,  and  in  some  measure 
explained,  by  another  assertion,  given  word  for  word  in  the 
First  and  Second  Gospels :  "  The  Son  of  Man  did  not  come 
to  be  ministered  to,  but  to  minister,  and  to  give  His  life  a 
ransom  for  many." 

The  word  'Xvrpoi',  or  ransom,  denotes  always  a  price  or 
means  by  which  one  is  set  free  from  captivity,  affliction,  or 
obligation.  The  cognate  verb  Xurpoco  is  very  common  in 
the  LXX.,  always  in  the  sense  of  setting  free.  Both  words 
are  common  in  classical  Greek  for  the  liberation  of  cap- 
tives by  a  price  paid.  So  Deuteronomy  vii.  8  :  "  The  Lord 
brought  you  out  with  a  strong  hand,  and  the  Lord  ran- 
somed thee  from   the  house  of  bondage,  from  the  hand  of 


IN   THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


Pharaoh  king  of  Egypt."  Also  chaps,  ix.  26,  xiii.  5,  xv.  15, 
xxi.  8,  xxiv.  18,  2  Samuel  vii.  23,  1  Chronicles  xvii.  21, 
Nehemiah  i.  10.  In  all  these  places,  the  idea  of  rescue  is 
conspicuous,  and  obscures  that  of  price.  So  David  says,  in 
2  Samuel  iv.  9,  "  The  Lord  liveth  who  has  ransomed  my 
soul  from  all  affliction." 

The  substantive  used  in  the  passage  now  before  us  is 
found  in  Proverbs  xiii.  8,  "A  man's  own  wealth  is  the 
ransom  of  his  life;  "  i.e.  money  may  save  a  man  from  death. 
If  so,  the  money  is  the  means  of  escape  from  the  gates  of 
the  grave.  And  in  all  human  thought  a  costly  means  is 
the  price  paid  for  the  result  attained.  Still  more  definite 
is  Proverbs  vi.  35  :  an  injured  husband  "  will  not  give  up 
his  enmity  for  any  ransom."  No  payment  of  money  will 
pacify  him. 

The  same  substantive  in  the  plural  is  sometimes,  and 
the  cognate  verb  is  frequently,  used  in  the  LXX.  in  re- 
ference to  that  on  which  the  Mosaic  Law  had  a  claim,  but 
which  was  released  for  a  price  or  substitute.  For  instance, 
God  claimed  the  firstborn,  but  waived  His  claim  on  pay- 
ment of  fi.ve  shekels  each.  So  Exodus  xiii.  13  :  "  I  sacrifice 
every  firstborn  male  to  the  Lord ;  and  every  firstborn  of 
my  sons  I  will  ransom"  {XvTpooaojjiaL).  Also  Numbers 
xviii.  15,  16:  "Every  firstborn,  so  many  as  they  offer  to 
the  Lord,  from  man  to  beast,  shall  be  thine  ;  except  that 
the  firstborn  of  men  shall  be  ransomed  with  ransoms 
(Xyrpot?,  \vTp(o6/]aeTai)  :  and  the  firstborn  of  the  unclean 
cattle  thou  shalt  ransom."  The  word  may  be  studied  in 
Leviticus  xxv.  25,  30,  33,  48,  49,  54  ;  xxvii.  13-33.  In  all 
these  places  the  word  denotes  the  liberation  for  ordinary 
use  of  that  on  which  the  Law  had  a  claim. 

Christ  asserts  in  Matthew  xx.  28,  Mark  x.  45,  that  He 
"came  .  .  .  to  give  His  life  a  ransom  iov  mo^ny ."  This 
can  only  mean  that  He  came  into  the  world,  or  less  likely, 
that    He  came  out  of   obscurity  into  public  life,  in  order 


8      TUE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 

to  die ;  and  in  order  that  His  death  might  be  a  means  of 
releasing  many  from  bondage  or  afdiction,  or  from  an  obh- 
gation  they  could  not  discharge. 

The  words  just  expounded  imply,  and  are  implied  in, 
the  necessity  for  the  death  of  Christ  asserted  in  Matthew 
xvi.  21.  For  the  idea  of  price  always  involves  necessity. 
AVe  pay  a  price  because  we  cannot  otherwise  obtain  the 
object  we  desire.  That  the  life  of  Christ  is  called  the 
ransom-price  of  our  salvation  implies  that  we  could  not 
otherwise  have  been  saved.  Moreover,  whatever  we  do  in 
order  to  attain  a  result  otherwise  unattainable,  we  speak  of 
as  a  price  paid  for  the  object  we  desire. 

The  verb  \vTpoua9at  is  found  again  in  Luke  xxiv.  21,  in 
the  lips  of  the  disciples  going  to  Emmaus  :  "  We  were 
hoping  that  it  was  He  that  is  about  to  ransom  Israel." 

The  murder  of  the  Master's  Son  is  the  climax  of  the 
parable  recorded  in  Matthew  xxi.  39,  Mark  xii.  8,  Luke 
XX.  15. 

The  institution  of  the  Lord's  Sapper  next  claims  our 
attention. 

The  great  Prophet  has  fulfilled  His  purpose  of  going  to 
Jerusalem.  In  an  upper  room  He  has  had  supper  with  His 
disciples.  At  the  close  of  the  meal.  He  takes  a  small  loaf 
of  bread,  probably  similar  to  those  found  at  Pompeii.  He 
breaks  it,  and  while  doing  so  says,  "  Take,  eat :  this  is  My 
body."  Evidently  He  means  that  something  is  about  to 
happen  to  His  body  like  that  which  before  His  disciples' 
eyes  was  happening  to  the  bread.  He  then  takes  the  cup, 
and  after  thanksgiving  hands  it  to  His  disciples,  saying, 
as  recorded  in  Matthew  xxvi.  27,  28,  Mark  xiv.  23,  24, 
"  This  is  My  blood  of  the  Covenant  which  is  being  shed  for 
many";  or,  as  the  First  Gospel  adds,  "for  forgiveness  of 
sins."  According  to  Luke  xxii.  20,  1  Corinthians  xi.  25, 
He  said,  "  This  cup  is  the  New  Covenant  in  My  blood." 
All  accounts  agree  in  the  breaking  of  the  bread,  which  is 


IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  9 

called  the  body  of  Christ.  And  all  speak  of  His  blood, 
either  as  being  shed  for  many,  or  as  the  basis  of  a  new 
Covenant  between  God  and  man. 

Take  them  as  we  will,  these  words  are  a  deliberate  and 
forcible  announcement  by  the  yomig  Teacher,  who  in 
health  and  in  the  prime  of  life,  and  in  freedom,  reclines 
among  His  disciples,  that  He  is  about  to  suffer  a  violent 
death.  Moreover,  while  living  and  well.  He  institutes  a 
ceremony  to  commemorate  His  approaching  death.  Such 
an  institution,  ordained  under  such  circumstances,  is 
unique  in  the  history  of  the  world.  Commemorations  of 
the  death  of  a  martyr  or  a  hero  are  not  unfrequent.  But 
we  never  heard  of  one  enjoined  by  the  martyr  himself;  and 
especially  while  in  liberty  and  health.  Moreover,  generally 
or  always,  commemorations  of  a  violent  death  have  been 
incitements  to  vengeance.  But  of  vengeance  we  have  no 
trace  here.  And  the  name,  Eucharist,  given  to  the  rite 
from  very  early  days,  suggests  only  gratitude  to  God. 

Looking  again  at  the  words  of  institution  as  recorded  by 
Luke  and  Paul,  we  find  Christ  saying,  "  This  cup  is  the 
New  Covenant  in  My  blood."  These  words  recall  at 
once  Jeremiah  xxxi.  31  :  "  Behold,  days  are  coming,  saith 
Jehovah,  and  I  will  make  with  the  house  of  Israel  and 
with  the  house  of  Judah  a  new  covenant ;  not  like  the 
covenant  which  I  made  with  their  fathers  in  the  day  when 
I  took  hold  of  their  hand  to  bring  them  forth  from  the  land 
of  Egypt,  which  My  covenant  they  broke  :  .  .  .  because 
this  is  the  covenant  which  I  will  make  with  the  house  of 
Israel  after  those  days,  saith  Jehovah,  I  will  put  My  Law 
within  them,  and  upon  their  heart  I  will  write  it,  and  will 
be  to  them  for  a  God,  and  they  shall  be  to  Me  for  a  people  : 
.  .  .  because  I  will  forgive  their  guilt,  and  their  sin  I  will 
remember  no  more."  Manifestly  Christ  meant  to  say  that 
the  day  foreseen  from  afar  by  Jeremiah  had  at  last  come, 
that  God  was  about  to  enter  into  a  new  relation  with  man, 


10  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 


and  that  this  new  rekition  was  in  some  way  to  be  brought 
about  by  the  violent  death  which  Christ  was  about  to  suffer. 

Practically  the  same  is  the  account  given  in  Matthew 
xxvi.  28  :  "  This  is  the  blood  of  the  covenant,  which  is 
being  shed  for  many  for  forgiveness  of  sins."  Here  again 
we  have  reference  to  a  covenant  between  God  and  man. 
Again  the  covenant  stands  in  close  relation  to  the  ap- 
proaching and  violent  death  of  Christ.  For  His  blood, 
about  to  be  shed,  is  "  the  blood  of  the  Covenant."  It  is  to 
be  shed  "for  many,  for  forgiveness  of  sins."  We  notice 
also  that  forgiveness  was  promised  in  Jeremiah's  prophecy 
of  the  New  Covenant.  All  accounts  agree  to  represent 
Christ  as  announcing  His  own  violent  death,  and  this  occu- 
pying an  important  relation  to  the  salvation  of  man. 

Christ's  words  at  the  institution  of  the  Supper  shed  light 
upon  those  recorded  in  Matthew  xx.  28.  For  sin  separates 
us  from  God,  and  gives  us  up  to  ruinous  bondage.  If 
Christ  brings  us  into  friendly  relation  to  God,  He  thereby 
rescues  us  from  the  bondage  of  sin.  That  in  order  to  do 
this  Christ  gave  up  His  life,  implies  that  our  rescue  could 
not  be  accomplished  by  any  less  costly  means.  And,  if  not, 
then  was  His  life  the  ransom  price  of  our  salvation.  From 
Matthew  xxvi.  27,  we  learn  that  the  necessity  for  this 
costly  ransom  lay  in  man's  sin. 

The  great  importance  of  the  death  of  Christ  is  made  very 
conspicuous  by  the  long  and  detailed  account  of  His  cruci- 
fixion given  in  each  of  the  four  Gospels. 

The  absolute  necessity  for  the  death  of  Christ  is  again 
asserted  after  His  resurrection  by  the  angels  at  His  tomb, 
as  recorded  in  Luke  xxiv.  7  ;  and  by  the  risen  Saviour 
Himself  to  the  disciples  going  to  Emmaus,  in  ver.  26. 

That  salvation  through  the  death  of  Christ  is  not  men- 
tioned in  the  great  inaugural  address  which  we  call  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  or  in  the  group  of  parables  con- 
tained in   Matthew  xiii.,  is  explained   by  the  statement  in 


IN   THE  XEW  TESTAMENT.  11 


chap.  xvi.  21  that  Christ  reserved  this  teaching  until  His 
bearers  had  learnt  His  superhuman  dignit3\  He  began 
His  teaching  by  asserting  with  authority,  and  expound- 
ing, the  broad  principles  of  morality  on  which  rests  all 
religion.  He  then  claimed  authority  to  forgive  sins,  and 
claimed  to  be  Lord  of  angels  and  Judge  of  all  men.  Lastly, 
He  announced  that  the  Judge  must  die  for  those  on  whom 
He  will  one  day  pronounce  sentence.  Only  in  this  order, 
and  at  intervals,  could  His  teaching  be  understood. 

It  is  now  evident  that  the  three  Synoptist  Gospels  pre- 
sent one  harmonious  conception  of  the  death  of  Christ. 
They  agree  to  represent  Him  as  frequently  and  deliberately 
purposing  to  go  to  Jerusalem  in  order  to  put  Himself  into 
the  hands  of  enemies  who.  He  knows,  will  kill  Him.  He 
speaks  of  this  self-surrender  as  a  binding  necessity  which 
must  determine  His  action.  This  necessity  He  somewhat 
explains  by  a  subsequent  assertion  that  His  life  is  a  ransom- 
price  for  many,  and  that  He  came  in  order  to  pay  that 
price.  It  is  still  further  explained  by  an  announcement, 
that  His  blood,  which  is  about  to  be  shed,  is  to  be  the  basis 
of  a  new  covenant  between  God  and  man,  a  covenant  offer- 
ing to  men  forgiveness  of  sins.  The  importance  thus  given 
to  His  approaching  death  He  sets  in  clearest  light  by 
ordaining  a  remarkable  rite  in  order  to  keep  it  ever  before 
the  eyes  of  His  servants.  The  importance  of  His  death  is 
further  maintained  by  a  full  account  of  His  crucifixion. 

To  sum  up.  The  Synoptist  Gospels  teach  that  man's 
salvation  comes  through  Christ's  violent  death ;  that  to 
save  us  He  deliberately  laid  down  His  life  ;  and  that  the 
need  for  this  costly  means  of  salvation  lay  in  man's  sin. 

In  other  papers  we  shall  compare  this  conception  of  the 
death  of  Christ  w;ith  that  presented  in  other  parts  of  the 
New  Testament. 

Joseph  Agar  Beet. 


12 


THE  PBESENT  POSITION  OF  THE   JOHANNEAN 
CONTBOVEBSY. 

III.  Kelation  to  the  Synoptic  Gospels. 

As  I  am  just  entering  upon  an  examination  of  the  internal 
evidence  supplied  by  the  Fourth  Gospel,  it  may  be  well  for 
me  to  preface  the  remarks  I  am  about  to  make  by  explain- 
ing my  silence  upon  a  point  which  some  may  think  an 
essential  one.  Neither  in  this  paper  nor  in  those  which 
follow  do  I  propose  to  say  anything  about  the  possibility  of 
the  supernatural,  or  the  a  priori  credibility  of  narratives 
which  imply  the  supernatural.  I  do  this,  not  because  I 
take  it  absolutely  for  granted,  but  because  I  think  that  if 
we  are  to  set  about  a  systematic  and  scientific  examination 
of  the  grounds  of  the  Christian  faith,  this  question  of  the 
supernatural  is  in  logical  order  the  last  with  which  we 
ought  to  deal,  and  because,  so  far  as  the  subject  matter  of 
these  papers  is  concerned,  we  are  not  yet  in  a  position  to 
deal  with  it  satisfactorily.  No  doubt  there  are  persons  who 
cannot  afford  to  wait  for  the  solution  of  so  momentous  a 
question.  To  such  I  would  strongly  recommend  the  second 
of  Mr.  Gore's  Bampton  Lectures,  or  an  excellent  work  en- 
titled Grounds  of  Theistic  and  Christian  Belief,  by  Dr.  G.  P. 
Fisher,  of  Yale.  But  to  those  who  are  content  to  take 
what  I  cannot  but  think  the  more  excellent  way  of  prolong- 
ing their  inquiry,  and  breaking  it  up  into  its  several  steps 
and  stages,  I  would  submit  that  the  proper  order  is  this  : 
First,  to  determine  what  documents  we  can  use,  and  how 
far  we  can  use  them ;  then,  by  the  help  of  these  documents, 
to  determine  as  nearly  as  we  can  what  are  the  historical 
facts  ;  and,  lastly,  and  not  until  that  has  been  done,  to  con- 
sider the  cause  of  those  facts,  and  how  far  it  transcends,  or 
does  not  transcend,  our  common  experience. 

Our  present  inquiry  belongs  to  the  first  of  these  stages. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  CONTROVERSY.  13 


"We  are  simply  trying  to  ascertain  who  was  the  author  of 
one  of  our  documents ;  and  this  can  quite  well  be  done,  as 
I  think  it  ought  to  be  done,  without  raising  the  question 
of  the  supernatural.  If  the  Gospel  ascribed  to  St.  John  is 
not  genuine  with  the  supernatural,  it  will  be  not  genuine 
witliout  it.  If  it  is  not  genuine,  there  must  surely  be  other 
indications  that  it  is  not  genuine  besides  the  mere  presence 
of  miracles.  There  are  certainly  a  multitude  of  other  data 
which  point  one  way  or  the  other.  And  my  contention  is, 
that  when  we  have  thoroughly  examined  all  those  other 
data,  it  will  be  time,  and  the  proper  time,  to  raise  the 
question  of  the  supernatural.  AYe  put  it  on  one  side  for  the 
present,  not  because  we  are  not  prepared  to  meet  it,  or 
because  w^e  cannot,  even  as  it  is,  give  a  rough  and  ready 
answer  to  it,  but  because  at  that  future  date  of  which  I 
speak  we  shall  be  able  to  approach  it  with  far  greater 
firmness,  sureness,  and  precision. 

Measured  by  the  standard  of  the  Synoptics,  objection  has 
been  taken  to  the  Fourth  Gospel  on  five — or  throwing  in  a 
subordinate  point  which  it  may  be  convenient  to  treat  here, 
we  may  say  six — main  grounds  :  (1)  That  the  scene  of  our 
Lord's  ministry  is  laid  for  the  most  part  in  Juda3a  rather 
than  in  Galilee  ;  (2)  that  its  duration  is  extended  over  some 
two  and  a  half  years  instead  of  one ;  (3)  that  in  particular 
a  different  day,  Nisan  14th  instead  of  15th,  is  assigned  to 
the  crucifixion  ;  (4)  that  there  is  a  further  discrepancy  of 
no  great  moment  in  connexion  with  this  which  involves 
however  the  question  of  the  evangelist's  reckoning  of  the 
hours  of  the  day ;  (5)  that  the  historical  narrative  is 
wanting  in  development  and  progression,  especially  on  the 
important  point  of  our  Lord's  declaration  of  His  Messiah- 
ship  ;  (6)  that  this  goes  along  with  a  general  heightening 
of  His  claims. 

Of  these  six  points  the  first   three  may   be  said  to    be 


14  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 

practically  given  up.  The  fourth  is  really  indiilerent, 
though  I  should  he  glad  to  say  a  few  words  upon  it.  It  is 
on  the  last  two  that  the  criticism  which  is  adverse  to 
St.  John's  authorship  concentrates  itself  most  tenaciously, 
and  on  these  therefore  that  it  will  be  well  for  us  to  give 
our  best  attention. 

1  &  2.  With  reference  to  the  scene  of  our  Lord's  minis- 
try, and  the  repeated  journeys  from  Galilee  to  Judrca, 
Schiu'er's  judgment  is  as  follows  : 

"  It  is  ■well  known  that  the  Synoptics  only  speak  o£  a  ministry  of 
Josus  in  Galilee,  and  do  not  make  Him  go  to  Judfea  until  the  last 
period  before  His  death.  The  Fourth  Gospel,  on  the  other  hand, 
makes  Him  come  forward  at  the  very  beginning  in  Juda3a,  and  then 
and  several  times  travel  backwards  and  forwards  between  Juda3a  and 
Galilee,  and  that  in  sncli  a  way  as  to  give  the  j^reponderance  to  JudsBa. 
Now  Banr  tried  to  explain  all  the  particulars  of  this  coming  and  going 
in  St.  John  as  dependent  on  the  design  which  the  evangelist  had  in 
view.  It  cannot  be  said  that  this  explanation  has  proved  satisfactory. 
On  the  other  hand,  Bleek  pointed  out  that  a  repeated  sojourn  of  Jesns 
ill  Jndffia  was  in  itself  quite  probable,  and  indeed  that  many  indications 
in  the  Synoptics  tliemselves  were  in  its  favour.  In  the  more  recent 
treatises  there  has  not  been  so  much  stress  laid  upon  this  point  as 
Banr  and  Bleek  assigned  to  it.  Rightly  so,  because  it  cannot  be 
decisive.  The  Synoptic  version  is  in  this  respect  so  vague,  that  in  no 
case  can  it  count  as  an  adverse  argument.  But  if  the  Joliannean 
version  is  to  be  preferred,  that  proves  no  more  than  that  the  author 
had  access  to  independent  traditions."  ' 

True,  there  are  both  possibilities,  that  the  author  drew 
from  his  own  memory,  and  that  he  drew  from  a  good 
tradition.  But  in  any  case  this  point  at  least  must  be  set 
down  to  his  credit;  it  is  an  argument  not  against  but  for 
the  historical  character  of  the  Gospel,  as  far  as  it  goes. 

That  St.  John  is  right  about  this  Judoean  ministry  is 
surely  overwhelmingly  probable.  The  silence  of  the  Synop- 
tics, and  the  detailed  allusions  to  such  a  ministry,  ha,ve 
been  excellently  treated  by  Dr.  Westcott  -  and  other 
English   commentators  ;    but   I   doubt   if  they  have   quite 

1  Vortrag,  p.  f.l  f.  -  P.ise  Ixxvii,  ff. 


THE  JOIIANNEAN  CONTROVERSY.  15 

laid  sufiicieiit  stress  on  the  broad  probabilities  of  the  case. 
That  the  Messiah  should  offer  Hiraself  to  His  people,  and 
only  spend  the  last  week  of  His  life  at  the  centre  of  the 
national  life  and  the  national  religion  is  too  great  a  para- 
dox. If  He  was  aware,  as  His  own  lips  tell  us,  that  it 
could  not  be  "  that  a  prophet  perish  out  of  Jerusalem,"  ^ 
can  we  believe  that  He  would  have  been  satisfied  only  to 
perish  there?  Was  it  not  further  true,  as  St.  John  hints, 
that  Jerusalem  was  the  proper  home  of  the  prophets '? 
Had  not  the  Jew — the  genuine  Jew,  and  not  merely  the 
Galiltean — that  prerogative  right  on  which  St.  Paul  so 
often  insists  (lovBauo  Trpoorov)  to  the  offer  of  the  gospel  ? 
Was  it  not  included  in  that  deep,  underlying  necessity 
which  marked  out  the  lines  of  the  Lord's  manifestation, 
that  He  should  really  go  to  the  heart  of  Israel  and  make 
Himself  known  there  ?  A  number  of  details  in  the  events 
of  the  last  week — the  crowds  that  come  out  to  meet  Him 
at  the  entry  into  Jerusalem ;  the  prompt  recognition  of  His 
commands  by  the  owners  of  the  ass's  colt  and  of  the  upper 
room;  His  own  words,  "I  sat  daily  in  the  temple";  the 
solicitude  ot  men  like  Joseph  of  Arimathoea — imply  that 
He  had  so  made  Himself  known  there.  But  these  details 
do  not  stand  alone  ;  if  the  Fourth  Gospel  had  not  come 
down  to  us  at  all,  we  might  have  been  sure  that  on  this 
question  of  the  scene  of  the  ministry  the  Synoptic  Gospels 
were  incomplete. 

By  one  little  detail  they  seem  to  show  that  they  are 
equally  incomplete  as  to  the  time  which  it  occupied.  When 
the  disciples  pluck  the  ears  of  corn,  quite  early  in  the  Gali- 
Icean  ministry,  that  means  that  the  corn  was  ripe,  but  not 
reaped.  In  other  words,  the  time  was  between  Passover 
and  Pentecost.-  This  fits  in  well  with  St.  John's  state- 
ment (vi.  4),  that  one  intermediate  Passover  was  spent  in 

'  Luke  xiii.  33. 

-  P.  Ewald,  HauptproUcm ,  etc.,  p.  52  ;  McClellan,  Gos^iels,  p.  553. 


16  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 


Galilee,  I  am  aware  that  Dr.  Hort  strains  every  nerve  to 
eject  TO  7racr;^a  from  this  verse.  This  is  quite  the  strongest 
piece  of  argument  I  know  in  favour  of  the  one  year's 
ministry.  But  at  the  end  of  his  long  and  important  note, 
I  do  not  gather  that  even  Dr.  Hort  would  contend  for  more 
than  that  the  omission  should  be  noted  in  the  margin;  and 
that  with  full  consciousness  of  the  weaknesses  of  readings 
which  rest  on  patristic  evidence  alone,  without  support  from 
MSS.  and  versions.  We  may  add,  on  patristic  evidence 
which  is  entirely  indirect  and  inferential.  Dr.  Westcott 
in  his  commentary  argues  for  the  retention  of  the  words. 

The  case  stands  thus :  If  we  could  get  rid  of  the  words 
TO  irda-xa,  the  Johannean  and  Synoptic  chronologies  could 
be  easily  harmonized.  But  even  with  the  words  they  can 
still  be  harmonized  ;  the  simple  fact  being  that  the  Synop- 
tic Gospels  are  only  a  series  of  incidents  loosely  strung 
together,  with  no  chronology  at  all  worthy  of  the  name. 

3.  In  regard  to  the  day  of  the  Last  Supper  and  of  the 
crucifixion,  they  have  something  better  than  a  chronology. 
They  do  not  say  expressly  on  what  day  of  the  month  these 
two  events  took  place  ;  but  they  let  it  appear  by  incidental 
allusions  that  the  Last  Supper  was  the  Paschal  meal,  and 
that  it  therefore  fell  on  the  evening  of  Kisan  14-15  (the 
Jewish  day  beginning  at  dusk),  and  the  crucifixion  in  the 
afternoon  of  the  day  following,  still  called  Nisan  15.  In 
St.  John  both  events  are  to  all  appearance  put  back  one 
day :  the  Last  Supper  falls  on  Nisan  13-14,  and  the 
crucifixion  in  the  afternoon,  as  Nisan  14  is  ending. 

What  are  we  to  say  to  this  ?  Schiirer  once  more  sums 
up  with  judicial  fairness. 

"  The  arguments  (lie  says)  in  favour  as  'well  of  tlie  one  interpreta- 
tion as  of  the  other  are  so  weighty,  that  a  cautious  j^erson  -will  hardly 
venture  with  full  coufulence  to  pi'onounce  either  the  one  or  the  other 
to  be  right."  ^ 

'  Yortraj,  ji.  03. 


THE  JOHANNEAN   QUESTION.  17 

The  advocate  of  the  genuineness  of  the  Fourth  Gospel 
may  well  be  content  with  this  verdict.  The  case  is  cer- 
tainly one  of  those  which  are  more  common  than  we  might 
consider  antecedently  probable,  where  of  two  conclusions 
one  only  can  be  right,  and  yet  a  really  substantial  case 
may  be  made  out  for  each.  The  question  is,  which  can  be 
interpreted  into  agreement  with  the  other  with  the  least 
forcing?  When  I  wrote  on  this  Gospel  twenty  years  ago, 
I  argued  strongly  in  favour  of  the  prima  facie  sense  of  St. 
John.  I  have  not  even  now  formed  an  opinion  which  I 
should  regard  as  absolutely  final ;  but  if  I  were  to  express 
the  opinion  to  which  I  incline  at  this  moment,  it  would  be 
rather  the  other  way.  The  considerations  on  which  this 
different  estimate  turns  are  these.  (1)  I  am  inclined  to 
rate  more  highly  the  indirect  evidence  that  the  Supper 
described  in  the  Synoptics  is  really  the  Paschal  meal.  (2) 
I  satisfied  myself  with  too  little  inquiry  that  St.  John's 
phrase,  "  to  eat  the  Passover "  {(f)ayeiu  to  Trdax^a),  must 
refer  to  the  eating  of  the  Paschal  lamb.  With  our 
associations  it  is  natural  to  think  this,  and  I  have  before 
me  a  monograph  of  Schiirer's  in  which  this  view  is  held. 
But  Dr.  Schiirer's  opinion  is  challenged  by  a  higher 
authority  on  such  a  point  even  than  his — Dr.  Edersheim.^ 
It  appears  to  be  certain  that  the  term  "  Passover "  was 
applied,  not  merely  to  the  Paschal  lamb,  but  to  all  the 
sacrifices  of  the  Paschal  feast,  especially  to  the  Chagigah, 
or  peace  offering  brought  on  Nisan  15.  It  appears  also  to 
be  proved  that  the  Pharisees  by  entering  a  heathen  house 
would  be  debarred  from  eating  there,  but  not  debarred  from 
eating  the  Passover  in  the  narrowest  sense,  because  their 
defilement  would  only  last  till  evening,  after  which  the 
Supper  commenced.     Dr.  Edersheim  puts  it  thus  : 

"No  competent  Jewish  arclifcologist  would  care  to  deii}-  tliat 
Pesacli  may  I'cfer  to  the  GhaglgaU;  while  the  raotire  assigned  to  I  lie 

'  Life  and  Times,  etc.,  vol.  ii..  p.  5CG  ff.,  ed.  i. 
VOL.  V.  2 


18  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 

Sanliedvists  by  St.  John  implies  that  in  tliis' iustancc  it  must  refer  to 
this,  and  not  to  the  Paschal  Lamb."^ 

Many  other  writers,  notably  Wieseler  and  McClellan, 
have  argued  ably  to  the  same  effect.^'  (3)  I  was  also  too 
hasty  in  assuming  that  the  day  when  the  Paschal  lamb 
was  sacrificed  would  be  marked  by  a  more  complete 
cessation  from  work  and  trade  than  the  other  days.  As 
a  fact,  it  was  not  so  strictly  kept  as  the  Sabbath.  Work 
was  stopped,  but  not  traffic.  There  would  be  no  obstacle 
either  to  Judas  buying  Chagigah,  or  to  Joseph  of  Arima- 
thsea  and  the  women  procuring  linen  and  spices.^  It 
seems  probable  that  Simon  of  Cyrene,  like  so  many  other 
pilgrims,  lodged  outside  the  city,  and  was  coming  in  to  the 
temple  worship,  not  from  work. 

The  other  difficulties  are  not  serious.  UapaaKeuij  alone 
had  come  to  be  the  regular  Jewish  word  for  "  Friday,"  and 
irapaaKev)]  rov  Tracrp^a  "^  may  be  quite  as  well  "Friday  in 
Paschal  week  "  as  the  "  day  of  preparation  for  the  Pass- 
over." Or  rather,  the  latter  interpretation  must  be  con- 
sidered extremely  doubtful,  if,  as  it  is  asserted  by  McClellan 
and  Wieseler,  there  is  no  example  of  the  phrase  bearing 
that  sense.  We  should  also  expect  the  article  in  the 
latter  case,  not  in  the  former.  Another  point  on  which 
I  laid  some  stress,  irph  t?]^  t'o/pT/}?  rov  -Kucfya  (John  xiii. 
1),  I  do  not  think  will  hold.  It  is  a  rather  remarkable 
peculiarity  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  that  it  brings  into  close 
juxtaposition  events,  or  events  and  sayings,  which  so 
near  together  seem  almost  to  contradict  each  other.  For 
instance,  at  the  marriage-feast  at  Cana,  our  Lord  is   made 

1  Life  and  Times,  etc.,  p.  508. 

2  Wieseler,  Beitrlige,  p.  242  it.  ;  McClellan,  Gospels,  p.  -iSG  ff. 

3  See  the  Talraudic  references  in  Nosgen,  Gesch.  d.  Neatest.  Offeiib.^  vol.  i.,  p. 
o79  ;  Dillmann-Knobel  on  Exod.  xii.  IG  ;  Edersheim,  Life  and  Times,  p.  508  n., 
and  App.  xvii.,  p.  783. 

*  See  ref.  to  Josepbus  in  McClellan  on  Matt,  xxvii.  02,  and  the  note  on  John 
xis.  li  ;  also  p.  485. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  QUESTION.  19 


to  say,  "My  hour"  {i.e.  for  worldng  miracles)  "is  not 
yet  come,"  though  a  few  minutes  later  He  acts  as  if  His 
"hour-"  had  come;  in  vii.  8  (according  to  the  reading 
which  is  perhaps,  on  the  whole,  more  probable).  He  is 
made  to  say  that  He  will  not  go  up  to  the  Feast  of  Taber- 
nacles, yet  He  does  go  up  in  time  to  arrive  at  the  middle 
of  the  feast.  So  here  I  think  it  quite  possible  that  "  before 
the  Feast  of  the  Passover  "  may  mean  an  hour  or  so  before, 
and  not  a  whole  day  before. 

On  these  grounds  I  now  incline  to  harmonize  St.  John 
with  the  Synoptics ;  but  I  feel  that  the  casting  vote  upon 
the  question  must  be  reserved  for  specialists  in  Jewish 
antiquities.  In  any  case,  there  is  nothing  to  prevent  the 
account  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  from  being  written  by  an 
Apostle. 

4.  Another  smaller  question  of  the  same  kind,  which  it 
may  be  well  to  touch  upon  here,  relates  to  the  reckoning 
of  hours  of  the  day  in  the  Gospel.  This  too  is  to  a  small 
extent  a  question  of  harmonizing,  but  nothing  of  any 
importance  turns  upon  it.  According  to  St.  Mark  the 
succession  of  events  is  this  : 

Delivery  to  Pilate         about  6  a.m. 

{irpwt,  Mark  xv.  1.) 

Crucifixion  9  a.m. 

{wpa  rpiTT],  Mark  xv.  25.) 

Darkness  12-3  p.m. 

{'yevojx^vi]^  liopa^  eiCT)]^     .     .     .     fftj?  wpa? 
eri'ar?;?,  Mark  XV.  33.) 

In  St.  John  the  note  of  time  is  inserted  in  the  account 
of  the  hearing  before  Pilate:  "Now  it  was  the  Prepara- 
tion of  the  Passover  (rather  perhaps  '  Friday  in  the  Paschal 
week'):  it  was  about  the  sixth  hour"  (John  xix.  14). 
Clearly  this  does  not  agree  if  by  the  sixth  hour  is  meant, 
as  it  usually  would,  "  noon."    But  all  would  fall  beautifully 


20  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 

into  place  if  by  "sixth  hour"  could  be  meant   "G  a.m.," 
as  with  us.     Such  harmonizing  as  this  is  perfectly  legiti- 
mate where  it  can  be  done  without  putting  a  strain  upon 
the  evidence.       Even  if  the  Gospel  were    written  in  the 
middle  of  the  second  century,    there  would  be  no  reason 
to  assume  gratuitous  contradictions.     And  it  happened  that 
in  this  particular  instance  there  were  a  number  of  similar 
notes  of  time,^  all  of  which  seemed  to  be  a  degree  more 
satisfactorily  explained  in  connexion  with  their  context  if 
the  reckoning  were  from  midnight  and  midday  as  with  us. 
Could    St.   John  have    adopted    such    a  reckoning?     It  is 
well  known  that  it  has  often  been  contended,  especially  in 
England,  but  also  by  writers   like    Tholuck,   Meyer   (not, 
however,    Weiss    in    the    sixth   and   following   editions   of 
Meyer),  Ewald,  and  AVieseler,  that  he  could.    Writing  with 
AVieseler's    elaborate    discussion   before  me,  I  nevertheless 
hesitated   to  claim  more  than  a  possibility  for   this   view. 
Since  then  it  has  been   maintained   with  his  usual  ability 
and  accuracy   by  McClellan,   and  adopted  also  by  Bishop 
Westcott.     The  subject  has  been  recently  reviewed,  rather 
in  a   negative   sense,  by  the  Kev.  J.  A.  Cross. ^     This  has 
led  me  to  go  over  the  evidence  again  as  well  as  I  could 
with   the  help  of  two  extremely  full  monographs  by  Dr. 
Gustav    Bilfinger,    Der   hiirgerlicJie    Tag   and    Die  antiken 
Stundenangahcn,  both  published  at  Stuttgart  in  1888.     In 
consequence  of  this    I  should    be  obliged   myself  to    take 
the  negative  view.     The  natural   and  common    reckoning 
among   the   Romans,    as    well    as  other   peoples,    was   the 
working   day   from   sunrise  to  sunset.      For   certain  legal 
purposes,  however,  the  day  was  held  to  begin  at  midnight. 
This  had  a  religious  or  ceremonial  ground  in  the  practice 
of  augury.     The  auspices  must  be  taken  at  night,  and  they 

1  i.  .39  ;  iv.  0,   7,  62,  5:^.     Cf.   McClellan,   Goq^h,  p.  71-2,  etc. ;  Westcott, 
St.  John,  p.  282. 
'^  Class.  ltd-.,  June,  IS'Jl,  p.  215  If. 


THE  JOIIANNEAN    QUESTION.  21 

must  also  be  taken  on  the  same  day  with  the  action  to 
which  they  referred.  Hence  it  was  clearly  necessary  to 
annex  a  portion  of  the  preceding  night  to  the  day.  This 
portion  began  with  midnight.  From  the  sphere  of  reli- 
gious ceremony  this  passed  into  the  sphere  of  law ;  any- 
thing which  happened  before  midnight  was  held  to  fall  in 
the  day  past,  anything  after  midnight  in  the  day  begun. 
This  determined  in  particular  the  day  of  birth.  The  day 
so  reckoned  was  called  the  "  civil  day."  ^ 

There  is  however  no  evidence  that  this  reckoning  of  the 
days  carried  with  it  a  corresponding  reckoning  of  the  hours. 
And  further  I  agree  with  Mr.  Cross  in  his  general  conclu- 
sion, if  not  in  quite  all  of  his  arguments,  that  the  proof 
that  this  mode  of  reckoning  hours  prevailed  in  Asia  Minor 
breaks  down.  The  passage  of  Pliny  on  which  greatest 
stress  is  laid  {Epp.  iii.  5)  refers  to  1  and  2  a.m.  and  mid- 
night. Roman  habits  were  very  much  earlier  than  ours. 
And  the  evidence  that  the  Asiatic  martyrdoms  took  place 
in  the  forenoon  is  much  too  remote  to  be  conclusive. 
Bilfinger  touches  upon  the  hypothesis,  only  to  reject  it 
peremptorily.^ 

It  will  be  remembered  that  Eusebius  has  a  wholly  dif- 
ferent solution  of  the  difficulty.  He  explains  "  the  sixth 
hour"  in  St.  John  as  a  textual  corruption,  F  (  =  3)  being 
misread  as  digamma  F  (  =  G).  And  the  reading  is  actually 
found  in  a  rather  strong  group  of  authorities  with  a  Wes- 
tern cast,  just  as  the  converse  change  has  some  slight 
support  in  St.  Mark.  We  must  leave  the  discrepancy  as 
we  fmd  it. 

5.  AVith  the  next  point  we  pp.ss  on  to  more  serious 
ground.  It  will  be  well  to  take  Schi'irer's  statement,  be- 
cause if  this  held  good  it  would  constitute  a  really  formi- 

1  Aulus  Gellius,  Noct.  Att.  iii.  2  (=Macrob.,  Saturn,  i.  3.  2-10) ;  Censorinus, 
DeBie  Nat.,  c.  23.     Cf.  Bilfinger,  Der  hUrg.  Tag,  pp.  12,  198-206. 
^  Bie  anflken  Stundenanjaheu,  p.  112. 


THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 


dable  indictment.  I  hope,  however,  to  show  (1)  that  it  is 
not  an  accurate  representation  of  the  facts  ;  (2)  that  so 
far  as  it  does  represent  them,  the  imphed  inference  does 
not  follow. 

The  charge  is  that  between  the  Fourth  Gospel  and  the 
earliest  Synoptic  document  there  is  a  deep-seated  difference 
respecting  the  tvliole  course  of  the  ministry  of  Christ. 

"  According  to  the  version  in  our  St.  Mark  (says  Schiirer),  it  is  in 
the  highest  degree  probable  that  Jesus  did  not  from  the  first  come 
forward  as  the  Messiah,  (a)  He  is  indeed  absolutely  certain  of  His 
mission.  He  challenges  faith  in  the  fact  that  through  Him  God  offers 
His  grace  and  His  helji  to  man.  But  •with  the  claim  to  be  the  Messiali, 
the  Son  of  God,  with  this  title,  in  true  pedagogic  wisdom  He  only  pre- 
sents Himself  at  a  later  period  and  gradually.  (6)  To  this  attitude  on 
His  part  there  corresponds  also  the  attitude  of  His  disciples.  They 
join  themselves  to  Him  as  their  Teacher  without  any  question  being 
raised  as  to  His  Messiahship.  Even  at  the  stilling  of  the  storm  at  sea 
the  disciples  sa}-  with  surprise  (Mark  iv.  41),  '  Who  is  this,  that  the  wind 
and  the  sea  obey  Him  ?  ' — an  expression  of  astonishment  which  would 
be  impossible  if  they  had  already  recognised  Him  as  the  Messiah.  Not 
tmtil  Cfesarea  Philippi  does  Peter  for  the  first  time  break  out  into  the 
confession,  '  Thou  art  the  Messiah  '  (Mark  viii.  29).  The  solemnity  with 
which  this  is  related  shows  jilaiuly  that  we  have  to  do  with  the  first 
breaking  forth  of  this  conviction  in  the  consciousness  of  the  disciples. 
Yet  even  then  Jesus  still  forbids  His  disciples  to  speak  of  it  in  public. 
He  wishes  not  to  rouse  the  unspiritual  enthusiasm  of  the  multitude. 
Only  just  at  the  end  of  His  ministry  does  He  allow  the  multitudes  to 
pay  homage  to  Him  as  the  Messiah,  (c)  "With  the  whole  of  this  pre- 
sentation agrees  the  protraiture  of  John  the  Baptist  in  the  oldest 
Synoptic  tradition.  The  oldest  report,  as  it  is  preserved  in  Mark  and 
Luke,  knows  nothing  about  Johii  recognising  Jesus  as  the  Messiah 
at  the  baptism.  ()\i  tlie  contrary,  it  is  well  known  how  the  Synoptics 
relate  that  John,  even  when  he  was  in  prison,  has  the  question  put  to 
Jesus  whether  He  is  the  Messiah  (Matt.  xi.  2-6  =  Luke  vii.  18-23).  In 
the  context  of  the  Synoptic  narrative  this  is  not  the  question  of  one 
who  has,  after  the  fact,  become  doubtful,  but  the  question  of  one 
in  whom  this  belief  flames  up  for  the  first  time.  All  this  gives  a 
thoroughly  consistent  picture. 

"  Just  as  consistent,  but  in  all  respects  opposed  to  it,  is  that  which  is 
drawn  for  us  in  the  Fourth  Gospel.  Here  from  the  first  Jesus  comes 
forward  with  the  full  claim  to  Divine  sonship  and  Messiahship.  (a) 
One  of  His  first  acts  is  that,  in  virtue  of  His  supreme  (huherem)  autho- 


TUE  JO  U ANNE  AN  QUESTION.  23 


rity.  He  cleanses  the  temple  from  all  secular  traffic, — an  event  which  the 
Synoptists  put  at  the  Terj  end  of  the  public  ministry.  Such  a  step 
assumes  the  full  claim  to  supreme,  nay  Divine  dignity.  (6)  And 
so,  according  to  the  Fourth  Gospel,  Jesus  is  from  the  first  acknow- 
ledged by  His  disciples  too  as  the  Messiah.  'We  have  found  the 
Messiah,'  says  Andrew  to  his  brother  Simon  (L  41).  '  We  have  found 
Him  of  whom  Moses  and  the  prophets  wrote,*  exclaims  Philip  to 
XathanaeL  The  disciples  therefore  attach  themselves  to  Jesus,  not 
only  as  pupils  to  a  teacher,  but  because  they  have  recognised  in  Him 
the  Messiah,  (c)  And  as  the  disciples,  so  also  is  John  the  Baptist  from 
the  first  fixed  in  his  Ijelief  in  Jesus  as  the  Messiah ;  indeed,  his  is  the 
first  clearly  uttered  testimony  to  the  Divine  mission  of  Jesus,  and  it 
is  through  him  that,  at  His  very  first  appearance,  Jesus  receives  His 
credentials  Ijefore  the  world. 

"  It  is  clear  that  these  two  portraits  mutually  exclude  each  other.  If 
the  first  is  historical,  the  second  cannot  be ;  but  then  the  hand  that 
drew  it  cannot  be  that  of  an  Apostle,  cannot  be  that  of  an  actual 
disciple  of  the  Lord."  * 

Certainly  an  impressive  argument,  if  the  facts  were  as 
they  are  stated.  Bat  before  testing  them,  let  us  pause  for 
a  moment  over  the  inference  at  the  end.  Surely  if  there 
is  one  thing  which  characterizes  the  action  of  memory, 
especially  of  memory  looking  back  over  a  wide  interval,  it  is 
the  tendency  to  foreshorten.  Events  lose  their  perspective. 
Features  in  the  picture  are  inserted  out  of  place.  The 
mind  is  so  full  of  the  significance  of  what  followed,  that  the 
traces  of  that  significance  are  antedated,  they  are  thrown 
backward  to  a  time  when  they  had  not  yet  discovered  them- 
selves. This  is  a  matter  of  extremely  common  experience. 
I  could  therefore  allow  that  there  was  some  antedating  in 
the  narrative  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  vdthout  denying  it  to 
be  the  work  of  an  Apostle.  It  would  be  the  easier  to  do 
this  because  the  author,  whoever  he  was,  had  just  the  kind 
of  mind  which  is  most  liable  to  such  displacements.  He 
has  not  the  simplicity  or  naivete  of  the  second  evangelist ; 
but  ideas  take  the  strongest  hold  upon  him,  and  he  sees 
facts  in  the  light  of  them.     That  in  such  a  mind,  setting 

*  Tortra'i.  vr.  C3-C-J. 


•21  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 

itself  to  write  history,  there  should  be  an  element  of  antici- 
pation would  not  be  at  all  surprising. 

But  is  it  the  case  that  the  Synoptic  versions  and  the 
Johannean  version  are  so  diametrically  opposed  as  they  are 
made  out  to  be  ?     I  cannot  admit  that  they  are. 

"We  are  pursued  by  the  influence  of  names  and  the  asso- 
ciations which  we  attach  to  them.  Because  Andrew  or 
Philip  say,  "  We  have  found  the  Messiah,"  and  because  we 
have  learnt  to  read  into  that  title  the  whole  depth  of  Pauline 
and  Johannean  theology,  we  at  once  imagine  that  they  also 
must  have  done  the  same  thing.  We  forget  that  there  were 
twenty  Messiahs  in  the  period  between  the  death  of  Herod 
and  the  Jewish  War,  most  of  whom  were  extinguished 
before  they  had  time  to  become  formidable.  The  impulse 
which  led  the  few  friends  and  neighbours  to  follow  the 
mysterious  intimations  of  John,  and  attach  themselves  to 
the  Person  of  Jesus,  was  a  most  tentative  thing.  If  they 
did  call  Him  "the  Messiah,"  they  knew  not  what  they 
said.  Even  John,  we  may  well  believe,  did  not  know  all 
that  he  said.  He  spoke  under  the  prophetic  afflatus,  which 
lifted  him  above  his  natural  level;  and  when  this  subsided, 
his  views  of  things  would  become  more  ordinary  again. 
The  Triple  Synopsis  makes  him  predict  the  coming  of 
One  mightier  than  himself,  who  would  baptize  with  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire.  The  Triple  Synopsis  also  leaves 
no  doubt  of  the  signs  which  accompanied  the  baptism  of 
Jesus,  and  asserts  that  the  Holy  Spirit  Itself  visibly  rested 
upon  Him.  The  Fourth  Gospel  adds  a  different  feature, 
"  the  Lamb  of  God,"  but  nothing  which  essentially  goes 
beyond  what  we  have  already  had  in  the  Synoptics. 

It  is,  I  cannot  but  think,  an  unimaginative  criticism 
which  finds  it  necessary  to  explain  away  the  access  of 
doubt  which  came  over  John  in  prison.  The  wonder  is 
that  any  one  who  shared  the  expectations  which  all  Israel 
entertained  of  their    Messiah   could    keep  up  his  faith  in 


THE  JOB  ANNE  AN   QUESTION. 


One  who  so  deliberately  and  persistently  contradicted  them. 
Jesus  by  His  reply  gave  him  a  sign.  He  recalled  to  his 
mind  a  forgotten  prophecy,  which  hit  the  central  truth  of 
what  the  Messiah  was  to  be.  By  meditating  on  that,  John 
might  be  led  to  recast  his  own  idea  and  rise  to  a  higher 
one. 

The  temptation  to  round  off  a  telling  antithesis  has  sadly 
spoiled  Dr.  Schiirer's  presentment  of  the  facts.  Why  is 
there  such  lofty  assumption  involved  in  the  cleansing  of 
the  Temple  ?  Is  it  not  an  act  that  any  prophet  might  have 
done?  Again,  is  it  true  that  St.  John  takes  no  note  of 
the  reserve  of  Christ  in  proclaiming  His  Messiahship? 
"  According  to  the  Synoptics,"  says  Schiirer,  "  He  does  not 
wish  to  rouse  the  unspiritual  enthusiasm  of  the  multitude." 
AVhat  of  that  incident  where  Jesus  retires  into  solitude  to 
escape  the  crowd  which  would  come  "  to  take  Him  by  force 
and  make  Him  king  "  ?  ^  What,  again,  of  that  taunt  and 
the  reason  alleged  for  it  :  "If  Thou  doest  these  things,  show 
Thyself  to  the  world  :  for  neither  did  His  brethren  believe 
on  Him"?  The  family  of  Jesus  is  incredulous  in  the 
Synoptics  ;  it  is  incredulous  also  in  St.  John.  The  seventh 
chapter  takes  us  straight  into  the  middle  of  the  public 
ministry ;  it  gives  us  a  picture  of  the  current  feeling  and 
notions  about  Christ :  is  that  a  picture  of  implicit  faith, 
of  commanding  and  unquestioned  Godhead?  And  quite 
late  in  the  day  we  are  told  how  the  Jews  crowded  round 
our  Lord  with  the  demand,  "  How  long  dost  Thou  hold 
us  in  suspense  (rP/i'  ylrv)(^r]v  y'jf^wv  atpet?)  ?  If  Thou  art  the 
Christ,  tell  us  plainly."  ^ 

There  are  as  many  and  as  unequivocal  signs  of  the 
reserve  of  Christ  in  St.  John  as  in  the  Synoptics,  if  we  will 
but  look  for  them. 

6.  Lastly,  we  have  another  point,  which  is  no  doubt 
also  of  serious  moment.  The  Fourth  Gospel  gives  us 
'  St.  John  vi.  lo.  -  St.  John  x.  24. 


26  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 


another  Christushild,  a  portrait  of  Christ  v/hich  is  all 
divinity.  "  That  Jesus  came  forth  from  the  Father,  that 
He  is  one  with  Him,  that  all  He  says  and  does  is  a  reve- 
lation of  God  Himself,  and  that  therefore  the  salvation 
of  men  depends  upon  His  acceptance  or  rejection — these," 
says  Schiirer,^  "  are  the  almost  exclusive  themes  of  the 
Johannean  discourses,  and  they  have  only  one  clear  parallel 
in  the  Synoptics  (Matt.  xi.  2)." 

Again  let  us  begin  by  allowing  that  here  too  there  may 
be  a  certain  selection,  and  that  that  selection  may  be  in- 
fluenced and  guided  by  the  meditation  of  a  profound  mind 
upon  those  "  greater  things  "  which  had  been  wrought  in 
the  Spirit  and  Name  of  Jesus  after  His  departure.  Look- 
ing back  over  the  fifty  or  sixty  years  which  bad  elapsed, 
the  Apostle  saw  what  were  the  really  fundamental  truths 
in  the  life  which  he  had  been  permitted  to  witness.  He 
carefully  gathers  up  and  reproduces  all  the  hints  which 
had  been  given  of  these  truths, — sometimes,  it  may  be, 
making  them  fuller  and  more  explicit. 

So  far  we  may  go,  but  no  farther. 

In  the  first  place,  let  us  note  that  the  great  passage, 
Matthew  xi.  25-27,  is  reproduced  almost  exactly  in  Luke 
X.  21,  22,  where  it  follows  immediately  upon  the  record 
of  the  return  of  the  seventy  and  of  their  success  in  the 
exercise  of  miraculous  powers.  This  Jesus  accepts  as  proof 
of  the  overthrow  of  the  Satanic  kingdom ;  and  He  goes 
on  solemnly  to  confer  upon  them  higher  powers  still  from 
the  fulness  of  those  with  w^iich  He  is  Himself  invested, 
— though  not  without  a  reminder  that  for  them  personally 
there  is  a  yet  more  excellent  way  ("Rejoice  not  that  the 
devils  are  subject  to  you,"  etc.).  We  may  take  it  that  the 
whole  of  this  passage — in  any  case  the  crucial  verse — comes 
from  the  Logia,  the  oldest  of  all  evangelical  compositions. 
It  is  introduced  easil}'  and  naturally,  and  stands  out  by  no 

'  Pauo  G(j. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  QUESTION. 


apparent  peculiarity  from  the  surrounding  context ;  and  yet 
the  language  is  full  of  what  we  consider  characteristically 
Johannean  expressions  (o  irarii'ip — o  vi6^ ;  irapaSiSovai,  of 
the  entrusting  of  forces  or  powers ;  iTrijcyuxxKetv  ;  airoica- 
XviTTeLv).  It  is  clear  that  such  expressions  were  current 
as  "words  of  the  Lord"  many  years  before  St.  John 
conceived  the  thought  of  writing  a  gospel.  The  degree  of 
frequency  with  which  they  were  repeated  in  other  narra- 
tives would  be  a  matter  of  accident  or  of  the  idiosyncrasy 
of  the  writer. 

The  Synoptics,  it  is  true,  give  a  more  photographic 
account  of  the  life  of  Christ  as  He  went  in  and  out  among 
the  peasants  of  Galilee;  but  when  we  come  to  look  at  them 
a  little  more  closely,  w^e  see  that  they  have  really  the  same 
substratum,  the  same  underlying  ideas,  as  the  Fourth 
Gospel.  They  are  not  one  whit  less  Christo-centric.  The 
Son  of  man  there  too  forgives  sins,  there  too  legislates  for 
His  Church,  there  too  claims  the  devotion  of  His  disciples, 
whose  acts  acquire  value  from  being  done  "  for  His  sake," 
"in  His  Name."  There  too  the  Son  is  also  Lord;  there  too 
He  promises  to  dwell  like  the  Shekinah  among  His  people, 
and  to  give  them  help  and  inspiration  after  He  is  gone ; 
there  too  He  seals  a  new  covenant  with  His  blood ;  there 
too  He  declares  that  He  will  come  again  to  judge. 

What  then  is  wanting  ?  The  criticism  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel  rings  the  changes  upon  one  idea — the  idea  of  pre- 
existence.  This  Schiirer  urges  is  in  St.  John  always  in 
the  background,  while  in  the  Synoptic  it  is  entirely  want- 
ing. There  are  two  ways  in  which  St.  John  teaches  this 
doctrine  of  pre-existence,  and  in  regard  to  each  of  these 
he  employs  a  different  cycle  of  language.  The  doctrine 
of  the  Logos  in  the  prologue  is  one  thing,  the  doctrine 
contained  in  the  discourses  of  our  Lord  Himself  is  another. 
Still  they  approximate  to  each  other.  The  idea  of  "  send- 
ing "    which    occurs     so    often    (with    both    verbs    izkinroa 


28  THE  JOE  ANNE  AN  QUESTION. 

and  uTToareXXco)  would  not  of  itself  imply  pre-existence, 
because  the  prophets  also  were  "  sent  "  ;  but  taken  as  it 
is  in  close  connexion  with  the  filial  relation,  "sendin^^  by 
the  Father,"  and  also  in  connexion  with  the  communication 
of  the  things  of  the  Father  ("we  speak  that  we  do  know, 
and  testify  that  we  have  seen"),  it  does  seem  to  contain  a 
reference  to  the  pre-existent  state.  The  commonest  form 
of  phrase  is  "He  that  (the  Bread  that,  etc.),  came  down 
out  of  heaven,"  "He  that  cometh  from  above."  But  we 
get  very  near  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Logos  in  such  sayings 
as  "Your  father  Abraham  rejoiced  to  see  My  day  :  and  he 
saw  it,  and  was  glad";  "before  Abraham  was,  I  am"; 
and,  still  more,  in  "  the  glory  which  I  had  with  Thee  be- 
fore the  world  was  "  ;  and  "  Thou  lovedst  Me  before  the 
foundation  of  the  ■^orld."^ 

All  these  are  no  doubt  remarkable  expressions.  But  let 
us  consider  for  a  moment.  Have  we  heard  nothing  like 
them?  When  St.  Peter  speaks  of  the  "  Spirit  of  Christ  " 
being  in  the  prophets,  and  testifying  through  them  to  the 
sufferings  of  Christ;-  when  St.  Paul  speaks  of  the  second 
Man  as  "  the  Lord  from  heaven,"  and  of  God  as  sending 
"forth  His  Son  "  ;  when  he  speaks  of  Him  who,  "  though 
He  was  rich,  yet  for  our  sakes  became  poor,"  of  Him  who 
"  existed  in  the  form  of  God,"  of  Him  through  whom  "all 
things  were  created,"  who  was  "before  all  things,"  and 
in  whom  "all  things  consist";"  when  the  author  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  speaks  of  the  Son  through  whom 
God  "made  the  worlds,"  who  "upholds  all  things  by  the 
word  of  His  power  "^ — we  are  naturally  driven  back  to 
some  common  source  from  which  these  three  writers  are 
drawing.  Already  in  the  year  57,  if  not  earlier,  St.  Paul 
implies  the  existence  of  the  doctrine.     He  refers  to  it  as 

>  St.  John  viii.  56,  58 ;  xvii.  5,  24.  "  1  Pet.  i.  11. 

3  1  Cor.  XV.  47  ;  Gal.  iv.  4 ;  2  Cor.  viii.  '.) ;  Plill.  ii.  0  ;  Col.  i.  IG,  17. 
•*  Hcb.  i.  2,  3. 


SAINT  PAUL'S  FIRST  JOURNEY  IN  ASIA  MINOR.   29 

something  which  he  takes  for  granted,  and  not  as  one 
propounding  anything  new.^  Does  not  this  bring  us  back 
very  near  the  foundation-head  of  all  Christian  doctrine  ? 
Should  we  not  be  led  to  suspect,  even  if  we  had  had  no 
Fourth  Gospel,  that  Christ  Himself  had  laid  the  foundation 
on  which  His  followers  were  buildiiig?  But  if  that  is 
so,  the  absence  of  this  doctrine  from  the  Synoptics  and 
its  presence  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  only  means  that  it  has 
preserved  what  they  had  not  preserved.  And  the  argument 
on  which  so  much  stress  has  been  laid  turns  out  to  be 
not  against  but  for  the  ancient  view,  that  we  have  in  it 
the  work  of  one  who  had  lain  on  the  breast  of  the  Lord. 

W.  Sanday. 


SAINT  PAUL'S  FIRST  JOURNEY  IN 
ASIA  MINOR. 

The  intention  of  this  paper  is,  presupposing  as  already 
familiar  to  the  reader  all  that  is  said  in  the  careful  and 
scholarly  work  of  Messrs.  Conybeare  and  Howson  and  in 
the  picturesque  pages  of  Dr.  Farrar,"  to  add  some  notes 
and  make  a  few  corrections  in  points  where  fresh  dis- 
coveries or  more  intimate  acquaintance  with  the  localities 
necessitate  a  revision  of  their  statements.  The  present 
writer  has  seen  every  place  named  in  the  following  pages 
except  Perga,  and  writes  as  an  eye-witness  ;  and  his  object 
is  to  fix  more  precisely  the  exact  situation  of  the  localities 
visited  by  Paul  and  Barnabas,  and  the  roads  along  which 
they  travelled,  and  to  draw  some  inferences  as  to  the 
direction  in  w4iich  further  knowledge  may  be  hoped  for. 

'  For  Ibis  reason  I  tbink  tbe  view  tbat  the  doctrine  owes  its  origin  to  St. 
Paul,  and  tbat  tlie  other  writers  are  all  dejiendcnt  upon  bim,  very  questionable. 
2  These  works  are,  for  brevity's  sake,  alluded  to  tbronghout  as  CH.  and  F. 


30  SAINT  PAUL'S  FIRST  JOURNEY  IN  ASIA  MINOR. 

In  general,  the  narrative  in  Acts  xiii.  and  xiv.  wants  the 
vividness  and  individuality  of  the  scene  at  Ephesus,  Acts 
xix.  Whereas  the  latter  must  embody  without  substantial 
alteration  the  account  given  in  great  detail  by  some  one 
present  at  the  scene,  the  description  of  the  journey  is 
so  slight,  so  vague,  and  so  wanting  in  individualized  de- 
tails of  place  or  of  time,  that  it  can  hardly  be  more  than 
the  account  given  by  one  who  had  only  second-hand  in- 
formation of  a  very  brief  kind  to  work  on,  and  little  or 
no  knowledge  of  the  localities  to  guide  him.  The  references 
to  Derbe  and  Lystra,  however,  are  much  more  precise  than 
the  rest  of  the  narrative,  and  contain  some  details  which 
can  be  put  to  the  test,  and  which  become  more  full  of 
meaning  when  compared  with  the  actual  localities.  For 
example,  "  Jupiter  before  the  city "  at  Lystra  is  a  trait 
that  can  be  proved  or  disproved  at  a  cost  of  i'lOO  spent 
in  digging ;  and  one  particular  site  for  the  temple  is  so 
probable,  that  a  couple  of  days'  work  might  perhaps  show 
where  it  stood. 

F.  explains  this  want  of  detail  as  due  to  the  absorption 
of  the  apostle  in  his  mission,  and  his  indifference  alike  to 
the  beauty  of  nature  and  to  the  discomforts  of  travel.^ 
But  this  does  not  sufficiently  account  for  the  absence 
of  details  which  show  real  acquaintance  with  localities, 
seasons,  and  surroundings.  Such  slight  touches  of  local 
colour  abound  in  parts  of  the  book,  and  it  is  more  natural 
to  explain  their  absence  here  from  the  fact  that  the  writer 
of  the  book  had  to  depend  entirely  on  brief  notes,  or  brief 
oral  accounts  given  by  the  actual  travellers,  and  that  he 
had  little  personal  acquaintance  with  the  localities.  It  is 
worth  remarking,  that  the  book  purports  to  be  written  by 

'  CH.  are  in  tbis  point  truer  to  nature  and  to  the  records ;  they  quote  the 
apostle's  own  words,  showing  that  the  dangers  of  travel  were  vividlj'  felt  by 
him  :  "  In  journeyings  often,  in  perils  of  rivers,  in  perils  of  robbers,  in  perils 
from  the  Gentiles,  in  perils  in  the  wilderness,  in  labour  and  travail,  in  watchings 
often,  in  hunger  and  thirst  "  (2  Cor.  xi.  20,  '11). 


SAINT  PAUL'S  FIRST  JOURNEY  IN  ASIA  MINOR.    ?! 


a  person  who  claims  no  acquaintance  with  Perga,  Antioch, 
etc.,  but  who  does  claim  to  have  seen  Iconium,  Derbe, 
and  Lj^stra. 

It  is  even  impossible  to  determine  the  season  of  the 
year  when  the  journey  was  made.  CH.  indeed,  followed 
by  F.,  argue  that  Paul  and  Barnabas  came  to  Perga 
about  May,  and  found  the  population  removing  oi  masse 
to  the  upper  country,  to  live  in  the  cooler  glens  amid  the 
mountains  of  Taurus.  In  this  way  they  explain  why  the 
apostles  are  not  said  to  have  preached  in  Perga :  they 
went  on  to  the  inner  country,  because  no  population  re- 
mained in  Perga  to  whom  they  could  address  themselves. 
But  CH.  can  hardly  be  right  in  supposing  that  general 
migrations  of  the  ancient  population  took  place  annually 
in  the  spring  or  early  summer.  The  modern  custom  which 
they  mention,  and  which  they  suppose  to  be  retained  from 
old  time,  is  due  to  the  semi-nomadic  character  of  the 
Turkish  tribes  which  have  come  into  the  country  at  various 
times  after  the  twelfth  century.  Even  at  the  present  day 
it  is  not  the  custom  for  the  population  of  the  coast  towns, 
who  have  not  been  much  affected  by  the  Turkish  mixture 
of  blood,  to  move  away  in  a  body  to  the  interior.  The 
migrations  which  take  place  are  almost  entirely  confined 
to  certain  wandering  tribes,  chiefly  Yuruks.  A  small 
number  of  the  townsmen  go  up  to  the  higher  ground  for 
reasons  of  health  and  comfort ;  and  this  custom  has  in 
recent  years  become  more  common  among  the  wealthier 
classes  in  the  towns,  who,  however,  do  not  go  away  from  the 
cities  till  the  end  of  June.  But  a  migration  en  masse  is 
contrary  to  all  that  we  know  about  the  ancient  population. 
The  custom  of  living  in  the  country  within  the  territory 
of  the  city  is  a  very  different  thing  ;  and  this  was  certainly 
practised  by  many  of  the  people  of  Perga.  But  it  is  prac- 
tically certain  that  the  territory  of  Perga  did  not  include 
any  part  of  the  upper  highlands  of  Taurus  ;  and  there  can 


32  SAINT  PAUL'S 'FIRST  JOURNEY  IN  ASIA  MINOR. 


be  no  doubt  that  the  festivals  and  the  ceremonial  of  the 
PergjEan  Artemis  went  on  throughout  the  summer,  and 
were  celebrated  by  the  entire  population.  The  govern- 
ment was  kept  up  in  the  same  way  during  summer  as 
during  winter. 

The  one  reason,  therefore,  why  this  journey  has  been 
supposed  to  begin  in  May  is  founded  on  an  error.  We 
must  be  content  to  know  nothing  about  the  time.  Can 
we,  however,  determine  what  was  the  route  by  which  Paul 
and  Barnabas  travelled  from  Perga  to  Antioch  of  Pisidia  ? 
In  regard  to  this  point  some  evidence  exists. 

The  apostles,  starting  from  Perga,  apparently  after  only 
a  very  brief  stay,  directed  their  steps  to  Antioch,  the  chief 
city  of  inner  Pisidia,   a  Koman  colony,  a  strong  fortress, 
the  centre  of  military  and  civil  administration  in  the  south- 
western parts  of  the  vast  province  called  by  the  Eomans 
Galatia.     There  can  be  no  doubt  that  there  existed  close 
commercial  relations  between  this  metropolis  on  the  north 
side  of  Taurus  and  the   Pamphylian  harbours,   especially 
Side,  Perga,  and  Attalia.      The    roads    from    Antioch    to 
Perga  and  to  Attalia  coincide ;  that  which  leads  to   Side 
is  quite  different.      There    can    also  be  no  doubt  that  in 
Antioch,  as  in  many  of  the  cities  founded  by  the  Seleucid 
kings  of  Syria,  there  was  a  considerable  Jewish  population. 
Josephus  mentions  that,  when  the  fidelity  of  Asia  Minor 
to  the  Seleucid  kings  was  doubtful,  2,000  Jewish  families 
were  transported  by  one  single  edict  to  the  fortresses  of 
Lydia  and  Phrygia.^     Being  strangers  to  their  neighbours 
in  the  country,  they  were  likely  to  be  faithful  to  the  Syrian 
kings  ;    and  specially  high  privileges  were  granted  them  in 
order  to  insure  their  fidelity.     These  privileges  were  con- 

1  Josepl).,  Antiq.  Jad.  xii.  H.  It  must  be  remembered  that,  though  Antioch 
is  generally  called  "  of  Pisidia,"  j'et  the  bounds  were  very  doubtful,  and  Strabo 
reckons  Antioch  to  be  in  I'lu-ygia.  It  was  doubtless  one  of  the  fortresses  here 
meant  by  Josephus. 


SAINT  PAUL'S  FIEST  JOURNEY  IN  ASIA  MINOR.   33 


firmed  by  the  Eoman  emperors  ;  for  the  imperial  policy 
was,  from  the  time  of  Julius  Caesar  onwards,  almost  in- 
variably favourable  to  the  Jews. 

The  commerce  of  Antioch  would  in  part  certainly  come 
to  Perga  and  Attalia  ;  in  all  probability  the  Jews  of  Antioch 
would  play  an  important  part  in  this  commerce.  Paul 
then  resolved  to  go  to  Antioch ;  and  the  immediate  result 
was  that  one  of  his  companions  lost  courage,  probably  in 
view  of  the  reported  dangers  of  the  road/  deserted  the  ex- 
pedition, and  returned  home. 

The  commerce  between  Antioch  and  Perga  or  Attalia 
must  of  course  have  followed  one  definite  route  ;  and  Paul 
would  naturally  choose  this  road.  CH.  and  F.  seem  to 
me  to  select  a  very  improbable  path.  The  former  incline 
to  the  supposition  that  the  apostles  went  by  the  steep 
pass  leading  from  Attalia  to  the  Buldur  Lake,  the  ancient 
Lake  Ascania;  and  both  CH.  and  F.  state  unhesitatingly 
that  the  path  led  along  the  coast  of  the  Egerdir  double 
lakes,  the  ancient  Limnai,  the  most  picturesque  sheet  of 
water  in  Asia  Minor.  But  the  natural,  obvious,  and  direct 
course  is  up  the  Oestrus  valley  to  Adada ;  and  we  must 
suppose  that  this  commercial  route  was  the  one  along 
which  the  strangers  were  directed. 

Adada  now  bears  the  name  of  Bavlo.  This  is  exactly 
the  modern  pronunciation  of  the  apostle's  name.  In  visit- 
ing the  district  I  paid  the  closest  attention  to  the  name, 
in  order  to  observe  whether  Baghlu  might  not  be  the  real 
form,  and  Bavlo  an  invention  of  the  Greeks,  who  often 
modify  a  Turkish  name  to  a  form  that  has  a  meaning  in 
Greek. ^  But  I  found  that  the  Turks  certainly  use  the 
form  Bavlo,  not  Baghlu.      The    analogy   of    many   other 

'  If  tho  road  was  frequented  by  commerce,  it  would  of  course  be  more 
dangerous.  Brigands  must  make  a  living,  and  go  where  most  money  is  to 
be  found. 

-  For  example,  they  have  transformed  Baluk-hissari,  "  Town  of  tho  Castle,"' 
into  Eali-kesri,    "  Old    Ca-sareia."     CH.  quote  a  rejiort  heard  by  Arundel  about 

VOL.  V.  3 


34  SAINT  PAUL'S  FIRST  JOURNEY  IN  ASIA  MINOR. 

modern  Turkish  names  for  cities  leaves  no  doubt  that  the 
name  Bavlo  has  arisen  from  the  fact  that  Paul  was  the 
patron  saint  of  the  cit}^  and  the  great  church  of  the  city 
was  dedicated  to  him.  It  is  impossible  not  to  connect 
this  fact  with  the  situation  of  Adada  on  the  natural 
route  between  Antioch  or  Perga ;  the  church  probably 
originated  in  the  belief  that  the  apostle  had  visited  Adada 
on  his  way  to  Antioch.  There  is  no  evidence  to  show 
whether  this  belief  was  founded  on  a  genuine  ancient 
tradition,  or  was  only  an  inference,  drawn  after  Adada 
was  christianized,  from  the  situation  of  the  city;  but  the 
latter  alternative  is  perhaps  more  probable.  It  is  obvious 
from  the  narrative  in  Acts  xiii.  that  Paul  did  not  stop  at 
Adada ;  and  it  is  not  likely  that  there  was  a  colony  of 
Jews  there,  through  whom  he  might  make  a  beginning 
of  his  work,  and  who  might  retain  the  memory  of  his 
visit. 

It  is  possible  that  some  reference  may  yet  be  found  in 
Eastern  hagiological  literatm'e  to  the  supposed  visit  of  Paul 
to  Adada,  and  to  the  church  from  which  the  modern  name 
is  derived.  If  the  belief  existed,  there  would  almost  cer- 
tainly arise  legends  of  incidents  connected  with  the  visit ; 
and  though  the  local  legends  of  this  remote  and  obscure 
Pisidian  city  had  little  chance  of  penetrating  into  literature, 
there  is  a  possibility  that  some  echo  of  them  may  still  sur- 
vive in  manuscript.  Kather  more  than  a  mile  south  of  the 
city,  on  the  west  side  of  the  road  that  leads  to  Perga,  stand 
the  ruins  of  a  church  of  early  date,  built  of  fine  masonry, 
but  not  of  very  great  size.  The  solitary  situation  of  this 
church  by  the  roadside  suggests  to  the  spectator  that  there 
was  connected  with  it  some  legend  about  an  apostle  or 
martyr  of  Adada.  It  stands  in  the  forest,  with  trees  growing 
in  and  around  it ;  and  its  walls  rise  to  the  height  of  five  to 

the  existence  of  Bavlo  (or  Paoli,  as  lie  gives  it)  ;  but  they  suppose  it  to  be  ou 
tbe  Euiymetlou,  and  far  away  east  of  the  road  which  they  select. 


SAINT  PAUL'S  FIRST  JOURNEY  IN  ASIA  MINOR.   35 

eight  feet  above  the  present  level  of  the  soil.  One  single 
hut  stands  about  half  a  mile  avv^ay  in  the  forest ;  no  other 
habitation  is  near.  Adada  itself  is  a  solitary  and  deserted 
heap  of  ruins  ;  there  is  a  small  village  with  a  fine  spring  of 
water  about  a  mile  north-cast  from  it.  So  lonely  is  the 
country,  that  our  guide  failed  to  find  the  ruins  ;  and,  when 
he  left  us  alone  in  the  forest,  we  w^ere  obliged  to  go  on  for 
six  miles  to  the  nearest  town  before  we  could  find  a  more 
trustworthy  guide.  After  all,  we  found  that  we  had  passed 
within  200  yards  of  the  ruins,  which  lay  on  a  hill  above 
our  path. 

The  ruins  of  Adada  are  very  imposing  from  their  extent, 
from  the  perfection  of  several  small  temples,  and  from  their 
comparative  immunity  from  spoliation.  No  one  has  used 
them  as  a  quarry,  which  is  the  usual  fate  of  ancient  cities. 
The  buildings  are  rather  rude  and  provincial  in  type,  show- 
ing that  the  town  retained  more  of  the  native  character, 
and  was  less  completely  affected  by  the  general  Grseco- 
Eoman  civilization  of  the  empire.  I  may  here  quote  a  few 
sentences  which  I  wTote  immediately  after  visiting  the 
ruins.  ^ 

"Witli  little  trouble,  and  at  no  great  expense,  the  mass  of  ruins 
miglit  be  sorted  and  thoroughly  examined,  the  whole  j^lan  of  the  city 
discovered,  aud  a  great  deal  of  information  obtained  about  its  condition 
under  the  empire.  Nothing  cati  be  expected  from  the  ruins  to  adorn 
a  museum  ;  for  it  is  improbable  that  any  fine  works  of  art  ever  came 
to  Adada,  and  certain  that  any  accessible  fragment  of  mai'blo  which 
ever  was  there  has  been  carried  away  long  ago.  But  for  a  picture  of 
society  as  it  was  formed  by  Grseco-Roman  civilization  in  an  Asiatic 
people,  there  is  perhaps  no  place  where  the  expenditure  of  a  few 
hundreds  woiild  produce  such  results.  The  opinion  will  not  be  uni- 
versally accepted  tliat  the  most  important  and  interesting  part  of 
ancient  history  is  the  study  of  the  evolution  of  society  during  the  lou"- 
conflict  between  Christianity  and  paganism  ;  but  those  who  hold  tliis 
opinion  will  not  easily  find  a  worlc  more  interesting  and  fruitful  at  tlic 
price  than  the  excavation  of  Adada." 

'  Atheiucum,  .July,  1890,  p.  136,  in  a  letter  written  in  part  by  my  friend  and 
fellow  traveller  Mr.  Hogarth ;  the  description  of  Adada  was  assigned  to  me. 


36  SAINT  PAUL'S  FIRST  JOURNEY  IN  ASIA  MINOR. 


CH.  are  right  in  emphasizing  the  dangers  to  which 
travellers  were  exposed  in  this  part  of  their  journey : 
"  perils  of  rivers,  perils  of  robhers."  The  following  ex- 
amples, not  known  to  CH.,  may  be  here  quoted.  They 
all  belong  to  the  Pisidiau  highlands,  not  far  from  the  road 
traversed  by  the  apostles,  and  considering  how  utterly 
ignorant  we  are  of  the  character  of  the  country  and  the 
population,  it  is  remarkable  that  such  a  large  proportion 
of  our  scanty  information  relates  to  scenes  of  danger  and 
precautions  against  violence. 

1.  A  dedication  and  thank-offering  by  Menis  son  of  Daos 
to  Jupiter,  Neptune,  Minerva,  and  all  the  gods,  and  also  to 
the  river  Eurus,  after  he  had  been  in  danger  and  had  been 
saved. ^  This  inscription  records  an  escape  from  drowning 
in  a  torrent  swollen  by  rain.  There  is  no  river  in  the 
neighbourhood  which  could  cause  danger  to  a  man,  except 
when  swollen  by  rain. 

'2,  An  epitaph  erected  by  Patrokles  and  Douda  over  the 
grave  of  their  son  Sousou,  a  policeman,  who  was  slain  by 
robbers." 

3.  Keferences  to  gens  cVarmes  of  various  classes  {opo- 
(f)vXaK6<i,  irapac^vXaiclTai)  occur  with  unusual  frequency  in 
this  district.  Very  few  soldiers  were  stationed  in  Pisidia  ; 
and  armed  policemen  were  a  necessity  in  such  an  unruly 
country.'' 

4.  A  stationarius,  one  of  the  road-guards,  part  of  whose 
duty  was  to  assist  in  the  capture  of  runaway  slaves  (always 
the  most  dangerous  of  brigands),  is  also  mentioned  in  an 
inscription."* 


1  Abbtj  Duchesne  in  BuUetin  de  Corresp.  Ilelleii.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  479.  The  name 
of  the  river  is  imcertain,  Eurus  or  Syrus ;  I  tried  in  vain  to  find  the  stone  in 
188G,  in  order  to  verify  the  text. 

-  I'rof.  Sterrett  in  Epigrapliic  Journey  in  Asia  Minor,  p.  IGG. 

^  Historical  (leograph;/  of  Asia  Minor,  p.  177  11". 

•*  Mittheihuirjen  dcs  Institute  zii,  Allien,  1885,  p.  77.  Examples  mi^'ht  be 
multiphed  by  including  the  parts  of  Taurus  further  removed  from  the  road. 


SAINT  PAUL'S  FIRST  JOURNEY  IN  ASIA  MINOR.  37 


The  roads  all  over  the  Eoman  empire  were  apt  to  be 
unsafe,  for  the  arrangements  for  insuring  public  safety  were 
exceedingly  defective ;  but  probably  the  part  of  his  life 
which  St.  Paul  had  most  in  mind  when  he  wrote  about 
the  perils  of  rivers  and  of  robbers,  which  he  had  faced  in 
his  journeys,  was  the  journey  from  Perga  across  Taurus  to 
Antioch  and  back  again. 

Between  Adada  and  Antioch  the  road  is  uncertain.  One 
path  leads  along  the  south-east  end  of  Egerdir  Lake,  tra- 
versing the  difficult  pass  now  called  Demir  Kapu,  "the  Iron 
Gate."  But  I  believe  there  is  a  more  direct  and  easy  road, 
though  further  exploration  is  needed  before  it  is  possible  to 
speak  confidently. 

CH.  give  a  good  account  of  Antioch,  the  site  of  which 
was  demonstrated  with  certainty  by  Arundel.  It  would 
not  be  possible  to  add  anything  essential  to  our  purpose  to 
their  account  without  discussing  the  history  and  consti- 
tution of  the  city  more  minutely  than  would  be  in  place 
here.^  The  details  given  of  Paul's  first  speech  in  the 
synagogue  at  Antioch  are  to  a  certain  extent  graphic,  but 
are  really  such  as  would  always  characterize  such  a  scene. 
The  text  gives  no  hint  as  to  the  length  of  the  apostles' 
stay,  and  widely  divergent  opinions  are  held  on  this  point. 
Almost  all  English  authorities  maintain  that  the  whole 
journey  was  performed  in  one  single  summer,  and  Antioch, 
Iconium,  Lystra,  and  Derbe  were  all  evangelized  during 
that  time.  The  continental  authorities  as  a  rule  consider 
that  months  or  even  a  year  were  spent  at  each  city,  and 
that  the  whole  journey  occupied  from  two  to  six  years. 
On  this  supposition  Paul  would  have  settled  down  in  each 


On  the  whole  subject  see  the  paper  of  Prof.  0.  Hirschfelcl  in  Berlin  Sitzungsher, 
1801,  p.  815  ff.,  on  "Die  Sicherheitspolizei  im  romischen  Kaiserreich." 

'  F.  mentions  Men  Archaios  as  the  great  god  of  Antioch  ;  but  the  manu- 
scripts of  Strabo  read  Asliaios  or  Ai-kaios,  and  there  can  be  little  doubt  tliat 
M.  Waddington's  correction,  Asliainos,  must  be  accepted. 


38  SAINT  PAUL'S  FIRST  JOURNEY  IN  ASIA  MINOR. 

place  to  maintain  himself  by  manual  labour;  and  the  events 
in  each  cit}^  which  are  related  so  summarily,  must  have 
gone  on  very  slowly.  The  fact  that  opinions  are  so  divided 
is  a  sufticient  proof  that  the  words  used  above  as  to  the 
want  of  precision  and  detail  in  the  narrative  do  not  over- 
state the  case. 

No  certain  memorial  of  the  Jewish  community,  and 
few  memorials  of  the  Christian  community,  at  Antioch  of 
Pisidia  ^  have  as  yet  been  found  among  the  inscriptions  of 
the  district.  One  monument,  which  was  probably  erected 
in  Antioch,  about  or  shortly  after  the  time  when  Paul  and 
Barnabas  visited  the  city,  deserves  mention.^  It  is  a 
pedestal,  which  probably  supported  a  small  statue  of  P. 
Anicius  Maximus,  a  native  of  Antioch.  Anicius,  beginning 
as  a  common  soldier,  was  promoted  from  the  ranks  to  be 
first  centurion  of  the  twelth  legion,  then  serving  in  Syria. 
When  the  emperor  Nero's  father  was  elected,  about  32-40 
A.D.,  to  an  honorary  magistracy  in  Antioch,  he  nominated 
Anicius  to  represent  him  and  perform  the  duties  of  the 
ofBce.  Anicius  was  an  officer  in  the  army  that  invaded 
Britain  in  43,  and  was,  for  the  second  time  rewarded 
for  distinguished  merit  during  this  expedition.  Pie  was 
then  sent  to  command  the  troops  stationed  in  Egypt,  and 
while  he  held  this  office,  the  ciiy  of  Alexandria  presented 
him  with  a  statuette  and  an  honorary  inscription,  to  be 
erected  in  a  public  place  in  his  native  city.  There  is  no 
evidence  what  was  the  nationality  of  Anicius ;  but  of  those 
inhabitants  of  central  Asia  Minor  who  rose  to  distinction 
in  the  Poman  service,  a  remarkable  proportion  are  known, 
even  with  our  scanty  evidence,  to  be  Jews.^  If  Anicius 
was  a  Jew,  it  would  be  easier  to  understand  why  he  was 


1  One  is  quotecT  in  Thk  ExposiTon,  1888,  Oct.,  p.  2G3. 

-  Corp.  Inscript.  Latin. ,\o\.  iii,  Suppl.,  No.  G809. 

^  See  the  statement  quoted  in  Reinacli's  Clironi(2Hes  (VOrient,  pp.  503,  501. 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  39 

selected  for  an  Egyptian  command,  and  why  he  was  so 
specially  honoured  by  a  city  where  Jewish  influence  was  so 
strong  as  Alexandria. 


W.  M.  Eamsay. 


(To  he  continued.) 


THE  MIBACLES  OF  CHEIST. 

The  assertion  has  gradually  settled  down  into  a  common- 
place, that  the  miraculous  in  the  Christian  religion  was  a 
great  help  to  its  early  diffusion,  but  is  now  the  chief  hin- 
drance to  its  acceptance  by  modern  thought,  armed  with 
rigorous  and  scientific  tests.  The  miraculous  was  a  very 
estimable  superstition,  used  by  Providence  (somewhat  un- 
scrupulously, one  must  confess)  to  pass  off  upon  the  ages 
of  credulity,  for  their  good,  a  revelation  which  we,  who  are 
not  thus  to  be  imposed  upon,  may  accept  for  its  own 
merits. 

It  is  therefore  proposed  to  relieve  the  faith  from  this 
encumbrance,  which  served  its  generation  by  the  will  of 
God,  but  must  now  fall  asleep.  We  are  advised  to  reject 
as  accretions,  afterthoughts,  all  the  supernatural  events 
which  surprise  us  in  the  story  of  Jesus  and  His  followers, 
while  reverently  retaining  the  marvellous  teaching,  the  lofty 
and  unprecedented  conception  of  life  and  duty,  and  the 
exquisite  morality  of  the  gospel. 

Alas  !  we  cannot  thus  reject  the  supernatural  from  Chris- 
tianity, and  retain  its  ethical  forces.  For  the  more  closely 
we  examine  the  Gospels,  the  more  certain  we  shall  become 
that  the  supernatural  is  by  no  means  eliminated  when  one 
tears  off  the  record  of  certain  events,  of  the  so  called  mira- 
cles, since  these  are  only  visible  flashes  from  an  atmosphere 
densely  laden,  surcharged  throughout  with  the  same  elec- 
tricity.    The  miraculous  reaches  far  beyond  the  miracles, 


40  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

which  are  rightly  called  "the  signs"  of  much  that  lies 
behind  them.  In  one  sense,  the  beginning  of  these  was  at 
Cana,  yet  we  know  what  Nathanael  felt  when  made  aware 
that  he  was  observed  mider  the  fig  tree.  The  supernatm'al 
is  no  patch  sewn  upon  this  garment,  nor  even  a  thread 
combining  with  others  to  form  a  tissue,  whence  it  might 
be  unravelled,  with  whatever  pains,  at  whatever  cost  to  the 
design.  It  is  not  even  a  pigment  by  which  all  is  so  deeply 
dyed  that  now  the  union  between  colour  and  fabric  is 
indissoluble.  It  is  the  fabric  itself.  Beneath  all  that 
Jesus  taught,  and  sustaining  it  all,  was  the  authority  of 
His  own  supernatural  personality,  like  the  canvas  beneath 
some  picture  which  the  artist  spreads,  touch  by  touch,  on 
this  essential,  all-sustaining  base. 

The  morality  of  Jesus  is  compliance  with  His  simple 
imperative  mandate,  for  the  sake  of  His  all-dominating 
personal  attraction.  The  self-sacrifice  which  Jesus  incul- 
cates is  "for  My  sake."  The  additions  made  by  Jesus  to 
the  code  of  Sinai  are  sufficiently  ratified  by  the  words,  "  I 
say  unto  you."  Jesus  calls  Himself  meek  and  lowly  in 
heart,  but  in  the  same  sentence  He  proposes  to  relieve  all 
the  burdens  of  mankind.  If  others  may  not  aspire  nor 
assert  themselves,  this  is  because  Jesus  is  the  only  Teacher, 
in  the  same  sense  in  which  God  is  the  only  Father. 

Now  all  this  is  without  a  precedent  or  parallel.  Socrates 
would  be  as  ignorant  as  any  one,  if  it  were  not  that  he  is 
aware  of  his  ignorance ;  but  Jesus  knows  the  Father  as 
thoroughly  as  the  Father  knows  Him.  Epictetus  gropes 
for  truth  :  "  The  beginning  of  philosophy  is  this,  a  per- 
ception of  the  disagreement  of  men  with  one  another,  and 
an  inquiry  into  the  cause  of  this,  and  a  distrust  of  the 
apparent,  and  the  discovery  of  some  such  test  as  physics 
possess  in  the  balance  and  the  yardstick."  But  the  teach- 
ing of  Jesus  rests  on  intuition.  According  to  St.  John, 
He  declares   what   is   heavenly  because  He  is    in    heaven. 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  41 

AccordiDg  to  the  Synoptics,  none  knowetli  the  Father  save 
the  Son,  and  he  to  whom  the  Son  willeth  to  reveal  Him. 
Marcus  Aurehus  infers :  "  It  is  satisfaction  to  a  man 
to  do  the  proper  works  of  a  man  :  now  it  is  the  proper 
work  of  a  man  to  be  benevolent."  But  Jesus  waives 
all  such  argumentation,  and  even  the  permissions  of  the 
Old  Testament,  aside  altogether :  "  It  hath  been  said 
unto  them  of  old  time,  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour, 
and  hate  thine  enemy  ;  but  I  say  unto  you.  Love  your 
enemies." 

It  is  abundantly  clear  that  Jesus  was  the  most  gigantic 
of  all  egoists,  or  else  He  was  a  supernatural  Ego,  and  not 
jnerely  an  ordinary  man  performing  supernatural  feats. 

Therefore  nothing  can  be  more  shallow  than  the  attempt 
to  solve  the  problem  which  Christianity  inflexibly  presents 
to  scientific  scepticism  by  accepting  Christ  and  His  teach- 
ing, but  rejecting  certain  of  His  actions  because  they  are 
tainted  with  the  supernatural.  Least  of  all  men  may  the 
sceptical  physicist  deny  that  the  laws  of  mind  are  as  rigid 
as  the  laws  of  naatter,  and  a  spiritual  portent  as  porten- 
tous as  any,  since,  according  to  him,  mind  and  spirit  are 
nothing  but  a  phase  of  matter. 

Well,  then,  here  is  an  absolutely  abnormal  Being,  a  Gali- 
Itean  artisan,  whose  thought  outsoars  the  thought  of  Plato ; 
whose  love  still  evokes  the  responsive  love  of  a  great  mul- 
titude, whom  no  man  can  number,  out  of  all  nations  and 
kindreds ;  who  imprinted  His  convictions  on  the  conscience 
of  the  race  without  a  shred  of  argumentation,  except  when 
controversy  was  forced  on  Him ;  who  was  right,  as  the 
event  has  proved,  in  valuing  His  own  sufferings  more  than 
the  loftiest  truths  He  taught ;  and  whose  matchless  self- 
reliance  is  now  justified  by  success,  even  when  He  declared 
that  His  flesh  should  become  the  bread  of  all  the  race. 

In  the  thought  of  God  there  is  a  power  to  overwhelm 
all  the  saints  with  self-abasement.      But  Jesus   is   not    a 


42  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

saint,  whether  we  call  Him  greater  or  less  than  they ;  and 
the  thought  of  God  simply  exalts  Him  to  assert  His  own 
unique  relationship. 

The  Founder  of  Christianity  is  utterly  unlike  other  men  ; 
and  in  one  sense  most  unlike  those  who  follow  Him  most 
closely ;  for  the  effect  of  copying  His  superh  holiness  is 
always  a  holiness  with  ashes  on  its  head. 

And  His  disciples  knew  well  that  He  was  a  greater  sign 
than  His  works.  When  tempted  to  desert  Him,  their 
question  was  not,  Who  else  can  do  such  prodigies  ?  It 
was  :  '*  To  whom  shall  we  go  ?  Thou  hast  the  words  of 
eternal  life.  And  we  have  believed,  and  we  know  that 
Thou  art  the  Holy  One  of  God." 

Now  all  this,  to  the  unbeliever  in  spiritual  realities,  is  a 
physical  product  of  natural  forces.  But  then,  the  evolu- 
tion of  Jesus  by  the  rehgious  influences  of  the  first  century 
is  a  far  greater  marvel  than  the  turning  of  water  into  wine. 
And  he  cannot  get  rid  of  the  supernatural  by  rejecting 
some  five  and  thirty  incidents  which  challenge  him  at  inter- 
vals along  the  story. ^ 

To  us,  the  supernatural  Person  explains  the  supernatural 
events.      The  true  key  to  every  act  is  in  the  personality 


^  Thus  wlieu  Keim  admits  that  in  Him  "  was  revealed,  not  only  a  religious 
genius,  but  the  miracle  of  God  and  His  presence  upon  earth  ;  the  person  itself, 
and  nothing  else,  is  the  miracle  "  {Jesus  of  Nazara,  1.,  p.  10),  the  main  affirma- 
tion destroys  the  warrant  for  the  interpolated  phrase,  "  and  nothing  else."  He 
tells  us  again  that  "  it  was  not  with  Him  as  with  the  other  great  characters  of 
the  earth  ;  .  .  .  and  however  steadily  and  minutely  we  examine,  in  order  to 
arrive  at  a  conclusion  without  any  fallacy,  we  are  still  able  to  retain  the  strong 
and  joyful  conviction  that  it  was  Virtue  herself  who  trod  the  earth  in  Him,  and 
that  the  dolorous  confession  made  by  antiquity  [and  surely  also  by  the  modern 
world]  of  the  impossibility  of  sinlessness,  and  the  non-existence  of  the  ideal 
of  virtue  and  wisdom,  found  in  Him  its  refutation  and  its  end"  (vi.,  p.  ilPt). 

But  the  Church  is  entitled  to  reply  that  all  this  is  an  admitted  exception  to 
law,  and  Keim's  own  word  "  miracle  "  applies  in  a  sense  as  .absolute  and  literal 
as  in  any  of  the  physical  marvels  which  Keim  explains  away.  Wlion  one 
miracle  is  established,  the  presumj^tion  against  a  second  miracle  is  nullified  ; 
we  are  no  longer  in  a  position  to  reason  from  ordinary  analogies  to  the  action 
of  what  is  confessedly  extraordinary  aud  phenomenal. 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  43 

of  the  actor.  To  a  modern  maker  of  instruments  the 
Cremona  violin  is  impossible,  but  this  is  because  he  is  no 
Straduarius.  And  to  an  ordinary  soldier  Marengo  is  a 
feat  of  the  gods,  but  Napoleon  explains  his  campaign.  To 
the  supernatural  Christ  the  miracles  are  natural ;  they  are 
simply  good  works  which  He  shows. , 

Here,  then,  are  certain  events,  of  which  it  will  presently 
become  clear  that,  without  assuming  the  occurrence,  the 
very  conception,  the  notion,  is  a  deviation  from  the  course 
of  nature.  And  here  also  is  a  Man,  all  of  whose  doctrines 
and  methods  of  thinking  and  teaching  are  as  unprece- 
dented and  astonishing  as  these  actions.  Do  you  gain 
much,  even  of  plausibility,  by  rending  asunder  these  clearly 
correlated  phenomena,  and  declaring  the  events  to  be 
unreal,  while  retaining,  in  your  own  despite,  the  pre- 
ternatural Teacher  ?  The  natural  wonder-worker  is  the 
predicted  One,  whose  name  is  Wonderful. 

To  all  this  it  is  answered  that  the  door  was  finally 
locked  against  miracles  when  science  discovered  the  abso- 
lute invariability  of  the  sum  of  the  forces  of  nature.  Force, 
active  and  latent  together,  is  always  the  same  in  quantity. 
The  same  heat  which  to-day  drives  an  engine  vibrated  in 
former  ages  from  the  sun,  and  has  lurked  ever  since  in 
those  vegetable  forms  which  slowly  consolidated  into  the 
coal  now  burning  in  the  furnace.  The  force  with  which  an 
iron  shield  is  stricken  by  the  projectile  from  an  eighty-ton 
gun  becomes  visible  for  a  moment  in  a  great  sheet  of  flame, 
and  then  disperses  itself  through  the  universe  in  radiated 
heat.  To  the  sum  of  existent  forces  nothing  is  really  added, 
from  it  nothing  is  really  withdrawn. 

It  is  granted  to  us  that  possibly  this  great  law  does  not 
formally  disprove  the  possibility  of  a  Divine  interference 
with  the  uniform  sum-total  of  force.  What  is  urged  is  that 
it  adds  so  enormously  to  the  presumption  in  favour  of  its 
stability,   that  any   hypothesis,   however  strained,  will   be 


44  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

more  credible  than  that  new  forces  should  have  been  poured 
into  nature  from  outside.  If  the  universe  be  indeed  a  crea- 
tion of  Deity,  the  Divine  Creator  decreed  the  stability  of 
force  in  it,  and  it  is  virtually  incredible  that  He  has  occa- 
sionally countermanded  His  edict. 

To  this  objection,  urged  both  against  miracles  and 
answers  to  prayer,  there  are  two  replies.  In  the  first  place, 
it  is  palpably  no  more  than  an  application  to  this  specific 
law  of  the  well-worn  general  argument  that  testimony  is 
more  likely  to  be  false  than  any  law  of  nature  to  be  violated. 
A  law  of  nature,  however,  is  only  a  generalization,  a  broad 
statement  to  which  we  have  been  led  by  observing  a  suffi- 
cient number  of  similar  cases.  Like  all  inductions,  it  leaps 
from  an  array  of  particular  observations  to  a  universal 
affirmation.  And  in  applying  it,  the  vital  point  is  the 
similarity  of  the  cases,  the  absence  of  any  new  condition, 
removing  the  event  in  question  from  the  category.  In 
a  temperate  climate  certain  laws  regulate  the  action  of 
dynamite ;  but  he  will  be  a  rash  man  who  reasons  from 
these  to  its  behaviour  when  crystallized  by  even  a  touch 
of  frost.  Now  it  is  an  audacious  j)etitio  principii  to  assume 
that  no  new  conditions  are  at  work,  when  the  question 
disputed  is  whether  the  Creator  has  willed  to  manifest  His 
power  to  His  creatures. 

But  in  the  second  place,  the  objection,  as  connected  with 
this  particular  law  of  the  conservation  of  force,  only  proves 
that  men,  otherwise  well  informed,  are  content  to  assail  the 
faith  in  utter  ignorance  of  its  teaching. 

Let  us,  on  our  side,  observe  that  the  forces  to  which  this 
celebrated  law  applies  are  purely  physical.  If  we  include 
in  the  sum  of  forces  human  thoughts,  convictions,  and 
volitions,  then  the  law  is  palpably  disproved.  When 
Demosthenes  or  Peter  the  Hermit  inflamed  great  multi- 
tudes with  new  passions  and  volitions,  the  sum  total  of 
emotion  was  changed,  although  no  physical   alteration  was 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  45 

produced,  not  a  flush  or  pallor,  not  the  clenching  of  a  fist, 
the  quickening  of  a  breath,  the  agitation  of  the  molecules 
of  any  brain,  except  by  drawing  on  the  reserves  which  are 
stored  in  every  human  frame,  and  quickening  the  need  of 
new  supphes.  What  was  physical  remained,  unaltered  in 
the  aggregate,  although  these  new  convictions  and  resolu- 
tions were  superadded ;  and  this,  by  the  way,  is  enough  to 
show  that  these  are  not  material  products,  since,  if  they 
were,  their  addition  would  involve  a  commensurate  decrease 
of  other  physical  forces. 

AVhen  a  man  dies,  certain  convictions  and  volitions  dis- 
appear, but  no  physical  energy  is  extinguished ;  that  is  only 
dissipated.  To  recall  him  to  life,  therefore,  would  not 
require  the  creation  of  new  physical  energies,  but  only  the 
reassembling  of  those  which  had  been  scattered.  The 
doctrine  of  the  conservation  of  force  does  not  in  any  sense 
affirm  that  the  volitions  and  energies  by  which  latent  force 
is  started  into  energy  remain  the  same.  No  man  ever 
creates  or  abolishes  force  enough  to  move  a  finger,  but  he 
can  propagate  beliefs  and  aspirations,  and  he  can  slay  them. 
His  name  may  be  Muhammad  or  Voltaire.  And  probably 
there  never  yet  was  a  conviction  which  did  not  more  or  less 
modify  the  arrangement  of  physical  forces. 

The  stability  of  the  sum  of  forces,  active  and  latent,  does 
not  forbid  me  to  produce  great  changes  by  flinging  a  match 
into  a  powder  magazine,  nor  by  prayers  addressed  to  any 
one  whom  I  can  induce  to  try  this  hazardous  experiment. 
An  infant,  upsetting  chemicals,  may  convulse  the  arrange- 
ment of  forces  for  miles  around.  And  if  there  be,  within 
the  circle  of  the  universe,  any  intellect  and  volition  superior 
to  mine,  it  will  also  produce  superior  changes,  without 
needing  to  create  any  new  stock  of  physical  forces,  by 
swaying,  exciting,  and  stilling  those  which  already  exist. 

When  scientific  unbelievers  assert  that  Christ  could  not 
have  worked  His  miracles  without  importing  new  force  from 


4fJ  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

outside  into  the  universe,  they  either  imply  that  God  is  not 
within  His  universe,  but  above  and  outside  it,  so  that  His 
interference  is  necessarily  the  importing  of  foreign  forces ; 
or  else,  that  the  total  resources  of  the  universe,  by  whatever 
intellect  and  energy  commanded,  is  so  inadequate  to  per- 
form the  "works  "  of  Christ,  that  foreign  forces  must  have 
been  drawn  upon.  But  the  latter  of  these  is  a  pure  assump- 
tion. To  raise  the  dead  is  clearly  not  a  creation  of  new 
forces,  it  is  a  reassembling  of  those  that  have  been  scat- 
tered. Whenever  Jesus  multiplied  food,  He  carefully  shut 
out  the  notion  of  creation  from  nothingness  by  working 
around  a  nucleus  of  existing  natural  material.  What  the 
seed  does  under  the  clod,  grasping  and  assimilating  mate- 
rials, transforming  these,  and  so  multiplying  itself,  that  was 
done  transcendently  by  a  transcendent  will  and  energy. 

The  only  ground  which  exists,  therefore,  for  the  appeal 
of  unbelief  to  the  conservation  of  force  is  the  notion  that 
God  is  outside  His  world,  and  His  interference  is  neces- 
sarily that  of  a  foreign  force,  adding  itself  to  those  within 
the  universe.  But  who  told  the  objector  that  God  can 
only  interfere  in  His  universe  "  from  outside  "?  The  doc- 
trine of  the  Church  is  that  by  Him  all  things  consist,  that 
in  Him  we  live,  move,  and  have  our  being. 

"  Closer  is  He  than  breathing,"  says  our  Christian  poet. 
And  Marcus  Aurelius  said  the  same  thing  before  Lord 
Tennyson  :"  The  all-embracing  intelligence  .  .  .  is  not 
less  all-diffusive  and  all-pervasive  for  whoever  is  willing  to 
receive  it,  than  is  the  atmosphere  for  who'ever  is  able  to 
inhale." 

That  God  could,  and  if  necessary  would,  pour  new  forces 
into  the  universe  "from  outside"  is  the  doctrine  of  crea- 
tion, and  is  implied  in  the  future  creation  of  new  heavens 
and  a  new  earth.  But  there  are  abundant  indications  in 
Scripture  that  this  is  not  the  true  light  in  which  to  regard 
the  miracles  of  Christ.     They  are  good  works  shown  from 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  47 

the  Father,  the  doing  "  Hkewise  "  of  whatsoever  the  Father 
doeth.  In  seeing  Him  who  wrought  these,  men  saw  the 
Father.  But  as  regards  creation  this  is  the  Sahbath  of 
God.  When  the  Christian  passes  within  the  veil,  he  enters 
into  that  Sabbath.  When  souls  transgress,  God  swears  that 
they  shall  "  not  enter  into  My  rest." 

If  then  the  works  of  Jesus  were  creative,  they  would  no 
longer  be  a  more  vivid  and  impressive  manifestation  of 
God's  work  in  providence,  for  creation  belongs  to  another 
order ;  but  this  is  a  notion  which  is  diametrically  opposed 
to  the  expressions  quoted  above.  And  our  position  becomes 
impregnable  when  we  observe  His  defence  against  the 
charge  of  Sabbath-breaking.  He  answers  :  I  only  do  upon 
My  Sabbath  what  My  Father  doeth  during  His:  "My 
Father  worketh  hitherto,  and  I  work." 

It  is  therefore  the  doctrine  of  Scripture  that  God  is  now 
working  from  within  His  universe,  and  not  from  above 
it,  by  wielding  its  forces,  not  by  superseding  them ;  and, 
secondly,  that  Jesus  in  His  miracles  only  carried  out  this 
process  further.  Against  these  positions,  modern  science 
has  not  a  word  to  say  which  would  not  equally  paralyse 
every  other  vital  energy  by  which  the  chain  of  forces  is 
shaken,  while  no  new  links  are  forged. 

The  results  at  which  we  have  now  arrived  are  far  from 
being  so  purely  negative,  so  merely  controversial,  as  may 
be  supposed. 

I.  We  have  been  led,  in  the  first  place,  to  a  reasonably 
definite  comprehension  of  what  a  miracle  may  be. 

For  the  laws  of  nature,  in  themselves  so  stable,  are  by 
no  means  invariable  in  their  results.  When  I  cause  an 
ivory  ball  to  "cannon  "  off  the  cushion  of  a  billiard-table, 
the  laws  which  govern  projectiles  are  neither  arrested  nor 
outraged,  yet  I  have  modified  the  result  of  them,  by  com- 
bining their  operation  with  that  of  another  law,  the  law  of 
action   and  reaction.     Gravitation  is  neither  arrested  nor 


48  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 


contradicted  when  a  balloon  ascends,  nor  the  laws  of  heat 
when  a  lump  of  ice  is  shaken  out  of  a  red-hot  crucible. 
The  additional  resources  possessed  by  the  modern  chemist 
enable  him  to  perform  this  marvel,  utterly  impossible  to 
me,  not  by  violating  law,  but  by  wielding  it.  Therefore  a 
Being  endowed  with  vastly  greater  resources  will  perform 
vastly  greater  works ;  but  works  contrary  to  the  laws  of 
nature  will  only  be  performed  in  periods  of  creative  or 
destructive  energy. 

The  miracles  of  Jesus,  therefore,  are  not  contra-natural. 
And  in  Scripture  they  are  never  said  even  to  be  super- 
natural. We  now  see  in  what  sense  this  latter  epithet  is 
just,  and  in  what  sense  it  is  unauthorized  and  perilous.  If 
by  the  supernatural  we  mean  that  which  natural  forces, 
the  existing  resources  of  the  universe,  could  not  accom- 
plish, by  whatever  energies  wielded,  then  we  reintroduce 
the  notion  of  creation,  and  the  collision  with  scientific 
teaching.  But  the  explicit  claim  of  Jesus  was  to  do  what 
the  Father  doeth  during  His  Sabbath  from  creation  of  new 
forces.  And  therefore  it  is  quite  enough  to  say  that  a 
miracle  is  what  transcends  the  effect  of  natural  forces 
wielded  by  merely  human  energies.  The  miracles  of  Jesus 
were  "the  works  that  none  other  man  did."  Therefore 
a  miracle  is  sometimes  called  "  a  wonder,"  a  much  less 
ignoble  epithet  than  many  commentators  believe.  For  it 
is  not  the  ignorance  of  a  backward  province  or  an  unscien- 
tific age  which  feels  this  wonder,  but  the  limitations 
natural  to  humanity.  The  true  marvel  is  marvellous  to 
man,  as  such.  And  his  wonder  is  wholesome  :  it  is  one 
premeditated  result  of  the  sign.  "  Greater  works  than 
these  shall  '  the  Father'  show  'the  Son,'  that  ye  may 
marvel"  (iva  v[ieL<i  dav/xu^ijre). 

II.  And  thus  the  true  ethical  importance  of  the  marvel 
becomes  clear.  Why,  it  is  sometimes  asked,  must  the 
Church  insist  on  her  prodigies,  when  it  is  proposed  to  leave 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  49 

intact  her  morality  and  her  adoration?  What  is  rehgious 
in  a  prodigy?  But  such  a  "wonder"  as  we  have  spoken 
of  is  "  a  sign";  it  imphes  an  adequate,  a  supernatural  Per- 
sonage ;  and  the  miraculous  Christ  is  assailed  when  you 
assail  the  miracles.  Apart  from  its  power  to  reveal  Him, 
the  miraculous  cannot  be  more  worthless  to  the  nineteenth 
century  than  it  was  to  St.  John.  The  signs  were  written 
in  his  book,  that  we  might  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Son 
of  God  (John  xx.  31).  And  he  has  recorded  a  remarkable 
expression  of  his  Master,  which  implies  the  same  truth. 
After  complaining  that  "  ye  seek  Me,  not  because  ye  saw 
signs,  but  because  ye  ate,"  Jesus  puts  His  indictment  into 
other  words  :  "  I  said  mito  you,  that  ye  have  seen  ME,  and 
believe  not."  To  have  missed,  not  the  marvel,  but  its 
revelation  of  Himself,  that  was  to  have  lost  all.  And  there- 
fore it  was  the  will  of  His  Father  "that  every  one  who 
beholdeth  the  Son"  (discerning  the  AVorker  in  the  work), 
"  and  believeth  on  Him,  should  have  everlasting  life " 
(John  vi.  26,  36,  40). 

in.  From  this  follows  a  test  of  the  reality  of  the 
miracles.  So  long  as  they  seem  to  be  merely  prodigies, 
amazing  interruptions  of  the  regularity  and  order  of  things, 
they  cannot  be  classified,  compared  with  other  events,  and 
reasoned  about  as  the  subjects  of  analogy  and  inference. 
But  when  they  come  to  be  recognised  as  the  natural 
"works  "  of  a  great  AVorker,  all  this  is  changed.  We  now 
expect  them  to  resemble  those  works  of  His  which  do  not 
startle  us.  We  look  for  character  in  them.  We  feel  cer- 
tain that,  if  we  possess  His  genuine  discourses  and  much 
of  His  real  life,  then  the  miracles  will  show  themselves  to 
be  His,  or  else  betray  the  fact  that  they  are  accretions,  by 
revealing  "the  mind  of  Christ"  or  the  somewhat  super- 
stitious, somewhat  vindictive,  and  not  a  little  puerile  char- 
acteristics of  the  next  age.  The  evidence  thus  afforded  is 
of  a  kind  the  more  valuable  because  it  is  incidental,  often 

VOL.  V.  4 


50  GIDEON. 

microscopic,  and  wholly  beyond  the  critical  or  literary 
power  of  early  Christianity.  And  its  results  will  be  purely 
scientific,  being  an  induction  from  a  large  number  of  ab- 
solutely indisputable  facts,  the  phenomena  exhibited  in 
certain  documents. 

Before  examining  these,  however,  some  other  preliminary 
questions  must  be  considered. 

G.  A.  Chadw^ick. 


GIDEON. 

The  story  of  that  great  Hebrew  judge  Gideon  is  the  sub- 
ject of  this  lecture  ;  but  before  taking  up  his  brief  career,  I 
ought  to  deal  with  two  or  three  questions  that  grow  out  of 
the  general  subject  of  the  conquest  of  Canaan  by  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel.  The  Hebrews,  expelled  by  oppression  from 
E^ypt,  lived  a  nomad  and  pastoral  life  for  a  number  ot 
years  in  the  Sinaitic  wilderness,  probably  with  Kadesli  as 
their  centre.  Apart  from  their  religious  character,  they 
must  have  been  very  much  like  the  Bedouin  tribes  :  fierce, 
warlike,  and  civilized  in  a  very  poor  way,  but  not  accus- 
tomed to  agriculture,  to  the  tillage  of  the  soil,  to  vintage,  or 
olive- ""rowing.  At  a  certain  point  a  strange  spirit  moves 
those  Hebrew  Bedouins.  They  unite  together.  They 
approach  a  fertile,  cultivated  country — Canaan.  They 
have  a  succession  of  battles ;  they  seize  the  country,  settle 
in  the  farms,  vineyards,  and  homesteads  ;  ultimately  and 
completely  they  dispossess  the  old  tenants. 

What  shall  we  say  as  to  the  moral  character  of  this 
transaction  ?  Was  the  conquest  of  Canaan  by  the  Hebrews 
morally  justifiable,  achieved  as  it  was  through  the  violence, 
bloodshed,  and  cruelty  with  which  war  has  blackened  the 
face  of  our  world  as  far  back  as  our  eyes  can  see  and  our 
ears  can  hear?  We  must  not  let  our  affection  or  veneration 
for  old  traditions  blind  us  to  the  difficulty  of  the  question. 


GIDEON.  51 

But  common  sense  has  suggested  to  me  one  or  two  con- 
siderations. First  of  all,  our  judgment  is  apt  to  be  pre- 
judiced here,  because  men  in  our  time,  we  English  people 
in  particular,  have  come  to  think  rather  falsely  about  war. 
A  profounder  apprehension  of  the  lovely  Christlike  spirit  of 
our  religion,  coupled  with  a  good  many  less  worthy  influ- 
ences, such  as  the  peaceableness  and  security  of  our  sea- 
girt life  in  these  isles,  have  all  combined  to  give  us  a  great 
horror  of  war  ;  not  because  of  the  sin  and  iniquity  of  it,  but 
because  it  means  wounds  and  bloodshed,  and  robbery  of  our 
property,  and  death. 

Now  indubitably  every  rational  man  will  say  that,  were 
our  world  free  from  selfishness  and  sin,  war  could  not  exist 
in  it.  Therefore  it  has  its  roots  in  iniquity.  Nevertheless, 
like  many  other  things  that  are  evils  in  themselves,  war 
may  be  used,  under  God's  providential  government  of  the 
world,  to  cure  worse  evils,  acting  remedially  like  the  sur- 
geon's knife,  and  bringing  renewed  life  to  the  nation  and 
the  individual.  And  a  careful  and  conscientious  study  of 
history,  I  am  able  honestly  to  tell  you,  does  go  to  show 
that,  in  the  long  run,  the  outcome  of  the  strife  and  blood- 
shed which  we  lament  so  much  in  the  course  of  human 
history  has  not  been  the  increase  of  the  worst  kinds  of 
human  misery.  Over  and  over  again  you  find  that  God  has 
used  war  for  the  furtherance  of  righteousness  and  purity, 
and  moral  and  religious  progress. 

In  the  second  place,  I  wish  to  add  another  consideration, 
I  venture  to  say  that  all  of  us,  in  our  historical  judgment, 
and  in  our  ethical  and  religious  teaching,  probably  have 
fallen  into  error,  in  that  we  overvalue  mere  physical  human 
life.  If  anything  is  manifest  in  this  world,  it  is  that  the 
material  hfe  counts  for  very  little  in  God's  sight ;  that  the 
material  life  is  mere  scaffolding,  the  machinery  by  which  or 
the  platform  on  which  the  mental,  moral,  and  ethical  life  is 
to  be  built  up. 


52  GIDEON. 

All  the  strife  of  existence,  all  our  battlings  with  the  ele- 
ments and  with  rivals,  are  educative  ;  they  are  a  moral 
discipline,  and  it  is  for  this  that  all  else  exists.  Manifestly 
therefore  it  must  falsify  all  our  estimates  of  God's  providen- 
tial government  of  the  world  if  at  any  time  we  conceive  a 
selfish  and  inordinate  regard  for  merely  physical  existence. 
Clearly  the  martyrs  did  nobly  and  well  when  they  cared 
nothing  for  bodily  torture  and  bodily  death  that  they  might 
vindicate  the  supremacy  and  grandeur  of  moral  and  reli- 
gious principle.  Over  and  over  again,  in  the  pathological 
history  of  our  human  race,  we  find  that  God  has  sacrificed 
millions  of  lives  to  compel  men  to  be  pure  and  dignified  in 
their  bodily  and  moral  habits.  Apply  this  to  war.  Though 
it  be  a  scourge  and  an  exterminator,  it  has  nevertheless  a 
wonderful  potential  force  in  it  to  produce  bravery,  courage, 
ability  of  every  description.  War  may  thus  be  used  to 
elevate  the  moral  and  mental  worth  of  our  race.  I  fear  it 
is  our  tendency  in  the  present  day  to  make  too  much  of 
physical  comfort  and  physical  life.  On  that  account  we 
recoil  unduly  when  God  has  wrought  out  benefit  for  our 
race  as  a  whole  through  terrible  trial,  aifiiction,  discipline, 
suffering,  and  self-sacrifice ;  as,  for  example,  by  wars  in 
which  cruel  despotisms,  tyrannous,  inferior,  and  sanguinary 
races,  have  succumbed  before  superior  moral  or  mental 
worth. 

I  am  afraid  too  we  do  not  deal  out  fair  measure  to  our 
predecessors.  We  are  ready  to  censure  these  Hebrews  or 
king  David  for  the  cruel  treatment  they  often  meted  out 
to  prisoners  of  war.  We  are  apt  to  say  that  the  men  who 
did  such  things  couldj  not,  along  with  such  a  low  moral 
character,  have  possessed  a  lofty,  pure  revelation  of  God, 
or  acknowledge  of  His  character.  But  that  is  too  hasty 
a  judgment.  Similarly  we  take  a  socialist  book,  describing 
life  in  the  lastj generation,  or  in  the  present  generation, 
in  our  England  ;  we  read  the  history ]'of  the  horrors  that 


GIDEON.  53 

produced  the  Factory  Acts — how  the  wealthy  capitaHst 
hved  in  luxury,  and  grudged  a  diminution  of  his  income 
that  would  have  made  the  condition  of  workshops  and  the 
hours  of  labour  such  as  would  have  averted  the  premature 
death  of  their  operatives,  of  men,  women,  and  children, 
until  Parliament  stepped  in.  We  say  those  men  who 
occupied  the  position  of  capitalists  were  fiends.  But  they 
were  nothing  of  the  kind  ;  some  of  them  were  even  eminent 
Christians.  But  Christianity  had  got  into  cursed  blindness 
and  ignorance  on  these  points,  and  they  belonged  to  their 
day  and  generation.  At  present,  are  we  so  very  far  above 
them  ?  Is  it  not  the  fact  that  constantly  you  have  great 
outbreaks  of  small-pox  or  scarlet  fever  spreading  death  in 
a  hundred  households  which  are  due  solely  to  carelessly 
scamped  work  '?  Have  we  not  the  horrors  of  the  East  End, 
and  the  City,  and  so  on?  But  are  we  therefore  all  bad 
men  ?  Not  so.  AVe  are  Christians  in  process  of  growing. 
These  are  evils  we  are  only  waking  up  to  discover,  the  sins 
we  have  inherited,  the  Canaanites  we  have  to  destroy. 

If  we  apply  the  same  measure  to  the  Hebrews,  we  see 
that  there  was  a  real  progress,  a  real  working  for  good 
in  a  society  that,  in  certain  moral  aspects,  was  low  and 
degraded.  God  does  not  demand  that  we  should  be  perfect 
saints  before  He  uses  us  to  do  His  political,  or  His  intel- 
lectual, or  His  moral,  or  His  spiritual  work  in  this  world. 
He  takes  us  as  we  are,  as  we  take  our  little  children.  He 
teaches  us  the  ABC  and  the  first  simple  rules  of  arithmetic. 
He  bears  with  our  blunders,  dulness,  and  ignorance  ;  and 
He  lifts  us  towards  Himself.  How  have  I  a  right  to 
say  that,  because  there  was  a  great  deal  of  cruel  human 
passion,  of  mere  selfishness  and  greed,  in  the  hearts  of  those 
Hebrews  when  they  conquered  Canaan,  there  nevertheless 
was  nothing  loftier?  There  was  something  very  much 
loftier ;  there  was  the  sense  of  having  the  true  God  with 
them,  and  of  taking  possession  of  a  kingdom  for  Him  on 


54  GIDEON. 

the  earth.  AVhy  have  I  a  right  to  say  that  ?  Because,  in 
spite  of  all  their  iniquity  and  degeneracy,  they  never  did 
sink  down  to  the  level  of  the  old  Canaanites.  Their  God 
was  the  one  true  God.  He  it  was  who  was  associated  with 
them.  That  is  what  some  of  our  apologists  are  afraid  to 
say,  and  what  infidels  fling  at  our  sacred  history  as  a  scoff; 
viz.  that  God  was  associated  with  men  who  were  at  a  low 
level  both  in  worship  and  morals.  But  He  was  with  them 
nevertheless;  He  was  working  with  them.  The  sin,  the 
degradation  of  the  nations  who  possessed  false  gods,  or  had 
lost  the  old  teaching  of  the  real,  living  God,  was  manifested 
in  this,  that  they  dragged  their  gods  down  to  their  own 
level,  and  made  them  in  their  own  likeness.  Conversely, 
it  was  the  glory  and  the  salvation  of  the  Hebrews,  this 
backsliding,  sensual  people,  that  their  God  gained  greater 
power  and  ascendency  over  them  with  time.  Plis  perfect 
righteousness  and  love  shone  out  upon  and  in  them.  He 
lifted  them  to  His  level ;  they  did  not  drag  Him  down  to 
theirs. 

Then  again,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  God  that  made  our 
world  has  made  this  law,  that  wherever  sin  of  a  certain 
type  and  degree  has  come  in,  the  retribution  of  moral 
obliquity  and  degradation  has  come  in  also,  in  the  shape  of 
annihilation  at  the  hands  of  a  superior  race.  That  seems 
a  cruel,  bard  thing;  but  nevertheless  so  it  is.  Moreover, 
to  make  it  more  mysterious,  the  conquering  race  is  not 
always  a  superior  race  in  the  perfect  sense.  But  we  have 
not  that  complication  here,  for  all  old  history  testifies  that 
the  most  blighting  curse  of  false  religion  and  the  vilest 
sensuality  of  our  world  in  these  days  lay  in  the  religion  of 
those  Canaanites.  Even  classic,  pagan  writers  say  that 
blank  atheism  would  have  been  better  than  that.  Wherever 
Phosnicians  established  their  colonies  and  their  places  of 
worship  they  introduced  nameless  vices  and  uncleannesses, 
and  dignified  them  with  the  name  of  religion.     And  where 


GIDEON.  55 

these  thiiif^s  were  introduced  they  spread,  so  much  so  that 
the  end  of  the  great  Eoman  empire  was  hastened,  its  old 
martial  strength  was  rooted  out,  by  the  corruption  that 
came  in  a  direct  line  from  that  old  Canaanitish  religion. 
To  justify  what  was  done  therefore,  we  do  not  need  to  say 
that  the  conquerors  were  perfect  and  immaculate.  All 
we  need  to  be  able  to  say  is,  that  it  was  a  deserved  retri- 
bution, and  that  it  was  better  for  our  w^orld  that  Canaan 
should  pass  into  the  hands  of  the  Hebrew  nation,  which 
has  done  the  grandest  moral  and  religious  work  for  the 
world. 

Further,  the  ideal,  the  impulse  that  stirred  those  Hebrews 
in  the  desert  to  go  in  the  name  of  their  God  and  take 
possession  of  that  land  involved  the  extermination  of 
many  of  the  inhabitants  and  much  that  was  found  there. 
They  were  utterly  to  destroy  the  luxuries,  furniture,  and 
machinery  of  that  false  religion.  And  as  it  was  religion 
which  at  that  time  possessed  practically  all  the  wealth  of 
the  country,  there  was  a  tremendous  destruction  of  property 
when  Baal  worship  was  done  away  with.  Nevertheless 
the  Israelites  did  not  utterly  annihilate  the  old  population, 
because  they  were  not  able.  Why  were  they  not  able? 
Probably  because  of  the  physical  conditions,  the  nature 
of  the  country,  which  impeded  military  operations,  the 
strength  of  the  fastnesses,  and  so  forth. 

But  the  fact  that  the  conquest  of  Canaan  and  the  exter- 
mination of  the  people  was  only  partially  accomplished 
proved  an  invaluable  discipline  to  the  Hebrews.  In  the 
third  chapter  of  the  book  of  Judges,  it  is  said  that  God 
providentially  ordered  it  so.  They  were  not  allowed  to 
settle  down  peacefully  and  to  become  prosperous  colonists 
at  once,  but  were  compelled  to  acquire  the  art  of  war, 
which  they  would  not  have  acquired  without  such  discipline 
being  put  upon  them.  From  the  subject  Canaanites,  too, 
they  learned  agriculture,  and  how  to  keep  the  country  in 


56  GIDEON. 

fertility.     Highest  of  all,  the  presence  of  these  aliens  was 
a  moral  and  rehgious  discipline  to  them. 

There  is  a  prevalent  theory  that  the  Hebrews  got  posses- 
sion of  the  country,  not  by  a  great  war  or  conquest,  but 
rather  by  stratagem,  by  alliances,  by  treaties,  and  by  inter- 
marriage. I  do  not  believe  in  that  theory  ;  it  is  just  the 
play  of  Hamlet  with  the  part  of  Hamlet  left  out.  How 
can  you  explain  Old  Testament  history,  how  can  you 
understand  the  Psalms,  ringing  as  they  do  with  j)i'ide  and 
exultation,  except  on  the  supposition  that  the  Israelites' 
memory  of  that  great  time  when,  under  Moses  and  Joshua, 
God  wrought  such  magnificent  deeds  for  His  people,  and 
when  Israel  achieved  such  repute  in  the  world's  history,  is 
accurate  in  the  main  ? 

Another  thing  is  perfectly  certain.  The  Hebrews  could 
not  have  achieved  that  enormous  feat  of  the  subjection 
of  Canaan,  with  its  walled  towns,  even  in  the  imperfect 
fashion  in  which  they  did  achieve  it,  unless  they  had  been 
welded  together  by  some  great  enthusiasm.  Now  people 
living  a  nomadic  life  for  any  length  of  time  rarely  possess 
any  intense  consciousness  of  national  unity.  The  only  pos- 
sible explanation  of  the  triumph  of  Israel  therefore  is  that 
the  people  were  possessed  by  an  extraordinary  amount  of 
zeal  for  a  God  that  had  revealed  Himself  in  a  new  and 
startling  fashion.  I  cannot  account  for  Old  Testament 
history  without  that  absolute  certainty.  Now  such  a  belief 
may  have  been  rough,  if  you  like,  savage,  gross,  unrefined, 
and  far  removed  from  the  spirit  of  Christ  in  its  inner 
essence.  Nevertheless  nothing  but  a  firm  conviction  that 
one  great  supreme  God  had  come,  and  was  going  to  work 
on  earth,  compelling  them  to  be  His  soldiers  and  servants 
in  achieving  a  career  of  resplendent  triumph  in  the  world's 
history,  could  have  made  this  nation  do  what  it  did.  Un- 
doubtedly that  belief  inspired  the  soul  of  Moses,  of  Joshua, 
and  of  the  army  that,  under  him,  conquered  Canaan. 


GIDEON.  hi 

But  when  the  war  was  over,  the  people  settled  down  side 
by  side  with  the  Canaanites.  In  some  cases  they  inhabited 
the  same  towns,  which  thus  became  half  Canaanitish  and 
half  Hebrew.  Moreover  the  Hebrews,  for  commerce  and 
for  agriculture,  were  brought  into  friendship  with  the 
Canaanites.  Now  in  ancient  days,  all  transactions,  either 
in  commerce  or  in  agriculture,  involved  the  performance  of 
religious  rites  on  both  sides.  But  it  must  often  have  hap- 
pened that  a  Canaanitish  shrine  was  nearer  than  Jehovah's 
altar,  and  the  temptation  would  be  great  to  let  one  rite 
performed  in  common  do  for  both.  You  see  how  easy  it 
must  have  been  for  the  Hebrews  to  adopt  the  religion 
of  the  Canaanites  also.  Further,  the  almost  inevitable 
splitting  up  of  the  people  into  separate  and  detached  com- 
munities, often  dependent  upon  the  Canaanitish  neighbour- 
ing commune,  tended  also  to  assimilate  the  Hebrews  to  the 
Canaanites  in  life  and  in  worship.  This  tendency  had 
continually  to  be  checked,  and  the  book  of  Judges  is  one 
continuous  exhibition  of  God's  providential  prevention  of 
the  destruction  of  true  religion.  From  it  we  gain  a  last 
argument  in  defence  of  the  Hebrew  conquest.  Jehovah 
deals  with  His  chosen  people  precisely  as  He  dealt  with  the 
heathen  in  that  case.  Whenever  the  Hebrew  conquerors 
amid  their  Canaanite  vassals  had  become  supine,  when 
their  relation  to  Jehovah  had  grown  slack,  and  their 
religious  enthusiasm  feeble,  when  selfishness,  comfort,  and 
luxury  were  their  supreme  ends  in  life,  they  in  their  turn 
became  weak  ;  the  Philistines  and  their  other  enemies  fell 
upon  them,  made  forays  into  their  land,  seized  parts  of  it, 
until  by  misery  they  were  compelled  to  return  to  their 
loyalty  and  to  their  God,  Jehovah.  Bead  the  Song  of 
Deborah,  and  you  will  see  that  very  principle  enunciated. 

I  have  now,  I  think,  said  quite  enough  on  the  preliminary 
question  to  enable  me  to  tell  the  story  of  Gideon  and  bring 
out  its  historical,  moral,  and  religious  wealth  of  meaning. 


58  GIDEON. 

Israel  bad  fallen  into  a  condition  of  lassitude,  sensuality, 
and  impotence.  The  Midianites,  Bedouins  of  the  desert 
east  of  the  Jordan,  saw  their  advantage,  and,  commencing 
in  a  small  way,  pushed  their  forays  farther  and  farther  into 
the  land.  Israel,  too  selfish,  too  detached  and  broken  up 
to  combine  together  in  order  to  resist  those  forays,  became 
subject  to  them  township  by  township.  Instead  of  assum- 
ing the  offensive,  they  were  compelled  to  stand  on  their 
defence. 

That  was  the  hero's  opportunity,  for  there  are  always 
in  a  healthy  nation  heroes  lying  in  wait  for  opportunity. 
They  do  not  always  find  it,  and  I  think  one  of  the  most 
pathetic  things  in  the  world's  story  is  that  so  often  men  of 
magnificent,  heroic  character  have  lived  in  times  when  they 
have  had  no  chance  to  show  it.  It  is  a  crisis  that  brings 
out  what  men  and  women  really  are.  It  is  when  disaster 
comes,  and  the  framework  of  ordinary  society  breaks  dov/n, 
that  you  discover  who  is  really  the  brave  man,  the  pure 
man,  and  who  is  the  man  of  faith.  There  were  a  great  many 
men  in  Israel  whose  spirit  was  gradually  moved  within 
them,  and  who  felt  that  the  subjection  to  the  Midianites 
was  intolerable.  Doubtless  these  men  talked  together, 
saying,  "  It  must  be  God's  will  that  Israel  should  be 
restored  to  its  proper  position."  One  day,  in  a  winepress 
hidden  out  of  sight,  a  man  with  a  flail  was  threshing  out  his 
wheat.  He  was  doing  it  there,  sneaking  out  of  sight  lest 
some  band  of  the  Midianites  should  mark  it,  and  see  that 
there  was  a  good  harvest  there  to  be  stolen.  As  he  went  oil 
with  his  threshing  a  stranger  greeted  him :  "  Jehovah  be 
with  you ;  my  valiant  hero,  my  brave  fellow ;  God  be  with 
you  !  "  Now  can  you  remember  a  time  in  your  life  when 
somebody  m-et  you,  and  said  to  you  one  of  the  common- 
places of  life  ;  and,  instead  of  responding  in  the  usual  way, 
you  broke  out  upon  him,  fell  upon  him,  overwhelmed  with 
indignation  and  fury  because  of  his  salutation  ? 


GIDEON.  59 

That  is  what  happened  with  Gideon.  "  God  be  with 
you  ! "  said  the  stranger.  Gideon  flung  down  his  flail. 
"God  be  with  us?  Don't  talk  nonsense,  man!  AVould  I 
be  skulking  in  this  winepress,  would  we  Hebrews  be  cower- 
ing before  those  pagan  Midianites,  if  God  were  with  us  ? 
They  say  God  w^as  with  us  when  we  came  out  of  Egypt, 
and  that  He  did  great  miracles  when  Joshua  conquered 
this  land.  Ah  !  if  that  is  true,  then  He  has  gone  away  and 
left  us  now.  Don't  talk  to  me  about  God,  when  facts  prove 
that  there  is  no  God  with  us."  How  do  you  think  a  modern 
minister  of  the  orthodox  type  would  have  treated  a  man 
who  had  spoken  in  that  fashion  about  God  ?  Not  as  the 
angel  treated  Gideon.  I  fear  the  modern  minister  would 
have  said,  "Here  is  a  most  dangerous,  blasphemous 
sceptic,  all  wrong  in  his  views,  full  of  heretical,  unsettling 
dangerous  feelings  and  ideas"  ;  and  he  would  have  sought 
to  argue  with  him  and  to  put  him  right.  What  did  the 
angel  ?  He  looked  at  him,  knew  he  was  wrong  in  blaming 
God  in  that  fashion,  but  also  that  he  was  right  to  refuse  to 
accept  a  religion  that  had  lost  all  its  nobility  and  bravery, 
that  had  no  backbone  in  it.  The  angel  said :  "  Go  in  this 
thy  might,  thy  spirit  that  cannot  tolerate  this  degradation 
of  God's  people,  that  rises  against  this  wrong;  go  thou, 
and  be  the  leader  in  Jehovah's  name,  and  set  things  right." 
Gideon  was  utterly  mistaken,  wicked,  sinful  in  blaming 
God.  But  do  you  see,  that  precisely  because  he  could  not 
settle  down  to  look  after  his  own  corn  while  his  neighbour's 
was  being  stolen,  precisely  because  he  rebelled  against  the 
customary  pious  phrases  which  cover  emptiness,  he  was 
picked  out  to  be  the  reformer  and  the  deliverer  of  his 
people? 

The  Church  would  be  a  good  deal  wiser  if  it  always  took 
care  to  distinguish  between  the  doubt  of  corruption  and 
worldliness,  the  cold,  callous,  sneering  doubt,  and  the  doubt 
of  a  brave  young  heart  that  doubts  because  religion  is  so 


60  GIDEON. 

poor  an  affair,  that  doubts  because  of  the  great  wrongs 
in  the  world,  because  of  the  deeds  of  evil  that  sin  works, 
that  doubts  precisely  because  it  is  crying  for  the  reality. 
We  should  go  to  every  such  man,  and  say:  "  My  brother, 
you  are  not  an  infidel ;  you  are  called  to  be  a  religious  man 
beyond  the  common.  You  are  not  an  atheist.  God  has 
hold  of  you,  and  wants  you  for  Himself.  Go  and  do  some- 
thing heroic,  and  show  that  God's  religion  is  the  mightiest 
force.  Go  and  demand  the  reality,  and  win  a  victory  for 
God  and  His  kingdom  such  as  the  world  has  never  seen 

yet." 

I  have  a  strong  impression  that  a  century  hence,  or  much 
less  than  that,  the  most  believed  and  accepted  religious 
historians  in  the  Christian  Church  will  say  that  in  our  age 
some  of  the  finest  religious  perceptions  of  where  God  was 
moving,  and  what  Christ's  heart  was  seeking,  appeared,  not 
within  the  traditional  Christian  Churches,  but  outside,  and 
in  the  form  of  rebellion  against  accepted  wrongs,  the  usages 
and  worship  of  the  world,  and  selfishness — the  actual  sins, 
and  the  curses  of  our  time  and  of  our  age.  I  am  glad  it 
should  be  so.  It  makes  me  feel  that  God's  Church  and 
God's  kingdom  is  a  vast  deal  wider  than  the  religious 
statistics  of  London,  for  which  I  have  not  much  respect, 
would  make  it  to  be. 

This  book  of  Judges  is  a  history  put  together  from  grand 
old  stories  told  by  father  to  son  for  generations  in  Canaan. 
Therefore  there  are  various  versions  combined  together,  and 
there  are  things  in  them  that  are  poetical  and  exaggerated. 
But  I  think  that  Gideon's  story,  as  we  have  it,  as  it  has 
existed  for  many  centuries,  has  in  it  a  unique  power  to 
supply  stimulus  and  inspiration  to  noble-hearted  young 
men  and  maidens.  For  see  how  the  story  goes  on.  Gideon 
has  had  his  discontent,  his  complaint  against  God  suddenly 
revolutionised  and  turned  into  a  Divine  call  to  do  something 
heroic  ;  and  the  man's  soul  responds  to  it.     The  next  thing 


GIDEON.  61 

that  flashes  into  his  soul,  with  the  voice  and  power  and 
majesty  of  God  iii  it,  is  this,  that  he  now  comprehends 
that  it  is  not  God's  slackness  after  all,  but  want  of  zeal  on 
the  part  of  the  Israelites,  their  own  moral  degradation, 
their  own  disloyalty,  that  had  brought  them  into  the  state 
they  were  in.  "  How  could  we  Hebrews,"  he  would  say, 
"  conquer  those  Midianites,  while  we  were  worshipping 
gross  Baals  and  the  gods  of  this  mountain,  and  forgetting 
our  own  God,  Jehovah  ?  "  And  so  the  voice  of  God  came 
to  this  man  of  valour,  and  said  :  "  Begin  at  home.  Set 
yourself  right,  and  be  quite  sure  that  God  will  soon  set 
the  world  right."  That  is  the  kind  of  thing  I  should  like 
to  see  in  many  showy  preachers  and  reformers,  orthodox 
and  unorthodox.  They  would  do  a  great  deal  more  for  the 
regeneration  of  the  world,  if  they  would  set  their  own 
characters  and  homes  right. 

The  voice  of  God  said  to  Gideon :  "  You  are  to  be 
Israel's  leader.  You  cannot  be  a  leader  until  you  do 
something  that  will  make  men  feel  that  you  have  a  rif^ht 
to  command  them.  The  real  curse  in  Israel  now  is  this 
Baal  worship.  In  your  father's  own  town  there  is  an  altar 
to  Baal.  Go  and  break  down  that  altar  and  desecrate  it, 
and  set  up  an  altar  to  Jehovah  there."  That  ni»ht  Gideon 
destroyed  the  altar  of  Baal,  built  an  altar  to  Jehovah,  and 
on  it  offered  sacrifice  to  the  true  God.  The  next  morninc^ 
the  population  were  roused  to  fury.  Some  little  boy  who 
saw  the  thing  done  said,  "  It  was  Gideon."  And  so  Gideon 
and  his  father  had  to  go  and  face  the  enraged  populace. 
The  Jehovah  worshippers  were  very  lukewarm.  Gideon 
and  his  father  stood  very  much  alone.  But  the  latter  had 
a  very  shrewd  head.  When  he  heard  that  Gideon  must 
be  put  to  death,  the  old  man  stepped  forward,  and  said  : 
"  Who  are  you  that  are  going  to  be  guilty  of  such  sacrilege? 
An  insult  has  been  offered  to  great  Baal,  the  god  of  light 
and  thunder  and  fire  ;  and  you  are  going  to  take  up  his 


G2  GIDEON. 

cause.  You  are  going  to  put  a  man  to  death.  He  will  be 
very  angry  with  5'ou :  he  means  to  do  that  himself.  This 
god,  surely  he  will  avenge  himself !  I  warn  you,  that  the 
man  who  steals  a  march  upon  that  god,  as  if  he  could  not 
defend  himself,  angers  him  ;  he  will  be  a  dead  man  before 
night.  Let  Baal  defend  himself.  Let  Baal  strike  the 
man  that  has  injured  him."  The  people  all  felt  that  this 
was  very  true,  and  they  simply  did  this.  They  all  looked 
on  Gideon,  and  said,  "  Before  to-morrow  morning  he  will 
die  a  horrible  death";  and  they  gave  him  the  name  of 
Jerubbaal,  i.e.  the  man  that  Baal  is  going  to  fight  against, 
the  man  that  has  Baal  for  his  antagonist,  the  man  doomed 
to  Baal's  wrath.  What  happened  ?  Nothing,  and  Gideon 
henceforth  stood  out  as  a  possible  bulwark  of  the  people. 

He  had  done  a  daring,  a  tremendous  deed  in  the  name 
of  Jehovah.  He  had  struck  down  Baal's  altar,  and  the 
weak-kneed  were  all  watching.  "Will  Baal  avenge  him- 
self"?  "  they  asked.  Baal  did  not,  and  it  then  appeared 
that  Gideon  had  struck  a  blow  at  the  superstitious  worship 
of  Baal.  From  that  day  he  was  a  marked  man.  He  stood 
out  as  Jehovah's  champion,  and  was  now  in  a  position  to 
put  himself  forward  in  a  crisis. 

Presently  the  Midianites  came  against  Israel  in  great 
force,  and  Gideon  blew  the  war  trumpet.  He  was  soon 
encamped  upon  some  post  of  vantage  in  the  pass  by  which 
the  Midianites  were  going  to  force  their  way.  The  Midian- 
ites numbered  about  135,000,  perhaps  not  so  many  ;  the 
Hebrews  nearly  32,500.  That  is  to  say,  the  Hebrews  were 
utterly  outnumbered.  In  a  situation  like  that  the  only 
hope  of  victory  is  by  stratagem,  and  stratagem  does  not 
need  quantity  of  soldiers,  it  needs  quality.  Every  man 
must  have  his  wits  about  him  and  be  no  coward.  There- 
fore Gideon  thinned  out  his  army,  and  as  everybody  afraid 
or  half-hearted  had  to  retire  from  the  critical  scene,  the 
bulk  of  his  army  disappeared ;   22,000  men  went  away.     He 


GIDEON.  63 

is  left  with  10,000  men.  That  is  far  too  many  for  stra- 
tagem. They  are  all  plucky  fellows,  but  they  may  not  all 
be  clever  fellows.  He  wants  both  courageous  and  capable 
men.  He  adopted  a  simple  expedient.  He  bad  them 
drink.  The  majority  of  them  unbuckled  their  swords  and 
eased  their  armour,  and  knelt  down  to  drink.  Three 
hundred  kept  their  swords  on,  and  simply  with  their  hands 
carried  the  water  to  their  mouths.  Gideon  said  to  those 
three  hundred,  "You  are  the  men  I  want."  The  men 
that  were  so  eager  for  battle  that  they  did  not  think  much 
about  their  own  comfort  were  the  three  hundred.  The 
others  were  good,  brave  men,  but  they  had  not  the  stuff 
in  them  that  was  in  the  three  hundred. 

Gideon  then  planned  to  throw  the  Midianite  camp  into 
a  panic.  He  took  his  three  hundred  men,  and  divided  them 
into  three  bands,  each  of  one  hundred.  Every  man  took 
a  trumpet  and  a  pitcher,  with  a  torch  hidden  in  the  pitcher. 
He  arranged  that  each  of  the  hundreds  should  approach  the 
camp  of  the  Midianites  from  a  different  side.  On  a  given 
signal  from  Gideon,  every  man  broke  his  pitcher,  took  the 
torch  in  his  left  hand,  waved  it  in  the  night,  and  blew  his 
trumpet.  The  Midianites  starting  to  their  feet,  rubbed 
their  eyes  in  astonishment.  Thinking  that  they  were 
caught  by  a  large  number  of  Hebrew  armies,  they  fell  into 
utter  confusion ;  and  running  against  each  other  in  the 
darkness,  they  slaughtered  each  other.  Those  who  sur- 
vived were  disorganized  and  soon  took  to  flight,  Gideon 
following  them  in  hot  pursuit.  He,  with  his  own  chosen 
followers,  his  three  hundred,  took  one  particular  course. 
But  it  was  impossible  for  him  with  this  small  number  to 
complete  his  victory,  and  merely  to  have  dispersed  the 
Midianites  was  not  much  of  a  triumph.  The  work  is  not 
half  done :  he  must  exterminate  them.  To  accomplish 
this  he  gives  the  order  to  the  men  of  Ephraim  to  intercept 
the  Midianites.     The  Ephrairaites  do  so,  while  Gideon  is 


64  GIDEON. 

pursuing  the  main  body,  and  the  victory  gained  was  com- 
plete. But  on  the  return  of  the  various  bodies  of  his 
troops,  there  was  a  natural  risk  that  the  conquerors  would 
fall  out  and  fight  among  themselves.  The  smaller-minded 
among  Gideon's  men  would  meet  the  late  comers  with 
the  taunt:  "You  cowards,  you  laggards,  you  left  us  to  do 
it  all  !  "  The  reply  was  naturally  a  hot  accusation  against 
Gideon  that  he  had  not  called  the  Ephraimites  sooner 
because  he  wished  to  have  all  the  glory  for  himself.  But 
Gideon  had  a  shrewd  head  :  he  was  his  father's  son  ;  and 
so  he  only  looked  at  them  and  said:  "What  are  you  talking 
about  ?  You  say  we  have  got  the  best  of  the  glory  and 
honour  ?  Not  at  all.  Look  at  the  enormous  slaughter 
you  have  inflicted  on  the  enemy,  and  you  have  captured 
the  two  leaders,  the  two  princes.  It  is  true  that  at  first 
we  took  the  vintage  ;  but  in  this  case  the  gleanings  are 
far  greater,  bigger,  and  more  glorious  than  the  vintage." 
The  historian  enjoys  that  in  the  way  he  puts  it  :  "  Then 
their  auger  was  abated  toward  him  when  he  had  said 
that."  Gideon  knew  human  nature,  and  his  conduct  here 
is  a  very  useful  study  for  those  who  have  to  lead  and  rule 
even  Christian  men. 

The  whole  story  of  Gideon  seems  contrived  to  reveal 
human  character.  We  learn  from  it  how  good  work  is  to 
be  done  in  the  face  of  difficulties.  The  recreant  men  in 
his  army,  and  the  men  of  Succoth  and  Penuel,  were  doing 
their  best  to  prevent  his  work  being  done  ;  but,  in  spite  of 
difficulty,  Gideon  did  a  great  deal  of  good  work.  Gideon 
had  the  Divine  vocation,  but  do  you  think  he  was  always 
sure  of  it  ?  No ;  for  when  the  crisis  came,  he  asked  God 
to  give  him  superstitious  signs.  That  is  a  bad  thing  in 
Gideon.  The  second  time  he  said,  "0  God,  be  not  angry." 
What  right  had  he  to  demand  physical  portents  and  mar- 
vels to  make  sure  that  he  was  doing  God's  work?  It  is 
the  sight  of  God's  face,   the  love    of   His  voice,  the  holy 


THE  BOOK  OF  LAMENTATIONS.  G5 

influence  of  His  Spirit  that  alone  can  uplift  men.  It  is 
the  weakness  of  men's  faith  that  makes  them  demand 
miracles.  But  God  takes  them  even  with  their  supersti- 
tion, their  weakness,  their  defects,  and  works  great  things 
by  them,  if  only  they  be  true  to  the  light  they  have. 
That  is  the  lesson  of  Gideon's  life.  There  was  much 
primitive  grossness  in  his  conception  of  religion,  of  war, 
and  of  government.  Nevertheless  the  central,  sovereign, 
animating  power  in  the  man's  soul  was  an  absolute  con- 
viction that  whatever  came  he  would  do  the  will  of  the 
one  true,  righteous  God  of  heaven  and  of  earth.  That 
made  his  career  glorious  ;  for  in  so  doing  he  was  faithful  to 
the  highest  light  he  had  access  to. 

W.  G.  Elms  LIE. 


THE    BOOK   OF  LAMENTATIONS. 

Of  all  the  poetical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  this  is 
probably  the  one  least  generally  known  ;  yet  it  is  the  one 
about  which  our  information  is  most  complete.  About  the 
circumstances  in  which  some  of  these  books  were  produced 
we  know  little  or  nothing ;  we  cannot  fix  their  dates  with 
certainty  to  within  hundreds  of  years.  But  we  can  tell 
precisely  the  circumstances  in  which  this  book  arose ;  and 
we  can  fix  its  date  to  within,  at  the  most,  a  year  or  two  ; 
some  think  to  within  a  month  or  two.^ 

In  the  year  58S  B.C.  the  city  of  Jerusalem  was  compassed 
round  by  the  Babylonians,  and,  after  a  siege  of  two  years, 
during  which  the  inhabitants  endured  all  the  extremities  of 
such  a  situation,  it  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  enemy,  who 
burnt  it  to  the  ground  and  transported  the  inhabitants,  a 
few  excepted,  to  far  off  Babylon.     Those  who  stayed  behind 

1  Bleek  argues  that  it  was  written  between  the  surrender  and  the  destruction 
of  tlie  city. 

VOL.    V.  C 


G6  THE  BOOK  OF  LAMENTATION'S. 

attempted  to  organize  themselves  in  the  empty  country. 
But  they,  were  attacked  in  their  weakness  by  the  predatory 
tribes  which  hved  on  the  borders,  and  so  harassed,  that 
at  last,  panic-stricken  and  demoralised,  they  set  off  for 
Egypt,  to  seek  refuge  there. 

The  book  has  for  its  theme  this  catastrophe  of  the  holy 
nation,  and  especially  of  the  holy  city  ;  and  it  is  evident 
that  it  was  written  at  the  time  by  one  who  was  an  eye- 
witness of  the  scenes  he  depicts  and  felt  to  the  very  depths 
of  his  soul  the  horror  and  pain  of  the  tragedy.^ 

There  is  one  man  well-known  to  us  who  was  on  the  spot 
during  all  these  events.  The  prophet  Jeremiah  had  fore- 
told for  many  years  that  this  calamity  was  coming  upon 
Jerusalem.  But  he  spoke  to  deaf  ears.  The  false  prophets 
by  whom  he  was  surrounded  made  light  of  his  warnings 
and  maintained  that  he  was  entirely  mistaken  :  the  city  of 
Jehovah  would  never  be  given  over  into  the  hands  of  the 
heathen.  The  people  were  only  too  ready  to  listen  to  these 
flatterers;  and  the  heads  of  the  community  were  so  irritated 
by  what  they  considered  Jeremiah's  pessimistic  croaking, 
that  they  shut  his  mouth  by  casting  him  into  prison. 

It  turned  out,  however,  that  he  was  a  true  prophet ;  and 
he  lived  to  see  the  fulfilment  of  the  worst  which  he  had 
foretold.  He  was  in  Jerusalem  all  through  the  siege  and 
the  subsequent  destruction  of  the  city ;  and,  after  the 
transportation  of  the  inhabitants  had  taken  place,  he  was 
among  the  small  remnant  who  stayed  for  a  time  in  the 
country.  He  resisted  the  migration  to  Egypt,  but  was 
compelled  at  last  to  go  with  the  rest. 

It  is  very  natural  to  suppose  that  he  was  the  author, 
therefore,  of  the  book.  This,  no  doubt,  is  why  it  is 
separated  in  our  Bible  from  the  rest  of  the  poetical  books 

'  Ewnld  contends  that  it  was  written  after  the  fugitives  arrived  in  Egypt, 
and  was  used  at  a  mournful  anniversary  celebration. 


THE  BOOK  OF  LAMENTATIONS.  67 

aud  inserted  after  Jeremiah's  prophecy.  In  the  Septuagint 
it  is  introduced  with  the  superscription  :  "  And  it  came  to 
pass,  after  Israel  was  led  into  captivity,  and  Jerusalem  laid 
waste,  that  Jeremiah  sat  weeping,  and  lamented  with  this 
lamentation  over  Jerusalem,  and  said."  These  words, 
however,  do  not  occur  in  the  Hebrew,  which  nowhere 
gives  the  name  of  the  author. 

Jeremiah  has  always  been  supposed  to  be  the  author  till 
the  present  day,  when  it  is  the  fashion  to  suppose  a  new 
author  wherever  there  is  the  faintest  pretext  for  doing  so.-^ 
The  reasons  which  have  been  discovered  for  attributing 
Lamentations  to  another  author  are  of  the  most  micro- 
scopic order  ;  but  they  have  appeared  sufficient  to  a  certain 
school.  It  is  allowed,  however,  that  the  writer  lived  at  the 
same  time  as  Jeremiah,  and  went  through  the  same  ex- 
perience. Bunsen  made  the  suggestion  that  he  may  have 
been  Baruch,  Jeremiah's  loved  disciple. 

The  question  is  of  comparatively  little  interest,  and  it 
has  no  religious  importance  whatever.  It  would  be  grati- 
fying to  know  that  besides  Jeremiah  there  was  another 
gifted  son  of  Israel  in  those  days,  who  loved  Zion  with  an 
affection  as  profound  as  is  displayed  in  this  book,  and  was 
able  to  express  in  such  lasting  literary  form  the  meaning 
of  these  tragic  events.  Nature  is  hardly,  however,  eg 
prodigal  of  her  gifts. 

The  genius  of  Jeremiah  was  a  rare  and  peculiar  one ;  but 
it  could  not  be  better  expressed  than  in  the  profound  im- 
pression made  on  the  heart  of  the  writer  of  this  book  by 
his  country's  calamities  and  the  profoundly  religious  view 
which  he  takes  of  the  situation.  It  is  also  a  noteworthy 
circumstance  that  we  know  from  other  Scripture  that  Jere- 
miah was  a  lament-writer.  Of  course  a  man  might  be  a 
prophet  without  having  the  peculiar  gift  of  the  poet.  But 
Jeremiah  not  only  wrote  poetry,  but  this  kind  of  poetry ; 

'  Whenever  the  writer  pauses  to  take  breath,  says  Matthew  Arnold. 


G8  THE  BOOK  OF  LAMENTATIONS 

he  wrote  a  lament  on  the  death  of  Josiah.^  There  are 
some  peculiarities  in  the  language  of  the  Lamentations 
which  do  not  occur  in  Jeremiah's  prophecy  ;  but  this  is  no 
more  than  might  be  expected,  when  a  writer  was  passing 
from  one  species  of  literature  to  another ;  ^  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  there  are  many  striking  resemblances,  and 
among  them  one  or  two  phrases  which  are  so  characteristic 
of  Jeremiah's  style,  that  they  may  almost  be  called  his 
cipher.  By  far  the  most  conclusive  proof,  however,  of  the 
authorship  is  the  account  of  Jeremiah's  personal  experience 
given  in  the  third  chapter.  Here  the  facts  of  the  ]3rophet's 
history  are  described  with  autobiographic  fulness.  And 
who  but  Jeremiah  could  have  used  the  opening  words  of 
that  great  chapter,  "  I  am  the  man  that  hath  seen  afflic- 
tion "  ?  Only  some  prominent  public  character  could  have 
ventured  to  apply  such  a  description  to  himself ;  and  whom 
does  the  grandiose  phrase  fit  so  well  as  the  typical  sufferer 
of  his  ase  ?  '" 


'  Dr.  Driver  takes  no  notice  of  this  fact,  wlien  giving  the  reasons  pro  and 
con,  in  his  Introduction  to  the  Literature  of  the  Old  Testament.  I  join  in  the 
gratitude  with  which  this  book  has  been  received.  It  is  an  ornament  to  English 
theology.  But  a  close  examination  of  it  in  this  case,  and  in  some  others  where 
I  happen  to  have  some  knowledge  of  my  own.  does  not  dispose  me  to  place 
absolute  confidence  in  it  in  other  cases  where  I  am  not  able  to  check  it  in  this 
w  ly.     The  air  of  moderation  which  it  wears  is  more  apparent  than  real. 

■■'  What  can  be  the  use  of  quoting  as  arguments  against  Jeremiah's  author- 
shp,  as  Dr.  Driver  does,  single  words  occurring  in  Lamentations  but  not  iu 
Jeremiah,  when,  according  to  Dr.  Driver's  own  theory,  these  words  were  current 
at  the  time  and  as  accessible  to  Jeremiah  as  to  any  of  his  disciples?  In  a  case 
like  this,  while  striking  resemblances  of  word  or  phrase  are  important  evidence, 
minute  verbal  differences  have  no  weight  whatever. 

Another  argument  to  which  Dr.  Driver  gives  prominence,  as  proving  that  at 
least  a  portion  of  the  book  is  not  by  Jeremiah,  is  that,  while  in  the  three  poems 
after  the  first  two  of  the  initial  Hebrew  letters  change  jjlaces,  they  occupy  in 
the  first  poem  their  usual  positions.  But  he  does  not  mention  the  simple 
suggestion  of  Ewald,  that  in  the  first  poem  an  editorial  hand  may  have  altered 
the  arrangement.  The  verses  read  better,  Ewald  thinks,  when  their  initial 
letters  stand  as  in  chapters  ii.,  iii.,  iv. 

^  The  interpretation  of  those  who  do  not  accept  Jeremiah's  authorship  of  the 
book  is  that  the  nation  pexsouified  sj^jcaks  here.  But  iu  chapter  i.  the  nation 
personified  is  a  woman. 


THE  BOOK  OF  LAMENTATIONS.  69 

The  form  of  this  book  is  of  course  poetical.  But  there 
are  certain  pecuHarities  in  its  poetry  which  deserve  to  be 
noted. 

The  book  is  not  a  continuous  poem,  but  a  collection  of 
five  separate  pieces,  all  of  the  same  character,  and  all  on 
the  same  theme.  And  the  book  is  so  divided  in  our  version 
that  each  poem  just  fills  a  chapter. 

The  poems  belong  to  the  elegiac  species  of  poetry ;  and 
we  should  call  the  separate  pieces  elegies,  or  dirges,  or 
laments.  This  kind  of  poetry  seems  to  have  been  much 
cultivated  in  Israel.  We  find  in  the  Bible  not  a  few 
other  laments  besides  those  of  Jeremiah.  They  appear  to 
have  been  frequently  composed  on  the  death  of  persons 
prominent  in  the  public  eye  or  beloved  by  a  large  circle 
of  acquaintance  ;  and  very  likely  they  were  sung  in  con- 
nexion with  the  funeral  rites.  But  they  might  also  be 
composed  in  commemoration  of  public  calamities ;  and 
there  are  some  very  remarkable  prophetic  laments,  predict- 
ing the  destruction  of  cities  with  the  accompanying  scenes 
of  woe.^ 

But  there  is  a  remarkable  peculiarity  still  to  be  men- 
tioned in  these  laments  of  Jeremiah.  The  first  four  of 
them  are  acrostics  on  the  Hebrew  alphabet.  That  is  to 
say,  the  successive  verses  begin  with  the  successive  letters 
of  the  alphabet  ;  the  first  with  the  letter  corresponding  to 
A,  the  second  with  B,  and  so  on.  And  in  the  great  third 
chapter  each  successive  letter  begins  three  successive 
verses.  The  fifth  chapter  has  the  same  number  of  verses 
as  it  would  have  if  it  were  an  acrostic  also ;  but  for  some 
unknown  reason  the  acrostic  form  is  dropped. 

This  strikes  us  as  a  very  peculiar  thing.  It  might  be 
expected  that  a  form  so  artificial  must  cramp  the  thought 
and  crush  out  all  naturalness.  But  it  is  not  uncommon 
in  Hebrew  poetry.      It  appears  in  several  of  the  Psalms, 

'  Dr.  Driver  has  a  valuable  note  on  tbe  form  of  the  biblical  lament. 


70  THE  BOOK  OF  LAMENTATIONS. 

culminating  in  cxix.,  where,  as  is  well  known,  each  succes- 
sive letter  of  the  alphabet  begins  eight  successive  verses. 
It  is  essentially  of  the  same  nature  as  parallelism,  allitera- 
tion, metre  and  rhyme.  It  appears  to  be  the  nature  of 
poetical  thought  to  submit  itself  to  such  restraints,  and 
yet  be  able  to  move  with  more  grace  and  freedom  than  in 
the  slovenly  garb  of  common  speech.  Odd  as  this  acrostic 
form  seems  to  us,  it  probably  appeared  far  more  natural  to 
an  ancient  poet  than  rhyme  would  have  done,  which  now  is 
thought  so  natural.  It  was  apparently  resorted  to  when 
the  material  of  the  poem  consisted  of  a  great  many  some- 
what similar  remarks,  and  an  artificial  thread  was  needed 
on  which  to  string  the  separate  thoughts,^ 

The  picture  painted  in  the  Lamentations  is  one  of 
colossal  sorrow.  The  siege  and  the  sack  of  cities  have 
always  been  horrible  incidents  of  warfare ;  but  the  enemies 
by  whom  Jerusalem  was  destroyed  were  noted  for  their 
cruelty  and  ruthlessness.  In  their  own  annals  and  in  their 
artistic  delineations  of  their  practices  in  war,  which  have 
been  dug  in  recent  times  from  beneath  the  sands  of  the 
desert,  this  is  made  painfully  evident.  The  Babylonians, 
in  the  height  of  their  power,  not  only  practised  the  most 
outrageous  cruelty,  but  gloried  in  it.  And  they  had  many 
reasons  for  not  sparing  Israel. 

A  most  pitiful  description  is  given  by  the  author  of 
the  sufferings  endured  in  the  siege,  especially  from  famine. 
The  children  swooned  with  hunger  and  cried  for  bread  to 
their  mothers,  who  had  none  to  give.  The  aged  gave  up 
the  ghost  "  w'hile  they  sought  their  meat  to  relieve  their 
souls."  The  famished  crept  through  the  streets  like  gray 
and  feeble  ghosts.     Those  who  all  their  lives  before  had  fed 

'  Dr.  Driver  alleges  this  acrostic  form  as  an  argument  agaiust  attributing 
the  book  to  Jeremiah,  "  who  iu  his  literary  style  followed  the  promptings  of 
nature  "  ! 


THE  BOOK  OF  LAMEETATIONS.  "tX 

delicately  and  been  clothed  in  scarlet  were  reduced  to  such 
extremities  that  they  were  willing  to  part  with  anything 
for  a  morsel  of  bread.  Of  the  nobles  ^  it  is  said  that  once 
"  they  were  purer  than  snow,  they  were  whiter  than  milk, 
they  were  more  ruddy  in  body  than  rubies,  their  polishing 
was  of  sapphire  "  :  but  now,  as  the  effect  of  famine,  "  their 
visage  is  blacker  than  a  coal ;  they  are  not  known  in  the 
streets  "  (so  disfigured  are  they)  ;  "  their  skin  cleaveth  to 
their  bones;  it  is  withered,  it  is  become  like  a  stick."  The 
dark  rumour  was  even  in  circulation  that  mothers,  mad 
with  hunger,  had  sodden  their  own  children. 

After  the  siege  came  the  indescribable  horrors  of  the 
sack  of  the  city,  when  the  gates  w^ere  burst  open  and  the 
brutal  soldiery,  irritated  by  long  delay,  rushed  in  to  wreak 
their  will  on  the  doomed  inhabitants.  Every  home  had 
to  endure  its  own  share  of  cruelty  and  shame.  But  above 
all  private  grief  towered  the  public  calamity.  Everything 
noble  and  venerable,  to  which  patriotic  affection  and  reli- 
gious feeling  clung,  was  ruthlessly  dishonoured.  To  crown 
all,  in  the  temple  was  heard  the  ribald  noise  and  shouting  of 
the  enemy,  loud  as  had  been  in  happier  days  the  mirth  of 
the  solemn  festivals.  "  The  adversary  hath  spread  out  his 
hand  upon  all  her  pleasant  things  ;  for  she  hath  seen  that 
the  heathen  entered  her  sanctuary,  whom  Thou  didst  com- 
mand that  they  should  not  enter  into  Thy  congregation." 

Then  followed  the  deportation  of  the  inhabitants  to 
Babylon,  in  which  king  and  princes,  priests  and  prophets, 
high  and  low,  were  all  mingled  in  a  common  degradation  ; 
and,  as  the  long  procession  moved  away,  they  could  see,  or 
seemed  in  their  melancholy  hearts  to  see,  the  ancient  and 
implacable  enemies  of  Israel,  such  as  the  Edomites,  drawn 
up  along  the  path  as  scornful  and  exultant  spectators  of 
their  calamity, 

A  remnant   were    left    behind,    among   whom   was    the 

^  111  Authorized  Version,  "  Nazarites." 


72  THE  BOOK  OF  LAMENTATIOXS. 

author  of  Lamentations.  But  their  lot  was  perhaps  the 
most  pitiable  of  all.  Not  only  were  they  constantly 
harassed  by  the  incursions  of  the  skirmishers  from  the 
desert  and  made  to  live  in  perpetual  fear,  but  they  had 
before  their  eyes  the  ruins  of  their  country  and  their  capital. 
The  gates  were  sunk  in  the  ground  and  the  bars  broken  ; 
the  city  was  a  heap  of  ruins,  and  silence  reigned  in  the 
streets.  "  A  sorrow's  crown  of  sorrow  is  remembering 
happier  things  "  ;  and,  as  amidst  the  silence  of  the  deserted 
city  they  remembered  the  days  of  music  and  mirth,  calling 
to  mind  especially  the  happy  pilgrim  bands  which  used  to 
make  vocal  the  roads  of  the  country,  now  deserted,  and  to 
crowd  the  courts  of  the  temple,  now  in  ruins,  no  wonder 
they  cried,  "  How  is  the  gold  become  dim  !  how  is  the 
most  fine  gold  changed  !  " 

To  all  this  history  of  sorrow  the  author  of  Lamentations 
gives  the  most  complete  and  sympathetic  expression.  The 
book  is  full  of  tears.  "Mine  eye  runneth  down  with  rivers 
of  water,"  he  says,  "for  the  destruction  of  the  daughter 
of  my  people."  In  the  first  chapter  he  personifies  Israel 
as  a  woman  weeping  and  appealing  to  the  whole  world : 
"Is  it  nothing  to  you  all  ye  that  pass  by?  behold,  and  see 
if  there  be  any  sorrow  like  unto  my  sorrow." 

But  he  had  a  deeper  purpose  than  merely  to  give  vent  to 
the  national  grief.  All  through  these  poems  the  minds  of 
the  people  for  whose  use  they  were  composed  are  directed, 
in  a  truly  prophetic  spirit,  to  the  cause  of  their  sufferings. 
The  Babylonians  were  not  the  cause  :  they  were  merely 
the  instruments  of  a  higher  will.  It  was  God  who  was 
chastising  them  ;  and  they  were  chastised  because  they  had 
sinned  :  "  The  Lord  hath  afdicted  her  for  the  multitude 
of  her  transgressions."  "The  Lord  is  righteous;  for  I 
have  rebelled  against  His  commandment."  Such  is  the 
undertone  from  first  to  last  below  the  record  of  calamity; 
and  the  poet  seeks  to  impress  on  his  fellow  sufferers  that 


THE  BOOK  OF  LAMENTATIONS.  73 

hope  lies  only  in  acknowledging  their  iniquity  and  seeking 
forgiveness  from  Him  against  whom  they  have  sinned. 

The  most  remarkable  of  all  the  five  chapters  is  the 
middle  one.  The  other  two  on  each  side  may  be  said  to 
lean  up  against  it,  while  it  towers  above  them.  In  it 
Jeremiah  comes  forward  to  speak  in  his  own  person,  begin- 
ing  with  the  words  already  quoted,  "  I  am  the  man  that 
hath  seen  aftiiction."  He  goes  on  to  give  a  poetical 
description  of  his  own  history,  for  the  purpose  of  showing 
the  right  way  of  dealing  with  trouble. 

His  fellow-sufferers  had  just  come  into  trouble,  but  he 
had  been  a  man  of  sorrows  all  his  life.  Years  before  their 
chastisement  arrived,  the  hand  of  God  had  been  laid 
heavily  on  him :  "  He  bent  bis  bow,  and  set  me  as  a  mark 
for  the  arrow.  He  caused  the  arrows  of  His  quiver  to 
enter  into  my  reins.  I  was  a  derision  to  all  my  people, 
and  their  song  all  the  day."  His  personal  grief  might  have 
been  described  in  the  very  words  which  would  now  describe 
their  public  calamity.  But  he  had  discovered  for  himself 
the  way  out  of  trouble,  and  he  could  now  teach  it  to  them. 

At  first  he  had  agitated  himself  and  cried  out  against  the 
hand  which  was  chastising  him ;  his  whole  being  was  in 
tumult  and  refused  to  be  comforted.  But,  when  he  became 
still  and  humbled  himself,  then  the  day  broke  and  the  day- 
star  arose  in  his  heart.  The  most  delightful  and  comfort- 
ing truths  came  pouring  into  his  mind  ;  in  the  strength  of 
which  he  surmounted  sorrow ;  and,  though  outward  trouble 
did  not  cease,  he  was  able  to  rise  above  it. 

It  is  here  that  there  come  in  a  dozen  or  score  of  verses 
totally  different  from  the  rest  of  this  book.  The  rest  of 
the  book  is  steeped  in  tears ;  this  portion  is  flushed  with 
sunshine  :  "It  is  of  the  Lord's  mercies  we  are  not  con- 
sumed, because  His  compassions  fail  not.  They  are  new 
every  morning  ;  great  is  Thy  faithfulness.  The  Lord  is 
my  portion,  saith  my  soul  ;  therefore  will  I  hope  in  Him. 


74  THE  BOOK  OF  LAMENTATIONS. 

The  Lord  is  good  unto  them  that  wait  for  Him,  unto  the 
soul  that  seeketh  Him.  It  is  good  that  a  man  should  both 
hope  and  quietly  wait  for  the  salvation  of  God.  It  is  good 
for  a  man  that  he  bear  the  yoke  in  his  youth.  .  .  .  For 
the  Lord  will  not  cast  off  for  ever ;  but,  though  He  cause 
grief,  yet  will  He  have  compassion  according  to  the  multi- 
tude of  His  mercies.  For  He  doth  not  afflict  wilhngly, 
nor  grieve  the  children  of  men." 

These  verses  are  like  a  bed  of  water-lilies  lying  on  the 
surface  of  a  brackish  and  desolate  mere.  The  rest  of  the 
book  may  be  compared  to  a  sky  full  of  black  and  dripping 
clouds,  but  these  verses  are  like  a  rainbow  arched  athwart 
them.  They  speak  of  hope  in  the  depths  of  desolation, 
and  show  the  way  to  reach  it.  They  sound  the  true  evan- 
gelic note,  which  echoes  all  through  the  Scripture.  They 
lead  up  to  the  proposal  with  which,  at  the  close  of  them, 
Jeremiah  appeals  to  his  fellow  countrymen,  "Let  us  search 
and  try  our  way,  and  turn  again  to  the  Lord." 

Thus  the  book  has  not  merely  a  historical  and  poetical 
interest ;  but  it  handles  with  inspired  power  the  problems 
of  sin  and  suffering,  and  points  out  clearly  the  way  to  God. 

As  we  close  it,  the  image  which  remains  in  our  minds  is 
that  figure  of  the  Septuagmt — Jeremiah  seated  on  the 
ruins  of  Jerusalem,  with  the  calamity  of  his  country  in  all 
its  compass  and  significance  mirrored  in  his  tear-filled 
heart.  And  that  figure  makes  our  eye  travel  forward  to 
another.  Another  son  of  Israel  and  lover  of  Jerusalem, 
when  He  was  come  near,  as  He  descended  the  Mount  of 
Olives,  beheld  the  city,  and  wept  over  it.  Strange  city  ! 
What  sons  that  nation  bore  !  How  amazingly  they  loved 
her !     And  how  unmotherly  was  her  treatment  of  them  ! 

Some  said,  in  the  days  of  our  Lord's  flesh,  that  He  was 
Jeremiah ;  and  between  the  prophet  and  the  Saviour  there 
v\ere  mauy  resemblances.     Both  loved  the  people  and  the 


ABRAHAM  KUEXEy. 


capital  of  their  country  with  passionate  affection.  Both 
were  repaid  with  deadly  cruelty  and  persecution,  and  yet 
they  could  not  cease  to  love.  Each  of  them  was  the  man 
of  sorrows  of  his  ow^i  age.  But  from  the  book  of  Lamen- 
tations we  may  draw  a  profounder  resemblance.  Jeremiah 
in  this  book  attempted  to  solve  the  twin  mysteries  of 
suffering  and  sin ;  and  may  we  not  say  that  to  do  this  was 
the  purpose  of  the  whole  life  of  Christ  ?  Jeremiah  solved 
the  mystery  well ;  but  it  was  left  for  Jesus  to  give  the 
perfect  solution,  when  He  made  sin  the  background  on 
which  to  display  to  the  universe  the  glory  of  love  Divine, 
and  when,  by  His  suffering  even  unto  death,  He  brought  to 
the  world  joy  unspeakable  and  life  eternal. 

James  Stalker. 


ABRAHAM  KUENEN. 

The  death  of  Professor  Abraham  Kuenen,  of  Leyden,  is  an  event 
which  cannot  fail  to  sadden  every  honest  student  ol:  the  Old 
Testament,  to  whatever  school  he  may  belong.  "  To  our  great 
sorrow,  our  dearly  beloved  father  and  brother  departed  this  life 
to-day  (Dec.  10),  after  a  long  illness,  suddenly  but  peacefully,  at 
the  age  of  sixty."  So  runs  the  mournful  notice  wliich  gives  most 
of  us  our  only  information  as  to  the  circumstances  of  Kuenen  s 
decease.  Who  has  not  heard  of  the  great  scholar  who  has  left 
us  ? — heard  of  him,  perhaps,  with  pain  and  regret  as  an  enemy  of 
Grod's  word.  Such  he  was  not ;  his  faith  was  firm  and  reverent. 
Note  the  words  in  which  he  expresses  the  lamentable  omission  of 
the  quality  of  "  revei'ence "  in  Steintlial's  definition  of  religion 
("idealism  on  a  naturalistic  basis,"  Theologisch  Tijdschrift,  May, 
188G).  Could  we  know  the  course  of  Kuenen's  development,  as 
we  doubtless  shall  before  long,  we  should  have  the  key  to  anything 
that  repels  English  Christians  in  Kuenen.  Perhaps  we  do  not 
love  ideal  truth  as  he  did  ;  perhaps  we  feel  that  Bible-students 
must,  for  the  sake  of  the  general  progress,  put  a  bridle  on  their 
mouth,  and  check  too  excessive  an  individualism.  But  the  more 
we  know   Kueuen,  the   more  we  shall  see  that,  allowing  for  his 


TG  ABRAHAM   KUENEN. 

cii'cumstances,  he  is  much  nearer  to  ns  than  we  had  supposed. 
Take  the  first  edition  of  that  monument  of  critical  scholai'ship,  the 
Onderzoek  (1861-1865),  and  see  how  moderate  its  results  are. 
And  now  compare  the  second  (part  i.,  1885-1887;  part  ii.,  1889). 
Can  it  be  said  that  there  is  any  real  extremeness  in  his  conclu- 
sions ?  N"o  ;  Ktienen  is  still  as  moderate  and  as  circumspect  as 
ever,  but  his  eye  for  facts  has  become  keener.  I  know  that  he 
opposed  the  old  supernaturalism,  and  that  he  himself  admits  that 
his  theological  convictions  may  have  reacted  on  his  criticisms  ;  but 
I  know  that  he  also  assures  us  that  neither  his  method  nor  his 
main  results  were  the  outcome  of  his  theological  principles.  It 
was  through  critical  exegesis  that  he  came  to  the  conviction  that 
a  dogmatic  supernaturalism  was  untenable,  and  the  canons  of 
critical  exegesis  are  independent  of  theological  dogma.  Let  me 
confess,  however,  that  what  the  Germans  call  Mystik,-as  distin- 
guishable from  Mysticisvius,  was  comparatively  deficient  in  Kuenen, 
that  was  not  his  charisma.  His  second  great  work,  not  the  less 
great  from  a  scientific  point  of  view  because  it  is  popular,  the 
epoch-making  Religion  of  Israel  (published  in  Holland  in  1869), 
is  singularly  wanting  in  really  deep  and  illuminative  suggestions 
on  the  movement  of  religious  ideas  in  Israel ;  we  must  still  turn 
from  Kuenen  to  Ewald,  whose  intuition  of  the  chief  characteristics 
both  of  prophecy  and  of  prophetic  religion  is  far  beyond  anything  to 
which.  Kuenen  seems  to  have  attained  !  How  clearly  this  incom- 
plete comprehension  of  prophecy  comes  out  in  a  third  remarkable 
Avork  of  this  great  writer,  which  owes  its  origin  to  a  liberal-minded 
Scottish  layman  (the  late  Dr.  John  Muir),  entitled.  The  Prophets 
and  Prophecy  in  Israel  (1877)  !  But,  as  a  controversial  treatise, 
few  Avill  deny  that  ihe  book  has  merits  of  the  highest  order ;  the 
only  question  is,  whether  the  opposed  doctrine  might  not  have 
been  left  to  fall  of  itself,  or  rather,  to  be  superseded  by  something 
far  higher  and  deeper,  to  which  no  thoughtfal  believer  would 
withhold  his  assent. 

Let  not  the  reader  blame  me  for  speaking  here  of  Kuenen  the 
theologian.  It  is  one  of  his  merits  that  he  was  a  theologian.  I^ot 
to  him  are  Delitzsch's  words  of  dislike  for  a  purely  critical  school 
of  theology  (see  his  correspondence  with  Martensen)  justly  ap- 
plicable. He  was  indeed  chiefly  a  writer ;  but  he  had  a  theology 
too.  Yes ;  and  he  had  a  heart  for  the  Church,  and  one  of  his 
latest  works  w^as  the  revision  of  a  new  popular  Dutch  translation 


OLD    TESTAMENT  NOTES.  77 

of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures.  But  now  let  me  return  for  a 
moment  to  Kuenen  the  critic.  How  great  he  Avas,  was  hardly 
seen  in  his  lifetime.  First,  because  he  wrote  in  Dutch,  and  next 
because  he  was  far  above  "  the  last  infirmity  of  noble  minds." 
Read,  if  you  will,  a  few  of  his  numerous  criticisms  on  books  in 
the  Dutch  periodical  (the  Theologisch  Tijdschrift)  of  which  he  was 
a  chief  editor.  How  mild  and  gracious  is  his  treatment  even  of 
those  from  whom  he  differs  !  Fairness  one  expects  in  an  opponent, 
but  graoiousness — how  seldom  is  this  Christ-like  temper  found  in 
a  critic  !  I  have  already  said  that  Kuenen  was  "moderate"  ;  so 
he  was.  Sobriety  was  the  dominant  tone  of  his  intellectual  char- 
acter. It  was  to  this  sobriety  that  we  owe  that  vast  accumulation 
of  well-arranged  facts  which  meets  us  in  the  Onderzoek,  and  in 
that  marvellous  series  of  articles  on  the  criticism  of  the  early 
narratives  contained  in  the  Tijdschrift.  He  was  possessed  by  the 
genius  of  oi'der,  and  it  is  this  which  permits  us  to  cherish  the 
hope  that  the  third  part  of  his  great  work  (in  the  second  edition) 
is  sufficiently  ready  to  be  printed.  For  this  restless  writer  was 
always  far  in  advance  of  his  printer.  Alas  !  the  tireless  brain  is 
stilled.  Suddenly  came  the  summons,  but  the  servant  was  ready. 
Pendent  opera  interrupta.  But  he  who  has  left  his  work  was  one 
who  believed  in  spiritual  immortality, 

"Held  we  fall  to  rise,  are  baffled  to  fight  better, 
Sleep  to  wake." 

T.  K.  Cheyne. 


OLD   TESTAMENT  NOTES. 

A  New  View  of  Psalm  xvi.  1-4. — May  we  permit  our 
general  view  of  the  purport  of  a  psalm  to  react  upon  our  view  of 
the  text  of  a  difficult  passage  ?  Professor  Wiideboer  is  convinced 
that  in  Psalm  xvi.  the  speaker  is  not  a  pious  individual,  but  the 
Church-nation,  in  fact,  the  "  Servant  of  Jehovah,"  of  whom  we 
read  in  the  second  part  of  Isaiah.  The  psalm  is,  on  this  as  well 
as  other  grounds,  not  Davidic,  but  Exilic,  or  post-Exilic,  and 
we  may,  in  correcting  the  text  of  the  very  obscure  second,  third, 
and  fourth  verses,  look  for  hints  to  the  "  Second  Isaiah."  Now 
it  appears  to  Professor  Wiideboer  (of  Groningen)  that  there  is 
an  allusion  in  vers.  2   and    3    to  Isaiah  Ixii.  4  (Beulah     .     .     . 


OLD   TESTAMENT  NOTES. 


Hephzi-bah),  and  with  this  clew  and  the  help  of  the  Septuagint 
he  proceeds  to  correct  the  text  with  the  following  result. 

1.  A  Davidic  jewel  \_iniclitam'].  Preserve  me,  0  God,  for -with 
thee  do  I  seek  refuge.  2.  I  say  unto  Jehovah  [Yahveh]  :  Lord, 
thou  art  the  good  of  (the  people  which  thy  pi^ophet  called),  thy 
"wedded  one"  [^n^y?].  3.  To  the  holy  ones  who  dwell  in  the 
land  (say  I  therefoi'e),  They  are  the  noble  ones  (of  whom  that 
saying  is  true),  "  In  them  is  all  my  delight."  They  increase  their 
own  pains  who  give  the  dowry  [mohar']  to  another  (god)  ;  (but)  I 
will  not  pour  out  their  libations  of  blood,  nor  take  their  name 
upon  my  lips  [Exod.  xxiii.  31]. 

The  reader  will  do  well  to  compare  the  Septuagint  and  the 
Peshittho.  Mr.  Burgess,  as  our  author  remarks,  has  already 
taken  a  hint  from  the  latter ;  he  produces  the  poor  rendering, 
"  .  .  .  My  goods  are  at  thy  disposal."  There  are  great  diffi- 
culties however  in  Professor  Wildeboer's  version.  In  ver.  2  the 
rhythm  requires  a  pause  at  nriX.  It  would  be  more  natural  to 
render,  "  I  say  unto  Jehovah  :  My  Lord  art  thou,  ray  (one  earthly) 
good  is  thy  wedded  one  (the  people  which  thy  prophet  called 
Jehovah's  Beulah,  or  'wedded  one')."  But  then,  of  course,  an 
individual  must  be  the  speaker,  and  the  psalm  must  be  divided 
(like  other  psalms)  between  the  Church-nation  and  any  pious 
Israelite.  In  ver.  3,  I  am  doubtful  about  the  excision  of  the  1  in 
'^'7'^^51,,  and  about  the  strange  genitive  to  ''1^?>?.  In  ver.  4,  I  can- 
not help  thinking  the  sense  given  to  1"inO  difficult,  in  spite  of 
Professor  Wildeboer's  reference  to  the  Arabic  mahr.  In  Hebrew 
usage,  so  far  as  we  know,  "inb  is  always  the  purchase-money 
which  the  bridegroom  gives  to  the  bride's  father.  The  theory  is 
very  ingenious,  and  shows  at  any  rate  that  the  author  is  not  satis- 
fled  with  Baethgen's  very  clever  emendation  of  ver.  3  in  accordance 
with  the  Septuagint,  illustrated  by  Isaiah  xlii.  21.  For  my  own 
part,  I  still  think  tliat  r\l2r\  .  .  .  Q^'/np'?  is  a  gloss.  (The 
above  "  new  view  "  is  set  forth  in  one  of  the  ai-ticles  which  together 
constitute  a  tribute  of  respect  to  Professor  de  Goeje  on  occasion 
of  his  professorial  jubilee,  Feesihundel  aan  Prof.  M.  J.  de  Goeje, 
etc.,  Leiden,  1891). 

The  Hebrew  Idea  of  Wisdom. — It  is  well  known 
that,  according  to  some  advanced  critics,  the  book  of  Proverbs 
bears  the  stamp  of  the  piii-e  theology  of  the  post-Exilic  age.  In 
connexion  with  this  it  Avill  be  not  unimportant  to  inquire  whether 


OLD    TESTAMENT  NOTES.  79 

the  growth  of  the  conception  of  the  heavenly  Wisdom,  found  in 
Proverbs  viii.,  may  not  have  been  facilitated  by  the  analogous  con- 
ception of  the  dsnya  hliratn  or  dsno-khart  found  in  the  Avesta  and 
in  the  (very  late)  Minokhired.  No  doubt  the  description  of  this 
heavenly  wisdom  (which  Ahura  Mazda  had  before  all  heavenly 
and  earthly  creations)  in  the  latter  book  has  been  influenced  by  a 
Hellenizing  intellectual  movement ;  Dastur  Jamasp  Asa  in  vain 
attempts  to  prove  that  Hellenism  borrowed  from  Zoroastrianism. 
But  the  fundamental  idea  is  clearly  pure  Zoroastrian  ;  it  belongs 
to  the  same  circle  of  ideas  as  the  other  personified  qualities  and 
Divine  attributes.^  When  for  instance  we  read  in  Yasna  xxii.  25, 
"  For  the  propitiation  of  the  Zarathustrian  law,  (and)  of  the 
understanding  which  is  innate  and  Mazda-made,"  we  are  not  in 
Greek,  but  in  Persian  surroundings,  and  we  hav^e  a  right  to  infer 
that  wise  men  of  Israel  who  knew  something  of  Zoroastrianism 
might  have  heard  of  the  heavenly  wisdom.  See  Oxford  Zenda- 
vesta  i.  4,  and  Darmesteter's  note ;  Shiegel,  Eravische  AUerthiimer 
ii.  34 ;  Casartelli,  Philosophy  of  the  Mazdayasnian  Religion  under 
the  Sassanians  (Bombay),  p.  41  ;  and  cf.  the  comparison  which 
I  have  ventured  to  institute  between  the  Hebrew  and  the  Zoroas- 
trian conceptions  of  the  Divine  glory  in  the  Expository  Times, 
August,  1891,  p.  252. 

Jewish  Influence  on  Persian  Beliefs. — It  is  well 
known  that  Persian  influence  upon  Judaism  increased  considerably 
in  the  first  four  Christian  centuries.  But  we  have  not  yet  found 
evidence  of  Jewish  influence  on  Persian  beliefs  or  forms  of  wor- 
ship during  the  same  period.  M.  James  Darmesteter  has  given 
much  attention  of  late  to  the  Pehlevi  texts  relative  to  Judaism, 
and  shown  that  under  the  Sassanid  kings  the  conditions  were 
altogether  favourable  to  a  reciprocity  of  religious  influences  (see 
Hevne  des  etudes  juives  xviii.  1-15,  xix.  41-56).  He  has  now 
published  a  Parsi  prayer  to  Ormazd,  c?i\\edi  Namdzi  Ormazd,  which 
is  upon  the  whole  both  beautiful  in  itself  and  i^emarkable  as 
containing  passages  which  are  certainly  derived  from  Judaism.- 

'  So  Mr.  Alger,  in  his  Critical  Histori/  of  the  Doctrine  of  a  Future  Life,  sees 
no  reason  to  believe  "  that  important  Christian  ideas  have  been  interpolated 
into  the  old  Zoroastrian  religion."  The  Dastur  referred  to  above  quotes  this 
passage  (in  the  translation  of  Casartelli)  on  his  side  ;  but  Mr.  Alger  carefully 
guards  himself  by  inserting  the  word  "  old." 

2  Une  pricrejndeo-persane.     Par  James  Darmesteter.     Paris,  1891. 


80  OLD   TESTAMENT  NOTES. 

Ver.  7  begins  thus  :  "  0  Createur,  je  te  remercie  de  ce  que  tu 
m'as  fait  iranien  et  de  la  bonne  relio-ion." 

Ver.  10  contains  these  words :  "  Merci  a  toi,  6  Createur,  de  ce 
que  tu  m'as  fait  de  la  race  des  hommes ;  .  .  .  de  ce  que  tu 
m'as  cree  libre  et  non  esclave ;  de  ce  que  tu  m'as  cree  honime 
et  nou  pas  femrae." 

These  passages  at  once  recall  three  of  the  benedictions  in  the 
Jewish  morning  prayer: 

"  Blessed  art  Thou,  0  Eternal,  our  God,  King  of  the  world, 
who  hast  not  made  me  a  heathen  (or,  originally,  who  hast  made 
me  an  Israelite). 

Blessed  art  Thou,  0  Eternal,  our  God,  King  of  the  world,  who 
hast  not  made  me  a  slave. 

Blessed  art  Thou,  0  Eternal,  our  God,  King  of  the  world,  who 
hast  not  made  me  a  woman." 

Tliese  three  Jewish  benedictions  have  a  history.  They  have 
a  different  origin  from  the  series  of  blessings  in  which  they  are 
inserted.  This  series  admittedly  comes  from  the  schools  of 
Babylonia ;  the  Babylonian  Talmud  ascribes  it  to  rabbins  of 
the  third  and  fourth  centuries  A.D.  But  the  three  inserted  bless- 
ings are  more  ancient,  and  come  from  Palestine.  After  proving 
that  the  latter  were  not  inspired  by  Zoroastrianism,  M.  Darmes- 
teter  argues  convincingly  that  the  parallel  passages  in  the  Namdzi 
Orviazd  were  borrowed  from  the  Jewish  formula?  in  the  fourth  or 
at  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century,  when  learned  Jews  were 
all-powerful  at  the  Sassanid  court.  Would  that  we  could  dis- 
cover equally  direct  evidence  as  to  the  relations  between  the 
Zoroastx'ian  and  the  Mosaic  religion,  in  the  pre-Maccabsean  period  ! 
But  we  may  be  sure  at  any  rate  that  the  Jews  must  have  looked 
with  respect  on  a  religion,  honoured  in  the  person  of  Cyrus  by 
one  of  their  greatest  prophets,  and  presenting  such  striking 
affinities  with  their  own.  Nor  is  probable  evidence  of  religious 
intercourse  between  the  Pei'siaus  and  the  Jews  altogether  wanting. 

T.  K.  Cheyxe. 


DB.  DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO   THE  OLD 
TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

Pakt  I. 

The  much  fuller  adhesion  of  Professor  Driver  to  the  still 
struggiiDg  cause  of  Old  Testament  criticism  is  an  event 
in  the  history  of  this  study.  That  many  things  indicated 
it  as  probable,  can  doubtless  now  be  observed  ;  but  until 
the  publication  in  the  Contemporary  Review  (February, 
1890)  of  a  singularly  clear  and  forcible  paper  on  the 
criticism  of  the  historical  books,  it  was  impossible  to  feel 
quite  sure  where  Dr.  Driver  stood.  Up  to  the  year  1882, 
he  was  known  through  various  learned  publications  (not- 
ably that  on  the  Hebrew  Tenses)  as  an  honest  and  keen- 
sighted  Hebrew  scholar,  but  in  matters  of  literary  and 
historical  criticism  he  had  not  as  yet  committed  himself, 
except  of  course  to  the  non-acceptance  of  any  such  plainl}'- 
unphilological  view  as  the  Solomonic  authorship  of  Ecclesi- 
astes.^  In  1882,  to  the  great  benefit  of  Hebrew  studies, 
he  succeeded  Dr.  Pusey  at  Christ  Church,  and  began  at 
once  to  improve  to  the  utmost  the  splendid  opportunities 
of  his  position  both  for  study  and  for  teaching.  He  now 
felt  it  impossible  to  confine  himself  within  purely  linguistic 
limits,  however  much  from  a  conscientious  regard  for  the 
"weak  brethren"  he  may  have  desired  to  do  so.  It  is 
true  that  in  his  first  published  critical  essay,  he  approached 
the  "  higher  criticism  "  from  the  linguistic  side  {Journal  of 
Philology,  1882,  pp.  201-236),  but  there  are  evidences  enough 
in  the  pages  of  The  Guardian  and  of  The  Expositoe  that 
he  was  quietly  and  unobtrusively  feeling  his  way  towards  a 


A'OL.  \. 


1  Ilihrcic  Tcnres,  ^  133  (cd.  2,  p.  151). 
81 


82  DB.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION-  TO 

large  and  deep  comprehension  of  the  critical  and  exegetical 
problems  of  the  Hexateuch.  Nor  must  the  old  lecture- 
lists  of  the  University  be  forgotten.  These  would  prove, 
if  proof  were  needed,  that  his  aspirations  were  high,  and 
his  range  of  teaching  wide,  and  that  the  sketch  of  his 
professorial  functions  given  in  his  excellent  inaugural  lec- 
ture was  being  justified.  To  the  delightful  obligation  of 
lecturing  on  the  Hebrew  texts,  we  owe  a  singularly  com- 
plete and  instructive  volume  on  the  Hebrew  of  Samuel 
(1890),  the  earnest  of  other  volumes  to  come.  And  that 
Dr.  Driver  did  not  shrink  from  touching  the  contents  of 
the  Old  Testament,  the  outsider  may  divine  from  a  small 
and  unostentatious  work,^  which  forms  an  admirable  popu- 
lar introduction  to  the  devout  critical  study  of  certain 
chapters  of  Genesis  and  Exodus.  In  1888  came  the  excel- 
lent though  critically  imperfect  handbook  on  Isaiah  (in 
the  "  Men  of  the  Bible "  Series),  which  very  naturally 
supersedes  my  own  handbook  published  in  1870.-  In  1891 
we  received  the  valuable  introduction  which  forms  the 
subject  of  this  notice,  and  some  time  previously  we  ought, 
I  believe,  to  have  had  before  us  the  articles  on  the  books 
of  the  Pentateuch  which  Dr.  Driver  had  contributed  to 
the  new  edition  of  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible. 

So  now  Dr.  Driver's  long  suspense  of  judgment  is  to  a 
great  extent  over.  The  mystery  is  cleared  up,  and  we 
know  very  nearly  where  he  now  stands.  If  any  outsider 
has  a  lingering  hope  or  fear  of  an  imminent  counter- 
revolution from  the  linguistic  side,  he  must  not  look  to 
Dr.  Driver  to  justify  it.  The  qualities  which  are  here  dis- 
played by  the  author  are  not  of  the  sensational  order,  as 

'  Critical  Notes  on  the  Inlernntiomd  Snndaij  School  Lessons  from  the 
Pentatench  for  1887.     (New  York  :  Charles  Scribner's  Sons,  1887.) 

-  It  is  only  just  to  myself  to  say  that  this  work  is  in  no  sense,  as  a  liostilo 
■writer  in  The  Giuirdian  states,  "  a  yonthfiil  in-oduction,"  but  was  written  at  an 
age  when  some  men  nowadays  are  professors,  and  both  was  and  is  respectfully 
referred  to  by  German  critics, 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  83 

a  brief  summary  of  them  will  show.  First,  there  is  a 
masterly  power  of  selection  and  condensation  of  material. 
Secondly,  a  minute  and  equally  masterly  attention  to  cor- 
rectness of  details.  Thirdly,  a  very  unusual  degree  of 
insight  into  critical  methods,  and  of  ability  to  apply  them. 
Fourthly,  a  truly  religious  candour  and  openness  of  mind. 
Fifthly,  a  sympathetic  interest  in  the  difficulties  of  the 
ordinary  orthodox  believer.  Willingly  do  I  mention  these 
points.     Dr.  Driver  and  I  are  both  engaged  in  a  work — 

"Too  great  foi*  hasto,  too  high  for  rivalry," 

and  we  both  agree  in  recognising  the  law  of  generosity. 
But  I  must  add  that  I  could  still  more  gladly  have  resigned 
this  privilege  to  another.  For  I  cannot  profess  to  be  satis- 
fied on  all  really  important  points  with  Dr.  Driver's  book. 
And  if  I  say  what  I  like,  I  must  also  mention  what  I — not 
indeed  dislike — but  to  a  certain  extent  regret.  But  why 
should  I  take  up  the  pen  ?  Has  not  the  book  had  praise 
and  (possibly)  dispraise  enough  already  ?  If  I  put  forward 
my  objections,  will  not  a  ripe  scholar  like  Dr.  Driver  have 
an  adequate  answer  from  his  own  point  of  view  for  most  of 
them  ?  Why  should  I  not  take  my  ease,  and  enjoy  even 
the  less  satisfactory  parts  of  the  book  as  reflexions  of  the 
individuality  of  a  friend?  And  the  answer  is.  Because  I 
fear  that  the  actual  position  of  Old  Testament  criticism 
may  not  be  sufficiently  understood  from  this  work,  and 
because  the  not  inconsiderable  priority  of  my  own  start  as 
a  critic  gives  me  a  certain  vantage-ground  and  consequently 
a  responsibility  which  Dr.  Driver  cannot  and  would  not 
dispute  with  me.  I  will  not  now  repeat  what  I  have  said 
with  an  entirely  different  object  in  the  Introduction  to  my 
Bampton  Lectures,  but  on  the  ground  of  those  facts  I  am 
bound  to  make  some  effort  to  check  the  growth  of  undesir- 
able illusions,  or,  at  any  rate,  to  contribute  something  to 
the  formation  of  clear  ideas  in  the  popular  mind. 


F4  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

I  must  here  beg  the  reader  not  to  jump  to  the  conclusion 
that  I  am  on  the  whole  opposed  to  Dr.  Driver.  As  I  have 
already  hinted,  the  points  of  agreement  between  us  are 
much  more  numerous  than  those  of  difference,  and  in 
many  respects  I  am  well  content  with  his  courage  and 
consistency.  The  debt  which  Dr.  Driver  owes  to  those 
scholars  who  worked  at  Old  Testament  criticism  before  him 
he  has  in  good  part  repaid.  He  came  to  this  subject  theo- 
logically and  critically  uncommitted,  and  the  result  is  that, 
in  the  main,  he  supports  criticism  with  the  fall  weight  of 
his  name  and  position.  There  is  only  one  objection  that 
I  have  to  make  to  the  Introduction.  It  is  however  three- 
fold :  1.  the  book  is  to  a  certain  extent  a  compromise ; 
2.  the  (partial)  compromise  offered  cannot  satisfy  those 
for  whom  it  is  intended  ;  3.  even  if  it  were  accepted,  it 
would  not  be  found  to  be  safe.  Let  us  take  the  first  point. 
My  meaning  is,  that  Dr.  Driver  is  free  in  his  criticism  up 
to  a  certain  point,  but  then  suddenly  stops  short,  and 
that  he  often  blunts  the  edge  of  his  decisions,  so  that 
the  student  cannot  judge  of  their  critical  bearings.  I  will 
endeavour  to  illustrate  this  from  the  book,  and,  in  doing 
so,  never  to  forget  the  "  plea"  which  Dr.  Driver  so  genially 
puts  in  to  be  "judged  leniently  for  what  he  has  not  said  " 
(Preface,  p.  ix.).  At  present,  to  clear  the  ground  for  future 
"  lenient  "  or  rather  friendly  criticisms,  let  me  only  remark 
that  I  am  not  myself  opposed  on  principle  to  all  "  stopping 
short,"  i.e.  to  all  compromise.  In  June  and  August,  1889, 
I  submitted  to  those  whom  it  concerned  a  plan  of  reform 
in  the  teaching  of  the  Old  Testament,  which  included  a 
large  provisional  use  of  it.^  My  earnest  appeal  was  indeed 
not  responded  to.  Even  my  friend  Dr.  Sanday  passes  it 
over  in  his  well-known  recent  work,-  and  praises  the  waiting 
attitude  of  our  more  liberal  bishops.     But  I  still  reiterate 

1  Sjc  Conicmvorary  J'wrieir,  August,  1889. 
-  The  Oracles  of  God  (1891). 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  85 

the  same  appeal  for  a  compromise,  though  I  couch  it 
differently.  It  is  not  at  all  hard  to  find  out  what  results 
of  criticism  are  most  easily  assimilated  by  thinking  laymen, 
and  most  important  for  building  up  the  religious  life.  Let 
those  results  be  put  forward,  \vith  the  more  generally  intel- 
ligible grounds  for  them,  first  of  all  for  private  study,  and 
then,  with  due  regard  to  local  circumstances,  in  public 
or  semi-public  teaching.  To  practical  compromises  I  am 
therefore  favourable,  but  this  does  not  bind  me  to  approve 
of  scientific  ones.  The  time  for  even  a  partly  apologetic 
criticism  or  exegesis  is  almost  over ;  nothing  but  the 
"  truest  truth  "  will  serve  the  purposes  of  the  best  con- 
temporary students  of  theology.  This  indeed  is  fully  re- 
cognised in  the  preface  of  the  editors  of  the  "  Library  " 
to  which  this  book  belongs,  the  object  of  which  is 
defined  as  being  "  adequately  (to)  represent  the  present 
condition  of  investigation,  and  (to)  indicate  the  way  for 
further  progress." 

I  regret  therefore  that  Dr.  Driver  did  not  leave  the  task 
of  forming  a  distinctively  Church  criticism  (of  which  even 
now  I  do  not  deny  the  value  for  a  certain  class  of  students) 
to  younger  men,^  or  to  those  excellent  persons  who,  after 
standing  aloof  for  years,  now  begin  to  patronize  criticism, 
saying,  "  Thus  far  shalt  thou  come,  but  no  farther  !  "  I 
heartily  sympathize  with  Dr.  Driver's  feelings,  but  I  think 
that  there  is  a  still  "more  excellent  way"  of  helping  the 
better  students,  viz.,  to  absorb  the  full  spirit  of  criticism 
(not  of  irreligious  criticism),  and  to  stand  beside  the  fore- 
most workers,  only  taking  care,  in  the  formulation  of 
results,  frankly  to  point  out  their  religious  bearings,  of 
which  no  one  who  has  true  faith  need  be  afraid.  I  know 
that  this  might  perhaps  have  involved  other  modifications 
of  Dr.  Driver's  plan,  but  I  cannot  help  this.     I  do  not  feel 

'  A  popular  semi-critical  book  on  the  origin  of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures 
might  be  of  great  use  for  schools  and  Bible-classes. 


8G  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION   TO 

called  upon  to  sketch  here  in  outline  the  book  that  might 
have  been,  but  I  could  not  withhold  this  remark,  especially 
as  I  am  sure  that  even  Dr.  Driver's  very  "moderate" 
textbook  will  appear  to  many  not  to  give  hints  enough 
concerning  the  religious  value  of  the  records  criticised. 
And  forcible,  judicious,  and  interesting  as  the  preface  is, 
I  do  not  feel  that  the  author  takes  sufficiently  high  ground. 
I  am  still  conscious  of  an  unsatisfied  desire  for  an  inspiring 
introductory  book  to  the  Old  Testament,  written  from  the 
combined  points  of  view  of  a  keen  critic  and  a  progressive 
evangelical  theologian. 

Next,  as  to  the  second  point.  Can  this  compromise  (or, 
partial  compromise)  satisfy  orthodox  judges  ?  It  is  true  that 
Dr.  Driver  has  one  moral  and  intellectual  quality  which 
might  be  expected  to  predispose  such  persons  specially  in 
his  favour — the  quality  of  caution.  The  words  "  modera- 
tion "  and  "  sobriety  "  have  a  charm  for  him  ;  to  be  called 
an  extreme  critic,  or  a  wild  theorist,  would  cause  him  an- 
noyance. And  this  "  characteristic  caution  "  has  not  failed 
to  impress  a  prominent  writer  in  the  most  influential 
(Anglican)  Church  paper.  The  passage  is  at  the  end  of 
the  first  part  of  a  review  of  the  Introduction,^  and  the 
writer  hazards  the  opinion  that,  on  the  most  "burning"  of 
all  questions  Dr.  Driver's  decision  contains  the  elements  of 
a  working  compromise  between  the  old  views  and  the  new. 
But  how  difficult  it  is  to  get  people  to  agree  as  to  what 
"caution"  and  "sobriety"  are!  For  if  we  turn  to  the 
obituary  notices  of  the  great  Dutch  critic  who  has  lately 
passed  away,  we  find  that  he  strikes  some  competent 
observers  as  eminently  cautious  and  sober-minded,  not 
moving  forward  till  he  has  prepared  the  way  by  care- 
ful investigation,  and  always  distinguishing  between  the 
certain  and  the  more  or  less  probable.  And  again,  it 
appears  from  the  recent  Charge  of  Bishop  EUicott  that  this 

'  Guardian,  November  25,  1891. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  87 


honoured  theologian  (who  alas  !  still  stands  where  he  stood 
in  earlier  crises)  sees  no  great  difference  between  the  critical 
views  of  Kuenen  and  Wellhausen  on  the  one  hand,  and 
those  of  Dr.  Driver  and  "the  English  Analytical  School" 
on  the  other.  If  the  former  have  "  lost  all  sense  of  pro- 
portion "  and  been  "hurried"  to  extreme  results  by  an 
"  almost  boundless  self-confidence,"  the  latter  have,  by 
their  "  over-hasty  excursions  into  the  Analytical  "  prepared 
the  way  for  "  shaken  and  unstable  minds  "  to  arrive  at  re- 
sults which  are  only  a  little  more  advanced.^  And  in  perfect 
harmony  with  Bishop  EUicott's  denial  of  the  possibility  of 
"  compromise,"  I  find  a  writer  of  less  sanguine  nature  than 
Dr.  Driver's  reviewer  warning  the  readers  of  the  Guardian 
that  the  supposed  rapprocheinent  will  not  "  form  a  bridge 
solid  enough  to  unite  the  opposite  sides  of  the  chasm  "  be- 
tw'een  the  two  schools  of  thought.^ 

This  is  in  my  opinion  a  true  saying.  Some  of  those 
to  whom  Dr.  Driver's  compromise  is  addressed  will  (like 
Bishop  EUicott)  be  kept  aloof  by  deep  theological  differ- 
ences. Others,  whose  minds  may  be  less  definitely  theo- 
logical, will  place  their  hope  in  a  critical  "  counter-revolu- 
tion "  (see  p.  82),  to  be  effected  either  by  an  induction  from 
linguistic  facts,  or  by  means  of  cuneiform  and  archseological 
discovery.  I  do  not  speak  without  cause,  as  readers  of 
popular  religious  journals  will  be  aware.  The  limits  of  Dr. 
Driver's  work  did  not  permit  him  to  refer  to  this  point ;  but 
considering  the  avidity  with  which  a  large  portion  of  the 
public  seizes  upon  assertions  backed  by  some  well-known 
name,  it  may  soon  become  necessary  for  him  and  for  others 
to  do  so.  Upon  a  very  slender  basis  of  reason  and  of  facts 
an  imposing  structure  of  revived  and  "rectified"'^  tradition- 


'  Christns  Comprohator  (1891),  pp.  29,  59.     I  cannot  help  respectfully  pro- 
testing against  the  title  of  this  work. 
'  Guardian,  December  2,  1891. 
'^  I  borrow  the  word  from  Bishop  EUicott. 


88  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

alism  may  soon  be  charmed  into  existence.  We  may  soon 
hear  again  the  confident  appeal  to  the  "  common  sense"  of 
the  "plain  Englishman" — that  invaluable  faculty  which, 
according  to  Bishop  Ellicott,  is  notably  wanting,  "if  it  he 
not  insular  prejudice  to  say  so,"  in  all  recent  German  critics 
of  the  Old  Testament.  Critical  and  historical  sense  (which 
is  really  the  perfection  of  common  sense,  trained  by  right 
methods,  and  assisted  by  a  healthy  imagination)  may  con- 
tinue to  be  treated  with  contempt,  and  Dr.  Driver's  book 
may  receive  credit,  not  for  its  substantial  merits,  but  for 
what,  by  comparison,  may  be  called  its  defects.  These  are 
real  dangers ;  nay,  rather  to  some  extent  they  are  already 
facts  which  cannot  but  hinder  the  acceptance  of  this  well- 
meant  compromise. 

And,  lastl}^  as  to  the  third  point.  Is  even  a  partial 
compromise  like  this  safe  ?  I  am  afraid  that  it  is  not. 
It  implies  that  Biblical  criticism  must  be  pared  down  for 
apologetic  reasons.  It  assumes  that  though  the  traditional 
theory  of  the  origin  and  (for  this  is,  in  part,  allusively  dealt 
with)  the  historic  value  of  the  Old  Testament  books,  has 
been  overthrown,  yet  we  must  in  our  reconstruction  keep 
as  close  to  the  old  theory  or  system  as  we  can.  This,  at 
the  present  stage  of  intehectual  development,  is  unsafe. 
Dr.  Driver's  fences  are  weak,  and  may  at  any  moment  be 
broken  down.  Nothing  but  the  most  fearless  criticism, 
combined  with  the  most  genuine  spiritual  faith  in  God,  and 
in  His  Son,  and  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  can  be  safe.  I  do  not 
of  course  judge  either  friends  or  foes  by  their  expressed 
theories.  If  it  should  be  made  decidedly  the  more  probable 
view  that  St.  John  did  not  originate  the  Fourth  Gospel  as 
it  now  stands,  I  am  sure,  in  spite  of  Dr.  Sanday's  recent 
words, ^  that  all  truly  religious  students  would  believe,  with 
heart  and  with  head,  as  strongly  as  ever  in  the  incompar- 
able nature  and  the  divine  mediatorship   of  Jesus  Christ. 

'  Contemporary  Review,  October,  1891,  p.  530. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  89 

They  would  do  so  on  the  ground  of  the  facts  which  would 
still  be  left  by  the  historical  analysis  of  the  Gospels,  and 
on  the  correspondence  between  a  simple  Christian  view  of 
those  facts  and  the  needs  of  their  own  and  of  the  Church's 
life.  And  so  I  am  sure  that  without  half  so  many  qualifica- 
tions as  Dr.  Driver  has  given,  the  great  facts  left,  not  to 
say  recovered,  by  advanced  Old  Testament  criticism  are 
quite  sufficient  to  justify  the  theory  of  Hebrews  i.  1,  which 
is,  I  doubt  not,  of  permanent  importance  for  the  thinking 
Christian. 

Before  passing  on,  let  me  crave  permission  to  make  two 
remarks,  which  may  perhaps  take  off  any  undue  sharpness 
from  previous  criticisms.  The  first  is,  that  in  criticising  the 
author,  I  am  equally  criticising  myself.  There  was  a  time 
when  I  was  simply  a  Biblical  critic,  and  was  untouched  by 
the  apologetic  interest.  Finding  that  this  course  cramped 
the  moral  energies,  I  ventured  to  superadd  the  function  of 
the  "Christian  advocate"  (of  course  only  in  the  modern 
sense  of  this  indispensable  phrase).  The  plan  to  which  I 
was  led  (for  I  do  not  doubt  that  the  most  obscure  workers 
are  led)  was  to  adapt  Old  Testament  criticism  and  exegesis 
to  the  prejudices  of  orthodox  students  by  giving  the  tradi- 
tional view,  in  its  most  refined  form,  the  benefit  of  the 
doubt,  whenever  there  was  a  sufficiently  reasonable  case  for 
doubt.  This  is  what  the  Germans  call  Vermittelung,  and  I 
think  that  as  late  as  ten  or  twelve  years  ago  Vermittelung 
was  sorely  needed.  But  now,  as  it  seems  to  me,  we  have 
got  beyond  this.  Vermittelung  has  become  a  hindrance, 
not  only  to  the  progress  of  historical  truth,  but  to  the  fuller 
apprehension  of  positive  evangelical  principles.  The  right 
course  for  those  who  would  be  in  the  van  of  progress  seems 
to  be  that  which  I  have  faintly  indicated  above,  and  too 
imperfectly  carried  out  in  my  more  recent  works.  A  per- 
fectly free  but  none  the  less  devout  criticism  is,  in  short, 
the  best  ally,  both  of  spiritual  religion  and  of  a  sound 
apologetic  theology. 


90  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 


The  second  is,  that  in   Dr.  Driver's   case  the  somewhat 
excessive  caution  of  his  critical  work  can  be  accounted  for, 
not  merely  by  a  conscientious  regard  to  the  supposed  in- 
terests of  the  Church,  but  by  his  peculiar  temperament  and 
past  history.      In   the   variety  of  temperaments   God   has 
appointed   that    the    specially    cautious  one   shall  not    be 
wanting;  and  this,  like  all  His  works,  is  no  doubt  "very 
good."      Caution,  like  other  useful  qualities,  needs  to  be 
sometimes    represented    in    an    intensified    degree.      And 
Hebrew    grammar   in   England    urgently   needed   a   more 
cautious,  more  exact  treatment.     This  Dr.  Driver  felt  at 
the  outset  of  his  course,  and  all  recent  Hebrew  students 
owe  him  a  debt  of  gratitude.     But  what  was  the  natural 
consequence  of  his  long  devotion  to  the  more  exact,  more 
philological  study  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures '?     This — that 
when   he   deliberately  enlarged   his  circle  of  interests,  he 
could  not  see  his  way  as  far  nor  as  clearly  as  those  critics 
of  wider  range,  who  had  entered  on  their  career  at  an  earlier 
period.     Indeed,  even  apart  from  the  habits  of  a  pure  philo- 
logist, so  long  a  suspension  of  judgment  on  critical  points 
must  have  reacted  somewhat  upon  Dr.  Driver's  mind,  and 
made  it  at  first  very  difficult  for  him   to  form  decisions. 
These    have    been    real    hindrances,    and    yet    to    what    a 
considerable  extent  he  has  overcome  them  !     How  much 
advanced  criticism  has  this  conscientious  churchman — this 
cautious  Hebraist — been  able  to  absorb?     And   how  cer- 
tainly therefore  he  has  contributed   to   that  readjustment 
of   theology  to  the  general  intellectual    progress  which  is 
becoming  more  and  more  urgent  ! 

I  now  proceed  to  such  a  survey  of  the  contents  of  the 
work  as  my  limits  render  possible.  The  preface  states,  in 
lucid  and  dignified  language,  the  author's  critical  and  reli- 
gious point  of  view,  which  is  that  of  all  modern-minded 
and  devout  Old  Testament  critics.  Then  follows  an  intro- 
duction  on    the  Old    Testament    Canon    according   to  the 


THE   OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  91 

Jews,    which   gives  multum   in  parvo,    and    is   thoroughly 
sound.     It  was  desirable  to  prefix  this  because  of  a  current 
assertion  that  critical  views  are  in  conflict  with  trustworthy 
Jewish  traditions.^     So  now  the  student  is  free,  both  in  a 
religious  and  in  a  historical  respect,  to  consider   the  pro- 
posed solutions  of  the  literary  problems  of  the   Old  Testa- 
ment, and   the  accompanying  views  respecting  the  objects 
of  the  several  records.     The  books  are  treated  in  the  order 
of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  beginning  with  those  of  the  Hexa- 
teuch,  and  ending  with  Ezra,   Nehemiah,  and  Chronicles. 
To  the  Hexateuch   150  pages  are  devoted — a  perfectly  fair 
allotment,  considering  the  great  importance  of   these  six 
books.     The  plan  adopted  here,  and  throughout  the  com- 
posite  narrative   books,    appears   to    be   this  :    after   some 
preliminary  remarks,  the  particular  book  is  broken  up  into 
sections  and  analysed,  with  a  view  to  ascertain  the  docu- 
ments  or   sources   which    the   later   compiler   or  redactor 
welded  together  into  a  whole.-    The  grounds  of  the  analysis 
are  given  in  small  print,  without  which  judicious  arrange- 
ment the  book  would  have  outrun  its  limits.     A  somewhat 
different    plan    is    necessary   for   Deuteronomy,    which    is 
treated  more  continuously,  special  care  being  taken  to  ex- 
hibit the  relation  of  the  laws  to  the  other  codes,  and  to 
trace  the  dependence  of  the  two  historical  retrospects  in 
chapters  i.,  iii.,  and  ix.-x.  on  the  earlier  narrative  of  "  JE." 
Then  follows  a  very  important  section  on  the  character  and 
probable  date  of  the   "prophetical,"   and  the    "priestly" 
narratives  respectively,  followed   by  a  compact  synopsis  of 
the   priestly    code.     As  regards  the  analysis  of  the  docu- 
ments, it  would  be  diiSicult,  from  a  teacher's  point  of  view, 

'  I  have  no  intention  of  criticising  Dr.  Driver's  very  useful  lists  of  books. 
It  is  however  a  strange  accident  that  he  only  mentions  ^Yilcleboer■s  recent 
work  on  the  Canon,  and  not  Buhl's.  Each  of  these  books,  of  course,  has  high 
merits  of  its  own. 

2  Note  especially  the  care  bestowed  on  the  composite  narrative  of  Korah, 
Dathan,  and  Abiram  in  Num.  xvi.-xvii.  (p.  59). 


92  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 


to  say  too  iniicb  in  praise  of  the  author's  presentatiou. 
Multum  in  parvo  is  again  one's  inevitable  comment.  The 
space  has  been  utiHzed  to  the  utmost,  and  the  student,  who 
will  be  content  to  work  hard,  will  find  no  lack  of  lucidity. 
No  one  can  deny  that  the  individuality  of  the  writer,  which 
is  in  this  part  very  strongly  marked,  fits  him  in  a  special 
degree  to  be  the  interpreter  of  the  analysts  to  young 
students.  One  only  asks  that  the  cautious  reserve,  which 
is  here  not  out  of  place,  may  not  be  contrasted  by  that 
untrained  "  common  sense,"  which  is  so  swift  to  speak, 
and  so  slow  to  hear,  with  the  bolder  but  fundamentally 
not  less  cautious  procedure  of  other  English  or  American 
analysts.  Such  remarks  will,  I  am  sure,  be  disapproved  of 
by  the  author  himself,  who  willingly  refers  to  less  reserved 
critics.  And  Dr.  Driver's  fellow-workers  will,  on  their  side, 
have  nothing  but  respect  for  his  helpful  contributions.  It 
should  be  added  that  whatever  is  vitally  important  is 
fully  granted  by  Dr.  Driver.  The  documents  J,  E,  D,  and 
P,  are  all  recognised ;  and  if  the  author  more  frequently 
than  some  critics  admits  a  difficulty  in  distinguishing 
between  J  and  E,  yet  this  is  but  a  formal  difference. 
Moreover,  no  one  doubts  that  J  and  E  were  combined 
together  by  an  editor  or  (Kuenen)  "  harmonist,"  so  that  we 
have  three  main  records  in  the  Hexateuch — the  prophetical 
(JE),  the  Deuteronomic  (D),  and  the  priestly  (P).  On  the 
limits  of  these  three  records  critics  of  different  schools  are 
practically  agreed. 

And  now,  will  the  author  forgive  me  if  I  say  that  neither 
here  nor  in  the  rest  of  the  Hexateuch  portion  does  he, 
strictly  speaking,  verify  the  description  of  the  object  of  the 
"Library"  given  by  the  general  editors'?  The  book,  as  it 
seems  to  me,  does  not,  upon  the  whole,  so  much  "  represent 
the  present  condition  of  investigation,  and  indicate  the 
way  for  future  progress  "  as  exhibit  the  present  position  of 
a  very  clear-headed  but  slowly  moving  scholar,  who  stands 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  93 


a  little  aside  from  the  common  pathway  of  critics'?  For 
the  majority  of  English  students  this  may  conceivably  be  a 
boon;  but  the  fact  (if  it  be  a  fact)  ought  to  be  borne  in 
mind,  otherwise  the  friends  and  the  foes  of  the  literary 
study  of  the  Old  Testament  will  alike  be  the  victims  of  an 
illusion.  There  is  a  number  of  points  of  considerable 
importance  for  the  better  class  of  students  on  which  the 
author  gives  no  light,  though  I  would  not  impute  this 
merely  to  his  natural  caution,  but  also  to  the  comparative 
scantiness  of  his  space.  For  instance,  besides  J,  E,  D,  P, 
and,  within  P,  H  {i.e.  the  "Law  of  Holiness,"  Lev.  xvii.- 
xxvi.),  I  find  now  and  then  recognised  both  D~  and  P-,  but 
not  J^  and  E^,  though  it  is  impossible  to  get  on  long  with- 
out these  symbols,  which  correspond  to  facts.  Nor  do  I 
find  any  mention  of  the  source  and  date  of  Genesis  xiv., 
upon  which  so  many  contradictory  statements  have  been 
propounded.  Nor  is  there  any  constructive  sketch  of  the 
growth  of  our  present  Plexateuch,  though  this  would  seem 
necessary  to  give  coherence  to  the  ideas  of  the  student.  It 
would  however  be  ungracious  to  dwell  further  on  this. 
On  the  dates  of  the  documents  J  and  E,  Dr.  Driver  is 
unfortunately  somewhat  indefinite.  It  is  surprising  to 
learn  that  "it  must  remain  an  open  question  whether  both 
(J  and  E)  may  not  in  reality  be  earlier"  {i.e.  earlier  than 
"the  early  centuries  of  the  monarchy").  I  can  of  course 
understand  that,  had  the  author  been  able  to  give  a  keener 
analysis  of  the  documents,  he  would  have  favoured  us  with 
a  fuller  consideration  of  their  period.  But  I  do  earnestly 
hope  that  he  is  not  meditating  a  step  backwards  in  deference 
to  hostile  archaeologists.^  One  more  startling  phenomenon 
I  seem  bound  to  mention.     On  p.  27  we  are  told  that — ■ 

1  I  am  in  sympathy  with  Prof.  Sayce's  statements  in  Ibe  Contemporary 
lieviciv,  September,  1890,  but  disagree  widely  with  his  papers  ou  Genesis  xiv.  in 
the  Newbury  House  Magazine  and  elsewhere,  and  especially  with  his  (uncon- 
sciously) misleading  article  in  the  E.xpository  Times,  December,  1891.  He  is 
not  however  so  far  astray  on  the  subject  of  the  "higher  criticism"  as  M. 


94  Dli.  DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

"  Probaljly  tlio  greater  jiart  of  the  Song  is  Mosaic,  and  the  modifica- 
tion, or  expansion,  is  limited  to  the  closing  versos  ;  for  the  general 
style  is  antique,  and  the  triumphant  tone  Avliich  ])ervades  it  is  jnst 
such  as  might  naturally  have  been  inspired  by  the  event  which  it 
celebrates." 

I  greatly  regret  this.  To  fall  behind  Ewald,  Dillmann, 
and  even  Delitzsch  and  Kittel,^  is  a  misfortune  which  I 
can  only  account  for  on  the  theory  of  compromise,  I  hesi- 
tate to  contemplate  the  consequences  which  might  possibly 
follow  from  the  acceptance  of  this  view. 

This  naturally  brings  me  to  the  pages  on  the  authorship 
and  date  of  Deuteronomy.  There  is  here  very  much  which 
commands  one's  entire  approbation,  especially  with  an  eye 
to  English  readers.  Candour  is  conspicuous  throughout, 
and  whenever  one  differs  from  the  author,  it  is  reluctantly 
and  with  entire  respect.     The  section  begins  thus  : — 

"  Even  though  it  were  clear  that  the  first  four  books  of 
the  Pentateuch  were  written  by  Moses,  it  would  be  difficult 
to  sustain  the  Mosaic  authorship  of  Deuteronomy.  For,  to 
say  nothing  of  the  remarkable  difference  of  style,  Deuter- 
onomy conflicts  with  the  legislation  of  Exodus-Numbers 
in  a  manner  that  would  not  be  credible  were  the  legislator 
in  both  one  and  the  same"  (p.  77).  And  in  particular 
",when  the  laws  of  Deuteronomy  are  compared  with  those 
of  P  such  a  supposition  becomes  impossible.  For  in 
Deuteronomy  language  is  used  implying  that  fundamental 
institutions  of  P  are  unknown  to  the  author.''  ^     Sufficient 

Hal6vy  (see  the  latter's  review  of  Kautzsch  and  Socin's  Genesis,  Revue  critique, 
September  14-21,  1891).  But  I  will  not  on  these  accounts  change  my  own 
attitude  of  disciplesliip  towards  Assyriologists,  but  will  continue  to  compare 
their  statements  and  use  them  with  due  discrimination.  The  fully  critical  use 
of  the  precious  Tell-el-Amarna  tablets  is,  of  course,  still  in  the  future.  Let  not 
English  Assyriological  students  imagine  that  tlie  "higher  critics"'  have  no 
room  for  fresh  facts  ! 

1  See,  besides  the  works  cited  by  Dr.  Driver,  Lagarde,  Scmitica,  i.  28  ;  Kuenen, 
Hexatettch,  p.  23'J  ;  Wellhauseu,  Frolerjomena,  p.  37'1  [352] ;  Cornill,  Einleitnng, 
pp.  C8,  69 ;  Kittel,  Gescliichte,  i.  83,  187  ;  and  my  Bampton  Lectures  (which 
give  my  own  view  since  1881),  i^p.  31,  177. 

-  Here,  as  always  in  quotations,  the  italics  are  those  of  the  author. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LFTERATURE.  95 

specimens  of  the  evidence  for  these  statements  are  given 
with  a  reference  for  further  particulars  to  the  article 
"Deuteronomy"  in  the  belated  new  edition  of  Smith's 
Dictionary.  I  look  forward  with  eagerness  to  the  appear- 
ance of  this  article,  and  meantime  venture  to  state  how 
I  have  been  struck  by  the  author's  treatment  of  the 
question  of  date.  Whatever  I  say  is  to  be  taken  with 
all  the  qualifications  arising  from  my  high  opinion  of  the 
author,  and  demanded  by  a  fair  consideration  of  his  narrow 
limits. 

In  the  first  place,  then,  I  think  that  on  one  important 
point  Dr.  Driver  does  not  quite  accurately  state  the  prevail- 
ing tendency  of  recent  investigations.  No  one  would  gather 
from  p.  82,  note  2,  that  criticism  is  more  inclined  to  place 
the  composition  of  the  original  Book  in  the  reign  of  Josiah 
than  in  that  of  Manasseh.  Such,  however,  is  the  case. 
Delitzsch  himself  says  regretfully,  "  It  will  scarcely  be 
possible  to  eradicate  the  ruling  critical  opinion  that 
Deuteronomy  was  composed  in  the  time  of  Jeremiah."  ^ 

If  this  view  of  the  tendency  of  criticism  is  correct,  it 
would  have  been  helpful  to  state  the  grounds  on  which  the 
reign  of  Josiah  has  been  preferred.  May  I  venture  to  put 
them  together  briefly  thus?  Let  the  student  read  once 
more,  with  a  fresh  mind,  the  famous  narrative  in  2  Kin-^s 
xxii.  He  can  hardly  fail  to  receive  the  impression  that  the 
only  person  who  is  vehemently  moved  by  the  perusal  of  "the 
law-book  "  (more  strictly,  "  the  book  of  tOrah  ")  is  the  king. 
How  is  this  to  be  accounted  for?  How  is  it  that  Hilkiah, 
Shaphan,  and  Huldah  display  such  imperturbability  ?  Most 
easily  by  the  supposition  that  these  three  persons  (to  whom 
we  must  add  Ahikam,  Achbor,  and  Asaiah)  had  agreed  to- 
gether, unknown  to  the  king,  on  their  course  of  action.  It 
may  be  thought  strange  that  all  these,  except  Hilkiah  and 

'  Preface  by  Delitzsch  to  Curtiss's  LerittcaZ  Pr/es<s-  (1877),  p.  x.  The  Litest 
introduction  (that  of  Cornill)  verifies  this  prognostication. 


96  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

Huldab,  were  courtiers.  But  they  were  also  (as  we  partly 
know,  partly  infer)  friends  of  the  prophet  Jeremiah,  and 
therefore  no  mere  courtiers.  Huldah,  moreover,  though  the 
wife  of  a  courtier,  was  herself  a  prophetess.  We  must  sup- 
pose, then,  in  order  to  realize  the  circumstances  at  once 
historically  and  devoutly,  that  to  the  priests  and  prophets 
who  loved  spiritual  religion  God  had  revealed  that  now  was 
the  time  to  take  a  bold  step  forward,  and  accomplish  the 
work  which  the  noblest  servants  of  Jehovah  had  so  long 
desired.  The  "pen  of  the  scribes"  (Jer.  viii.  8)  had  been 
recently  consecrated  to  this  purpose  by  the  writing  down  of 
the  kernel  of  what  we  now  call  Deuteronomy.  This  docu- 
ment consisted  of  ancient  laws  adapted  to  present  purposes, 
and  completed  by  the  addition  of  recent  or  even  perfectly 
new  ones,  framed  in  the  spirit  of  Moses  and  under  the 
sacred  authority  of  priests  and  prophets,  together  with  ear- 
nest exhortations  and  threatenings.  It  had  apparently 
been  placed  in  a  repository  beside  the  ark  (comp.  Deut. 
xxxi.  9,  26),^  and  there  (if  we  may  so  interpret  the  words 
"in  the  house  of  Jehovah")  Hilkiah  professed  to  Shaphan 
"  the  secretary"  to  have  "found"  it.  One  of  those  seem- 
ing "chances"  which  mark  the  interposing  hand  of  God 
favoured  the  project  of  Hilkiah.  Kepairs  on  a  large  scale 
had  been  undertaken  in  the  temple,  and  with  his  mind  set 
on  the  restoration  of  the  material  "  house  of  God,"  Josiah 
was  all  the  more  hkely  to  be  interested  in  the  re-edification 
of  His  spiritual  house.  So  Shaphan  reported  the  "  finding," 
and  read  the  book  in  the  ears  of  the  king.     The  king  recog- 

1  Deuteronomy  xxxi.  9  belongs  to  the  main  body  of  Deuteronomy,  whereas 
ver.  26  (as  a  part  of  vv.  2i-30)  belongs  to  the  editor.  According  to  Dilhiiann, 
however,  it.  24-20a  (down  to  "Jehovah  your  God")  originally  stood  after 
vv.  9-13,  and  belong  to  Deuteronomy  proper.  But  in  any  case  it  is  certain  that 
the  editor  riijhthj  interpreted  the  "  deUvering  "  of  the  Torah  to  the  "  Levitical 
priests,"  when  he  made  Moses  say,  "  Take  this  law-book,  and  put  it  beside  the 
ark."  For  of  course  the  persons  addressed  were  to  carry  both  the  ark  and  the 
"  bag"  or  "  box"  {nrgdz,  see  1  Sam.  vi.  8,  11,  lo)  which  contained  the  most 
sacred  objects  of  religion. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  97 

nised  the  voice  of  Moses  ;  this  was  not  one  of  those  law- 
books which  Jeremiah  ascribed  to  "  the  lying  pen  of 
scribes."  The  result  is  matter  of  history  to  all  at  any  rate 
but  the  followers  of  M.  Maurice  Vernes. 

It  may  doubtless  be  urged  against  this  view  of  the  circum- 
stances that  we  have  enlisted  the  imagination  in  the  service 
of  history.  But  why  should  we  not  do  so?  Of  course,  we 
would  very  gladly  dispense  with  this  usefid  but  dangerous 
ally,  but  is  there  a  single  historical  critic,  a  single  critical 
historian,  who  is  not  often  obliged  to  invite  its  help  ?  Cer- 
tainly in  the  case  of  2  Kings  xxii.,  which  is  an  extract  from 
a  larger  and  fuller  document,  it  is  impossible  not  to  en- 
deavour to  fill  up  lacuncc  with  the  help  of  the  imagination. 
The  alternative  view — that  the  "law-book  "  was  written  in 
the  reign  of  Manasseh — is  not  one  which  commends  itself 
to  the  historic  sense.  Even  supposing  that  some  ardent 
spirit  conceived  the  idea  of  a  reformation  by  means  of  a 
"law-book,"  yet  there  is  a  gulf  between  such  an  idea  and 
its  successful  accomplishment.  No  prophecy  pointed  to  the 
advent  of  a  reforming  king  (1  Kings  xiii.,  as  consistent 
critics  agree,  is  of  very  late  origin)  ;  we  cannot  therefore 
appeal  to  the  analogy  of  Ezekiel's  ideal  legislation.  The 
hopeful  and  practical  spirit  which  pervades  the  Book  is 
inconsistent  with  a  time  of  reaction,  when  it  seemed  to  a 
prophet  that  the  "good  man"  had  "perished  out  of  the 
earth,"  and  that  there  was  "none  upright  among  men" 
(Mic.  vii.  2).  I. admit  that  the  prophecy  from  which  I  have 
just  quoted  (Mic.  vi.  1-vii.  6),  and  which  was  probably 
written  under  Manasseh,  reminds  us  somev/hat,  at  the  out- 
set, of  Deuteronomy,  but  the  gloomy  and  indignant  tone 
which  predominates  in  it  is  entirely  alien  to  the  threat  "  law- 
book." The  assertion  that  the  date  of  Deuteronomy  must 
be  pushed  up  a  little  higher  to  allow  time  for  literary  style 
to  sink  to  the  level  of  Jeremiah  is  a  doubtful  one.  Cer- 
tainly Jeremiah's  style   is  less  pure  than  that  of  Deuter- 

voL.  V.  y 


98  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

onomy  (as  Kleinert  has  well  shown).  But  who  would  main- 
tain that  in  all  the  different  literary  circles  of  Jerusalem  at 
the  same  period  an  equally  pure  style  was  in  vogue?  Pro- 
verbs i.-ix.  is  placed  by  critics,  with  whom  Dr.  Driver  (p. 
382)  seems  inclined  to  agree,  in  the  reign  of  Josiah,  and 
here  at  least  we  have  an  elevated,  oratorical  diction,  with 
very  little  Aramaism.  Jeremiah  himself  was  too  emotional 
to  be  either  a  purist  or  an  artist.  What  is  the  most  obvious 
conclusion  from  all  these  facts  and  indications  ?  Surely 
this — that  while  the  heathenish  reaction  under  Manasseh, 
by  knitting  the  faithful  together  and  forcing  them  to  medi- 
tate on  their  principles  and  on  the  means  of  applying  these 
to  practice,  created  some  of  the  conditions  under  which 
alone  "  Deuteronomy  "  could  arise,  it  is  not  the  period  in 
which  the  Book  [i.e.,  its  kernel)  can  have  been  composed. 
Instead  of  saying,  "  not  later  than  the  reign  of  Manasseh" 
(p.  82),  it  would  have  been  truer  to  the  actual  state  of 
critical  study  to  say  (against  M.  Vernes),  "by  no  possi- 
bility later  than  the  eighteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Josiah." 
Indeed,  the  sole  advantage  of  Dr.  Driver's  present  theory 
is  that  it  will  enable  popular  writers  to  defend  Hilkiah  the 
more  easily  from  the  charge  (which  conservative  scholars 
sometimes  imagine  to  be  involved  in  the  other  theory)  of 
complicity  in  a  "  forgery."  But  may  it  not  be  questioned 
whether  even  for  popular  writers  it  is  not  best  to  approach 
as  near  as  they  can  to  the  truth?  The  test  of  a  forgery 
suggested  by  Mr.  Gore,  vi/.  to  find  out  whether  the  writer 
of  a  particular  book  could  have  afl'orded  to  disclose  the 
method  and  circumstances  of  his  production,  can  be  suc- 
cessfully stood  by  the  writer  of  Deuteronomy.  Hilkiah,  as 
representing  this  writer,'  could  well  have  afforded  to  make 


'  Hilkiah  may  possibly  (in  spite  of  Deut.  xviii.  (3-8)  Lave  had  to  do  with  the 
composition  of  the  Book.  He  was  certainly  concerned  in  its  publication,  and, 
as  I'audissin  remark?,  was  probably  above  the  narrow  classfeehngs  of  Lis 
corporation. 


THE  OLD    TESTAMENT  LFTERATURE.  99 

such  a  disclosure  to  literary  students  familiar  with  the 
modes  of  thought  of  priestly  and  prophetic  writers.  But 
was  Josiah  such  a  student,  and  even  if  he  were,  was  this  a 
time  for  any  such  minute  explanation  ?  Practical  wisdom 
required  that  the  account  given  to  Josiah  should  be  the 
same  which  would  have  to  be  given  to  the  people  at  large. 
The  Book  was  "  the  tdrCili  of  Moses,"  and  the  basis  of  the 
legal  portion  of  it  (viz.  the  "Book  of  the  Covenant")  had 
no  doubt  been  kept  in  the  temple  archives.  What,  pray, 
could  be  said  of  it,  even  by  a  religious  statesman,  but  that 
it  had  been  "  found  in  the  house  of  Jehovah?  "  If  any  one 
calls  this  a  "falsehood,"  must  he  not  at  least  admit  that  it 
is  defensible  on  the  same  principle  by  which  Plato  defends 
certain  select  legendary  tales,  viz.  that  such  falsehood  is 
"the  closest  attainable  copy  of  the  truth?"  ^  Such  con- 
duct as  that  of  Hilkiah  is,  I  maintain,  fully  worthy  of  an 
inspired  teacher  and  statesman.  It  is  also  not  without  a 
distant  resemblance  to  the  course  of  Divine  Providence,  so 
far  as  this  can  be  scanned  by  our  weak  faculties.  Indeed, 
if  we  reject  the  theory  of  "  needful  illusion,"  we  are  thrown 
upon  a  sea  of  perplexity.  Was  there  no  book  on  Jeremiah 
bringing  home  the  need  of  this  theory  to  the  Christian 
conscience,  to  which  Dr.  Driver  could  have  referred  ? 

But  no  doubt  the  student  will  here  ask,  How  can  the 
kernel  of  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy  be  justly  described  as 
the  "  tOrah  of  Moses  "  ?  Dr.  Driver  devotes  what  space  he 
can  afford  to  this  most  important  question  (see  pp.  88-85). 
He  begins  by  drawing  the  distinction  (on  which  great  stress 
is  also  laid  by  Delitzsch)  that — 

"  Though  it  may  seem  paradoxical  to  say  so,  Deuteronomy  does  not 
dalm  to  he  loritten  hij  Moses.  AVherever  the  author  speaks  himself, 
ho  purposes  to  give  a  descriptiou  in  tlie  third  ijersoii  of  -what  Moses  did 
or  said.  The  true  "  author  "  of  Deuteronomy  is  thus  the  writer  who 
iiitroducee  Moses  i)i  the  third  iierson  ;  aud  the  discourses  which  he  is 

*  The  rwjHihUc  of  riatOt  3S2. 


100  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

represented  as  having  spoken  fall  in  consequence  into  the  same 
category  as  the  speeches  in  the  historical  books,  some  of  which  largely, 
and  others  entirely,  are  the  composition  of  the  compilers,  and  are 
placed  l)y  them  in  the  mouths  of  historical  characters.  .  .  .  An 
author,  therefore,  in'framing  discourses  appropriate  to  Moses'  situation, 
especially  if  (as  is  probable)  the  elements  were  provided  for  him  by 
tradition,  could  be  doing  l^othing  inconsistent  with  the  literary  usages 
of  his  ago  and  ])coplc." 

This  hardly  goes  far  towards  meeting  the  difficulties  of 
the  student.  In  a  footnote  (p.  84)  there  is  a  list  of  passages 
of  Deuteronomy  describing  in  the  third  person  what  Moses 
did  or  said,  which  closes  with  Deuteronomy  xxxi.  1-30.  I 
do  not  forget  the  demands  on  Dr.  Driver's  space,  but  in  this 
closing  passage  there  occur  two  statements,  "  And  Moses 
wrote  this  torah  "  (ver.  9),  and  "  When  Moses  had  made  an 
end  of  writing  the  words  of  this  torcih  in  a  book,  until  they 
were  finished  "  (ver.  24),  which  demanded  special  consider- 
ation. Let  us  listen  to  the  candid  and  devout  Delitzsch. 
"If  the  statement,  'And  Moses  wrote,'  were  meant  to  be 
valid  for  the  whole  of  Deuteronomy  as  it  stands,  Deutero- 
nomy would  be  a  pseudepigraphon  "  {Genesis,  p.  23).  In  the 
sequel  Delitzsch  communicates  his  own  explanation  of  the 
difficulty.  Now  should  not  Dr.  Driver  have  given  two  or 
three  lines  to  a  mention  of  the  difficulty,  and  a  particularly 
full  reference  to  the  sentences  in  Delitzsch's  Genesis,  which 
contain  that  scholar's  solution,  if  he  was  not  prepared  to 
give  one  of  his  own  ?  AVhat  Dr.  Driver  tells  us  in  the  text 
is,  that  ancient  historians  (including  those  of  Israel)  habi- 
tually claimed  the  liberty  of  composing  speeches  for  the 
personages  of  their  narratives.  But  where,  it  may  be  re- 
plied, is  there  any  instance  of  this  liberty  being  used  on 
such  a  large  scale  as  in  the  discourses  of  Deuteronomy? 
If  indeed  Ecclesiastes  had  been  introduced  by  the  words, 
"  And  Solomon  said,"  and  inserted  in  the  Book  of  Kings, 
an  Old  Testament  parallel  would  not  be  wanting.  But 
Ecclesiastes  bears  no  such  heading,   and  was  presumably 


THE   OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  101 

designed  by  the  unknown  writer  for  the  narrow  circle  of 
his  friends  or  disciples.  The  license  appealed  to  by  Dr. 
Driver  will  hardly  bear  the  weight  which  he  puts  upon  it. 
Josiah  certainly  did  not  conceive  that  it  was  used  in  the 
composition  of  the  Book,  which  he  received  with  alarm  as 
the  neglected  law-book  written  of  old  by  Moses.  As  for 
the  statement  that  the  elements  of  the  discourses  in  Deu- 
teronomy were  provided  for  the  writer  by  tradition,  if  it 
means  that  the  writer  reproduces  the  substance  of  what 
Moses  really  said,  somewhat  as  the  writer  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel  is  held  to  reproduce  sayings  or  ideas  of  the  Lord 
Jesus,  I  should  think  this,  historically,  a  very  difficult 
position.  This  does  indeed  appear  to  have  been  the  belief 
of  Delitzsch,  but  the  principles  which  underlie  it  are  not 
those  which  Dr.  Driver  would,  as  I  think,  deliberately  desire 
to  promote. 

Dr.  Driver's  second  argument  in  justification  of  the 
writer  of  Deuteronomy  relates  to  the  legislative  portion 
of  the  Book.     He  says  : — 

"  It  is  an  altogetlier  false  view  of  the  laws  in  Dentevouomy  to  treat 
tliem  as  the  author's  "  mventions."  Many  are  repeated  from  the  Book 
of  the  Covenant ;  the  existence  of  others  is  independently  attested  by  the 
"  Law  of  Holiness  "  :  others,  upon  intrinsic  grounds,  are  clearly  ancient. 
.  .  .  The  new  element  in  Deuteronomy  is  thus  not  the  laws,  but 
their  parenetic  setting.  Deutei-onomy  may  be  described  as  the  pro- 
])hetic  re-foi'mulation  and  adaptation  to  new  needs  of  an  older 
legislation." 

Dr.  Driver  does  almost  too  much  honour  to  a  view  which 
is  only  w^orthy  of  some  ill-instructed  secularist  lecturer. 
The  statement  that  "the  laws  in  Deuteronomy"  are  "the 
author's  inventions,"  is,  of  course,  utterly  erroneous.  But 
Dr.  Driver's  statement  of  his  own  opinion  may  possibly 
bear  amendment.  He  at  any  rate  appears  to  identify  him- 
self with  the  view  of  Kleinert  that  Deuteronomy  consists  of 
"  old   statutes  worked  over  and    adapted   to  later  circum- 


102  DB.   DniVER\S  JNTEODUCTION  TO 

stances,"  ^  and  as  an  instance  of  a  law  which  has  an  ancient 
kernel,  he  proceeds  to  adduce  the  so-called  "  law  of  the 
kingdom"  (Deut.  xvii,  14-20).  But  the  former  view  seems 
to  have  been  refuted  by  Kuenen,  and  on  the  latter  I  may 
appeal  to  Dillmann's  judgment  that  "  the  law  is  new  and 
purely  Deiiteronomic."  It  seems  to  me  even  possible  that 
Kleinert  and  Stade  may  be  right  in  regarding  this  law  as  a 
later  Deuteronomistic  insertion.  Dr.  Driver  refers  next  to 
the  "law  of  the  central  sanctuary  "  (Deut.  xii.  5,  etc.).  He 
states  distinctly  that  it  "  appears,  in  its  exclusiveness,  to  be 
of  comparatively^  modern  origin,"  but  seems  to  weaken 
the  force  of  this  remark  by  saying  that  "it  only  accentuated 
the  old  pre-eminence  [of  the  sanctuary  where  the  ark  for 
the  time  was  placed]  in  the  interests  of  a  principle  which 
is  often  insisted  on  in  JE,  viz.  the  separation  of  Israel 
from  heathen  influences."  Surely  the  important  thing  to 
know  is  that  the  law  itself  is  not  old  but  new,  and  that  even 
Isaiah  does  not  appear  to  have  conceived  the  idea  of  a  single 
sanctuary.  "The  one  and  essential  point,"  says  Dr.  G. 
Vos,  "  which  we  wish  the  higher  criticism  to  establish,  is 
this,  that  the  (Deuteronomic)  Code  does  not  fit  into  the 
historical  situation,  by  which,  according  to  its  own  testi- 
mony, it  was  called  forth.""  Dr.  Driver  should,  I  think, 
have  had  some  regard  to  this,  even  though  he  was  not 
directly  speaking  of  the  date  of  the  law-book.  And  in  order 
more  fully  to  represent  the  strictly  critical  point  of  view,  he 
should  (if  he  will  excuse  me  for  seeming  to  dictate  to  him) 
have  mentioned  other  laws  besides  that  of  the  central 
sanctuary,  which,  even  if  more  or  less  developments  of 
ancient  principles,  are  held  by  consistent  critics  to  be  of 
modern  origin.'^ 

^  Das  Deiiteronnmium  nnd  der  Denteronomiker,  p.  132. 

-  I  understand  the  qualification.  But  in  view  of  the  want  of  any  confirming 
evidence  from  Isaiah,  one  may,  with  Stade,  doubt  whether  Hezetiah  did  indeed 
formally  and  absolutely  abolish  all  the  local  sanctuaries  throughout  his  kingdom, 
as  2  Kings  xviii.  4  appears  to  state. 

"  The  Mosaic  Origin  of  the  Pentateuchal  Codes  (1886),  p.  90. 
Cf.  Dillmann,  K2nn.-Dent.-J0s.,  p.  604. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  103 


Upon  the  whole  I  desiderate  a  larger  theory  to  account 
for,  and  therefore  to  justify,  the  statements  in  Deuteronomy, 
"And  Moses  said,"  "And  Moses  wrote."  May  we  perhaps 
put  the  whole  matter  thus?  The  Book  is  at  once  legal, 
prophetic  and  historical.  Under  ea^h  of  these  aspects  a 
fully  instructed  Israelite  might  naturally  call  it  "Mosaic." 
In  so  far  as  it  was  legal,  it  could,  be  said  that  the  author 
belonged  to  the  "  Mosaic,"  or,  as  w'e  may  describe  it 
(in  opposition  to  certain  "  lying  pens,"  Jer.  viii.  8),  the 
"  orthodox"  school  of  legalists.  Its  priestly  author  claimed, 
virtually  at  any  rate,  the  name  of  Moses  (just  as  the  school 
of  the  prophet-reformer  Zarathustra,  not  only  virtually, 
but  actually,  called  itself  by  its  founder's  name),  because 
he  "  sat  in  Moses'  seat,"  and  continued  the  development  of 
the  antique  decisions  of  the  lawgiver.  That  Deuteronomy 
xii.-xxvi.  was  intended  as  a  new  edition  of  the  old  "  Book 
of  the  Covenant,"  admits  of  no  reasonable  doubt.  It  was 
possibly  in  the  mind  of  the  author,  a  "legal  fiction,"  like 
similar  developments  in  English,  and  more  especially  in 
Roman  law,^  though  this  may  not  have  been  understood 
by  Josiah.  In  so  far  as  the  Book  was  prophetic,  it  was  a 
"Mosaic"  work,  because  its  author  summed  up  the  religious 
ideas  of  that  prophetic  succession  of  which  Moses,  as  the 
writer  fully  believed,  was  the  head.~  And  in  so  far  as  it 
was  historical,  it  was  "  Mosaic,"  because  the  facts  which  it 
recorded  were  based  on  traditional  records  which  the  author 
believed  to  have  come  from  Moses  or  his  circle.  Yes  ;  even 
the  statement  that  Moses  delivered  laws  to  the  people  in 
the  fortieth  year  of  the   wanderings,  has  very  probably  a 


1  Cf.  W.  R.  Smith,  The  Old  Testament  in  the  Jewish  Church,  p.  385. 

-  See  Dent,  xviii.  18,  "  A  prophet  will  1  [from  time  to  time]  raise  up  unto 
them  .  .  .  like  unto  me."  Note  the  emphasis  laid  upon  the  truthfulness  of 
the  jn-ophet ;  how  could  the  writer  of  such  a  passage  be — a  "forger"?  Even 
M.  Darmesteter  holds  that  the  idea';  of  the  Book  are  derived  from  the  great 
prophets  (review  of  M.  Kenan's  Histoirc  cVIsrael  in  Revue  des  deux  Moiides, 
1  avril,  1S91). 


104  DB.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

traditional  basis.  In  JE,  as  it  stands,  both  the  Book  of 
the  Covenant  (Exod.  xx.  22-xxii.)  and  the  Words  of  the 
Covenant  (Exod.  xxxiv.  10-28)  form  part  of  the  Sinaitic 
revelation.  But  Kuenen  has  made  it  in  a  hi^h  degree 
plausible  that  in  the  original  JE  they  were  revealed  indeed 
at  Sinai,  but  not  promulgated  by  Moses  till  just  before  the 
passage  of  the  Jordan.  It  was,  as  he  has  sought  in  a 
masterly  way  to  show,  the  Deuteronomic  writer  of  JE 
who  transposed  the  scene  of  the  promulgation  from  Moab 
to  Sinai,  thus  making  room  in  the  narrative  of  the  fortieth 
year  for  the  new  edition  (as  Kuenen  well  calls  it)  of  the 
Book  of  the  Covenant  {i.e.  Deut.  xiii.-xxvi.  with  the 
"  parenetic  setting  ").^ 

Dr.  Driver's  treatment  of  the  other  problems  of  Deuter- 
onomy shows  learning,  but  no  special  critical  insight.  In 
dealing  with  the  date  of  Deuteronomy  xxxii.,  no  arguments 
are  adduced  from  the  religious  contents  of  the  Song. 
Indeed,  it  is  here  once  more  shown  how  unsatisfactory  it 
is  to  treat  the  lyric  products  of  the  old  Hebrew  poetry 
separately.  But  let  us  pass  on  to  the  Priestly  Code.  Here 
the  evidence  of  date  is  abundant,  though  complicated,  and 
Dr.  Driver's  treatment  of  it  shows  him  at  his  very  best. 
I  should  say  that  this  portion  (pp.  118-150)  is  the  gem  of 
the  whole  book.  Here  too  at  any  rate  there  is  no  deficiency 
of  courage.  The  author  is  strong  in  the  confidence  that  all 
that  orthodoxy  really  requires  is,  that  the  chief  ceremonial 
institutions  referred  to  in  P  should  be  "  in  tlieir  origin  of 
great  antiquity,"  and  that  the  legislation  should  be  based 
on  legal  traditions  which,  though  modified  and  adapted  to 
new  circumstances  from  time  to  time,  were  yet  in  unbroken 
connexion  with  Israel's  prime.  This  he  believes  that  a 
patient  criticism  can  show.     He  is  therefore  free  to  admit 

1  See  Kuenen,  Ilc.vateiich,  pp.  258-202,  and  (especially  on  Exod.  xxiv.  4)  cf. 
Cornill,  Einleitung,  p.  75;  Montefiore,  Jeivish  Quarterly  lieview,  January,  1891, 
p.  280,  etc. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  105 

(frankly  and  without  reserve)  that  P  in  its  completed  form 
is  later  than  Ezekiel,  who  was  the  first  to  introduce  the 
radical  distinction  between  priests  and  Levites  which  we 
find  in  P  (see  Ezek.  xliv.  6-16).  The  arguments  for  a 
later  date  are  so  fully  and  clearly  presented,  that  I  can 
hardly  conceive  any  fresh  mind  resisting  their  force,  I  can 
only  here  refer  to  the  linguistic  argument.  Dr.  Driver  has, 
I  observe,  made  progress  since  1882,  when  he  subjected  the 
not  sufiiciently  exact  philological  argument  of  Giesebrecht 
(in  Stade's  Zeitschrift  for  1881)  to  a  somewhat  severe 
criticism.^  It  is  obvious  that  the  writer  was  still  feeling 
his  way  in  a  complicated  critical  problem,  and  did  not  as 
yet  see  distinctly  the  real  value  of  the  linguistic  argument. 
His  criticism  of  Giesebrecht's  details  is  indeed  upon  the 
whole  sound,  but,  for  all  that,  Giesebrecht  was  right  in  his 
general  principles.  It  was  Eyssel  (in  a  somewhat  earlier 
treatise,  praised  by  Dr.  Driver  in  1882)  and  not  Giesebrecht 
who  overrated  the  value  of  the  linguistic  argument,  and 
Giesebrecht  has  in  the  article  referred  to  already,  put  for- 
ward what  Dr.  Driver,  in  1891,  expresses  thus  : — 

"The  plu-aseologj'  of  P,  it  is  natural  to  suppose,  is  one  ■u-luch  had 
gradually  formed ;  hence  it  contains  elements  which  are  no  doubt 
ancient  side  by  side  with  those  which  were  introduced  later.  The 
priests  of  eacli  successive  generation  would  adopt,  as  a  matter  of 
course,  the  technical  formulae  and  stereotyped  expressions  which  they 
learned  from  their  seniors,  neAV  terms,  when  they  were  introduced, 
being  accommodated  to  the  old  moulds  "  (p.  148). 

It  is  possible  indeed,  that  Dr.  Driver,  writing  in  1891, 
would  assert  the  presence  of  a  larger  traditional  element  in 
the  phraseology  of  P  than  Giesebrecht  did,  writing  in  1881. 
But  whatever  difference  there  may  now  exist  between  the 
two  scholars  must  be  very  small,  and  not  of  much  impor- 
tance, except  to  those  who  attach  an  inordinate  value  to 
proving  the  archaic  origin  of  Jewish  ritual  laws.     To  Dr. 

*  See  reference,  j).  81 ;  and  comp.  Kuenen,  Tlexateuch,  p.  291.  Coruill  {Ein- 
h'itung,  p.  66)  is  slightly  too  eulogistic  towards  Giesebrecht. 


lOG  DR.   DRIVEIVS  INTRODUCTION  TO 

Driver's  excellently  formulated  statement  I  only  desire  to 
add  the  remark  of  Ivuenen  : — 

"  Liuguistic  arguments  do  nofc  fm-nisli  a  positive  or  conclusive 
argument.  But  they  do  fui'nish  a  very  strong  presiunj^tion  against  the 
theory'  that  the  priestly  laws  were  written  in  the  golden  age  of 
Israelitish  literature.  As  long  as  P-  [Dr.  Driver's  PJ  is  regarded  as 
a  contcmpoi-ary  of  Isaiah,  the  ever-increasing  number  of  pai"allels  [to 
later  writers]  must  remain  an  enigma.  A  constantly  recurring  pheno- 
menon    .     .     .     must  rest  on  some  general  basis." 

On  linguistic  arguments  I  may  find  space  to  speak  later 
on.  It  is,  at  any  rate,  not  unimportant  to  know  that  an 
"  induction  from  the  facts  of  the  Hebrew  language  "  cannot 
prevent  us  from  accepting  a  post-Deuteronomic  (i.e.  post- 
Josian)  date  for  P,  indeed  that  it  furnishes  good  presump- 
tive evidence  in  its  favour. 

I  do  not,  however,  forget,  nor  does  Dr.  Driver,  that  the 
Priestly  Code  contains  many  very  early  elements.  Levi- 
ticus xi.  for  instance,  which  is  virtually  identical  with 
Deuteronomy  xiv.  4-20,  is,  no  doubt,  as  Kuenen  says,  "  a 
later  and  amplified  edition  of  those  priestly  decisions  on 
clean  and  unclean  animals,  which  the  Deuteronomist 
adopted."  ^  And  above  all,  Leviticus  xvii-xxvi.,  when 
carefully  studied,  is  seen  to  contain  an  earlier  stratum  of 
legislation  (known  as  H,  or  P^),  which  "exhibits  a  charac- 
teristic phraseology,  and  is  marked  by  the  preponderance 
of  certain  characteristic  principles  and  motives"  (p.  54). 
That  the  greater  part  of  this  collection  of  laws  dates  from 
a  time  considerably  prior  to  Ezekiel,  may  now  be  taken  as 
granted.  But  what  is  the  date  of  the  writer  who  arranged 
these  laws  in  the  existing  "  parenetic  framework";  or,  in 
other  words,  the  date  of  the  comjjilatioii  of  H  ?  Dr.  Driver 
replies  that  he  wrote  shortly  before  the  close  of  the 
monarchy ;  but  this  relatively  conservative  conclusion 
hardly  does  justice  to  the  natural  impression  of  the  reader 
that  the  predicted  devastation  of  the  land  of  Israel  is  really 

1  The  Ile.ratcuch,  p.  2G4. 


THE  OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  107 


an  accomplished  fact.  It  appears  safer  to  hold  that  H  as 
it  stands  was  arranged  by  a  priestly  writer  in  the  second 
half  of  the  Babylonian  exile.  On  the  question,  When  was 
H  absorbed  into  P  ?  and,  indeed,  on  the  larger  question  of 
the  later  stages  of  our  present  Hexateuch,  Dr.  Driver  still 
holds  his  opinion  in  reserve.  No  reference  is  made  to  the 
important  narrative  in  Nehemiah  viii.,  which  seems  the 
counterpart  of  that  in  2  Kings  xxii. 

And  now  as  to  the  character  of  the  Priestly  Narrative. 
The  view  of  things  which  this  narrative  gives  seems,  ac- 
cording to  our  author, 

"  To  be  the  result  of  a  sj'steraatizing  process  working  upon  these 
materials,  and  perhaps  also  seeking  to  give  sensible  expression  to 
certain  ideas  or  truths  (as,  to  the  truth  of  Jehovah's  presence  in  the 
inidst  of  His  people,  symbolized  by  the  ''  Tent  of  Meeting,"  surrounded 
by  its  immediate  attendants,  in  the  centre  of  the  camp),"  p.  120. 

And  in  a  footnote  he  says  that, — 

"  It  is  difficult  to  escape  the  conclusion  that  the  representation  of  P 
contains  elements,  not,  in  the  ordinary  sense  of  the  word,  historical  " 
[e.g.  especially  in  his  chronological  scheme,  and  in  the  numbers  of  the 
Israelites. — See  Numbei's  i.-iv.]. 

Similarly,  in  speaking  of  P's  work  in  the  Book  of  Joshua, 
he  says  that, — 

"  The  jjartition  of  the  land  being  conceived  as  ideally  effected  by 
Joshua,  its  complete  distribution  and  occupation  by  the  tribes  are 
treated  as  his  work,  and  as  accomplished  in  his  life-time"  (pp.  108, 
109). 

Let  me  honestly  say  that  these  views,  though  correct, 
present  great  difficulties  to  those  whose  reverence  is  of  the 
old  type ;  and  that  in  order  to  understand,  and,  if  it  may 
be,  to  justify  the  author  or  compiler  of  P,  careful  historical 
training  is  necessary.  Dr.  Driver's  book  does  not  give  any 
of  the  hints  which  the  religious  study  of  criticism  appears 
at  this  point  to  require.  But,  no  doubt,  he  was  hampered 
equally  by  his  want  of  space  and  by  his  plan. 


108  DR.   DRIVERS  INTRODUCTION  TO 

As  to  the  ascription  of  the  laws  to  Moses,  on  the  other 
hand,    the   author   is    really   helpful.     He   points   out   the 
double  aspect  of  the  Priestly  Code,  which,  though  Exilic 
and  early  post-Exihc   in  its   formulation,  is  "based  upon 
pre-existing  temple-usage"   (p.  135).     In  taking  this  view 
he  is  at  one  with  critics  of  very  different  schools,  so  that 
we  may  hope  soon  to  hear  no  more  of  the  charge  that, 
according     to     the    critics,    the     translation     of    P    was 
"manufactured"  by  the  later   priests.     Dr.  Driver  would 
rather  have  abstained  altogether  from  touching  on  Biblical 
archeeology,  his  object  (an  impossible  one)  being  to  confine 
himself  to  the  purely  literary  aspect  of  the  Old  Testament. 
But,  as  Merx  long  ago  said,  a  purely  literary  criticism  of 
the  Hexateuch  is  insufficient.    To  show  that  there  is  a  basis 
of  early   customary  law  in  later  legal  collections,    we  are 
compelled   to   consider  historical   analogies.      In    spite    of 
Kuenen's  adverse  criticism  of  Mr.  Fenton's  explanation  of 
the  law  of  "jubilee  "  (Lev.  xxv.  8-55),  I  still  feel  that  their 
may  be  a  kernel  of  truth  in  it ;  and  much  more  certainly 
the  sacrificial  laws  have  a  basis  of  pre-exilic  priestly  ordi- 
nance.    But  can  those  institutions  and  rites  be  traced  back 
to    Moses  ?      Dr.    Driver   feels  it   necessary  to  satisfy   his 
readers  to  some  extent  on  this  point.     What  he  says  is, 
in  fact,  much  the  same  as  Kuenen  said  in  the  Godsdienst 
van   Israel   in   1870.^      It    is    however   from    an    orthodox 
point  of  view,  startling ;  and  considering  that  Kuenen  be- 
came afterwards  more  extreme  in  his  views,-  Dr.  Driver 
may  fairly  lay  claim,  not  merely  to   courage   and  consis- 
tency, but  also  to  moderation  and   sobriety.     Certainly  I 
fully  approve  what  Dr.  Driver  has  said.     It  is  "sober,"  i.e. 
it  does  not  go  beyond  the  facts,  nor  is  its  sobriety  impaired 
by  the  circumstance  that  the  few  facts  at  his  disposal  have 
had  to  be  interpreted  imaginatively.     How  else,  as  I  have 

1  Kuenen,  Godsdienst  van  Israel,  i.  278-28G  ;  ii.  209  (E.T.  i.  282-290,  ii.  302). 

2  Kuenen,  Ondcrzuck,  i.  238  {Hexateuch,  p.  211). 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LFTERATURE.  109 

said  already,  can  the  bearing  of  these  few  precious  but  dry 
facts  be  reaHzed  ?  I  am  only  afraid  that  some  readers  will 
think  that  Moses  was  more  systematic,  more  of  a  modern 
founder  and  organizer  than  he  can  really  have  been  ;  but  I 
suspect  that  a  fuller  explanation  would  show  that  there  is 
no  real  difference  between  Dr.  Driver  and  myself.  I  am  in 
full  accord  with  him  when  he  says  (in  tacit  opposition  to 
Kuenen's  later  view)  that  "  the  teaching  of  Moses  on  these 
subjects  (civil  and  ceremonial  precepts)  is  preserved  in  its 
least  modified  form  in  the  Decalogue  and  the  Book  of  the 
Covenant."  It  becomes  any  one  to  differ  from  Kuenen 
with  humility,  but  my  own  historical  sense  emphatically 
requires  that  from  the  very  beginning  there  should  have 
been  the  germ  of  the  advanced  "ethical  monotheism"  of 
the  prophets  ;  and  if  only  it  be  admitted  that  even  the 
shortened  form  of  the  Decalogue  proposed  by  Ewald  ^  has 
probably  been  modified  (we  have  no  right  to  equalize  Moses 
with  Zoroaster),^  we  may  not  unreasonably  suppose  that 
the  "  Ten  Words  "  are  indeed  derived  from  "  Moses,  the 
man  of  God,"  and  that  the  other  similar  "  decads  "  ^  were 
imitated  from  this  one.  That  Dr.  Driver  has  made  no 
reference  in  this  important  passage  to  Exodus  xv.  (in  spite 
of  his  conservative  view  on  the  authorship  of  the  Song), 
deserves  recognition. 

There  is  only  one  other  point  which  I  could  have  wished 
to  see  stated.     I  will  express  it  in  the  words  of  Kuenen  : — 

"  It  is  Moses'  great  Avork  and  enduring  merit — not  that  he  introduced 
into  Israel  any  particuhxr  religious  forms  and  practices,  but — that  lie 
established  the  service  of  Jahveh  among  his  people  upon  a  moral 
footing."  * 

'  Ewald,  Gc3c/aV/«fe,  ii.  231  (E.T.  ii.  163).  Comp.  Driver,  Introduction,  p. 
31,  with  the  accompanying  diacussiou  of  the  two  traditional  texts  of  the 
Decalogue.  A  conjectural  but  historically  conceivable  revision  of  Ewald's 
form  of  the  Decalogue  has  been  given  by  Mr.  Wicksteed,  The  Christian 
Eeformer,  May,  188(5,  pp.  307-313. 

'^  See  ray  article  in  Nineteenth  Century,  Dec,  1891. 

3  See  Ewald,  Gexchichte,  I.e. ;  and  cf.  Wildeboer,  Thcolog.  Studicn,  1887,  p.  21. 

4  Kueueu,  Jldifjion  of  Israel,  i.  292  (Godsdiemt,  i.  289). 


110  DR.   DRIVEIVS  INTRODUCTION   TO 

This  surely  ought  to  satisfy  the  needs  of  essential  ortlio- 
doxij.  For  what  conservatives  vi^ant,  or  ought  to  want,  is 
not  so  much  to  prove  the  veracity  of  the  IsraeHtish  priests, 
when  they  ascribed  certain  ordinances  to  Moses,  as  to  show 
that  Moses  had  high  intuitions  of  God  and  of  morahty.  In 
a  word,  they  want,  or  they  ought  to  want,  to  contradict  the 
view  that  the  rehgion  of  Israel — at  any  rate,  between  Moses 
and  Amos — in  no  essential  respect  differed  from  that  of 
"  Moab,  Amnion,  and  Edom,  Israel's  nearest  kinsfolk  and 
neighbours."  ^  Their  mistake  has  hitherto  been  in  attri- 
buting to  Moses  certain  ahsolutehj  correct  religious  and 
moral  views.  In  doing  so,  they  interfered  with  the  origin- 
ality both  of  the  prophets  of  Israel  and  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  they  have  to  avoid  this  in  future  by  recognising  that 
Moses'  high  intuitions  were  limited  by  his  early  place  in 
the  history  of  Israel's  revelation. 

I  am  most  thankful  that  in  this  very  important  matter 
(which,  even  in  an  introduction  to  the  Old  Testament  lite- 
rature, could  not  be  passed  over)  Dr.  Driver  has  not  felt 
himself  obliged  to  make  any  deduction  from  critical  results. 
The  second  chapter  is  one  which  makes  somewhat  less 
demand  than  the  first  on  the  patient  candour  of  orthodox 
readers.  It  may  also  appear  less  interesting  until  we  have 
learned  that  the  narrative  books  are  of  the  utmost  impor- 
tance for  Hexateuch  students,  as  supplying  the  historical 
framework  for  the  Hexateuch  records.  In  fact,  all  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures  are  interlaced  by  numberless  delicate 
threads,  so  that  no  part  can  be  neglected  without  injury 
to  the  rest.  Undoubtedly,  the  criticism  of  Judg.-Sam.- 
Kings  has  not  reached  such  minute  accuracy  as  that  of  the 
Hexateuch,  and  it  was  a  disadvantage  to  Dr.  Driver  that 
he  had  to  write  upon  these  books  before  the  researches  of 
Budde  and  Cornill  (to  whom  we  may  now  add  Kautzsch 
and  Kittel)  had  attained  more  complete  analytical  results. 

1  "Wellhauscn,  Shelch  of  the  Jlistoiij  of  Israel  and  Jiulah  (1891),  p.  23. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  Ill 

Still  one  feels  that,  with  the  earlier  pioneering  works  to 
aid  him  (including  Budde's  and  Cornill's  earlier  essays),  Dr. 
Driver  could  have  been  much  fuller,  with  more  space  and 
perhaps  with  more  courage.  At  any  rate,  the  most  essential 
critical  points  have  been  duly  indicated,  and  I  welcome 
Dr.  Driver's  second  chapter,  in  combination  with  his  work 
on  the  Text  of  Samuel,  as  materially  advancing  the  study 
of  these  books  in  England.^  A  valuable  hint  was  already 
given  in  chapter  i.  (pp.  3,  4).  AVith  regard  to  Judges  and 
Kings  we  are  there  told  that  "in  each  a  series  of  older 
narratives  has  been  taken  by  the  compiler,  and  fitted  with 
a  framework  supplied  by  himself"  ;  whereas  in  Samuel, 
though  this  too  is  a  compilation,  "  the  compiler's  hand  is 
very  much  less  conspicuous  than  is  the  case  in  Judges  and 
Kings"  (pp.  3,  4).  Of  the  work  of  the  compiler  in  Kings, 
we  are  further  told  in  chapter  ii.  that  it  included  not  only 
brief  statistical  notices,  sometimes  called  the  "  Epitome," 
but  also  the  introduction  of  fresh  and  "prophetic  glances  at 
the  future"  and  the  "amplification"  of  already  existing 
prophecies  (see  pp.  178,  184,  189.  He  judges  historical 
events  by  the  standard  of  Deuteronomy,  and  his  Deuterono- 
mizing  peculiarities  receive  a  careful  description,  which  is 
illustrated  by  a  valuable  list  of  his  characteristic  phrases 
(with  reference  to  Deuteronomy  and  Jeremiah).  We  are 
introduced,  in  fact,  to  what  Kleinert  calls  the  Deuferonomis- 
tische  Schriftstellerei,  and  realize  how  great  must  have  been 
the  effect  of  that  great  monument  both  of  religion  and  of 
literature — the  kernel  of  our  Deuteronomy. 

On  the  historical  value  of  Judges,  the  author  speaks 
cautiously,  following  Dr.  A.  B.  Davidson,  who  has  re- 
marked (Expositor,  Jan.,  1887)  on  the  different  points  of 
view  in  the  narratives  and  in  the  framework,  and  who  finds 
in  the  latter,  not,  strictly  speaking,  history,  but  rather  the 

^  A  forthcoming  work  of  my  own  ou  the  Study  of  Criticism  will,  I  hope, 
slightly  supplement  and  strengthen  this  part  of  Dr.  Driver's  book. 


112  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 


"  philosophy  of  history,"  To  this  eminent  teacher  the 
author  also  appeals  as  having  already  pointed  out  the  com- 
bination of  different  accounts  of  the  same  facts — a  striking 
phenomenon  which  meets  us  in  a  still  greater  degree  in  the 
first  part  of  Samuel.  It  was  surely  hardly  necessary  to  do 
so.  Support  might  have  been  more  valuable  for  the  ascrip- 
tion of  the  Song  of  Hannah  to  a  later  period,  though  here 
Dr.  Driver  is  relatively  conservative.  The  other  poetical 
passages  in  Samuel  have  no  special  treatment.  Still  a 
generally  correct  impression  is  given  of  the  composition  of 
our  Samuel,  and  the  praise  given  to  "  the  most  considerable 
part  which  appears  plainly  to  be  the  work  of  a  single 
author  "  (2  Sam.  ix.-xx.,  to  which  1  Kings  i.-ii.  in  the 
main  belongs)  is  not  at  all  too  high. 

It  strikes  me,  however,  that  in  this  chapter  Dr.  Driver 
does  not  show  as  much  courage  as  in  the  preceding  one. 
Not  to  dwell  on  the  cautious  reserve  with  which  he  alludes 
to  questions  of  historicity,  I  must  regret  that  the  duplicate 
narratives  in  Samuel  are  so  treated,  that  some  of  the  chief 
critical  points  are  missed,  and  that  the  true  character  of  the 
record  does  not  fully  appear. 

And   how  strange  it  is  to  read  of  1  Samuel  xxiv.   and 

xxvi.,  that 

"Whether  the  two  narratives  really  relate  to  two  different  occa- 
sions, or  whether  they  are  merely  different  versions  of  the  same  occur- 
rence, is  a  question  on  whicli  0])inion  will  probably  continue  to  be 
divided"'  (p.  171)! 

Nor  is  anything  said  either  of  1  Samuel  xvi.  1-13 
(the  anointing  of  David),-  nor  of  the  prophecy  of  Nathan 
(2  Sam.  vii.),  except  that  the  latter  is  included  among  the 
"  relatively  latest  passages  "  (p.  173),  where  I  am  afraid  that 
the  reader  may  overlook  it.  The  former  passage  was  no 
doubt  difficult  to  treat  without  a  somewhat  fuller  adoption 

'  See  BudJe,  Die  Biicher  Richtcr  uml  Samuel,  p.  227. 

*  It  is  less  important  that  nothing  is  said  on  the  "  doublets,"  1  Sam.  xxxi., 
2  Sam.  i.  1-1(3. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  113 

of  the  principles  which  govern,  and  must  govern,  the  critical 
analysis  of  the  Hebrew  texts.  Nor  can  I  help  wondering 
whether  there  is  the  note  of  true  "moderation"  in  the 
remark  on  1  Kings  xiii.  1-32,  that  it  is  "  a  narrative  not 
probably  of  very  early  origin,  as  it  seems  to  date  from  a 
time  when  the  names  both  of  the  prophet  of  Judah,  and  of 
the  '  old  prophet '   were  no  longer  remembered  "   (p.  183). 

1  turn  to  Ivlostermann,  whom  Professor  Lias  at  the  last 
Church  Congress  extolled  as  the  representation  of  common 
sense  in  literary  criticism,  and  whose  doctrinal  orthodoxy  is 
at  any  rate  above  suspicion,  and  find  these  remarks  : — 

"  The  following  narrative  in  its  present  form  comes  in 
the  main  from  a  book  of  anecdotes  from  the  prophetic  life 
of  an  earlier  period  with  a  didactic  tendency,  designed  for 
disciples  of  the  prophets.  .  .  .  It  is  probable  that  the 
reminiscence  of  Amos  iii.  14;  vii.  16,  17  ;  ix.  1,  etc.,  influ- 
enced this  narrative,  as  well  as  tlie  recollection  of  Joslalis 
2:)rofanation  of  the  sanctuary  at  BetJieV  (2  Kings  xxiii.). 

So  then  this  narrative  is  later  than  the  other  Elijah 
narratives  ;  is,  in  fact,  post-Deuteronomic.  To  the  original 
writer  of  2  Kings  xxii.,  xxiii.,  it  was  unknown.  Obviously 
it  occasioned  the  later  insertion  of  2  Kings  xxiii.  lfi-18 
(notice  the  apologetic  interest  in  Luciaii's  fuller  text  of 
the  Septuagint  of  v.  18).     Why  not  say  so  plainly  ? 

And  why  meet  the  irreverence  of  the  remarks  of  Ewald 
and  of  "Wellhausen  on  2  Kings  i.^  (an  irreverence  which  is 
only  on  the  surface,  and  is  excused  by  manifest  loyalty  to 
historical  truth)  by  the  something  less  than  accurate  state- 
ment that  this  chapter  "  presents  an  impressive  picture  of 
Elijah's  inviolable  greatness  "  (p.  185)? 

I   know  that  Dr.   Driver  will   reply   that  he  desired  to 

'  See  Ewald,  Ilistori/,  iv.  112  ;  Wellhausen,  Die  Composition  des  He.vateuchi', 
etc.,  pp.  284-5.  The  fundamental  reverence  of  all  Ewald's  Biblical  work  is,  I 
presume,  too  patent  to  be  denied.     He  would  not  have  spoken  as  he  did  on 

2  Kings  i.  without  good  cause. 

VOL.   V.  8 


114  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION. 

leave  historical  criticism  on  one  side.  By  so  doing  he 
would,  no  doubt,  satisfy  the  author  of  the  Impregnable  Bock 
of  Ilohj  Scripture,  who,  if  I  remember  right,  tolerates  lite- 
rary, but  not  real  historical,  criticism.  But  Dr.  Driver  has 
already  found  in  chapter  i.  that  the  separation  cannot  be 
maintained.  AVhy  attempt  what  is  neither  possible,  nor  (if 
I  may  say  so)  desirable,  in  chapter  ii.  ?  Here  let  me  pause 
for  awhile  ;  the  first  section  of  my  critical  survey  is  at  an 
end.  But  I  cannot  pass  on  without  the  willing  attestation 
that  the  scholarly  character  of  these  two  chapters  is  high, 
and  that  even  the  author's  compromises  reveal  a  thought- 
ful and  conscientious  mind.  May  his  work  and  mine  alike 
tend  to  the  hallowing  of  criticism,  to  the  strengthening  of 
spiritual  faith,  and  to  the  awakening  in  wider  circles  of 
a  more  intelligent  love  for  the  records  of  the  Christian 
revelation. 

T.  K.  Cheyne. 


115 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT  IN  THE 
NEW  TESTAMENT. 

II.  The  Johannean  Writings, 

In  a  former  paper  I  endeavoured  to  reproduce  the  teaching 
of  Christ,  as  recorded  in  the  Synoptist  Gospels,  about  His 
own  death  and  its  relation  to  the  salvation  of  men,  I  shall 
now  give  an  account  of  His  teaching  on  the  same  topic  as 
recorded  in  the  Fourth  Gospel ;  and  with  this  I  shall  ex- 
pound a  few  words  attributed  in  the  same  Gospel  to  John 
the  Baptist,  and  a  few  explanatory  words  from  the  pen 
of  the  Evangelist.  This  will  be  followed  by  an  exposition 
of  the  teaching  of  the  First  Epistle  of  John,  and  of  that  of 
the  Book  of  Kevelation. 

Of  these  documents,  the  first  two  were  accepted  with 
complete  confidence,  as  undoubtedly  written  by  the  beloved 
Apostle  John,  by  all  the  early  Christian  writers,  the  earliest 
mention  of  the  author's  name  being  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
second  century.  This  unanimous  tradition  is  supported  by 
what  seems  to  me  to  be  strong  internal  evidence.  The 
authorship  of  the  Book  of  Revelation  was  not  accepted  with 
the  same  unquestioning  confidence.  It  is  however  not  only 
quoted  in  the  latter  part  of  the  second  century  by  Irena3us 
(bk,  V.  28,  30)  as  written  by  John,  but  in  the  middle  of  that 
century  Justin  {Dialogue  with  Trijplio  ch,  Ixxxi,)  quotes  it 
in  the  following  words  :  "  a  teacher  of  ours  whose  name  was 
John,  one  of  the  twelve  Apostles  of  Christ,  foretold  in  a 
Revelation  which  was  made  to  him,  that  they  who  believe 
in  our  Christ  should  pass  a  thousand  years  in  Jerusalem  ; 
and  after  that  there  should  be  a  universal,  and  in  a  word 
an  eternal,  resurrection  of  all  men  together,  and  then  the 
judgment,"  Without  farther  discussion  of  their  author- 
ship,  these  documents  claim   our  reverence  as  very  early 


IIG  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 

witnesses  of  the  teaching  of  Christ  and  of  the  behef  of  those 
who  heard  Him. 

In  one  of  the  beautiful  pictures  contained  in  the  first 
chapter  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  the  Baptist,  seeing  Jesus 
coming  towards  him,  says,  as  recorded  in  John  i.  29, 
"  Behold  the  Lamb  of  God  who  takes  away  the  sin  of  the 
world."  The  connection  of  the  words  Lamb  and  sin 
suggests  at  once  the  sacrificial  lambs  offered  in  the  temple 
every  morning  and  evening,  as  prescribed  in  Exodus  xxix. 
38-41,  Numbers  xxviii.  3.  Possibly  the  near  approach  of 
the  Passover,  noted  in  John  ii.  13,  may  have  suggested  also 
the  Paschal  lamb  which  (see  Exodus  xii.  5)  in  Egypt  by  its 
own  death  saved  the  firstborn  from  death.  The  definite 
term  "Lamb  of  God"  implies  that  He  whom  John  saw 
approaching  stood,  even  in  contrast  to  the  sacrificial  lambs 
prescribed  in  the  Mosaic  Law,  in  a  peculiar  and  intimate 
relation  to  God. 

The  forerunner  completes  his  description  of  his  Lord  by 
adding,  "who  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world."  The 
word  atpct)  suggests  effort,  as  when  with  a  strong  hand  men 
lift  up  and  carry  a  load  ;  and  removal,  as  when  men  carry 
away  the  load  they  have  lifted  up.  In  one  or  both  of  these 
senses  it  is  very  common  in  each  of  the  four  Gospels.  This 
common  use  of  the  word  and  these  associations  of  thought 
suggest  that  in  this  passage  "the  sin  of  the  world"  is 
represented  as  a  burden  pressing  with  full  weight  on  the 
Lamb  of  God  and  by  Him  removed. 

These  words,  following  as  they  do  a  quotation  from 
Isaiah  in  ver.  23,  recall  also  Isaiah  liii.  4-7  :  "  Surely  He 
hath  borne  our  griefs,  and  carried  our  sorrows  ;  yet  we 
did  esteem  Him  stricken,  smitten  of  God  and  afflicted. 
But  He  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions,  He  was 
bruised  for  our  iniquities  :  the  chastisement  of  our  peace 
was  upon  Him  ;  and  with  His  stripes  we  are  healed.  All 
we  like  sheep  have  gone  astray  ;  we  have  turned  every  one 


IN   THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  117 

to  his  own  way;  and  Jehovah  hath  made  to  hght  on  Him 
the  iniquity  of  us  all.  He  was  oppressed,  yet  He  humbled 
Himself  and  opened  not  His  mouth  ;  as  a  lamb  is  led  to 
the  slaughter,  and  as  a  sheep  that  before  her  shearers  is 
dumb  ;  yea.  He  opened  not  His  mouth." 

If  the  words  of  the  great  preacher  do  not  assert  expressly 
that  Christ  saves  men  from  death  by  Himself  dying,  yet 
taken  in  their  environment  they  suggest  very  strongly  that 
this  doctrine,  afterwards  plainly  set  forth  by  Christ,  was 
already  more  or  less  clearly  present  to  the  thought  of  His 
mysterious  forerunner. 

In  an  important  and  conspicuous  exposition  of  His 
mission,  recorded  in  John  iii.  14-17,  Christ  says  to  Nico- 
demus,  "  as  Moses  lifted  up  the  serpent  in  the  wilderness 
so  must  needs  the  Son  of  Man  ba  lifted  up,  in  order  that 
every  one  who  believeth  in  Him  may  have  eternal  life." 
Our  Lord  here  asserts  that  something  similar  to  that  which 
was  done  to  the  brazen  serpent  in  the  wilderness  when  it 
was  set  on  a  banner-pole  before  the  eyes  of  Israel  must 
needs  happen  to  Him  in  order  that  men  ready  to  die  may 
live  for  ever.  The  word  oel  w^hich  asserts  conspicuously 
the  necessity  of  this  elevation  of  Christ  in  order  to  save 
men,  recalls  at  once  the  same  word  used  by  Christ  in 
Matthew  xvi.  21,  "He  must  needs  go  to  Jerusalem  .  . 
and  be  put  to  death."  The  word  rendered  llf ted-up, 
vy{rco9P]i'ac,  occurs  again  in  the  same  connection  in  John 
xii.  32  ;  and  is  explained  by  the  Evangelist  :  "  this  said  He, 
signifying  by  what  kind  of  death  He  was  about  to  die." 
And  this  is  the  only  satisfactory  explanation  of  the  earlier 
words  to  Nicodemus.  The  serpent  of  brass  set  on  a  pole 
before  the  eyes  of  Israel  as  a  means  of  their  salvation  from 
death  suggests  irresistibly,  when  once  a  comparison  with 
Christ  is  made.  His  body  hanging  upon  the  cross  before 
the  eyes  of  Jerusalem  for  the  salvation  of  the  world.  And 
this  reference    is  somewhat  confirmed  in  ver.   16    by    the 


118  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 


"love"  which  prompted  God  to  give  His  only  begotten 
Son  in  order  that  men  might  be  saved.  For,  of  that  love, 
the  gift  of  Christ  to  die  veas  the  crowning  manifestation. 

AVe  must  now  go  forward  at  least  a  year  in  the  Sacred 
Life.  Again,  as  recorded  in  John  vi.  4,  the  Jewish  Pass- 
over is  at  hand.  Yesterday  the  great  Teacher,  whom 
crowds  now  follow,  fed  five  thousand  men  with  five  loaves 
and  two  fishes.  But  to-day  in  doubt  and  unbelief  some 
who  so  lately  enjoyed  His  superhuman  bounty  ask  Him 
to  work  a  sign  something  like  that  in  the  wilderness  when 
God  gave  to  Israel  bread  from  heaven.  The  Master  replies 
that  bread  more  wonderful  than  that  given  of  old,  the  real 
bread  from  heaven,  is  now  being  given  ;  and  claims  in  ver. 
35  to  be  Himself  "the  Bread  of  Life."  The  mode  by 
which  this  food  is  to  be  appropriated  is  then  specified  : 
"  he  that  cometh  to  me  shall  not  hunger,  and  he  that 
believeth  in  Me  shall  never  thirst."  "  The  Jews  began 
to  murmur  about  Him,  because  He  said,  I  am  the  Bread 
which  came  down  from  heaven"  :  ver.  41.  But  in  ver.  48 
and  again  in  ver.  51  Christ  repeats  His  claim  to  be  "  the 
Bread  of  Life  "  ;  and  adds  that  this  bread  differs  from  that 
eaten  by  the  ancestors  of  Israel  in  the  wilderness  in  that 
they  died,  whereas  those  who  eat  of  the  Bread  now  given 
will  live  for  ever. 

We  notice  in  passing  that  bread  nourishes  only  by  its 
own  destruction.  And  only  by  the  destruction  of  that 
which  has  had  life  can  life  be  maintained.  Even  in  the 
bread  we  eat  real  vegetable  life  has  been  sacrificed  for  our 
life. 

In  ver.  51  Christ  expounds  the  metaphor  of  bread  by 
another  metaphor:  "and  the  bread  which  I  will  give  is 
My  flesh  on  behalf  of  the  world's  life."  The  new  thought 
thus  introduced  at  once  increases  the  difficulty  of  the 
Jews.  They  ask,  "  How  can  this  man  give  us  his  flesh 
to  eat  ?  "     This  difficulty,  our  Lord  refuses  to  lessen,  and 


IN    THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  119 

merely  repeats  in  more  emphatic  language  His  previous 
assertion :  "  verily,  verily,  I  say  to  you,  unless  ye  eat  the 
flesh  of  the  Son  of  Man  and  drink  His  blood,  ye  have 
not  life  in  yourselves."  He  adds  in  ver.  56,  "  He  that 
eateth  My  flesh  and  drinketh  My  blood  abideth  in  Me  and 
I  in  him." 

These  vi^ords,  which  sound  so  strangely  in  western  ears, 
point  forward  in  the  most  conspicuous  manner  possible  to 
the  approaching  death  of  Christ.  For,  wherever  flesh  is 
eaten,  blood  has  been  shed  and  life  violently  taken.  Con- 
sequently, by  this  startling  phraseology  Christ  asserts  un- 
mistakably and  conspicuously  that  His  own  death,  which 
actually  took  place  at  the  passover  following,  is  a  necessary 
condition  of  the  spiritual  nourishment  which  He  has  just 
promised  to  all  who  come  to  and  believe  in  Him.  It  is 
a  reassertion  of  His  own  words  in  chap.  iii.  14 :  "  the  Son 
of  Man  must  needs  be  lifted  up."  The  emphatic  repetition 
of  the  words  flesh  and  blood  reveal  the  importance,  in  the 
thought  of  Christ,  of  this  mysterious  condition  of  the  ■ 
salvation  of  the  world. 

In  John  X.  1.5  the  good  Shepherd  says,  "  I  lay  down 
My  life  on  behalf  of  the  sheep."  He  thus  announces  His 
deliberate  purpose  to  die  for  the  good  of  men.  That  His 
approaching  death  will  be  voluntary  and  with  a  definite 
purpose,  He  asserts  again  in  verses  17,18:  "I  lay  down 
My  life,  in  order  that  I  may  take  it  again.  No  one  taketh 
it  from  Me,  but  I  lay  it  down  of  Myself."  The  further  pur- 
pose expressed  in  the  words  "  that  I  may  take  it  again  " 
is  in  close  harmony  with  Christ's  reference  in  Matthew  xvi. 
21,  xvii.  23  to  His  death  as  to  be  followed  by  resurrection. 
He  thus  asserts  in  plainest  language  that  to  die  for  man 
was  part  of  the  purpose  He  came  to  accomplish. 

In  John  xi.  47,  48  the  Jewish  Sanhedrin  is  consulting 
about  what  is  to  be  done  to  arrest  the  increasing  influence 
of  Jesus.      They  fear  that  if  things  go  on  as  they  are  now 


120  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 

going  He  will  win  the  faith  of  all  men,  and  thus,  by  excit- 
ing the  apprehensions  of  the  Komans,  bring  ruin  on  the 
nation.  The  wily  Sadducee  who  was  then  high  priest  saw 
in  this  fear  an  opportunity  ;  and  suggested  that  as  Jesus 
was  bringing  ruin  on  the  nation  it  would  be  better  for  Him 
who  was  only  one  to  be  put  to  death  rather  than  to  permit 
Him  to  destroy  all.  In  these  words,  animated  by  hatred 
and  craft,  the  Evangelist  saw  an  unconscious  and  very 
remarkable  prophecy  of  the  actual  and  designed  result  of 
the  approaching  death  of  Christ.  He  declared  that  Christ 
was  about  to  die  on  behalf  of  the  nation  and  in  order  that 
the  scattered  children  of  God  might  be  gathered  into  one 
community.  This  explanation  is  another  assertion  that 
Christ's  death  was  by  His  own  deliberate  purpose  and  for 
the  salvation  of  men. 

In  chap.  xii.  22  we  read  that  Andrew  and  Philip  come 
to  Jesus  and  tell  Him  that  certain  Greeks,  strangers  from 
the  western  world,  desire  to  see  Him.  This  inquiry,  a 
foretaste  of  the  conversion  of  Europe  with  its  momentous 
influence  upon  the  development  of  the  Kingdom  of  God, 
greatl}^  moved  the  Saviour.  In  these  seekers  from  afar  He 
saw  a  firstfruit  of  a  great  harvest.  But  He  knew  that  this 
great  result  could  be  obtained  only  by  His  own  death,  that 
before  the  harvest  can  be  gathered  the  seed  must  fall  into 
the  ground  and  die.  The  meaning  of  this  striking  meta- 
phor is,  to  us  who  know  what  happened  to  Jesus  during 
this  feast  at  which  these  Greeks  visited  Jerusalem,  evident. 
Before  the  Gentiles  can  be  gathered  into  the  Kingdom  of 
God,  Himself  must  be  laid  dead  in  the  grave.  The  words 
before  us  are  thus  a  reassertion  of  the  absolute  necessity  ot 
the  death  of  Christ  for  the  salvation  of  men. 

We  have  already  noticed  a  reference  by  Christ  in  chap, 
xii.  32  to  Himself,  which  is  explained  by  the  Evangelist  to 
be  a  prophecy  of  His  death  :  "  and  I,  if  I  be  lifted  up  from 
the  earth,  will  draw  all  to  Myself."     We  have  here  another 


IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  121 

announcement   that   the  success  of  our  Lord's  work  was 
conditioned  by  His  death. 

In  close  agreement  with  chap.  x.  11,  we  read  in  chap.  xv. 
13,  "  greater  love  than  this  hath  no  man,  that  a  man  lay 
down  his  life  for  his  friends." 

In  chap.  xvi.  7  Christ  says  that  unless  He  goes  away  the 
Paraclete,  or  Helper,  will  not  come.  That  the  departure 
of  the  great  Teacher  would  bring  greater  blessing  than  His 
presence,  and  that  His  removal  from  the  midst  of  His 
disciples  was  a  necessary  condition  of  the  gift  of  the  Spirit 
of  God  to  be  the  animating  principle  of  their  life,  is  another 
assertion  that  His  death  is  an  essential  link  in  the  chain  of 
man's  salvation. 

In  the  Fourth  Gospel,  as  in  the  Synoptist  Gospels,  a 
long  and  full  account  is  given  of  the  death  of  Christ,  reveal- 
ing its  large  place  in  the  writer's  thought. 

The  death  of  Christ  and  its  relation  to  the  salvation  of 
men  are  perhaps  somewhat  more  conspicuous  in  the  Fourth 
Gospel  than  in  the  other  three  Gospels.  That  He  was 
about  to  die  for  the  salvation  of  men,  is  suggested,  before 
His  public  ministry  began,  in  a  few  words  spoken  by  the 
Baptist ;  and  shortly  afterwards  by  Himself  in  His  conver- 
sation with  Nicodemus.  It  is  plainly  indicated  in  very 
conspicuous  and  starthng  words,  spoken  a  year  before  His 
death.  And  this  indication  is  confirmed  by  several  later 
remarks.  In  each  of  the  four  Gospels  we  are  taught,  in 
language  which  leaves  no  room  for  doubt,  that  the  violent 
death  of  Christ  was  essential  for  the  salvation  of  men,  and 
was  a  part  of  His  purpose  of  salvation. 

From  the  recorded  words  of  Christ,  spoken  during  His 
earthly  life,  we  now  turn  to  documents  written  by  His 
followers  after  His  death  in  the  light  shed  upon  that  event 
by  the  birth  and  progress  of  the  Christian  Church.  In 
these  documents  we  shall  find  teaching  much  more  definite 
than  that  which  I  have  just  expounded. 


122  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 

In  1  John  i.  7  are  words  as  startling  as  those  recorded 
in  John  vi.  51,  "  the  blood  of  Jesus,  His  Son,  cleanseth  us 
from  all  sin."  Manifestly  "the  blood  of  Jesus"  refers  to 
His  violent  death  on  the  cross.  The  writer  aftirms  that 
this  event  in  the  past  is  a  present  means  of  Christian 
purity.  He  can  only  mean  that,  had  not  Christ  died,  there 
had  been  for  us,  none  of  whom  can  say  that  he  has  no  sin, 
no  cleansing  from  sin  ;  in  other  words,  that  the  death  of 
Christ  is  a  necessary  condition,  and  in  some  sense  the  in- 
strument of  this  cleansing.  This  strong  la.nguage  reveals 
the  deep  impression  made  upon  the  mind  of  the  disciple  by 
the  death  of  his  Master. 

In  ver.  9  we  read,  "  He  is  faithful  and  just  to  forgive  us 
our  sins."  These  words  contain  no  express  reference  to 
the  death  of  Christ ;  but  they  imply  that  the  justice  of  God 
is  involved  in  the  pardon  of  sin,  in  close  agreement  with 
the  teaching  of  St.  Paul  in  Komans  iii.  26,  "  Himself  just 
and  a  justifier  of  him  that  hath  faith"  in  Jesus."  The  great 
importance  of  this  last  passage  we  shall  see  at  a  later  stage 
of  our  inquiry. 

In  1  John  ii.  2,  after  saying  that  "  if  any  one  sin,  we  have 
an  advocate  with  the  Father,"  the  writer  goes  on  to  say 
that  "  Himself  is  a  propitiation  for  our  sins  ;  and  not  for 
ours  only  but  also  for  the  whole  world."  Similar  language 
occurs  again  in  chap.  iv.  10:  "He  loved  us  and  sent  His 
Son  to  be  a  propitiation  for  our  sins." 

The  word  rendered  jpropitiatlon,  IXaa/j-o^,  is  found  occa- 
sionally in  the  LXX.,  e.g.,  Numbers  v.  8,  "  the  ram  of  the 
propitiation  "  ;  Ezekiel  xliv.  27,  "  they  shall  offer  propitia- 
tion "  ;  Psalm  cxxx.  4,  "  with  Thee  is  the  propitiation." 
And  it  at  once  recalls  the  almost  equivalent  word  e|iA,acr/xo'f, 
e.g.,  in  Leviticus  xxiii.  27,  28;  and  the  cognate  verb, 
e^tXdaKofxai,  which  is  very  common  in  the  ritual  of  the 
Pentateuch.  Unfortunately,  the  connection  of  the  words 
is  obscured  even  in    the  Kevised  Version,  which   renders 


IN   THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  123 

them,  "without  marginal  note,  propitiation  in  the  New 
Testament  and  atonement  in  the  Old.  But  the  meaning  is 
quite  plain.  So  Leviticus  iv.  20,  "  the  priest  shall  make 
propitiation  for  them,  and  the  sin  shall  be  forgiven  to 
them"  ;  and  again,  almost  word  for  word,  in  verses  26,  31, 
35  ;  V.  6,  10,  13,  18.  In  some  of  these  passages  we  have 
propitiation  for  sin  almost  word  for  word  as  in  1  John 
ii.  2. 

In  each  of  the  above  places  the  effect  of  propitiation  is 
described  as  forgiveness.  Evidently  the  sacrifices  here 
prescribed  were  means  ordained  by  God  by  which  a  sinner 
might  escape  the  punishment  due  to  his  sin.  The  same 
verb  occurs  very  frequently  throughout  the  Book  of  Levi- 
ticus, e.g.  sixteen  times  in  chap.  xvi.  in  reference  to  the 
great  Lay  of  Atonement. 

This  frequent  use  of  a  cognate  word  is  at  once  recalled 
by  1  John  ii.  2,  where  again  we  have  conspicuous  and  re- 
peated mention  of  sin  and,  a  few  verses  earlier,  of  forgive- 
ness of  sins.  The  passage  before  us  evidently  means  that 
Christ  is  Himself,  not  only  the  sinner's  Advocate  with  God, 
but  a  means  by  which  the  sinner  finds  shelter  from  the 
anger  of  God  against  sin. 

We  notice  that  in  the  Mosaic  ritual,  where  the  word 
atonement  or  propitiation  is  often  used,  the  only  ordinary 
means  of  propitiation  is  a  bloody  sacrifice.  This  almost 
constant  use  of  the  word,  taken  in  connection  with  the 
express  mention  of  the  blood  of  Christ  in  1  John  i.  7, 
leaves  no  room  for  doubt  that  the  propitiation  mentioned  in 
chap.  ii.  2  is  brought  about  by  the  violent  death  of  Christ 
on  the  cross. 

Similarly  in  chap.  iv.  10,  after  stating  in  ver.  9  that 
"  God  sent  His  only  begotten  Son  into  the  world  in  order 
that  we  may  live  through  Him,"  the  writer  further  ex- 
pounds the  mission  of  Christ  by  adding  that  "  God  sent  His 
Son  to  be  a  propitiation  for  our  sins."      The  two  phrases 


124  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 

are  equivalent.  For,  to  guilty  man  there  is  no  entrance 
into  life  unless  God  provide  for  him  a  means  of  escape  from 
the  penalty  due  to  his  sins. 

In  the  Book  of  Revelation  we  have  three  statements 
about  the  death  of  Christ  in  its  relation  to  man's  sin,  each 
as  definite  as  any  passage  expounded  above. 

In  Eevelation  i.  5,  at  the  opening  of  the  wondrous 
vision,  we  hear  a  greeting  of  peace  from  each  Person  of 
the  blessed  Trinity ;  and  a  special  song  of  praise  to  the 
Second  Person,  "  To  Him  that  loved  us  and  loosed  us 
from  our  sins  in  His  blood."  This  outburst  of  gratitude, 
prompted  by  mention  of  the  name  of  Jesus,  directs  con- 
spicuous attention  to  the  violent  death  of  Christ  as  the 
means  of  our  salvation  from  sin,  in  complete  harmony 
with  the  teaching  expounded  above  from  the  Gospels  and 
the  First  Epistle  of  John. 

In  chap.  iv.  2  we  have  a  vision  of  the  Father  enthroned 
in  majesty.  In  ver.  8  He  is  saluted  as  the  thrice  Holy,  as 
Almighty,  as  He  that  was,  and  is,  and  cometh  ;  and  in  ver. 
11  as  the  Creator  of  all  things.  In  the  next  chapter  another 
scene  opens  before  us.  The  prophet  sees  in  the  midst  of 
the  throne,  among  the  four  living  creatures  and  the  seated 
elders,  "a  Lamb  standing  as  slain."  Amid  the  splendours 
of  heaven,  the  Son  bears  marks  of  His  cruel  death  on  earth. 
The  significance  of  this  vision  of  past  death  amid  present 
and  endless  life  is  explained  in  the  "  new  song "  which 
bursts  upon  our  delighted  ears  in  ver.  9  :  "  worthy  art 
Thou  to  take  the  book  because  Thou  wast  slain  and  didst 
purchase  for  God  in  Thy  blood  out  of  every  tribe  and 
tongue  and  people  and  nation."  The  words  in  ver.  9 
Tliou  toast  slain  followed  by  in  Thy  blood  throws  into  most 
conspicuous  prominence  the  death  of  Christ ;  and  we  are 
told  that  by  that  death  Christ  has  purchased  men  for  God  : 
'>p/6paaa<;  tu>  Qecp.  The  writer  here  asserts,  in  language 
open  to  no  doubt  whatever,  that  the  death  of  Christ  upon 


IX  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  125 


the  cross  was  the  means  by  which  He  has  restored  men 
to  their  right  relation  to  God  as  His  possession. 

The  idea  of  purchase,  expressed  in  this  passage,  is  in 
close  harmony  with  Matthew  xx.  28,  Mark  x.  45,  already 
expounded :  "  the  Son  of  Man  came  to  give  His  life  a 
ransom  instead  of  many." 

In  close  agreement  with  1  John  i.  7,  but  in  a  form  agree- 
ing with  the  bold  imagery  of  the  Book  of  Eevelation, 
we  read  in  chap.  vii.  14,  "  they  washed  their  robes  and 
made  them  white  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb."  The  former 
passage  teaches  that  the  purification  attributed  to  the  death 
of  Christ  comes  to  us  from  a  source  other  than  ourselves  : 
the  latter  implies  that  the  cleansing  wrought  for  men  in  the 
death  of  Christ  must  be  appropriated  by  each  one  for  him- 
self. In  each  passage  the  death  of  Christ  is  conspicuous  as 
the  means  of  purification. 

Thus  across  the  bright  visions  of  the  Book  of  Eevelation 
falls  three  times  the  deep  shadow  of  the  cross  of  Christ.  And 
each  time  the  shadow  kindles  the  radiance  into  a  brighter 
glory. 

To  sum  up.  In  a  former  paper  we  found  Christ  teaching, 
as  His  words  are  recorded  in  the  Synoptist  Gospels,  that 
He  was  about  voluntarily  to  lay  down  His  life  in  order 
to  save  men,  that  for  their  salvation  His  death  was  abso- 
lutely needful,  that  it  was  to  be  the  basis  of  a  new  Cove- 
nant between  God  and  man,  in  order  to  gain  for  man 
forgiveness  of  sins.  In  this  paper  we  have  found  a  type  of 
teaching  differing  widely  in  phraseology  and  modes  of 
thought  from  that  of  the  Synoptist  Gospels.  But  in  the 
Fourth  Gospel  we  have  found  references  somewhat  more 
numerous  than  in  the  other  three  Gospels,  to  the  approach- 
ing death  of  Christ  as  the  designed  means  of  the  salvation 
He  announced  to  men.  In  an  epistle  most  closely  related 
to  the  Fourth  Gospel  and  manifestly  from  the  same  pen  we 
found  an  assertion  linking  purification  from  sin  with  the 


12G  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

death  of  Christ,  and  two  other  passages  connecting  the 
deHverance  from  sin  wrought  by  Christ  with  the  ancient 
sacrifices  prescribed  in  the  Mosaic  ritual  as  a  means  of 
forgiveness.  Lastly,  in  the  Book  of  Eevelation  we  found 
three  most  conspicuous  assertions  that  the  blood  and  death 
of  Christ  were  the  means  of  deliverance  from  sin. 

In  our  next  paper  I  shall  discuss  the  teaching  of  the 
Book  of  Acts  and  of  the  Epistles  of  Peter  on  the  great  sub- 
ject now  before  us. 

Joseph  Agae  Beet. 


THE  MIBACLES   OF  CHRIST. 

II. 

We  have  seen  that  what  the  Christian  miracles  imply  is 
not  a  superseding  of  the  forces  of  nature,  but  the  wielding 
of  them  in  a  more  than  human  grasp.  Jesus  Himself  re- 
garded them  as  a  manifestation  of  God,  that  God  who  is 
now  resting  from  creation,  and  into  whose  sabbath  we  that 
believe  do  enter.  They  cannot  be  a  violation  of  this  very 
sabbath  by  new  exertions  of  creative  power,  for  Christ  did 
only  what  he  saw  His  Father  do,  and  was  faithful  as  a 
Son  in  His  Father's  house.  Now  it  is  certain  that  the 
objections  of  science  entirely  fail  to  reach,  not  to  speak  of 
refuting,  this  conception  of  the  miracles. 

Invited  to  retain  our  faith  in  Jesus,  but  to  reject  the 
miraculous  from  our  creed  as  an  accretion,  we  have  rejoined 
that  this  proposal  ignores  the  existence  of  the  supernatural 
in  the  very  conception  of  Jesus.  Thence  it  cannot,  upon 
any  theory  whatever,  be  eliminated  without  denying  all  the 
laws  of  that  human  nature  above  which  this  conception 
towers,  sublime,  and  even  now  without  a  parallel,  although 
the  model  is  before  us,  and  although  He  is  for  ever  repro- 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  127 

ducing  Himself  iu  the  bosom  of  the  Church.  When  all  is 
said,  the  miracles  are  not  a  stumbling-block  except  because 
they  transcend  the  ordinary  experience  of  mankind  so 
amazingly,  and,  for  men  who  deny  God,  so  inexplicably. 
But  why  are  not  the  story  of  Christ  and  His  teaching  and 
its  influence  (wherever  they  come  from,  call  them  history 
or  legend  as  you  please)  felt  to  transcend  experience  in  a 
manner  quite  as  amazing,  and  without  God,  as  inexplic- 
able ?  Why  is  it  not  confessed  that  the  problem  exists, 
and  what  is  now  demanded  is  a  vindex  nodo  dignus  .'  Only 
because  men  are  far  more  deeply  impressed  by  what  is 
physical  than  what  is  spiritual,  by  a  disease  than  a  sin,  by 
recovered  health  than  by  purity  restored. 

But  there  is  more  to  say.  If  we  consent  to  reject  the 
supernatural,  on  what  ground,  with  what  object,  should  we 
still  retain  our  faith  in  Jesus?  "Because,"  it  will  assuredly 
be  answered,  "  we  confess  what  you  have  just  now  urged  : 
the  teaching  of  Jesus  vouches  itself.  Its  purity  is  not  more 
phenomenal  than  its  power.  If  anywhere  in  the  writing  of 
a  sage  or  an  ascetic  we  discover  an  incomplete  parallel  for 
some  of  his  maxims,  still  we  search  in  vain  for  a  similar 
grasp  on  the  convictions  and  affections  of  mankind.  Jesus 
proves  His  religion  by  making  it  work ;  by  its  fruit  we  know 
it :  its  true  evidence  is  experimental,  like  that  of  bread. 
Get  rid  then  of  what  offends  our  scientific  prepossessions, 
and  you  will  attain  universal  acceptance  ;  you  will  com- 
mend the  divine  morality  to  our  conscience,  and  the  divine 
sorrow  to  our  sympathy."  This  hope  gives  all  its  plausi- 
bility to  the  proposal  to  revise  Christianity.  But  this  hope 
is  a  dream.  Eliminate  the  miraculous,  and  with  it  vanishes 
every  weapon  that  arms  our  religion  with  practical  power 
over  mankind.  The  authority  of  scripture  vanishes  with 
inspiration.  The  sacraments  vanish,  because  they  assert 
the  resurrection  life,  shared  with  us,  who  are  "  risen  with 
Him  "  as  from  the  baptismal  wave,  and  are  nourished  by  His 


128  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

flesh,  which  is  "  life  indeed."  The  day  of  rest  vanishes, 
because  it  is  a  celebration  of  His  resurrection.  All  the 
appeals  by  which  sinners  are  converted  vanish,  for  He  does 
not  stand  at  the  door  and  knock,  nor  see  of  the  travail  of 
His  soul ;  neither  can  ingratitude  crucify  Him  afresh  ;  nor 
have  we  any  High  Priest  to  reassure  our  unworthiness, 
unless  He  is  risen  from  the  dead.  Our  hope  is  vain,  and 
we  are  yet  in  our  sins.  Thus,  when  the  living  Christ  is 
gone,  the  life  fades  out  of  the  system  also.  We  need  no 
Goethe  to  instruct  us  that  all  theory  is  grey  while  the  tree 
of  life  is  green.  Our  religion  becomes  weak  and  unsubstan- 
tial as  a  ghost,  if  it  has  only  a  ghost  of  Jesus  to  rely  upon. 

Concede  the  greatest  of  the  miracles,  and  it  is  absurd  to 
wrangle,  in  the  name  of  science,  about  the  rest.  Eeject 
this,  and  there  is  an  end  of  that  religion  which  cannot,  you 
tell  us,  be  replaced,  which  has  the  same  evidence  that  com- 
mends our  food  to  us,  the  evidence  of  a  universal  craving 
and  a  universal  satisfaction.  In  truth  it  matters  not  upon 
what  evidence  we  rely  for  our  new  and  non-miraculous 
Christianity-testimony  or  intuition  or  human  need — that 
same  evidence  attests  also  the  miraculous.  Especially  is 
this  true  of  the  evidence  from  its  effect  on  human  nature, 
on  the  public  conscience,  for  this  depends  entirely  on  the 
conviction  that  He  who  suffered  and  loved  is  declared  to  be 
the  Son  of  God  with  power  by  the  resurrection  from  the 
dead. 

This  brings  us  to  consider  the  nature  of  the  evidence  for 
the  miraculous.  A  living  student  of  science  loves  to  con- 
trast the  evidence  on  which  she  accepts  her  facts  with  that, 
for  example,  upon  which  religion  receives  the  narrative 
concerning  what  he  so  wittily  calls  the  Gadarene  pigs. 
He  apparently  supposes  that  he  will  refute  everything 
when  he  can  discern  one  miracle  that  cannot,  if  isolated 
from  the  rest,  offer   sufficient   independent   evidence ;  and 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  129 

that  it  is  our  duty  to  present  satisfactory  and  exhaustive 
proofs  for  every  several  miracle.  But  this  is  a  reversal, 
both  of  his  own  position  and  of  ours.  We  are  no  more 
bound  to  establish  separately  the  actual  occurrence  and  the 
miraculous  nature  of  each  event  in  the  narrative,  than 
science  is  bound  to  demonstrate  separately  the  electrical 
origin  of  every  lightning-flash,  and  every  Aurora  Borealis. 
Explain  one  storm,  and  we  concede  the  explanation  of  the 
rest.  Establish  one  miracle,  and  there  need  be  no  trouble 
about  the  others.  Thus,  for  example,  the  miracle  of  the 
coin  in  the  fish's  mouth  was  probably  at  no  time  attested 
by  other  witnesses  besides  Peter  himself.  If  we  found  it  in 
the  life  of  Xavier,  we  should  only  say,  "  Here  is  one  more, 
added  to  the  numberless  and  baseless  legends  which  sprang 
up  years  after  the  great  missionary  died."  To  us  it  is 
commended  by  its  place  among  more  public  miracles,  by 
something  in  itself  which  we  shall  hereafter  see,  but  es- 
pecially by  its  connection  with  the  best  attested  fact  in 
history — the  resurrection  of  Jesus.  These  things  make  it 
so  easy  to  believe,  that  we  do  not  even  observe  the  absence 
of  any  information  that  it  ever  happened  at  all.  AVe  simply 
read  that  Peter  was  bidden  to  cast  the  hook,  and  we  as- 
sume, as  a  matter  of  course  in  the  circumstances,  that  the 
result  followed. 

Clearly  then  our  opponent  is  not  free  to  make  merry  over 
"the  pigs"  before  he  has  addressed  himself  to  the  most 
public,  the  most  powerfully  attested,  and  the  most  spiritu- 
ally fruitful  of  all  the  miracles — the  resurrection  of  Jesus 
from  the  dead. 

Thus  our  faith  in  the  miracles  resembles  an  arch  of  many 
stones.  Like  such  an  arch  on  its  foundations,  it  rests  upon 
solid  testimony  ;  but  it  is  not  required  that  every  stone 
should  touch  the  ground,  or  every  incident  repose  directly 
upon  such  evidence.  When  once  the  base  is  firmly  laid, 
the  stability  of  all  will  be  secured  by  their  being  properly 

VOL.    V.  9 


130  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

fitted  together,  by  their  relative  adjustment  to  one  another, 
to  the  system  of  which  they  are  a  part,  and  especially  to  the 
true  conception  of  Jesus,  Whom  they  ought  to  manifest, 
not  only  as  a  supernatural  power,  but  also  as  the  perfect 
and  ideal  Man. 

In  saying  this,  we  put  forward  no  special  claim  on  behalf 
of  the  miraculous.     "When  the  best  of  witnesses  steps  into 
the  box,  his  story  cannot  be  checked  and  substantiated  at 
every  point.     But  the  cross-examiner  will  lose  his  case  if 
he  contents  himself  with  showing  that  not  every  point  is 
sustained  by  independent  testimony  :  he  must  disprove  the 
claim  that  wherever  it  can  be  tested  it  stands  the  trial,  and 
that    whatever  is  unsubstantiated   is    consistent  with   the 
rest.     It  may  be  a  paradox,  but  it  is  true,  that  in  ordinary 
life   a  story   consisting  of  many   details,   and   vouched    by 
many  witnesses,  is  so  judged  that  at  one  and  the  same  time 
the  parts  are  building  up  the  whole,  and  the  total  effect  is 
vouching  for  the  parts.     A  man  has  a  good  character  to 
start  with.     When  the  trial  is  over,  his  reputation  is  demo- 
lished by  an  accumulation  of  particulars,  not  one  of  which 
would   have  resisted  for  a   moment  our  conviction  of  his 
integrity,  while  some,  taken  by  themselves,  are  an  actual 
stumbling-block  to  our  new  judgment.      Taken  with  the 
rest  they  are  not  a  hindrance,  but  a  supplement  and  a  com- 
mentary.    And  if  we  find  hereafter  in  these  strange  stories, 
upon  which  unbelief  loves  to  dwell,  any  indications,  which 
we  could  ill  spare,  of  the  true  mind  of  Jesus,  any  solid  con- 
tribution towards  the  general  effect,  which  is  confessedly 
adorable,  if  they  prove  to  be  essential  notes  in  a  musical 
harmony,  then  the  fact  that  they  are  exposed  to  plausible 
challenge,  to  superficial  objection,  and  above  all  to  ridicule, 
will  only  prove  that  it  was  no  shallow,  legendarj',  or  mythi- 
cal impulse  which  conceived  and  embraced  them.     For  it 
is  part  of  the  adverse  argument  that  the  story  was  actually 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  131 

modified    to   meet   a  popular    sentiment,    lofty   enough   to 
mould  it  into  the  Christian  Messiah. 

When  we  are  bidden  to  contrast  the  evidence  on  which 
science  proceeds  with  the  evidence  for  the  story  of  the 
swine,  or  the  coin  in  the  fish's  mouth,  two  facts  are  delibe- 
rately or  carelessly  ignored.  The  decisions  of  practical  life 
are  habitually  reached  and  held  fast  on  evidence  far  from 
scientific.  And  again,  science  herself  demands  the  assent 
of  the  public  on  slender  and  hearsay  evidence.  "What 
evidence  have  we,  the  public,  for  those  experiments  in  the 
high  Alps  by  which  Mr.  Tyndall  refuted  the  belief  that  life 
is  being  spontaneously  generated?  What  evidence  had  we, 
first  for  the  fishing  up  of  protoplasm  from  the  deep  seas, 
and  afterwards  for  the  decision  that  this  all-important 
substance  was  fished  up,  only  because  it  had  been  sunk  in 
an  ill-washed  vessel  ?  Why  were  we  invited  to  believe  in 
a  discovery  so  momentous,  and  then  to  rescind  our  creed 
again  ?  ^ 

It  is  objected,  however,  that  the  miracles  of  Jesus  gained 
credence,  merely  because,  in  that  superstitious  age,  it  was 
almost  as  easy  to  believe  a  miracle  as  any  other  event. 
"  As  for  miracles,  people  at  that  period  took  them  for  the 
indispensable  marks  of  the  Divine,  and  for  the  signs  of 
prophetic  vocations.  The  legends  of  Elijah  and  Elisha 
were  full  of  them.  It  was  settled  that  the  Messiah  should 
work  many."  "The  power  of  working  miracles  passed  for 
a  licence  regularly  given  by  God  to  men,  and  had  nothing 
surprising  in  it"  (Kenan,  V.  cle  J.,  pp.  266-7.  Ed.  15). 
"  They  were  a  people  who,  whether  we  think  of  the  Jews 
or   the   Galileans,   were   inclined   to   be    superficial,    were 

'  "  The  evidence  of  miracles,  at  least  to  Protestant  Christians,  is  not,  in  our 
own  day,  of  this  cogent  description.  It  is  not  the  evidence  of  our  senses,  but 
of  witnesses,  and  even  this  not  at  first  hand,  hut  resting  on  the  attestation  of 
books  and  traditions  ■'  (J.  S.  Mill :  "Essays  on  Religion,"  p.  219).  It  is  twenty 
to  one  that  every  word  of  this  indictment  equally  applied  to  Mill's  own  convic- 
tion that  the  earth  revolves  around  the  sun. 


132  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

notoriously  credulous,  superstitious,  and  lovers  of  the 
marvellous,  and  among  whom  belief  in  the  miraculous 
was  daily  growing  stronger"  (Keim,  /.  of  N.  iii.  169).  It 
was  an  age  "  when  no  one  thought  it  worth  while  to 
contradict  any  alleged  miracle,  because  it  was  the  belief 
of  the  age  that  miracles  proved  nothing.  .  .  .  There 
was  scarcely  any  canon  of  probability,  and  miracles  were 
thought  to  be  the  commonest  of  all  phenomena"  (J.  S. 
Mill,  Essays  on  Beligion,  pp.  237,  8). 

As  soon  as  one  looks  carefully  at  these  bold  assertions,  he 
discovers  them  to  be  mutually  destructive.  It  was  natural 
that  miracles  should  be  ascribed  to  Jesus  as  soon  as  He  was 
believed  to  be  the  Messiah,  says  Kenan,  because  they  were 
"  indispensable  marks  of  the  Divine,  and  signs  of  a  pro- 
phetic vocation."  It  was  natural  that  they  should  pass 
uncontradicted,  says  Mill,  because  every  one  agreed  that 
they  proved  nothing  at  all. 

Nothing  is  plainer  than  that  one  or  other  of  these  state- 
ments was  not  derived  from  history,  but  from  theological 
bias,  and  the  supposed  necessities  of  the  situation.  And 
this  is  a  lesson  to  be  remembered  when  next  we  meet  with 
bold  and  generalizing  assertions  of  the  kind.  We  came 
on  just  such  another  lesson  when  Strauss,  in  the  New 
Life  explained  the  miracles  by  the  demand  for  them. 
"Miracles  He  must  perform,  whether  He  would  or  not.  As 
soon  as  He  was  considered  to  be  a  prophet  .  .  .  miracu- 
lous powers  were  attributed  to  Him  ;  and  as  soon  as  they 
were  attributed  to  Him,  they  came  of  course  into  opera- 
tion." Yes,  but  this  explanation  assumes  that  He  had  first, 
without  a  miracle,  attained  prophetic  rank :  how  did  this 
come  to  pass  ?  Easily  enough,  answered  Strauss.  **  We 
cannot  doubt  that  He  might  attain  this  character,  as  well 
as  the  Baptist,  even  without  miracles"  (i.  365).  Here  is 
wisdom  indeed.  On  the  same  page,  from  the  same  para- 
graph, we  learn  that  a  prophet  must  work  miracles  (because 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  133 

they  would  spring  up  around  him,  spontaneously  gener- 
ated) ;  and  also  we  are  reminded  that  the  only  other 
prophet  of  the  period  experienced  no  inconvenience  of  the 
kind. 

Nor  does  the  Old  Testament  at  all  countenance  the 
assertion  that  miracles  were  a  necessary  ornament  of  the 
prophetic  rank.  It  is  true  that  they  are  attributed  to 
Elijah  and  Elisha  (as  Kenan  carefully  mentions),  but  it  is 
quite  as  certain  that  numbers  of  the  prophets  performed 
none,  and  among  them  was  Jeremiah,  whom  some  con- 
founded with  Jesus. 

It  is  not  only  to  Strauss,  or  by  virtue  of  one  awkward 
slip,  that  the  case  of  the  Baptist  is  inconvenient.  The  fact 
that  he  succeeded  without  a  miracle  is  well  attested.  It 
rests,  not  only  on  the  assertion  in  St.  John,  but  also  on 
Herod's  ingenious  notion,  that  Christ  worked  them  because 
He  was  the  Baptist,  risen  from  the  dead,  and  therefore  pos- 
sessed of  the  secrets  of  another  world.  This  implies  that 
John  had  not  wrought  miracles  before  his  death.  And 
there  is  further  confirmation  in  the  intense  curiosity  of 
Herod  to  see  Jesus,  and  thus  to  behold  a  marvel. 

Now,  if  John  worked  no  miracle,  and  yet  his  rank  was 
so  well  established  that  the  chief  priests  would  have  been 
sboned  if  they  denied  it,  what  becomes  of  all  this  theoriz- 
ing about  the  inevitable,  contagious,  impOTative,  and  univer- 
sal persuasion,  by  means  of  which  miracles  were  forced  on 
Jesus? 

But  there  is  another  very  practical  view  of  the  case.  If 
the  belief  in  miracles,  and  the  demand  for  them  from  a 
prophet,  was  so  universal,  what  would  have  become  of 
Jesus  unless  He  actually  performed  them  and  upon  a 
sujfficient  scale?  Consider,  for  example,  His  reply  to  the 
Baptist,  when  the  faith  of  His  forerunner  was  at  fault. 
A  simple-minded  reader  will  find  Keim's  criticism  of  this 
passage  quite  astonishing.       "  To   the  Baptist's    inquiries 


134  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

as  to  His  Messiahship,  Jesiis  answered  in  the  words  of 
Isaiah's  prophecy.  .  .  ,  Did  He,  contrary  to  Isaiah's 
meaning,  and  contrary  to  the  unequivocal  final  word  about 
the  spiritual  gospel  to  the  poor,  refer  to  the  physically 
diseased,  to  the  physically  diseased  alone,  to  those  who 
were  physically  raised  again,  as  the  Gospels  understand 
Him  to  have  done?"  (-/.  of  N.  iii.  161).  Certainly  not  to 
these  alone.  Such  a  notion  is  precluded  indeed  by  the 
final  words,  but  these  imply,  by  their  separate  mention 
of  evangelization,  that  something  different  was  meant  in 
the  previous  clauses.  And  it  is  quite  absurd  to  suppose 
that  Jesus  quoted  these  without  any  intention  that  they 
should  be  literally  understood,  at  the  time  when  Keim 
admits  that  works  of  healing  were  eagerly  expected,  and 
were  actually  being  evolved  by  this  expectation,  when  "  the 
confidence  of  men,  and  their  misery,  hastened  to  the  new 
Teacher  and  besought  His  help,"  when  He  was  consequently 
"driven  further  "  than  He  anticipated  (p.  173)  ;  and  when 
there  could  not  but  "  arise  for  Him  the  necessity  of  being 
the  physician  for  the  bodily  as  well  as  the  spiritually 
sick"  (p.  175).  It  was  amid  such  circumstances  that  He, 
enumerating  the  physical  ills  supposed  to  be  removed,  said, 
"ye  see  and  hear"  these  things,  and  bade  them  be  repeated 
to  John ;  and  yet,  as  we  are  assured,  the  evangelists  blun- 
dered egregiously  in  supposing  all  this  to  be  anything  more 
than  a  figure  of  speech. 

In  truth,  the  widespread  and  general  expectation  that 
the  Messiah  should  work  miracles,  carries  two  results  along 
with  it,  which  are  somewhat  embarrassing  to  the  modern 
rationalist.  It  absolutely  refutes  the  wild  notion  of  Mill, 
that  by  general  consent  a  miracle  proved  nothing,  and 
deserved  no  attention.  It  also  raises  very  seriously  the 
price  at  which  a  pretender  could  make  his  claim  good.  If 
miracles  were  not  expected,  if  their  effect  were  not  dis- 
counted   by  the  popular  anticipation,  then  a   few  modest 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  135 

marvels  might  have  sufficed  to  impress  men  and  to  attract 
them.  It  would  then  have  been  more  easy  to  explain 
such  unassuming  wonders  by  supposing,  with  Kenan,  that 
"  the  presence  of  a  superior  person  treating  the  sick  man 
with  sweetness,  and  giving  him,  by  some  visible  signs,  the 
assurance  of  his  restoration,  was  the  decisive  medicine"; 
that  "  the  pleasure  of  seeing  Him  did  much  :  He  gave  what 
He  was  able,  a  sigh,  a  hope,  and  that  is  not  ineffectual"  {V. 
de  J.  270,  271).  We  might  then  be  satisfied  with  Keiin's 
deeper  and  more  reverential  application  of  the  same  notion, 
"  the  mere  stimulation  of  the  oppressed  or  dormant  life  of 
the  soul  would  bring  with  it  an  immediate  release  from  the 
predominance  of,  from  the  one-sided  slavery  to,  material 
infirmities  and  pains "  (iii.  194).  Or  we  might  accept 
Schenkel's  variation  of  the  same  theory,  that  "it  is  not 
irreconcilable  with  the  nature  of  the  human  spirit  that 
Jesus,  by  His  spiritual  power,  produced  on  other  minds 
effects  which  manifested  themselves  physically  "  ;  but  that 
these  were,  "after  all,  only  effects  produced  by  the  personal 
human  spirit."  And  we  might  even  suppose  that  if  a  leper 
were  "  already  in  an  advanced  state  of  cure "  he  could 
"receive  from  Jesus  an  access  of  vital  power  greatly 
accelerating  his  restoration"  {Sketch  of  the  Character  of 
J.  pp.  69,  375). 

All  this  would  at  least  be  less  intolerable  to  the  reason, 
if  expectation  were  not  on  fire.  But  the  theory  is,  that 
the  public  imagination  first  created  marvels  and  forced 
them  upon  Jesus,  and  then  exaggerated  wildly  the  marvels 
which  its  eagerness  and  impressibility  rendered  possible. 
Who  does  not  see  that  such  a  state  of  feeling  would  in- 
dignantly refuse  to  be  satisfied  by  small  responses  ?  It  is 
true  enough  that  before  now,  upon  a  sudden  cry  of  Fire, 
persons  who  were  honestly  bed-ridden  for  years,  have  fled 
for  their  lives.  Let  us  grant,  then,  that  certain  forms 
of  decrepitude,  if  attracted  to  Jesus  by  a  wide-spread  per- 


136  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 


suasion  that  He  could  heal,  might  have  been  so  nerved  and 
braced  up  by  the  pleasure  of  seeing  Him,  and  the  gift 
of  a  sigh  and  a  hope  (as  Kenan  has  it),  that  the  disease 
would  be  charmed  away.  But  this  would  not  long  suftice. 
The  Old  Testament  prophecies  spoke  expressly  of  leprosy 
and  blindness  ;  nor,  in  the  actual  record,  is  any  other  form 
of  disease  more  common,  and  more  frequently  relieved. 
Are  we  to  believe  that  in  fact  no  such  sufferers  publicly 
challenged  Him?  Or  did  excitement  restore  the  ruined 
organ,  the  corroded  tissue,  the  chemistry  of  the  poisoned 
blood?  Or  would  the  common  faith  have  survived 
one  failure,  not  to  speak  of  persistent  failure  in  treat- 
ing all  such  cases?  And  the  Pharisees,  who  exhausted 
all  the  resources  of  self-interested  malice,  who  actually 
traded  on  His  refasal  to  grant  a  sign  "  from  heaven,"  and 
who  are  found  on  His  return  from  the  Transfiguration  eagerly 
questioning  the  disciples,  amid  a  violently  agitated  con- 
course, because  they  have  failed  to  cleanse  a  demoniac — 
would  the  Pharisees  not  have  challenged  Him,  again  and 
again,  to  cross  the  narrow  limits  marked  for  His  works 
by  the  remedial  effect  of  the  imagination  of  the  sick? 
The  ruin  of  Savonarola  is  a  fine  comment  upon  such 
theories. 

Besides,  the  pubhc  expectation  found  Jesus  by  no  means 
so  plastic  in  its  hands.  It  failed  to  make  Him  either 
a  politician  or  a  king,  how  did  it  force  Him  "  either  to 
renounce  His  mission,  or  else  become  a  thaumaturgist  ?  " 
(Renan,  V.  de  J.,  267). 

A  strange  specimen  of  the  recklessness  even  of  dis- 
tinguished writers  upon  this  subject  is  that  St.  Paul,  of 
all  men,  should  have  been  pressed  into  the  sceptical  ranks. 
J.  S.  Mill  asserts  that  "  St.  Paul,  the  only  known  exception 
to  the  ignorance  and  want  of  education  of  the  first  genera- 
tion of  Christians,  attests  no  miracle  but  that  of  his  own 
conversion,  which  of  all  the  miracles  of  the  New  Testa- 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  137 

ment,  is  the  one  which  admits  of  the  easiest  explanation 
from  natural  causes  "   {Essays  on  Belig.,  p.  239). 

Keira  does  not  put  the  matter  quite  so  rudely,  but  it 
comes  to  much  the  same  in  the  upshot.  "  The  Apostle 
Paul  was  silent  concerning  the  miracles  of  Jesus,  and 
repulsed  with  displeasure  the  Jewish  demand  for  signs" 
(iii.  154).  Even  without  the  last  clause,  which  makes 
the  meaning  plain,  it  would  be  clear  enough  that  no  in- 
ference could  fairly  be  drawn  from  silence  "  concerning 
the  miracles  of  Jesus,"  if  other  miracles  are  relied  upon, 
wrought  by  His  authority  and  in  His  name.  When  one 
w'ho  is  simply  a  follower  of  Jesus  claims  to  work  miracles, 
it  is  absurd  to  pretend  that  his  superior  culture  was  doubt- 
ful about  the  miracles  of  his  Lord.  In  fact,  however, 
St  Paul,  in  the  very  earliest  of  his  extant  epistles,  asserts 
the  resurrection  of  Christ  as  a  matter  entirely  established, 
and  as  the  warrant  for  expecting  our  own  (1  Thess.  iv.  14). 
And  the  assertion  of  Mill  is  false  to  every  page  of  Paul's 
writing,  unless  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  is  "  no  miracle." 

As  to  his  own  miracles,  their  treatment  in  his  writings 
is  most  instructive  and  remarkable.  When  his  authority 
is  conceded,  and  a  Church  is  at  peace  within  itself,  he  does 
not  even  mention  the  miraculous  powers  which  he  claimed. 
Now  this  is  exactly  the  time  when  excitement  would  lead  a 
fanatic  to  flaunt  them,  when  calculation  and  self-assertion 
would  make  an  impostor  loud  about  them,  when  only  grace 
would  keep  silent  about  its  own  performances.  But  the 
moment  it  is  necessary  to  vindicate  his  apostolic  powers, 
just  when  an  enthusiast  would  be  chilled,  and  an  impostor 
reserved  and  cautious,  he  promptly  and  always  appeals  to 
the  sanction  of  the  supernatural.  Thus  his  use  of  the 
miracles  is  at  once  practical,  sober,  and  bold ;  and  it  is 
exhibited  in  the  very  epistles  which  reveal  his  vehement, 
intrepid,  and  yet  loving  nature  so  decisively,  that  criticism 
has  least  to  say  against  their  authenticity,  and   controver- 


138  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

sialists  who  appeal  to  his  sentiments  at  all  must  be  taken 
to  accept  their  evidence. 

In  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  he  enumerates 
twice  over  gifts  of  healings,  workings  of  powers,  prophecy, 
speaking  with  divers  tongues,  and  their  interpretation  (xii. 
9,  10,  28). 

In  the  Second  Epistle  to  the  same  restive  Church,  he 
writes  :  "  The  signs  of  an  apostle  were  wrought  among 
3'^ou  in  all  patience,  by  signs  and  wonders  and  powers  "  ;  nor 
were  these  experiences  peculiar  to  them,  but  only  matters 
in  which  they  were  not  made  inferior  to  other  Churches 
(xii.  V2,  13). 

Only  the  wildest  fanaticism  of  unbelief  would  question 
the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  ;  and,  indeed,  unbelief  has  pre- 
ferred to  use  it  against  the  history  of  St.  Luke ;  yet  there  he 
stakes  the  whole  controversy  upon  the  question,  "  He  that 
supplieth  to  you  the  spirit,  and  worketh  miracles  among 
you,  doeth  he  it  by  the  works  of  the  law  or  by  the  hearing 
of  faith  ?  "  (iii.  5).  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Eomans,  a  Church 
rent  by  internal  divisions,  he  insists  upon  the  things 
"  which  Christ  wrought  through  me,  for  the  obedience 
of  the  Gentiles,  by  word  and  deed,  in  the  power  of  signs 
and  wonders  "  (xv.  18,  10).  In  fact  it  is  impossible  for  the 
most  corrosive  criticism  so  to  dissolve  the  writings  of  the 
great  apostle  that  anything  shall  survive,  and  yet  to 
obliterate  the  affirmation  both  of  his  own  miracles,  and 
also  of  the  resurrection  of  his  Lord.  To  use  his  name, 
therefore,  in  disparagement  of  the  miraculous  in  the  gospel 
story,  which  is  the  undisguised  object  both  of  Mill  and 
Keim,  is  a  lamentable  perversion  of  the  evidence. 

On  the  contrary,  we  may  boldly  contend  that  the  evidence 
of  the  Gospels  and  the  admissions  of  sceptics  concerning 
the  claims  of  Jesus,  and  the  admitted  writings  of  St.  Paul, 
reveal  a  phenomenon  without  a  parallel  outside  our  own 
religion.      Miracles  have  been  attributed  by  other  persons 


HISTORICAL  GEOGRAPHY  OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  139 


to  many  great  and  good  men.  And  again,  many  great  and 
good  men,  from  St.  Augustine  to  Cardinal  Newman,  have 
professed  a  belief  in  contemporary  miracles  not  their  own. 

What  cannot  be  matched  in  history  is  the  foundation 
of  a  great  and  solid  movement,  and  then  its  promulgation, 
by  deep  thinkers  and  holy  and  soberminded  men,  who 
claimed  that  they  themselves,  in  carrying  forward  such 
a  movement,  were  assisted  by  the  power  of  working 
miracles. 

This  is  the  claim  which  Schenkel  and  Strauss,  Eenan  and 
Keim,  admit  that  Jesus  made,  however  they  minimize 
its  value.  It  is  a  claim  which  cannot  be  rent  away  from 
the  writings  of  His  mighty  follawer.  And  it  stands  utterly 
alone  in  the  annals  of  the  human  mind. 

G.  A.  Chadwick. 


THE  HISTOBIGAL    GEOGRAPHY  OF    THE    HOLY 

LAND. 

Introductory. 

The  aim  of  these  papers  is  to  illustrate  God's  Word  and 
the  story  of  His  early  Church,  by  helping  others  to  see,  as 
I  myself  have  seen,  their  earthly  stage  and  background. 

There  are  many  ways  of  illustrating  the  Book  by  the 
Land,  but  some  are  wearisome  and  some  are  vain.  There 
is,  for  instance,  that  most  common  and  easy  way,  of  taking 
one's  readers  along  the  track  of  one's  own  journey  through 
Palestine,  reproducing  every  adventure,  scene,  social  custom 
or  antiquity  encountered,  and  labelling  it  with  a  text  or 
story  from  Scripture.  But  such  a  method  may  easily 
degenerate  into  the  sheerest  showing  of  waxworks  ;  it  does 
not  give  a  vision  of  the  land  as  a  whole,  nor  help  you  to 
hear  through  it  the  sound  of  running  history.  AVhat  is 
needed  by  the  reader  or  teacher  of  the  Bible  is  some  idea 


140  THE  HISTORICAL  GEOGRAPHY 


of  the  main  outlines  of  Palestine — its  shape  and  disposition ; 
its  plains,  passes  and  mountains ;  its  winds  and  tempera- 
tures ;  its  colours,  lights  and  shades.  Students  of  the  Bible 
desire  to  see  a  background  and  to  feel  an  atmosphere — to 
discover  from  "  the  lie  of  the  land  "  why  the  history  took 
certain  lines  and  the  prophecy  and  gospel  were  expressed  in 
certain  styles — above  all  to  discern  between  what  physical 
nature  contributed  to  that  wonderful  religious  development 
and  what  was  the  product  of  purely  moral  and  spiritual 
forces.  On  this  last  point  the  geography  of  the  Holy  Laud 
reaches  its  highest  interest.  It  is  also  good  to  realise  the 
historical  influences  by  which  our  religion  was  at  first  nur- 
tured or  exercised,  as  far  as  we  can  do  this  from  the  ruins 
which  these  have  left  in  the  country.  To  go  no  farther 
back  than  the  New  Testament — there  are  the  Greek  art, 
the  Eoman  rule,  and  the  industry  and  pride  of  Herod.  But 
the  remains  of  Scripture  times  are  not  so  many  as  the 
remains  of  the  centuries  since.  The  Palestine  of  to-day  is 
more  a  museum  of  Church  history  than  of  the  Bible — a 
museum  full  of  living  as  well  as  ancient  specimens  of  its 
subject.  East  of  Jordan,  in  the  indestructible  basalt  of 
the  Hauran,  there  are  monuments  of  the  passage  from 
Paganism  to  Christianity  even  more  numerous  and  remark- 
able than  the  catacombs  or  earliest  Churches  of  Rome  ; 
there  are  also  what  Italy  cannot  give  us — the  melancholy 
wrecks  of  the  passage  from  Christianity  to  Mohammedan- 
ism. On  the  west  of  the  Jordan  there  are  the  castles  and 
churches  of  the  Crusaders,  the  impression  of  their  brief 
kingdom  and  its  ruin.  And  then,  after  the  long  silence 
and  the  crumbling,  there  are  the  living  churches  of  to-day, 
and  the  lines  of  pilgrims  coming  up  to  Jerusalem  from  the 
four  corners  of  the  world. 

Deeper  than  all  this,  however,  is  the  need  which  Chris- 
tian men  have  to  realise  the  supreme  fact  of  their  religion 
— that  the  truth    and  love  of   God  have   come    to   us    in 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  141 

their  highest  power,  not  as  a  book  or  a  doctrine,  not  as  a 
whisper  in  our  hearts  or  vague  effluence  upon  the  world, 
but  as  a  Man,  a  native  and  citizen  of  this  land,  who  during 
His  earthly  labours  never  left  its  narrow  limits,  who  drew 
His  parables  from  the  fields  its  sunshine  lights,  and  all  the 
bustle  of  its  daily  life,  who  prayed  and  agonized  for  us 
through  its  quiet  night  scenes,  and  who  died  for  the  world 
upon  one  of  its  common  places  of  execution. 

Even  for  our  faith  in  the  Incarnation,  I  believe  that  a 
study  of  the  historical  geography  of  Palestine  is  not  with- 
out its  discipline.  Besides  helping  us  to  realise  the  long 
preparation  of  history  for  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  God 
ill  the  flesh,  a  vision  of  the  soil  and  climate  in  which  He 
grew  up  and  laboured  delivers  us  on  the  one  hand  from 
those  abstract  views  of  His  manhood,  which  have  so  often 
been  the  error  and  curse  of  Christianity  ;  and  on  the  other 
hand,  from  what  is  a  more  present  danger — the  interpreta- 
tion of  Christ  (prevalent  with  many  of  our  preachers)  as  if 
He  were  a  son  of  our  own  generation  and  soil.  Nor  need 
many  words  be  wasted  on  those  who  foolishly  imagine  that 
for  Christian  faith,  in  general,  familiarity  with  the  features 
of  Palestine  must  mean  disappointment.  This  can  happen 
only  where  faith  is  nothing  more  than  sentiment ;  to  mere 
religious  romance  a  close  acquaintance  with  Palestine  will 
always  be  a  shock.  But  he  who  comes  with  that  in- 
ward experience  of  his  religion,  which  no  material  vision 
can  either  diminish  or  materially  increase,  who  comes 
soberly,  knowing  that  even  round  Zion  and  upon  Jordan 
men  must  walk  by  faith  and  not  by  sight,  and  who  comes 
intelligently,  with  an  ordered  knowledge  of  the  story  of 
his  faith  and  church — he  will  never  be  disillusioned  by 
the  Holy  Land.  Every  league  of  her  is  a  witness  to  the 
natural,  unaffected   accuracy   of    the   Bible.  ^     Her   barest 

'  This  has  struck  every  ■visitor  to  the  laud.  Napoleou  the  Great  may  be 
quoted  :  "  En  campant  sur  les  ruiues  de  ces  auciennes  villes,  ou  hsait  tous  les 


142  THE  HISTORICAL   GEOGRAPHY 

features  may  correct  but  cannot  hurt  his  faith  ;  while  even 
those  historical  mysteries  which  now  darken  her  fields, 
once  so  bright  with  vision,  and  depress  her  people,  once 
so  favoured  of  God — those  triumphs  of  a  rude  and  sensual 
rehgion  over  the  Church  of  Christ  on  the  very  scenes  of 
His  revelation — are  but  warnings  of  the  misuse  to  which 
Christians  have  put  the  "holiness"  of  the  land,  and  pro- 
found motives  to  labour  upon  it  once  more  in  the  true 
spirit  of  Christ  Himself. 

The  Five  Parallel  Zones  and  the  Crossing. 

The  historical  geography  of  Palestine,  so  far  as  its  rela- 
tions with  the  rest  of  the  world  are  concerned,  may  be 
summed  up  in  a  paragraph.  Syria  lies  between  two  conti- 
nents, Asia  and  Africa  :  between  two  primeval  homes  of 
men,  the  valley  of  the  Euphrates  and  the  valley  of  the  Nile  : 
between  two  great  centres  both  of  ancient  and  of  modern 
empire.  Western  Asia  and  Egypt.  Its  long  highland  range, 
which  runs  almost  continuously  from  Mount  Taurus,  at  the 
north-east  corner  of  the  Levant,  to  the  Gulf  of  Akaba  on 
the  Eed  Sea,  has  been  likened  to  a  bridge  connecting  the 
two  continents — a  bridge  with  the  Great  Sea  upon  its  one 
side,  and  the  Great  Desert  upon  its  other.  The  natural 
entrances  to  a  bridge  are  by  the  ends  ;  and  with  two  very 
notable  exceptions  all  the  great  arrivals  or  assaults  upon 
Palestine  have  happened  from  the  north  or  from  the  south. 
The  two  exceptions  forced  the  Bridge  upon  its  eastern 
flank ;  by  this  way  both  Israel  and  Islam  entered  upon 
their  long  occupations  of  the  land.  But  for  reasons 
which  we  shall  presently  see,  no  invasion  ever  came  upon 
the  Bridge  from  the  west,  from  the  sea  ;  even  when  the 

soirs  I'ecriture  sainte a,  haute  voix sous  la  tente  du  geneial  eu  chef.  L'aualogie 
et  la  vei'ite  des  descriptions  etaieut  frappantes  ;  elles  convieiinent  encore  a  ce 
pays  apr^s  tant  de  siijclesetde  ■vicissitudes." — Memoires  jioiir  sei'vir  :  the  Cam- 
l)aigns  of  Egypt  and  Syria,  1798-1799,  dictated  by  Napoleon  himself.  Paris, 
1847. 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  143 


nations  of  Europe  sought  Palestine,  their  armies  did  not 
enter  by  its  harbours  till  the  littoral  was  already  in  their 
possession. 

Nevertheless,  it  is  from  the  sea  that  a  stranger  enjoys 
the  most  comprehensive  view  of  the  country,  and  by  the 
coast  that  he  now  most  frequently  approaches  it.  Before 
he  chmbs  the  long  range,  which  runs  down  Palestine,  from 
north  to  south,  it  is  better  that  he  should  stand  off  the 
land  altogether,  and  survey  that  central  range  itself; 
and  the  lower  hills  which  buttress  it  nearly  all  the  way 
along  ;  and,  between  them  and  the  sea,  the  plain  of  varying 
dimensions ;  and  the  straight  line  of  coast  in  alternate 
stretches  of  cliff  and  sand.  Afterwards  climbing  the 
central  range,  he  may  look  down  upon  the  Jordan  Valley, 
and  beyond  it  on  the  high  tableland  of  Eastern  Palestine. 

He  will  then  have  seen  the  five  parallel  zones  into  which 
the  Holy  Land  may  be  divided  :  (1)  The  Coast  and  Mari- 
time Plain;  (2)  The  Shephelah,  or  Low  Hills;  (3)  The 
Central  Kange ;  (4)  The  Jordan  Valley ;  (5)  The  Land  East 
of  Jordan. 

For  a  distance  of  one  hundred  miles  from  the  south  end 
of  the  Dead  Sea  (a  little  south  of  Beersheba)  these  zones 
run  northward  unbroken.  But  there  the  first  four  are 
crossed  or  entered  by  a  sixth  great  feature  of  the  land — 
the  wide  Plain  of  Esdraelon  or  Megiddo.  Esdraelon  unites 
the  maritime  plain  with  the  Jordan  Valley  by  completely 
interrupting  the  central  ranges  of  hills,  high  and  low. 
But  to  the  north  of  Esdraelon  these  form  again,  and  with 
very  considerable  modification  the  whole  five-zoned  system 
passes  out  of  the  limits  of  the  Holy  Land — in  the  strip  of 
Phoenician  coast,  the  highlands  of  Galilee,  and  the  long 
masses  of  Lebanon  and  Anti-Lebanon  with  Coele-Syria 
between  them.^ 

1  For  a  general  view  of  the  country  the  following  approximate  levels  to  the 
south  of  Esdraelon  are  necessary.     The  coast  is  either  beach,  with  low  sand- 


144  THE  HISTORICAL   GEOGRAPHY 

In  this  lecture  I  propose  to  deal  with  the  first  of  these 
parallel  zones. 

I.  The  Coast  and  the  Maritime  Plain. 

Every  one  remembers  the  shape,  on  the  map,  of  the  east 
end  of  the  Levant — an  almost  straight  line  running  from 
north  to  south,  with  a  slight  inclination  westwards  :  no 
island  off  it  but  Cyprus,  some  sixty  miles  away,  and  upon 
it  almost  no  harbour  or  fully-sheltered  gulf.  From  the 
mouth  of  the  Nile  this  coast  is  absolutely  devoid  of  pro- 
montory or  recess,^  till  the  high  headland  of  Carmel  comes 
forth  and  forms  the  imperfect  Bay  of  Acre.  It  is  this 
southern  half  of  the  coast-line  of  Syria — ninety  or  one 
hundred  miles  from  Carmel  to  the  border  of  Egypt,  that  we 
are  now  to  look  at.  No  invader,  as  I  have  said,  has  ever 
disembarked  an  army  upon  its  rock  or  sand  till  the  country 
behind  was  already  in  his  power.  Even  invaders  from 
Europe, — Alexander,  Pompey,  the  First  Crusaders  and 
Napoleon, — have  found  their  way  into  Palestine  by  land, 
either  from  Asia  Minor  or  from  Egypt.- 

hills  or  cliffs  about  fifty  feet  high.  The  Maritime  Plain  rises  with  undulations, 
some  of  which  are  as  high  as  350  feet,  to  a  general  level  of  about  200  at  the 
foot  of  the  low  hills.  The  low  hills  rise  from  500  feet  with  a  general  average  of 
about  800  or  900,  to  a  few  summits  as  high  as  1,200  and  1,500  feet.  The  main 
Central  Eange  holds  a  pretty  uniform  level  from  2,000  to  2,500  feet,  with 
summits  as' high  as  Ebal,  3,084;  Tell  Asur,  3,318;  near  Bireh,  2,900;  2,300 
at  Jerusalem,  and  thence  an  ascent  through  the  hill  country  of  Judnea  to 
2,700  at  Tekoa,  and  3,400  at  Er-Eameh,  near  Hebron.  This  Central  Eange 
drops  swiftly  into  the  next  zone,  the  Jordan  Valley,  whose  dejjth  varies  from 
628  feet  heloic  the  sea  at  the  Lake  of  Galilee,  to  1,280  feet  at  the  Dead  Sea.  The 
plateau  on  the  East  of  Jordan  varies  from  1,500  to  2,500  feet,  with  summits 
of  over  3,000  feet.  Eoughly,  the  Maritime  Plain  is  from  eight  to  nineteen  miles 
broad,  the  Shephelah  varies  from  five  to  ten,  the  Central  Eange  from  fifteen  to 
twenty,  and  the  Jordan  Valley  from  occasionally  only  a  mile  to  eight  or  twelve 
miles. 

1  The  forward  rock  of  Athlit  in  Carmel's  shadow,  the  mole  at  Cjesarea,  the 
mouth  of  the  Nahr  Eubin,  where  the  port  of  Jamnia  used  to  lie  ;  and  the 
shallow  mouths  of  one  or  two  other  streams  like  the  Zerka  and  Aujeh  are  not 
large  enough  to  be  exceptions. 

-  In  the  Third  Crusade,  the  European  forces,  though  assisted  sometimes  by 
fleets  from  sea,  won  all  the  coast  fortresses  from  the  land. 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  145 

The  inhabitants  of  the  coast  have  indeed  attempted  the 
creation  of  harbours,  but  have  never  succeeded  in  making 
one  permanent.  Gaza  and  Jaffa  are  unsheltered  road- 
steads— the  latter  with  a  reef  almost  more  dangerous  in 
storm  than  it  is  useful  in  calm.  Ascalon,  Ashdod  and 
Jamnia  had  once  small  ports,  but  they  have  disappeared, 
and  their  sites  are  used  only  as  landing  places  for  small 
boats.  Even  the  Eonian  Ctesarea  has  almost  wholly 
crumbled  away.  Athlit,  the  Crusaders'  last  stronghold  on 
holy  soil,  was  hardly  more  than  an  exposed  jetty. ^ 

I  have  twice  sailed  along  this  coast  on  a  summer  after- 
noon with  a  western  sun  thoroughly  illuminating  it,  and 
I  remember  no  break  in  the  long  line  of  foam  where  land 
and  sea  met,  no  single  spot  where  the  land  gave  way  and 
welcomed  the  sea  to  itself.  On  both  occasions  the  air  was 
quiet,  yet  all  along  the  line  there  was  disturbance.  It 
seemed  as  if  the  land  were  everywhere  saying  to  the  sea : 
I  do  not  wish  you,  I  do  not  need  you.  And  that  is  but 
the  echo  of  the  land's  history.  Throughout  the  Old  Testa- 
ment the  sea  spreads  before  us  for  spectacle,  for  symbol,  for 
music,  but  never  for  use — save  in  the  one  case  when  a 
prophet  sought  it  as  an  escape  from  his  God.  In  the 
Psalms  the  straight  coast  serves  to  illustrate  the  irre- 
movable limits  which  the  Almighty  has  set  between  sea 
and  land.  In  the  Prophets  its  roar  and  foam  symbolize 
the  futile  rage  of  the  heathen  beating  on  Jehovah's  stead- 
fast purpose  for  His  own  people  :  Ah  !  the  booming  of  the 
peojyles,  the  multitudes — like  the  booming  of  the  seas  thcij 
boom;    and  the  rushing  of  the  nations,  like  the  rushing  of 

*  North  of  Carmel  it  is  different.  Acre  has  always  deserved  to  some  extent 
the  name  of  a  port,  and  many  have  been  the  famous  embarkations  upon  its 
quays.  It  was  commercially  important  in  very  early  times  (Song  of  Deborah, 
V.  17).  It  was  aPioman  colony  under  Claudius  ;  a  landing-place  for  pilgrims  and 
Crusaders  ;  a  depot  for  Genoese  and  Venetian  fleets  in  the  early  middle  ages  ; 
and  a  trading  station  of  some  importance,  ever  since.  But  that  so  unsheltered 
a  roadstead  should  for  so  long  have  been  so  important,  is  the  plainer  proof  of 
the  bareness  of  the  rest  of  the  coast. 

VOL.  V.  lO 


146  THE  HISTORICAL   GEOGRAPHY 


mighty  waters  they  rush  ;  nations — like  the  rushing  of  many 
waters  tliey  rush.  But  He  checheth  it,  and  it  Jleeth  far 
away,  and  is  chased  like  chaff  on  the  mountains  before  tlie 
wind,  and  like  sioirling  dust  before  a  lohirlioind} 

As  in  the  Psalms  and  the  Prophets,  so  also  in  the  His- 
tory the  sea  was  a  barrier  and  not  a  highway.  From  the 
first  it  was  said:  Ye  shall  have  the  G?-eat  Sea  for  a 
borders  There  were  three  tribes,  of  whom  we  have 
evidence  that  they  reached  the  maritime  frontier  appointed 
for  them  :  Dan,  who  in  Deborah's  time  was  remaining  in 
shi2JS,-'  but  he  speedily  left  them  and  his  bit  of  coast  at 
Joppa  for  the  far  inland  som'ces  of  Jordan  ;  and  Asher  and 
Zebulon,  whose  territory  was  not  south  but  north  of 
Carmel,  Even  in  their  case  no  ports  are  mentioned,^the 
word  translated  haven,  in  the  blessing  of  Zebulon  and  in 
the  blame  of  Asher,"^  being  but  beach,  land  loashed  by  the 
sea,  and  the  word  translated  creeks  meaning  no  more  than 
just  that, — cracks  or  breaks.  So  that  the  only  mention  of  a 
real  harbour  in  the  Old  Testament  is  in  the  general  picture 
of  the  storm  in  Psalm  cvii.,  where  the  word  used  means 
refuge.  Of  the  name  or  idea  of  a.  port,  gateway  in  or  out, 
there  is  no  trace ;  and  Major  Conder  has  remarked  the 
interesting  fact  that  in  the  designation  for  Ctesarea  in  the 
Talmud,  Limineh,  and  in  the  name  still  given  to  some 
landing-places  on  the  Phihstine  coast,  El-Mineh,  it  is  no 
Semitic  root,  but  the  Greek  Limen  which  appears.^  In 
this  inability  of  their  coast-line  to  furnish  the  language  of 
Israel  with  even  the  suggestion  of  a  port,  w^e  have  the 
crowning  proof  of  the  peculiar  security  and  seclusion  of 
their  land  as  far  as  the  sea  is  concerned. 

Here  I  may  point  out  how  much  truth  there  is  in  the 
common  contrast  between  Palestine  and  Greece.  In  respect 
of  security  the  two  lands  did  not  much  differ ;  the  physical 

Isa.  xvii.  12,  13.  -  Num.  xxxiv.  6.  ^  Judges  v.  17. 

*  Geu.  xlix.  is ;  Judges  v.  17.  ^  Tent  IVorli,  see  p.  283. 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  147 


geography  of  Greece  is  even  more  admirably  adapted  than 
that  of  Palestine  for  pm'poses  of  defence.  But  in  respect 
of  seclusion  from  the  rest  of  the  world,  they  differed  entirely. 
Upon  almost  every  league  of  his  broken  and  embayed 
coast-line,  the  ancient  Greek  had  an  invitation  to  voyage. 
The  sea  came  far  inland  to  woo  him  :  by  island  after  island 
she  tempted  him  across  to  other  continents.  She  was  the 
ready  means  to  him  of  commerce,  of  colonising,  and  of  all 
that  chancre  of  his  native  life,  and  that  adventure  with 
other  men,  which  breed  openness,  originality  and  subtlety  of 
mind.  But  the  coast-line  of  the  Jew  was  very  different,  and 
from  his  high  inland  station  he  saw  it  only  afar  off— a  stiff, 
stormy  line,  down  the  whole  length  of  which  as  there  was 
nothing  to  tempt  men  in,  so  there  was  nothing  to  tempt 
them  out. 

The  effect  of  a  nation's  physical  environment  upon  their 
temper  and  ideals  is  always  interesting,  but  can  never 
be  more  than  vaguely  described.  Whereas  of  even  greater 
interest,  and  capable,  too,  of  exact  definition,  because  abrupt, 
imperious  and  supreme,  is  the  manner  in  which  a  nation's 
genius,  by  sheer  moral  force  and  Divine  inspiration,  dares 
to  look  beyond  its  natural  limits,  feels  at  last  too  great  for 
the  conditions  in  which  it  was  developed,  and  appropriates 
regions  and  peoples,  towards  which  Nature  has  provided 
it  with  no  avenue.  Such  a  process  is  nowhere  more 
evident  than  in  the  history  of  Israel.  In  the  development 
of  Israel's  religious  consciousness,  there  came  a  time  when 
her  eyes  were  lifted  beyond  that  iron  coast,  and  her  face, 
in  the  words  of  her  great  prophet,  became  radiant  and  her 
heart  large  loith  the  sparkle  of  the  sea  :  for  there  is  turned 
upon  thee  thb  sea- s  flood-tide,  and  the  luealth  of  the  nation'^ 
is  coming  unto  thee.  Who  are  these  like  a  cloud  that 
Jig,  and  like  doves  to  their  windows  /  Surely  towards  Me 
the  isles  are  stretching,  and  ships  of  Tarshish  in  the  van,  to 
bring   thy  sons  from  afar,  their  silver  and  their  gold  loith 


148  THE  HISTORICAL   GEOGRAPHY 


them,  to  tlie  name  of  JeJiovaJi  of  Hosts  and  to  tlie  Holy  of 
Israel,  for  He  JiatJi  glorified  thee.  Isles  here  are  any 
maritime  lands,  but  it  is  admitted  that  the  prophet  had 
chiefly  in  view  those  western  islands  and  coasts,  of  which 
the  Greek  enjoyed  physical  sight,  but  which  to  the 
Hebrew  could  be  the  object  only  of  spiritual  hope  and 
daring.^ 

The  isles  shall  2vait  for  His  law  :  let  them  give  glory  to 
Jehovah,  and  piihlish  His  praise  in  the  isles  :  nnto  Me  the 
isles  sJiall  hope.  It  is  true  that  this  communication  between 
Judea  and  the  West  was  not  at  first  fulfilled  across  the 
coast  of  Palestine  :  the  Jewish  dispersion  took  place  chiefly 
from  Alexandria  and  Babylon.  But  at  last  even  that  coast 
was  broken  through,  and  a  real  port  established  upon  it. 
It  is  singular  that  this  should  have  happened  just  in  time 
to  be  of  use  in  Israel's  second  great  dispersion  and  aposto- 
late.  Every  one  knows  the  part  played  by  Cassarea  in  the 
early  progress  of  Christianity.  (In  the  same  connexion 
Stanley  fitly  recalls  that  Peter's  first  vision  of  the  Gentile 
world  came  upon  him  at  Joppa).  Now  Csesarea  had  just 
been  built  by  Herod  in  honour  of  Augustus.  It  speedily 
became  and  long  continued  to  be  the  virtual  capital  of 
Palestine — the  only  instance  of  any  coast  city  which  did  so. 
It  was  the  seat  of  the  Koman  Procurator,  and,  through  the 
first  Christian  centuries,  of  the  Metropolitan  of  Palestine. 
So  much  for  the  single  and  very  late  exception  to  the 
impassableness  of  the  coast  of  the  Holy  Land.  Its  appear- 
ance, in  spite  of  nature,  at  "the  fulness  of  the  times"  is 
very  significant. 


^  Cyprus  is  not  visible  from  any  part  of  the  Holy  Land  proper.  But  its 
peaks  are  within  sight  of  the  mountains  of  Northern  Syria,  and  at  certain 
seasons  of  the  year  even  of  Lebanon.  In  midsummer,  when  the  sun  sets  in 
the  north-west,  and  between  sunset  and  dark,  a  summit  of  Mount  Troodos  is 
visible  from  the  hills  above  Beyrout.  In  July,  18',tl,  Dr.  Carslaw,  of  Shweir, 
and  I  saw  the  bare  mountain-top  from  a  hill  in  front  of  Shweir,  six  hours 
above  Beyrout,  and  5,000  feet  above  the  Mediterranean. 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  149 


Beyond  this  forbidding  coast  there  stretches  as  you  look 
east  a  prospect  of  plain,  the  Maritime  Plain— on  the  north 
cut  swiftly  down  upon  by  Carmel,  whose  headland  comes 
within  '200  yards  of  the  sea,  hut  at  Carmel's  other  end  six 
miles  broad,  and  thence  gradually  widening  southwards,  till 
at  Joppa  there  are  twelve  miles,  and  farther  south  there  are 
twenty  miles  between  the  far  blue  mountains  of  Judsea  and 
the  sea.  The  Maritime  Plain  divides  into  three  portions. 
The  north  corner  between  Carmel  and  the  sea  is  bounded 
on  the  south  by  the  Crocodile  Kiver,  the  modern  Nahr-el- 
Zerka,  and  is  about  twenty-one  miles  long.  From  the 
Crocodile  Kiver  the  Plain  of  Sharon,  widening  from  eight 
miles  to  twelve,  rolls  southward,  forty-four  miles  to  the 
mouth  of  the  Nahr  Eubin  and  a  line  of  low  hills  on  the 
south  of  Eamleh.  The  country  is  undulating,  with  groups 
of  hills  from  250  to  300  feet  high.  To  the  north  it  is  largely 
wild  moor  and  marsh,  with  one  large  oak  wood  in  the  ex- 
treme north,  and  groves  of  the  same  tree  scattering  south- 
ward— remains,  doubtless,  of  the  great  forest  which  Strabo 
describes  in  this  region.  In  the  southern  half  of  Sharon 
there  is  far  more  cultivation, — cornfields,  fields  of  melons, 
gardens,  orange  groves,  and  groves  of  palms,  with  strips  of 
coarse  grass  and  sand,  frequent  villages  on  mounds,  the 
once  considerable  towns  of  Jaffa,  Lydda  and  Ramleh,  and 
the  high  road  running  between  them  to  Jerusalem.  To  the 
south  of  the  low  hills  that  bound  Sharon,  the  Plain  of 
Philistia  rolls  on  to  the  Eiver  of  Egypt,  about  forty  miles, 
rising  now  and  again  into  gentle  ranges  300  feet  high,  and 
cut  here  and  there  by  a  gully.  But  Philistia  is  mostly  level, 
everywhere  capable  of  cultivation  and  presenting  the  view 
of  vast  seas  of  corn. 

The  whole  Maritime  Plain  possesses  a  quiet  but  rich 
beauty.  If  the  contours  are  gentle  the  colours  are  strong 
and  varied.  Along  almost  the  whole  seaboard  runs  a  strip 
of  links  and  downs,  sometimes  of  pure  drifting  sand,  some- 


150  THE  IIISrOniCAL  GEOGRAPHY 


times  of  grass  and  sand  together.  Outside  this  border 
of  broken  gold  there  is  the  bhie  sea,  with  its  fringe  of 
foam.  Within  the  soil  is  a  chocolate  brown :  with  breaks 
and  gullies,  now  bare  to  their  dirty  white  shingle  and 
stagnant  puddles,  and  now  full  of  rich  dark  green  resds 
and  rushes  that  tell  of  swift  and  ample  water  beneatli. 
Over  corn  and  moorland  a  million  flowers  are  scattered — 
poppies,  pimpernels,  anemones,  the  convolvulus,  and  the 
mallow,  the  narcissus  and  blue  iris — "  roses  of  Sharon  and 
lilies  of  the  valley."  Lizards  haunt  all  the  sunny  banks. 
The  shimmering  air  is  filled  with  bees  and  butterflies,  and 
with  the  twittering  of  small  birds,  hushed  now  and  then 
as  the  shadow  of  a  great  hawk  blots  the  haze.  Nor  when 
darkness  comes  is  all  a  blank.  The  soft  night  is  sprinkled 
thick  with  glittering  fireflies. 

Such  a  plain,  rising  through  the  heat  by  dim  slopes  to 
the  long  persistent  range  of  blue  hills  beyond,  presents 
to-day  a  prospect  of  nothing  but  fruitfulness  and  peace. 
And  yet  it  has  ever  been  one  of  the  most  famous  war- 
paths of  the  world.  It  is  not  only  level,  it  is  open.  If  its 
coast-line  is  so  destitute  of  harbours,  both  its  ends  offer 
wide  and  easy  entrances.  The  southern  rolls  off  upon 
the  great  passage  from  Syria  to  Egypt  :  upon  those  illus- 
trious, as  well  as  horrible,  ten  sandy  marches  from  Gaza, 
— past  Eafia,  Khinocoloura,  "the  Serbonian  Bog,"  and 
the  sands  where  Pompey  was  stabbed  to  death, — to  Pelu- 
sium  and  the  Nile.  Of  this  historical  highway  between 
Asia  and  Africa,  along  which  Thothmes,  Sennacherib, 
Alexander,  Cambyses,  Antipater,  Titus,  Napoleon  and  many 
more  great  generals  have  led  their  armies — of  this  high- 
way the  Maritime  Plain  of  Palestine  is  but  the  continu- 
ation. 

Nor  is  the  north  end  of  the  Plain  shut  in  by  Carmel, 
as  the  view  from  the  sea  clearly  shows.  From  the  sea 
the  skyline  of  Carmel,  running  south-east  from  the  coast 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  151 


at  an  angle  of  45°,  is  bow-shaped,  drooping  from  the  central 
heif'ht  to  both  ends.  At  the  sea,  under  the  headland,  a 
beach  of  200  yards  is  left ;  but  this,  though  often  used  b}^ 
armies,  is  not  the  historical  passage  round  Carmel,  which 
lies  at  the  other,  or  inland  end.  There  the  ridge  ceases 
before  the  central  range  of  the  land  is  reached.  A  number 
of  low  hills  with  easy  passes  through  them  and  one  great 
valley,  the  valley  of  Dothan,  divide  Carmel  from  the  high 
hills  of  Samaria.  By  this  division  the  Maritime  Plain 
easily  communicates  with  the  Plain  of  Esdraelon,  and  the 
open  road  from  Egypt  is  continued  all  the  way  to  Jordan 
at  Beisan,  or  to  the  north  end  of  the  Lake  of  Galilee, 
and  so  to  Damascus.^ 

To  this  issue  of  Sharon  into  Esdraelon,  which  is  hardly 
ever  noticed  in  manuals  of  sacred  geography,  too  much 
attention  cannot  be  paid.  Its  presence  is  felt  by  all  the 
history  of  the  land.  No  pass  had  more  effect  upon  the 
direction  of  campaigns,  the  sites  of  great  battles,  or  the 
limitation  of  Israel's  actual  possessions.  "\Ve  shall  more 
fully  see  the  effects  of  it  when  we  come  to  study  the  plain 
of  Esdraelon.  Here  it  is  enough  to  mention  such  facts  as 
illustrate  the  easy  access    between  Esdraelon  and  Sharon. 

'  The  headland  of  Carmel  is  some  500  feet  above  the  sea  ;  theuce  the  ridge 
rises  in  rather  over  eleven  miles  to  1,810  feet ;  thence  drops  for  eight  or  nine 
miles  to  about  700  feet  above  the  sea.  Then  come,  almost  at  right  angles  to 
Carmel,  the  series  of  lower  ranges  (mostly  about  600  feet,  but  with  peaks  as 
high  as  1,600  feet)  among  which  the  easy  passes  penetrate  from  Sharon  into 
Esdraelon.  The  chief  pass  is  from  Kh.  es  Sumrah  to  Lejjun  (one  of  the 
sites  favoured  for  Megiddo),  a  distance  of  about  twelve  miles  as  the  crow  flies. 
The  level  of  Sbaron  at  its  eastern  margin  by  the  foot  of  the  hills  is  200  feet 
above  tiie  sea.  Esdraelon  at  Lejjun  is  about  the  same;  there  are  no  figures 
as  to  the  pass  between,  but  it  cannot  be  much  higher.  The  other  and  more 
used  way  from  Sharon  to  Esdraelon  by  Dothan  leaves  Sharon  much  farther 
to  the  south  and  goes  up  the  Wady  Abu  Nar,  afterwards  W.  el  Ghamik  and 
W.  el  Wesa  into  Dothan,  which  is  some  650  or  700  feet  above  the  sea.  From 
Dothan  the  way  descends  north-east  to  Jenin  in  Esdraelon,  517  feet.  This 
road  from  Sharon  to  Esdraelon  is  about  seventeen  miles,  but  it  is  much  nearer 
than  the  Lejjun  route  for  Beisan  and  the  Jordan  Valley,  and  is  no  doubt 
the  historical  road  from  Egypt  and  the  Mediterranean  coast  to  the  east  of  the 
Jordan  and  Damascus. 


152  THE  HISTORICAL   GEOGliAPHY 

In  ancient  Egyptian  documents  of  travel  and  invasion/  the 
names  Gaza,  Joppa,  Megiddo,  Beth-shan  have  all  been 
identified,  and  a  journey  is  recorded  which  was  made  in  a 
chariot  from  Egypt  to  Bethshan.  In  the  Bible,  too,  both 
the  Philistines  and  the  Egyptians  are  frequently  repre- 
sented in  Esdraelon.  It  must  surprise  the  reader  of  the 
historical  books  that  Saul  and  Jonathan  should  have  to 
come  so  far  north  as  Gilboa  to  fight  with  Philistines, 
whose  border  was  to  the  south  of  them,  and  that  king 
Josiah  should  meet  the  Egyptians  at  Megiddo.  The  ex- 
planation is  afforded  by  the  easy  passage  from  Sharon  into 
Esdraelon.  There  is  no  such  pass  from  the  Maritime 
Plain  into  the  Judasan  hills,  and  therefore  these  southern 
foes  of  Israel  sought  the  easier  entrance  to  her  centre  on 
the  north. 

We  now  see  why  the  Maritime  Plain  was  so  famous  a 
war-path.  It  is  really  not  the  whole  of  Palestine  which 
deserves  that  name  of  Bridge  between  Asia  and  Africa — it 
is  this  level  and  open  coast-land  along  which  the  embassies 
and  armies  of  the  two  continents  passed  to  and  fro,  not 
troubling  themselves,  unless  they  were  provoked,  with  the 
barren  and  awkward  highlands  to  the  east.  So  Thothmes 
III.,  for  example,  passed  north  by  Megiddo  to  the  Hittite 
frontier  and  the  Euphrates.  So  Tiglath  Pileser  and 
Shalmaneser  and  Sargou  swept  south  across  Jordan  and 
Esdraelon  to  the  cities  of  the  Philistines  without  troubling 
Judah.  So  Napoleon  brought  up  his  legions  from  Egypt 
to  fight  the  battle  of  Tabor  on  Esdraelon's  northern  slope. 
From  their  hills  the  Jews  could  watch  all  the  spectacle  of 
war  between  them  and  the  sea — the  burning  villages,  the 
swift,  long  lines  of  chariots  and  cavalry — years  before  Jeru- 
salem herself  was   threatened.-     When   Judas  Maccabeus 

1  Like   The  Travels  of  an  Egyptiau  Moliar,  Tlie  Annals  of  Thothmes  III., 
Letters  from  Egyptian  Officials  in  Syria,  found  at  Tel-el-Amarua. 
-  Isa.  V.  10. 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  153 


burnt  the  harbour  and  ships  at  Jamnia,  the  light  of  the 
fire  was  seen  at  Jerusalem  two  hundred  and  fifty  furlongs 
off}  It  was  on  this  plain,  by  a  victory  at  Ascalon  over 
an  Egyptian  army,  that  Godfrey  won  Jerusalem  for  the 
Christians  for  a  hundred  j^ears  ;  and  during  that  and  the 
subsequent  century  the  plain,  down  to  the  borders  of  Egypt, 
was  the  scene  of  innumerable  conflicts  and  sieges  between 
the  Crusaders  and  the  African  Moslems  ;  a  more  constantly 
contested  part  of  Syria  there  was  not  all  that  time.  But 
perhaps  this  garden  of  the  Lord  was  never  so  violated  and 
made  horrible  as  when  in  the  spring  of  1799  Napoleon 
brought  up  his  great  army  from  Egypt,  and  the  plague 
followed  them,  or  when  in  the  heat  of  summer  he  retreated 
to  Egypt,  burning  the  towns  of  the  plain  and  abandoning 
his  sick  and  wounded." 

Two  other  facts  remain  to  be  stated  concerning  this  first 
zone  of  the  Holy  Land,  and  its  openness  to  north  and  south. 

It  has  once  and  perhaps  twice  given  its  name  to  the 
whole  country.  The  doubtful  instance  is  Canaan,  the 
certain  is  Palestine.  Canaan  means  the  loio  or  sunken 
land,  in  distinction  to  Aram,  the  high  or  lifted  land.  It 
was  originally  given  to  the  coast-land  inhabited  by  the 
Phoenicians ;  whether  it  applied  also  to  Sharon  and 
Phihstia  is  doubtful.  More  probably  it  included  the  deep 
depression  of  the  Jordan.  It  must  have  applied  to  one  or 
other  of  the  low  countries  on  either  side  of  the  Judfean 
highlands,  for  it  could  scarcely  have  been  extended  to 
these  latter  from  Phoenicia.  In  the  Old  Testament  Pele- 
sheth  is  still  only  the  Philistine  coast,  after  which  also 
the  sea  beyond  is  called."'  In  accurate  description  of  the 
physical  shape  of  the  Maritime  Plain,  the  sacred  writers 


1  II.  Maccabees  xii.  10. 

-  Campagncs  (VKgypta  ct  de  Sgrie,  1798-1799.      Mi'moir(^s  pour  scrvir,  etc. 
Dictei  par  Napoleon  lui-menie  et  publics  par  le  General  Bertrand.     Paris,  1847. 
3  Exod.  xxiii.  31. 


154  THE   JTISTOniCAL    GEOGRAPHY 


twice  call  it  the  sliouldcr.^  But  the  Egyptians  naturally 
understood  by  Philistia  not  only  the  little  strip  of  coast, 
but  all  the  country  beyond,  and  with  that  meaning  the 
name  passed  from  them  to  the  Greeks.  Josephus  employs 
Palestina  in  both  senses,"  but  most  ancient  writers  use  it 
only  of  the  whole  land  between  Jordan  and  the  sea." 

If  this  "shoulder"  was  to  foreigners  their  first  step  into 
the  Holy  Land,  it  was  to  the  natives  of  that  land  in  periods 
of  expansion  their  first  step  into  the  world.  Little  of  the 
history  of  the  Jews  was  transacted  upon  it ;  but  as  soon  as 
the  old  dispensation  has  fallen,  the  sacred  story  bursts  the 
barrier  of  the  hills  and  carries  us  out  on  the  plain  of  Sharon. 
With  the  apostles  and  evangelists  of  Christ  w^e  are  at  Ash- 
dod,  Lydda,  Jaffa,  Caesarea. 

The  five  cities  of  the  Philistines  were  Gaza,  Ashkelon, 
Ashdod,  Ekron  and  Gath.  The  site  of  Gath  is  alone 
uncertain,  and  may  best  be  inferred  from  a  consideration 
of  the  other  four.  Three,  Gaza,  Ashkelon  and  Ashdod, 
are  on  the  coast,  but  stand  off  the  sea  as  if  they  felt  that 
their  business  was  not  with  her.  They  are  just  such 
sites  as  immigrants  like  the  Philistines  would  naturally 
settle  upon,  and  continue  to  fortify,  for  they  dominate  the 
level  coast  road.  Like  Damascus,  Gaza  has  no  advantage 
of  position  other  than  the  nearness  of  its  fertile  fields  to 
the  desert.  It  is  not  a  strong  place,  but  it  is  an  indis- 
pensable one, — a  harbour  of  refuge  from  the  wilderness 
that    stretches    away   to  Egypt  and   to  Arabia,    a   market 


'  J] n 5,  Josh.  XV.  11,  f/ie  shoulder  of  Ekron,  and  Isa.  xi.  14:  Ephraim  a]id 
Jtidah  shall  fhj  doxvn  on  the  shoulder  of  the  Philistines  on  the  west. 

-  In  the  original  sense  Aiitiq.  I.  G  i;  2,  etc. :  and  in  the  general  sense,  Arch. 
8,4. 

3  Palestina,  in  the  second  century,  was  a  province  of  the  Roman  empire, 
with  CiPsarea  as  capital.  Later  on  there  were  three  Palestinas.  Palestina  I., 
the  coast  with  the  most  of  .Tuda}a  and  Samaria.  Palestina  II.,  to  the  east  with 
Scythopolis  for  capital.  Palestina  III.,  or  the  other  side  of  Jordan  to  Petra. 
The  Arab  "  jund"'  or  military  canton,  Filistin,  corresponded  to  Palestina  I. 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAXD.  155 

for  the  Bedouin  as  far  as  the  Ilijjaz,  an  outpost  and 
garrison  of  civilisation. 

Far  more  important  in  military  history  has  been  Ashke- 
lon.  The  site  does  not  look  a  historical  one,  but  during 
the  Crusades  it  was  the  key  to  south-western  Palestine. 
The  Moslems  called  it  the  "Bride  of  Syria,"  and  the 
"  Summit  of  Syria."  ^  The  Egyptians  held  it  long  after 
the  Crusaders  occupied  Jerusalem.  It  faced  the  Christian 
outposts  at  Eamleh,  resisted  many  assaults,  and  discharged 
two  expeditions  right  up  to  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  before 
it  was  captured  by  Baldwin  III.  in  1154.  The  scene  of 
two  more  battles,  it  was  retaken  by  Saladin  in  1187,  and 
dismantled  by  him  four  j'ears  later  when  he  retired  upon 
Jerusalem.  The  Christians  tried  to  rebuild  the  fortress, 
but  then  came  the  truce,  one  of  the  articles  of  which 
was  that  Ashkelon  should  be  fortified  by  neither  side,  and 
the  place  was  finally  demolished  in  1270.  This  fierce 
contest  and  jealousy  amply  certify  the  strategical  im- 
portance of  the  old  Philistine  site,  which  in  itself  has  no 
other  explanation  of  its  history  than  the  presence  of 
sweet  water  and  an  open  road  to  Egypt.  In  David's 
Lamentation  over  Saul  it  is  not  Gath  and  Gaza,  but  Gath 
and  Ashkelon  which  are  taken  as  the  two  typical  cities. 
Publish  it  not  in  the  streets  of  Aslikelon :  the  city  was 
always  renowned  as  "  opulent  and  spacious."  " 

The  importance  of  Ashdod  is  explained  by  its  position — 
on  water,  and  at  the  mouth  of  the  most  broad  and  fertile 
wady  of  Philistia;  but  the  site  has  not  even  the  slight 
elevation  of  Ashkelon,  and  its  appearance  in  military  history 
is  only  in  the  records  of  its  capture.^ 

With  these  three  coast  towns  of  the  Philistine  League, 
we  may  associate  Jabneh  or  Jamnia  with  its  creek  at  the 

^  Le  Strange :  Palestine  binder  the  Moslems,  p.  4G2. 

-  Palestine  under  the  Moslems — Asbkelou. 

^  2  Chron.  xxvi.  8;  Isaiah  xx. 


156  HISTORICAL  GEOGRAPHY  OF  THE  HOLY  LAND. 


mouth  of  the  Kubin,  famous  in  the  history  of  the  Jews  for 
their  frequent  capti:res  of  it,  and  for  the  settlement  there 
of  the  Jewish  Sanhedrim,  and  a  school  of  rabbinic  theology 
after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Titus.  Inland  from 
the  site  of  Jamnia  lay  Ekron  (modern  'Akir),  which  won 
its  place  in  the  league  by  its  possession  of  an  oracle  of 
Beelzebub  and  by  its  site  on  the  northern  frontier  of 
Philistia  in  the  Vale  of  Sorek,  where  a  pass  breaks  through 
the  low  hills  to  Eamleh  in  Sharon. 

Now  where  was  Gath  ?  The  site  of  Gath  has  been  fixed 
on  the  eastern  edge  of  the  plain,  along  the  beginning  of  the 
low  hills — by  some  on  the  isolated  height,  Tell-es-Safiyeh, 
which  commands  the  entrance  to  the  Vale  of  Elah,  and 
looks  across  Philistia  to  the  sea,  a  site  so  important  that 
Pichard  I.  fortified  it,  and  called  it  Blanchegarde  from  its 
white  limestone  scarps — by  others  on  the  south-eastern 
angle  of  the  plains  in  a  pass  leading  north  between  the 
Shephelah  hills  on  the  east,  and  a  region  of  cross  ridges 
running  down  towards  Gaza.^  It  is  certain  that  Gath  lay 
inland.  The  ark  when  taken  to  Ashdod  was  brought 
about,  i.e.  inland  again  to  Gath  ;  Gath  was  the  Philistine 
city  most  frequently  retaken  by  the  Israelites  ;  after  taking 
Gath  a  leader  could  talk  of  marching  against  Jerusalem  ;  ^ 
it  was  rebuilt  by  Eehoboam  as  a  city  of  Judah.  Gath 
therefore  lay  inland.  I  am  quite  as  sure  that  it  lay  on  the 
north  of  Philistia,  and  not  where  Mr.  Saunders  would  put 
it,  on  the  extreme  south.  It  is  mentioned  between  Ashke- 
lon  and  Ekron ;  ^  with  Ekron,^  especially  in  the  pursuit  of 
the  Philistines  from  Elah  to  Ekron ;  ^  and  in  a  raid  of  the 
inhabitants  of  the  Vale  of  Ajalon.''  In  a  raid  of  Uzziah  it 
is  coupled  with  Jamnia  and  Ashdod.^     All  this  does  not 

*  Trelawney  Saunders  :  Introduction  to  Survey  of  Western  Palestine. 

-  2  Kiugs  xii.  17.  ■'  1  Sam.  v.  viii.  ■•  lb.  vii.  14. 

•'  11).  xviii.  '■•  1  Chion.  viii.  2:j.  "  2  Cliron.  v.  S. 


BRIEF  NOTICES.  157 


prevent  its  having  been  at  Tell-es-Safiyeb,  a  site  which 
agrees  with  Jerome's  data  ;  but  I  am  inclined  to  place  it 
even  farther  north.  It  is  significant  that  the  Crusaders 
reckoned  it  at  Jamnia,  but  it  must  have  been  farther  inland. 

Such  were  the  famous  Five  Cities,  mothers  of  those 
mysterious  men,  who  suddenly  break  out  of  the  darkness  of 
early  history  to  war  against  the  chosen  people  of  God,  and 
in  their  light  have  remained  through  all  ages,  types  of 
idolatry,  impenetrableness  and  obscurantism. 

In  the  next  paper  we  shall  turn  to  the  debatable  ground 
between  the  Philistines  and  Israel — the  second  of  the 
parallel  zones — the  Shephelah, 

George  Adam  Smith. 


BBIEF  NOTICES. 

Prof.  Rendel  Harris'  Codex  Bezae,  A  Study  of  the  so-called 
Western  Text  of  the  Neiv  Testament,  is  a  model  of  original  researcli 
and  felicitous  exposition.  It  forms  the  first  part  of  the  second 
volume  of  the  sei-ies  of  Texts  and  Studies  edited  by  Mr.  Armitage 
Robinson,  and  published  by  the  Cambridge  University  Press,  and 
it  is  sufficient  of  itself  to  win  the  amplest  recognition  and  a  per- 
manent place  for  this  series.  The  purpose  of  Prof.  Harris'  study 
is  to  throw  light  upon  tlie  origin  of  the  Western  Text  by  investi- 
gating and  tracing  to  their  source  the  anomalous  readings  and 
general  affinities  of  Codex  Bezae.  He  finds  that  the  MS.  itself 
is  of  Gallican  origin.  This  is  proved  in  a  most  interesting  chapter 
in  which  the  local  pronunciation  is  shown  to  have  affected  the 
orthography  of  certain  words.  As  Augustus  becomes  in  French 
Aout,  Lugdunum  Lyons  and  so  forth,  so  in  this  remarkable  MS. 
AlfJN  is  found  for  AErifiN,  AON  for  AOFON  and  other  similar 
traces  of  Gallican  pronunciation.  But  it  is  in  tracing  the  text 
represented  in  Codex  D  that  Prof.  Harris  breaks  into  a  new  field. 
He  adduces  evidence  to  show  that  the  Latin  text  of  this  MS.  is 
genealogically  contiguous  to  the  Latin  translation  of  Iremeus,  that 
Tatian  used  a  Latin  copy  of  the  gospels  and  a  copy  whose  text 
was  closely  related  to  the  Latin  of   Codex   D,  and  he  makes  it 


158  BRIEF  NOTICES. 


appear  probable  in  the  liigliest  degree  that  the  whole  body  of 
Western  readings  go  back  to  a  single  bilingual  copy,  the  i^emote 
ancestor  of  D,  and  existing  early  in  tlie  second  century.  So  much 
evidence  for  these  results  is  adduced,  and  the  reasoning  is  so  per- 
spicuous, that  it  seems  likely  that  Prof.  Harris'  conclusions  will  be 
accepted.  His  attempt  to  identify  the  birthplace  of  this  text  is 
perhaps  not  so  successful.  The  abundant  traces  of  Montanist 
influence  enable  him,  he  thinks,  with  some  certainty  to  assign  its 
origin  to  Rome,  Carthage,  or  Lyons,  but  his  grounds  for  preferring 
Carthage  seem  scarcely  adequate.  Such  studies  as  this  not  only 
maintain  the  credit  of  English  scholarship  but  materially  advance 
Biblical  learning,  and  must  almost  inevitably  attract  to  this  field 
of  inquiry  a  larger  number  of  well-equipped  Avorkers.  It  is 
.scarcely  necessary  to  add  that  the  volume  is  beautifully  printed. 

The  reputation  of  the  Expositor  s  Bible  is  more  than  sustained 
by  Mr.  Denney's  volume  on  The  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians 
(Hodder  and  Stoughton).  Were  one  compelled  to  characterize  it 
in  one  word,  that  word  would  be  "  strong."  It  is  pervaded  by  the 
strength  that  indicates  an  earnest  moi-al  nature  rooted  in  cai'efully 
ascertained  and  firmly  held  truth.  The  spirit  of  power  and  of 
love  and  of  a  sound  mind  is  everywhere  discernible.  Hence  there 
is  a  rare  and  remarkable  combination  of  uncompromising  or- 
thodoxy wdth  the  most  perfectly  frank  outspokenness.  If  in- 
dependence in  thouglit  be  the  faculty  of  looking  with  one's  own 
eyes  and  seeing  for  oneself,  unbiassed  by  what  others  have  seen 
and  led  one  to  expect  to  see,  few  men  can  be  more  independent 
than  Mr.  Denney.  This  appears  perhaps  most  conspicuously  in 
his  treatment  of  the  Man  of  Sin,  but  also  in  his  firm  and  lucid 
interpretation  of  every  difficult  passage  in  the  Epistles.  Mr. 
Denney  is  a  born  exegete ;  but  strong  as  are  his  doctrinal  ex- 
positions, his  enforcement  of  ethical  points  is  even  stronger.  His 
book  distinctly  advances  our  knowledge  of  the  Epistles  to  the 
Thessalonians. 

In  Pictured  Palestine  Mr.  James  Neil,  formerly  incumbent  of 
Christ  Church,  Jerusalem,  has  laid  himself  open  to  the  suspicion 
of  bookmaking.  N^either  letterpress  nor  illustrations  ai"e  quite 
up  to  the  level  of  his  former  very  successful  volumes.  Not  that 
there  is  nothing  to  be  enjoyed  or  learned  from  the  present  woi'k, 


BRIEF  NOTICES.  159 

i'or  Mr.  Xell  presents  us  with  some  illustrations  of  Scripture  wliicli 
are  both  striking  and  novel,  and  the  "  pictures  "  are  often  above 
repi'oach.  All  through  the  book  the  reader  feels  the  satisfaction 
of  listening  to  a  man  vpho  is  joerfectly  at  home  in  what  he  is  de- 
scribing, and  who  imparts  his  information  in  an  interesting  man- 
ner. But  why  should  jMr.  ]>feil,  or  any  one  else  at  this  time  of 
day,  elaborately  inform  us  that  in  the  East  sons  are  more  welcome 
than  daughters,  or  that  one  daily  sees  exemplification  of  the 
truth  that  fingers  were  made  before  knives  and  forks,  or  that 
supei-stitions  abound,  or  that  Eastern  customs  are  slow  to  change  ? 
In  this  year  of  grace  one  or  two  things  may  be  taken  for  granted. 
Mr.  Neil's  book  is  published  by  Messrs.  James  Nisbet. — Another 
book  on  Palestine  has  been  produced  by  Mr.  D.  M.  Ross,  of 
Dundee,  and  is  published  by  Messrs.  Hodder  and  Stoughton  under 
the  title  The  Cradle  of  Christianity.  This  is  a  book  that  deserves 
to  be  widely  read.  It  is  written  for  those  "  who  are  not  deeply 
versed  in  recent  literature  on  Palestine,"  and  the  author  succeeds 
in  presenting  the  broad  features  of  the  country  and  the  most  out- 
standing characteristics  of  its  population.  So  fresh  are  Mr.  Ross' 
descriptions  that  the  reader  feels  he  has  never  seen  Palestine  be- 
fore. The  shadeless  roads,  the  bare  hills,  even  the  Jordan  and  the 
Sea  of  Galilee,  seem  to  be  seen  for  the  first  time.  The  chapter  on 
"The  Queer  Folk  in  Palestine"  will  surprise  and  delight  many; 
and  the  bright,  broad  intelligence  with  which  everything  is 
described,  and  which  enters  sympathetically  into  the  most  various 
customs  and  religious  observances,  makes  it  a  very  great  treat  to 
sit  at  the  fireside  and  travel  Avith  Mr.  Ross  for  a  guide. 

Mrs.  Harris  has  very  admirably  seconded  her  husband's  Avork 
by  giving  a  brief  and  popular  accoant  of  Prof.  Rendel  Harris' 
discovery  of  the  Apology  of  Aristides  in  the  library  of  the 
convent  of  St.  Catherine.  Prom  this  small  and  pretty  volume, 
published  by  Messrs.  Hodder  and  Stoughton,  and  entitled  The 
Neioly  Discovered  Apology  of  Aristides,  any  one  may  in  an  hour  or 
two  obtain  a  fair  idea  of  the  fortunes  and  contents  of  this  remark- 
able relic  of  the  2nd  century.  In  Social  and  Present  Day  Questions 
(Hodder  and  Stoughton),  Archdeacon  Parrar  proves  himself 
worthy  of  the  position  he  holds  as  the  preacher  in  what  may 
popularly  be  called  the  most  national  pulpit  in  the  land.  The 
sermons  in  this  volume  exhibit  the  usual  eloquence  and  felicity  of 


IGO  BRIEF  NOTICES. 


quotation  to  Avliicli  "\ve  are  accustomed  in   Dr.   Farrar's  writings 
they  exhibit  also  a  very  earnest  interest  in  the  social  probk'ms 
■with  which  we  are  at  present  beset. 

Messrs.  Unwin  Brothers  (The  Greshara  Press)  have  sent  us  a 
copy  of  their  edition  of  The  Collected  Sermons  of  Thomas  Fuller, 
B.D.,  1631-1659.  These  two  handsome  volumes  may  be  recom- 
mended to  all  book-fanciers  as  beautiful  specimens  of  typography 
The  editing  of  the  sermons  has  been  a  labour  of  lore  to  the  late 
John  Eglinton  Bailey  and  Mr.  "William  E.  A.  Axon.  It  is  too 
late  in  the  day  to  recommend  Thomas  Fuller.  In  these  sermons, 
as  in  all  his  writings,  we  are  entertained  with  an  overflowing  and 
w^ise  wit,  with  inexhaustible  learning,  and  with  a  devoutness  of 
spirit  which  insensibly  elevates  the  reader.  But  the  chief  feeling 
which  these  handsome  volumes  evoke  is  one  of  regret  that  we 
have  not  all  Fuller's  woiks  in  a  similar  form. 

Makcus  Dods. 


THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF  THE  JOHANNEAN 
QUESTION. 

TV.    The  Author. 

It  has  become  almost  a  fixed  custom  with  defenders  of  the 
Fourth  Gospel  to  couduct  their  argument  in  a  series  of 
narrowing  circles,  proving  (1)  that  the  author  must  have 
been  a  Jew,  (2)  that  he  must  have  been  a  Jew  of  Palestine, 
(3)  that  he  must  have  been  a  contemporary  and  eye-witness 
of  the  events,  (4)  that  if  a  contemporary  and  eye-witness  he 
was  probably  an  Apostle,  and  (5)  that  if  an  Apostle  he  was 
probably  St.  John.  The  first  and  the  (except  on  the  theory 
of  Dr.  Delff)  latest  steps  in  this  chain  of  reasoning  are  be- 
coming more  and  more  generally  admitted  ;  and  the  con- 
troversy is  coming  more  and  more  to  concentrate  itself 
on  the  two  intermediate  points,  the  proposition  that  the 
author  was  a  Jew  of  Palestine,  and  the  proposition  that  he 
was  a  contemporary  and  eye-witness. 

It  was  one  of  the  axioms  of  Tubingen  criticism  that  the 
author  represented  the  Gentile  branch  of  the  Church.  He 
was  held  to  have  had  nothing  to  do  with  Palestine  ;  and 
instances  were  quoted  to  show  his  ignorance  not  only  of 
Palestinian  geography  but  of  Jewish  customs.  The  first  I 
believe  to  throw  over  these  instances,  though  they  would  of 
course  have  made  for  his  own  conclusion,  was  Keim. 

"  Under  tliis  head,"  he  wrote,  "  we  do  not  reekou  the  list  of  errors,  in 
general  history',  or  in  geography  which  it  is  the  fashion  to  prove,  over 
and  above  the  Synoptics,  from  the  Old  Testament,  from  Josephus,  and 
even  from  Eusebius  and  Jerome.  There  is  the  less  need  to  accept  these 
supposed  errors  aboiit  Bethany  and  Bctlicsda,  Cana  and  Kidron,  Salcn) 

VOL-    V.  ■     ■  II 


102  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 

aud  Sychar,  about  the  '  liigli  priest  of  that  year,'  and  about  the  dis- 
tances of  Cana  and  Capernaum,  Bethany  and  Percea,  because  in  other 
respects  the  autlior  shows  a  fairly  good  knowledge  of  the  country,  and 
even  the  most  difficult  cases  can  be  explained  by  a  special  intention. 
The  high  priest  of  the  '  Death- Year '  (Todesjahres)  is  significant,  and 
does  not  at  all  betray  the  opinion  of  a  yearly  change  in  the  office ; 
Sychar  is  a  vernacular  or  mock  name  for  Sichem  ;  Salem  and  Ain  are 
situated  in  Juda-a,  or  rather  in  Samaria,  to  the  borders  of  which  the 
forerunner  of  him  who  sat  by  Jacob's  well  made  his  way ;  the  exaggera- 
tion of  distances  is  to  enhance  the  miracle."  ^ 

Further  on  Keim  admits  a  Hebrew  colouring  in  the 
language,  an  understanding  of  the  Old  Testament  in  the 
original,  acquaintance  with  Jewish  customs  and  places,  and 
even  with  particular  features  (Einzelmomente)  in  the 
Messianic  idea.^'  And  the  ultimate  conclusion  to  which  he 
comes  is  that  the  author  was  "  well  acquainted  with  the 
Holy  Land  ;  a  Jewish  Christian,  though  liberal  and  friendly 
disposed  towards  the  Gentiles,  and  probably  belonging  to 
the  Jewish  Diaspora  in  Asia  Minor."  ^ 

Schiirer  himself  takes  up  very  much  the  same  position. 

"  Among  serious  difficulties  we  need  no  longer  reckon  at  the  present 
day  the  supposed  ignorance  of  Palestinian  aud  Jewish  matters  from 
which  Bretschneider  and  Baur  inferred  that  the  author  was  neither  a 
Palestinian  nor  in  any  sense  a  Jew.  The  geographical  errors  and 
ignorance  of  things  Jewish  have  more  and  more  shrunk  to  a  viiuinuDn. 
And  the  opposition  no  longer  laj^s  stress  upon  them.  It  is  true  that 
everything  is  not  explained.  In  particular  it  remains  questionable  that 
the  author  seems  to  have  assumed  a  yearly  change  in  the  high  priest- 
hood. But  on  the  whole  he  has  without  doubt  a  good  knowledge  of 
things  Jewish.  And  even  by  opponents  of  the  genuineness,  it  is  more 
and  more  pronounced  probable  that  he  was  of  Jewish  origin,  Hellenistic 
if  not  Palestinian."'  ^ 

^  G('.<e/i.  Jesu  r.  Nazara,  i.  133.  (There  are  several  faults  in  the  rendering 
of  this  passage  in  E.  T.,  i.  181  f.,  ed.  2.) 

2  Ibid.,  p.  156  (E.  T.,  p.  212). 

3  Ibid.,  p.  1G8  (E.  T,,  p.  228). 

•*  1'ortiap,  p.  67  f.  '1  bis  instalment  was  written  before  the  appearance  of 
Dr.  Schiirer's  essay  in  EngHsb,  aud  the  quotations  are  left  as  they  stood  from 
tlie  original  as  being  in  several  respects  a  more  satis'^aetory  presentation  of  his 
views. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  QUESTION.  103 


To  this  last  point  we  shall  returii.  In  the  meantime,  in 
reference  to  the  one  lingering  objection  which  is  still  taken 
by  Schiirer,  it  is  enough  to  appeal  to  the  answer  already- 
given  by  Keim.  In  view  of  the  writer's  sense  of  the 
solemnity  of  the  crisis  which  he  is  describing,  and  in  view 
of  his  fondness  for  casting  emphasis  by  the  use  of  the  par- 
ticular word  iK€lvo<;,  in  view  too  of  the  admission  just  made 
of  his  knowledge  of  Jewish  customs,  which  includes  many 
things  far  more  minute  and  remote  than  those  of  the  tenure 
of  the  high  priesthood,  it  is  surely  strained  on  the  part  of 
Schiirer,  and  unlike  his  usual  judgment  to  leave  even  this 
one  objection  standing.^ 

We  might  leave  the  whole  matter  here,  content  only  to 
claim  that  if  so  much  is  conceded  as  both  Schiirer  and 
Keim  are  ready  to  concede,  it  shall  be  taken  in  earnest,  and 
not  merely  remain  as  a  concession  in  words,  but  be  allowed 
to  have  the  full  weight  in  the  mind  which  it  deserves  to 
have;  we  might  be  content  with  this,  if  it  were  not  that 
a  more  sweeping  objection  has  recently  been  raised  by  Mr. 
Cross.  Mr.  Cross  calls  in  question  not  the  minor  premiss 
of  the  argument  but  the  major.  He  does  not  dispute  the 
local  knowledge,  but  he  disputes  the  inference  that  is  drawn 
from  it. 

"  We  cannot  but  feel,"  he  says,  "  as  we  read  [the  Fourth  Gospel]  that 
the  ■nriter  is  quite  at  home  in  Palestine.  He  knows  the  general  lie  of 
the  country,  the  position  of  Samaria,  the  shores  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee, 
and  many  such  other  places,  with  their  special  local  features,  and  his 
narrative  moves  freely  and  without  constraint  through  these  scenes. 
Still  this  knowledge,  or  even  his  use  of  it  in  telling  his  story,  does  not 
prove  that  he  was  an  eye-witness.  It  does  not  even  prove  that  he  was 
a  native  of  Palestine."  ^ 

He  quotes  the  cases  of  Origen  and  Jerome,  both  resident 

'  The  two  Holtzmauns  account  for  what  they  think  the  mistake  by  con- 
fusion with  the  Asian  high  priesthood,  which  did  change  hands  every  year. 
(H.  Holtzmaun,  Einl.,  p.  469,  ed.  2  ;  0.  Holtzinann,  Joh.-Ev.,  p.  115.) 

-   Westminster  ncvicic,  Aug.,  18\)0,  i^.  177. 


164  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 


for  long  periods  in  Palestine,  and  he  desiderates  a  fuller 
examination  of  the  literary  habits  of  the  time.  In  a  later 
article  he  returns  to  the  subject.     He  urges  that 

"  Many  exain})les  niiglit  be  cited  to  show  tliat  a  knowledge  of  Pales- 
tine "was  not  limited  to  born  Jews.  .  .  .  It  is  remarkable  that  in 
the  Gospel  of  Pseudo-Matthew,  a  work  which  is  universally  dated  long 
after  the  destruction  of  .Jerusalem,  there  are  a  large  number  of  verj- 
exact  references,  not  only  to  the  topography  of  Palestine  and  neigh- 
bouring countries,  but  also  to  Jerusalem  and  the  buildings  of  the 
Temple,  much  more  than  are  to  be  found  in  any  of  the  Gospels,  or  per- 
haps in  all  of  theui  together."  ^ 

It  may  be  well  therefore  to  pause  a  moment,  and  ask  a 
little  more  precisely  how  far  this  argument  will  carry  us. 
There  are  obvious  limits  to  it,  and  it  is  important  that  these 
limits  should  be  borne  in  mind.  It  will  be  hardly  necessary 
for  me  to  say  that  the  argument  has  not  been  invented  for 
the  purpose  of  application  to  St.  .John's  Gospel,  but  that  it 
is  in  common  use  amongst  critics ;  and  I  confess  that,  so  far 
as  I  can  judge,  the  use  hitherto  made  of  it  is  a  sound  one. 
Some  of  the  best  examples  would,  I  think,  be  taken  from 
the  writings  of  Professor  Eamsay.  I  may  refer,  for  instance, 
to  his  treatment  of  the  stories  of  St.  Artemon  and  St. 
Abercius  in  The  Expositor.^  "  Fidelity  of  local  detail," 
he  says,  "is  one  of  the  most  important  characteristics  of 
the  class  of  tales  which  is  here  described."  However,  the 
notes  of  place  may  be  right,  but  the  notes  of  time  wrong. 
The  inference  is  that  the  story  grew  up  where  the  scene  is 
laid,  though  it  took  the  exact  shape  in  which  it  has  come 
down  to  us  at  a  later  period.  The  case  of  St.  Abercius  is 
peculiarly  interesting  because  the  growth  of  the  legend  can 
be  traced  from  its  beginning  in  an  epitaph  cut  in  stone  by 
the  order  of  Abercius  himself,  and  rediscovered  by  Professor 
Ramsay.^    Other  examples  of  the  same  kind  might  be  taken 

!  Critical  Fu  vi,-w,  Feb.,  1891,  p.  157  f. 

2  1889,  1,  141  II.,  253  ff.,  'A'.)2  ff. 

s  See  the  articles  rcfeivcd  to  above  ;  also  Ligbtfcot,  Irjnctivif,  i.  47G  ff. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  QUESTIOX.  1G5 


from  the  same  traveller's  recent  work  on  Asia  Minor.  Thus 
it  is  proved  that  the  tale  of  St.  Zosimus  "  first  took  literary 
form  after  the  reorganization  of  the  provinces  attributed  to 
Diocletian ;  but  the  local  knowledge  is  a  clear  mark  of  a 
genuine  popular  tradition  living  in  the  country."  ^  In 
regard  to  another  document,  the  "  Acts  of  Theodore 
Sykeota,"  Professor  Kamsay  does  not  require  confirmation 
for  all  the  details,  where  enough  are  confirmed  to  be  a 
guarantee  for  the  remainder.  At  the  same  time,  a  distinc- 
tion is  drawn  between  the  different  parts  of  the  area  to 
which  the  evidence  extends.  "  The  numerous  topographi- 
cal details  which  we  cannot  control  by  independent  testi- 
mony may  be  accepted  with  confidence  for  the  country 
within  a  moderate  distance  ;  but  in  regard  to  remoter  cities, 
the  author's  geographical  knowledge  is  defective."  ^  Like 
traces  of  local  knowledge  appear  in  the  Acts  of  Basiliscus 
and  John  of  Kybistra."' 

Another  writer  who  has  made  a  brilliant  use  of  local 
indications  is  Von  Gutschmid  in  his  Essay  on  "  Names 
of  Kings  in  the  Apocryphal  Acts  "  {Die  Koenigsnamen  in 
den  apokr.  ApostelgeschicJiten  ■*).  I  may  mention  for  the 
benefit  of  our  own  explorers,  in  case  it  should  happen  to 
have  escaped  them,  that  he  calls  attention  (p.  388)  to 
the  material  that  may  be  obtained  from  the  "  Acts  of 
Barnabas"  for  the  topography  of  the  island  of  Cyprus. 
Throughout  this  essay  there  is  the  underlying  assumption 
that  geographical  accuracy  shows  where,  if  not  when,  a 
legend  arose. 

On  one  of  the  Acts  discussed  by  Von  Gutschmid  the  last 
word  has  probably  not  yet  been  spoken.  It  was  a  striking 
discovery    that  the  Princess  Tryphsena,  who  plays  a  part 

•  Historical  Geo(j.  of  Asia  Minor.     London,  1890,  p.  400  n. 
-  Ihiil,  p.  216  f. 

3  Ibid.,  pp.  2(52,  337. 

*  Ileprinted   in   vol.    ii.    of    his    posthumously   collected   Kleiiie    Schrijten 
(Leipzig,  1890). 


166  THE  PRESENT  POSTTION  OF 


in  the  Acts  of  Paul  and  Thecla,  was  a  historical  personage, 
the  discarded  wife  of  Polemo  II.,  king  at  different  times 
of  Pontus,  the  Cimmerian  Bosphorus,  and  Cihcia.  Von 
Gutschmid  locates  this  lady  at  Antioch  in  Pisidia,  which 
is,  or  ought  to  be,  the  scene  of  the  Thecla  legend.  Dr. 
Gwynn,  in  an  elaborate  article  in  the  Dictionary  of  Christ- 
ian Biography  {s.v.  Thecla)  speaks  more  doubtfully.  We 
know  in  any  case  from  Tertulhan  that  the  original  Acts 
of  Paul  and  Thecla,  which  are  probably  ours,  though 
possibly  only  the  base  out  of  which  ours  have  been  con- 
structed, were  written  by  a  presbyter  of  the  province  of 
Asia.  Dr.  Gwynn  thinks  that  he  shows  signs  of  some,  but 
not  an  exact,  acquaintance  with  the  localities  with  which 
he  is  dealing.^  We  may  look  for  more  light  on  this  sub- 
ject ;  ^  and  it  may  be  observed  in  passing  that  it  is  im- 
portant to  get  at  the  true  text  of  the  Acts  for  which 
Lipsius,  following  Tischendorf,  has  now  given  us  ample 
materials.^ 

It  was  by  following  a  similar  method  to  Von  Gutschmid 
and  Ramsay,  that  Usener  was  able  to  assign  an  Ephesian 
origin  to  the  Acts  of  St.  Timothy,  which  he  was  the  first 
to  publish  in  the  Greek,'^  though  in  their  present  form  they 
seem  to  date  from  the  fourth  century.  On  the  one  hand 
there  is  the  mention  of  the  Catagogia,  a  festival  probably  of 
Artemis,  and  the  suburb  of  Pion ;  on  the  other  hand 
Lycaonia  is  described  as  a  "province,"  which  it  did  not  be- 
come till  the  time  of  Diocletian.  In  contrast  with  these  Acts 
we  have  the  Acta  Johannis  of  Prochorus  :  their  scene  is  laid 
at  Ephesus,  and  a  number  of  would-be  Ephesian  or  Asiatic 
localities  are  mentioned,  all  either  non-existent  or  wrongly 

•   Ut  s;/^j.,p.  893f. 

-  Since  this  was  written  (and  I  leave  it  exactly  as  it  stood)  I  hear  that  the 
new  light  desiderated  is  soon  to  be  thrown  in  the  pages  of  The  ExrosiToii  by 
I'rofessor  Eamsay. 

^  Acta  Ajiostolontm  Apocrypha  (Lipsia?,  1891),  i.  23.3  ff. 

••  Univ. -programme,  15onn,  1S77. 


THE  JOHANNEAN   QUESTION.  1G7 

placed/  This  is  enough  to  mark  a  pure  romance.  Like  the 
Acts  of  Timothy,  that  ancient  Syriac  work  the  Doctrine  of 
Addai  itself  belongs  to  the  fourth  or  early  fifth  century,  but 
there  are  local  traits  which  clearly  connect  it  with  Edessa.- 
An  example  of  the  way  in  which  a  single  local  touch  may 
reveal  the  nationality  of  a  writer  is  supplied  by  an  interest- 
ing work  published  not  long  ago  for  the  first  time  by 
Gamurrini.  The  work  in  question  bears  the  title,  S.  Silviae 
Aquitancc  Peregrmatio  ad  Loca  Sancta aim.  385-388  (Eomas, 
1887),^  mainly  on  the  strength  of  two  allusions.  The 
authoress,  who  is  writing  to  the  sisters  in  a  nunnery  with 
which  she  had  been  connected,  is  seen  to  be  a  native  of 
Gaul  from  the  way  in  which  she  compares  the  Euphrates 
in  the  rush  and  breadth  of  its  waters  to  the  Rhone  ;  and  her 
date  is  fixed  approximately  by  the  state  of  things  at  Edessa, 
which  she  visits,  and  on  the  Eastern  frontier  of  the  empire.'* 
The  identification  with  Silvia,  the  sister  of  Rufinus,  the 
minister  of  Theodosius  and  Arcadius,  also  rests  on  fair 
grounds,  and  has  not  yet  been  questioned.  One  is  reminded 
of  another  coincidence  on  which  stress  has  recently  been 
laid.  It  will  be  remembered  that  the  scene  of  the  Kinth 
Similitude  in  Hermas  is  laid  in  Arcadia.  For  this  Zahn 
proposed  to  read  "  Aricia,"  but  Professor  Rendel  Harris 
pointed  out  in  the  Journal  of  Biblical  Exegesis  for  January, 
1887,  that  the  description  given  corresponds  closely  to  the 
view  of  the  surrounding  mountains  from  the  plain  of 
Orchomenos,  with  the  hill  of  Orchomenos  answering  to 
the  0/309  /iaoTcoSe?  in  the  midst.  An  opinion  of  this  kind 
gains  greatly  when  more  than  one  person  is  struck  by  the 
same  thing.     Professor  Rendel  Harris  appears  to  base  his 

•  Acta  Joluninix  (ed.  Zahn,  Erangen,  1880),  p.  Hi. 

-  Tixeront :  Oriijines  de  VEijli-a  d'Kdesse  (Paris,  13S8),  p.  145;  Zahu,  Liat. 
Tati((n'.s,  p.  882. 

^  A  more  correct  text  is  pvomisetl,  though  as  au  editio  princeps,  aceompauied 
by  a  commentary,  Gamurrini's  is  by  no  means  without  merit. 

■*  Gamurrini,  pp.  xxvii.-xxxii. 


1G8  THE  PRESENT  POSITION   OF 

arguments  on  maps  and  descriptions,  but  Mr.  Armitage 
Robinson,  who  has  himself  visited  the  spot,  assures  me 
that  the  coincidence  is  very  marked.  The  inference  which 
Mr.  Harris  draws  is  that  Hermas  has  made  use  of  Pau- 
sanias,  or  (as  there  is  a  difficulty  about  the  date  of  Pau- 
sanias'  Arcadia)  of  some  other  work  similar  to  his.  But 
would  it  not  be  a  still  simpler  explanation  to  suppose 
that  he  was  born  and  brought  up  under  the  shadow  of 
these  very  mountains,  and  that  the  scene  which  he  de- 
scribes is  drawn  from  the  recollections  of  his  youth  ?  I 
am  not  aware  that  there  is  anything  in  the  way  of  this 
supposition.  AVe  know  that  Hermas  was  sold  as  a  slave 
to  a  Eoman  lady  called  Ehoda ;  but  that  is  the  point  at 
which  his  recorded  history  begins.  We  are  not  told  where 
he  came  from ;  and  in  the  absence  of  such  knowledge  an 
indication  like  this  may  be  followed. 

The  question  is  pertinent  to  the  point  from  which  we 
started.  Mr.  Cross  seems  to  think  that  the  author  of  the 
Fourth  Gospel  might  have  got  his  knowledge  of  Palestine 
from  books,  or  at  least  from  a  prolonged  visit.  It  was  a 
rare  thing  in  ancient  times  for  a  country  to  be  described 
with  so  much  fulness  as  Pausanias  has  given  to  the  parts 
which  he  visited  of  Greece.  Most  of  the  works  which  do 
duty  for  geographies  are  little  more  than  lists  of  names. ^ 
Palestine  in  particular  has  had  scant  measure  dealt  to  it 
in  the  works  which  have  come  down  to  us.  Pomponius 
Mela  was  a  geographer  of  some  note  in  the  first  century ; 
and  he  mentions  a  single  place,  Gaza,  about  which  he  gives 
us  the  interesting  information  that  the  name  is  the  Persian 
word  for  "  treasure."  ~     Ptolemy  in  the  second  century  is 

^  For  instance,  of  the  aucient  autlioiitic  of  which  Professor  Eanisay  makes 
use  in  his  IIi>itorical  Geography  of  Asia  I\liii<>r,  the  Si/nccdemns  of  Hierocles, 
the  Notitiae  EjyincopatniDn,  the  Antouiue  Itinerary  aud  the  Peiitinger  Table  are 
all  of  this  character. 

-  For  a  more  probable  (derivation  see  Keller,  T aleini^che  I'Dlk^etijinolofiie, 
p.  240. 


THE  JO  H ANNE  AN   QUESTION.  169 

more  scientific,  and  has  given  his  name  to  a  complete 
astronomical  system.  Yet  he  merely  gives  the  boundaries 
of  Palestine,  and  then  a  list  of  towns  and  cities,  with  a 
rough  sort  of  latitude  and  longitude.  In  the  whole  of 
Galilee  he  only  mentions  four  names  :  Sepphoris,  Capar- 
cotni  (on  the  southern  edge  of  the  Plain  of  Esdraelon, 
opposite  Nazareth),  Julias  (Bethsaida  Julias),  and  Tiberias. 
In  Samaria  he  only  mentions  two  names,  Neapolis  (Sichem) 
and  Thena.  In  Judtea  he  mentions  twenty  names,  many 
along  the  Maritime  Plain,  but  of  these  only  one,  Jerusalem, 
occurs  in  St.  John.  The  reproduction  of  Ptolemy's  view 
of  the  geography  of  Palestine,  and  the  adjacent  countries  in 
Spruner-Menke's  yl?'Za5  (p.  27)  shows  that  he  had  a  curious 
idea  of  its  configuration.  Strabo,  the  greatest  of  all  the 
geographers  of  antiquity,  gives  a  very  poor  account  of 
Palestine.  He  knows  something  about  the  coast-line,  but 
betrays  his  dependence  on  literary  sources  by  speaking  of 
Gaza  as  ''deserted,"  although  it  had  been  refounded  by 
Gabiuius  (57-55  B.c.).^  He  has  then  a  brief  and  barely 
recognisable  sketch  of  Jewish  history,  which  becomes  a 
little  more  definite  as  it  approaches  the  taking  of  Jeru- 
salem and  other  strongholds  by  Pompey.  Then  there  is  a 
sketch  of  the  plain  of  Jericho.  Then  some  account  of  the 
remarkable  phenomena  of  the  Dead  Sea,  which  Strabo 
calls  7]  Sep^oivU  XifivT],  clearly  confusing  it  with  the  real 
"  Serbonian  bog"  near  Mount  Casius  on  the  frontier  of 
Egypt.  Then  he  mentions  another  instance  of  water  with 
curious  properties  in  the  district  of  Gadara.  That  is  all. 
The  Itineraries  again  furnish  very  little  help.-  The  Peu- 
tinger  Table,  for  instance,  only  gives  the  stations  along 
the    Eoraan  roads,  and   appears   to   make   the    Hieromax 

'  Schiirer,  Gcxch.  d.  jiid.  Volkes,  ii.  C2. 

-  These  Itineraries  are  based  upon  a  survey  begun  under  Julius  Casar,  and 
completed  under  Augustus,  the  results  of  which  were  represented  upon  a  globe 
which  was  kept  in  the  portico  of  PoUa  (Jung  in  Iwan  Miiller's  Ihnulhuch,  iii. 
■l(j«  f.J. 


170  THE  PRESEWl    POSITION  OF 


(Jarmuk)  fall,  not  into  the  Jordan,  but  directly  into  the 
Dead  Sea.  When  we  come  to  Christian  times  naturally 
rather  more  was  done.  Eusebius  and  Jerome  both  made 
a  study  of  Biblical  sites  ;  but  still  the  results  only  take 
the  form  of  bare  statistics  of  names  and  distances,  often 
with  etymologies  giving  the  meaning  of  the  names. ^  The 
stream  of  pilgrims  to  the  Holy  Places  begins  with  the 
Bordeaux  pilgrim  in  333 — unless  we  are  to  count  Origen 
the  first  of  the  pilgrims. 

But  it  will  have  been  seen  from  this  sketch  how  scanty 
were  the  materials  which  the  author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel 
would  have  had  to  work  upon  if  he  had  tried  to  prepare 
himself  for  his  task  by  literary  studies.  It  is  not  as  if  it 
were  likely  that  he  had  access  to  other  and  fuller  authori- 
ties which  have  perished.  Those  which  have  survived 
enable  us  to  take  the  measure  of  those  which  have  not 
survived.  And  that  by  the  help  of  either  class,  or  indeed 
of  any  form  of  literary  description  current  in  antiquity, 
he  could  have  hit  upon  the  topographical  allusions  in  the 
Gospel,  is  simply  impossible.  Think  for  a  moment  what 
these  are  :  First,  we  have  Bethany  beyond  Jordan,  not 
mentioned  by  any  other  writer,  but  guaranteed  by  its 
precise  distinction  from  the  other  Bethany,  which  is  identi- 
fied by  its  distance  (15  stades)  from  Jerusalem.  Then  we 
have  Cana  of  Galilee,  also  not  mentioned,  unless — what 
is  not  certain — this  is  the  same  with  a  village  three  times 
named  by  Josephus.-  Here  however  again  the  sure  hand 
of  the  author  appears,  because  he  alone  gives  the  distin- 
guishing epithet  "of  Galilee,"  and  Josephus  mentions 
another  Cana  in  Judaea,-'  The  modern  explorer  has  two 
sites  in  Galilee  which  bear  the  name  of  Cana  to  choose 
between.     Aenon,  M.  Benan  calls  "  un  trait  de  lumiere  "  : 

'  Sec  especially  Lagarde,  Ortomantica  Sacra,  2nd  ed.     Giittiiigeii,  18S7. 
-  Vil.,  lO;  Ant.,  xiii.  lo,  1  ;    ]}.  J.,  i.  17,  o. 
s  /,'../.,  i.  4,  7. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  QUESTION.  171 


it  simply  represents  the  Aramaic  for  "  springs."  It  is 
placed  by  Jerome  eight  Koman  miles  from  Scythopolis 
near  to  Salim  which  he  takes  as  known. ^  Sychar  is  not 
quite  so  certain,  but  it  is  now  generally  identified  with  the 
modern  village  of  Askar.  The  details  of  Jacob's  well  with 
Gerizim  rising  above  it,  are  exactly  given  as  they  may  be 
seen  to  this  day.'  Keaders  of  the  Palestine  Exploration 
Fund  Beports  will  know  the  claim  that  has  recently  been 
made  for  the  rediscovery  of  the  Pool  of  Bethesda  ("Beth- 
saida,"  or  still  more  probably  "  Bezetha,"  as  the  name  is 
read  in  some  MSS.),  with  substantial  remains  even  of  the 
five  colonnades.  The  identification  may  not  be  certain — 
though  the  presence  of  such  remains  tallying  with  the 
description  and  exactly  in  the  quarter  where  we  should 
expect  to  find  them,  must  count  for  something  ;  but  in  any 
case,  the  very  precise  statement  (including  the  "  Sheep- 
gate"),  must  be  set  down  to  the  credit  of  the  writer. 
The  city  of  Ephraim  readily  identified  with  Ophrah  of  the 
Old  Testament,  and  probably  with  the  modern  et-Taiijiheh ; 
the  "treasury"  and  Solomon's  porch  in  the  Temple; 
Gabbatha,  Golgotha,  the  Kedron  ravine,  taken  together, 
if  not  taken  singly,  were  far  too  minute  and  precise  to 
have  come  from  literary  sources. 

But  then,  Mr.  Cross  urges,  the  author  of  the  Gospel 
though  not  a  Jew,  may  have  settled  for  a  length  of  time 
in  Palestine,  as  Origen  did  and  Jerome.  True,  he  may 
have  so  settled.  But  it  must  have  been  for  a  longtime; 
and  he  must  have  moved  about  considerably  from  place 
to  place  to  lay  his  finger  with  so  much  accuracy  on  spots 
so  far  apart  as  Cana  and  Bethany,  Aenon,  and  the  Kedron 
ravine. 

However  this  may  be,  Mr.  Cross  still  urges,  and  how- 
ever the  fact  is  to  be  explained,  the  Fourth  Gospel  need 

'  Lagarcle,  Oiidiiuist.,  p.  V-M. 

-  See  especially  Ligbtfoot,  Exi'Ohitok,  1S90,  i.  170-!). 


172  THE  PRESENT  POSITION   OF 


not  have  been  written  by  a  Palestinian  Jew  in  the  first 
century,  because  there  are  examples  of  works,  neither 
genuine  nor  contemporary,  which  yet  are  distinguished  by 
precise  topographical  details.  Such  an  example  he  finds 
in  the  Apocryphal  Gospel  of  Matthew,  which  it  may  there- 
fore be  interesting  to  test  somewhat  fully.  The  case  would 
certainly  be  a  strong  one,  if  it  should  be  found  to  hold 
good,  as  Lipsius  assigns  the  work  in  question  to  the  second 
half  of  the  fifth  century.  I  should  imagine  that  this  is 
not  far  wrong.  To  avoid  repetition  in  the  next  section  of 
our  inquiry,  we  may  take  at  once  the  indications  which 
bear  upon  the  date  of  the  so-called  Gospel  and  upon  its 
place  of  origin.  The  text  of  the  Gospel  exists  only  in 
Latin,  and  is  published  by  Tischendorf  in  his  Evangelia 
Apocrypha,  pp.  51-112  (ed.  2,  1876).  We  have  also  facili- 
ties for  comparing  the  Pseudo-Matthsean  legend  with  an 
older  version  in  the  Proievangelium  Jacohi,  which  precedes 
it  in  Tischendorf  s  collection. 

In  cap.  i.  we  are  told  how  Joachim  lived  the  life  of  a 
pious  shepherd,  showing  his  devotion  by  his  liberality 
towards  those  who  ministered  in  sacred  things,  dupUcia 
offerens  munera  in  timore  Dei  et  doctrina  lahorantihus  et 
simplicia  offerens  Ids  qui  ministrahant  eis.  Indeed,  he 
divided  the  produce  of  his  flocks  and  all  that  he  had  into 
three  parts,  and  gave  one  part  to  the  widows,  orphans, 
strangers  and  poor,  one  part  to  the  priests  {colentihus 
Deiun),  while  he  only  reserved  the  remaining  third  to  him- 
self and  his  house.  The  stress  which  is  laid  on  gifts  to 
the  priests  (or  clergy)  points  to  a  late  date.  For  the  single 
and  double  gifts  to  the  different  orders  of  the  ministry  I 
have  not  found  a  parallel.  In  the  Apostolic  Constitutions 
(vii.  29),  firstfruits  of  certain  specified  things  are  to  go 
to  the  priests,  tithes  and  some  other  firstfruits  to  the 
widows  and  orphans.  The  common  rule  for  the  distribution 
of  tithes  was  that  they  should  be  divided  into  four  parts. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  QUESTION.  173 

not  always  applied  in  quite  the  same  way.  But  besides 
the  quadripartite  division,  there  was  also  a  tripartite.  The 
earliest  example  of  this  quoted  by  Dr.  Hatch  in  his  Groicth 
of  Church  Institutions  (p.  112)  is  dated  801.  Here  the 
division  applies  to  tithe,  in  Pseudo-Matthew  to  all  produce. 
No  doubt  an  exceptional  degree  of  virtue  is  intended  ;  still 
the  idea  of  threefold  division  had  apparently  defined  itself 
when  the  author  wrote.  The  Protevangelium  simply  says 
that  Joachim  doubled  his  gifts  {'npoae<^epe  ra  hwpa  avTov 
SnrXd,  i.  1). 

In  cap.  ii.  Joachim  goes  up  among  those  "  who  offered 
incense  to  the  Lord."  The  offering  of  incense  belonged 
specially  to  the  priests ;  but  Joachim  we  are  told  was  of 
the  family  of  David.  He  is  repelled  from  sacrificing  by  the 
scriha  templi,  an  official,  I  believe,  not  otherwise  heard  of. 
The  "  scribes  "  {ypaixjiareh)  are  mentioned  in  the  Prote- 
vangelium, but  not  in  this  connexion. 

Meantime  Anna  is  promised  the  birth  of  a  daughter,  and 
goes  to  meet  her  husband  at  the  "golden  gate."  The 
epithet  is  an  addition  to  the  Protevangelium  (iv.  4),  and 
not  a  very  happy  one.  The  designation  "  golden  gate " 
does  not,  I  beheve,  occur  before  Justinian  (if  indeed  then), 
and  the  present  structure  probably  dates  from  that  period.^ 
It  led  out  of  the  Kedron  ravine  through  the  east  wall  into 
the  temple  area — hardly  a  natural  place  for  Anna  to  meet 
her  husband.  The  part  of  the  wall  in  which  it  was 
situated  appears  to  have  been  in  ruins  at  the  time  of 
Paula's  visit  {circa  383,  a.d.),  and  the  ;porta  speciosa  of 
Antoninus  was  still  ruined  in  his  time  {circa  ^ilO  a.d.).^ 

'  See  Prof.  Hayter  Lewis,  Holy  Places  of  Jermalem,  p.  96  (cf.  p.  92).  The 
Bordeaux  pilgrim  speaks  of  a  gate,  and  Antouinus  of  a  gate  which  lie  calls 
porta  speciosa. 

-  Sir  C.  Wilson  thinks  that  this  may  have  been  the  present  "  golden  gate  " 
{Pal.  Pilg.  Texts,  No.  1,  pp.  14,  15) ;  but  are  not  the  domes  against  this  ?  The 
date  assigned  to  Antoninus  on  the  title-page  of  P.  P.  T.  is  a  misprint  (cf. 
p.  v.,  and  -Intonini  Pla':cntiiii  Iliucraritini,  ed.  Gjldcmeister,  p.  xvii.). 


174  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 

Mary  is  born,  and  while  yet  an  infant  is  presented  to 
the  Lord  in  contuhernium  virginum  quae  die  noctuque  in 
Dei  laudihus  pennanehant.  Elsewhere  (cap.  viii.)  we  are 
told  that  from  the  time  of  Solomon  onwards  there  had 
always  been  in  the  temple  "  daughters  of  kings  who  were 
virgins,  and  of  prophets,  and  of  chief  priests  and  priests." 
Mary  takes  her  place  among  the  "senior  virgins,"  and 
apportions  out  her  own  day  from  dawn  to  the  third  hour, 
from  the  third  hour  to  the  ninth  (cap.  vi.).  Clearly  all 
this  group  of  ideas  is  taken  from  the  convents  and  the 
convent  schools  which  were  not  fully  organized  before  the 
fifth  century.  The  Protevangelium  speaks  only  of  the  pre- 
sentation of  the  Virgin  without  these  embellishments. 

At  last  (in  cap.  iv.)  we  come  to  what  seems  an  accu- 
rate local  touch.  On  her  presentation  in  the  temple  Mary, 
though  quite  an  infant,  runs  up  "the  fifteen  steps"  with- 
out looking  back  for  her  parents.  It  is  true  that  there  was 
a  well-known  flight  of  "  fifteen  steps  "  in  the  Temple  on 
which  the  "Psalms  of  Degrees"  are  traditionally  said  to 
have  been  recited  by  the  Levites.^  It  is  however  unfortu- 
nate for  Pseudo-Matthew  (1)  that  these  steps  led,  not  into 
the  court  of  the  women  (which  was  entered  by  a  flight  of 
twelve  steps,  not  fifteen),  but  from  that  of  the  women  into 
the  court  of  Israel ;  and  (2)  that  the  steps  are  not  placed 
by  him  within  the  Temple  at  all,  but  outside  it  {ante 
Templum  in  some  MSS.,  which  Tischendorf  favours  ;  ante 
foras  Templi  in  others).  Still  in  spite  of  these  errors  the 
mention  of  "fifteen  steps  "  may  attract  some  notice.  The 
"  steps  of  the  Temple"  early  gained  and  long  maintained 
a  place  in  Christian  history  or  legend.  It  was  on  them 
that  according  to  one  version  St.  James  met  his  death. 
There  was  an  Ebionite  Apocryplion  called  the  'Ava/3adfiol 


•  Neubaner  iu  Slud.  Bibl. ,  ii.  Hi',.     The  Pivtev.  describes  liow_the  cliikl  was 
set  ou  the  "  tliird  step  of  the  altar  "—a  different  matter. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  QUESTION.  175 

'laKco^ov,^  with   which  it   is  natural    to  compare  the  title 
of  Psahus  cxix.  (LXX.)  to  cxxxiii.,  cpSal  twv  uva^aOfxcov. 

In  cap.  vii.  there  is  a  discussion  on  virginity  which  would 
have  heen  much  out  of  place  in  the  Jewish  Temple.  Ahel 
is  said  to  have  received  "  two  crowns,  the  crown  of  obla- 
tion and  the  crown  of  virginity." 

We  now  have  the  story  of  the  espousal  of  Mary  and 
Joseph,  the  Annunciation  and  Nativity,  told  largely  in 
Biblical  language,  but  with  the  cave  as  well  as  the  manger. 
These  features  are  also  found  in  Protevangelium,  which  ends 
at  this  point.  The  descent  into  Egypt  is  more  fully  elabo- 
rated. Here  it  is  that  we  get  the  allusions  to  the  topo- 
graphy of  other  countries  besides  Palestine.  The  well- 
known  miracles  of  the  legend  take  place  upon  the  way. 
The  travellers  have  their  journey  preternaturally  shortened, 
and  arrive  first  at  the  district  (?)  of  Hermopolis,  where 
they  enter  a  city  called  Sotinen  {devenerunt  in  finihus  Her- 
mopolis et  in  unam  ex  civitatibus  Egypti  quae  Sotinen 
dicitur).  There  does  not  seem  to  be  any  "  district  "  or 
"  nome  "  bearing  the  name  Hermopolis:  there  are  how- 
ever two  cities  of  that  name,  neither  of  which  seems  to 
suit  the  conditions  which  appear  to  require  a  place  on 
the  main  route  from  Palestine.  Hermopolis  Magna  is  far 
up  the  Nile,  about  mid-way  between  Memphis  and  Thebes  ; 
and  Hermopolis  Parva  (the  modern  Damanliur)  is  not  far 
from  Alexandria.^  Heroopolis  might  have  been  rather 
nearer  the  mark,  as  there  is  a  city  and  nome  so-called  on 
the  road  to  Palestine.  There  is  however  no  variant  in 
the  MSS.  of  Pseudo-Matthew.  The  nearest  approach  I 
can  find  to  "  Sotinen "  is  a  city  of  the  Delta  called  in 
the  Coptic  documents  PSENETAI,  and  said  to  be  repre- 

1  Epiph.,  Haer.,  xxx.  IG  ;  Lipsius,  Apokr.  Apostelrjesch.,  ii.  2,  245;  Salmon  in 
Diet,  of  Chr.  liiog.,  i.  568. 

2  Diimichen  conjectures  the  possible  existence  of  anotlirr  Hermopolis  in 
tbe  loth  Nome,  not  far  from  the  Phatnltic  arm  of  the  Nile  {Geogiaphie  des 
alten  Aegyptcns,  p.  261). 


17G  THE  PRESENT  POSFTION  OF 


sented  on  the  maps  as  "  Schenit,  El-Seneta  and  Seneda." 
Whether  this  has  anything  to  do  with  Sotinen  I  should 
not  like  to  say  ;  hut  at  any  rate  it  is  in  quite  a  different 
nome  (the  11th)  from  either  HermopoHs  or  Heroopohs. 
The  Nile  would  have  to  he  crossed  to  reach  it,  and  it  is 
not  near  either  the  road  to  Palestine  or  the  "mountains  " 
which  had  just  heen  described  as  coming  in  sight. 

At  Sotinen  there  is  a  temple,  quod  capitolium  Egijpti 
vocahatur.  In  this  temple  there  are  365  idols,  which  on 
the  entrance  of  Mother  and  Child  fall  to  the  ground  and  are 
broken  in  pieces.  Affrodisius,  dux  civitatis  illius,  arrives 
"with  all  his  army"  to  take  vengeance  for  the  sacrilege, 
but  instead  falls  down  and  worships.  The  title  dux  civi- 
tatis does  not  belong  at  all  to  the  first  century.  It  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  until  the  time  of  Constantino  that 
dux  was  used  of  any  of  the  smaller  units  in  the  army  or  of 
local  garrisons,  and  then  it  ranks  above  the  "  chiliarch."  ^ 
In  Egypt  the  strategi  were  officers  of  the  nome,  and  only 
had  under  their  orders  a  few  police.^  The  Egyptians  were 
not  likely  to  call  their  temple  the  "  Capitol  of  Egypt."  It 
is  true  that  the  term  is  used  of  any  large  and  splendid 
temple,''  but  of  course  only  in  the  West.  The  pantheon  of 
gods  with  their  rotating  days  of  honour  needs  verification  ; 
but  in  any  case  it  does  not  agree  either  with  HermopoHs, 
which  was  dedicated  specially  to  the  god  Thoth,  or  with 
Senetai,  which  was  dedicated  specially  to  Horus.'* 

The  narratives  of  the  pilgrims  to  the  Holy  Places  supply 
a  further  means  of  obtaining  at  least  a  terminus  a  quo  for 
the  date  of  the  apocryphal  Gospel.  Of  the  five  pilgrims 
before  the  Arab  invasion  of  whom  accounts  have  come 
down  to  us,  three  made  a  point  of  visiting  Egypt,  and  a 

'  Oil  /xofcv  (KaTOVTapxij^v  koX  x'-^'-o-PX'^" >  o-^^o-  ^0.1  tCjv  \eyo/j.h cof  ^cvkuv  ot  arpa- 
TTjyCv  €i>  eKacTTuiToiTU)  rd^if  iirtlxov  (Zosimus,  Hist,  ii.,  33). 
^  Marquardt,  Eom.  Staatsverwaltinig,  i.  290. 
•''  See  Gporf^es  ad  vac. 
■•  paniiclun.  tit  snj).,  pp.  -(il.  2ji. 


THE  JO  H ANNE  AN   QUESTION.  Ill 


fourth  (Theodosius)  has  a  note  on  Memphis  which  may  be 
derived  from  personal  knowledge.  The  two  earliest,  Paula, 
whose  movements  are  described  by  Jerome,  and  Silvia  of 
Aquitaine,  evidently  had  a  double  interest.  They  visited 
the  sites  connected  with  Israel  in  Egypt  and  the  Exodus, 
and  they  were  also  interested  in  monasteries  and  monasti- 
cism.  But  of  the  legend  which  surrounds  the  flight  of  the 
Holy  Family  into  Egypt  there  is  not  the  slightest  trace. 
The  first  and  only  indication  of  this  is  in  Antoninus  of 
Placentia  (c.  570,  a.d.),  of  whom  it  is  said  that  at  Memphis 
he  saw  the  door  (regia,  i.e.  "main  door")  of  a  church, 
formerly  a  temple,  which  had  shut  itself  to  against  the 
infant  Christ,  and  could  never  afterwards  be  opened.  Not 
even  in  Antoninus  is  there  any  allusion  to  "  Sotinen  "  and 
"  Hermopolis."  We  may  however  suspect  that  these  names 
are  more  or  less  distorted  versions  of  the  reports  brought 
back  by  pilgrims. 

In  any  case,  I  do  not  think  it  can  be  said  that  the  Gospel 
of  Pseudo-Matthew  supplies  a  substantial  argument  against 
the  inferences  which  have  been  drawn  from  local  knowledge. 

Going  back  then  to  the  Gospel  of  St.  John,  we  are  left, 
with  two  alternatives.  Either  the  author  of  the  Gospel 
was  a  Jew  born  and  bred  in  Palestine,  or  he  must  at  least 
have  made  so  long  a  stay  there,  and  have  so  gone  about 
from  place  to  place  as  to  have  become  intimately  acquainted 
with  a  great  part  of  the  country  and  able  to  handle  local 
names  with  sureness  and  ease.  In  order  to  decide  between 
these  alternatives  we  must  have  recourse  to  other  criteria. 
We  must  endeavour  to  enter  into  the  mind  of  the  author 
and  see  from  "what  point  of  view  he  looked  out  upon 
things,  whether  from  that  of  one  who  was  from  the  first 
wholly  a  Jew,  or  from  that  of  one  in  whom  Jewish  ideas 
were  mingled  with  ideas  foreign  to  Judaism. 

Let  us  take  our  first  test  under  this  head  from  the  use  of 
the  Old  Testament. 

VOL     V  12 


178  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 

In  my  book  of  twenty  years  ago  I  used  an  expression 
which  was  rather  too  strong  about  this.  Assuming  that 
St.  John  in  two  places  gave  a  version  of  his  own  directly 
from  the  Hebrew,  without  regard  to  the  LXX.,  I  spoke  of 
this  as  "convincing."  Mr.  Cross  demurs:^  and  in  view 
of  some  new  light  which  has  been  thrown  upon  quotations 
from  the  Old  Testament  on  the  New  and  in  early  writers, 
I  accept  the  correction,  though  I  still  think  that  the  argu- 
ment has  some  not  inconsiderable  weight. 

Bishop  Lightfoot,-  with  his  usual  lucidity  and  force  of 
reasoning,  pressed  home  three  passages  as  showing  a  direct 
influence  of  the  Hebrew. 

St.  Jolni  xix.  37  (  =  Zecli.  xii.  10),  "  They  shall  look  on  Him  whom 

they  pierced." 
St.  Johu  xii.  40  (  =  Isa.  vi.  10),  "  Because  that  Esaias  said  again,  He 

hath  blinded  their  eyes,"  etc. 
St.  Johnxiii.  18  (==Ps.  xli.  9  Heb. ;  xl.  10,  LXX.),  "He  that  catetli 

bread  with  Me  hath  lifted  up  his  heel  against  Me." 

It  is  well  known  that  in  the  first  of  these  passages  the 
Septuagint  has  not  "  whom  they  pierced,"  but  "  because 
they  insulted."  The  first  of  these  two  versions  was  correct 
as  a  rendering  of  the  Hebrew — at  least  of  our  present 
Hebrew.  Mr.  Cross  however  challenged  the  inference  that 
St.  John  made  a  new  version  for  himself.  He  pointed  to 
the  fact  that  "  whom  they  pierced  "  is  found  not  only  in 
the  Gospel  but  also  in  the  Apocalypse,  in  Justin  Martyr, 
in  some  MSS.  of  the  Septuagint,  and  in  the  three  versions 
of  Aquila,  Symmachus,  and  Theodotion  ;  and  he  argued 
that  the  author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  did  not  translate  for 
himself,  but  adopted  another  version  current  at  the  time. 

Dr.  T.  K.  Abbott  replied  to  this,'^  that  Aq.,  Symm.,  Theod., 
MSS.  of  LXX.  might  be  reduced  practically  to  Aquila,  from 

1  Class.  Bee.  181J0,  p.  458  f.,  also  1891,  p.  112  f. 

2  ExrosiTOR,  1890,  pp.  19-21.  It  should  be  rememba-ed  however  that  the 
Essay,  though  printed  at  this  date,  was  written  in  1871. 

8  Ibid.,  I'eb.,  189L  p.  11  f. 


THE  JOB  AN  KE AN  QUESTION.  179 


whom  all  the  other  renderings  or  readings  were  derived. 
The  same  article  contained  some  criticism  of  Dr.  Hatch, 
who  had  adopted  a  view  similar  to  that  of  Mr.  Cross. 

The  state  of  the  case  in  regard  to  divergent  quotations 
from  the  Old  Testament  is  this. 

Generally  speaking,  it  may  be  said  that  up  to  the  year 
1884  the  assumption  had  been  made  that  where  an  author 
quoted  from  the  Old  Testament  in  a  form  more  nearly 
resembling  the  Hebrew  than  the  Septuagint  he  had  either 
himself  translated  directly  from  the  Hebrew  or  followed 
some  other  writer  who  had  so  translated.  But  from  that 
year  onwards,  starting  from  a  small  beginning  but  with  a 
wider  accession  of  facts  as  it  proceeded,  the  conviction  has 
been  growing  that  there  were  current  as  far  back  as  the 
period  of  the  New  Testament  itself,  at  least  for  certain 
books,  other  Greek  versions  than  those  which  go  under  the 
name  of  the  Septuagint  and  in  some  cases  more  nearly 
representing  the  Hebrew. 

The  impulse  was  given  by  two  observations  of  Professor 
Eendel  Harris  and  Dr.  Hort.^  Professor  Eendel  Harris 
noticed  that  a  passage  in  the  Shepherd  of  Hermas  was  really 
based  upon  the  Greek  of  Daniel,  but  upon  the  Greek  in  a 
peculiar  form.  Dr.  Hort  thereupon  pointed  out  that  the  form 
in  question  implied  the  version  of  Theodotion,  not  the  text 
which  properly  bore  the  name  of  Septuagint.  Hitherto  it 
had  been  supposed  that  Theodotion's  version  was  at  least 
some  forty  years  later  than  Hermas,  but  doubt  was  at  once 
thrown  on  this.  It  happened  that  Dr.  Salmon  had  a 
special  interest  in  the  date  of  Hermas,  as  he  maintained  a 
view  which,  though  no  doubt  defensible,  is  as  yet  held  by  a 
minority  of  scholars.  At  his  instance  Dr.  Gwynn  worked 
out  yet  further  the  traces  of  a  version  similar  to  Theodo- 
tion's, but  before  Theodotion,  with  the  result  that  it  has 
been  made  highly  probable  that  the  name  of  that  editor  has 

'  Juhns  IIopl;in»  University  Circulars,  18S1,  Apr.  ami  Dec. 


180  THE  PRESENT  POSITION   OF 

been  given  to  a  version  not  only  current  but  largely  pre- 
ferred to  the  Septuagint  version  before  his  day. 

Dr.  Hatch,  in  his  Essays  in  Biblical  Greek,  published  in 
1889,  maintained  not  exactly  this  theory  but  another  which 
somew4iat  resembled  it,  viz.,  that  many  of  the  quotations 
in  early  Christian  writers  were  taken  not  directly  from  the 
Books  of  the  Old  Testament  quoted  but  from  collections  of 
extracts  or  short  manuals  compiled  from  the  Old  Testament 
by  the  Jews.  This  too  is  a  possibility  that  has  something 
in  its  favour  and  that  must  be  distinctly  contemplated, 
though  it  is  not  the  only  hypothesis  which  will  explain  the 
facts. 

As  a  consequence  of  these  investigations,  the  old  simple 
inference  has  at  least  lost  its  stringency.  It  is  no  longer 
certain  that  a  writer  who  agrees  more  nearly  with  the 
Hebrew  than  the  Septuagint  is  himself  translating  from  the 
Hebrew.  He  may  be  using  a  different  version  or  he  may 
be  using  a  collection  of  extracts. 

What  are  we  to  say  to  the  particular  instances  adduced 
by  Dr.  Lightfoot  and  by  others  who  have  dealt  with  the 
Introduction  to  the  Fourth  Gospel  ?  As  between  Dr.  T.  K. 
Abbott  and  Mr.  Cross,  it  seems  to  me  that  Dr.  Abbott  has 
certainly  reduced  considerably  the  apparent  body  of  evi- 
dence for  the  existence  of  a  version  of  Zechariah  xii.  10  dis- 
tinct from  that  of  the  LXX.  It  now  stands  as  Gosp.  Apoc. 
Just. -Mart.  Aq.  If  the  Fourth  Gospel  and  the  Apocalypse 
are  both  by  the  same  hand,  or  at  least  closely  connected, 
and  if,  as  is  possible,  the  form  of  the  quotation  in  Justin  is 
influenced  by  these  writings,  then  the  evidence  would  be 
reduced  still  further,  it  would  in  fact  consist  of  only  two 
items,  Script.  Joan,  and  Aquila ;  and  between  these  two, 
for  reasons  which  Dr.  Abbott  has  urged,  the  coincidence  of 
rendering  might  be  accidental.  Still  each  of  these  steps 
involves  a  certain  amount  of  assumption  ;  and  on  the  other 
hand  the  existence  of  a  version  not  identical  with  the  LXX. 


THE  JOIIANNEAN  QUESTION.  181 

seems  to  be  sufficiently  proved;  so  that  on  the  whole,  if 
this  passage  had  stood  alone,  I  should  have  been  inclined 
to  side  with  Mr.  Cross,  and  to  think  that  the  use  of  such 
a  version  was  the  easier  hypothesis  of  the  two. 

But  it  must  be  remembered  that  there  are  two  other 
passages  in  regard  to  which  the  balance  of  probability 
seems  to  be  different.  In  xiii.  18  (  =  Ps.  xh.  9,  "lifted  up 
his  heel  ")  the  Fourth  Gospel  stands  alone  :  Aquila,  Sym- 
machus,  and  Theodotion  are  all  extant,  and  agree  more 
with  the  LXX.  than  with  the  Gospel. 

St.  Johx:   i-rnjpev  eV  e/i,£  T7yi'  Trreprai'  avTuv. 
LXX.  :    ijXiydXvi'ev  lir   i/xe  TVTepvLcrjxov, 
Aq.,  TiiEOD.  :    KaTefJieyaXvi'Or]  fxov  Trrepi'u. 
SVM.M.  :    KaT€fieya\m'6ri  fxov  aKoXovOCjv. 

Here  the  Johannean  rendering  is  quite  isolated,  and  looks 
as  if  it  were  affected  either  by  the  original  text  or  by  a 
Targumic  paraphrase. 

There  is  a  like  isolation  in  xii.  40  (  =  Isa.  vi.  10).  This 
verse  is  quoted  in  two  other  places  in  the  New  Testament 
(Matt.  xiii.  15  and  Acts  xxviii.  27),  in  both  closely  with  the 
LXX.  ;  and  Symmachus,  who  alone  is  extant,  is  nearer  to 
the  LXX.  than  to  St.  John  and  the  Hebrew. 

There  is  some  difficulty  in  supposing  that  in  these  two 
instances  an  alternative  version  had  reached  the  writer  of 
the  Fourth  Gospel  and  had  not  reached  any  of  the  com- 
panions which  he  had  with  him  in  the  quotation  from 
Zechariah.  So  that,  on  the  whole,  and  with  some  hesita- 
tion, I  lean  to  the  old  view  that  the  Gospel  does  show 
signs  of  the  influence  of  the  original  either  directly  or  in- 
directly through  an  Aramaic  paraphrase. 

I  lean  to  this  view  the  more  readily  because  it  only  falls 
in  with  a  conclusion  arrived  at  in  other  ways.  Whether  or 
not  in  the  outer  circumference  of  his  mind  the  writer  of  the 
Gospel  had  imbibed  ideas  derived  from  Alexandrian  Hellen- 


182  THE  JOIIANNEAN  QUESTION. 


ism  must  for  the  present  be  left  an  open  question,  but  in 
any  case  at  its  centre  he  was  essentially  a  Jew.  The  argu- 
ment from  style  and  diction  I  do  not  propose  to  discuss.  It 
will  be  found  excellently  stated  by  Bishop  Lightfoot  ^  and 
by  Dr.  Westcott ;-  I  may  add  also  by  Keim  in  the  passage 
referred  to  above. ^  But  the  question  of  modes  of  thought  is 
perhaps  more  debateable,  and  to  that  I  hope  to  return  in 
the  next  paper. 

W.  Sanday. 


Note. — The  last  of  these  papers  brought  me  two  letters  from  Dr.  Hort,  which 
are  of  great  value  to  me  personally,  and  require  a  word  of  notice. 

In  the  first  jjlace,  I  hasten  to  disclaim  a  construction  which  I  fear  might 
have  been  jjlaced  upon  my  words.  In  saying  that  Dr.  Hort  had  urged  all  that 
could  possibly  be  urged  against  the  words  t6  Trdaxa  in  St.  John  vi.  4,  I  did  not 
mean  to  imply  that  this  was  done  with  any  harmonistic  object.  The  paragraph 
in  which  I  spoke  of  the  effect  of  the  omission  upon  the  harmony  of  the  Gospels 
was  not  meant  to  be  connected  logically  with  the  paragraph  which  went  before, 
though  I  can  see  that  it  might  be  taken  as  so  connected.  There  is  no  writer, 
English  or  foreign,  who  is  so  entirely  above  suspicion  of  being  influenced  by 
anj'  such  object ;  and  to  suggest  otherwise  was  far  indeed  from  my  mind. 

I  was  well  aware  that  I  was  myself  more  open  to  the  charge  of  "  Harmonis- 
tik,"  from  the  attempt  which  I  made  to  reconcile  the  Synoptic  and  .Johanneau 
narratives  on  the  day  of  the  Crucifixion.  I  could  not  plead  guilty  to  the  charge, 
because  I  was  only  dealing  with  the  Gospel  narratives  precisely  as  I  should  have 
dealt  with  any  two  other  historical  autborities  under  similar  circumstances.  I 
also,  as  I  hope,  succeeded  in  making  it  understood  that  the  reconciliation 
which  I  put  forward — not  as  my  own,  but  on  tbe  lines  of  Edersheim,  Niisgen, 
and  others — was  put  forward  most  tentatively,  and  subject  to  the  validity  of 
certain  premises  which,  as  neither  Hebraist  nor  Talmudist,  I  did  not  feel  com- 
petent to  criticise  personally. 

Dr.  Hort  has  been  so  good  as  to  give  me  his  opinion  on  these  premises.  On 
every  one  he  goes  bebind  the  data  on  which  I  was  relying,  with  the  result  that 
as  a  whole  I  no  longer  regard  the  explanation  offered  as  tenable.  I  can  cn'y 
fall  back  on  the  views  which  I  expressed  twenty  years  ago,  with  just  this 
reservation,  that  because  the  two  accounts  are  not  reconciled  I  do  not  think  it 
follows  that  they  are  not  reconcilable.  I  venture  to  quote  the  sentences  in 
which  Dr.  Hort  states  his  conclusion. 

"  I  feel  sure,"  he  says,  "  that  St.  John  meant  to  place  the  Crucifixion  on 
Nisan  14,  and  that  he  may  safely  be  trusted  here,  more  especially  as  this 
chronology  is  supported  by  often-noticed  details  in  the  Synoptic  accounts.    But 


'  ExposiTor.,  ISflO,  pii.  15-19.  "  Comm.,  pp.  50-52. 

^  p.  1(>2.     See  also  Bleck-Mangnld,  p.  303  :  the  only  dissentient  among  recent 
writers  ajipcars  to  be  Scholti'n. 


THE  DOCTRINE   OF  THE  ATONEMENT.  183 


I  am  by  no  means  so  conlideut  as  to  the  interpretation  of  the  Synoptic  chrono- 
logy. The  most  obvious,  and  perhaps  the  most  probable,  view  is  that  St.  John 
is  tacitly  but  deliberately  correcting  an  error  of  the  Synoptists.  But  the  great- 
ness of  the  supposed  error  is  very  perplexing  if  any  of  the  Twelve  had  any  part 
in  the  redaction  of  anyone  of  the  three  (lospels.  ...  I  think  there  is 
real  force  in  what  Westcott  urges  (Introd.,  p.  3-l'l)  against  treating  the  Synoptic 
language  as  due  to  mere  blunder  or  fiction,  though  I  cannot  be  as  hopeful  as  he 
seems  to  be  that  fuller  knowledge  would  justify  it  in  all  particulars." 

I  would  gladly  express  my  adhesion  to  this  judgment,  with  perhaps  some 
emphasis  on  the  point  contended  for  by  Dr.  Westcott.  It  was  really  this 
(e.j.  a  verse  like  St.  Luke  xxii.  15,  "  With  desire  have  I  desired,"  etc.)  which  put 
me  upon  attempting  the  reconciliation  which  I  now  believe  to  have  failed. 

Another  correspondent  reminds  me  that  in  pointing  out  the  parallels  between 
the  Synoptic  sayings  in  Matthew  xi.  27,  Luke  x.  22,  and  St.  John,  I  should 
have  bracketed  the  prepositions  in  [Trap\e5Jdri,  [e7rt]7ij'W(T\ft,  as  St.  John  (like 
St,  Luke  in  the  case  of  yiviba-Kei)  uses  the  simple  and  not  the  compound  verb.s, 
but  there  are  a  great  number  of  parallels  which  are  very  close  in  sense  {e.g. 
SoCvai  e^ovaiav,  John  i.  12,  v.  27,  xvii.  2  ;  dovfai  iv  rrj  xetpt,  iii.  i^o  ;  els  raj 
Xeipas,  xiii.  3  ;  also  iii.  27,  v.  22,  36,  vi.  37,  39,  etc. ;  and  for  yivuiffKnv  especially 
John  X.  14,  15,  xiv.  7,  '.•,  17,  xvi.  3,  xvii.  25,  etc.).  That  this  was  not  more  fully 
verified  before  was  due  to  an  accident  which  I  need  not  explain  at  length. 


THE  DOCTBINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT  IN  THE 
NEW  TESTAMENT. 

III.    St,  Peter. 

We  shall  now  consider  the  teaching  of  the  Book  of  Acts 
and  of  the  Epistles  of  Peter. 

The  discourses  preserved  in  the  Book  of  Acts,  while  fre- 
quently mentioning  the  death  of  Christ,  do  not  say  much 
about  its  spiritual  significance.  The  Apostles  were  more 
eager  to  proclaim  that  the  Crucified  had  come  forth  living 
from  the  grave  than  to  expound  a  recondite  doctrine,  which 
can  be  appreciated  only  by  those  who  have  already  put 
faith  in  Him.  We  have  however,  in  St.  Peter's  inaugural 
address  on  the  Day  of  Pentecost  and  in  an  address  by 
St.  Paul,  two  important  passages  bearing  most  closely  on 
the  subject  before  us.     These  now  demand  attention. 

In  Acts  ii.  23  Peter  is  recorded  to  have  said,  in  reference 
to  Christ,  "  whom,  being  delivered  up  by  the  determinate 


184  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 


counsel  and  foreknowledge  of  God,  ye  by  the  band  of  law- 
less men  did  crucify  and  slay."  He  tbus  asserts  tbat  tbe 
deatb  of  Cbrist  was  no  mere  calamity,  but  was  an  accom- 
plishment of  a  divine  purpose.  In  other  words,  he  says 
that  God  foresaw  that,  if  He  sent  His  Son  into  the  world 
to  proclaim  salvation  for  all  who  believe  in  Him,  the  Jews 
would  give  Him  up  to  the  Eoman  power  to  be  put  to 
death  ;  and  that,  foreseeing  this,  God  sent  Him  into  the 
world  in  order  that  by  His  death  He  might  accomplish  a 
definite  purpose.  This  implies  that  the  death  of  Christ 
was  a  definite  part  of  God's  purpose  of  salvation ;  in  com- 
plete harmony  with  His  assertion  in  Matthew  xvi.  21  that 
He  must  needs  go  away  to  Jerusalem  to  be  put  to  death, 
with  that  in  chapter  xx.  28  that  He  came  to  give  His  life 
a  ransom  for  many,  and  with  all  the  passages  quoted  in 
my  first  and  second  papers. 

In  Acts  XX.  28,  in  an  address  at  Miletus  to  the  elders 
of  the  Church  at  Ephesus,  Paul  is  recorded  to  have  said, 
"  shepherd  the  Church  of  God  (or,  of  the  Lord)  which  He 
hath  acquired  (E.V.  margin)  for  Himself  with  His  own 
blood."  AVhatever  be  the  correct  reading,  the  blood  here 
mentioned  can  only  be  that  of  Christ.  The  meaning  of 
the  verb  Trepnroula-aro  may  be  studied  in  1  Timothy  iii.  13, 
"  they  who  have  discharged  well  the  office  of  a  deacon 
acquire  for  themselves  a  good  degree";  in  Isaiah  Ixiii.  21, 
LXX.,  "a  people  of  My  own,  whom  I  have  acquired  for 
Myself  that  they  may  set  forth  My  praises  "  ;  in  1  Macca- 
bees vi.  44,  "  He  gave  Himself  to  save  His  people,  and  to 
acquire  for  Himself  a  name  and  power."  The  middle  voice 
in  all  the  above  passages  except  the  last,  which  has  a  still 
stronger  form,  indicates  that  those  whom  Christ  acquired 
were  henceforth  to  stand  in  special  relation  to  Himself  as 
His  own  possession.  St.  Paul  asserts  plainly  that  the 
death  of  Christ  was  the  instrument  which  He  used  to  save 
men  and  to  bring  them  into  His  Church,  and  thus  to  unite 


IN   THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  185 

them  to  Himself.  All  this  implies  that  the  death  of  Christ 
was  an  essential  link  in  the  chain  of  man's  salvation.  Thus 
these  recorded  words  of  Paul  are  in  complete  harmony 
with  the  teaching  of  Christ  already  expounded. 

It  is  worthy  of  note  that  the  Epistle  of  James,  which 
does  not  clearly  announce  salvation  through  faith,  does  not 
mention  the  death  of  Christ.  This  silence  is  full  of  instruc- 
tion as  suggesting  a  relation  between  these  two  doctrines. 
We  shall  find  at  a  later  stage  of  our  inquiry  that  the  sal- 
vation of  sinners  through  faith  becomes  possible  only  by 
the  death  of  Christ  for  the  world's  sin. 

We  come  now  to  a  document  accepted  with  perfect  con- 
fidence by  all  early  Christian  writers  as  written  by  the  most 
conspicuous  of  those  who  were  called  to  be  Apostles  during 
the  lifetime  of  Christ,  viz.,  the  First  Epistle  of  Peter. 

In  1  Peter  i.  18,  19  we  read,  "  Knowing  that,  not  with 
perishable  things,  with  silver  or  gold,  ye  were  ransomed 
from  your  useless  manner  of  life  handed  down  from  your 
fathers,  but  with  precious  blood  as  of  a  lamb  without 
blemish  and  without  spot,  even  that  of  Christ."  The 
word  which  I  have  rendered  ransom,  is  found  also  in 
Luke  xxiv.  21,  in  Deuteronomy  vii.  8  (LXX.),  and  in  other 
passages  quoted  in  my  first  paper.  And  it  is  cognate  to 
the  word  used  in  the  important  assertion  of  Christ  pre- 
served in  Matthew  xx.  28.  The  word  denotes,  as  we  saw 
in  my  exposition  of  this  last  passage,  always  liberation,  and 
usually  liberation  by  pi  ice  paid.  In  1  Peter  i.  18,  19,  now 
before  us,  the  ideas  of  liberation  and  price  are  very  con- 
spicuous. The  Apostle  reminds  his  readers  that  they  had 
been  set  free  from  a  way  of  living,  without  aim  and  without 
result,  which  they  had  accepted  from  their  fathers,  who 
themselves  had  lived  this  useless  life.  This  description  of 
their  former  life  is  unhappily  true  of  the  mass  of  mankind 
in  all  ages.  They  toil,  but  without  worthy  result.  And 
the  word  ransom  implies  that  this  mode  of  life  was  a  bond- 


18G  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 


age  from  which  they  could  not  save  themselves.  But  the 
Apostle  says  that  deliverance  has  been  effected,  and  that 
it  has  been  costly.  Its  price  has  been,  not  silver  or  even 
gold,  but  precious  blood,  blood  in  some  respects  like  that 
of  the  animals  slain  in  sacrifice,  but  more  costly,  viz.,  the 
blood  of  Christ.  The  writer  thus  re-echoes  and  expounds 
the  words  of  Christ  in  Matthew  xx.  28,  words  which  pos- 
sibly he  may  have  heard  from  the  Master's  own  lips. 

Manifestly  the  passage  before  us  means  that  the  bloody 
death  of  Christ  upon  the  cross  was  the  costly  means  by 
which  the  servants  of  Christ  have  been  rescued  from  bond- 
age to  an  inherited  and  useless  way  of  life.  The  costliness 
of  the  means  of  deliverance  implies  that  man's  liberation 
was  not  otherwise  possible.  In  other  words,  it  implies, 
in  harmony  with  the  plain  teaching  of  each  of  the  four 
Gospels,  the  absolute  necessity  of  the  death  of  Christ  for 
the  salvation  of  men. 

In  1  Peter  ii.  21  we  read  that  "  Christ  suffered  on  your 
behalf"  :  eTraOev  virep  v/xcov.  And  the  mention  in  verse  24 
of  "  His  body  on  the  wood  "  teaches  clearly  that  the  suffer- 
ing referred  to  is  His  death  on  the  cross.  The  preposition 
virep  with  the  genitive  conveys  simply  the  idea  of  benefit, 
without  stating  what  the  benefit  is.  It  is  used  in  reference 
to  the  death  of  Christ  in  Mark  xiv.  24,  Luke  xxii.  19,  20, 
John  vi.  51,  x.  11,  15,  xi.  50,  51,  52,  xv.  13,  already 
expounded.  As  conveying  simply  the  idea  of  benefit,  v-rrep 
differs  from  uvti,  which  is  used  in  Matthew  xx.  28,  "to 
give  His  life  a  ransom  instead  of  many,"  and  which  con- 
veys the  idea  of  substitution,  of  one  thing  put  instead  of 
another.  This  being  the  difference  between  them,  either 
preposition  may  be  used  to  describe  the  relation  of  the 
death  of  Christ  to  those  for  whom  He  died.  But  each  con- 
veys its  own  significance,  and  that  only.  Christ  died  on 
our  behalf,  i.e.,  for  our  benefit;  He  died  in  our  stead;  for, 
had  He  not  died,  we  must. 


IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  187 


In  the  verse  now  before  us,  the  writer  asserts  that  Christ 
suffered  death  upon  the  cross  for  our  benefit.  What  the 
benefit  is,  and  wherein  lay  the  need  for  this  mysterious  and 
costly  mode  of  doing  us  good,  we  learn  from  the  verses 
following.  In  verse  22  we  read  that  Christ  was  Himself 
sinless  ;  and  in  verse  24  that  He  "  bore  our  sins  in  His 
body  on  the  wood."  This  implies  that  the  awfal  sufferings 
endured  in  the  sacred  body  nailed  to  the  timber  of  the  cross 
on  Golgotha  were  a  consequence  of  "  our  sins."  The  aim 
of  these  sufferings,  or  in  other  words  the  benefit  to  be 
thereby  obtained  for  us,  is  at  once  stated,  viz.,  "in  order 
that,  having  been  removed  from  our  sins,  we  may  live  for 
righteousness."  We  have  here  another  plain  assertion  that 
Christ  died  with  a  definite  aim,  viz.,  in  order  that  we  may 
escape  from  the  penalty  and  bondage  resulting  ft'om  our 
past  sins,  and  may  live  a  new  and  righteous  life.  The 
actual  result  of  the  death  of  Christ  is  then  added  :  "  by 
whose  wound  ye  have  been  healed." 

In  close  agreement  with  the  above,  we  read  in  1  Peter 
iii.  18,  that  "  Christ  suffered  once  for  sins,  a  just  man  on 
behalf  of  unjust  men,  in  order  that  He  may  lead  us  to  God, 
put  to  death  in  flesh,  but  made  alive  in  spirit,"  etc.  These 
last  words  prove  that  the  Apostle  again  refers  to  Christ's 
suffering  on  the  cross.  AVe  are  told  expressly  that  His  death 
was  occasioned  by  the  sins  of  men,  that  it  was  endured 
with  a  definite  aim,  viz.,  "  in  order  to  lead  us  to  God." 

In  the  light  of  this  passage  we  may  expound  1  Peter  iv. 
1,  "  since  Christ  hath  suffered  in  flesh,  arm  yourselves  with 
the  same  mind";  and  verse  18,  "ye  are  sharers  of  the 
sufferings  of  Christ."  For,  as  we  read  in  chapter  ii.  21, 
Christ  is  our  pattern  even  in  His  suffering  of  death  ;  and 
they  who  share  the  loyalty  to  God  and  the  love  to  man 
which  prompted  Him  to  lay  down  His  life  in  order  to  save 
men  are  sharers  of  His  sufferings  and  will  be  sharers  of  His 
glory  and  joy. 


188  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT. 


It  is  now  evident  that  the  teaching  of  the  four  Gospels 
about  the  significance  and  aim  of  the  death  of  Christ  is 
reproduced,  and  with  still  greater  clearness  and  fulness,  in 
an  epistle  written  probably  by  one  of  the  most  intimate 
associates  of  His  life  on  earth.  That  His  death  is  spoken 
of  as  the  costly  price  of  man's  salvation,  implies  its  absolute 
necessity  for  this  end.  This  necessity  is  traced  to  man's 
sin.  And  we  are  told  that  He  died  with  a  definite  aim,  viz., 
to  bring  men  into  right  relation  to  God,  and  to  enable 
them  to  live  a  righteous  life. 

The  evidence  for  the  genuineness  of  the  Second  Epistle 
which  claims  to  be  from  the  Apostle  Peter  is  far  less 
satisfactory  than  that  for  the  First  Epistle.  But,  whatever 
be  its  authorship,  it  is  an  embodiment  of  early  Christian 
thought.  And  I  notice  in  passing  that  in  2  Peter  ii.  1 
we  read  of  some  who  "  deny  the  Master  who  bought  them." 
We  have  here  again  the  idea  of  purchase  already  found  in 
the  first  two  Gospels  and  in  the  First  Epistle  of  Peter. 
And  we  are  told  that  Christ  died  even  for  some  who  will 
ultimately  perish,  for  the  persons  referred  to  are  "  bringing 
upon  themselves  quick  destruction." 

We  have  now  examined  briefly  the  four  Gospels,  the 
Book  of  Acts,  and  the  Epistles  of  Peter,  documents  differ- 
ing very  widely  both  in  phraseology  and  modes  of  thought. 
And  we  have  found  everywhere  the  same  account  of  the 
occasion  and  aim  of  the  death  of  Christ.  From  various 
points  of  view,  all  these  documents  represent  it  as  the 
means  of  man's  salvation,  and  as  absolutely  needful  for  this 
end.  The  need  for  this  costly  means  of  salvation,  they 
find  in  man's  sin.  And  they  teach  that  He  died,  not  by 
accident,  but  by  His  own  free  choice,  and  with  a  deliberate 
purpose  of  thus  working  out  for  men  a  salvation  otherwise 
impossible. 

It  is  also  worthy  of  note,  that  in  the  ritual  of  the  Old 
Covenant,  the  shedding  of  innocent  blood  is  a  conspicuous 


HISTORICAL  GEOGRAPHY  OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.   189 

feature ;  and  that  sometimes  the  language  of  the  New 
Testament  about  the  death  of  Christ  is  coloured  by  sacri- 
ficial associations.  As  examples,  I  may  quote  John  i.  29, 
1  John  ii.  2  taken  in  connection  with  chapter  i.  7,  1  Peter 
i.  19,  ii.  24,  iii.  18.  On  the  other  hand,  salvation  by  means 
of  the  death  of  the  innocent  is  almost  or  altogether  absent 
from  the  spiritual  thought  and  life  which  find  expression  in 
the  Book  of  Psalms. 

Why  it  was  needful  that,  in  order  to  save  men  from  the 
due  consequences  of  their  own  sins,  Christ  should  die,  the 
documents  we  have  examined  do  not  teach.  They  thus 
prompt  a  question  more  pressing  and  difficult  than  those 
which  they  answer.  For  an  answer  to  this  question  we 
shall  turn  to  the  teaching  of  one  who,  so  far  as  we  can 
judge,  understood  the  mystery  of  the  agony  upon  the  cross 
much  better  than  did  the  disciples  who  were  with  Christ  in 
the  garden,  better  even  than  did  the  beloved  Apostles  who 
saw  Him  on  the  cross.  In  our  next  paper  I  shall  endeavour 
to  expound  the  all-important  teaching  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans. 

Joseph  Agak  Beet. 


THE  HISTORICAL    GEOGBAPHY  OF   THE   HOLY 

LAND. 

II. 

The  Low  Hills  or  Shephelah. 

Over  the  Philistine  Plain,  as  you  come  up  from  the  coast, 
you  see  a  sloping  moorland  break  into  scalps  and  ridges  of 
rock,  and  over  these  a  loose  gathering  of  chalk  and  limestone 
hills,  round,  bare  and  featureless,  but  with  an  occasional 
bastion  flung  out  in  front  of  them.  This  is  the  so-called 
Shephelah — a  famous  theatre  of  the  history  of  Palestine 
—  the  debatable  ground  between  Israel  and  the  Philistines, 


190  THE  HISTORICAL   GEGGBAPHJ 


between  the  Maccabees  and  the  Syrians,  between  Saladin 
and  the  Crusaders. 

The  name  Shephelah  means  loio  or  lowland}  The  Sep- 
tuagint  mostly  render  it  by  plaiii,"^  and  even  in  very  recent 
works,  such  as  Stanley's  Sinai  and  Palestine,  it  has  been 
applied  to  the  Plain  of  Philistia.  But  the  towns  assigned 
by  the  O.  T.  to  the  Shephelah  are  all  of  them  situated  in  the 
low  hills  and  not  on  the  plain  ;  ^  in  the  first  Book  of  the 
Maccabees,  too,  I  notice  that  the  town  of  Adida  is  described 
in  one  passage  as  being  in  the  Shephelah  and  in  another  as 
over  against  the  plain  ;  "^  and  in  the  Talmud  the  Shephelah 
is  expressly  distinguished  from  the  plain,'  Lydda,  being 
marked  as  the  point  of  division.  We  conclude,  therefore, 
that  though  the  name  may  sometimes  have  been  used  to 
include  the  Maritime  Plain,*^  the  Shephelah  proper  was  the 
region  of  lotc  hills,  between  that  plain  and  the  high  Central 
Range.  The  Shephelah  would  thus  be  equivalent  to  our 
"downs,"  low  hills  as  distinguished  from  high,  did  it  not 
also  include  the  great  amount  of  flat  valley  land,  which  is 
as  characteristic  of  this  broken  region  as  the  subdued  eleva- 
tion of  its  hills.     The  name  has  been  more  fitly  compared 

^  A  feminine  form  from  the  verb  in  the  well-known  passage  ei'«r//  mountain 
shall  be  made  low.  It  occurs  with  a  like  meaning  in  Arabic,  and  may  possibly 
be  the  same  root  as  we  find  in  Seville  (Geseuius,  Thesaurus,  sub  voce). 

-  TO  Trediov  or  r;  irediv^. 

^  Josh.  XV.  33;  9.  Chrou.  xxviii.  IS.  Ajalon  in  its  vale,  and  Gimzo  to  the 
west  of  it ;  Zorah,  Eshtaol  and  Bethshemesh  in  the  Vale  of  Sorek  :  Gedcrah  t 
the  north,  andEn-gannim,  Zanoab,  and  .Jarmuth  within  three  miles  to  the  south 
of  Sorek  :  Adullam  and  Shocoh  up  the  Vale  of  Elah  (W.  es  Sunt) :  Tappuah 
in  the  W.  el  'Afranj  ;  Rlareshah,  Lachish,  and  Eglon  to  the  south-west  of  Beit- 
Gibrin.  The  others  given  have  not  been  properly  identified.  T'r.  45-47  of 
Joshua  XV.,  which  give  Philistine  towns  in  the  Plain,  are  probably  a  later  addi- 
tion. Eusebius  describes  the  Shephelah  as  all  the  low  country  (Tre5tvri)  lyin 
about  Eleutheropolis  (Beit-Gibrin)  to  the  north  and  the  west.  It  is  about 
Beit-Gibrin  that  Clermont-Ganneau  and  Conder  have  re-discovered  the  name, 
in  its  Arabic  form,  Sifla  {Tent  WorJi,  277). 

*  1  Mace.  xii.  38;  xiii.  13.     ev  rrj  ^((priXg.  and  Kara  irpoauKov  tov  ireoiov. 

■'  Quoted  by  Conder,  Handbook,  p.  302.     Tal.,  Jer.,  Shebiith,  9.  2. 

"'  As  shown  by  Conder  in  his  quotations,  Handbook,  302  :  and  perhaps  by 
Eusebius  (sec  note  above). 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  191 

to  the   Scottish  "  Lowlands,"  which  also   are  not  entirely 
plain,  but  have  their  ranges  of  hills. 

How  far  north  did  the  Shephelah  run  ?  I  have  spoken  of 
this  zone  of  the  Holy  Land,  as  if  it  were  as  continuous  as  the 
other  four.  And  it  is  true  that  the  range  of  low  hills  be- 
tween the  Maritime  Plain  and  the  high  Central  Eange  runs 
all  the  way  north  to  Esdraelon.  From  the  sea,  low  hills  are 
seen  buttressing  the  range  behind  them  all  the  way  along. 
Now  the  name  Shephelah  might  be  correctly  applied  to  the 
whole  length  of  these  low  hills  :  ^  but  it  does  not  appear  ever 
to  have  extended  north  of  Lydda  and  the  Vale  of  Ajalon. 
All  the  towns  mentioned  in  the  0.  T.  as  in  the  Shephelah 
are  south  of  this ;  and  if  Major  Gender's  identification 
be  correct  of  "Adida  in  the  Shephelah"-  with  Haditheh, 
four  miles  E.N.E.  of  Lydda,  then  this  is  the  most  northerly 
instance  of  the  name.  Koughly  speaking,  the  Shephelah 
meant  the  low  hills  south  of  Ajalon  and  not  those  north  of 
Ajalon.  Now,  very  remarkably,  this  distinction  corresponds 
with  a  difference  of  a  physical  kind — in  the  relations  of  these 
two  parts  of  the  low  hills  to  the  Central  Kange.  North  of 
Ajalon  the  low  hills  which  run  out  on  Sharon  are  connected 
with  the  high  mountains  behind  them.  You  ascend  to  the 
latter  from  Sharon  either  by  long  sloping  ridges,  such  as 
that  which  to-day  carries  the  telegraph-wire  and  the  high 
road  from  Jaffa  to  Nablus  ;  or  else  you  climb  up  terraces, 
like  the  succession  of  ranges  closely  built  upon  one  an- 
other, by  which  the  country  rises  from  Lydda  to  Bethel. 
But  south  of  Ajalon  the  low  hills  do  not  so  hang  upon  the 
Central  Kange,  but  are  separated  from  the  mountains  of 
Juda3a  by  a  series  of  valleys,  both  wide  and  narrow,  which 
run  all  the  way  from  Ajalon  to  near  Beersheba ;  and  it  is 


'  Tlie  Jerusalem  Talmud  (quoted  by  Conder,  llandbool;,  p.  302)  even  a^jplied 
the  came  to  lower  hills  across  the  Jordan. 

2  1.  Mace.  xii.  88  :  Kal  ^.i/jLUp  wKoSofj-rjae  rr]v  'ASioa  cu  rrj  Zf^iT/Xa  — evidently  as 
a  cover  to  the  road  from  Joppa  whicli  he  bad  won  for  the  Jews. 


192  THE  HISTORICAL   GEOGRAPHY 

only  where  the  low  hills  are  thus  flung  off  the  Central 
Eange  into  an  independent  group,  separating  Judoea  from 
Philistia,  that  the  name  Shephelah  seems  to  have  been 
applied  to  them. 

This  difference  in  the  relation  of  the  low  hills  to  the 
Central  Eange,  north  and  south  of  Ajalon,  illustrates  two 
important  historical  phenomena.  First,  it  explains  some  of 
the  difference  between  the  histories  of  Samaria  and  Judah, 
While  the  northern  low  hills  opposite  Samaria  are  really 
only  approaches,  slopes  and  terraces  of  access  to  Samaria's 
centre,  the  southern  low  hills — those  opposite  Judah — offer 
no  furtherance  at  all  towards  this  more  isolated  province  : 
to  have  conquered  them  is  not  to  have  got  footing  upon  it. 
And  secondUj,  this  division  between  the  Shephelah  and 
Judah  explains  why  the  Shephelah  has  so  much  more 
interest  and  importance  in  history  than  the  northern  low 
hills,  which  are  not  so  divided  from  Samaria.  It  is  indepen- 
dent as  they  are  not ;  and  debatable  as  they  cannot  be. 
They  are  merged  in  Samaria.  It  has  a  history  of  its  own, 
for  they  cannot  be  held  by  themselves,  and  it  can  be,  and 
was,  so  held  at  frequent  famous  periods  of  war  and  invasion. 

This  division  between  the  Shephelah  and  Judaea  is  of  such 
importance  in  the  history  of  the  land  that  it  will  be  useful 
for  us  to  follow  it  in  detail. 

As  we  ride  across  the  Maritime  Plain  from  Jaffa  towards 
the  Vale  of  Ajalon  by  the  main  road  to  Jerusalem,  we  be- 
come aware,  as  the  road  bends  south,  of  getting  behind  ow 
hills,  which  gradually  shut  out  the  view  of  the  coast.  These 
are  spurs  of  the  Shephelah  :  we  are  at  the  back  of  it,  and 
in  front  of  us  are  the  high  hills  of  the  Central  Range,  with 
the  wide  break  in  them  of  the  Vale  of  Ajalon.  Near  the  so- 
called  half-way  house,  the  road  to  Jerusalem  enters  a  steep 
and  narrow  defile,  the  Wady  Ali,  which  is  the  real  entrance 
to  the  Central  Eange,  for  at  its  upper  end  we  come  out 
among  peaks  over  2,000  feet  high.    But  if  instead  of  entering 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  193 

this  steep  defile  we  turn  to  the  south  crossing  a  broad  low 
watershed,  we  shall  find  ourselves  in  the  Wady  el  Gburab,  a 
valley  running  southwest,  with  hills  to  the  east  of  us  touch- 
ing 2,000  feet,  and  hills  to  the  west  seldom  above  800.  The 
Wady  el  Ghurab  brings  us  out  upon  the  broad  Wady  es 
Surar,  the  Vale  of  Sorek,  crossing  which  we  find  the  mouth 
of  the  Wady  en  Nagil  ^  and  ride  still  south  along  its  straight 
narrow  bed.  Here  again  the  mountains  to  the  east  of  us 
are  over  2,000  feet,  cleft  by  narrow  and  tortuous  defiles, 
diificult  ascents  to  the  Judrean  plateau  above,  while  to 
the  west  the  hills  of  the  Shephelah  seldom  reach  1,000  feet 
and  the  valleys  among  them  are  broad  and  easy.  They 
might  stand — especially  if  we  remember  that  they  have 
respectively  Jerusalem  and  Philistia  behind  them — for  the 
narrow  and  broad  ways  of  our  Lord's  parable.  From  the 
end  of  Wady  en  Nagil  the  passage  is  immediate  to  the  Vale 
of  Elah,  the  Wady  es  Sunt,  at  the  spot  where  David  slew 
Goliath,  and  from  there  the  broad  Wady  es  Sur  runs  south, 
separating  by  one  or  two  miles  the  lofty  and  compact  range 
of  Judaea  on  the  east  from  the  lower,  looser  hills  of  the  She- 
phelah on  the  west.  The  Wady  es  Sur  terminates  opposite 
Hebron  ;  -  and  there  the  dividing  hollow  turns  south-west, 
and  runs  between  peaks  of  nearly  3,000  feet  high  to  the 
east,  and  almost  nothing  above  1,500  to  the  west,  into  the 
Wady  esh  Sheria,  which  finds  the  sea  south  of  Gaza  and 
may  be  regarded  as  the  southern  boundary  of  the  Shephe- 
lah. I  have  ridden  nearly  every  mile  of  this  great  fosse, 
that  has  been  planted  along  the  ramparts  of  Juda?a,  and 
have  described  from  my  own  observations  the  striking 
difference  of  its  two  sides.  All  down  the  east,  let  me 
repeat,  runs  that  close  and  lofty  barrier  of  the  Central 
Kange,  penetrated  only  by  difficult  defiles,  its  edge  turreted 
here   and   there   by  a  town,  giving   proof  of  a   tableland 

1  All  g's  are  soft  in  the  modern  Arabic  of  Palestine. 
-'  Near  Terkumieh. 

VOL.  V.  13 


194  THE  HISTORICAL  GEOGRAPHY 

behind ;  but  all  down  the  west  the  low  scattered  ranges 
and  clusters  of  the  Shephelah,  with  their  shallow  dales  and 
softer  brows,  much  open  ground  and  wide  passes  to  the 
^ea,  Eiding  along  the  fosse  between,  I  understood  why 
the  Shephelah  was  always  debatable  land,  open  equally  to 
Israelite  and  Philistine,  and  why  the  Philistine,  who  so 
easily  overran  the  Shephelah,  seldom  got  further  than  its 
eastern  border,  on  which  many  of  his  encounters  with  Israel 
took  place. 

Prom  this  definition  of  its  boundaries — so  necessary  to 
the  understanding  of  its  independence  alike  of  Plain  and 
of  Mountain — let  us  turn  to  a  survey  of  the  Shephelah 
itself. 

The  mountains  look  on  the  Shephelah,  and  the  She- 
phelah looks  on  the  sea, — across  the  Phihstine  Plain.  It 
curves  round  this  plain  from  Gaza  to  Jaffa  like  an  amphi- 
theatre.^ But  the  amphitheatre  is  cut  by  three  or  four 
great  gaps — wide  valleys  that  come  right  through  from  the 
foot  of  the  Judaean  hills  to  the  sea.  Between  these  gaps 
the  low  hills  gather  in  clumps  and  in  short  ranges  from 
500  to  800  feet  high,  with  one  or  two  summits  up  to  1,500. 
The  formation  is  of  limestone  or  chalk,  and  very  soft — there- 
fore irregular  and  almost  featureless,  with  a  few  prominent 
outposts  upon  the  plain.  In  the  wide  cross  valleys  there 
are  perennial,  or  almost  perennial,  streams,  with  broad 
pebbly  beds ;  the  soil  is  alluvial  and  red,  with  great  corn- 
fields. But  on  the  slopes  and  glens  of  each  hilly  maze 
between  the  cross  valleys  the  soil  is  a  grey  white  ;  there 
are  no  perennial  streams,  and  few  springs,  but  in  their 
place  reservoirs  of  rainwater.  The  cornfields  straggle  for 
want  of  level  space,  but  the  olive-groves  are  finer  than  on 
either  the  plain  below  or  the  range  above.  Inhabited  vil- 
lages are  frequent ;  the  ruins  of  abandoned  ones  more  so. 
But  the  prevailing  scenery  of  the  region  is  of  short,  steep 

'  Trelawncy  Sauuders,  Introd.,  p  219. 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  195 


hillsides  and  narrow  glens,  with  a  very  few  great  trees,  and 
thickly  covered  by  brushwood  and  oak-scrub — crags  and 
scalps  of  limestone  breaking  through,  and  a  rough  grey 
torrent  bed  at  the  bottom  of  each  glen.  In  the  more  open 
passes  of  the  south,  the  straight  line  of  a  Eoman  road 
dominates  the  brushwood,  or  you  will  see  the  levelled  walls 
of  an  early  Christian  convent,  and  perhaps  the  solitary 
gable  of  a  Crusader's  church.  In  the  rocks  there  are  older 
monuments — large  wine  and  oil  presses  cut  on  level  plat- 
forms above  ridges  that  may  formerly  have  been  vineyards  ; 
and  once  or  twice  on  a  braeside  a  huge  boulder  has  well- 
worn  steps  up  it,  and  on  its  top  little  cup-like  hollows, 
evidently  an  ancient  altar.  Caves,  of  course,  abound — near 
the  villages  bare,  blackened  dens  for  men  and  cattle,  but 
up  the  unfrequented  glens  hidden  by  hanging  bush,  behind 
which  you  disturb  only  the  wild  pigeon.  Bees  murmur 
everywhere,  larks  are  singing ;  and  although  in  the  maze  of 
hills  you  may  wander  for  hours  without  meeting  a  man, 
or  seeing  a  house,  you  are  seldom  out  of  sound  of  the 
human  voice,  shepherds  and  ploughmen  calling  to  their 
cattle  and  to  each  other  across  the  glens.  Higher  up  you 
rise  on  to  moorland,  with  rich  green  grass  if  there  is  a 
spring,  but  otherwise  heath,  thorns,  and  rough  herbs  that 
scent  the  wind.  Bees  abound  here,  too,  and  dragon-flies, 
kites  and  crows  ;  and  sometimes  an  eagle  floats  over  from 
the  cliffs  of  Judaea.  The  sun  beats  strong,  but  you  see  the 
sea,  and  feel  its  freshness  ;  the  high  mountains  are  behind, 
every  night  they  breathe  upon  these  lower  ridges  cool, 
gentle  breezes,  and  the  dews  are  heavy. 

Altogether  it  is  a  rough,  happy  land,  with  its  glens  and 
moors,  its  mingled  brushwood  and  barleyfields ;  frequently 
under  cultivation,  but  for  the  most  part  broken  and  thirsty, 
with  few  wells  and  many  hiding-places ;  just  the  home  for 
strong  border-men  like  Samson,  and  just  the  theatre  for 
that  guerilla  warfare,  varied  occasionally  by  pitched  battles, 


19G  THE  HISTORICAL   GEOGRAPHY 

which  Israel  and  Philistia,  the  Maccabees  and  Syrians,  and 
Saladin  and  Richard  waged  with  each  other. 

The  chief  encounters  of  these  foes  naturally  took  place 
in  the  wide  valleys,  which  cut  right  through  the  Shephelah 
maze.  The  strategic  importance  of  these  valleys  can  hardly 
be  over-rated,  for  they  do  not  belong  to  the  Shephelah 
alone.  Each  of  them  is  continued  by  a  defile  into  the  very 
heart  of  Juda3a,  not  far  from  an  important  city,  and  each 
of  them  has  at  its  other  end,  on  the  coast,  one  of  the  five 
cities  of  the  Philistines.  To  realise  these  valleys  is  to 
understand  the  wars  that  have  been  fought  on  the  western 
watershed  of  Palestine  from  Joshua's  time  to  Saladin's. 

1.  Take  the  most  northerly  of  these  valleys.  The  narrow 
plain,  along  which  the  present  high  road  to  Jerusalem  runs, 
brings  you  up  from  Ramleh,  to  opposite  the  high  Valley  of 
Ajalon.  The  Valley  of  Ajalon,  which  is  really  part  of  the 
Shephelah,^  is  a  broad  fertile  plain  gently  sloping  up  to  the 
foot  of  the  Central  Eange,  the  steep  wall  of  which  seems 
to  forbid  further  passage.  But  three  gorges  break  through, 
and,  with  sloping  ridges  between  them  run  up  past  the 
two  Bethhorons  on  to  the  plateau  at  Gibeon,  a  few  flat 
miles  north  of  Jerusalem.  This  has  always  been  the  easiest 
passage  from  the  coast  to  the  capital  of  Judtea.  Through- 
out history  we  see  hosts  swarming  up  it,  or  swept  down 
it  in  flight.  At  the  high  head  of  it  invading  Israel  first 
emerged  from  the  Jordan  Valley,  and  looked  over  the 
Shephelah  towards  the  Great  Sea.  Joshua  drove  the 
Canaanites  down  to  Makkedah  in  the  Shephelah  on  that 
day  when  such  long  work  had  to  be  done  that  he  bade  the 
sun  stand  still  for  its  accomplishment ;  ~  down  Ajalon  the 
early  men  of  Ephraim  and  Benjamin  raided  the  Philis- 
tines ;  ^  and   by  the   same   way,  soon  after  his    accession, 

'  Thus  the  town  of  Ajalon  was  in  the  Shephelah  (2  Chron.  xxviii.  18). 
2  Josh.  X.  10.     Makkedah  is  identified  by  Warren  as  el-Mughar  to  the  south 
of  Ekron,  but  this  is  very  doubtful. 
»  1  Chron.  vii.  21 ;  viii.  13. 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  197 

King  David  smote  the  Philistines — who  had  come  up  about 
Jerusalem  either  by  this  route  or  the  gorges  leading  from 
the  Vale  of  Sovek— from  Gibeon  until  thou  come  to  Gezer,^ 
that  looks  right  up  Ajalon.  Ages  later  this  rout  found  a 
singular  counterpart.  In  66  a.d.  a  Eoman  army  under 
Cestius  Gallus  came  up  from  Antipatris — on  the  modern 
Aujeh,  a  few  miles  north-east  of  Jaffa — by  way  of  Ajalon. 
When  they  entered  the  gorges  of  the  Central  Kange,  they 
suffered  from  the  sudden  attacks  of  the  Jews ;  and  although 
they  actually  set  Jerusalem  on  fire  and  occupied  part  of  it, 
they  suddenly  retreated  by  the  way  they  had  come.  The 
Jews  pursued,  and  as  far  as  Antipatris  itself  smote  the 
Eomans  in  thousands,  as  David  had  smitten  the  Philis- 
tines. It  may  have  been  because  of  this  that  Titus,  when 
he  came  up  to  punish  the  Jews  two  years  later,  avoided 
Ajalon  and  the  gorges  at  its  head,  and  took  the  higher  and 
less  covered  road  by  Gophna  to  Gibeah. 

But  it  was  in  the  time  of  the  Maccabean  wars  and  in 
the  time  of  the  Crusades  that  this  part  of  the  Shephelah 
was  most  famously  contested. 

Ajalon  was  the  natural  opening  into  Judsea  for  the 
Syrian  armies  who  came  by  the  coast  road  from  the  north  ; 
and  Modin,  the  home  of  the  Maccabees  and  origin  of  the 
revolt  against  Syria,  lies  near  the  edge  of  Ajalon,  by  the 
very  path  the  invaders  took.  The  first  camps  on  both  sides 
were  pitched  about  Emmaus,  not  far  off  the  present  high 
road  to  Jerusalem.  The  battles  rolled — for  the  battles  in 
the  Shephelah  were  always  rolling  battles — between  Beth- 
horon  and  Gezer,  and  twice  the  pursuit  of  the  Syrians 
extended  across  the  last  ridges  of  the  Shephelah  to  Jamnia 
and  Ashdod.2  Judas  swept  right  down  to  Joppa,  which 
his  brother  Simon  gave  the  Jews  as  their  first  port.  But 
the  tide  sometimes  turned,  and  the  Syrians,  mastering  the 

1  2  Sam.  V.  25  ;  1  Chron.  xiv.  16. 
-  1  Miicc.  iii.,  iv.,  ix. 


198  THE  HISTORICAL   GEOGRAPHY 


Shephelah   fortresses,    surged   up   Ajalon   to   the    walls    of 
Jerusalem. 

Now  up  and  down  this  great  channel  thirteen  centuries 
later  the  fortune  of  war  ebbed  and  flowed  in  an  almost  pre- 
cisely similar  fashion.     Like  the  Syrians— and  indeed  from 
the  same  centre  of  Antioch — the  Crusaders  took  their  way 
to  Jerusalem  by  Tyre,  Acre,  and  Joppa,  and  there  turned 
up  through  the  Shephelah  and  the  Vale  of  Ajalon.     The 
First  Crusaders  found  no  opposition  ;  two  days  sufficed  for 
their  march  from  Eamleh  to  the  Holy  City.     Through  the 
Third  Crusade,  however,   Saladin  firmly  held  the  Central 
Eange,  and  though  parties  of  Christians  swept  up  within 
sight  of  Jerusalem,   their   camps   never   advanced   beyond 
Ajalon.     But  all  the  Shephelah  rang  with  the  exploits  of 
Richard.     Fighting  his  way  from  Carmel  along  the  foot  of 
the  low  hills,  infested  as  they  were  by  an  enemy  that  per- 
petually assailed   his   long   and    straggling   flank,   Richard 
first  established   himself  at   Joppa,  and  planting   forts  on 
the   spurs  of  the    Shephelah,  pushed   his   front   gradually 
through  it  by  Eamleh  to  Emmaus,  and  thence  to  Betenoble 
in   the   Vale   of    Ajalon.^      This    cost    him    from   August, 
1191,  to  June,  1192.     He  was  then  within  twelve  miles  of 
Jerusalem    as    the   crow   flies,  and  on   a  raid   he    actually 
saw   the   secluded  cit)'',  but   he   retired.      His  funds  were 
exhausted,    and    his    followers    quarrelsome.      He    feared, 
too,   the  summer   waterlessness  of  Jerusalem,   which   had 
compelled   Cestius   Gallus   to  withdraw  in  the  moment  of 
victory.     But,   above    all,  Richard's  retreat   from  the  foot 
of  the  Central  Range  illustrates  what  I  have  already  em- 
phasised,  that  to  have  taken  the  Shephelah  was  really  to 

^  Betenoble,  described  in  Geoffrey  de  Viusaufs  Ittneranj  of  liicliard  I. 
(Bk.  IV.  cb.  34)  as  "  near  the  foot  of  the  mountain!;,"  is  philologically  liker  the 
modern  Beit  Nabala  at  the  foot  of  the  low  hills,  nearly  foin-  miles  N.E.  of 
Lydda,  than  Beit  Nuba  np  in  Ajalon  at  the  foot  of  the  high  hills.  But  other 
references  to  it  in  the  Itinerary,  though  not  conclusive  (V.  4.9,  VI.  9),  imply 
that  it  was  well  inland  from  Ramleh. 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  199 

be  no  nearer  to  Judoea.  The  Crusaders  fell  back  through 
their  castles  in  the  Shephelah,  Emmaus,  Turon  or  Latrun, 
Arnaud,  Forts  des  Plans  and  de  Maen,  Mirabel  and  Mont- 
gisart  ^  upon  the  coast.  Saladin  rushed  after  them,  took 
Joppa,  and  though  Richard  relieved  it  and  the  coast 
remained  with  the  Crusaders  for  some  years  to  come,  all 
the  Shephelah,  with  its  castles  and  convents,  passed  from 
Christian  possession. 

We  have  won  a  much  more  vivid  imagination  of  the 
far-oft'  campaigns  of  Joshua  and  David  by  following  the 
marches  of  Judas  Maccabeus,  the  rout  of  the  Roman 
legions,  and  the  advance  and  retreat  of  Richard  Lionheart, 
— the  last  especially  described  with  so  much  detail.  The 
natural  lines,  which  all  these  armies  had  to  follow,  remained 
throughout  the  centuries  the  same;  the  same  were  the 
difticulties  of  climate,  forage,  and  locomotion ;  so  that  the 
best  commentaries  on  many  chapters  of  the  Old  Testament 
are  the  Books  of  the  Maccabees,  the  annals  of  Josephus, 
and  the  Chronicles  of  the  Crusades.  History  never  repeats 
itself  without  explaining  its  past. 

One  point  in  the  Northern  Shephelah,  round  which  these 
tides  of  war  have  swept,  deserves  special  notice — Gezer,  or 
Gazer.  It  is  one  of  the  few  remarkable  bastions  which  the 
Shephelah  flings  out  to  the  west  —  on  a  ridge  running 
towards  Ramleh,  the  most  prominent  object  in  view  of 
the  traveller  from  Jaffa  towards  Jerusalem.  It  is  high  and 
isolated,  but  fertile  and  well  watered — a  very  strong  post 


'  We  owe  so  much  to  Captain  ConJer  for  his  numerous  and  valuable  identi- 
fications that  it  seems  ungracious  to  question  any  of  them.  But  I  do  not  think 
he  has  made  out  his  case  for  the  Crusading  ruins  near  Autipatris  being  the  site 
of  Mirabel.  Is  this  not  contradicted  by  the  statement  iu  G.  de  Viusauf's 
Itineninj  that  the  Turks  whom  Eichard  scattered  at  Emmaus  fled  to  Mirabel, 
that  is,  if  Antipatris  be  Mirabel,  north-west  and  towanh  the  plains  which  the 
Christians  held.  Of  the  two  suggestions.  Captain  Conder  makes  for  the  site 
of  Maen  [Syrian  Stone-Lore,  p.  3U8),  the  second  is,  of  course,  the  correct  one. 
Both  Plans  and  Maen  lay  east  of  Joppa,  but  not  east  of  Bamlch.  Vinsauf, 
Itinerary  of  Richard  J.,  Bk.  IV.  ch.  2'J. 


200  THE  HISTORICAL   GEOGRAPHY 

and  striking  landmark.  A  royal  city  of  the  Canaanites  under 
a  king  of  its  own,  Hormah,  Gezer  was  appointed  as  a  bound- 
ary of  the  tribe  of  Joseph,  but  the  Israelites  drove  not  out 
the  Canaanites  that  dwelt  at  Gezer,^  and  in  their  hands  it 
remained  till  its  conquest  by  Egypt,  when  Pharaoh  gave  it 
to  Solomon  with  his  daughter,  and  Solomon  rebuilt  it.- 
Judas  Maccabeus  was  strategist  enough  to  gird  himself 
early  to  the  capture  of  Gezer,  and  Simon  fortified  it  to 
cover  the  way  to  the  harbour  of  Joppa,  and  caused  John  his 
son,  the  captain  of  the  host,  to  dwell  there. ^  It  was  virtu- 
ally, therefore,  the  key  of  Judaea,  at  a  time  when  Judaea's 
foes  came  down  the  coast  from  the  north ;  and  with  Joppa 
it  formed  part  of  the  Syrian  demands  upon  the  Jews."*  But 
this  is  by  no  means  the  last  of  it.  M.  Clermont-Ganneau, 
who  a  number  of  years  ago  discovered  the  site,^  has  lately 
identified  Gezer  with  the  Mont  Gisart  of  the  Crusades.*^ 
Mont  Gisart  was  a  castle  and  fief  in  the  county  of  Joppa, 
with  an  abbey  of  St.  Katharine  of  Mont  Gisart,  "  whose 
prior  was  one  of  the  five  suffragans  of  the  Bishop  of 
Lydda."  It  was  the  scene,  on  24th  November,  1174,  seven- 
teen years  before  the  Third  Crusade,  oi  a  victory  won  by 
a  small  army  from  Jerusalem  under  the  boy-king,  the  leper 
Baldwin  IV.,  against  a  very  much  larger  army  under  Saladin 
himself,  and  in  1192  Saladin  encamped  upon  it  during  his 
negotiations  for  a  truce  with  Eichard.'^ 

Shade  of  King  Hormah,  what  hosts  of  men  have  fallen 
about  that  citadel  of  yours  !  On  what  camps  and  columns 
has  it  looked  down  through  the  centuries,  since  first  you  saw 
the  strange  Hebrews  burst  with  the  sunrise  across  the  hills 
and  chase  your  countrymen  down  Ajalon — that  day  when 

1  Josh.  xvi.  3,  10.  -  1  Kings  ix.  15-17. 

»  1  Mace.  xiii.  56.  ^  1  Mace.  xv.  25. 

•'  By  lindiug  upon  it  two  stones  evidently  dated  from  the  time  of  the  Macca- 
bees.    See  Pal.  Expl.  Fund  Quarterly,  1875. 

"  Recueil  iVArchtulogie  Oiientale,  Paris,  1888.     pp.  351-392. 
'  Ibid.,  p.  359. 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  201 

the  victors  felt  the  very  sun  conspiring  with  them  to 
achieve  the  unexampled  length  of  battle.  AVithin  sight 
of  every  Egyptian  and  every  Assyrian  invasion  of  the 
land,  Gezer  has  also  seen  Alexander  pass  by  and  the  legions 
of  Rome  in  unusual  flight,  and  the  armies  of  the  Cross 
struggle,  waver  and  give  way.  If  all  could  rise  who  have 
fallen  around  its  base, — Ethiopians,  Hebrews,  Turanian 
soldiers  of  Sennacherib,  Arabs,  Turcomans,  Greeks,  Romans, 
Saxons — what  a  rehearsal  of  the  Judgment  Day  it  would 
be  !  Few  of  the  travellers,  who  now  rush  across  the  plain, 
realise  that  the  first  conspicuous  hill  they  pass  in  Palestine 
is  also  one  of  the  most  thickly  haunted — even  in  that 
narrow  land  into  which  history  has  so  crowded  itself.  But 
upon  the  ridge  of  Gezer  no  sign  of  all  this  remains  except 
in  the  name  Tell  Gezer,  and,  in  a  sweet  hollow  to  the 
north  beside  a  fountain,  where  lie  scattered  the  Christian 
stones  of  Deir  Warda,  the  Convent  of  the  Rose. 

Up  none  of  the  other  valleys  of  the  Shephelah  has  history 
surged  as  up  and  down  Ajalon  and  past  Gezer,  for  none  are 
so  open  to  the  north,  nor  present  so  easy  a  passage  to 
Jerusalem. 

2.  The  next  Shephelah  valley,  however,  the  Wady  Surar, 
or  Vale  of  Sorek,  has  an  importance  of  its  own,  and,  re- 
markably enough,  is  to  be  the  future  road  to  Jerusalem. 
The  new  railway  from  Jaffa,  instead  of  being  carried  up 
Ajalon,  turns  south  at  Ramleh  by  the  pass  through  the 
low  sandhills  to  Ekron,  and  thence  runs  up  the  Wady  es 
Surar  and  its  continuing  defile  through  the  Judoean  range 
on  to  that  plain  south-east  of  Jerusalem,  which  probably 
represents  the  ancient  Vale  of  Rephaim.  It  is  the  way  the 
Philistines  used  to  come  up  in  the  days  of  the  Judges  and 
of  David ;  there  is  no  shorter  road  into  Judtpa  from  Ekron, 
Jamnia  and  perhaps  Ashdod.^     Ashkelon  would  be  better 

*  By  the  Wady  es  Surar  Jerusalem  is  some  tweuty-ei^bt  miles  from  Ekrou, 
thirty-two  from  Jamuia,  thirty-eight  from  Ashdod,  forty-live  from  Ashkelon. 


202  THE  HISTORICAL    GEOGRAPHY 

reached — as  it  was  by  the  Crusaders  when  they  held  Jeru- 
salem— by  way  of  the  Wady  es  Sunt  and  Tell-es-Sufiyeh. 

Just  before  the  Wady  es  Surar  approaches  the  Judaean 
range,  its  great  width  is  increased  by  the  entrance  of  the 
Wady  Ghurab.  The  broad  basin  they  form  was  Samson's 
home.  Zorah  and  Eshtaol  remain,  almost  under  their  old 
names,  on  the  north  bank  of  the  double  Wady,  with  the 
Camp  of  Dan  between  them.^  It  is  as  fair  a  nursery  for 
boyhood  as  you  will  find  in  all  the  land — a  hillside  facing 
south  against  the  strong  sunshine,  with  corn,  grass,  and 
olives,  scattered  boulders  and  winter  brooks,  the  broad 
valley  below  with  the  pebbly  stream  and  screens  of  oleanders, 
the  south-west  wind  from  the  sea  blowing  over  all.  There 
the  child  Samson  greio  up ;  and  the  Lord  blessed  him,  and 
the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  began  to  move  him  in  the  camp  of 
Dan  betioeen  Zorah  and  Eshtaol.  Across  the  Valley  of 
Sorek,  in  full  view,  is  Beth-shemesh,  now  "  Ain  Shems," 
House  and  Well  of  the  Sun,  with  which  name  it  is  so 
natural  to  connect  his  own — Shimshon,  "  Sun-like."  Over 
the  low  hills  beyond  is  Timnah,  where  he  found  his  first 
love  and  killed  the  young  lion.^  Further  is  the  Philistine 
Plain,  with  its  miles  upon  miles  of  corn,  which,  if  as  closely 
sown  then  as  now,  would  require  scarce  three,  let  alone 
three  hundred,  foxes,  with  torches  on  their  tails,  to  set  it 
all  afire.  The  Philistine  cities  are  but  a  day's  march  away, 
by  easy  roads.  And  so  from  these  fresh  country  braes  to 
yonder  plains  and  the  highway  of  the  great  world, — from 
the  pure  home  and  the  mother  who  talked  with  angels,  and 
the  vows  of  consecration,  to  the  heathen  cities,  their  harlots 
and  their  prisons, — we  see  at  one  sweep  of  the  eye  all  the 

'  One  would  like  to  know  what  ancient  town  is  represented  by  Attuf,  a  much 
more  important  site  on  the  headland  between  the  two  Wadies. 

-  There  are  no  lions  now  in  Palestine,  but  they  were  in  the  Jordan  Valley  in 
the  twelfth  century  a. d.  (Pihjrimage  of  the  Abbot  Daniel,  HOG,  1107).  Leopards 
are  still  found  in  the  ueif^libourhood — one  was  killed  just  before  I  was  there — 
and  jackals  of  course  abound. 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  203 

course  in  which  this  unregulated  strength,  tumbhng  and 
sporting  at  first  with  laughter  like  one  of  its  native  brooks, 
like  them  also  ran  to  the  flats  and  the  mud,  and  being  dark- 
ened and  befouled,  was  used  by  men  to  turn  their  mills. ^ 
The  plausible  theory,  that  the  story  of  Samson  is  a  Sun- 
myth,  edited  for  the  sacred  record  by  an  orthodox  Israelite, 
while  it  has  at  last  reached  the  public  who  are  interested 
in  Old  Testament  criticism,  is  yielding  among  the  few  who 
fondly  held  it,  and  has  never  received  any  acceptance  from 
the  leading  critics  who  have  all  been  convinced  more  or 
less  of  the  hero's  historic  reality.^  None  who  study  the 
story  of  Samson  along  with  its  geography,  can  fail  to 
feel  the  reality  that  is  in  it.  Unlike  the  exploits  of  the 
impersonations  of  the  Solar  Fire  in  Aryan  and  Semitic 
mythologies,  those  of  Samson  are  confined  to  a  very  limited 
region.  The  attempt  to  interpret  them  all  as  phases  and 
influences  of  the  sun  has  broken  down.  To  me  it  seems 
just  as  easy  and  just  as  foolish  to  read  the  story  of  this 
turbulent  strength  as  the  myth  of  a  mountain-stream, 
at  first  exuberant  and  sparkling  and  sporting  with  its 
powers,  but  when  it  has  left  its  native  hills,  mastered  and 
darkened  by  men,  and  yet  afterwards  bursting  its  confine- 
ment and  taking  its  revenge  upon  them.     For  it  is  rivers 

'  The  other  scenes  of  Samson's  life  have  not  been  satisfactorily  identified. 
Major  Conder  proposes  for  the  rock  of  Etam  and  its  cleft  a  peculiar  cave  at 
Beit  Atab  (/  and  m  being  interchangeable)  on  the  Judiean  plateau.  But  the 
cave  at  Beit  Atab  (I  have  visited  the  place)  is  too  large  to  be  described  as  only 
a  cleft ;  and  if  Etam  were  so  high  up,  the  narrative  would  not  have  said,  as  it 
does  (Judges  xvi.  8),  that  Samson  n-ent  down  to  the  rock  of  Etam.  Captain 
Coudcr  also  suggests  for  Eamath-Lehi  and  Eu-hakkore  (Judges  xv.  14  ff.)  a 
place  a  little  to  the  north  of  Zorah,  Ayun  Abu  Meharib,  "  fountains  of  the  place 
of  battles,"  sometimes  called  Ayun  Kara,  "founts  of  a  crier,"  where  there  is  a 
chapel  dedicated  to  Sheikh  Nedhir,  "  the  Nazarite  chief,"  and  higher  up  a  ruiu 
■with  the  name  'Ism  Allah,  "possibly  a  corruption  of  Esma  'a  Allah,  'God 
heard.'  "  All  this  is  extremely  interesting;  but  it  looks  too  complete,  as  if  we 
had  in  it  not  the  impression  of  the  original  Samson,  but  the  artistic  grouping 
by  some  medieval  Christians  of  the  scenes  of  the  Samson  story. 

2  Cf.  Hitzig  in  his  Histonj  ;  Ewald  in  his  ;  Kueuen  ;  and  Budde,  Die  Biklier 
Bichter  v.  Samuel,  p.  133. 


204  THE  HISTOraCAL   GEOGRAPHY 


and  not  sunbeams  that  work  mills  and  overthrow  temples. 
But  the  idea  of  finding  any  nature  myth  in  such  a  story 
is  farfetched.  As  Hitzig  emphasises,  it  is  not  a  nature- 
force  but  a  character  that  we  have  to  deal  with  here,  and, 
above  all,  the  religious  element  in  the  story,  so  far  from 
being  a  later  flavour  imparted  to  the  original  material,  is 
the  very  life  of  the  whole. ^ 

It  was  also  about  the  head  of  Sorek  that  the  campaign 
was  fought  in  which  the  Philistines  took  the  ark ;  ^  but 
where  Eben-ezer  and  Aphek  lay  is  not  certain.  From  very 
early  times  the  former  has  been  identified  with  the  present 
Deir-Aban,  which  overlooks  the  defiles  from  Judaea  into  the 
head  of  the  Vale  of  Sorek, — a  natural  position  for  the 
camp  of  Israel  at  a  time  when  the  tribe  of  Dan  had  dis- 
appeared from  the  Shephelah  below  and  left  the  higher 
line  as  Israel's  frontier  towards  the  Philistines.  If  Deir- 
Aban  be  Eben-ezer,  then  Aphek  lay  below  it  in  the  She- 
phelah, and  the  Israelites,  in  their  false  faith  in  the  ark, 
descended  there  from  their  impregnable  position  and  suf- 
fered a  merited  defeat." 

The  course,  however,  of  the  ark's  return  is  certain.  It 
was  up  the  broad  Vale  of  Sorek  that  the  untended  kine  of 

'  This  point  is  well  put  by  Von  Oielli  in  bis  most  judicious  treatment  of  the 
whole  subject  in  Herzog's  lleal-Encijkl«p<idie. 

-  1  Sam.  iv. 

■^  Aphek  has  been  placed  without  reason  at  Kh.  Beled-el-Foka,  in  the  She- 
phelah, south  of  W^ady  es  Surar.  Wellhausen  {Histonj  of  Israel,  Eng.  Trans.,  1st 
ed.,  p.  448)  would  place  this  Aphek  in  Sharon  (founding  on  another  reading  of 
.Joshua  xii.  18,  A'tnry  of  Apltch  in  Shuron),  opposite  Dothan.  But  his  geography 
is  not  to  be  relied  on.  He  talks  of  the  plain  of  Sharon  mc.rguif]  into  Dothan. 
There  were  several  Apheks  :  one  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Gilboa,  where  the 
Philistines  encamped  before  the  battle  with  Saul  (1  Sam.  xxix.  (>)  ;  another  on 
the  plateau  to  the  east  of  the  Lake  of  Galilee,  where  Israel  defeated  the  Syrians 
(1  Kings  XX.  26,  :50).  Mr.  .J.  S.  Black  holds  these  two  to  have  been  the  same, 
and  identifies  them  with  the  Aphek  of  Sharon  (alternative  reading  of  .Josh.  xii. 
18.  See  I\Ir.  Black's  Smaller  Camb.  Bible  for  Schools  on  that  verse).  The 
whole  subject  of  the  .\pheks  of  the  Old  Testament  deserves  separate  treatment. 
and  I  hope  to  return  to  it.  It  is  singular  that  twice  over  Philistines  should 
encamp  against  Israel  at  an  Aphek. 


OF  THE  HOLY   LAND.  205 


Beth-shemesh  dragged  the  ark  behind  them,  cropping  the 
barley  as  they  went,  and  lowing  the  frequent  signal  of 
their  coming  to  the  reapers  at  the  top  of  the  valley.  The 
new  site,  suggested  with  so  much  reason  for  Kirjath-jearim, 
Khurbet  'Erma,  lies  at  the  entrance  to  Jud»a. 

3.  The  next  valley  that  cuts  the  Shephelah  is  the  Wady 
es  Sunt,  from  the  head  of  which  the  narrow  Wady  el  Jindy 
takes  you  up  through  the  Central  Kange  to  the  neighbour- 
hood of  Bethlehem.  The  Wady  es  Sunt  is  probably  the 
Vale  of  Elah.^  Its  entrance  from  the  Philistine  Plain  is 
commanded  by  the  famous  Tell-es-Safiyeh,  the  Blanche- 
garde  of  the  Crusaders,  whose  high  white  front  looks  west 
across  the  plain  twelve  miles  to  Ashdod.  Blanchegarde 
must  always  have  been  a  very  strong  position,  and  it  is 
simply  inability  to  assign  to  the  site  any  other  Biblical 
town — for  Libnah  has  no  satisfactory  claims — that  makes 
the  case  so  strong  for  its  having  been  the  site  of  Gath. 
Blanchegarde  is  twenty-three  miles  from  Jerusalem,  but 
the  way  up  is  most  difficult  after  you  leave  the  Wady  es 
Sunt.  It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  when  Eichard  decided 
to  besiege  Jerusalem,  and  had  already  marched  from  Asca- 
lon  to  Blanchegarde  on  his  way,  instead  of  then  pursuing 
the  Wady  es  Sunt  and  its  narrow  continuation  to  Bethlehem, 
he  preferred  to  turn  north  two  days'  march  across  the  She- 
phelah hills  with  his  flank  to  the  enemy,  and  to  attack  his 
goal  up  the  Valley  of  Ajalon.- 

An  hour's  ride  from  Tell-es-Safiyeh  up  the  winding  Vale 
of  Elah  brings  us  to  its  head,  where  the  Wady  el  Jindy 
comes  down  from  near  Bethlehem,  and  the  Wady  es  Sur 
from  opposite  Hebron.^  At  the  junction  there  is  a  level 
plain  of  a  quarter  of  a  mile  broad  cut  by  three  brooks, 
which  combine  to  form  the  stream  down  Wady  es  Sunt. 

^  1  Sam.  xvii.  2. 

2  Geoffrey  de  Vinsauf,  Itinevarij  V.  48  pp. 

^  The  W^ady  es  Sur  aud  Wady  es  Sunt  are  really  oue  and  the  same  valley. 


20G  THE  HISTORICAL   GEOGRAPHY 


This  plain  is  probably  the  scene  of  David's  encounter  with 
Goliath ;  for  to  the  south  of  it,  on  the  low  range  that 
bounds  the  "Wady  es  Sunt  in  that  direction,  is  the  name 
Shuweikeh,  probably  the  Shocoh,  on  which  the  Philistines 
rested  their  rear  and  faced  the  Israelites  across  the  valley.^ 
Major  Conder  recognises  the  "  Gai,"  or  ravine,  which 
separated  them  -  in  the  deep  trench  that  the  combined 
stream  has  cut  through  the  level  land  :  and  this  is  another 
article  in  the  cumulative  evidence  for  the  site.  To  Major 
Conder's  admirable  picture  of  the  disposition  of  the  armies 
I  may  add  the  following :  Shocoh  is  a  strong  position  iso- 
lated from  the  rest  of  the  ridge  ;  and  it  keeps  open  the  line 
of  retreat  down  the  valley.  Saul's  army  was  probably  not 
immediately  opposite,  but  a  little  way  up  on  the  slopes  of 
the  incoming  Wady  el  Jindy,  and  so  placed  that  the 
Philistines  in  attacking  it  must  cross  not  only  the  level 
land  and  the  main  stream,  but  one  of  the  two  other  streams 
as  well,  and  must  also  climb  the  slopes  for  some  distance. 
Both  positions  were  thus  very  strong,  and  this  fact  per- 
haps explains  the  long  hesitation  of  the  armies  in  face  of 
each  other,  even  though  the  Philistines  had  the  advantage 
of  Goliath.  The  Israelite  position  certainly  looks  the 
stronger.  It  is  interesting,  too,  that  from  its  rear  the 
narrow  pass  goes  right  up  to  the  interior  of  the  land  near 
Bethlehem ;  so  that  the  shepherd-boy,  whom  the  story 
represents  as  being  sent  by  his  father  for  news  of  the  battle, 
— and  who,  when  he  came,  turned  the  even  balance  between 
these  two  strong  positions  by  a  little  pebble — would  have 
almost  twelve  miles  to  cover  between  his  father's  house  and 
the  camp. 

4.  The  fourth  of  the  valleys  that  cut  the  Shephelah,  is 
that  now  named  the  Wady  el  'Afranj,  which  runs  from 
opposite  Hebron  north-west  to  Ashdod  and  the  coast.  It 
is  important  as  containing  the  real  capital  of  the  Shephelah, 

1  Tent  Worh,  p.  279.  -  1  Sam.  xvii.  3. 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  207 

the  present  Beit-Gibrin.  This  site  has  not  been  identified 
with  any  Old  Testament  name,  but,  like  so  many  other 
places  in  Palestine,  its  permanent  importance  is  illustrated 
by  its  use  during  Eoman  times,  and  also  during  the 
Crusades.  It  was  a  centre  of  the  Idumoeans  when  they 
extended  north  across  the  Shephelah  in  the  last  centuries 
before  Christ.  The  Komans  fortified  it,  and  the  roads  they 
built  from  it  in  all  directions  are  still  visible  among  the 
brushwood  and  cornfields  of  the  neighbouring  valleys. 
Septimius  Severus  gave  it  certain  rights,  from  which  it 
received  the  new  name  Eleutheropolis,  and  it  became  the 
centre  of  a  Christian  see.  During  the  Latin  kingdom  of 
Jerusalem,  Gibelin,  as  the  place  was  called,  was  the  Cru- 
sader's base  against  Ascalon,  and  Fulke  of  Anjou  built  the 
citadel.  The  remains  of  this  and  of  a  great  church  still 
impress  the  squalid  village  with  some  sense  of  grandeur. 
Hard  by  there  is  the  noble  ruin  of  Sandahanna,  church 
and  cloister  of  Saint  Anne,  the  mother  of  the  virgin.  The 
chalk  ridges  are  penetrated  by  vast  caves,  elaborately 
carved,  perhaps  once  the  dwelling  of  the  ancient  Horites  ; 
certainly  in  later  times  the  refuge  of  Christians,  whose 
marks  they  yet  bear.  The  mouths  of  those  caves  that  look 
south  have  a  glorious  view  across  Mareshah,  Moresheth 
Gath,  and  the  site  of  Lachish  to  Gaza  and  the  sea.  But 
it  was  the  straight,  solid  Eoman  roads  that  interested  me 
most  about  Beit-Gibrin ;  for  there  is  little  doubt  that  it 
was  by  one  of  them,  or  rather  by  one  of  the  previous  high- 
ways they  represent,  that  the  eunuch  of  Queen  Candace, 
either  before  or  after  his  baptism,  passed  home  in  his 
chariot. 

5.  The  last  of  the  valleys  through  the  Shephelah  is 
Wady  el  Hesy,  or  Wady  el  Jizair,  running  from  a  point 
about  six  miles  south-west  of  Hebron  to  the  sea,  between 
Gaza  and  Ascalon.  This  valley  also  has  its  important 
sites;    for   Lachish,    which    used    to   be   placed    at    Umm 


208  THE  HISTORICAL   GEOGRAPHY 

Lakis  on  the  slopes  to  the  south  of  it,  is  now,  since  Mr. 
Fhnders  Petrie's  excavations,  more  clearly  identified  with 
Tell  el  Hesy,  a  mound  in  the  bed  of  it,  and  Eglon  is  close 

by. 

Above  Lachish,  some  five  miles  to  the  Wells  of  Qassaba 
or  Wells  of  the  Beeds,  there  is  usually  wealth  of  water,  and 
all  the  year  round  a  stream.^  Latin  Chronicles  of  the 
Crusades  know  the  place  as  Cannetum  Esturnellorum,  or 
'*  The  Canebrake  of  the  Starlings."  Eichard  twice  made 
it  a  base  of  operations  :  once  on  coming  up  the  Wady  el 
Hesy  from  the  coast  after  taking  Darum,  when  he  advanced 
on  Beit-Gibrin,  and  once  again  when  he  came  to  intercept, 
in  the  Wady  esh  Sheria,  a  rich  caravan  on  its  way  from 
Egypt  to  Jerusalem.  The  description  of  these  two  opera- 
tions ^  helps  us  to  realise  the  importance  of  Lachish  and 
its  Wady  in  Old  Testament  times.  Lachish  covered  Gaza, 
as  well  as  the  coast  road  to  Egypt,  and  the  inland  road  by 
Beersheba. 

I  have  now  explained  the  strategic  importance  of  the 
Shephelah,  and  especially  of  the  five  valleys  that  are  the 
only  possibilities  of  passage  through  it  for  great  armies. 
How  much  of  the  history  of  all  these  centuries  can  be 
localised  along  one  or  other  of  them  !  and  when  we  have 
done  so,  how  much  more  vivid  that  history  becomes ! 

There  is  one  great  campaign  in  the  Shephelah,  which  I 
have  not  discussed  in  connection  with  any  of  the  main 
routes,  because  the  details  of  it  are  obscure — Sennacherib's 
invasion  of  Syria  in  701  B.C.  But  the  general  course  of  it, 
as  told  in  the  Assyrian  annals  and  the  Bible,  becomes  plain 
in  the  light  of  the  geography  we  have  been  studying.  Sen- 
nacherib, coming  down  the  coast,  like  the  Syrians  and 
Crusaders,  like  them  also  conquered  first  the  towns  about 


1  Clermont-Ganueau  :  IteciicH,  etc.,  378. 
-  Vinsauf :  Itinerarium,  V.  41,  VI.  4. 


OF  THE  HOLY  L.iXD.  209 

Joppa.^  Then  he  defeated  an  Egyptian  army  before  Alteku, 
somewhere  near  Ekron,  on  the  Phihstine  Plain, ^  and  took 
Ekron  and  Timnah.  AVith  Egypt  beaten  back,  and  the 
northern  Shephelah  mastered,  the  way  was  now  open  into 
Judah,  the  invasion  of  which  and  the  investment  of  Jeru- 
salem accordingly  appear  next  in  the  list  of  Sennacherib's 
triumphs.  These  must  have  been  effected  by  a  detachment 
of  the  Assyrian  army,  for  Sennacherib  himself  is  next  heard 
of  in  the  southern  Shephelah,  besieging  Lachish  and  Libnah, 
no  doubt  with  the  view  of  securing  his  way  to  Egypt.  At 
Lachish  he  received  the  tribute  of  Hezekiah,  who  thus 
hoped  to  purchase  the  relief  of  the  still  inviolate  Jerusalem  ; 
but  in  spite  of  the  tribute,  he  sent  to  Hezekiah  from 
Lachish  and  Libnah  two  peremptory  demands  for  her  sur- 
render. Then  the  Assyrian  army  was  smitten,  not,  as  we 
usually  imagine,  round  the  walls  of  Jerusalem,  for  the  Bible 
nowhere  implies  that,  but  under  Sennacherib  himself  in  the 
main  camp  and  headquarters,  which  either  were  still  in  the 
southern  Shephelah,  or,  if  we  may  believe  Herodotus,  had 
crossed  the  desert  to  Pelusium,  and  were  overtaken  in  that 
pestiferous  region,  that  has  destroyed  so  many  armies. 

George  Adam  Smith. 

'  See  Becords  of  the  Past,  First  Series,  Vol.  I.,  and  Vol.  I.  of  Sclirader's  Cunei- 
form Inscriptions  and  the  O.T.  I  gave  an  account  of  this  campaign  in  illustra- 
tion of  the  relevant  prophecies  of  Isaiah  (Isaiah :  Expositor's  Bible,  Vol.  I. 
chapters  xix.-xxiii.),  which  I  still  think  to  be  justified  by  the  data  of  the 
Bible,  the  Assyrian  annals,  and  Herodotus  ii.  14.,  and  more  correct  than 
S;'hrader's  view,  which  makes  the  crisis  of  tbe  campaign  the  Battle  of  Eltekeh. 

-  Alteku,  the  Eltekeh  of  Joshua  xix.  44,  cannot  be  where  the  survey  map 
suggests,  up  the  vale  of  Ajalon, — for  how  could  an  Assyrian  and  Egyptian  army 
have  met  there  ? — but  was  near  Ekron,  and  on  the  route  to  Egypt.  Kh.  Lezka 
is  the  only  modern  name  there  at  all  like  it. 


.^OL.  y.  14 


210 


DB.   DBIVERS  INTRODUCTION  TO   THE  OLD 
TESTAMENT  LITEBATUBE. 

Paet  II. 

I  VENTURE  b}'  way  of  preface  to  express  the  hope  that 
whatever  I  say  here  may  be  read  in  the  hght  of  the  intro- 
ductory pages  of  Part  I.  The  book  before  us  is  not  only 
full  of  facts  but  characterized  by  a  thoroughly  individual 
way  of  regarding  its  subject.  This  individuality  I  have 
endeavoured  to  sketch  with  a  free  but  friendly  hand.  If 
the  reader  has  not  followed  me  in  this,  he  may  perhaps 
misinterpret  the  remarks  which  this  part  of  my  study  con- 
tains. It  is  only  worth  while  for  me  to  differ  from  Dr. 
Driver  because  at  heart  I  am  at  one  with  him,  and  on 
many  important  points  we  agree.  And  I  am  reconciled 
to  a  frequent  difference  of  opinion  both  as  a  critic  and  to 
some  extent  as  a  theologian  by  the  thought  that  in  our 
common  studies  it  is  by  the  contact  of  trained  and  dis- 
ciplined "  subjectivities"  that  true  progress  is  made. 

In  the  first  two  chapters  of  the  Introduction,  a  part  of 
which  I  have  called  "  the  gem  of  the  book,"  Dr.  Driver 
takes  the  student  as  near  as  possible  to  the  centre  of  the 
problems.  I  do  not  think  that  this  is  equally  the  case 
throughout  the  remainder  of  the  work.  But  I  am  very  far 
from  blaming  the  author  for  this  relative  inferiority  of  the 
following  chapters.  His  narrow  limits,  which  he  refers  to 
in  the  preface,  go  a  long  way  towards  accounting  for  this. 
And  if  I  add  another  explanation  which  seems  here  and 
there  to  be  applicable,  it  is  not  in  the  spirit  of  opposition. 
Let  me  confess,  then,  that  some  problems  of  not  incon- 
siderable importance  are  neglected,  possibly  because  Dr. 
Driver's  early  formed  linguistic  habits  of  mind  hinder 
him  from  fully  grasping  the  data  for  their  solution.  The 
reader  will  see  what  I  mean  presently. 


1)U.  DUIVEirs  IXTHODUCTIOX.  211 

Let  us  now  resume  our  survey.  Chapter  III.  relates  to 
the  very  important  Book  of  Isaiah.  I  need  not  say  that  it 
is  a  very  carefal  and  solid  piece  of  work  ;  and  yet  nowhere, 
as  it  seems  to  me,  do  the  limitations  of  Dr.  Driver's  criti- 
cism come  more  clearly  into  view.  How  inadequate,  for 
instance,  is  his  treatment  of  chap,  i.,  the  prologue,  pre- 
sumably, of  a  larger  collection  of  Isaiah's  prophecies  !  Has 
it,  or  has  it  not,  more  than  a  literary  unity?  Tlie  question 
is  not  even  touched.  And  what  is  the  date  of  its  composi- 
tion or  redaction?  Two  dates  are  mentioned,  but  without 
sufticient  explanation,  and  no  decision  between  them  is 
made.^  Is  this  a  laudable  "sobriety"  and  "judicial  re- 
serve"? It  would  be  an  illusion  to  think  so.  And  yet, 
even  here  there  is  an  indication  that  the  author  has  pro- 
gressed since  1888.  The  curiously  popular  reason  offered 
(but  "  without  any  confidence  ")  in  Isaiah,  p.  20,  for  as- 
signing this  prophecy  to  the  reign  of  Jotham  is  silently 
withdrawn.  And  just  so  (to  criticise  myself  as  well  as  the 
author)  I  have  long  ago  ceased  to  assign  Isaiah  i.  to  the 
time  of  a  supposed  invasion  of  Judah  by  Sargon.  I  miglit 
of  course  fill  many  pages  were  I  to  follow  Dr.  Driver  through 
the  Book  of  Isaiah  step  by  step.  This  being  impossible,  I 
will  confine  myself  to  the  most  salient  points  of  his  criti- 
cism. There  is  much  to  content  even  a  severe  judge;  how 
excellent,  for  instance,  are  the  remarks  on  the  origin  of 
Isaiah  xv.-xvi.  !  Nor  will  I  blame  the  author  much  for  not 
alluding  to  what  some  may  call  hypercritical  theories  ;  it  is 
rather  his  insufficient  reference  to  familiar  and  inevitable 
problems  which   I   am  compelled  to  regret.     Nothing,   for 

'  The  reference  (p.  190,  foot)  to  Geseuius,  Delitzsch,  ami  Dillmanu  as  having 
advocated  this  date  is  hardly  correct.  Geseuius  says  (Jesain,  i.  148j,  "I'or 
Jotbam  I  find  no  grounds  adduced."  Dehtzsch  (Jes.,  p.  G8j,  "  The  date  of  tliis 
first  prophecy  is  a  riddle,"  but  at  any  rate  it  seems,  he  thinks,  to  belong  to 
'•  the  lime  after  Uzziah  and  Jotham."  Dillmaun  (Jcs.,  p.  2j  refers  Isa.  i.  to  th^ 
Syro-Ephraimitish  war,  but  lie  states  emphatically  (p.  G.i)  that  though  the  hos- 
tLhtJes  begun  under  Jutham,  they  were  nut  very  serious  iJU  the  leign  of  Aliaz. 


212  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 


instance,  is  said  of  the  difficult  problem  of  Isaiah  xix.  16-25. 
It  may  be  urged  by  the  author  that  Kuenen  himself  pro- 
nounces in  favour  of  the  integrity  of  the  chapter/  and  that 
such  a  careful  scholar  as  Prof.  Whitehouse  has  recently 
expressed  his  surprise  at  the  continued  doubts  of  some 
critics.-  That  is  true,  but  it  should  be  added  that  Kuenen 
fully  admits  the  strength  of  the  critical  arguments  on  the 
opposite  side,  and  that  Prof.  Whitehouse  pronounces  judg- 
ment before  he  has  fully  heard  the  case. 

Nor  can  I  help  being  surprised  (in  spite  of  the  anticipa- 
tory "plea"  offered  in  the  preface)  at  Dr.  Driver's  incom- 
plete treatment  of  Isaiah  xxiii.,  and  for  the  same  reason, 
viz.,  that  its  problems  are  familiar  ones.  I  will  not  here 
argue  the  case  in  favour  of  the  theory  of  editorial  manipula- 
tion. But  among  the  stylistic  phenomena  which  point  to 
another  hand  than  Isaiah's  I  may  at  least  mention  n^]3tPi'2 
{v.  11),  U'^;m  and  D^^^"^  '"^19'  (^-  13),  HDJi^  {v.  18).'  And 
why  should  the  unintelligent  ridicule  directed  against  so- 
called  "divination"  and  "guesswork"  prevent  me  from 
attaching  weight  to  the  impression  of  so  many  good  critics 
that  Isaiah  never  (if  I  may  use  the  phrase)  "passed  this 
work  for  publication  "  '?  Verses  15-18  are  doubtless  a  post- 
Exilic  epilogue"  ("doubtless"  from  the  point  of  view  of 
those  w4io  have  already  satisfied  themselves  of  the  existence 
of  much  besides  that  is  post-Exilic  in  pre-Exilic  works). 
Verse  13  is  written  by  one  who  has  both  Isaiah's  phrases 
and  those  of  other  writers  in  his  head ;  it  may  of  course 
even  be  an  Isaianic  verse  recast.  Verses  1-12,  14  are  too 
fine  (such  is  my  own  impression)  for  Jeremiah,  and  now 
that  it  is  certain  (see  Niese's  text  of  Josephus)  that  Me- 

1  Onderzoeh,  ii.  71,  72. 

■■^  Critical  llevinc,  January,  1892,  p.  10.  The  case  for  disintegration  is  much 
stronger  than  this  writer  supposes,  nor  are  the  familiar  arguments  adduced 
by  him  conclusive. 

^  My  own  origiufil  view  (in  Isaiah  Chroivy.ofjicdlUj  ArraiKjed)  from  wli'cli  I 
ought  not  to  have  swerveJ, 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  213 


nander,  quoted  in  Jos.,  Ant.  ix.  14,  2,  referred  to  Bhal- 
maneser  by  name  {'Xe\dix-y\ra^)  as  the  besieger  of  Tyre,  there 
seems  good  reason  to  believe  that  Isaiah  really  wrote  Isaiah 
xxiii.  1-14,  but  in  a  form  not  entirely  identical  with  our 
present  text.^ 

Thus  much  on  Dr.  Driver's  treatment  of  the  generally 
acknowledged  prophecies  of  Isaiah.  With  a  word  of  hearty 
praise  to  the  useful  criticism  of  chaps,  xxxvi.-xxxix.  (in 
which  I  only  miss  a  reference  to  the  debate  as  to  the  Song 
of  Hezekiah),  I  pass  on  to  that  large  portion  of  the  Book 
which  is  of  disputed  origin.  Here  I  have  been  specially 
anxious  to  notice  any  signs  of  advance,  for  it  is  Dr.  Driver's 
treatment  of  these  chapters  in  his  earlier  book  which  pre- 
vents me  from  fully  endorsing  Dr.  Sanday's  eulogy  of  that 
work  in  the  preface  to  The  Oracles  of  God.  First  of  all, 
however,  I  must  make  some  reference  to  a  passage  on  which 
I  have  myself  unwittingly  helped  to  lead  the  author  astray. 
It  is  one  which  most  critics  have  denied  to  Isaiah  and 
grouped  with  xiii.  1-xiv.  23,  but  which,  following  Kleinert, 
I  thought  in  1881  might  be  reclaimed  for  that  prophet  by 
the  help  of  Assyriology — the  "oracle  on  the  wilderness  by 
the  sea"  (xxi.  1-10).  Dr.  Driver  mentions  (p.  20-3)  the 
chief  reasons  for  thinking  that  the  siege  of  Babylon  referred 
to  in  this  passage  is  one  of  the  three  which  took  place  in 
Isaiah's  lifetime,  and  tells  us  that  in  his  earlier  work  he 
followed  me  in  adopting  this  theory,  but  adds  that  it  has 
not  found  favour  with  recent  writers  on  Isaiah.  With 
these  "  recent  writers  "  I  myself  now  fully  agree.  I  adopted 
Kleinert's  (or,  more  strictly,  George  Smith's'-)  thoDry  as  a 
part  of  a  connected  view  of  a  group  of  prophecies  of  Isaiah 
(including  x.  5-33  and  xxii.   1-14),  and  I  understood  the 


'  The  aJaptatiou  of  Isaiah's  prophecy  to  post-ExiUc  readers  will  be  like 
Isaiah's  adaptation  of  au  old  prophecy  on  Moab  in  chaps,  xv.,  svi.  (if  Dr.  Driver 
is  right  in  agreeing  with  me,  p.  203). 

2  Transactiom  of  the  Society  of  Biblical  Arcltaologu,  ii.  329. 


214  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

words  "  0  my  threshed  and  winnowed  one"  (xxi.  10)  to 
refer  to  Sargon's  supposed  invasion  of  Jadah.  A  change  in 
my  view  of  these  prophecies,  however,  naturally  led  me  to 
reconsider  the  date  of  the  prophecy  xxi.  1-10,  which  I  now 
understand  as  written  at  the  close  of  the  exile  ("  Elam  "  in 
V.  2  =  "Anzan,"  of  which  Cyrus  was  king  before  he  con- 
quered Media).  The  strange  thing  to  me  is  that  Dr. 
Driver  should  ever  have  agreed  with  me :  1,  because,  as  I 
warned  the  student,  there  were  "reasons  of  striking  plau- 
sibility "  for  not  separating  this  prophecy  from  the  other 
prophecies  on  Babylon  which  were  undoubtedly  not  of 
Isaiah's  age ;  2,  because  Dr.  Driver  differed  from  me  as  to 
the  reality  of  Sargon's  supposed  invasion,  and  had  therefore 
a  much  less  strong  case  to  offer  for  the  new  theory.  The 
truth  is  that  the  author  was  biassed  by  a  false  apologetic 
and  an  imperfect  critical  theory.  Isaiah  xxi.  1-10  could 
hardly  refer  to  the  capture  of  Babylon  in  538.  Why? 
Because,  "firstly,  no  intelligible  purpose  would  be  sub- 
served by  Isaiah's  announcing  to  the  generation  of  Hezekiah 
an  occurrence  lying  like  this  in  the  distant  future,"  etc. 
{Introd.,  205).  In  other  words,  Dr.  Driver  quietly  assumes 
(inconsistently,  I  gladly  admit,  with  his  own  words  on 
Isaiah  xiii.  2,  etc.)  that  Isaiah  xxi.  1-10  must  be  Isaiah's 
work,  or,  at  least,  that  any  other  view  is  too  improbable  to 
mention.  And  in  order  to  interpret  the  prophecy  in  accord- 
ance with  an  isolated  pavt  of  Kleinert's  and  of  my  own 
former  theory,  he  is  forced  to  interpret  "  0  my  threshed 
one"  in  v.  10  as  a  prediction  ("he  foresees  the  sufferings 
which  the  present  triumph  of  Assyria  will  entail  upon 
them,"  etc.,  p.  205),  whereas  the  only  natural  view  of  the 
words  is  that  which  explains  them  as  descriptive  of  past 
sufferings.  It  is  important  to  add  that  Dr.  Driver  seems 
now  inclined  to  retreat  from  his  former  position  (which  was 
in  the  main  my  own),  though  he  does  not  mention  the  mix- 
ture of  Isaianic  and  non-Isaianic  phenomena  in  the  passage. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  215 

Bishop  Ellicott  may  perhaps  he  severe  on  our  supposed 
chaiigeableness.  But  if  he  will  refer  to  my  own  Isaiah 
(ed.  3,  vol  i.,  p.  127),  he  will  find  these  words,  "I  gladly 
admit  that  a  further  knowledge  of  the  circumstances  of 
the  Jews  might  conceivably  enable  us  to  reconcile  the 
prophecy  with  a  date  at  the  close  of  the  Exile."  Here 
there  was  no  dogmatism,  no  determination  to  treat  the 
point  as  finally  settled.  And  undue  dogmatism  is,  I  am 
sure,  not  less  abhorrent  to  Dr.  Driver  than  to  myself. 

Next  with  regard  to  the  more  commonly  controverted 
prophecies  in  Isaiah  i.-xxxix.  The  remarks  on  Isaiah  xiii. 
1-xiv.  28  are  excellent.  If  they  appear  to  any  one  some- 
what popular  and  obvious,  let  it  be  remembered  that  this 
section  is  the  first  of  those  which  are  written  from  an  Exilic 
point  of  view.  It  was  therefore  specially  needful  to  be 
popular ;  I  only  regret  not  to  find  it  pointed  out  that  what- 
ever you  say  about  the  prophecy,  to  assign  an  ode  like  that 
in  Isaiah  xiv.  4-21  to  Isaiah  is  the  very  height  of  unreason. 
Dr.  Driver's  treatment  of  the  other  prophecies  shows  in- 
creased definiteness  and  insight.  Chapters  xxxiv.  audxxxv. 
were  not  expressly  dated  in  the  Isaiah;  they  are  now  re- 
ferred to  the  period  of  the  Exile,  and  grouped  with  Isaiah 
xiii.  2,  etc.,  and  Jeremiah  1.,  li.  This  however  is  not  a 
sufficient  step  in  advance.  Long  ago  (see  Isaiah  i.  194)^  I 
ventured  to  maintain  that  these  chapters  are  post-Exilic 
works  of  the  imitative  school  of  prophecy,  and  ten  years 
have  only  deepened  my  convictions.  Dr.  Driver  may  indeed 
claim  for  his  own  view  the  high  authority  of  Dillmanu,  who 
thinks  that  the  phenomena  of  these  chapters  "  bring  us  at 
any  rate  to  the  close  of  the  Exile,"  but  would  it  not  have 
been  well  to  give  the  grounds  of  that  cautious  critic's  sig- 
nificant qualification  (y6'cZe??/rt^Zs)  ?     Let  us  pass  on  now  to 

'  See  Eiicij.  Brit.,  art.  "  Isaiah  "  (1881) ;  Jewish  Qiiaiterli/  lleiiew,  July,  1891, 
p.  102 ;  Jan.,  18'.)2,  p.  382 ;  and  cf.  Dillmaun,  Jcsaja,  p.  302  ;  Kuenen,  Onder- 
zoel:,  ii.  I»l-03 ;  Griitz,  Jncish  Quarterly  Review,  Oct.,  IHUl,  pp.  1-8. 


21G  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

chaps,  xxiv.-xxvii. — a  dangerous  hunting-ground  for  young 
scholars  in  search  of  distinction,  as  Mr.  W.  E.  Barnes  has 
lately  proved  by  his  elaborate  defence  of  Isaiah's  authorship 
of  these  chapters  against  all  modern  critics  (including  among 
these  even  Delitzsch.)  ^  Dr.  Driver  himself,  though  not  a 
young  scholar,  was  led  astray  for  a  time  by  the  same  spirit 
of  compromise  which  has  so  often  injured  him  as  a  critic. 
In  1888  he  was  "  disposed  "  (as  he  remarks,  p.  209)  "  to 
acquiesce  in  the  opinion  that  it  might  have  been  written 
on  the  eve  of  the  Exile,"  a  most  unfortunate  and  scarcely 
critical  opinion  which  isolated  the  author  from  his  natural 
allies.  The  consequences  of  this  violation  of  all  historical 
probability  has  since  then  become  visible  to  the  author,  who 
remarks  that  this  prophecy — 

"  Differs  so  widely  from  the  other  projihccies  of  this  periol  (Jer. 
Ezek.)  that  this  view  can  scarcely  be  maintained.  There  are  features 
in  which  it  is  in  advance  not  mcrelj'  of  Isaiah,  but  even  of  Deutero- 
Isaiah.  It  may  be  referred  most  plausibly  to  the  early  post-Exilic 
period"  (p.  210). 

Well,  perhaps  it  may — for  the  present.  At  any  rate,  Dr. 
Driver  grants  that  a  post-Exilic  writing  has  found  its  way 
into  the  Book  of  Isaiah.  I  am  not  without  hope  that 
further  study  of  the  later  prophetic  writings  and  of  the 
post-Exilic  period  in  general  may  convince  him  that  he  is 
still  somewhat  too  cautious,  and  that  the  ideas  of  this 
singular  but  most  instructive  prophecy  can  only  be  under- 
stood as  characteristic  of  the  later  Persian  age.  Far  be  it 
from  any  one  to  disparage  this  period.  The  Spirit  of  the 
Lord  was  not  suddenly  straitened  ;  the  period  of  artificial 
prophecy  (artificial  from  a  literary  point  of  view)  was  not 
without   fine  monuments  of  faith  and  hope  and  religious 

'  Delitzsch,  it  is  true,  had  not  made  liimseU  fully  at  home  in  the  results  of 
that  criticism  to  which  he  was  so  late  a  convert.  He  can  only  satisfy  himself 
that  the  author  is  "not  Isaiah  himself,  but  a  disciple  of  Isaiah  who  here  sur- 
passes the  master."  But  he  is  not  only  a  discii)lc  of  Isaiah,  but  of  other  pro- 
phets too  (see  Dr.  Driver's  selection  of  allusions). 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LTTERATURE.  217 

thought.  But  to  carry  this  subject  further  would  compel 
me  to  enter  into  the  history  of  religious  ideas/  and  to  ex- 
ceed the  limits  of  this  review. 

And  now  we  can  no  longer  avoid  applying  to  the  author 
one  of  the  crucial  tests  of  criticism,  and  ask,  How  does  he 
stand  in  relation  to  the  critical  problems  of  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi.  ? 
That  Dr.  Driver  neither  could  nor  would  assign  these  chap- 
ters to  Isaiah  was  indeed  well  known  from  his  Isaiah,  nor 
need  I  stint  my  eulogy  of  the  general  treatment  of  Isaiah 
xl.-lxvi.  in  that  book  as  compared  with  most  other  popular 
works  on  the  subject,  A'ery  heartily  do  I  wish  the  Isaiah 
a  long  career  of  usefulness.  For  though  unsopliisticated 
common  sense  may  recognise  at  once  that  these  chapters 
can  no  more  have  been  written  by  Isaiah  than  Psalm 
cxxxvii,  can  have  been  written  by  David,  there  are  still,  I 
fear,  not  many  persons  like — 

'■  My  friend  A,  uho,  reading  more  than  tAventj  years  ago  tlic  Book 
of  the  Prophet  Isaiah,  and  passing  withont  panse  from  the  .39th  to  the 
40th  chapter,  Avas  suddenly  struck  with  amazement  and  the  conviction 
that  it  was  impossible  that  one  man  should  have  written  both  chap- 
ters." - 

In  such  a  brilliantly  intellectual  paper  as  the  Spectator  it 
is  still  possible  to  read  vehement  defences  of  the  unity  of 
authorship,  and  who  can  wonder  that  less  literary  Bible- 
students,  in  spite  of  their  "  English  common  sense,"  cling 
to  the  same  belief?  It  is  very  necessary  therefore  for  some 
competent  scholar  like  Dr.  Driver  to  remedy,  so  far  as  he 
can,  what  may  be  called  the  sophistication  of  our  native 
good  sense.  Still  an  older  student  of  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi,  may 
be  permitted  to  regret  the  imperfection  of  Dr.  Driver's  work. 
To  treat  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi,  as  a  "continuous  prophecy,"  writ- 
ten from  the  same  historical  and  religious  standpoint,  and 
dealing  throughout  with  a  common  theme,  is  a  retrograde 

'  Comp.  my  Bampto-.i  Lecture.';,  pp.  120,  1:5:5,  102,  43:3. 

-  From  a  letter  signed  "  Hope  "  iu  the  Tines,  .Jau.  7tli,  1892. 


218  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION   TO 


policy  which  I  cannot  help  lamenting.  As  long  as  this 
theory  was  advocated  in  a  semi-popular  work,  it  was  pos- 
sible to  hold  that  Dr.  Driver  adopted  it  from  educational 
considerations.  There  is,  of  course,  no  competent  teacher 
who  does  not  sometimes  have  to  condescend  to  the  capa- 
cities of  his  pupils.  It  is  no  doubt  easier  for  a  beginner 
to  take  in  the  view  of  what  I  have  heard  called  the  "  dual 
authorship  of  the  Book  of  Isaiah  "  than  a  more  compli- 
cated, even  though  a  sounder  theory.  But  when  the  state- 
ments of  Dr.  Driver's  Isaiah  are  repeated  in  a  work  which 
aims  at  "  representing  the  present  condition  of  investiga- 
tion," it  becomes  more  difficult  to  account  for  them.  For 
the  progress  of  exegesis  has  revealed  the  fact  that  there 
are  several  striking  breaks  in  the  continuity,  changes  in 
the  tone  and  the  historical  situation,  modifications  of  the 
religious  ideas.  "  Kevealed  "  may  seem  a  strong  word,  but 
the  truth  is  that  though  some  early  critics  had  a  glimpse 
of  these  facts,  the  knowledge  was  lost  again  in  a  very 
natural  rebound  from  the  pernicious  extreme  of  the  fanatical 
disintegrators.  It  was  Ewald  who  rectified  the  new  error 
of  Gesenius  and  Hitzig,  and  the  example  of  moderate  dis- 
integration set  by  him  was  followed,  not  of  course  without 
very  much  variety  of  view,  by  Bleek,  Geiger,  Oort,  Kuenen, 
Stade,  Dillmann,  Cornill,  Budde,  and  in  England  by  myself 
in  1881,  and  by  Mr.  G.  A.  Smith  in  1890.  The  principal 
exegetical  facts  which  require  disintegration  will  be  found 
in  my  own  commentary  on  Isaiah  (1880-1881),  my  own 
latest  explanation  of  them  in  two  published  academical 
lectures.^     1   have  no  feverish  anxiety  to    make  converts  ; 

'  See  Jewish  Qaartcrhj  Ri^vien-,  July  aiul  Oct.,  18'.)1.  Budde  approaches  very 
near  to  me,  confirming  his  view  by  his  researches  into  the  "elegiac  rhythm"' 
(Stade's  Zt.,  1891,  p.  242).  Those  who  wish  for  bolder  theories  may  go  to 
Kueuen  and  Cornill.  The  gradualuess  of  Kuenen's  advance  adds  special 
weight  to  his  opinion.s.  I  will  not  deny  the  plausibility  of  his  arguments, 
especially  in  the  light  of  a  more  advanced  view  of  the  date  of  Job.  15ut  I  can 
only  write  according  to  the  light  which  I  have  at  the  time. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  219 


I  am  perfectly  willing  to  be  converted  to  other  theories 
by  more  acute  and  thorough  critics  than  myself.  But 
what  is  desirable  is  this  :  that  the  exegetical  facts  which 
so  many  trained  critics  have  noticed  should  be  recognised 
and  critically  explained  by  all  earnest  scholars,  and  that 
some  credit  both  for  priority  among  recent  analysts  and 
for  caution  and  moderation  should  be  awarded  where  it 
is  due.  Such  remarks  as  these  ought  to  be  impossible  in 
the  principal  literary  organ  of  Anglican  Churchmen. 

"  We  think  tliiit  there  is  at  present  iu  some  quarters  ['another  pro- 
fessor' liad  l)eeii  already  indicated]  a  readiness  to  break  up  works  on 
utterly  insufficient  grounds,  -which  is  almost  wantonly  provoking,  and 
Ave  are  heartily  glad  that  Dr.  Driver  gives  no  countenance  whatever 
to  such  a  proceeding,"  ' 

The  pretension  here  and  elsewhere  set  up  on  behalf  of 
Dr.  Driver  is  doubtless  most  repugnant  to  that  candid 
scholar,  but  it  is,  I  fear,  his  own  imperfect  exhibition  of 
the  "  present  condition  of  investigation  "  which  has  pro- 
duced the  serious  errors  and  illusions  of  a  conscientious 
but  ill-informed  writer, 

I  will  now  advance  a  step.  It  is  in  the  interests,  not 
only  of  criticism,  but  also  of  that  very  view  of  the  "pro- 
phecy of  restoration  "  which  Dr,  Driver  himself  values  so 
highly  that  I  venture  to  criticise  his  treatment  of  Isaiah 
xl,-lxvi.  For  although  there  is  much  in  these  chapters 
which,  as  conservative  scholars  admit,  may  be  taken  to 
favour  an  Exilic  date,  there  are  also,  as  they  rightly  main- 
tain, other  phenomena  which  seem  inconsistent  with  this 
date,  Dr,  Driver  has,  of  course,  an  explanation  for  those 
phenomena  which  do  not  altogether  suit  him,  and  so,  too, 
have  his  conservative  opponents  for  those  which  do  not 
suit  them.  It  is  impossible  therefore  that  either  side 
should    gain    an   undisputed    victory.-       Seeing    this,    the 

'    (inanUan,  Dec.  2,  1891  (p.  IWoW). 

^  Even  if  it  be  granted  that  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi.  i.s  not  Isaiali's  work,  there  i.s  no 


220  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 


moderate  disintegrating  critics  intervene  with  an  eirenicon  ; 
why  should  not  Dr.  Driver  join  them,  and  claim  for  him- 
self a  share  in  the  blessing  of  the  peace-makers  ?  There 
is  room  enough  for  the  linguistic  and  the  rhythmical  keys, 
as  well  as  for  that  which  I  myself  chiefly  applied  to  these 
problems.  But  I  will  not  dwell  longer  on  this  thorny 
subject. 

The  next  prophets  in  order  are  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel. 
On  these  the  "  higher  criticism  "  has  less  to  say  than  on 
the  Book  of  Isaiah.  With  regard  to  Jeremiah  x.  1-16,  Dr. 
Driver  tells  us  that  either  it  belongs  to  the  latter  part  of 
Jeremiah's  career,  or  it  is  the  work  of  a  prophet  at  the  close 
of  the  Exile.  But  why  hesitate  ?  Surely  the  two  theories 
are  not  equally  probable,  and  interesting  as  the  linguistic 
remarks  on  the  interpolated  Aramaic  verse  (v.  11)  may 
be,  are  they  not  somewhat  out  of  place  ?  At  any  rate 
the  facts  want  a  little  more  theory  to  illuminate  them. 
Nor  are  they  complete.  If  hip")}*^  occurs  in  x.  11  a,  is  not 
the  ordinary  form  j^^-)}^  found  in  x.  11  b?  And  does  not 
the  less  usual  form  occur  in  the  Midrashim  (e.g.,  Ber.  B. 
13)  ?  Moreover,  does  not  the  suftix  Qin  deserve  mention? 
It  agrees  with  the  Aramaic  part  of  Ezra,  but  not  with 
that  of  Daniel^  (which  always  gives  pn)-  I  do  not  (as 
the  reader  will  see  later)  undervalue  linguistic  data ;  but 
would  not  these  particular  facts  have  been  more  in  place 
in  the  great  forthcoming  Hebrew  Dictionary  ?  And  why 
is  there  no  reference  to  Mr.  Ball's  somewhat  elaborate 
discussion  of  chap.  x.  in  his  contribution  to  the  Expositor's 
Bible?  ^      Consider   how   much    else    has    been    "crowded 


absolute  necessity  to  adoijt  Dr.  Driver's  view.  For  it  may  be  asked,  May  not 
the  projihccy  he  a  work  of  the  restoration-period  ?  (So  not  only  Seinecke  but 
Isidore  Loeb,  Revue  des  etudes  juivea,  juillet-sept.,  1891.)  My  own  answer,  of 
course,  is  ready;  but  what  cau  Dr.  Driver  say? 

'  Mr.  Bevan  omits  to  notice  this  point  in  his  excellent  work  on  Daniel  (p.  36). 

-  Mr.  Ball's  Jeremiah  has  escaped  the  notice  of  the  autbor,  who  takes  such 
pleasure  in  recognising  English  work. 


THE   OLD   TESTAMEyr  LITERATURE.  221 

out."  For  instance,  though  perhaps  enough  is  said  of  the 
two  texts  of  Jeremiah  (Dr.  Driver,  on  the  whole,  prefers 
the  Hebrew;  Cornill  the  Greek  text),  there  is  no  sufficient 
discussion  of  the  method  and  plan  of  Jeremiah's  editor,  nor 
are  any  hints  given  with  regard  to  possible  interpolations 
other  than  those  to  which  the  Septuagint  can  guide  us 
{e.g.  xvii.  19-27).  Another  interesting  question  (raised  by 
Schwally)  is  that  of  the  authorship  of  Jeremiah  xxv.  and 
xlvi.-H.  Though  Jeremiah  l.-li.  is  fully  admitted  (on 
grounds  which  supplement  those  given  in  1885  in  my 
"Pulpit  Commentary")  to  be  Exilic,  the  larger  problem  is 
not  referred  to.  On  the  contents  of  Ezekiel,  too,  much 
more  might  have  been  said.  There  are  difficulties  con- 
nected with  the  question  of  Ezekiel's  editorial  processes 
— difficulties  exaggerated  by  a  too  brilliant  Dutch  scholar 
(A.  Pierson),  and  yet  grave  enough  to  be  mentioned.  But 
of  course  a  difference  of  judgment  as  to  the  selection  of 
material  is  occasionally  to  be  expected.  At  any  rate,  valu- 
able help  is  given  on  Ezekiel  xl.-xlviii.,  which,  by  an  in- 
structive exaggeration,  some  one  has  called  "  the  key  to  the 
Old  Testament."  ^  It  remains  for  some  future  scholar  to 
rediscover  this  great  pastor,  patriot,  and  prophet.^ 

The  Minor  Prophets  are  by  no  means  all  of  them  either 
of  minor  importance  or  of  minor  difficulty.^  In  some  cases, 
it  is  true,  the  date  and  authorship  are  on  the  whole  free 
from  difficulty.  Hence  in  treating  of  Hosea,  Amos,  Na- 
hum,  Habakkuk,  Zephaniah,  Haggai,  and  Malachi,  it  is 
the  contents  and  special  characteristics  of  the  books  to 
which  Dr.  Driver  mainly  directs  his  attention.     Not  that 


'  J.  Ortli,  «/).  Wellhauseu,  Proh'nonu'nn,  p.  447. 

-  Prof.  Davidson's  Er.ekiel  (iu  the  Cambridge  Biblical  series)  Las  uot  yet 
come  into  my  hands. 

"  I  venture  to  regret  that  no  mention  is  made  of  Eeuau's  interesting  study 
on  the  Minor  Prophets  iu  the  Journal  des  savaiita,  No?.,  1888.  Kenan  may 
have  great  faults,  but  cannot  be  altogether  ignored.  Taylor's  'Text  of  Mlcak 
(ISyi)  might  also  claim  mention. 


222  nii.   DUIVEIVS  INTKOJJUCTIOy  TO 

there  are  no  critical  questions  of  any  moment,  but,  as  a 
rule,  they  are  of  a  class  in  which  the  author  is  not  as  yet 
much  interested.  It  were  ungracious  to  touch  upon  them 
here,  except  in  the  case  of  Habakkuk  iii.  In  omitting  all 
criticism  of  the  heading  of  this  ode,  or  psalm,  Dr.  Driver 
seems  to  me  inconsistent  with  himself;  for  though  he 
leaves  the  authorship  of  the  "  Song  of  Hezekiah  "  unques- 
tioned, he  has  no  scruple  in  holding  that  the  psalm  in 
Jonah  ii.  was  not  the  work  of  Jonah.  In  the  "present 
state  of  critical  investigation  "  it  has  become  almost 
equally  difficult  to  defend  tradition  in  any,  one  of  these 
cases.  Certainly  neither  the  expressions  nor  the  ideas  of 
Habakkuk  iii.  agree  with  those  of  Habakkuk  i.,  ii.  ;  they 
favour  a  post-ExiHc  rather  than  a  pre-Exilic  date.  The 
most  reasonable  view  is  that  both  the  psalms  of  Hezekiah 
and  that  of  Habakkuk  once  formed  part  of  a  liturgical 
collection  (cf.  Hab,  iii.  19,  Isa.  xxxviii.  20).^  Had  Dr. 
Driver  omitted  the  reference  on  page  283  to  a  bold  conjec- 
ture of  Prof.  Sayce,'  he  would  have  gained  more  than 
enough  space  for  some  mention  of  this  important  critical 
point.  He  might  also  have  gracefully  referred  to  Mr. 
Sinker's  Psalm  of  Habakkuk  (1890).  I  venture  to  add 
that  caution  is  carried  too  far  when  the  date  of  Nahum  is 
placed  between  B.C.  664  and  607.  The  prophecy  must,  it 
would  seem,  have  been  written  either  circa  B.C.  660  (as, 
following  Schrader,  Tiele  and  myself  dated  it  in  1888),  or 
circa  623,  the  date  of  the  first  campaign  of  Cyaxares  against 
Assyria  (as  recentlj'^  both  Kuenen  and  Cornill). 

The  other  Minor  Prophets  are  considerably  more  diffi- 
cult. Obadiah,  for  instance,  well  deserves  a  closer  investi- 
gation.    Dr.  Driver's  treatment  of  the  book  is,  as  far  as  it 


1  So  Static  and  Kuenen;  see  also  my  Jhimptou  Lectures,  pp.  125  (top),  luC, 
ly7,  210,  214,  and  Isaiah,  i.  228-9. 

2  For  which,  besides  Dr.  Driver's  references,  see  Bahylonian  and  Oriental 
Recurd,  ii.  lS-22. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  223 


goes,  excellent.  On  Obadiah  1-9  he  adopts  the  most 
critical  view,  viz.,  that  Obadiah  here  takes  for  his  text  a 
much  older  prophecy,  which  is  also  reproduced  with  greater 
freedom  in  Jeremiah  xlix.  7-22.  But  he  makes  no  attempt 
to  fix  the  period  of  the  prophecy  more  precisely.  I  will 
not  presume  to  censure  him  for  this.  But  if  the  book  was 
to  carry  out  the  promises  of  the  programme,  I  venture  to 
think  that  the  two  views  which  are  still  held  ought  to  have 
been  mentioned,  viz.  (L)  that  Obadiah  wrote  soon  after  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadrezzar  (Schrader, 
Kiehm,  Meyrick)  ;  and  (2)  that  his  date  is  some  time  after 
the  re-establishment  of  the  Jews  in  their  own  land  (Kuenen, 
Cornill).  The  latter  view  seems  to  me  to  be  required  by 
a  strict  exegesis. 

There  is  also  another  omission  of  which  I  would  gently 
complain.  Dr.  Driver  undertakes  to  give  some  account  of 
the  contents  of  the  several  books.  But  here  he  omits  one 
most  important  feature  of  Obadiah's  description,  which  I 
venture  to  give  from  a  critical  paper  of  my  own  (printed  in 
1881)  which  has  escaped  the  notice  of  Dr.  Driver. 

"  One  very  singular  feature  requires  explanation.  The  captives  of 
the  northern  kingdom  are  not  to  settle  in  their  old  homes ;  their  kins- 
men of  the  southern  tribes  have  expanded  too  much  for  this.  They  are 
tlierefoi-e  compensated  by  the  gift  of  that  border-land,  which  had  never 
as  yet  been  thoroughly  conquered,  'the  cities  of  the  Cauaanites  as  far  as 
Zarephath'  (this  is  the  most  probable  view  of  the  first  half  of  v.  20) — 
they  became,  in  fact,  the  guardians  of  the  northern  marches  just  as  the 
captives  of  Judah  are  the  kee})ers  of  the  southern.  Tyre  is  excepted, 
for  a  great  future  is  reserved  for  Tyre  (Isa.  xxiii.  17, 18).  But  in  speak- 
ing of  the  captives  of  Judah  we  must  draw  a  distinction.  The  guardians 
of  the  '  south-counti-y  '  (the  Negeb,  or  '  dry  land  ")  are,  not  the  mass  of 
the  captives  of  Israel,  l)ut  those  '  who  are  in  Sepharad.' "  ' 

Now,  what  is  "  Sepharad  "  ?  If  this  had  nothing  to  do 
with  the  date  of  the  book,  Dr  Driver  might  simply  have 
referred  to  a  dictionary  of  the  Bible.     But  it  has  very  much 

'  "  The  Book  of  Obadiah,"  Homiletic  Quarterhj,  .Jan.,  1881,  pp.  lH-117. 


224  DE.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 


indeed  to  do  with  it,  and  Prof.  Sayce  may  justly  complain 
of  the  author  for  this  neglect  of  archaeological  evidences.  I 
am  aware  of  the  diversity  of  opinion  which  exists  among 
scholars  as  to  the  locality  of  "  Sepharad"  ;  the  evidence  and 
the  arguments  lie  before  me.  But  it  is  clear  that  if  the 
prophecy,  as  it  stands,  is  post-Exilic,  we  can  hardly  help 
identifying  "  Sepharad"  with  Cparda,  the  name  of  a  province 
of  the  Persian  empire,  which  stands  between  Cappadocia 
and  Ionia  in  the  inscription  of  Darius  at  Naksh-i-Rustam.^ 
What  now  becomes  the  most  natural  view  of  the  date  of 
the  prophecy '?  When  can  there  have  been  a  captive-band 
from  Jerusalem  in  Phrygia  or  Lydia  ?  The  earliest  possible 
time  known  to  us  is  about  B.C.  351,  when  Artaxerxes  Ochus 
so  cruelly  punished  the  participation  of  the  Jews  in  the 
great  revolt.  I  have  remarked  elsewhere  that  this  was 
"  the  third  of  Israel's  great  captivities,"  ~  and  have  referred 
various  psalms  to  the  distress  and  embitterment  which  it 
produced.  It  is  very  noteworthy  that  the  prophet  nowhere 
mentions  either  the  Chaldeans  or  Babylon.  Also  that  Joel 
iii.  6,  refers  to  "children  of  Judah  and  of  Jerusalem"  as 
having  been  sold  to  the  "  sons  of  the  Javanites  "  (Ionia  was 
close  to  Cparda  =  Sepharad).  Now  Joel,  as  Dr.  Driver  and 
I  agree,  is  post-Exilic,  and  appears  to  refer  in  ii.  32  to  Obad. 
17.  Is  all  this  of  no  importance  to  the  student?  I  cannot 
think  so,  provided  that  the  critic  also  points  out  the  reli- 
gious elements  which  give  vitality  to  this  little  prophecy. 

Here  let  me  remind  the  reader  that  I  am  no  opponent  ol 
Professor  Driver.  Most  gladly  would  I  have  given  him 
unmingled  thanks  for  all  the  good  that  is  in  his  book.  I 
am  only  hindered  from  doing  so  by  those  very  serious  mis- 

1  See  Records  of  the  Past,  V.  70  (where  however  "  Sparta  "  is  an  incorrect 
identification  of  "  Cparda").  On  "  Sepharad,"  Lassen,  Spiegel,  Oppert,  Sayce, 
but  especially  Schrader,  Lave  learnedly  discoursed.  See  ihe  latter's  I'ke  Cunei- 
form Inscri2}tion-'i,  etc.  (by  Whitehouse)  on  Obad.  20,  and  his  Keilschriften  nnd 
Geschicht.Hforschuvfi,  pp.  llG-11!). 

-  Hampton  Lectures  for  1889,  p.  53  ;  cf,  p.  229, 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  225 

apprehensions  of  the  pubHc,  which  I  have  endeavoured  to 
combat,  and  to  which,  in  one  respect,  the  editors  of  the 
"Library"  have  unintentionally  contributed.  It  was  per- 
haps specially  difficult  for  Professor  Driver  to  explain  the 
prevailing  tendency  of  critical  opinion  on  the  Minor 
Prophets  because  of  the  attention  naturally  directed  in 
the  Anglican  Church  to  the  successor  of  Dr.  Pasey,  a 
scholar  who  not  only  worthily  summed  up  and  closed  a 
philological  period,  but  represented  a  school  of  orthodoxy 
which  is  still  powerful  among  us.  Dr.  Driver  would  not, 
I  believe,  say  that  he  has  as  yet  given  us  all  that  he  hopes 
to  know  about  Joel.  This  little  Book  is  one  of  those  which 
suffer  most  by  a  separate  treatment,  and  every  advance 
which  we  make  in  our  study  of  the  other  post-Exilic  writ- 
ings must  react  (as  I  have  shown  in  one  case  already)  on 
our  view  of  Joel.  But  what  Dr.  Driver  does  give  us  is  ex- 
cellent ;  I  only  miss  the  definite  statement  (which  is  surely 
a  necessary  inference  from  the  facts  produced)  that  the 
Book  of  Joel  is  at  any  rate  hardly  earlier  than  the  age  of 
Nehemiah  [i.e.  the  second  half  of  the  fifth  century).^  It 
might  also  have  been  mentioned  that  the  early  Jewish 
doctors  were  rather  for  than  against  a  late  date  for  Joel.- 

I  now  come  to  a  Book  which,  by  the  common  consent  of 
sympathetic  readers,  is  one  of  the  most  beautiful  in  the 
Old  Testament  Canon — the  Book  of  Jonah.  It  is  also 
however  one  of  the  most  controverted,  and  one  cannot  but 
admire  the  quiet  dignity  with  which  Dr.  Driver  sets  forth 
his  own  free  but  devout  critical  views.  In  the  first  place, 
as  to  the  date.  By  four  (or  rather  five)  ^  arguments  un- 
connected with  the  extraordinary  character  of  the  story,  it 
is  shown  that  the  Book  finds  its  only  natural  home  in  the 

1  So  Merx,  Kucuen,  Cornill,  and  Prof.  Ilobertson  Smith.  On  the  lioguistic 
argument  see  further  on. 

^  See  Eosenzweig,  Bas  Jahrlmmkrt  nach  dem  Lab.  E.vile,  p.  45. 
3  See  note  1,  p.  301. 

VOL.  V  15 


22G  DE.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION   TO 

post-Exilic  period.  I  think  myself  that  we  might  go  further, 
and  that  from  a  fuller  study  of  the  literature  and  history  of 
the  post-Exilic  period,  and  also  (if  I  may  say  so)  of  ijsalm- 
criticism,  Dr.  Driver  may  obtain  a  still  more  definite 
solution  of  the  critical  problem.  But  the  main  point  has 
been  settled  beyond  dispute.  It  remains  however  to 
determine  (1)  What  the  didactic  purpose  of  the  Book  is, 
and  (2)  Whether,  or  to  what  extent,  the  narrative  is  his- 
torical. On  the  latter  point  Dr.  Driver  says  that  "  quite 
irrespectively  of  the  miraculous  features  in  the  narrative, 
it  must  be  admitted  that  it  is  not  strictly  historical,"  but 
also  that — 

"  No  doubt  the  materials  of  the  narrative  were  supplied  to  tiic  author 
by  tradition,  and  rest  ultimately  ou  a  basis  of  fact :  no  doubt  the  out- 
lines of  the  narrative  are  historical,  and  Jonah's  iDreaching  was  actually 
successful  at  Nineveh  (Luke  xi.  30,  32),  though  not  upon  the  scale 
represented  in  the  Book  "  (p.  303). 

May  I  be  allowed  gently  to  criticise  the  latter  statement, 
which  yields  too  much  to  stationary  thinkers  like  Bishop 
Ellicott?  The  author  speaks  here  as  if,  whenever  the 
Saviour  referred  in  appearance  to  historical  individuals,  He 
necessarily  believed  Himself  that  the  persons  named  were 
actually  historical.  This  in  Sir  Philip  Sidney's  time 
appears  to  have  been  commonly  held ;  for  in  mentioning 
the  story  of  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus  ^  he  apologetically 
refers  to  "  the  learned  divines  "  who  account  the  narrative 
to  be  a  parable.  But  what  necessity  is  there  for  this  view 
with  regard  to  Christ's  words  in  Luke  xi.  30,  32  ?  Con- 
sidering how  temporary  and  therefore  how  superficial  the 
"repentance"  of  the  Ninevites  (if  historical)  must  have  been, 
and  how  completely  different  was  the  repentance  which 
Christ  demanded,  it  becomes  surely  the  most  natural  view 
that  Jesus  Christ  interpreted  the  story  as  an  instructive 
parable.     We  cannot  indeed  prove  this;  and  even  if  He  did, 

1  An  Apolopie  for  Foctrir.  (Arber),  p.  35. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  227 

with  His  wonderful  spiritual  tact,  so  interpret  it,  we  cannot 
be  sure  that  He  would  have  communicated  His  interpret- 
ation to  His  dull  disciples,  on  whom  probably  the  distinc- 
tion between  history  and  quasi-historical  didactic  fiction 
would  have  been  lost. 

I  venture  also  to  object  that  Dr.  Driver's  reference  to  the 
New  Testament  will  give  offence  to  many  young  men  who, 
without  being  in  the  least  undevout,  desire  to  study  the  Old 
Testament   historically.      He   who    would    guide  this   best 
class  of  students  must  not  even  seem  to  be  biassed  by  a 
disputable  theological  theory  respecting  the  knowledge  of 
the  Saviour.     To  me  it  appears  in  the  highest  degree  prob- 
able that  the  story  of  the  Book  of  Jonah  is  not  merely  not 
in  all  points,  but  not  in  any  point,  historical,  and  I  have  on 
my  side  such  a  moderate  and  orthodox  critic  as  Eiehm.^ 
The  romantic  form  of  literature  which  flourished  among 
the  later  Jews  must  have  had  a  beginning  ;    Tobit   cannot 
have  been  its  first  specimen.     It  also  appears  to  me  more 
than  probable  that  there  is  a  mythic  element  in  the  story 
of  Jonah.     I  do  not  mean  that  this  story  is  itself  a  popular 
myth,  but  that,  as  I  showed  in  1877,^  the  author  of  "Jonah" 
(like  the  writer  of  Jeremiah  li.  34,  44)  adopted  a  well-known 
Oriental   mode  of   expression,   based  upon  a  solar  myth.^ 
Bishop  Ellicott,  whom  I  meet  with  regret  as  an  opponent, 
thinks   this   view   dishonouring    to   the    Bible.      To    the 
younger  generation  however  who  have  felt  the  fascination 
of  myths,  the  word  which  has  dropped  from  the  Bishop's 
pen  in  connection  with  myself,^  will  appear  strangely  mis- 

'  Riehm,  Eiiileitumj,  ii.  167  ("  eine  reine  Dichtung"). 

-  See  Theological  Review,  1877,  pp.  211-219. 

•''  See  my  Jeremiah,  vol.  ii.  (1885),  pp.  293,  294,  and  my  Job  and  Solomon 
(1887),  pp.  76,  77  (where  allusions  to  the  Babylonian  myth  of  the  struggle 
between  Marduk  (Merodach)  and  the  dragon  Tiamat  are  pointed  out).  In  Jer. 
li.  34,  44,  which  very  possibly  furnished  the  author  of  "  Jonah  "  with  the  basis 
of  his  story,  it  is  Israel  whom  Nebuchadrezzar  "  hath  swallowed  up  like  the 
dragon." 

*  Christus  Comjnohator,  p.  186. 


228  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 


placed.  They  will  be  well  pleased  at  the  discovery  that 
the  story  of  Jonah  (like  that  of  Esther)  contains  an  element 
of  mythic  symbol.  They  will  reverence  its  writer  as  one 
of  those  inspired  men  who  could  convert  mythic  and  semi- 
mythic  stories  and  symbols  into  vehicles  of  spiritual  truth. 
Dr.  Driver,  it  is  true,  is  not  on  my  side  here.  He  timidly 
refers  to  the  allegoric  theory,  without  himself  adopting 
it,  and  even  without  mentioning  how  I  have  completed 
the  theory  by  explaining  the  allegoric  machinery.  Still, 
what  Dr.  Driver  does  say  (p.  302)  as  to  the  aim  of  the 
Book  of  Jonah  is  in  itself  excellent,  and  may,  without 
violence,  be  attached  to  the  mythic-allegoric  theory.  The 
story  of  Jonah  did  in  fact  teach  the  Jews  "  that  God's 
purposes  of  grace  are  not  limited  to  Israel  alone,  but  are 
open  to  the  heathen  as  well,  if  only  they  abandon  their 
sinful  courses,  and  turn  to  Him  in  true  penitence."  And 
I  think  these  words  may  be  illustrated  and  confirmed  by  a 
passage  from  my  own  discussion  of  the  relation  of  the 
Jewish  Church  to  heathen  races. 

"  The  author  [of  Jonah]  helono's  to  that  freer  and  more  catholic 
school,  which  protested  against  a  too  legalistic  spirit,  and  he  fully 
recognises  (see  Jonah  iv.  2)  that  the  doctrine  of  Joel  ii.  12  applies  not 
merely  to  Israel,  but  to  all  nations.  He  is  aware  too  that  Israel 
(typified  by  Jonah  "  the  dove  ")  cannot  evade  its  missionary  duty,  and 
that  its  pi-eaching  should  be  alike  of  mercy  and  of  justice."  ^ 

There  still  remain  Micah  and  Zechariah.  Both  books 
are  treated  with  great  fulness,  and  with  results  which  fairly 
represent  the  present  state  of  opinion.  I  would  gladly  quote 
from  both  sections,  but  especially  from  that  on  Micah.  On 
Micah  iv.  10  the  author  agrees  with  me  that  the  words, 
"  and  thou  shalt  go  even  to  Babylon,"  are  an  interpolation. 
This  is  a  brave    admission,  though   the  author  does   not 

^  Bampton  Lectures  for  1889,  pp.  294-5.  Why  is  Israel  called  Jonah  ? 
Because  Israel's  true  ideal  is  to  be  like,  not  the  eagle,  but  the  dove.  See  my 
note  on  Ps.  Ixviii.  l-i  (end),  and  comp.  a  beautiful  passage  in  Links  and  Clues, 
p.  113. 


THE   OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  229 

recognise  the  consequence  which  follows  from  this  for  the 
criticism  of  Isaiah  xxxix.  6,  1}     On   Micah  vi.,  vii.  (later 
additions),   able    as   the   author's    criticisms  are,   they  are 
lacking  in  firmness.     In  the  Zechariah  section,  the  great 
result  is  attained,  that  not  only  Zechariah  i.-viii.,  but  also 
Zechariah  ix.-xi.,  and  xii.-xiv.,  come  to  us  from  post-Exilic 
times.     Not  that  Dr.  Driver,  like  another  able  philologist. 
Professor  G.  Hoffmann,'-^  goes  back  to  the  old  view  of  the 
unity   of  authorship — a  plurality  of  authors   is   evidently 
implied   by   his   remarks.      Nor   yet   that   he   accepts   the 
somewhat  radical  theory  of  Stade,  published  in  his  Zeit- 
schrift  in  1881-82.      He  holds  that  in  Zechariah  ix.-xi.  we 
have  a  post-Exilic  prophecy,  which  was  modified  in  details, 
and  accommodated  to  a  later  situation  by  a  writer  who 
lived  well  on  in  the  post-Exilic  period.     This  is  substan- 
tially the  view  which  I  have  already  put  forward  and  to 
which  Kuenen  has  independently  given  his  high  authority. 
Nor  ought  I  to  pass  over  the  fact  that  though  Stade  has 
done  more  than  any  one  for  the  spread  of  a  similar  view,  my 
own  theory  was  expounded  at  length  by  myself  in  1879,  in 
a  paper  read  before  the  Taylerian  Society,  and  briefly  sum- 
marized  in   the    same   year  in    print   in   the    Theological 
Beview.^     Dr.  Driver  is  so  kind  as  to  refer  to  this  paper, 
which  only  lately  reached  publication.     For  this  I  thank 
him.      There   is    too   little   recognition   of  work    done   by 
Englishmen  in  darker  days,  before  criticism  began  to  be 
fashionable.      But  the  greater  becomes  my  regret  at  Dr. 

'  Nothing  iu  Dillmanu's  note  on  Isaiah,  I.e.,  affects  the  main  points  urged  in 
my  own  commentary.  For  my  matured  opinion  on  Micah  iv.  10,  and  a  vindi- 
cation of  its  essential  reverence,  see  my  note  iu  the  small  Cambridge  edition  of 
Micah. 

-  llioh  (1891),  p.  34,  note. 

^  See  Theolofjical  ]ieview,  1871),  p.  284  ;  Jeunsh  Quarterly  Hrriew,  1889,  pp. 
76-8;-5.  I  must  add  that  Professor  Kobertson  Smith  said  iu  1881  that  he  had 
long  held  Zechariah  xii.-xiv.  to  be  post-Exilic,  and  that  Stade  had  convinced 
him  that  Zecliariali  ix.-xii.  was  of  the  same  period  (ZVte  Prophets  of  Israel, 
p.  41-2). 


230  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

Driver's  neglect  of  similar  work  of  mine,  which  also  stands 
chronologically  at  the  head  of  a  movement,  on  Isaiah 
xl.-lxvi.^ 

The  remaining  six  chapters  of  the  Introduction  relate  to 
the  Kethubim  or  Hagiographa.  May  they  be  widely  read, 
and  stir  up  some  students  to  give  more  attention  to  these 
precious  monuments  of  the  inspired  Church-nation  of 
Israel !  Prefixed  are  some  excellent  pages  on  Hebrew 
poetry,  in  which  some  will  miss  a  reference  to  Budde's 
important  researches  on  the  elegiac  rhythm  (the  omission 
is  repaired  on  p.  429).  After  this,  we  are  introduced  to  the 
first  of  the  Hagiographa,  according  to  our  Hebrew  Bibles 
— the  Book  of  Psalms.  Surely  there  is  no  book  in  the 
Canon  on  which  an  Anglican  Churchman  and  a  member 
of  a  cathedral  chapter  may  more  reasonably  be  expected 
to  throw  some  light  than  the  Psalter.  It  must  how- 
ever be  remembered  that  Dr.  Driver's  space  is  limited. 
He  has  only  twenty-three  pages — all  too  few  to  expound 
the  facts  and  theories  to  which  the  Christian  apologist 
has  by  degrees  to  accommodate  himself.  Let  no  one 
therefore  quarrel  with  the  author,  if  on  the  religious 
bearings  of  his  criticism  he  withholds  the  help  which 
some  students  will  earnestly  desire ;  and  let  it  be  also 
remembered  that  Dr.  Driver  is  one  of  a  band  of  scholars 
who  supplement  each  other's  work,  and  that  every  good 
special  work  on  the  Psalms  which  in  any  large  degree 
deviates  from  tradition  supplies  (or  should  supply)  some 
part  of  the  apologetic  considerations  which  are  here 
necessarily  omitted.  He  had  only  twenty-three  pages ! 
But  how  full  these  pages  are  of  accurate  and  (under  the 
circumstances)  lucidly  expounded  facts  !  Nor  is  this  all. 
His  critical  argument  opens  up  very  instructive  glimpses 
of  the  actual  condition  of  investigation.     How  difficult  his 

*  I  ought,  however,  to  add  that  my  articles  receive  a  bare  mention  in  the 
Addenda  to  Dr.  Driver's  second  edition. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  231 


task  was,  I  am  perhaps  well  qualified  to  judge,  and  the 
regret  which  I  feel  at  some  undue  hesitation  in  his  criticism 
is  as  nothing  to  my  pleasure  at  the  large  recognition  of 
truth. 

For  there  is  in  fact  no  subject  on  which  it  is  so  easy 
to  go  wrong  as  in  the  criticism  of  the  Psalter.      It  is  to 
be  feared  that  English  scholars  in  general  do  not  take  up 
the  inquiry  at  the  point  to  which  it  has  been  brought  by 
previous  workers.^     Here,  for  instance,  is  Professor  Sanday 
— that   fine   New    Testament    critic   and    catholic-minded 
theologian — expending  twelve  pages  on  the  proof  that  the 
age  of  the  Maccabees  is  the  latest  possible  period  for  the 
completion   of   the   Psalter,    and   then    expressing   a   half- 
formed  opinion  on   Maccabean   Psalms ;    and  these  pages 
form  part  of  a  work  designed  as  a  guide  to  opinion  on  some 
current    Biblical    controversies,^      And    here   is   Professor 
Kirkpatrick,  from  whom  as  a  Hebraist  one  hopes  so  much, 
entering  on  one  of  the  most  complicated  critical  inquiries 
without   telling   us   clearly  where    he  stands  with   regard 
to  any  of  the  other  questions  of  the  "higher  criticism."^ 
Other  persons   may  find,  in   facts   like   these,  nothing  to 

^  The  best  general  introduction  to  the  Psalms  is  still  Professor  Kobertson 
Smith's  article  "  Psalms  "  in  the  Encijclopocdia  Britannica  (1886).  As  a  contrast 
see  M.  de  Harlez's  article  on  the  age  of  the  Psalms  {Dublin  Heview,  July,  1891) 
—  a  singular  specimen  of  crude  and  fallacious  criticism. 

-  Sanday,  The  Oracles  of  God,  2nd  ed.,  pp.  I'29-IIO.  I  am,  of  course,  only 
speaking  of  the  appendix  of  this  useful  book. 

3  See  Kirkpatrick,  The  Fsalms :  Book  I.  (1891).  Another  work  by  Professor 
Kirkpatrick  [The  Divine  Library  of  the  Old  Testament)  iuat  received,  enables 
me  to  supplement  the  above  remark.  The  book  is  written  in  a  good  spirit, 
and  in  a  limpid  style,  and  will  be  useful  to  many  as  a  temporary  compromise. 
Since  however  the  author  directly  challenges  me  to  speak,  I  must  venture 
to  say  that  I  am  not  convinced  of  the  maturity  of  his  critical  studies.  On 
some  parts  of  the  Old  Testament,  indeed,  he  expresses  himself  in  a  not  un- 
critical way.  But  it  is  only  on  Isaiah  that  anything  like  a  date  is  given, 
Isaiah  xl.-lxvi.  being  assigned  to  a  prophet  in  Babylonia,  near  the  close  of 
the  Exile.  On  the  results  of  modern  criticism  of  the  Books  of  Samuel  the 
author  is  still  as  silent  as  he  was  in  his  early  work  {Samuel,  2  vols.,  1880-81). 
I  am  afraid  that  from  these  roots  a  healthy  and  mature  historical  criticism 
of  the  Psalms  will  but  slowly  spring. 


232  DR.   DRIVERS  INTRODUCTION   TO 


regret.  I  confess  that  I  do  myself  regret  them  very  much. 
Criticism  appears  to  me  a  historical  and  a  European  move- 
ment, and  I  am  sure  that  this  view  is  endorsed  by  the 
editors  of  this  "international  and  iuterconfessional  "  series. 
But  let  me  hasten  to  add  that  I  do  not  feel  this  regret  in 
reading  Dr.  Driver  on  the  Psalms.  He  does  not,  indeed, 
tell  us  much  about  his  method  of  research ;  the  plan  of 
his  work  forbade  him  to  exhibit  his  results  genetically. 
But  on  pages  3G0-362  he  gives  hints  of  great  value  to 
students,  on  which  I  will  only  offer  this  remark — that  with 
all  his  love  for  the  Hebrew  language  he  cannot  bring 
himself  to  say  that  the  linguistic  argument  is  a  primary 
one  (to  this  point  I  may  return  later).  One  thing  at  least 
is  certain,  that  the  author  is  not  in  that  stage  represented 
provisionally  by  Professor  Kirkpatrick,  when  "  internal 
evidence,  w^hether  of  thought,  or  style,  or  language,"  seems 
to  be  "a  precarious  guide,"  and  when  the  student  who 
has  become  sceptical  of  the  titles  of  the  psalms  feels  that 
he  is  "  launched  upon  a  sea  of  uncertainty."  ^ 

But  to  proceed  to  details.  One  of  the  most  important 
things  for  Dr.  Driver  to  bring  out  was  the  composite  origin 
of  the  Psalter.  At  the  very  outset  we  are  met  by  the  fact 
that  in  the  Hebrew  Bible  (coriip.  the  Eevised  English 
Version)  the  Psalter  is  divided  into  five  books.  Four  of 
these  books  are  closed  by  a  doxology,  which  Dr.  Driver 
explains  by  the  custom  of  Oriental  authors  and  transcribers 
to  close  their  work  with  a  pious  formula  (p.  345).  But 
how  strange  it  is,  on  this  theory,  that  the  Psalter  itself  is 
7wt  closed  by  such  a  formula,  but  only  certain  divisions  of 
the  Psalter  !  If  the  doxologies  are  expressions  of  personal 
piety,  the  fact  that  Psalm  cl.  is  a  liturgical  song  of  praise 
constitutes  no  reason  for  the  omission  of  a  closing  doxology. 
And  when  we  examine  the  doxologies  more  closely,  we  find 

1  Kiikpatricli,  TIic  Psalms  :  Booh  I.,  latrod.,  p.  xxxi. 


THE  OLD   TESTMIENT  LITERATURE.  233 

that  they  all  have  a  pronounced  liturgical  character.^  This 
is  of  some  consequence  for  the  controversy  with  tradition- 
alistic  writers  on  the  Psalms.  Next  comes  the  great  fact  of 
the  existence  of  internal  groups,  marked  by  the  headings  ; 
Dr.  Driver  sums  up  the  best  that  has  been  said  in  a  small 
space.  On  the  titles  he  is  somewhat  tantalizing ;  a  dispro- 
portionate amount  of  space  is  given  to  the  demolition  of 
the  historical  value  of  the  title  "  To  David  "  as  a  record  of 
authorship.  At  least,  my  own  feeling  is  that  the  small- 
print  illustrations  on  pp.  353-355  could  have  been  omitted, 
and  that  the  author  should  have  trusted  to  the  natural  im- 
pression of  an  honest  reader  of  the  Psalms.  At  any  rate,  no 
one  who  has  followed  Dr.  Driver  thus  far  can  doubt  that,  in 
Prof.  Robertson  Smith's  words,  "  not  only  are  many  of  the 
titles  certainly  wrong,  but  they  are  wrong  in  such  a  way  as 
to  prove  that  they  date  from  an  age  to  which  David  was 
merely  the  abstract  psalmist,  and  which  had  no  idea  what- 
ever of  the  historical  conditions  of  his  age." 

There  are  three  points  which  I  should  have  been  specially 
glad  to  see  mentioned.  First,  that  the  Septuagint  differs 
considerably  from  the  Hebrew  text  in  its  psalm-titles.  A 
careful  study  of  the  Greek  titles  would  be  most  illuminative 
to  the  ordinary  student.  Secondly,  that  in  order  properly 
to  criticise  the  ascription  of  any  particular  psalm,  the 
student  must  first  of  all  obtain  a  historical  view  of  the 
picture  of  David  in  different  ages,  beginning  with  that 
disclosed  by  a  critical  study  of  the  Books  of  Samuel,  and 
ending  with  that  in  the  Books  of  Chronicles.  More  espe- 
cially he  must  to  some  extent  assimilate  a  free  (but  not 
therefore  undevout)  criticism  of  the  two  former  books. 
Dr.  Driver's  work  does  not  give  as  much  help  as  could  be 
wished  in  this  respect,  but  his  results  on  the  "  Davidic " 
psalms  really  presuppose  a  critical  insight  into  the  David- 

*  See  Bampton  *ru'ctures  for  1889,  p.  457,  and  cf.  Abbott,  Essui/s  on  the 
Original  Texts  (1891),  p.  222. 


234  7)/t'.    DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

narratives.  And  thirdly,  something  should,  I  think,  have 
been  said  about  the  titles  of  Psalms  vii.  and  xviii ; — of  the 
former,  because  conservative  scholars  maintain  that  the 
mention  of  the  otherwise  unknown  "  Cush "  proves  the 
great  antiquity  of  the  title,  or  at  any  rate  of  the  tradition 
embodied  therein,^  and  of  the  latter,  because  of  its  unusual 
fulness,  and  because  the  psalm  occurs  again  in  a  somewhat 
different  reunion  with  almost  exactly  the  same  title  near 
the  end  of  the  second  Book  of  Samuel,  which  latter  circum- 
stance has  been  supposed  greatly  to  increase  the  probability 
of  the  accuracy  of  the  title."  With  regard  to  the  former 
title,  it  ought  to  be  admitted  that  "Cush"  is  no  Hebrew 
proper  name ;  there  must  be  a  corruption  in  the  text." 
With  regard  to  the  latter,  it  can  hardly  be  doubted  that  it 
comes  from  some  lost  narrative  of  the  life  of  David,  which 
on  critical  grounds  can  hardly  be  placed  earlier  than  the  reign 
of  Josiah."^  (There  seems  to  be  no  reason  for  thinking  that 
the  editor  of  the  "  Davidic  "  psalter  took  it  from  Samuel). 

The  result  of  the  argument  against  the  universal 
accuracy  of  the  title  "To  David"  is  thus  summed  up  by 
Dr.  Driver  :  — 


1  So  Delitzsch,  followed  by  Prof.  Kirkpatrick. 

'■'  51.  de  Harlez  thinks  that  "  if  we  choose  to  look  upon  the  testimony  of 
2  Kings  (Sam.)  xxii.  as  false,  then  the  whole  Bible  most  be  a  gigantic  falsehood, 
and  there  is  no  use  troubling  ourselves  about  it"  [Buhl.  Rev.,  July,  1891,  p.  70). 

3  Cornill  {Kinl.,  \>.  208)  proposes  to  read  "  Cushi  "  (following  Sept.'s  Xoi/crei); 
but  the  episode  of  "  Cusbi  "  (see  2  Sara,  xviii.)  was  surely  most  unlikely  to  have 
been  thought  of.  The  corruption  must  lie  deeper.  "  A  Benjamite  "  certainly 
looks  as  if  intended  to  introduce  a  person  not  previously  known  (otherwise,  as 
Delitzsch  remarks,  we  should  have  "  tliP  Benjamite  ").  But  such  a  person 
would  be  sure  to  have  his  father's  or  some  ancestor's  name  given.  The  Tar- 
gum  substitutes  for  Cush,  "  Saul,  the  son  of  Kish."  But  Saul  is  a  well-known 
person,  and  elsewhere  in  the  titles  has  no  appendage  to  his  name.  Shimei, 
who  reviled  David,  might  be  thought  of,  but  he  is  called  (2  Sam.  xix.  Id) 
"Shimei,  son  of  Gera,  the  Benjamite."  The  conjecture  adopted  in  Bampt. 
Lcct.,  pp.  229-243  alone  remains.  "  Targum  sheni "  on  Estlier  expressly 
credits  David  with  a  prevision  of  Mordecai  (cf.  Cassel,  Esther,  p.  299).  I  hesi- 
tate between  this  conjecture  and  the  preceding  one. 

■«  Cf.  Bam2)t.  Led.,  p.  200  (foot). 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LrTERATURE.  235 

"  Every  indication  converges  to  the  same  conclusion,  viz.,  that  the 
'  Davidic '  psalms  spring,  in  fact,  from  many  different  periods  of  Israel- 
itish  history,  from  the  period  of  David  himself  downwards  ;  and  that 
in  the  varied  words  which  they  reflect  .  .  .  i/hey  set  before  us  the 
experiences  of  many  men,  and  of  many  ages  of  the  national  life " 
(p.  355). 

It  is  however  scarcely  possible  to  say  that  this  inference 
is  logical.  It  is,  of  course,  an  idea  which  involuntarily 
suggests  itself  at  the  point  which  Dr.  Driver's  argument 
has  reached,  but  it  is  not  a  legitimate  "  conclusion  "  from 
the  data  which  have  as  yet  been  brought  forward,  and 
to  dally  with  it  disturbs  the  mind,  which  henceforth  has 
to  contend  with  a  conscious  or  unconscious  bias.  The 
author  however  still  strives  hard  to  reason  fairly.  "  The 
majority  of  the  'Davidic'  psalms,"  he  says,  "are  thus 
certainly  not  David's  ;  is  it  possible  to  determine  whether 
any  are  his?  "  (p.  355). 

He  then  examines  the  evidence  respecting  David's 
musical  and  poetical  talents.  Here  he  is  less  tender  to 
conservatism  than  I  should  have  expected.  He  gives  no 
testimony  to  David's  composition  of  religious  poetry  earlier 
than  the  Chronicler^  (about  300  B.C.);  it  is  only  later  on,  in 
connexion  with  criteria  of  David's  poetical  style,  that  the 
poems  in  2  Samuel  xxii.  (  =  Ps.  xviii.)  and  xxiii.  1-7  are 
referred  to.  He  says,  too,  that  even  if  David  did  compose 
liturgical  poems,  this  would  not  account  for  his  authorship 
of  more  than  a  very  few  of  the  "  Davidic  "  psalms,  most  of 
the  psalms  ascribed  to  David  not  being  adapted  (at  least  in 
the  first  instance)  for  public  worship.  This  remark  seems 
not  very  cogent,  especially  when  limited  by  what  is  said 
afterwards  respecting  the  "  representative  character "  of 
many  psalms.  What  we  really  want,  is  something  that 
Dr.  Driver  could  not,  consistently  with  his  plan,  give  us ; 

'  At  first  I  wrongly  inferred  from  this  that  Dr.  Driver  regarded  the  poems  in 
2  Sam.  xxii.  and  xxiii.  as  post-Exilic,  which  is  at  least  a  plausible  view  (see 
Cornill,  Einl.,  p.  119). 


23G  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

viz.,  a  statement  of  the  grounds  on  which  psahns  similar 
to  those  which  we  possess  can  (or  cannot)  be  supposed  to 
have  existed  prior  to  the  regenerating  activity  of  Isaiah 
and  his  fellow-prophets  (if  indeed  they  can  historically  be 
imagined  at  all  in  the  pre-Exilic  period).^  That  admirable 
scholar,  Dr.  A.  B.  Davidson,  whom  I  respect  even  when  I 
cannot  follow  him,  will  no  doubt  supply  the  omission  in 
his  Old  Testament  Theology. 

One  group  of  interesting  facts  is  relegated  by  the  author 
to  a  footnote  (pp.  356,  357).  Among  the  Jews  who  re- 
turned from  Babylon  in  B.C.  536,  the  contemporary  register 
(Neh.  vii.  44  =  Ezra  ii.  46)  includes  148  (128)  "sons  of 
Asaph,  singers"  (they  are  distinguished  from  "the  Levites"). 
On  the  other  hand,  there  is  no  allusion  whatever  to  a 
special  class  of  temple-singers  in  the  pre-Exilic  narratives. 
It  seems  to  follow  that  the  official  singers  cannot  have  been 
very  prominent  before  the  Exile.  I  should  like  to  have  seen 
this  more  developed ;  the  footnote  will  be  obscure  to  some 
readers.  But  of  course  the  strength  of  the  argument  for 
the  late  date  of  the  psalms  is  wholly  apart  from  "  doubtful 
disputations"  respecting  pre-Exilic  music  and  singing.  I 
will  only  add.  that  Jeremiah  xxxiii.  11  ought  hardly  to  have 
been  quoted  as  an  evidence  for  the  early  existence  of  a 
class  of  singers  (for  those  who  blessed  Jehovah  were  not 
necessarily  temple-officers),  but  in  relation  to  the  probable 
contents  of  pre-Exilic  psalms. 

Dr.  Driver's  remarks  on  Ewald's  (esthetic  criteria  of 
really  Davidic  psalms  are  on  the  whole  very  just.  But  how 
strange  it  is  that  after  admitting  that  we  have  no  tolerably 
sure  standard  for  David's  poetry  outside  the  psalter  except 
2  Samuel  i.  19-27  and  iii.  33,  34  he  should  close  the 
paragraph  thus, — 


1  That  there  are  no  psalms  of  Jeremiah  has  lately  been  shown  afresh  by 
W.  Campe  (1891).     Dr.  Driver's  judgment  (p.  3G0)  might  be  more  decided. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  237 


"  On  the  whole,  a  non  liquet  must  be  our  verdict ;  it  is  possible  that 
Ewald's  list  of  Uavidic  psalms  is  too  large,  but  it  is  not  clear  that  none 
of  the  psalms  contained  in  it  arc  of  David's  composition." 

Surely  here  Dr.  Driver  is  not  untouched  by  the  spirit  ot 
compromise.  The  reader  will,  I  hope,  not  misunderstand 
me.  I  mean  that  in  his  desire  to  help  those  whose  spiritual 
faith  is  (unfortunately)  bound  up  with  an  intellectual  belief 
in  Davidic  psalms  he  sometimes  sympathizes  with  them 
more  than  is  good  for  his  critical  judgment,  and  I  wish,  not 
that  his  desire  to  help  were  diminished,  but  that  he  could 
adopt  a  "  more  excellent  way  "  of  helping.  Dr.  Sanday 
works,  I  imagine,  in  the  same  spirit,  and  consequently 
■"rests  for  the  moment  in  temporary  hypotheses  and  half- 
way positions,  prepared  to  go  either  forwards  or  backwards 
as  the  case  may  be,"  and  disposed  to  idealize  Dr.  Driver's 
hesitations  and  inconsistencies  as  "the  combined  open- 
mindedness  and  caution  which  are  characteristic  of  a 
scholar."  ^  I  respect  Dr.  Sanday  very  highly,  but  I  have  an 
uncomfortable  suspicion  that  his  language  helps  to  foster 
the  "  undesirable  illusions  "  to  which  I  referred  in  Part  I. 
I  hope  that  it  may  not  be  thought  unreasonable  if  I  decline 
either  to  "  go  backwards  "  or  to  adopt  a  "half-way  position  " 
until  it  has  been  shown  that  the  hypothesis  of  Davidic 
elements  in  the  Psalter  has  any  practical  value.  Unless 
Books  I.  and  11.  date  from  the  age  before  Amos,  any 
Davidic  elements  which  they  contain  -'  must  have  been  so 
modified  as  to  be  practically  unrecognisable.  To  analyse 
the  Psalms  with  the  view  of  detecting  Davidic  passages 
would  be  the  most  hopeless  of  undertakings.  David  may 
have  indited  religious  songs ;  but  how  far  removed  was 
David's  religion  from  that  of  the  Psalms !  The  song  of 
Deborah  is  perhaps  not  alone  the  highest  thoughts  of  David; 
but  can  it  be  said  that  the  tone  of  this  poem  approaches 

1  Sanday,  The  Oracles  of  God,  pp.  Ill,  113. 

2  Cf.  Bampt.  Led.,  p.  193. 


238  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 


the  spirituality  of  the  Psalms  ?  I  think  therefore  that  Dr. 
Driver's  verdict  is  premature.  It  would  have  been  safer 
from  his  point  of  view  to  say,  "  It  is  not  clear  that  some  of 
the  Psalms  may  not  be  pre-Exilic,  and  that  even  post- 
Exilic  Psalms  may  not  contain  unrecognisable  Davidic 
fragments." 

But  why   all  this  eagerness  to  rescue   a  small  Davidic 
Psalter  within  the  undoubtedly  much  larger  non-Davidic 
one  ?     Was  it  David  who  founded  the   higher   religion  of 
Israel  ?    Surely,  as  Professor  Kobertson  Smith  in  his  article 
on  the  Psalms  has  remarked,  "  whether  any  of  the  older 
poems  really  are  David's  is  a  question  more  curious  than 
important."     Por   the   question   of  questions   is,  To   what 
period  or  periods  does  the  collection  of  the  Psalters  withiji 
the  Psalter   beloiig?     For   what    period   in    the    religious 
history  of  Israel  may  we  use  the  Psalter -as  an  authority 'r^ 
This  was  what  I  had  chiefly  in  view  when  I  prefixed  an 
inquiry  into  the  origin  of  the  Psalter  to  a  sketch  of  the 
theology  of  the  psalmist.      I  cannot  find  that  any  help  is 
given   to  the  student   of  this   subject  in  the  Introduction, 
and  this  is  one  of  the  points  in  which  this  valuable  chapter 
appears  to  me  to  fail.    Nor  can  I  express  myself  as  satisfied 
with  Dr.  Driver's  remarks  on  the  means,  which  we  have  of 
approximately  fixing   the  periods    of   the  Psalms.      I  can 
divine  from  it  that  there  is  much  which  enters  into  a  full 
discussion  of  this  subject  upon  which  Dr.    Driver    and  I 
would  at  present  differ.     Nor  can  I  content  myself  either 
with  the  author's  neutrality  on  Psalm  cxviii.,  or  with  his 
vague  remarks  on  Psalm  ex.,  that  "  though  it  may  be  an- 
cient, it  can  hardly  have  been  composed  by  David,"  '  and 

1  These  words  are  from  the  footnote  on  ijp.  3G'2,  HOS.  In  the  text  it  is  said 
that  Psalm  ex.  "  may  be  presumed  to  he  pre-Exilic."  I  cannot  but  regret  the 
misplaced  moderation  of  the  words  "  can  hardly  have  been  composed  by  David," 
and  the  deference  to  a  tradition  admitted  to  be  weak  in  the  extreme  which 
expresses  itself  in  the  "presumption"  that  the  psalm  is  pre-Exilic.  I  can 
enter  into  the  reasoning  so  skilfully  indicated  in  the  reference  to  Jer.  xxx.  21,. 


THE  OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  239 

that  "  the  cogeucy  of  [Christ's]  argument  (in  Mark  xii." 
35-37)  is  unimpaired,  as  long  as  it  is  recognised  that  the 
psalm  is  a  Messianic  one,"  or  with  the  remark  (p.  3G7) 
on  the  accommodation  of  individualistic  psalms  to  liturgical 
use  by  slight  changes  in  the  phraseology.^ 

On  the  other  hand  I  am  much  gratified  to  find  that  Dr. 
Driver  accepts  the  theory  that  Psalm  li.  is  "  a  confession 
vs^ritten  on  behalf  of  the  nation  by  one  w^ho  had  a  deep 
sense  of  his  people's  sin."  That  he  adds  "  during  the 
Exile  "  is  comj)aratively  unimportant ;  on  the  main  point 
he  accepts  my  own  view  already  expressed  in  Tlie  Booh  of 
Psalms  (1888).  His  arguments  are  identical  with  those 
which  I  have  myself  repeatedly  urged.-  The  only  objection 
which  I  have  to  make  relates  to  his  treatment  of  verse  5,  but 
as  I  have  put  it  forward  already  in  The  Expositok,  1892 
(2),  p.  398,  I  will  here  only  express  the  conviction  that  the 
Church-nation    theory  can,   without    violence,    be   applied 


but  what  this  naturally  leads  up  to  is — not  that  the  psalm  refers  to  au  actual 
pre-Exilic  king,  but  that  it  is  a  thoroughly  idealistic  lyric  prophecy  of  the 
early  post-Exilic  i^eriod,  when  both  psalmists  and  prophets  devoted  themselves 
largely  to  the  development  of  earlier  prophetic  ideas.  The  author  follows 
Kielim  in  the  stress  which  he  lays  on  Jer.  xxx.  21,  but  significantly  omits 
lliehm's  second  reference  [Messianic  Prophecy,  pp.  121,  284)  to  Zech.  iii.  vi. 
I  must  also  express  my  regret  at  his  useless  attempt  to  soften  opposition  by  a 
necessarily  vague  description  of  the  contents  of  the  psalm.  Such  a  description 
can  be  made  to  suit  any  theory,  as  Dr.  Gifford  (the  eminent  commentator  on 
llomaus)  has  shown,  by  basing  upon  it  the  conclusion  "  that  the  whole  course 
of  thought  "  favours  the  old  theory  of  the  Davidic  authorship  of  the  psalm. 
The  whole  footnote,  in  its  present  form,  seems  to  me  out  of  place  ;  it  fosters 
uufortunate  illusions.  One  result  is  that  Dr.  Driver  is  jaraised  for  his  weak  as 
well  as  for  his  strong  points,  and  another  that  many  theologians  will  not  give  a 
patient  hearing  to  a  scholar  who  cannot  adopt  Dr.  Driver's  manner.  If  Dr. 
(iiSord,  for  instance,  had  read  the  notes  to  my  Bampton  Lectures,  he  would 
have  been  enabled  (from  note  ''■'  p.  39)  to  correct  his  own  hasty  criticism  of  a 
well-weighed  statement  (see  The  Authorship  of  the  110th  Psalm,  by  E.  H.  Gifford, 
D.D.,  Oxford,  1891,  p.  9).  I  could  also  wish  that  he  had  noticed  a  careful 
statement  of  Dr.  Driver  (in  Sanday's  The  Oracles  of  God,  p.  142),  which  bears 
strongly  against  even  the  relative  antiquity  of  Ps.  ex. 

*  Similarly  Stekhoven,  on  whom  see  Bampt.  Led.,  p.  277. 

-  Most  recently  in  sermon-studies  on  Ps.  li.,  which  will  be  included  in  Aids 
to  Studu  (see  above,  p.  Ill,  note). 


240  DIl.  URIVEirS  INTRODUCTION. 

throughout  the  psalm.  I  know  how  much  untrained 
Enghsh  common  sense  has  to  say  against  it,  but  I  think 
it  quite  possible  by  a  few  historical  and  exegetical  hints 
to  make  common  sense  agree  entirely  with  the  experts. 
We  must  however  make  it  perfectly  clear  that  the  person 
who  speaks  in  the  51st  and  other  psalms  is  not  a  mere 
rhetorical  collective  expression  for  a  number  of  individuals, 
but  that  complete  living  organism  of  which  Isaiah  said, 
"  The  whole  head  is  sick,  and  the  whole  heart  faint."  ^ 

T.  K.  Cheyne. 

1  See  Bampt.  Led.,  pp.  201-265,  27G-27S. 
(To  be  concluded.) 


DB.  DRIVERS  INTRODUCTION   TO   THE   OLD 
TESTAMENT  LITERATURE. 

Part  III. 

I  SAID  in  Part  11.  that  Dr.  Driver  would  have  done  well  to 
make  his  non  liquet  refer,  not  to  Davidic,  hut  to  pre-Exilic 
psalms.  There  are  in  fact,  as  it  appears  to  me,  two  tenable 
(though  not  two  equally  tenable)  views.  According  to  one, 
we  may  still  have  some  pre-Exilic  psalms  (including  those 
which  refer  to  a  king,  and  some  at  least  of  the  persecution- 
Psalms),  a  few  Exilic  (e.g.  Pss.  xxii.,  li.,  cii.),  and  also  a  con- 
siderable number  of  post-Exilic  Psalms  (including  a  few 
Maccabean  Psalms,  and  at  any  rate  Pss.  xliv.,  Ixxiv.,  Ixxix).^ 
This  was  the  view  which  I  adopted  not  as  critical  truth  but 
as  a  working  hypothesis,  when  preparing  that  commentary 
on  the  Psalms  (1888)  which  has  been  so  strangely  overlooked 
by  nearly  all  the  reviewers  of  my  Bampton  Lectures.  It 
is  the  very  view  now  independently  adopted  by  Dr.  Driver, 
which  indicates  that  in  his  more  special  study  of  the  Psalms 
he  has  now  reached  the  point  which  I  had  reached  in  1888. 
At  this  I  rejoice,  for  I  am  confident  that  the  view  which 
was  only  a  working  hypothesis  to  me  in  1886  is  no  more 
than  this  to  Dr.  Driver  in  1891.  He  cannot  go  backward 
— this  were  to  deny  facts ;  he  can  only  go  on  to  the  second 
of  the   two  views  mentioned,  viz.  that  the  whole  of  the 

'  Some  of  those  who  have  reviewed  my  Bampton  Lectures  have  accused  me 
of  having  treated  the  external  evidence  which  has  been  thought  to  be  adverse 
to  the  theory  of  Maccabean  psalms  and  the  objections  drawn  from  the 
Septuagint  Psalter  too  slightly.  The  view  which  these  scholars  take  of  the 
present  position  of  Psalm  criticism  is  however  entirely  different  from  my  own  and 
from  that  taken  by  competent  scholars  abroad  (sec  Miihlmann,  Zur  Fraije  der 
viakk.  Fsnlmen,  1801,  p.  3).  Nor,  so  far  as  I  can  judge,  is  it  that  of  Prof.  Driver. 
VOL.   V.  2U  l6 


242  nn.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

Psalter,  in  its  present  form,  with  the  possible  exception  of 
Ps.  xviii. ;  is  post-Exilic.  Just  as  Cornill  thought  in  1881 
that  the  24th  and  probably  other  Psalms  were  Davidic, 
and  that  Psalms  Ixxxiv.,  Ixxxv.,  xlii.,  xliii.,  were  of  the 
reign  of  Jehoiakim,  but  by  1891  had  come  to  see  that  the 
whole  Psalter  (except  perhaps  Psalm  Ixxxix.)  was  post- 
Exilic,^  so  it  will  probably  be  with  Dr.  Driver,  however 
much  he  may  modify  his  view  by  qualifications.-  It  is 
the  latter  theory  of  which  I  have  myself  for  the  first 
time  offered  a  comprehensive  justification.  Caution  and 
sobriety  were  as  much  needed  for  this  as  for  any  other 
critical  task,  nor  would  the  want  of  ability  to  enter  into 
the  feelings  of  a  psalmist  {nachempfinden)  and  to  realize 
his  historical  situation  have  been  at  all  a  helpful  qualifica- 
tion. The  result  is  doubtless  capable  of  large  improvement 
in  detail,  but  in  the  fundamental  points  can  hardly  be 
modified." 

Does  this  latter  theory  differ  essentially,  or  only  in 
secondary  points,  from  that  of  Dr.  Driver  ?  Only  in 
secondary  points.     I  made    no    leap  in   the    dark  when   I 

»  Cf.  his  essay  in  Luthardt's  Zeitu^hrift,  1881,  pp.  337-3-43  with  §  3G  of  his 
Einleilung  (1891). 

-  I  do  not  think  that  he  will  find  that  much  is  gained  by  insisting  on  an 
ancient  basis  which  has  been  obscured  by  editors.  If  it  hel^DS  any  one  to 
believe  in  such  a  basis,  by  all  means  let  him  do  so ;  it  is  more  hamiless  than 
in  the  case  of  the  Book  of  Daniel.  But  the  chief  object  of  the  criticism  of  the 
psalms  is  to  determine  the  date  when  they  became  known  in  substantially  their 
present  form.  It  appears  to  me  that  in  all  probability  the  editors  mainly  con- 
cerned themselves  with  the  omission  of  passages  which  had  too  temporary  a 
reference.  In  two  (presumably)  Maccabean  psalms — Ixxiv.  and  ex. — there 
certainly  seem  to  be  some  omissions  ;  in  Psalm  Ixxiv.  there  may  also  be  a  fresh 
insertion  {vv.  12-17). 

^  It  is  difficult  to  reply  as  one  would  wish  to  a  series  of  criticisms  made  from 
a  different  and  perhaps  a  narrower  point  of  view,  especially  when  such 
criticisms  deal  largely  with  subordinate  points  which  are  not  essential  to  the 
main  theory.  When  the  next  English  dissertation  on  the  origin  of  the  Psalter 
appears,  it  will  at  any  rate  be  compelled  to  make  considerable  use  of  hypo- 
thesis, or  it  will  be  a  failure.  Prof.  Davison  (in  the  Thiiihcr,  Feb.,  1892)  does 
not  seem  to  recognise  this.  To  him  and  to  Prof.  Kennedy  (two  of  the  most 
courteous  of  my  critics)  I  have  given  an  imperfect  reply  in  the  Thinkrr  for 
April ;  to  Prof.  Kennedy  also  in  the  Ex^wsitori/  Times  for  the  same  month. 


THE  OLD   TESTMIENT  LITERATURE.  243 


prepared  my  Lectures,  nor  will  ])r.  ]J)river  be  conscious 
of  any  abrupt  transition,  when  he  finds  opportunity  to 
advance  further.  The  essential  of  both  views  is  the  recog- 
nition of  the  impossibility  of  proving  that  any  psalm  in  its 
present  form  is  pre-Exilic.  "  Of  many  Psalms,"  adds  Dr. 
Driver,  "  the  Exilic  or  post-Exilic  date  is  manifest,  and  is 
not  disputed  ;  of  others  it  is  difficult  to  say  whether  they 
are  pre-  or  post-Exilic"  (p.  362).  Whichever  view  be 
adopted,  it  must  be  allowed  that  even  Books  I.  and  II.  were 
put  forth  after  the  Return.  This  is  not  expressly  men- 
tioned by  Dr.  Driver,  and,  as  I  have  said,  it  seems  to  me 
a  regrettable  omission.  But  though  not  mentioned,  it  is 
not,  nor  can  it  be,  denied.  I  venture  to  put  this  before 
those  theological  reviewers  who,  in  their  needless  anxiety 
for  the  ark  of  God,  have  hurried  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
author  has  "  rejected  Dr.  Cheyne's  sweeping  criticism  of  the 
Psalms,"  and  that  the  "  net  result  "  set  forth  by  the  author 
on  pp.  362,  363  is  "  very  different  from  that  which  Dr. 
Cheyne  has  given  us,"  ^  and  to  express  the  hope  that  they 
may  perceive  the  error  into  which  they  have  fallen,  and 
begin  to  suspect  that  it  is  not  the  only  one. 

We  are  now  come  to  Proverbs  and  Job,  and  nowhere 
perhaps  does  one  feel  more  strongly  the  imperfection  of  Dr. 
Driver's  plan.  It  is  true,  what  was  most  desirable  was  'not 
yet  feasible — a  thorough  and  comprehensive  study  of  the 
contents  and  origin  of  the  Wisdom-literature,  which  would 
furnish  results  at  once  surer  and  more  definite  than  the  old- 
fashioned  Introductions  can  give.  But  I  think  that  more 
might  have  been  done  than  has  been  done  to  show  the 
threads  which  connect  the  products  of  this  style  of  writing, 
and  to  anticipate  the  results  which  a  critic  of  insight  and 
courage  could  not  fail  to  reach.  But  alas  !  Dr.  Driver  has  not 
thrown  off  that  spirit  of  deference  to  conservatism  which, 

1  See  Church  Qiiarterl,'/  Bcrieu\  Jan..  1892,  p.  318  ;  Guardiau,T)ec.  2nd,  1891, 
p.  1953, 


244  /)/.'.   DRIVERS  INTRODUCTION  TO 

if  I  am  not  mistaken,  injures  bis  work  elsewhere.  At  the 
very  outset  the  tradition  respecting  Solomon  in  1  Kings  iv. 
29-34  receives  no  critical  examination,  and  though  the 
headings  in  Proverbs  x.  1,  xxv.  1  ^  are  not  unconditionally 
accepted,  Dr.  Driver  speaks  notwithstanding  as  if  some  of 
the  Proverbs  in  two  of  the  greater  collections  might  possibly 
be  the  work  of  Solomon.  This  is  hardly  the  way  to  culti- 
vate the  critical  spirit  in  young  students,  and  (against  the 
author's  will)  may  foster  an  unjust  prejudice  against  critics 
not  less  careful,  but  perhaps  less  compromising  than  the 
author.  As  to  the  conclusions  here  offered,  I  feel  that 
while  censure  would  be  impertinent,  praise  would  be  mis- 
leading. The  "  present  condition  of  investigation  "  is  only 
indicated  in  a  few  lines  of  a  footnote  (p.  381),  and  the 
"  way  for  future  progress  "  is  not  even  allusively  mentioned. 
It  appears  to  me  that  criticism  ought  to  start  not  from  the 
worthless  tradition  of  Solomonic  authorship,  but  from  the 
fact  that  the  other  proverbial  books  in  the  Old  Testament 
are  with  increasing  certainty  seen  to  be  later  than  538  B.C. 
Now  what  does  Ben  Sira  tell  us  about  his  own  work? 

'•  I  too,  as  the  last,  bestowed  zeal, 
And  as  one  who  gleaneth  after  the  vintage ; 
By  the  blessing  of  the  Jjord  I  was  the  foremost, 
And  as  a  gra])e-gatlierer  did  I  fill  my  winepress." 

— (Ecclus.  xxxiii.  10.) 

Who  were  Ben  Sira's  predecessors,  and  when  did  they 
live  ?  The  writers  of  Proverbs  xxx.  and  xxxi.  1-9  and 
10-31,  and  of  the  gnomic  sayings  (or  some  of  them)  in 
Koheleth  may  be  among  them ;  but  surely  there  were  more 
productive  writers  or  editors  than  these  (so  far  as  we  know 
them  from  their  writings).  The  force  of  the  arguments 
against  a  post-Exilic  date  for  the  final  arrangement  of  our 
composite  Book  of  Proverbs  seems  to  me  to  be  constantly 

*  Note  that  Seijt.  does  not  give  tlie  former  heatling  at  all,  and  has  no  "  also  " 
in  the  latter. 


THE  OLD    TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  245 


increasing,  and  were  I  to  resume  the  work  laid  aside  in 
18S7,  I  feel  that  my  results  would  be  nearer  to  those  of 
Eeuss  and  Stade  (adopted  by  Mr.  Montefiore)  than  to  those 
of  Delitzsch.'  I  am  not  indeed  prepared  to  give  up  a  large 
antique  basis  -  for  chaps,  xxv.-xxvii.,  the  proverbs  in  which, 
as  Prof.  Davidson  has  pointed  out,  differ  on  the  w^iole  con- 
siderably in  style  from  those  in  x.  1-xxii.  16.  But  not  only 
chaps.  XXX.  and  xxxi.,  but  the  passages  forming  the  "Praise 
of  Wisdom,"  and  the  introductory  verses  of  the  redactor 
(i.  1-6),  are  altogether  post-Exilic  (not  of  course  contem- 
porary), and  so  too,  probably,  is  much  of  the  rest  of  the 
book.  Indeed  however  much  allowance  is  made  for  the 
tenacity  of  the  life  of  proverbs,  and  for  the  tendency  to 
recast  old  gnomic  material,  one  must  maintain  that  in  its 
present  form  the  Book  of  Proverbs  is  a  a  source  of  informa- 
tion, not  for  the  pre-Exilic,  but  for  various  parts  of  the 
post-Exilic  period.'^  I  will  only  add  that  Dr.  Driver  may 
perhaps  modify  his  view  of  the  gradual  formation  of  Pro- 
verbs in  deference  to  recent  researches  of  Gustav  Bickell."* 

The  chapter  on  Job  is  a  skilful  exhibition  of  views  which 
are  well  deserving  of  careful  study.  It  is  evidently  much 
influenced  by  a  book  of  which  I  too  have  the  highest  appre- 
ciation— Prcf.  Davidson's  volume  on  Job  in  the  Cambridge 
series  (comp.  his  article  "Job"  in  the  Encijcl.  Brit.).     If 


'  lu  my  article  "  Isaiah  "  (Encij.  Brit.,  1889)  I  expressed  the  view  that  the 
"  Praise  of  Wisdom  "  is  either  Exilic  or  post-Exilic  ;  in  my  Job  and  Solomon 
(1887)  I  dated  it  earlier.  But,  as  Bampt.  Led.,  p.  363,  shows,  I  have  been 
coming  back  to  my  former  view  of  Prov.  i.-ix.,  and  taking  a  survey  of  Proverbs 
from  this  fixed  point,  I  see  that  the  difficulties  of  Eeuss's  and  Stade's  view 
(when  duly  qualified)  are  less  than  those  of  my  own  former  and  of  Dr.  Driver's 
present  theory.  Comj:).  Mr.  Montefiore's  thorough  and  interesting  article  on 
Proverbs,  Jeiciah  Quarterly  Beview,  18<)0,  pp.  430-153. 

-  The  heading  in  xxv.  1  reminds  one  of  Assyrian  library  notes.  Isa.  xxxviii. 
9  may  rest  on  a  tradition  of  Hezekiah's  interest  in  books. 

^  In  this  connection  I  may  refer  to  my  notes  on  the  Persian  affinities  of  the 
"Wisdom"  of  Prov.  viii.,  Expositor,  Jan.,  1892,  p.  79. 

■•  See  the  Wiener  Zcitschr.  f.  d.  Kunde  des  Morgenlandcs.  1891-1892  (chiefly 
important  for  the  metrical  study  of  Job,  Proverbs,  and  Ecclesiasticus). 


24G  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION   TO 

therefore  I  object  to  it,  it  can  only  be  in  the  most  friendly 
manner,  and  on  the  same  grounds  on  which  I  have  already 
criticised  that  beautiful  textbook.'  I  must  however  add 
that  I  think  Dr.  Driver  should  have  taken  some  steps  in 
advance  of  a  book  published  in  1884.  Both  he  and  Dr. 
Davidson  have  a  way  of  stopping  short  in  the  most  provok- 
ing manner.  At  the  very  outset,  for  instance,  they  com- 
promise rather  more  than  is  strictly  critical  on  the  subject 
of  the  historical  existence  of  Job.~  It  is  true,  we  ought  not, 
without  strong  grounds  to  presume  that  the  plot  of  the 
poem  is  purely  romantic,  Semitic  writers  preferring  to 
build  on  tradition  as  far  as  they  can.  But  to  use  the  words 
"  histurif"  and  "  historical  tradition"  of  the  main  features 
of  the  Job  story  is  misleading,  unless  we  are  also  bold 
enough  to  apply  these  terms  to  the  pathetic  Indian  story  of 
Harischandra  in  vol.  i.  of  Muir's  Sanskrit  Texts.  ISo  doubt 
there  were  current  stories,  native  or  borrowed,  of  the 
sudden  ruin  of  a  righteous  man's  fortunes ;  but  if  we 
had  them,  we  should  see  that  they  were  not  historical,  but 
simple  folk-tales,  which,  to  a  student  of  natural  psycho- 
logies, are  surely  better  than  what  we  call  history.  On 
this  however  I  have  said  enough  elsewhere  ;''  so  I  wnll  pass 
on  to  one  of  the  great  critical  questions — that  of  the 
integrity  of  the  Book. 

Here  Dr.  Driver  is  not  very  satisfactory.  It  is  true,  he 
thinks  it  "  all  but  certain"  (why  this  hesitation?)  that  the 
Elihu-speeches  are  a  later  insertion,  which,  considering 
his  conservatism  on  Isaiah  xl.-lxvi.,  is  a  concession  of  much 
value.     ]^ut  he   unfortunately  ignores  even  the  mildest  of 

'  Academy,  Kov.  1,  18^*1. 

-  Among  minor  matters  connected  with  the  I'loluguc,  these  may  be  noted. 
I  see  no  exjilanation  of  the  name  of  Job,  and  for  the  meaning  of  the  "  bind  of 
Uz  "  miss  a  reference  to  "W.  1\.  Smith,  Kinsln'p  in  Arabia,  p.  '2(;i.  A  liint 
might  also  have  been  given  of  the  ajipcarance  of  a  legend  of  "three  hiiigs" 
from  the  East  (.Job  ii.  11,  Sept.). 

^  Jul)  (iitd  Solomo]i,  pp.  ()2,  2'JO. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  247 

those    critical    theories,   of  which    a    wiser  critic    (in  my 
opinion)  speaks  thus  in  an  American  review  ^ : — 

"  If  Ave  are  not  mistaken,  a  much  better  case  could  be  made  out  for  a 
theory  of  many  authors  than  for  the  theory  of  one  [or  of  two].  As  the 
name  of  David  attracted  successive  collections  of  Psalms,  and  the  name 
of  Solomon  successive  collections  of  Proverbs,  why  may  not  the  name 
of  Job  have  attracted  various  treatments  of  the  problems  of  suffering 
righteousness?" 

Why  not,  indeed,  if  the  evidence  points,  as  it  does,  in  this 
direction '?  And  my  complaint  is  not  that  Dr.  Driver  does 
not  adopt  this  or  that  particular  theory,  but  that  he  fails  to 
recognise  a  number  of  exegetical  facts.  He  approaches  the 
Book  of  Job,  as  it  seems  to  me,  with  the  preconceived  idea 
that  it  left  the  author's  hand  as  a  finished  and  well-rounded 
composition.  This  idea  is  no  doubt  natural  enough,  but  is 
hardly  consistent  with  the  results  of  criticism  in  other  parts 
of  the  Old  Testament  and  in  other  literatures.  As  has  been 
well  said  by  the  authors  of  the  Corpus  Poeticum  Boreale, 
'^  The  great  books  of  old  time  are  accretions ;  our  Psalter  is 
such  a  one,  Homer  is  such  a  one,  the  Sagas  are  such  a  one." 
Ewald,  who  began  by  believing  in  the  unity  of  Genesis, 
found  out  that  this  unity  was  factitious  ;  may  it  not  very 
naturally  be  so  with  a  poem,  which,  like  the  dialogues  in  Job, 
prompted  to  imitation  and  to  contradiction  ?  Dr.  Driver's 
able  forerunner  has  indeed  justified  his  own  reluctance  to 
disintegrate  by  his  desire  to  enjoy  the  poem  as  much  as  he 
can.  He  can  sympathize,  he  tells  us,  with  those  persons 
who  are  "  so  intoxicated  with  the  beauty  of  a  great  creation, 
that  they  do  not  care  a  whit  how  it  arose."  ^'  But  he  forgets 
that  the  true  writer  is  not  a  mere  dissector,  but  analyzes  in 
order  to  reconstruct.  Nor  can  it  be  said  that  the  Book  of 
Job  as  it  stands  is  a  great  work  of  art.  I  know  all  that  can 
be  said  on  the  difference  between  Eastern  and  "Western  art, 

•  Keview  of  Genuug's  Epic  of  the  Inner  Life  iu  The  Nation,  Aug.  27tli,  1891. 
-  Davidson,  Expositor,  1833,  p.  88. 


248  DR.  DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 


and  between  Eastern  and  Western  psychology ;  but  the  dif- 
ference must  not  be  pressed  to  an  extreme.  I  am  willing  to 
admit — indeed,  I  did  in  1887  expressly  admit — that  the  six  ac- 
cretions indicated  in  my  Job  and  Solomon  (pp.  07-69),  need 
not  have  come  from  as  many  different  writers.  The  Elihu- 
speeches,  however,  which  are  the  most  obvious  of  the  accre- 
tions, cannot  have  come  from  the  writer  of  the  Dialogues 
(though  Kamphausen  once  thought  so).  Nor,  as  it  would 
seem,  can  the  Epilogue.  I  grant  that  the  author  of  the 
Dialogues  prefixed  to  his  work  not  only  chap,  iii.,  but  also 
chaps,  i.  and  ii.  But  I  cannot  believe  that  he  meant  xlii. 
7-17  to  be  the  denoument  of  the  story  ; — that  hypothesis 
at  least  no  ingenuity  can  render  plausible.  "  The  only 
possible  close  of  the  poem,  if  the  writer  is  not  untrue  to  his 
deepest  convictions,  is  that  the  Satan  should  confess  before 
Jehovah  and  the  court  of  heaven  that  there  are  '  perfect 
and  upright '  men  who  serve  God  without  interested 
motives."  ^  Such  at  least  is  still  my  own  opinion.  That 
we  do  not  now  find  such  a  close,  only  proves  either  (what 
we  knew  before)  that  the  original  poem  has  not  come  down 
to  us  intact,  or  that  the  Book  of  Job,  like  that  of  Koheleth, 
was  left  in  an  unfinished  state  by  the  author. 

Whether  the  other  passages  were,  or  were  not,  added  by 
the  author  is  to  some  extent  an  open  question.  It  seems 
to  me  extremely  hazardous  to  suppose  that  the  writer  went 
on  retouching  his  own  work,  but  this  is  the  only  possible 
course  for  those  who  hold  out  against  the  view,  which  for 
some  at  least  of  the  added  passages  I  cannot  help  advo- 
cating. But  at  any  rate  one  thing  is  certain,  viz.  that 
even  after  removing  the  speeches  of  Elihu,  the  Book  of  Job 
does  not  form  a  genuine  whole — that  some  of  the  original 
passages  have  been  retouched  and  new  ones  added.  That 
eminent  critic  Dillmann,  who  in  spite  of  himself  continually 

'  Critical  Fevicir,  May,  1891,  p.  253  (the  present  writer's  review  of  Hoff- 
maun's  Iliob). 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  24U 

makes  such  gratifying  concessions  to  younger  scholars,  is  in 
the  main  point  on  my  side/  and  so  are  all  the  chief  workers 
in  this  department.  Against  me,  as  I  have  good  cause  to 
know,  there  stands  arrayed  the  host  of  English  theological 
reviewers.  But  how  many  of  these  have  made  a  serious 
critical  study  of  the  Book  of  Job?  How  many  have  even 
read  carefully — much  less  worked  at — any  critical  work  in 
which  the  unity  of  Job  is  denied,  and  have  assimilated  the 
positive  side  of  a  disintegrating  theory  ?  I  complain  of  my 
friend  Dr.  Driver  because,  with  the  best  intentions,  he  has 
made  it  more  difficult  for  ordinary  students  to  come  to  the 
knowledge  of  important  facts,  and  made  it  possible  for 
a  thoroughly  representative,  and  in  some  respects  not 
illiberal,  writer  in  a  leading  Anglican  review  to  use  language 
which  must,  I  fear,  be  qualified  as  both  unseemly  and 
misleading.- 

And  what  has  the  author  to  say  on  the  date  of  the 
poem,  or  rather  since  the  poem  has,  by  his  own  admission, 
been  added  to,  on  the  date  of  the  original  work  and  of  the 
Elihu-speeches  ?  To  answer  that  the  latter  were  added  by 
"a  somewhat  later  writer"  is,  I  think,  only  defensible  if 
the  original  poem  be  made  post-Exilic.  For  surely,  if  any- 
thing has  grown  clearer  of  late  years,  it  is  that  the  language 
and  ideas  of  "  Elihu  "  are  those  of  some  part  of  the  post- 
Exilic  period. 

The  new  edition  of  Dillmann's  Hioh  may  be  taken  as 
evidence  of  this.  He  still  makes  the  original  poem  pre- 
Exilic  (though  nearer  to  B.C.  58G  than  formerly),  but  whereas 
in  1869  he  thought  that  the  Ehhu-speeches  "  might  have 
been  written  in  the  course  of  the  sixth  century  "  {i.e. 
possibly  before  the  Eeturn),  in  1891  he  tells  us  that  they 
are  probably  to  be  assigned  to  the  fifth  century.     As  to  the 

1  See  Dillmann,  Hloh  (1801),  EinL,  p.  xxviii.,  aud  cf.  Iiis  remarks  on  th 
controverted  i^assages  in  the  course  of  the  book. 

2  Guardian,  Dec.  2,  1891. 


250  DE.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 


original  poem,  our  author  states  (as  I  did  myself  in  1887) 
that— 

"  It  will  scarcely  be  earlier  tlian  tlie  age  of  Jereraiah,  and  belongs 
most  probably  to  the  period  of  the  Babylonian  captivity."  ' 

Both  Dillmanii  and  Dr.  Briggs  favour  the  former  date  ; 
Umhreit,  Knobel,  Griitz,  and  Prof.  Davidson  the  latter. 
Gesenius  also  prefers  an  Exilic  date,  but  will  not  deny  the 
possibility  of  a  still  later  one.  And  it  is  a  post-Exilic  date 
which  many  critics  {e.g.  Kuenen,  Wellhausen,  Stade,  Hoff- 
mann,- Cornill)  are  in  our  day  inclined  to  accept.  Ought 
not  this  to  have  been  mentioned  ?  I  feel  myself  that  in 
the  present  position  of  the  criticism  of  the  Hagiographa 
a  post-Exilic  date  has  acquired  a  greater  degree  of  plaus- 
ibility.•'  If,  for  instance,  the  Book  of  Proverbs  is  in  the 
main  a  composite  post-Exilic  work,  it  becomes  at  once  in 
a  higher  degree  probable  that  the  Book  of  Job  is  so  too. 

'  Prof.  Bissell,  I  observe,  hopes  to  prove  a  considerably  earlier  date  hij  the 
help  of  Glasers  discoieries  in  Arabia  (Presbyterian  and  Reformed  Bevieiv,  Oct., 
1891).  He  refers  to  Prof.  Sayce.  I  trust  that  Prof.  Whitehouse  will  be  more 
cautious  (see  Critical  Review,  Jan.,  1802,  p.  1'2). 

-  Prof.  G.  Hoffmann's  arguments  {Hiob,  1801)  do  not  perhaps  materially 
advance  the  discussion,  though  his  book  ought  to  have  been  referred  to  by 
our  author.  His  linguistic  proposals  are  too  violent,  and  his  references  to 
Zoroastrianism  do  not  show  enough  studj'.  Nor  am  I  sure  that  he  has  added 
much  of  value  to  the  argument  from  parallel  passages.  On  the  latter  I 
venture  to  add  these  remarks  for  comparison  with  Dr.  Driver's  valuable  section 
(l).  408).  On  the  parallels  between  Job  and  the  probably  or  certainly  Exilic 
parts  of  ii.  Isaiah  it  is  difficult  to  speak  confidently.  Nor  need  we  perhaps 
consider  the  Prologue  of  Job  to  be  indebted  to  Zech.  iii.  ;  the  modes  of 
representation  used  were  "in  the  air"  in  the  iwst-Exilic  period.  And  as 
to  the  parallel  adduced  by  Cornill  (Einl.,  p.  231)  between  Job  xlii.  17  and 
Gen.  XXXV.  20,  xxv.  8  (both  P),  this,  if  admitted  as  important,  will  only  affect 
the  date  of  the  Epilogue.  Then  we  turn  to  the  Psalms,  the  Song  of  Hezekiah, 
and  the  Lamentations.  It  would  be  difficult  indeed  to  say  that  Isa.  xxxviii. 
10-20,  or  that  Ps.  xxxix.  and  Ixxxviii.  were  not  written  in  the  same  period  as 
Job,  and  these  works  can,  I  believe,  be  shown  to  be  post-Exilic.  If  this  seems 
doubtful  to  any  one,  yet  Ps.  viii.  5  "is  no  doubt  parodied  in  Job  vii,  17  " 
(Driver),  and  there  is  no  reason  for  not  grouping  Ps.  viii.  with  the  Priestly 
Code.  I  admit  that  Lam.  iii.  is,  by  the  same  right  as  Ps.  Ixxxviii.,  to  be  viewed 
as  in  a  large  sense  contemporary  with  Job  (see  Delitzsch,  Iliob,  p.  21).  But 
what  is  the  date  of  the  Lamentations  ?     Sec  fartlier  on. 

••  Conip.  ISainpt.  Lect.,  p.  202. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  251 


It  is  still  of  course  a  question  to  be  argued  out  in  detail ; 
there  is  no  escaping  from  the  discipline  of  hard  and  minute 
investigation.  But,  so  far  as  I  can  see,  the  evidence  col- 
lected, when  viewed  in  the  light  of  general  probabilities, 
and  of  the  results  attained  and  being  attained  elsewhere, 
justifies  us  in  asserting  that  the  whole  of  the  Book  of  Job 
belongs  most  probably  to  the  Persian  period.  On  linguistic 
grounds  ^  I  should  like  to  put  the  main  part  of  the  Book 
in  the  first  half  of  this  period,  and  the  Elihu-speeches  in 
the  second,  but  these  grounds  are  not  by  themselves  de- 
cisive. 

A  word  must  here  be  said  on  a  subject  which  will  be  in 
the  mind  of  many  readers.  These  critical  results  must 
have  some  bearing  on  theories  of  inspiration.  But  what 
bearing?  I  have  an  uneasy  feeling  that  the  remark  on 
page  405 — that  "precisely  the  same  inspiration  attaches 
to  the  Elihu-speeches]  which  attaches  to  the  poem  gener- 
ally " — is  hardly  penetrating  enough,  and  that  by  such 
a  half-truth  Dr.  Driver  has  unwisely  blunted  the  edge 
of  his  critical  decision.  Of  course,  the  Elihu-speeches  arc 
inspired  ;  they  are  touched  by  the  same  religious  influences 
which  pervades  all  the  genuine  Church  records  of  the  Exilic 
or  post-Exilic  period  which  are  contained  in  the  Hagio- 
grapha.  But  it  can  hardly  be  said  that  these  speeches 
have  the  same  degree  of  inspiration  as  the  rest  of  the  Book 
of  Job,  at  least  if  the  general  impression  of  discriminating 
readers  may  be  trusted.  The  creator  of  "Elihu"  may 
have  some  deeper  ideas,  but  he  has  not  as  capacious  a 
vessel  to  receive  them  as  the  older  poet.-  And  though  it 
may  be  true  that  he  had  a  good  motive,  and  that  the  course 
which  he  took  was  sanctioned  by  the  religious  authorities 

1  These  giouuds  are  briefly  indicated  by  Dr.  Driver  on  p.  404  (sect.  8)  and 
p.  406  (top) ;  cf.  my  Job  and  Solomon,  pp.  '291-295.  Besides  Budde's  Ucitratjc, 
Stickel  {Hioh,  1842,  pp.  248-262)  still  deserves  to  bo  consulted  on  the  Elihu- 
portion. 

-  See  Job  and  Solomon,  pp.  42-^4. 


252  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

of  the  day,  yet  it  is  certain  both  that  he  has  defects  from 
which  the  earher  writer  is  free,  and  that  he  has  for  modern 
readers  greatly  hindered  the  beneficial  effect  of  the  rest  of 
the  poem.  We  must  not,  in  short,  force  om'selves  to 
reverence  these  two  poets  in  an  equal  degree. 

I  admit  that  the  difficulties  which  theories  of  inspiration 
have  to  encounter  in  the  Song  of  Songs,  Ecclesiastes,  and 
Esther  are  still  greater,  and  I  think  that  Dr.  Driver  would 
have  facilitated  the  reception  of  his  critical  results  on  these 
books  if  he  had  at  once  taken  up  a  strong  position  with 
reference  to  those  difficulties.  It  might  even  have  been 
enough  to  quote  a  luminous  passage  from  a  lecture  by  Prof. 
Eobertson  Smith, ^  the  upshot  of  which  is  that  these  three 
books  "  which  were  still  disputed  among  the  orthodox  Jews 
in  the  apostolic  age,  and  to  which  the  New  Testament  never 
makes  reference,"-  and,  let  me  add,  which  do  not  seem  to 
be  touched  by  the  special  religious  influences  referred  to 
above,  are  not  for  us  Christians  in  the  truest  sense  of  the 
word  canonical."'  These  books  however  are  intensely  in- 
teresting, and  a  "frank  and  reverent  study  of  the  texts" 
shows  that  they  "have  their  use  and  value  even  for  us,"  and 
my  only  regret  is  that  in  Esther  and  Ecclesiastes,  at  any 
rate,  Dr.  Driver  is  slightly  more  "  moderate  "  than  was 
necessary,  and  that  he  does  not  make  it  quite  as  easy  as 
it  might  have  been  for  some  of  his  readers  to  agree  with 
him. 

I  pass  to  a  book  in  which  I  have  long  had  so  special  an 
interest  that  it  will  require  an  effort  to  be  brief — the 
glorious  Song  of  Songs.     Our  author  rejects  the  old  alle- 


'  The  Old  Testament  in  the  Jeicish  Church,  pp.  174,  175  ;  cf.  WilJeboer,  Die 
Entstehnng  des  alttest.  Kanons  (1891),  pp.  150,  152. 

^  See  however  Trench,  Seven  Churches  of  Asia,  pp.  225,  226. 

•'*  Of  tbe  Song  of  Songs,  Lowth,  writing  to  Warburton  in  1756,  says  :  "  If  you 
deny  that  it  is  an  allegory,  you  must  exclude  it  from  the  Canon  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture ;  for  it  holds  its  place  there  by  no  other  tenure  "(Warburton's  Works,  by 
Hurd,  xii.  158). 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LFTERATURE.  253 

gorical  interpretation  as  artificial  and  extravagant  (p.  428), 
but  does  not  regard  Delitzsch's  modification  of  it  as  unten- 
able, provided  it  be  admitted  that  there  is  nothing  in  the 
poem  itself  to  suggest  it.  His  meaning,  I  presume,  is  this 
— that  the  Song  is  only  allegorical  in  so  far  as  all  true 
marriage  to  a  religious  mind  is  allegorical,^  but  that  we  can- 
not suppose  the  poet  to  have  thought  of  this  allegory  when 
he  wrote,  and  that,  his  own  meaning  being  so  beautiful,  it  is 
almost  a  pity  to  look  beyond  it.  Dr.  Driver's  treatment  of 
the  Song  is  marked  by  much  reserve.  He  does  indeed  com- 
mit himself  to  the  lyrical  drama  theory,  without  consider- 
ing whether  the  poet  may  not  to  some  extent  have  worked 
up  current  popular  songs  (just  as  Poliziano  did  in  Medicaean 
Florence)  ;  and  though  he  puts  two  forms  of  this  theory 
(Delitzsch's  and  Ewald's)  very  thoroughly  before  the  reader, 
he  evidently  prefers  the  latter,  with  some  modifications 
from  Oettli.  Still  one  feels  after  all  that  he  has  not  given 
us  a  thorough  explanation  of  the  Song.  This  was  perhaps 
justifiable  in  the  present  state  of  exegesis.  For  though  the 
poem  has  not  been  altogether  neglected  by  recent  scholars, 
with  the  exception  of  Griitz  and  Stickel  none  of  them  has 
seriously  grappled  afresh  with  the  problem  of  its  origin.  To 
Griltz  (in  spite  of  his  many  faults  as  a  scholar)  and  Stickel 
the  student  should  have  been  expressly  referred ; "  the  men- 
tion of  the  former  on  p.  423  seems  to  me  far  from  sufficient. 
Help  may  also  be  got  from  Prof.  Kobertson  Smith's  able 
article  in  the  EncijclopcBclia  Britannica  (1876),  and  by  the 
section  relative  to  the  Song  in  Eeuss'  French  edition  of  the 
Bible. 

For  determining  the  date  of  the  Song  the  linguistic 
argument  is  of  more  than  common  importance.  Here  I 
must  complain  that  such  a  thorough  Hebraist  as  Dr.  Driver 

'  Cf.  Julia  Wedgewood,  The  Moral  Ideal  (1888),  pp.  269,  270. 
-  Stickel's  book  appeared  in  1838,  and  was  ably  reviewed  by  Prof.  Budde 
[Thcol.  Lit.-ztg.,  1888,  no.  6). 


254  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

hesitates  so  much.  The  only  fresh  ground  for  uncertainty  is 
the  discovery  of  a  weight  on  the  site  of  Samaria,  ascribed 
to  the  eighth  century,  with  7'\l^  as  in  Song  i,  6  (viii.  12),  iii. 
7.  Apart  from  this,  a  hnguist  would  certainly  say  that  this 
pleonastic  periphrasis  proved  the  late  date  of  the  poem  as 
it  stands,  but  now  it  seems  permissible  to  Dr.  Driver  to 
doubt.  That  I  reluctantly  call  an  unwise  compromising 
with  tradition.  In  1876  (the  date  of  Prof.  liobertson  Smith's 
article)  we  did  not  see  our  way  in  the  post-Exilic  period  as 
we  do  now.  If  there  is  anything  in  the  contents  of  the 
Song  which  express  a  pre-Exilic  date,  let  it  be  pointed  out. 
Meantime  all  the  facts  as  yet  elicited  by  exegesis  can  be 
explained  quite  as  well  on  the  assumption  of  a  late  date 
as  of  an  early  one.  Let  us  then  (failing  any  fresh  exegetical 
evidence)  hear  no  more  of  the  Song  of  Deborah  and  the 
early  north-Israelitish  dialect.  It  is  certain  that  the  use  of 
TD  for  "l^h^  is  specially  characteristic  of  late  writings ;  certain, 
that  nr^^ti^  Song  i.  7  is  analogous  to  ^'P7'^  Jon-  i-  7,  and 
also  to  lli»^^  bp:i  Eccles.  viii.  17,  and  HD^'  ')pi^_  Dan.  i.  10 
(the  fuller  relative  used  as  in  Jon.  i.  8  ^  [contrast  ver.  7  ■ ,  in 
a  carefully  expressed  speech) ;  certain,  too,  that  some  at 
least  of  the  loan-words  mentioned  on  pp.  422,  423  (note  ^) 
point  definitely  to  the  post-Exilic  period  (even  one  or  two 
Greek  words  seem  highly  probable).  Kuenen  in  1865, 
in  spite  of  his  preconceived  theory  of  an  early  date,  ad- 
mitted that  "  the  language  seemed,  at  first  sight,  to  plead 
for  the  Persian  period";  Gesenius  and  M.  Sachs — a  great 
Christian  and  a  great  Jewish  Hebraist — have  expressed 
themselves  still  more  strongly  on  the  "modern  Hebrew" 
of  the  Song  of  Songs.  It  is  also  highly  probable  that  a 
careful  study  of  the  names  of  plants  in  the  Song  would 
favour  a  post-Exilic  date.  Nor  can  the  parallelisms  be- 
tween this  book  and  that  "  song  of  loves  (or,  love),"  the 

'  I  do  not  take  tlio  fuller  phrase  in  ver.  K  to  be  a  j^loss   (cf.  the  four  lines 
added  by  Dr.  Driver  on  p.  liOl  in  2ud  edition). 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  255 

45th  Psalm,  be  ignored.  If  that  psahii  is  post-Exihc,  so 
also  presumably  is  the  Song  of  Songs. ^  But  Dr.  Driver's 
researches  on  the  Psalms  have  not  yet  perhaps  led  him  to 
see  what  to  me  is  now  so  clear,  and  I  am  therefore  content 
to  have  shown  that,  quite  apart  from  this,  the  facts 
admitted  by  Dr.  Driver  point  rather  to  a  late  than  to  au 
ear]}^  date,  and  that  we  cannot  therefore  safely  assume, 
with  our  author,  that  the  poem  has  a  basis  of  fact. 
Eeaders  of  Delitzsch's  delightful  essay  on  "  Dancing, 
and  Pentateuch-Criticism "  ~  do  not  need  to  be  assured 
that  the  post-Exilic  period  was  not  without  the  enliven- 
ment  of  secular  dancing  and  song. 

And  now  comes  another  little  disappointment — another 
little  compromise  with  conservatism,  which  I  should  prefer 
to  glide  gently  over,  but  for  the  illusion  which  is  growing 
up  among  us  that  paring  down  the  results  of  criticism  is 
necessary  for  a  truly  Christian  teaching.  The  Book  of 
Ruth,  according  to  our  author,  is  a  prose  idyll,  similar,  I 
presume,  to  that  which  may  have  lain  in  the  mind  of  the 
author  of  that  idyllic  group  of  quasi-dramatic  tableaux — 
the  Song  of  Songs,  and  based,  like  the  Song  (according  to 
Dr.  Driver),  on  tradition.     We  are  told  that, — 

"  The  basis  of  the  narrative  consists,  it  may  reasonably  be  supposed, 
of  the  family  traditions  respecting  Ruth  and  lier  marriage  with  Boaz. 
Tliese  have  been  cast  into  a  literary  form  by  the  [pre-Exilic]  author, 
who  has,  no  doubt,  to  a  certain  extent  idealized  both  the  characters  and 
the  scenes.  Distance  seems  to  have  mellowed  the  rude,  unsettled  age 
of  the  Judges  "  (pp.  427,  428). 

This  description  seems  to  soften  the  facts  a  little  too 
much.     It  is  not  merely  a   "mellowed"  picture  that  we 

1  See  Bampton  Lectures,  pp.  1G7,  179  (cf.  p.  298).  On  p.  1G7  (foot),  read 
"  can  he  better  accounted  for.'''  I  do  not  see  where  to  find  a  situation  for  either 
of  these  poems  before  the  Greek  period.  One  of  the  early  and  fortunate  reigns 
must  of  course  be  selected.    But  I  hold  myself  open  to  correction. 

2  Delitzseh,  Iris  (E.  T.),  pp.  189-204).  The  Mishna  {TaanitJi,  iv.  8;  see 
Wimsche,  Talm.,  i,  473)  tells  how  Song  iii.  11  was  sung  in  the  vineyard 
dances. 


256  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

have  before  us,  but,  as  Mr.  Cobb  has  remarked,  ^  complete 
"  contrariety  of  spirit,  style,  social  life,  and  public  affairs." 
Nor  is  anything  gained  by  postulating  an  uncertain  amount 
of  traditional  material ;  the  story  of  Ruth  is  practically  as 
imaginative  as  that  of  Tobit,  and  is  none  the  less  edifying 
on  this  account.  But  let  us  see  how  the  acute  and  learned 
author  endeavours  to  prove  a  pre-Exilic  date.  The  genea- 
logy, as  he  admits,  "  appears  to  suggest  an  Exilic  or  post- 
Exilic  date,"  but  this  "  forms  no  integral  part  of  the  book," 
while,  in  spite  of  many  isolated  expressions "'  which,  taken 
together,  seem  at  first  sight  to  point  to  the  post-Exilic 
period,  the  "  general  beauty  and  purity  of  the  style  of  Euth 
point  decidedly  to  the  pre-Exilic  period."  We  are  not  told 
whether  the  book  was  written  before  or  after  Deuteronomy 
(which  is  referred  on  p.  82  to  the  reign  of  Manasseh),  but 
it  is  pointed  out  that  the  peculiar  kind  of  marriage  referred 
to  in  chapters  iii.  and  iv.  is  not  strictly  that  of  levirate 
(Deut.  XXV.  5),  and  that  the  reception  of  Ruth  into  an 
Israelitish  family  "  appears  to  conflict  with  Deuteronomy 
xxiii.  2."  In  reply,  it  may  be  said  (1)  that  in  order  to 
give  the  "present  condition  of  investigation"  it  was 
important  to  give  a  much  fuller  statement  of  the  grounds 
on  which  "most  modern  critics  consider  Euth  to  be  Exilic 
(Ewald)  or  post-Exilic  (Bertheau,  Wellhausen,  Kuenen, 
etc.)";  (2)  that  by  Dr.  Driver's  very  candid  admission 
"the  style  of  the  prose-parts  of  Job  ['most  probably' 
Exilic,  p.  405]  is  not  less  pure";  (3)  that  the  religious 
liberality  of  the  writer  and  the  family  relations  which  he 
describes  in  the  Book  are  perfectly  intelligible  in  the  post- 

1  Bihliolheca  Sacra,  Oct.,  1891,  p.  662. 

'  iH?!  1?^',  2*p  are,  I  think,  decisive.  I  incline  to  add  *"T.!^',  which  before 
the  Exile  is  poetical  (see  Hampton  Lectures,  p.  84).  Dr.  Driver  regards  Rutli 
iv.  7  (Q^p)  as  a  gloss,  cf.  1  Sam.  ix.  9.  But  the  latter  passage  is  embedded  in 
a  pre-Exilic  section,  whereas  Ruth  iv.  7  occurs  ex  hyp.  in  a  iDOst-Exilic  narra- 
tive. The  narrator  tries  to  throw  himself  back  into  early  times,  but  has  to 
explain  a  custom  unknown  to  his  post-Exilic  readers.  Nor  is  there  any  special 
reason  to  regard  \'ro  as  a  word  of  the  early  northern  dialect  (p.  -127). 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  257 

Exilic  period  (cf.  on  the  one  band  the  Book  of  Jonah,  and 
on  the  other  Kuenen's  remark  on  Leviticus  xviii.  and  xx., 
Hexateuch ,  p.  268) ;  and  (4)  there  is  clearly  no  necessity  to 
suppose  the  genealogy  to  have  been  added  in  a  later  age.  In 
fact  the  one  excuse  for  giving  this  Book  an  earlier  date  than 
that  of  Jonah  is  the  greater  flavour  of  antiquity  which  it 
possesses  (notice  the  points  of  contact  with  Samuel  given 
by  Bertheau  in  the  Kurzgef.  Handbitch,  p.  286).^  Its  real 
design  is,  not  to  glorify  the  Davidic  house,  but  to  show  the 
universality  of  God's  love.  Just  as  our  Lord  exhibits  a 
Samaritan  as  the  model  of  practical  piety,  so  the  unknown 
writer  of  this  beautiful  little  book  brings  before  us  a 
Moabitish  woman  as  the  model  of  an  affectionate  daughter 
who  receives  the  highest  earthly  reward." 

The  five  Lamentations  deserve  attention,  not  only  for  some 
classic  beauties  of  expression  which  have  endeared  them  to 
the  Christian  heart,  but  as  (perhaps)  the  earliest  monuments 
of  the  piety  of  regenerate  Israel,  and  as  (perhaps)  supplying 
presumptive  evidence  of  the  cultivation  of  religious  lyric 
poetry  long  before  the  Exile.  Nowhere  perhaps  does  Dr. 
Driver's  individuality  show  itself  more  strikingly  than  here. 
What  pains  he  takes  to  soften  the  prejudices  of  old-fashioned 
readers,  and  give  the  principal  result  of  criticism  in  its  most 
moderate  form!  To  unprejudiced  students,  however,  he 
may  seem  timid,  and  it  is  certainly  strange  to  hear  that 
"  even  though  the  poems  be  not  the  work  of  Jeremiah, 
there  is  no  question  that  they  are  the  work  of  a  contem- 
porary (or  contemporaries)."  Nagelsbach  long  ago  saw 
that  at  any  rate  Lamentations  ii.  implies  an  acquaintance 
with  the  Book  of  Ezekiel,  and,  to  Dr.  Driver,  the  affinities 
between  all  the  Lamentations  and  the  prophecies  of 
Jeremiah    ought    surely   to    suggest   that    the    author    (or 

'  See  Dr.  Driver,  p.  302,  and  cf.  Baitipton  Lectures,  p.  30G, 
2  Comp.  Talm.  Bab.,  Sanhedrin,  96/;  (Wiinsohe,  iii.   188),  where  still  bolder 
flights  are  taken. 

VOL.   V.  1/ 


258  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

authors)  had  made  a  Hierary  study  of  that  Book.  A  con- 
siderable interval  must  therefore  have  elapsed  between  B.C. 
586  and  the  writing  of  the  Lamentations,  ^  and  the  lan- 
guage used  in  Lamentations  v.  20  (comp.  Isa.  xlii.  14, 
Ivii.  11)  points  rather  to  the  end  than  to  the  beginning 
of  the  Exile.  This  period  is,  moreover,  the  earliest  which 
will  suit  the  parallelisms  between  Lamentations  iii.  and 
the  Book  of  Job  (referred  in  this  work  to  the  Exile), 
which  are  more  easily  explained  on  the  supposition  that  the 
elegy  is  dependent  on  Job  than  on  the  opposite  theory.- 
It  ought  however  to  be  mentioned  that  there  are  plausible 
grounds  for  giving  a  still  later  date  to  the  third  elegy,  in 
which  Jerusalem  is  not  once  mentioned,  and  which  it  is 
difticult  not  to  associate  with  the  Jeremianic  psalms.  If 
Psalm  xxxi.  is  post-Exilic  (and  any  other  theory  seems  to 
me  extremely  improbable),  so  also  is  Lamentations  iii.,  and 
of  course  we  must  add.  If  the  poem  of  Job  (as  a  whole)  is 
post-Exilic,  so  also  is  Lamentations  iii.  And  though  I  do 
not  for  a  moment  deny  that  lamentations  were  indited 
during  the  Exile  (the  Books  of  Ezekiel  and  of  ii.  Isaiah 
sufficiently  prove  this),  yet  the  mere  fact  that  the  authors 
of  Lamentations  i.,  ii.,  iv.,  and  v.  refer  so  prominently  to 
the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  is  no  conclusive  proof  that  these 
lamentations  too  were  not  written  in  Judah  after  the  return. 
The  dramatic  imaginativeness  of  the  psalmists  has,  I  be- 
lieve, been  proved,  "  and  the  peculiar  rhythm  called 
"  elegiac"  has  been  traced  by  Budde  in  many  productions 
of  the  post-Exilic  age.  It  seems  to  me  far  from  impossible 
that,  just  as  the  Church  of  the  Second  Temple  composed 
its  own  psalms,  so  it  preferred  to  indite  fresh  elegies  for  use 
on  the  old  fast- days. 

'  See  Prof.  "VV.  K.  Smith's  excellent  article  in  EncijclopcEdia  Britannica. 

-  See  my  Lamentations  (Pulpit  Comm.),  Introd.,  p.  iii. 

3  Cf.  my  commentary  on  Pss.  Ixxiv.  and  exxxvii.  The  Second  Isaiah,  too, 
describes  imaginatively  in  "  elegiac  rhythm"  the  state  of  captm'ed  Jerusalem 
Isa.  Ii.  17-20). 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  259 


The  next  section  is  one  of  the  very  best  in  this  part  of  the 
volume — it  is  on  Ecclesiastes.  I  will  not  occupy  space  with 
summarizing  it,  but  urge  the  student  to  master  its  contents. 
I  quite  agree  with  Dr.  Driver  that  the  work  may  possibly 
be  a  work  of  the  Greek  period.  The  language,  as  I  re- 
marked in  1887,  favours  (though  it  does  not  absolutely 
require)  a  later  date  than  that  suggested  by  Ewald  (close  of 
the  Persian  period).  The  objection  that  if  the  book  be  of 
the  Greek  period,  we  have  a  right  to  expect  definite  traces 
of  Greek  influence,  I  now  see  to  be  inconclusive;  the 
Wisdom  of  Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach  contains  none,  and  yet 
belongs  to  the  Greek  period.^  Moreover,  Hellenism  must 
have  influenced  very  many  who  did  not  definitely  adopt 
Greek  theories.  Certainly  the  work  is  very  un-Jewish. 
Very  probably  Kuenen  is  correct  in  dating  it  about  200 
B.C.,  i.e.,  about  forty  years  before  the  great  MaccabEean 
rising  (so  too  Mr.  Tyler).  Dr.  Driver  admits  the  force  of 
his  reasoning,  though  he  still  not  unreasonably  hesitates. 
He  is  himself  strongest  on  the  hnguistic  side  of  the  argu- 
ment ;  see  especially  his  note  on  the  bearings  of  Prof. 
Margoliouth's  attempted  restorations  of  Ben  Sira  (p.  447). 
I  cannot  equally  follow  him  in  his  argument  against  a 
theory  which  I  myself  hold,  viz.  that  the  text  of  Ecclesiastes 
has  been  manipulated  in  the  interests  of  orthodoxy.  As 
was  remarked  above,  the  book  is  not  in  the  strictest  sense 
canonical,  and  we  have  therefore  no  interest  in  creating  or 
magnifying  difficulties  in  a  theory  which  is  intrinsically 
probable,  and  is  supported  by  numerous  phenomena  in  the 
later  period. 

The  section  on  Esther  is  also  in  the  main  very  satis- 
factory. But  why  are  we  told  that  this  narrative  (which 
was  not  canonical  according  to  St.  Athanasius,  and  which, 
fascinating  as  it  is,  we  can  hardly  venture  to  call  inspired) 

'  On  supposed  Greek  influences,  see,  besides  Menzel,  Qohelct  und  die 
nacJiarUtuteliscItc  Fltilosopltic,  von  August  Palm  (1885). 


2G0  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 


cannot  reasonably  be  doubted  to  have  a  historical  basis '? 
Is  it  because  of  the  appeal  to  Persian  chronicles  (Esth.  ii. 
23 ;  X.  1;  cf.  ix.  32)  ?  But  it  is  of  the  essence  of  the 
art  of  romance  not  to  shrink  from  appeals  to  fictitious 
authorities.  One  may  however  admit  that  a  story  like 
Esther,  which  professed  to  account  for  the  origin  of  a 
popular  festival,  probably  had  a  traditional,  though  not  a 
historical,  basis.  On  this  point  reference  may  be  made  to 
Kuenen's  Onderzoeh  (ed,  2),  p.  551,  and  Zimmern  in  Stade's 
Zeitschrift,  1891,  p.  168.  The  latter  thinks  (and  both 
Jensen  and  Lagarde  agree)  that  the  Feast  of  Purim  may 
be  derived  ultimately  from  a  Babylonian  New  Year's  Feast, 
and  that  the  story  of  the  struggle  between  Mordecai  and 
Haman  was  suggested  by  a  Babylonian  New  Year's  legend 
of  the  struggle  between  Marduk  and  Tiamat.  This  coin- 
cides curiously  with  the  views  proposed  above  to  explain 
the  origin  of  the  Jonah-narrative.  Of  course,  the  story  may 
have  been  enriched  with  Persian  elements  (on  which  see 
Lagarde  and  Kueuen')  before  it  was  Hebraized  by  a  Jewish 
story-teller. 

Dr.  Driver's  lingustic  argument  for  placing  Esther  in  the 
4th  or  3rd  century  e.g.  is  excellent.  But  there  is  one 
important  omission  in  his  brief  discussion.  If  the  date  is  so 
early,  how  is  it  that  the  earliest  independent  evidence  for 
the  observance  of  Parim  in  Judfca  is  in  2  Maccabees  (see 
p.  452)  ?  Moreover,  there  is  no  mention  of  Mordecai  and 
Esther-  in  Ben  Sira's  "praise  of  famous  men"  (Eccles. 
xliv.-xlix),  which  would  be  strange  if  Purim  and  its  story 
were  well  known  in  Judsca  in  b.c.  180.  May  not  the 
festival  have  been  introduced  into  Judasa,  and  the  Book  of 
Esther  have  been  written  some  time  after  the  Maccabaean 

^  Lagarde's  treatise  Ihirim  (1887)  is  important ;  Dr.  Driver's  reference  gives 
no  idea  of  this.  See  also  bis  Mitthcilunrien,  ii.  378-381,  iv.  347.  On  Persian 
legendary  elements,  sec  also  Kueucn,  Ond.,  cd.  2,  ii.  551,  and  cf.  Cornill,  Einl., 
l>.  253. 

^  Cf.  Een  Sira's  silence  as  to  Daniel  (see  Jvb  ami  Solomo)i,  p.  191). 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LTTERATURE.  2G1 

War  (so  Reuss,  Kuenen,  and  Cornill)  ?  Or,  though  this 
seems  less  probable,  the  book  may  have  been  written  by 
a  Persian  Jew  in  the  third  century,  but  not  brought  to 
Palestine  till  later.  Dr.  Driver  ought  perhaps  to  have 
mentioned  this  theory  (Mr.  Bevan,  Daniel,  p.  29,  notes 
two  significant  words  which  Esther  has  in  common  with 
Daniel).  He  might  also  have  added  to  his  "literature" 
my  article  "Esther"  in  Enc.  Brit.  (1878);  GsiSseVs  Esther 
(1888);  and  Dieulafoy,  "  Le  livre  d'Esther  et  le  palais 
d'Assuerus  "  in  Bevue  ties  etudes  jiiives,  1888  (Actes  et  Con- 
ferences). 

Nor  can  I  help  giving  hearty  praise  to  the  sections  on 
Chronicles,  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah.  The  details,  especially 
on  style,  are  worked  out  with  great  care.  The  only  objec- 
tion that  I  shall  raise  relates  to  the  sketch  of  the  method 
and  spirit  of  the  Chronicler,  which  I  could  have  wished  not 
less  reverent,  but  bolder  and  more  distinct  in  expression. 
We  are  all  familiar  with  the  attacks  to  which  writers  like 
Dr.  Driver  are  exposed  ;  some  of  the  most  vigorous  passages 
of  Bishop  Ellicott's  recent  charge  are  directed  against  that 
strangest  of  all  theories — "  an  inspiration  of  repainting  his- 
tory " — to  which  these  reverent-minded  writers  are  sup- 
posed to  have  committed  themselves.  If  Dr.  Driver  had 
only  been  a  little  clearer  on  the  subjects  of  inspiration  and 
of  the  growth  of  the  Canon,  how  much  simpler  would  have 
been  his  task,  especially  in  dealing  with  the  Hagiographa ! 
Of  course,  the  Chronicles  are  inspired,  not  as  the  prophecies 
of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  but  as  even  a  sermon  might  be 
called  inspired,  i.e.  touched  in  a  high  degree  with  the  best 
spiritual  influences  of  the  time.  Dr.  Driver  says  (Preface, 
p.  xvi.)  : — 

"  It  was  tlie  function  of  in.spiration  to  guide  the  individual  [his- 
torian] in  the  choice  and  disposition  of  his  material,  and  in  his  use  of 
it  for  the  inculcation  of  special  lessons." 

But  clearly  this  can   be  true  of  the  Chronicler  cnly  with 


2G2  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 

those  limitations,  subject  to  which  the  same  thing  could  bo 
said  of  any  conscientious  and  humble-minded  preacher  of 
the  Christian  Church.  And  if  these  limitations  cannot  be 
borne  in  mind,  it  is  better  to  drop  the  word  altogether,  and 
express  what  we  mean  by  some  other  term.  That  there  are 
some  passages  in  Chronicles  which  have  a  specially  inspir- 
ing quality,  and  may  tlierefore  be  called  inspired,  is  not  of 
course  to  be  denied.  But  upon  the  whole,  as  Prof.  Kobert- 
son  Smith  truly  says,^  the  Chronicler  "is  not  so  much  a 
historian  as  a  Levitical  preacher  on  the  old  history."  The 
spirit  of  the  Deuteronomistic  editor  of  the  earlier  narrative 
books  has  found  in  him  its  most  consistent  representative. 
He  omits  some  facts  and  colours  others  in  perfect  good  faith 
according  to  a  preconceived  religious  theory,  to  edify  himself 
and  his  readers.  He  also  adds  some  new  facts,  not  on  his 
own  authority,  but  on  that  of  earlier  records,  but  we  dare 
not  say  that  he  had  any  greater  skill  than  his  neighbours  in 
sifting  the  contents  of  these  records,  if  indeed  he  had  any 
desire  to  do  so.  Dr.  Driver's  language  (p.  501)  respecting 
the  "  traditional  element  "  used  by  the  Chronicler  seems 
therefore  somewhat  liable  to  misunderstanding. '-' 

The  only  remaining  section  of  the  book  relates  to  the 
Book  of  Daniel,  and  upon  this,  as  might  be  expected, 
Dr.  Driver's  individuality  has  left  a  strong  impress.  It  is 
needless  to  say  that  the  student  can  fully  trust  the  facts 
which  are  here  stored  up  in  abundance,  also  that  the  con- 
clusions arrived  at  are  in  the  main  judicious,  and  the  mode 
of  their  presentation  considerate.  And  yet  helpful,  very 
helpful,  as  this  section  is,  it  does  not  fully  satisfy  a  severely 
critical  standard.  Far  be  it  from  me  to  blame  the  author 
for  this  ;  I  sympathize  too  deeply  with  the  conflict  of  feel- 

>  The  Old  Test,  in  the  Jewish  Church,  p.  420. 

2  To  the  "literature"  of  Ezra  I  should  add  Nestle,  "Zur  Frage  nach  der 
urspriinglichen  Einheit  der  Biicher  Chronik,  Esra,  Neh.,"  iu  Studien  n.  Kriti- 
AvH,  1879,  pp.  517-520;  van  Iloouacker,  "Xeheuiie  et  Esdras  ;  uouvelle  hypo- 
tht'se,"  in  Le  Mmron,  1«'.I0. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  263 


ings  amid  \vliich  he  must  have  written.  I  would  speak 
frankl}^  but  (on  the  grounds  ah-eady  mentioned)  without 
assumption  of  superiority.  First  of  all,  I  think  it  a  mis- 
fortune that  the  sketch  of  the  contents  of  the  Book  could 
not  have  been  shortened.  I  know  the  excuse  ;  there  existed 
in  English  no  commentary  on  Daniel  sufticiently  critical  to 
be  referred  to.  But  on  the  other  hand,  there  was  the  most 
urgent  need  for  more  preliminary  matter,  especially  on  the 
characteristics  of  this  Book.  Ordinary  readers  simply  cannot 
understand  Daniel.  Modern  culture  supplies  no  key  to  it, 
as  Mr.  Gilbert's  interesting  paper  in  the  Expositor  for 
June,  1889,  conclusively  shows.  I  do  not  undervalue  the 
judicious  remarks  on  pp.  480-482,  but  on  "apocalyptic" 
literature  something  more  was  wanted  than  bare  references 
to  various  German  authors,  one  of  whom  (Smend)  ought, 
as  I  think,  to  have  been  made  much  more  prominent.^ 
Secondly,  I  think  that  a  freer  use  should  have  been  made 
of  the  cuneiform  inscriptions,  especially  considering  the 
unfriendly  criticisms  of  Professor  Sayce.  In  this  respect  I 
believe  myself  to  have  long  ago  set  a  good  example,  though 
my  article  on  Daniel  (Enc.  Brit.,  1876)  of  course  requires 
much  modification  and  expansion.-  And  here  let  me  re- 
pair an  omission  in  Part  I.  of  this  review.  Dr.  Driver 
should,  I  think,  in  deahng  with  Hexateuch  criticism,  have 
taken  some  account  of  Assyrian  and  Egyptian  investiga- 
tions. Even  if  he  thought  it  safer  not  to  speak  too  posi- 
tively on  the  bearings  of  these  researches  on  the  question  of 
the  dates  of  documents,  he  ought,  I  think,  to  have  "  indi- 
cated the  way  for  future  progress  "  (editor's  preface)."     But 

1  Dr.  Wright's  work  on  Daniel  in  the  Pul^rit  Cummentanj  will,'  I  am  sure,  be 
full  of  learned  and  honest  discussion.  But  when  will  it  appear  ?  Mr.  Bevan's 
Short  Commentari/  on  Daniel  (1892)  is  so  good  that  we  may  even  ask  him  for 
Bomething  more  complete,  though  not  more  careful  and  critical. 

•-  See  alsoCoHip^.  Lect.,  pp.  105-107  (cf.  94,  296). 

^  I  referred  to  this  at  the  Church  Congress  in  1883  (Job  and  Solomoi,  p.  (1), 
and  Prof.  Kobertson  Smith  wrote  an  acute  paper  on  "  Archasology  and  the  Date 
of   the  Pentateuch  ■'    iu  the    ConleiiqK   ii^.c.  for  October,  1887.    Against    the 


264  DR.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 


on  the  relation  of  cuneiform  research  to  the  criticism  of 
Daniel  no  reserve  was  called  for.  It  would  have  been  quite 
right  to  say  that  the  statement  respecting  Belteshazzar  in 
Daniel  iv.  was  erroneous,  and  that  the  names  Ashpenaz, 
Shadrach,  and  Meshach  could  not  have  been  put  forward  as 
Babylonian  in  Exilic  times  ;  ^  also  that  Hamelsar  (probably) 
and  Abed-nego  (certainly)  are  ignorant  deformations  of 
Babylonian  names,  and  that  though  Arioch  is  doubtless 
Eri-aku,  yet  this  name  was  probably  obtained  from  Genesis 
xiv.  1.'  And  much  more  might,  I  think,  have  been  made 
of  the  writer's  slight  acquaintance  with  Babylonian  ideas 
and  customs.  Above  all,  while  on  "the  Chaldoeans  "  and 
on  Belshazzar  very  just  remarks  are  made,  on  "  Darius 
the  Mede  "  we  get  this  unfortunate  compromise  between 
criticism  and  conservatism  (p.  469  ;  cf.  p.  479,  note  ~)  : — 

"  Still  the  circumstances  are  not  perhaps  such  as  to  be  altogether 
inconsistent  "with  either  the  existence  or  the  office  of  "  Darius  the 
Mede  "  ;  and  a  cautions  criticism  will  not  build  too  much  on  the  silence 
of  the  inscriptions,  when  many  certainly  remain  yet  to  be  brought  to 
light." 

Now  it  is  quite  true  that  in  the  addenda  to  the  second 
edition  it  is  stated,  in  accordance  with  the  contract-tablets 
published  by  Strassmaier,  that  neither  "  Darius  the  Mede  " 
nor  even  Belshazzar  bore  the  title  of  king  between  Nabu- 
na'id  and  Cyrus.     But  it  is  not  the  very  venial  error  in 

coloured  statements  of  Prof.  Sayce's  interesting  paper  in  the  Expositor!/  Times 
for  December,  1881,  I  have  already  protested  (p.  'J3).  The  Tell-el-Amarna 
tablets  introduce  a  fresh  element,  not  of  simplicity,  but  of  complication 
("  development  "is,  alas  !  not  such  a  simple  matter  as  theorists  used  to  sup- 
pose). But  E.  Meyer's  critical  inference  from  Egyptian  history  in  Stade's  Zt., 
1888,  pp.  47-40  (cf.  his  Gesch.  des  Alt.,  I,  202)  aj^pears  to  be  worth  a  corner  even 
of  Dr.  Driver's  limited  space. 

1  Few  probably  will  accept  Kohler's  suggestions  on  "  the  Chaldean  names  of 
Daniel  and  his  three  friends,"  in  the  /A.fur  Assyriolouie,  1889,  pp.  46-ol. 

-  Tlie  reported  "discovery  of  transcendent  importance"  relative  to  Gen. 
xiv.  18,  sinks  upon  examination  into  an  interesting  and  valuable  fact  about 
Jerusalem,  which  is  of  no  direct  importance  for  Gene.sis-criticism.  See  my 
Ilawp.  Lect.,  p.  4'>,  and  cf.  Zimmern,  Zt.  /.  Assi/riologic,  Sept.  1891,  p.  203. 
Let  popular  opoloijitic  writers  be  more  on  their  <jnard! 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  2G5 


the  original  statement  on  which  I  lay  stress,  but  the 
attitude  of  the  writer.  Out  of  excessive  sympathy  with 
old-fashioned  readers,  he  seems  to  forget  the  claims  of 
criticism.  The  words  of  Daniel  v.  31  should  be  in  them- 
selves sufftcient  to  prove  the  narrative  in  which  they  occur 
to  have  been  written  long  after  B.C.  536.^ 

Thirdly,  against  the  view  that  chap.  xi.  contains  true 
predictions,  the  author  should,  I  think,  have  urged  Nestle's 
certain  explanation  of  the  so-called  "  abomination  of 
desolation"  in  Stade's  Zeitschrift  for  1883''  (see  Bampt. 
Led.,  p.  105).  That  an  Exilic  prophet  should  have  used 
the  phrase  explained  by  Nestle,  Bishop  EUicott  himself 
will  admit  to  be  inconceivable.  I  will  not  blame  Dr.  Driver 
for  his  remark  on  p.  477  (line  28,  etc.),  but  I  believe  that 
it  is  not  quite  critical,  and  that  Nestle's  discovery  supplies 
the  last  fact  that  was  wanted  to  prove  to  the  general 
satisfaction  that  Daniel  xi.,  xii.  (and  all  that  belongs  to  it) 
was  written  in  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  I  say 
"the  last  fact,"  because  a  faithful  historical  explanation 
of  Daniel  xi.,  xii.  such  as  is  given  by  the  great  Church- 
Father  Hippolytus  in  the  lately  discovered  fourth  book 
of  his  commentary  ^ /orce.s  on  the  unprejudiced  mind  the 
conclusion  that  this  section  w'as  written  during  the  Syrian 

1  That  Mr.  Pinches  should  have  coine  forward  on  the  side  of  conservatism  at 
the  Church  Congress  in  IS'Jl,  is,  I  presume,  of  no  significance.  He  is  far  too 
modest  to  claim  to  have  studied  the  Book  of  Daniel  criticallj-.  The  same 
remark  probably  applies  to  Mr.  Flinders  Petrie  (see  Bampt.  Led.,  pp.  U,  \^). 
On  "  Darius  the  Mede,"  compare  Meinhold  (Beltrluje,  1888),  and  Sayce,  h'rcsli 
Light,  etc.  (188i),  p.  181,  who  however  unduly  blunts  the  edge  of  his  critical 
decision.  See  also  my  own  article  "  Daniel,"  for  an  incidental  evidence  of  the 
confusion  between  Cyrus  and  Darius  Hystaspis  from  1  Kings  x.  18,  Sept. 

-  Dr.  Driver  mentions  this  explanation  in  the  addenda  to  ed.  2.  But,  like 
Mr.  Bevau  (Daniel,  p.  193,  who  also  refers  to  Nestle),  he  thinks  the  "abomina- 
tion "  was  an  altar.  Surely,  as  lileek  saw,  it  was  (primarily  at  least)  a  statue. 
The  statue  of  Olympian  Zeus  bore  the  Divine  name,  and  the  altar  was  pre- 
sumably erected  before  it. 

■''  Fragments  of  the  Syriac  version  of  this  fourth  book  were  given  by  Lagarde, 
Analecta  Syriaca  (1838),  pp.  79-91.  Georgiades  discovered,  and  Dr.  E.  Bratke 
edited  the  complete  work  in  Greek  in  1891. 


26G  BE.   DRIVER'S  INTRODUCTION  TO 


persecution.  Hippolytus,  it  is  true,  did  not  draw  this  con- 
clusion, but  who  can  wonder  that  the  Neoplatonic  philo- 
sopher Porphyry  did?  And  should  we  not  be  ready  to 
learn  even  from  our  foes  ? 

Fourthly.  (The  reader  will  pardon  this  dry  arrange- 
ment under  heads  with  a  view  to  brevity.)  I  notice  on 
p.  479  the  same  confusion  which  occurs  elsewhere  between 
"tradition"  and  history.  I  do  not  think  that  any  critic 
who  agrees  on  the  main  point  with  Dr.  Driver  would  main- 
tain that  "  Daniel,  it  cannot  be  doubted,  was  a  historical 
person"  except  the  newly  converted  Delitzsch,  who,  as 
his  article  in  the  second  edition  of  Herzog's  Encyclopedia 
shows,  had  not  worked  his  way  to  perfect  clearness.  Listen 
to  the  late  Prof.  Eiehm,  who  is  now  just  obtaining  recog- 
nition among  us. 

"  The  material  of  his  narratives  the  author  may  partly  have  taken 
from  folk-tales  {aus  der  Volkssor/e),  though  at  any  rate  in  part  he 
invented  it  himself.  .  .  .  And  even  if  there  was  a  folk-tale  {Volks- 
sacje),  according  to  "which  Daniel  was  a  projahet  living  during  the 
Exile  and  distinguished  for  his  piety,  yet  the  historical  existence  of 
an  Exilic  propliet  Daniel  is  more  than  doubtful."^ 

One  must,  I  fear,  add  that  the  two  statements  mentioned 
in  note  -  as  resting  possibly  or  probably  on  a  basis  of  fact 
are,  the  one  very  doubtful,  the  other  now  admitted  to  be 
without  foundation. 

Fifthly,  as  to  the  date  of  the  composition  of  the  book. 
Dr.  Driver  states  this  to  be  at  earliest  about  B.C.  800,  but 
more  probably  B.C.  168  or  107  (p.  467).  Delitzsch  is  bolder 
and  more  critical ;  he  says  about  B.C.  108.  But  to  be  true 
to  all  the  facts,  we  ought  rather  to  say  that,  while  some 
evidence  points  to  a  date  not  earlier  than  B.C.  300,  other 
facts  point  to  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  and  per- 
haps more  definitely  still  to  the  period  between  the  end  of 
Dec.  105  (the  dedication' of  the  temple,  which  is  mentioned 

1  EinlcitUHfj  ill  das  A.T.,  ii.  30*). 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LTTERATURE.  267 

in  Daniel  viii.  1-1)  and  June  1G4  (the  end  of  the  seventieth 
year-week,  when  the  writer  of  Daniel  expected  the  tyrant 
Antiochus  to  "  come  to  his  end.").' 

It  was  a  pity  that  so  little  could  be  said  on  the  composition 
of  the  book.  Keuss  and  Lagarde  both  held  that  the  book 
was  made  up  of  a  number  of  separate  "  fly-sheets,"  and 
Dr.  C.  H.  H.  Wright  maintains  that  it  is  but  an  abridg- 
ment of  a  larger  work.  The  theories  of  Lenormant, 
Zockler,  and  Strack  also  deserved  a  mention.  On  Mein- 
hold's  theory  a  somewhat  too  hesitating  judgment  is  ex- 
pressed (p.  483),  which  should  be  compared  with  Mr. 
Bevan's  more  decided  view  in  his  Daniel.  From  the  form 
of  the  opening  sentence  of  par.  3  on  page  482,  I  conjecture 
that  something  on  this  subject  may  have  been  omitted. 
But  if  by  so  doing  the  author  obtained  more  room  for  his 
linguistic  arguments,  I  can  but  rejoice.  Gladly  do  I  call 
attention  to  the  soundness  of  the  facts  on  which  these  are 
based  and  the  truly  critical  character  of  his  judgments, 
and  more  particularly  to  what  is  said  on  the  Aramaic  of 
the  Book  of  Daniel,  and  the  eminently  fair  references  to 
Prof.  Margoliouth." 

But  the  treatment  of  the  language  of  Daniel  is  but  the 
climax  of  a  series  of  linguistic  contributions.  To  any  one 
who  has  eyes  to  see,  the  special  value  of  the  book  consists 
in  its  presentation  of  the  linguistic  evidence  of  the  date  of 
the  documents  (cf.  p.  106).  I  do  not  say  that  I  am  not 
sometimes  disappointed.  No  wonder ;  did  not  a  good 
scholar  like  Budde,  in  1876,  claim  the  Elihu-speeches  for 
the  original  Book  of  Job  on  grounds  of  language  ?  Often 
I  could  have  wished  both  that  more  evidence  were  given 

1  The  fullest  justification  of  this  is  given  by  Cornill,  Die  siehzlg  Jalirwochen 
Daniels  (Konigsberg,  1889);  cf.  Einleitung,  p.  258.  This  little  treatise  deserves 
a  fuller  criticism  than  it  has  yet  received. 

-  Mr.  Bevan's  mainly  linguistic  commentary  on  Daniel  and  Mr.  Brasted's 
study  on  the  order  of  the  sentences  in  the  Hebrew  portions  of  Daniel  {Ilcbraica, 
July,  1891,  p.  244,  etc.)  appeared  after  the  completion  of  Dr.  Driver's  work. 


268  DR.  BE  WEE'S  INTEODUCTION  TO 


and  a  more  definite  conclusion  reached  {e.g.  on  Joel)  ;  but  I 
recognise  the  difficulties  with  which  Dr.  Driver  had  to  con- 
tend, arising  partly  from  his  limited  space,  partly  from  the 
unfamiliarity  of  the  reader  with   this    style  of  argument. 
With  Dr.  Driver's  remark  in  the  Journal  of  Philosophy,  xi. 
133  (note  ')  I  agree,  and  when  Dr.  Briggs  suggests  that  in 
my  researches  on  the  Psalms  "the  argument  from  language 
is  not  employed  with  much  effect,"  ^  I  feel  that  if  not  quite 
as  firm  as  I  might  have  been,  I  have  been  at  least  as  bold 
as  Dr.  Driver  would  have  been  ;  indeed,  I  am  indebted  to 
m}^  colleague  for  criticisms  of  my  "  Linguistic  Affinities  of 
the  Psalms,"  which  tended  rather  to  the  limiting  than  to 
the  heightening  of  their  "  effect."     I  think  that  I  should 
now  be  able  to  put  forward  a  few  somewhat  more  definite 
conclusions  (positive  and  negative),  but  Dr.  Driver's   self- 
restraint  on  p.  361  will  perhaps  show  Dr.  Briggs  that  if 
I  erred,  it  was  in  good  company.     Let  me   add  that  tlie 
author  himself  has  not  lost  the  opportunity  of  giving  some 
sufficiently   definite   conclusions    on    the    development    of 
Hebrew    style.      It  is   on   a   paragraph    which   begins   by 
stating  that  "  the  great  turning-point  in  Hebrew  style  falls 
in  the  age  of  Nehemiah  "  (p.  473).     The  result  thus  indi- 
cated is  based  upon  much  careful  observation.     It  agrees 
substantially  with  the  view  of  H.  Ewald  {Lehrbuch,  p.  24), 
which  is  a  decided   improvement   upon  Gesenius's   {Gesch. 
tier.   hehr.  Spy.),  but  must  however,  as  I  believe,  be  quali- 
fied,   in    accordance    with    the   great   variety    of  Hebrew 
composition. - 

In  bringing  this  review  to  an  end,  let  me  say  once  more 
how  much  more  gladly  I  would  have  echoed  the  words  of 
that  generous-minded  eulogist  of  this  book — Prof.  Herbert 


^  In  a  very  generous  notice  of  Bampt.  Lcct.,  North  American  Ilevieic, 
January,  1892,  p.  106. 

-  Cf.  Bampt.  Led.,  pp.  4G0-4G3 ;  Geiger,  Uischrift,  pp.  40,  41.  I  need  not 
say  that  I  am  by  no  means  a  disciple  of  this  brilliant  but  too  hasty  critic. 


THE  OLD   TESTAMENT  LITERATURE.  2G9 

E.  Kyle.^  I  have  written  because  of  the  illusions  which 
seem  gathering  fresh  strength  or  assuming  new  forms 
among  us,  and  if  I  have  shown  some  eagerness,  I  trust 
that  it  has  been  a  chastened  eagerness.  The  work  before 
us  is  a  contribution  of  value  to  a  great  subject,  and  if 
the  facts  and  theories  which  it  so  ably  presents  should 
influence  the  higher  religious  teaching,  no  one  would 
rejoice  more  than  myself.  But  solid,  judicious,  and  in 
one  place  brilliant  as  it  is,  it  requires  much  supplementing 
as  a  sketch  of  the  present  state  of  criticism — not  merely  in 
the  sense  in  which  this  must  be  true  of  even  the  best 
handbooks,  but  for  reasons  which  have,  as  I  hope,  been 
courteously  stated.  The  author  appears  to  have  thought 
that  criticism  of  the  Bible  was  one  of  those  shy  Alpine 
plants  of  which  it  has  been  well  said  that  "  we  can  easily 
give  our  plants  the  soil  they  require,  but  we  cannot  give 
them  the  climate  and  atmosphere  ;  the  climate  and  atmo- 
sphere are  of  as  much  importance  to  their  well-being  as 
carefully  selected  soil."  I  venture,  however,  to  hope  that 
he  is  unduly  fearful,  and  that  the  mental  climate  and 
atmosphere  of  England  is  no  longer  so  adverse  as  formerly 
to  a  free  but  reverent  Biblical  criticism.  Indeed,  one  of  my 
chief  grounds  for  advocating  such  a  criticism  is  that  it 
appears  to  me  to  be  becoming  more  and  more  necessary 
for  the  maintenance  of  true  evangelical  religion.  It  is, 
therefore,  in  the  name  of  the  Apostle  of  Faith  that  one 
of  the  weakest  of  his  followers  advocates  a  firmer  treat- 
ment of  all  parts  of  the  grave  historical  problem  of  the 
origin  of  our  religion. 

T.  K.  Cheyne. 

^  See  Critical  Review,  Jan.,  1892. 


270 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 
III. 

Peeiiaps  the  most  sublime  passage  in  all  literature  is  that 
march  of  God  in  Habakkuk,  beside  which  the  rush  of 
Achilles,  with  his  helmet  blazing  like  a  baleful  star,  shines 
very  dimly.  And  the  most  awful  phrase  in  that  tremen- 
dous poem  tells  us  that  "Before  Him  went  the  pestilence." 
It  is  a  lurid  expression  of  one  side  of  what  we  think  of  God, 
the  Avenger,  the  jealous  God.  Egypt  mourning  for  her 
firstborn  learned  to  know  Jehovah  preceded  by  that  grim 
forerunner. 

How  comes  it,  now,  that  such  a  conception  of  the  Lord 
has  fallen  quite  into  the  back-ground,  so  that  our  hymns 
and  litanies  never  say,  "  Before  Him  went  the  pestilence," 
but  love  to  proclaim  that  "  Mercy  and  truth  go  before  His 
face  "  ?  We  owe  the  victory  of  the  milder  conception  most 
of  all  to  the  life,  to  the  words  and  works  of  Jesus.  AVe  owe 
the  harmony  and  fulness  of  our  belief  that  God  is  love  to 
the  harmony,  fulness,  and  consistent  vividness  of  His 
character,  in  Whom  Christendom  adores  her  manifested 
and  incarnate  God.  And  this  is  the  supreme  greatness  of 
our  creed.  Sir  Edwin  Arnold  himself  does  not  pretend  that 
even  the  Buddha  of  his  daring  romance  taught  this  lesson. 

"  Thy  Jesus  filled 
The  leaf  of  wisdom  iu,  and  wrote  for  men 
The  name  Lord  Buddha  would  not  say  nor  spell, 

, Denying  not, 

Affirming  not,  but  finding  no  word  fit 
Saving  the  Wordless,  the  Immeasurable, 
But  thou,  reporting     .     .     .     dost  inscribe 
This  mighty  name  of  Lore." 

—  The  Light  of  the  World. 

But  it  is  absolutely  certain  that  this  supreme  issue  of  the 
teaching  of  Jesus,  by  which  He  draws  all  men  unto  Him,  is 
not  the  result  of  abstract  moralizing,  but  of  the  clear,  har- 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  271 

muuioLis,  and  vital  presentment  of  Ilis  own  life,  that  life  in 

which  His  church  sees  God. 

"The  AVord  luid  fiesh,  aud  wrought 
With  human  hands  the  creed  of  creeds, 
In  h^vclincss  of  perfect  deeds." 

This  is  the  charm  of  the  religion  of  Jesus,  and  the  spell 
would  have  been  broken  by  the  slightest  admixture  of  miry 
clay  with  the  pure  gold  of  this  unparalleled  and  marvellous 
conception.  Students  may  prefer  to  dwell  upon  the  lofty 
precepts  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount ;  but  they  are  dull 
students  who  fail  to  observe  that  the  public,  the  church,  the 
masses,  are  much  more  powerfully  affected  by  such  words 
as  "  Jesus  wept."  Now  these  words  occur  in  the  story  of  a 
miracle.  And  all  the  miracles  of  Jesus  deepen  our  sense  of 
perfect  love  and  absolute  condescension.  Any  inquirer  (and 
there  are  many  such)  who  hesitates  to  accept  the  miracu- 
lous, while  conscious  of  a  divine  power  and  reality  in  the 
gospel  story,  of  a  life  which  throbs  there,  can  easily  do  more 
to  help  himself  than  many  subtle  arguments  can  do  for  him. 
He  can  score  out  of  the  four  Gospels  all  the  miraculous 
narratives,  and  then  carefully  read  over  and  weigh  the 
residue.  The  first  thing  which  will  probably  arrest  his 
mind  is  the  remarkable  identity  of  character  in  what  re- 
mains and  what  is  cancelled.  The  next  is  that  somehow 
this  character  is  no  longer  so  well  accounted  for.  The  key 
to  its  idiosyncrasies  is  lost.  Still,  for  example.  He  teaches 
with  authority  ;  but  His  "  Verily  I  say  "  does  not  appear  so 
reasonable,  so  decisive,  as  when  He  also  with  authority 
commanded  even  the  unclean  spirits.  A  certain  lack  of 
argument,  syllogism,  logical  demonstration  is  felt,  for  the 
first  time,  in  the  absence  of  demonstrations  of  another  kind. 
He  will  find  moreover  that  the  picture  has  faded  woefully, 
which  is  strange,  considering  that  what  has  been  expunged 
is  no  part  of  it,  so  that  the  tints  should  have  brightened, 
and  the  fiirures  should  stand  out  better  from  the  canvas. 


272  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 


On  the  contraiy,  much  of  the  love  and  condescension,  the 
forbearance  and  thonghtfuhiess  for  others,  is  now  compara- 
tively dim  and  indistinct.  The  meekness  of  Jesus  is  cer- 
tainly not  so  adorable,  so  inspiring  an  example,  as  when  we 
felt  that  He  could  have  summoned  legions  of  angels  to  His 
side,  while  in  fact  He  only  healed  His  persecutor's  wound. 

The  investigator  may  now  ask  himself  whetheit,  like  a 
skilful  restorer,  he  has  removed  only  dust  and  smoke,  the 
accretions  of  a  later  day,  or  has  unhappily  cleaned  away 
much  of  the  inimitable,  the  divine  picture  itself.  The 
miracles  answered  their  highest  purpose,  said  Neander,  in 
vividly  exhibiting  the  nature  of  Christ. 

Think  how  unbelievers  explain  the  presence  of  the  mir- 
acles. First  of  all,  there  were  the  portents  of  the  Old 
Testament,  inflaming  the  public  imagination,  and  forcing 
similar  prodigies  into  the  Messianic  legend.  "  It  was  known 
in  detail,"  said  Strauss,  "  what  sort  of  miracles  Jesus,  being 
the  Messiah,  must  have  performed."  He  tells  us  that 
nameless  lepers  were  cleansed,  because  the  heroes  of  the  Old 
Testament  healed  Miriam  for  whom  a  nation  mourned,  and 
Naaman  for  whom  a  sovereign  interceded.  Six  pots  of 
water  were  turned  into  wine,  to  rival  the  plague  which  con- 
verted the  mighty  Nile  into  blood,  of  which  wine  is  a  type. 
A  meal  had  to  be  given,  lest  the  Messiah  should  be  out- 
stripped by  him  who  fed  a  whole  nation  during  forty  years, 
and  it  had  to  be  repeated  because  the  former  miracle  was 
mentioned  twice.  As  there  were  quails,  with  the  manna, 
knee-deep  all  around  the  camp,  therefore  Jesus  added  fish 
(for  which  Israel  had  murmured  vainly)  to  the  barley-bread 
which  made  so  fine  a  substitute  for  angel's  food.  Because 
the  nation  marched  through  the  Red  Sea,  and  Pharaoh  was 
engulfed,  therefore  Jesus  walked  upon  a  lake,  and  Peter  nar- 
rowly escaped  with  his  life.  Because  God  spoke  to  Moses 
in  thunder  from  Mount  Sinai  before  a  whole  nation  which 
trembled,  therefore  two  human  beings  appeared  to  Jesus  on 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  273 


Hermon,  before  three  spectators  \Yho  just  kept  awake.  Such 
is  the  issue  of  an  imperative  instinct,  which  commanded 
that  the  Messiah  should  not  "  be  outstripped."  Never 
surely  was  the  mythical  impulse  at  once  so  busy  and  so 
modest.  These  absurdities  are  heightened  by  assertions 
that  the  Messiah  had  "to  excel  the  prophet"  Elijah,  and 
"  to  do  at  least  as  much,"  whereas  it  is  frankly  recorded 
that  Jesus  was  challenged  to  show  a  sign  from  heaven  (as 
Elijah  did  on  Carmel),  and  refused  ;  and  again  that  He 
rebuked  His  disciples  for  wishing,  like  him,  to  call  down  fire 
upon  His  enemies.  Yet  even  Keim,  in  his  perplexed  and 
hesitating  discussion  of  the  first  cure  of  leprosy,  when  his 
reluctance  to  admit  the  supernatural  is  well-nigh  balanced 
by  his  sense  of  the  verisimilitude  of  the  story,  appeals  to  the 
repeated  mention  of  leprosy  in  the  story  of  Moses,  and  to 
the  healing  of  Naaman. 

We  shall  presently  have  to  ask  the  meaning  of  what  is  so 
plain  in  the  above  examples,  the  total  absence  of  any  desire 
to  outstrip,  or  even  to  rival,  the  stupendous  and  shattering 
miracles  which  are  connected  with  the  Exodus.  In  the 
meantime,  these  parallel  cases,  in  all  of  which  the  advan- 
tage of  bulk  and  brilliance  must  be  conceded  to  the  earlier 
story,  are  an  admirable  commentary  upon  Schenkel's  reck- 
less phrase,  "As  Moses  had  drawn  water  from  the  rock  to 
refresh  the  thirsty  and  had  fed  the  hungry  with  manna,  as 
Elijah  and  Elisha  had  healed  the  sick,  how  natural  was  it 
to  ascribe  greater  and  more  glorious  deeds  to  one  who  was 
unquestionably  greater  than  Moses  and  more  glorious  than 
Elijah,  .  .  .  seeking  by  such  hyperboles  to  give  expres- 
sion ...  to  the  sacred  glow  of  their  admiration,  love, 
and  reverence"  {Sketch  21,  22).  In  candour  we  should  have 
been  reminded  that,  except  the  raising  of  Lazarus  alone, 
every  one  of  these  remarkable  hyperboles,  devised  by  the 
"religiously  inspired  imagination"  of  "followers  touched 
to  the  uttermost,"  as  a  rival  prodigy  falls  absurdly  short  of 

vov.  V.  1 8 


274  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 


what  it  is  asserted  to  compete  with.  No  such  explanation 
would  explain  anything,  if  only  the  average  reader  would 
compare  the  facts  with  the  theories  which  profess  to  ac- 
count for  them.^ 

In  the  meantime,  these  passages  are  an  invaluable  proof, 
from  hostile  sources,  that  the  gospel  iniracles  are  not  the 
natural  outcome  of  such  tendencies,  and,  what  is  more  im- 
portant, that  the  Messianic  expectations,  the  popular  de- 
mands, the  requirements  of  the  Time-Spirit,  when  Jesus 
came,  would  have  scorned  to  accept  any  such  limp  and 
bloodless  achievements  as  the  charm  of  an  exalted  person- 
ality might  work  upon  the  nerves  of  the  hysterical. 

The  explanation  of  the  miracles  by  nervous  excitement 
is,  from  quite  another  point  of  view^  forbidden  by  the  facts. 
Of  all  great  teachers,  Jesus  was  the  most  reasonable,  sober, 
and  unexciting.  Every  one  has  noticed  the  small  part  given 
to  penalty  and  spiritual  terrors  in  His  treatment  of  all  but 
the  most  stubborn  and  insolent  sin.  He  imposes  silence 
upon  every  approach  to  demonstrative  and  revivalistic  testi- 
mony. He  does  not  strive  nor  cry.  In  form.  His  teaching 
is  often  paradoxical :  it  pierces  deep  and  demands  every- 
thing ;  but  it  is  reasonable  in  the  purest  and  highest  sense. 
The    Christian   war,    the    Christian  building   must  not   be 

^  But  so  delicieut  are  most  readers  iu  this  faculty  of  simple,  observation,  this 
vigilauce  of  the  mind,  that  many  readers  were  befooled  by  J.  S.  Mill's  wickedly 
reckless  assertion,  "  Christ  is  never  said  to  have  declared  any  evidence  of  His 
mission  (unless  His  own  interpretation  of  the  prophecies  be  so  considered) 
except  internal  conviction  "  {Essays  on  lielifjion,  p.  2-10).  The  sting  of  this 
passage  is  not  in  any  opinion  which  Mill  may  entertain,  going  behind  the  docu- 
ments, about  what  Jesus  taught.  This  we  can  take  for  what  it  is  worth.  What 
imposes  on  people  is  the  assertion,  by  a  man  of  intellectual  rank,  that  more 
than  this  is  never  claimed  for  Him,  "  is  never  said."  This  meaus  that  He  is 
never  recorded  to  have  said,  "  That  ye  may  know  that  the  Sou  of  Man  hath 
power  to  forgive  sius,  take  up  thy  Bed  and  walk  "  ;  nor  acain,  "  If  I  by  the  lin- 
ger of  God  cast  oat  devils,  no  doubt  the  kingdom  of  God  is  come  unto  j'ou  "  ; 
nor,  "  If  I  had  not  done  among  them  the  works  that  none  other  man  did,  they 
had  not  had  sin  "  ;  nor,  "  Believe  Me  for  the  very  work's  sake."  The  assertion 
is  an  impressive  warning  to  the  credulous,  not  all  of  whom  are  Christians,  since 
it  appears  that  Mill  believed  this. 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST,  275 

undertaken  without  lirst  sitting  down  to  count  the  cost. 
If  one  impulsively  ofifers  to  follow  Jesus  anywhere,  he  is 
reminded  that  the  Son  of  Man  hath  not  where  to  lay  His 
head.  Instead  of  heated  nocturnal  assemblies,  we  find  our- 
selves in  the  daylight  and  the  fresh  air.  Eenan's  eye  for 
the  picturesque  has  seen  correctly  that  "  Jesus  lived  with 
His  disciples  almost  altogether  in  the  open  air.  Sometimes 
He  entered  a  boat,  and  taught  them  congregated  on  the 
beach.  Sometimes  He  sat  upon  the  mountains  which 
fringed  the  lake,  where  the  atmosphere  is  so  pure  and  the 
horizon  so  lucid  "  (F.  de  J.,  172).  But  how  does  all  this 
agree  with  the  notion  that  overstimulated  nervous  excite- 
ment is  the  true  explanation  of  the  success  of  the  Carpenter 
and  His  fishermen,  that  it  worked  His  miracles  for  Him  by 
hysterical  expectation,  and  after  His  death  beheld  Him  by 
consentient  hallucinations,  and  of  all  times  and  places  did 
this  on  a  breezy  mountain,  and  when  they  went  a-fishing  ? 

Look  again  at  the  style  of  Jesus.  Never  w^as  teacher  so 
full  of  vivid  illustrations,  but  His  allusions  are  not  to  thun- 
der, earthquake,  and  volcano;  they  are  to  dawn  and  sunset, 
birds  and  grasses,  seeds  growing  silently,  leaven  leavening 
the  lump.  Even  the  same  image  which  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment was  thrown  into  sublime  and  lofty  forms,  becomes 
homely,  vivid  indeed  and  picturesque,  but  unstrained,  when 
Jesus  uses  it.  The  lion  out  of  the  forest  that  rends  them 
becomes  a  wolf  that  scattereth  the  flock.  The  eagle  that 
fluttered  over  her  young  is  now  the  hen  that  would  have 
sheltered  her  chickens.  "\Ve  miss  the  oak,  the  palm,  the 
cedar,  and  the  terebinth ;  but  we  find  instead  a  tiny  seed 
that  actually  becomes  a  tree,  tall  enough  for  birds  to  shelter 
in.  Eead  any  page  of  Thomas  Carlyle,  and  then  any 
chapter  of  the  discourses  of  Jesus,  and  it  will  become  very 
plain  that  no  teaching  is  less  calculated  to  produce  halluci- 
nation, extravagance,  or  hysterical  delusions. 

Precisely  the  same  character,  calm,  absolutely  balanced. 


276  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

utterly  unfit  for  the  stimulating  of  false  excitement,  is 
actually  to  be  recognised  in  the  process  of  working  the  very 
miracles  which  are  explained  by  popular  excitement.  And 
this  fact  has  a  double  value.  It  not  only  refutes  this  theory, 
but  also  identifies  the  character  of  Jesus  in  this  part  of  the 
story  and  in  the  rest,  and  so  establishes  their  common  origin. 
Thus  when  the  belief  of  any  sufferer  is  so  weak  as  to  re- 
quire special  confirmation,  the  emotions  are  not  inflamed, 
but  repressed  and  calmed ;  not  a  stimulant,  but  exercise  is 
administered  to  faith.  Some  He  sends  to  a  distance,  to 
wash  at  an  appointed  fountain,  or  to  show  themselves  to 
the  priests.  Others  He  takes  aside,  withdrawing  them  from 
the  excited  crowd.  Matter-of-fact  questions  are  put  to 
the  excited  demoniacs  or  their  friends  :  What  is  thy  name  ? 
How  long  is  it  since  this  came  upon  him  ?  Everything  is 
calm,  and  fitted  to  calm  the  patient ;  it  is  a  method  ac- 
curately the  reverse  of  what  the  sceptical  theory  demands. 

The  same  temperament  reappears  when  the  miracle  is 
wrought.  Sometimes  He  conveys  Himself  away  so  un- 
obtrusively that  the  sufferer  only  discovers  afterwards  to 
whom  he  is  indebted.  Very  often  He  charges  them  not  to 
make  Him  known.  In  a  moment  when  amazement  has 
paralysed  the  practical  energies  of  all  others,  Jesus  is  keenly 
observant.  He  provides  for  her  healthy  appetite  when  the 
daughter  of  Jairus  has  recovered ;  He  delivers  to  the  widow 
of  Nain  the  son  from  whom,  as  from  an  unearthly  and 
spell-bound  being,  she  still  held  aloof;  and  He  is  careful 
that  Lazarus  should  be  disentangled  from  his  graveclothes.^ 
Thus  He  is  divinely  at  home  among  His  wonders,  and  quite 
as  ready  to  remove  trouble  by  a  familiar  word  afterwards  as 
by  the  summons  which  recalls  the  dead.     In  His  greatest 

1  No  mythical  impulse  could  have  infused  into  three  events  in  various  docu- 
ments these  curiously  diverse  j-et  harmonious  touches,  of  which  tlie  consistent 
individuality  is  left  unnoticed  by  Farrar,  Geikie,  and  Edersheim.  All  these 
writers  indeed  have  passed  one  or  more  of  the  charming  incidents  in  question 
without  mention. 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  277 

miracles  He  is  much  more  truly  the  good  Phj^sician  than 
the  dazzling  Thaumaturgist. 

We  find,  then,  in  the  modest  scale  of  the  Christian 
miracles,  compared  with  those  of  Jewish  history,  a  con- 
vincing refutation  of  the  sceptical  argument,  and  also  clear 
marks  of  identity  with  the  admitted  character  of  Jesus. 
But  this  is  not  all.  His  aims,  and  therefore  the  effect 
which  His  miracles  should  produce,  were  entirely  different 
from  those  of  Moses  and  of  Elijah.  One  of  these  had  to 
execute  judgment  on  all  the  gods  of  Egypt,  the  other  had 
to  wring  from  apostate  Israel  the  confession  that  only 
Jehovah  was  Elohim.  The  praise  of  Jethro  (as  commonly 
understood)  is  exactly  w'hat  was  desired  by  both  :  "  Now 
know  I  that  Jehovah  is  greater  than  all  gods,  yea,  in  the 
thing  wherein  they  dwelt  proudly."  And  this  avowal  was 
extorted  by  an  overwhelming  display  of  those  physical 
powers  for  the  sake  of  which  false  gods  were  adored,  as 
may  be  clearly  seen  by  the  competition  of  the  magicians 
in  Egypt,  and  by  Elijah's  appeal,  in  rivalry  with  Baal,  to 
the  test  of  an  answer  by  fire.  What  had  to  be  made  good 
was  a  supremacy  in  power.  Therefore  Egypt  was  visited 
with  every  form  of  loathsome  and  dreadful  plague,  ending 
in  the  wholesale  destruction  of  the  very  flower  of  the  nation. 
Therefore  all  nature  was  made  to  own  its  Master ;  the  river 
rolled  down  blood ;  the  sun  was  darkened ;  the  sea  was 
rent  asunder  by  an  obedient  tempest ;  and  presently  the 
wliole  mountain  of  Sinai  burned  with  fire  up  to  heaven. 
Therefore,  again,  the  flame  of  God  consumed  the  sacrifice 
on  Carmel,  and  drought  and  famine,  and  afterwards  rain, 
were  obedient  to  the  prayers  of  a  mortal. 

Very  difi'erent  was  the  task  of  Jesus  among  a  people  who 
had  no  doubt  whatever  about  the  worship  of  Jehovah  and 
the  vanity  of  idols.  And  no  more  delicate  problem  could 
be  devised  than  this  one  ;  by  what  degree  and  kind  of 
miracle  should  a  Messiah  best  authenticate  his  claim,  w^ho 


278  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

did  not  profess  to  establish  the  pretensions  of  a  new  Deit)'-, 
or  to  overwhehn  a  rival  god,  but  on  the  contrary  to 
establish  a  true  character  of  that  God  who  was  already 
worshipped,  and  even  to  exhibit  it,  being  Himself  God 
manifest  in  the  flesh.  This  problem,  like  many  others 
apparently  insoluble,  Jesus  solved  without  hesitation  and 
without  an  effort.  For  it  is  evident  that  the  mind  of  God 
is  most  clearly  shown,  not  by  what  is  exceptional  but  by 
His  usual  course,  which  therefore  ought  not  to  be  disturbed 
by  such  an  envoy,  even  when  He  overstepped  its  range. 
The  convulsions  of  nature  and  the  diseases  of  men  are 
disorders,  penal  interruptions,  His  "strange  work,"  and 
they  shall  cease  when  His  full  purpose  is  worked  out. 
Therefore  these  could  have  no  place  in  the  works  of  One, 
in  whom  God  was  reconciling  the  world  unto  Himself,  and 
whom  He  sent  not  to  judge  the  world. 

Now  the  whole  work  of  Jesus  was  a  restoration  of  har- 
mony to  convulsed  nature,  and  of  health  to  afflicted  men. 
When  this  is  observed,  the  alleged  rivalry  between  Christian 
miracles  and  those  of  Moses  and  Elijah  is  converted  into 
a  most  instructive  contrast.  At  the  bidding  of  Moses  all 
the  water  of  Egypt  was  polluted ;  Jesus  only  supplied  wine 
when  it  had  failed.  Elijah  smote  the  land  with  famine  ; 
Jesus  only  gave  bread  to  the  hungry.  Moses  stretched 
out  his  rod,  and  the  sea  overwhelmed  Pharaoh  ;  Jesus  only 
rebuked  the  wind  and  the  waves,  and  there  was  a  great 
calm.  All  this  could  never  have  been  astutely  devised  by 
the  criticism  of  the  early  church,  because  the  Apocryphal 
Gospels  are  in  quite  another  style,  and  because  the  sceptics 
even  of  our  own  time  are  unaware  of  this  change  of  tone. 
Thus  Renan  tells  us  that  "  the  coming  of  Messiah  with  His 
glories  and  terrors,  the  nations  trampling  on  each  other, 
the  convulsion  of  heaven  and  earth,  were  the  familiar  food 
of  His  imagination  "  {Vie  de  J.,  p.  40j.  But  Jesus  actually 
convulses  nothing.     Strauss  appeals  to  "  tlic  iirodudion  and 


THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  279 


cure  of  leprosy"  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  to  the  fact 
that  Miriam  was  first  visited  with  leprosy  for  having  "  had 
the  audacity  to  rebel  against  her  brother,"  and  afterwards 
relieved,  and  he  also  mentions  the  punishment  of  Gehazi ; 
but  he  omits  to  explain  the  fact  that  no  person  is  thus 
afflicted  for  disrespect  to  Jesus.  "Leprosy,  and  the  healing 
of  leprosy,"  says  Keim,  "appear  in  connection  with  Moses 
from  the  time  when  he  was  first  called,  as  well  as  in  con- 
nection with  the  miracle-working  prophets  of  the  ninth 
pre-Christian  century,  especially  Elisha"  {Jesus  of  Na,zara, 
iii.  210,  11).  But  he,  too,  remains  quite  unconscious  of  the 
problem  why  it  is  that  not  "leprosy"  but  only  "  the  heal- 
ing of  leprosj^ "  has  been  taken  over  into  the  New  Testa- 
ment, by  the  mythical  impulse,  so  jealous  of  those  exploits. 
In  truth,  Neander  is  right  when  he  insists  that  the 
miracles  are  a  part  of  Christ's  humiliation.  They  are 
so  because,  intentionally  and  in  the  face  of  taunt  and 
challenge.  He  abstains  from  all  glittering  and  conspicuous 
works,  neither  casting  Himself  from  the  temple  summits, 
nor  exhibiting  "  a  sign  from  heaven,"  nor  granting  to  "this 
generation,"  to  official  inquisition  or  to  the  public  in  bulk, 
and  as  a  w^hole,  any  sign  whatever,  not  so  much  as  thunder 
in  barley  harvest  or  the  return  of  a  shadow  on  a  dial. 
They  are  so  because,  in  every  one  of  them,  Jesus  is  among 
us  as  He  that  serveth,  breaking  the  bread  for  the  hungry, 
rudely  awakened  by  the  terrified,  touching  the  defilement 
of  the  leper,  the  bleeding  wound  of  Malchus,  the  cold  and 
defiling  hand  of  the  dead.  They  are  so,  again,  because, 
unlike  any  wonderworker  of  the  Old  Testament,  He  w'as 
disobeyed  and  slandered  with  absolute  impunity.  He 
charged  the  restored  not  to  make  Him  known,  but  they 
blazed  it  the  more  abroad,  yet  retained  their  health  :  He 
asked.  Where  are  the  nine  ?  yet  their  cleansing  held  good  : 
the  impotent  man  betrayed  Him  to  a  hostile  quest,  but 
we  read  not  that  any  worse  thing  came  upon  him. 


280  THE  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 


And  yet,  in  the  midst  of  this  lowly  gentleness,  there  is 
one  respect,  and  that  all-important,  in  which  His  works  are 
entirely  without  a  parallel.  They  are  wrought  by  no  in- 
vocation of  any  greater  name.  Instead  of  soliciting,  He 
bestows.  And  it  is  a  strong  evidence  of  the  consistent 
truth  of  the  story,  that  very  early  indeed  this  peculiarity 
was  observed  by  every  one,  so  that  the  bystanders  said,  With 
authority  He  commandeth  even  the  unclean  spirits;  and  the 
centurion  compared  His  action  to  that  of  an  officer  saying, 
Go,  and  Come ;  and  the  Pharisees  demanded,  By  what 
authority  doest  Thou  these  things? 

It  is  a  strange  irony  that  the  only  apparent  exception  is 
found  in  that  Gospel  which  is  loudly  charged  with  suppress- 
ing all  the  lowlier  and  more  human  manifestations  of  His 
nature.  It  is  in  the  words.  Father,  I  thank  Thee  that 
Thou  hast  heard  Me. 

In  the  miracles  of  Jesus  He  is  meek,  unobtrusive,  willing 
that  His  followers  should  perform  greater  works  than  these. 
But  they  are  the  manifestations  of  a  God  who  is  not  above 
but  within  Him,  and  they  are  quiet,  beautiful  and  benig- 
nant as  the  ordinary  ways  of  God  ;  even  as  He  said.  Many 
fair  {koXu)  works  have  I  shown  you  from  My  Father. 

G.  A.  Chad  WICK. 


281 


THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF  THE  JOHANNEAN 
QUESTION. 

Y.     The  Author  {continued). 

My  contention  is  that  the  author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel 
not  only  shows  his  Jewish  origin  by  his  knowledge  of 
Palestinian  topography,  by  the  cast  of  his  style,  by  his  in- 
terpretation of  Jewish  names  (a  topic  on  which  I  have  not 
enlarged,  but  which  will  be  found  excellently  treated  by 
Bishop  Lightfoot),^  by  the  frequency  of  his  quotations  from 
the  Old  Testament,  and  by  the  probability  that  in  some  of 
them  he  has  been  influenced  by  his  acquaintance  either 
with  the  original  text  or  with  the  current  Aramaic  para- 
phrases,— but  that  more  than  this,  his  mind  is  really 
steeped  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  that  his  leading  ideas 
stand  as  much  in  a  direct  line  with  the  Old  Testament  as 
those  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  Peter. 

Here  I  am  aware  that  I  come  to  some  extent  into  col- 
lision with  Dr.  Schiirer,  though  he  is  clearly  conscious  of 
another  side  to  the  question  besides  that  to  which  he 
seems  himself  to  give  the  preference.  He  strikes  a  balance 
between  the  opposing  arguments  thus  : — 

"  It  cannot  be  questioned  that  the  author  o£  the  Fourth  Gospel  has 
imbibed  Greek  culture  (ein  Mann  von  griechischer  Bildung  war). 
And  we  may  add  that  this  culture  was  that  of  Hellenistic  Judaism  in 
the  form  in  which  it  is  specially  represented  l)y  Philo.  Can  we  assume 
this  for  the  Apostle  John?  The  opponents  of  the  genuineness  lay 
great  stress  on  this  head,  pointing  more  particularly  to  the  marked 
coincidences  between  the  sphere  of  thought  in  our  Gospel  and  the 
I'hilonian,  e.g.  in  regard  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Logos.  Tlie  Evangelist, 
they  think,  was  trained  in  the  Alexandrian  philosophy,  which  could 
not  be  expected  of  the  Apostle.  The  defenders  begin  by  seeking  to 
reduce  the  measure  of  Hellenic  culture  in  our  Evangelist  as  much  as 
possible.  jMany  deny  broadly  that  our  Evangelist  Avas  influenced  bj- 
specifically  Philonian  ideas  at  all.     Sncli  a  degree  of  Greek  culture  as 

1  ExrosiTOK,  1890,  i.  17-19. 


282  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 

the  Evangelist  really  exhibits,  they  think  that  the  Apostle  John  might 
have  acquired  iu  his  later  life  among  his  Greek  sun'oundings  at 
Ephesns.  The  question  therefore  stands  under  this  head  pretty  much 
as  it  does  in  regard  to  his  anti-Jewish  standpoint.  Is  it  probable  that 
tlie  Apostle  John  in  his  later  yeai's  .should  have  undergone  such  a 
change  ?  It  is  harder  to  answer  this  question  in  the  affirmative  in 
proportion  to  the  degree  of  Hellenic  culture  avIiicIl  one  is  compelled  to 
attribute  to  the  Evangelist."  ^ 

My  own  position  is  one  which  Dr.  Schlirer  would  think 
a  rather  extreme  one  ;  it  also  marks  what  will  be  from  his 
point  of  view  a  distinct  retrogression.  When  I  wrote  on 
St.  John  twenty  years  ago,  I  went  with  the  stream  in 
conceding  a  decided  influence  of  Philonian  or  at  least 
Alexandrian  philosophy.  My  present  tendency  is,  if  not 
absolutely  to  deny  such  influence,  at  least  to  reduce  it 
within  very  narrow  limits  ;  to  regard  it  as  in  any  case  ex- 
tremely remote  and  indirect,  and  not  comparable  for  a 
moment  with  the  influence  of  the  Old  Testament. 

I  know  that  in  forming  this  opinion  some  will  think  me 
actuated  by  an  apologetic  motive.  I  can  only  reply,  that 
if  that  is  so,  I  am  not  conscious  of  it  ;  but  that  I  have 
rather  tried  to  exercise  a  certain  watchfulness  over  myself ; 
and  that  I  have  moved  rather  more  slowly  than  I  might 
otherwise  have  done.  Since  I  wrote  much  of  course  has 
been  published  on  this  subject.  Dr.  Westcott's  great  com- 
mentary and  the  many  solid  works  by  Dr.  B.  AVeiss  (6th 
edition  of  Meyer's  Commentary,  ISSO ;  BihUsche  Theologie, 
4th  edition,  1884;  Einleitung,  1886),  who  has  always  con- 
sistently rejected  the  Philonian  theory,  as  well  as  Franke's 
Das  alte  Testament  hei  Johannes,  have  not  been  without  their 
effect  upon  me.  I  will  not  however  appeal  to  these,  but 
will  take  one  or  two  writers  on  Dr.  Schiirer's  own  side  of 
the  question  to  show  that  there  is  at  least  a  rather  strong 
set  of  the  tide  in  the  direction  I  have  taken. 

It  has  not  been  my  fortune  so  far  to  speak  with  very 

'    I'orlnig,  j).  i'.!»f. 


THE  JOIIANNEAN  QUESTION.  283 

great  respect  of  Herr  Thoma,  The  main  body  of  his  book 
I  consider  to  be  very  wide  of  the  mark.  On  the  subject 
of  topography,  with  which  we  were  last  deahng,  he  has 
notions  which  seem  to  me  of  a  very  airy  texture  indeed,  and 
they  come  out  in  close  juxtaposition  to  the  passage  I  am 
going  to  quote  :  but  tliat  passage  is  so  admirable,  not  merely 
for  my  present  purpose,  but  as  a  real  expression  of  the 
facts,  that  I  have  a  peculiar  pleasure  in  quoting  it.  It 
touches  on  some  other  points  both  before  and  behind  that 
with  which  we  are  now  dealing. 

••  This  fi'iendliuess  towards  the  Gentiles  -whieh  the  Evangelist  shares 
with  the  Apostle  [of  the  Gentiles]  serves  as  little  as  his  dislike  of  the 
Jews  to  prove  his  Gentile  origin.  On  the  contrary,  his  whole  cultnre, 
the  circle  of  ideas  in  wdiich  he  is  at  home,  the  language  which  is 
familiar  to  him,  point  to  a  Jewish  or  Jewish-Christian  origin. 

"  True,  the  Samaritan  Justin  has  also  a  very  good  knowledge  of  Scrip- 
ture. But  the  way  in  which  he  applies  it  shows  that  this  know^ledge 
has  been  acquired  for  learned  and  literary  use  in  polemics  and  apolo- 
getics ;  it  is  rather  an  importation  from  without  of  foreign  material 
which  he  has  built  into  his  walls.  With  the  Evangelist,  on  the  other 
hand,  one  sees  that  he  has  sucked  in  a  Jewish  way  of  thinking  with 
his  mother's  milk,  that  from  a  child  he  has  been  fed  upon  the  living- 
bread  of  the  "Word  of  God,  that  from  his  youth  up  he  has  read  the 
Holy  Scriptures  and  steeped  himself  in  their  ideas,  figures  of  speech, 
and  words  of  expression,  so  that  the  reminiscences  of  them  come  out 
as  if  they  were  something  of  his  own,  rather  an  unconscious  and  spon- 
taneous manner  of  thinking  and  speaking  than  as  quotation  and  in- 
terju-etation. 

■■  Along  with  this  he  is  ac([aainted  with  Jewish  customs  and  usages, 
and  that  such  as  are  not  to  be  got  from  the  Old  Testament,  or  such  as 
might  impress  themselves  vividly  and  faniiliai-ly  upon  a  spectator 
from  observing  the  religious  ceremonies  of  an  alien  societj'.  He 
alludes  impartially  and  with  no  great  effort  to  such  Jewish  traditions 
and  ideas  as  would  only  be  possible  to  one  who  had  himself  been 
accustomed  to  move  amongst  Jews  ;  indeed  this  perhaps  is  tlie  reason 
Avhich  makes  him  forget  here  and  there  to  put  in  explanations  which, 
to  a  non- Jewish  reader,  would  Ije  quite  indispensable  to  make  him 
understand  what  was  said.'  On  the  other  hand  his  explanatory  notes 
on  tlie  manners  and  customs  of  the  Jews  may  be  accounted  for  by 

'  vii.  37f.,  '22f.,  xviii.  32,  \ik.  '.',1  ;  contrasted  with  xix.  41. 


284  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 

reference  to  Gentile  readers  on  whom  the  author  had  to  reckon,  and 
probably  did  immediately  reckon. 

"  But  what  tells  more  especially  for  Jewish  origin  is  the  knowledge 
of  Hebrew  which  the  author  displays.  This  knowledge  is  considerably 
greater  than  Justin's,  who  undertakes  to  give  the  meaning  of  a  name 
here  and  there,  badly  enough  ;  it  is  better  than  Philo's,  who  may  per- 
haps have  taken  his  interpretations  from  an  0)iomasticon}  Because 
from  the  current  version,  to  which  both  the  Jewish  and  the  Christian 
philosopher  keeji  as  a  rule,  there  are  found  in  the  Gospel  considerable 
divergences  which  appear  to  rest  not  iipon  a  special  improved  trans- 
lation of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  but  i;pon  a  knowledge  of  the 
Hebrew  text.  What  most  directly  points  to  a  knowledge  of  Hebrew 
is  the  fact  that  tlie  author  not  only  is  able  to  give  a  meaning  and  in- 
terpretation to  names  which  he  finds  to  his  hand,  or  else  (as  in  the 
case  of  Nathaniel)  to  express  them  bj-  synonyms,  but  he  even  forms 
Aramaic  words  of  his  own  like  Bethesda."  - 

All  this,  except  the  last  clause,  seems  to  me  first-rate  in 
perception  and  appreciation  ;  and  I  invite  Dr.  Schiirer  and 
those  who  agree  with  him  to  ask  themselves  if  it  is  not 
strictly  and  emphatically  true. 

There  is  however  another  name  which  I  have  to  quote, 
and  to  which  I  know  that  Dr.  Schiirer  would  listen  with 
respect — that  of  his  former  colleague.  Dr.  Harnack.  After 
saying  that  the  origin  of  the  Johannean  writings  is  from 
the  point  of  view  of  literature  and  doctrine  the  strangest 
enigma  which  the  earliest  history  of  Christianity  has  to 
offer,  Dr.  Harnack  goes  on  :  — 

"  To  refer  to  Philo  and  Hellenism  is  by  no  means  enough,  inasmuch 
as  they  do  not  satisfactorily  exi)lain  one  external  side  of  the  pT'ol)lem. 
It  is  not  Greek  ilieologoumena  which  have  been  at  work  in  the  Johan- 
nean theology — even  the  Logos  has  in  common  Avith  Philo's  little  more 
than  the  name — but  from  the  ancient  faith  of  Prophets  and  Psalraists/i 
under  the  impression  made  l)y  the  Person  of  Jesus,  a  new  faith  has 
arisen.  For  this  very  reason  the  author  must  undoubtedly  and  in 
spite  of  his  emphatic  anti- Judaism,  be  held  to  be  a  l^oi-n  .lew,  and  his 
theology  Cliristiano-Palcstinian."'  •' 

'  ZeitschriJ'tf.  wiss.  Throl.,  xxxii.  305ff.  ;  Siegfried,  Philo,  p.  14:5f. 

-  Die  Genesis  d.  Johannes-Kvanciclinms,  pp.,  786-788. 

3  Dogmcnocschichte,  p.  (iC  (1st  od.,  188G  ;  p.  85,  2nd  ed.,  1888). 


THE  J  OH  ANNE  AN  QUESTION.  285 


This  is  from  the  first  edition  of  the  Dogmcngeschichte  : 
there  are  some  significant  alterations  in  the  second  edition 
in  the  direction  of  a  greater  agreement  with  Schurer. 
The  most  important  is  in  the  last  sentence  but  one,  which 
now  reads,  "out  of  the  ancient  faith  of  Prophets  and 
Psalmists  the  testimony  of  the  Apostles  to  Christ  created  a 
new  faith  in  one  who  lived  among  Greeks  with  disciples  of 
Jesus."  In  other  words,  it  is  no  longer  the  direct  im- 
pression of  the  Person  of  Jesus,  but  the  same  impression 
conveyed  mediately  through  the  apostolic  preaching. 
Otherwise  the  points  most  directly  bearing  upon  our 
subject — the  dismissal  of  Greek  tJieologoumena,  the  Philo- 
nian  Logos  like  only  in  name,  and  the  "  ancient  faith  of 
Prophets  and  Psalmists" — remain  intact,  except  that  the 
Christiano-Palestinian  theology  has  dropped  out.  An  in- 
structive passage,  if  one  was  attempting  to  analyse  the 
position  of  this  extremely  able  and  energetic  writer,  in 
whose  mind  however  I  cannot  help  thinking  that  a  number 
of  disparate  propositions  lie  collected,  which  his  many 
occupations  have  not  left  him  time  thoroughly  to  corre- 
late and  harmonize.  As  a  final  opinion  then  upon  the 
whole  question,  I  confess  that  I  do  not  think  it  important, 
but  as  reflecting  the  impression  made  upon  a  candid  and 
highly  competent  critic,  its  value  is  considerable. 

Schurer  has  expressed  his  views  on  the  relation  of  the 
Gospel  to  the  Old  Testament  and  Alexandrianism  more  fully 
in  a  review  of  Franke's  work  on  the  Old  Testament  in  St. 
John.^  The  article  breathes  all  his  usual  moderation  and 
care  in  judging.  He  rejects,  I  must  needs  think  rightly, 
certain  exaggerations  into  which  Franke  has  been  led. 

'•  What  Franke  has  proved,  he  says,  is  only  this,  that  the  Fourth 
Evangelist  has  held  more  firmly  than  Pliilo  to  the  religious  concep- 
tions of  the  Old  Testament ;  that  he  is  far  less  influenced  by  Greek 
philosophy.      But    what    reasonable    person    will    deny    this  ?      For 

■  Theol.  Literatur-Zeituug,  1886,  col.  i.  ff. 


286  THE  PRESENT  POSFFION  OF 

Friinko's  thesis,  AvhicU   denies  iiil  Alcxanilriauisiu  straight  away,  no- 
thing is  gained." 

To  this  I  assent.  But  then  Schurer  goes  on  to  show 
that  his  own  contention  in  favour  of  Alexandrian  influence 
is  practically  concentrated  upon  the  doctrine  of  the  Logos. 
He  criticises,  again  I  think  rightly,  Franke's  attempt  to 
depreciate  the  points  of  contact  between  Philo  and  the 
Gospel,  by  reducing  them  to  a  single  point,  the  tendency 
"  ^'o  conceive  of  the  creative  AVord  hypostatically."  I 
quite  agree  that  that  is  a  large  matter  and  not  a  small  one. 
But  then  I  certainly  think  that  in  what  follows  Schurer 
in  his  turn  has  not  done  justice  to  the  evidence  which  goes 
to  show  that  this  tendency  to  insert  a  personal  or  quasi- 
personal  Being  between  God  and  the  world  was  by  no 
means  confined  to  Philo  or  to  Alexandria.  We  ought  to 
allow  in  thought  more  than  I  suspect  we  do  for  the  differ- 
ence between  the  real  distribution  of  facts  and  their 
apparent  distribution  on  such  evidence  as  happens  to  have 
come  down  to  us.  The  writings  of  Philo  are  voluminous, 
and  they  have  been  preserved,  possibly  with  some  that 
are  not  his  ;  and  we  do  not  know  how  much  has  been 
lost,  especially  in  the  fifty  years  which  separate  him  from 
the  Fourth  Gospel,  which  might  have  suggested  to  the 
Evangelist  similar  ideas.  Schurer,  I  feel  convinced,  is 
wrong  in  making  light  of  the  Targums.  It  may  have 
been  proved  or  rendered  probable  that  the  oldest  extant 
Targum,  the  Targum  (so  called)  of  Onkelos,  is  not  as  we 
have  it  older  than  the  third  century.  But  within  that 
there  are  I  believe  traces  of  an  older  substratum ;  and 
behind  the  written  tradition  there  was  an  oral  tradition 
which,  from  what  we  know  of  the  Jews  at  this  date,  must 
have  been  conservative  in  its  character.  But  apart  alto- 
gether from  the  Targums  we  know  that  the  tendency  to 
which  they  gave  expression  by  the  introduction  of  the 
"  Memra,"   was  at  work  long  before  them.     Traces   of  it 


THE  JOHANNEAN  QUESTION.  287 

are  found  in  the  oldest  parts  of  the  Septuagiut.  But  it 
was  no  monopoly  of  Alexandria,  but  extended  more  or  less 
all  over  the  East.  For  the  proof  that  St.  John  might  have 
arrived  at  his  conception  of  the  Logos  without  any  save 
the  remotest  influence  from  Philo,  we  need  not  go  outside 
the  New  Testament.  Harnack  says  that  the  Philonian 
Logos  and  the  Johannean  have  nothing  in  common  but 
the  name.  We  may  go  a  step  farther  and  add  that  St. 
Paul's  doctrine  and  St.  John's  have  everything  in  common 
but  the  name.  If  St.  Paul  wrote  the  Epistle  to  the 
Colossians,  as  I  truly  believe  he  did,^  then  St.  Johij  had  a 
doctrine  of  the  Logos  ready  made  to  his  hand,  and  wanting 
only  the  name  to  make  it  complete.  The  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  is  another  strong  link  in  the  chain.  The  sub- 
stantial elements  of  the  conception  were  all  there.  And 
we  can  well  understand  how  almost  any  stray  wind  might 
blow  in  the  direction  of  the  Apostle,  the  one  luminous 
word  for  which  we  may  suppose  him  seeking. 

The  literary  questions  connected  with  the  Apocalypse 
are  of  extreme  difficulty,  and  in  their  present  wholly  un- 
settled state  afford  no  argument  either  one  way  or  the  other 
bearing  upon  the  genuineness  of  the  Gospel.  But  in  any 
case  it  is  certain  that  the  two  works  had  their  origin  near 
each  other;  and  the  impressive  revelation  of  the  Word  of 
God  in  Apoc.  xix.  13  shows  that  the  author  of  the  Gospel 
must  have  had  the  conception  very  close  to  his  hand. 

It  is  difficult  to  believe  that  the  Evangelist,  whoever 
he  was,  had  read  a  line  of  Philo.  The  difference  between 
them  is  too  fundamental.  Philo  is  essentially  a  philo- 
sopher. His  dominant  interest  is  intellectual.  It  is  true 
that  he  works  in  with  this  intellectual  interest  something 
of  a  moral  and  religious  interest  as  well ;  but  we  can  see 

1  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  in  the  recently  publisliecl  Iland-Commentar 
(Freiburg  i.  B,  1891)  von  Soden,  who  had  previously  maintained  the  existence 
of  some  not  lengthy  hut  rather  important  interpolations  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Colossians,  now  accepts  the  whole  as  genuine. 


288  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 


that  his  attention  is  engaged  chiefly  by  the  processes  of 
thought,  and  his  tendency  is  to  express  facts  which  might 
naturally  have  received  a  moral  or  religious  interpretation 
in  terms  derived  from  those  processes.  His  style  and  mode 
of  treatment  is  florid  and  diffuse.  All  this  is  as  different 
as  possible  from  the  Fourth  Gospel.  Here  there  is  one 
absorbing  interest,  but  its  object  is  personal.  It  is  the 
record  of  the  Life  of  Jesus  professedly  (and  does  not  the 
statement  of  the  case  almost  constrain  us  to  say,  really  '?) 
by  the  disciple  "  whom  Jesus  loved."  That  fact  is  the 
centre  .round  which  all  revolves.  It  carries  with  it  no 
doubt  far-reaching  consequences — consequences  for  every 
individual  who  calls  upon  the  same  beloved  name  ;  conse- 
quences for  the  society  which  those  individuals  combine 
to  form.  And  besides  the  external  facts  of  the  biography, 
there  is  a  sense  of  something  deeply  mysterious  in  the 
Person  of  Him  with  whom  it  is  concerned.  The  way  in 
which  He  had  spoken  of  Himself  and  of  His  Mission  had 
linked  both  inseparably  with  the  "  ancient  faith  of  Prophets 
and  of  Psalmists,"  and  with  their  highest  aspirations. 
When  these  were  considered,  when  the  new  force  which 
had  been  brought  into  society  and  the  revolution  it  was 
effecting  were  considered,  there  seemed  to  emerge  some- 
thing not  merely  of  local  but  of  cosmical  significance.  An 
expression  had  to  be  found  for  that  significance,  and  the 
Evangelist  St.  John,  as  we  believe,  hit  upon  the  pregnant 
term  Logos.  It  was  already  in  the  air ;  stray  spores  were 
flying  about,  and  one  of  them  was  blown,  as  it  were, 
across  his  path.  It  gave  him  just  what  he  wanted.  The 
keystone  was  dropped  into  the  arch.  There  arose  a  system 
of  thought,  grandiose  yet  severely  simple  in  its  outlines. 
It  would  hardly  be  right  to  call  it  a  philosophy.  "These 
things  are  written  that  ye  may  believe  that  Jesus  is  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  God  ;  and  that  believing  ye  may  have 
life  in  His  name."     That  is  not  philosophical  language. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  QUESTION.  '      289 


Pbilo  used,  and  used  first,  the  same  expression  Logos, 
but  its  content  was  wholly  different.  With  him  the 
leading  idea  was  Reason.  The  Logos  of  God  was  the 
active,  creative  Reason  or  Thought  of  God.  With  St. 
John  the  leading  idea  is  Character  and  Will.  The  Logos 
of  God  is  that  agency  through  which,  or  the  agent  through 
whom,  the  Will  of  God  expressed  itself  in  the  act  of 
creation  and  in  the  conservation  and  energizing  of  things 
created.  It  is  the  agency  by  which,  or  the  agent  by 
whom,  He  has  made  known  His  will  and  character  to 
men  both  in  previous  ages  and  conspicuously  in  the 
coming  of  the  Messiah. 

When  once  the  idea  was  grasped  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth 
was  the  Word  or  personal  manifestation  of  the  Godhead,  it 
was  natural  that  round  this  central  idea  other  subordinate 
ideas  should  group  themselves,  especially  those  connected 
with  manifestations  of  Divine  energy  in  contact  with  men. 
Such  foundation  texts  as  these  were  taken  :  "  With  Thee 
is  the  fountain  of  life:  in  Thy  light  we  shall  see  light" 
(Ps.  xxxvi.  9)  ;  "0  send  out  Thy  light  and  Thy  truth ;  let 
them  lead  me  "  (Ps.  xliii.  3)  ;  in  both  of  which  there  is  an 
idea  of  emission  or  procession  which  when  a  personal  organ 
had  been  found  for  the  revelation  readily  attached  them  to 
it.  Such  I  believe  to  be  the  Old  Testament  roots  of  the 
conception,  "  In  Him  was  life,  and  the  life  was  the  light  of 
men  "  ;  "  grace  and  truth  came  by  Jesus  Christ."  Parallels 
are  found  in  Pbilo ;  ^  but  the  metaphors  are  too  obvious 
and  elementary  for  any  stress  to  be  laid  upon  them.  In 
any  case,  I  do  not  think  there  can  be  any  doubt  as  to  the 
origin  in  the  Old  Testament  and  in  essentially  Jewish  soil 
of  a  number  of  other  leading  Johannean  conceptions  :  the 
"tabernacling"  of  the  Logos  among  men  ;  the  Divine  glory 

*  For  instance,  this  is  quoted  from  Leg.  Allcg.,  iii.  59,  rl  yap  liv  ei'??  \afnrpoTipov 
■)}  TrjXavyicTTepov  delov  \6yov,  ov  Kara  p.eTOv<jiav  Kai  rk  &\\a  ttjv  dx^vs  Kal  rbv 
^j(pov  dTreXavveL,  (purbi  Koivuvriaai  \pvxi-KoO  yXixofJ-^va.  (Siegfried,  Philo,  p.  318). 

VOL.    V.  19 


20O  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 

or  Shekinah  ;  the  Divine  Name  in  its  significant  Jewish 
sense  which  occurs  so  often;  the  idea  of  "witness";  the 
idea  of  "  signs  "  ;  the  "  water  of  hfe  "  ;  and,  we  may  add, 
the  "  bread  of  Hfe,"  with  all  that  profound  symbohsm 
associated  with  it  in  chapter  vi>  The  more  closely  the 
Gospel  is  studied,  verse  by  verse  from  beginning  to  end,  the 
more  I  feel  sure  will  the  reader  rise  up  with  the  conviction 
that  the  base  on  which  it  primarily  rests  is  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. Many  connections  will  come  out  on  a  closer  study 
which  do  not  lie  upon  the  surface.  One  was  pointed  out  to 
me  lately  ^  which  I  do  not  think  I  should  have  noticed,  but 
which  is  very  attractive  when  attention  is  called  to  it.  It 
is  well  known  what  a  leading  idea  with  St.  John  is  that  of 
"  lifting  up  "  {v^^wOrivai)  in  connection  with  the  Passion. 
The  great  mine  of  Christian  thought  in  reference  to  the 
Passion  is  Isaiah  liii. ;  but  how  is  that  passage  introduced  ? 
"  Behold  My  Servant  .  .  .  shall  be  exalted  and  extoHed 
and  be  very  high.  As  many  were  astonied  at  Thee,"  etc. 
(Isa.  lii.  13  £f.).  This  "exalting"  of  the  suffering  Servant 
I  believe  to  have  given  the  hint  to  the  stress  which  is  laid 
on  the  exaltation  of  the  crucified  Saviour  in  the  Gospel. 

Just  one  passage  might  give  us  pause  in  disclaiming  a 
dependence  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  on  Philo,  the  strongest  in 
my  opinion  of  all  those  that  are  adduced  to  prove  the  point. 
Not  only  do  we  find  in  Philo  the  term  Logos,  but  also 
another  leading  term  with  St.  John,  Paraclete.  The  word 
occurs  in  a  curious  passage,  Vit.  Mos.,  iii.  14.  The  high 
priest's  dress  is  symbolical  of  the  cosmos,  his  breastplate 
(Xoyiov)  naturally  symbolical  of  the  Logos ;  it  was  necessary 
that  be  should  take  this  with  him  as  a  "  paraclete  "  into  the 
holy  place.  There  is  no  real  affinity  between  this  and  St. 
John  xiv.,  xvi.,  but  the  coincidence  in  the  word  is  at  first 
si"ht  striking.  The  word  "paraclete"  was  however  far 
more  common  than  we  might  suppose.     It  is  a  legal  term 

'  By  Dr.  C,  A.  Biiggs,  of  New  Tork, 


THE  J  OH  ANNE  AN  QUESTION.  291 


apparently  dating  back  to  the  Greek  period.  With  its 
counterpart  Kar)'jyopo<;  it  is  naturalized  in  the  Talmud,  and 
found  even  in  the  earliest  treatise,  the  PirJie  Ahoth  :  the 
form  Karip/oip  comes  back  from  Hebrew  to  Greek  in  the 
corrected  text  of  Revelation  xii.  10.'  There  was  therefore 
clearly  no  need  to  travel  to  Alexandria  in  order  to  have  this 
word  suggested. 

With  this  the  last  mainstay  of  the  Alexandrianizing  theory 
seems  to  go,  and  the  crowd  of  arguments  -  from  geography, 
style,  manners  and  customs,  relation  to  the  Old  Testament 
modes  of  thought,  is  left  in  all  its  full  force,  proving  that 
the  author  of  the  Gospel  was  a  Jew  of  Palestine,  no  mere 
"  bird  of  passage,"  but  one  who  was  there  born  and  bred, 
and  who  drew  in  from  Palestine  his  habits  of  thought  and 
speech  as  from  his  native  soil. 

But  is  it  so  clear  that  the  author  was  a  contemporary  and 
eye-witness  ?  No  doubt  this  is  a  point  which  involves  more 
delicate  argumentation.  Schiirer  does  not  deal  directly 
with  this  ;  he  seems  to  think  that  enough  is  said  when  it 
is  shown  that  the  Evangelist  had  access  to  a  good  tradition. 
Mr.  Cross  comes  to  closer  quarters,  and  he  disputes  at  each 
step  the  validity  of  the  inference. 

Let  us  first  consider  what  the  argument  is. 

There  was  one  moment  in  the  history  of  the  Church 
which  when  once  it  had  passed  did  not  return — the  moment 
when  the  new  faith  was  in  the  act  of  forming  and  bursting 
through  the  husk  of  the  old.  John  the  Baptist  was  a 
prophet  like  those  of  the  old  dispensation  ;  he  was  looked 
upon  askance  by  the  ruling  authorities  of  Jewish  religion  ; 
they  did  not  encourage  his  preaching;  they  suspected  dan- 
ger to  themselves  in  the  movement  to  which  he  gave  the 
impulse;  but  there  was  nothing  tangible  which  they  could 

1  See  especially  the  excellent  Excursus  on  the  word  "  Paraclete,"  by  Arch- 
deacon Watkins,  in  Bishop  EUicott's  Commentary  for  EiujUsh  Readers. 

-  I  do  not  repeat  these  arguments,  which  will  be  found  in  abundance  in 
Westcott,  Salmon,  Watkins,  Keviiolls,  riumuicr.  or  any  other  csmraentarv. 


292  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 

take  hold  of  either  to  lay  an  interdict  upon  it  or  to  threaten 
his  person.     The  Prophet  of  Nazareth  began  in  the  same 
manner  as  His  forerunner.      He  too  preached  repentance 
and  the  approach  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.     Again  there 
is  evidence  that    from  an  early  period  the    Pharisaic    and 
hierarchical  party  had  their  suspicions  aroused.     But  again 
there  was  nothing  tangible  for  them  to  take  hold  of,  and 
they  v^^ere   obliged  to  let   the   preaching   take   its    course. 
Only  by  degrees  did  they  attempt   to  check   the  freedom 
shown  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Law  and  in  the  treatment 
of  Jewish  institutions.     Only  by  degrees  did  they  become 
conscious  that  this  new  Teacher  was  not  merely  a  liberal- 
minded   candidate   for  the   office   and    consideration    of    a 
Rabbi,  but  that  He  claimed  to  possess  an  authority  different 
in  kind  from  their  own.     Long  before  St.  Peter's  great  con- 
fession there  were  floating  about  whispers  and  rumours  that 
the  Galilean  Prophet  was  something  more  than  a  Prophet. 
He  had  reminded  them  of  what  had  been  said  to  them  of 
old  time,  and  then  like  a  second  Moses  He  had  taken  upon 
Him  to  pronounce,  "  But  I  say  unto  you,"  etc.    He  had  had 
the  presumption  to  declare  the  forgiveness  of  sins.     On  one 
occasion,  contrasting  the  behaviour  of  previous  generations 
with  that  of  His  own  generation,  He  had  said,  "  A  greater 
than  Solomon,  a  greater  than  Jonah,  is   here."      In    the 
meantime  there  were  reports  of  wonderful  works  wrought 
by  Him,  not  so  much  as  signs  of  extraordinary  power, — for 
when  He  was  challenged  to  show  such  signs  He  repeatedly 
refused, — but  as  acts  of  mercy  to   the  weak  and  suffering. 
All  this  generated  a  feeling  of  eager,  if  bafiled,  interest  and 
expectation.     Men  were  going  about  saying  that  the  Mes- 
siah was  among  them.     When  they  said   "  the  Messiah," 
of  course  they  meant  what  the  Jews  of  that  day  understood 
by  the  Messiah,  a  leader  armed  with  preternatural  power, 
who  would  expel  the  Eoman  oppressor  and  inaugurate  an 
age  of  supreme  prosperity  and  glory  for  Israel.     Starting 


THE  JOIIANNEAN   QUESTION.  293 

with  such  ideas,  we  can  imagine  that  there  would  be  ahnost 
as  much  to  disappoint  their  hopes  as  to  rouse  them.  Many 
signs  had  pointed  to  the  immediate  coming  of  the  Messiah  ; 
men  said  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  this  Messiah  ;  and 
yet  there  was  something  so  strangely  pacific,  quiet  and 
unobtrusive  about  His  whole  character  and  mode  of  work- 
ing, that  it  was  hard  to  believe  that  He  could  be  the 
Messiah  indeed.  The  atmosphere  was  highly  charged  and 
sensitive;  a  single  spark  would  set  the  combustible  ma- 
terials all  around  in  flame.  Constantly  that  spark  seemed 
to  be  on  the  point  of  falling,  and  still  it  was  in  some 
mysterious  way  held  back.  On  one  occasion  in  particular 
it  was  very  near.  Something  strange  had  happened  on  the 
waste  land  to  the  east  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee.  Great  crowds 
had  collected,  and  their  wants  had  been  wonderfully  sup- 
plied. A  sudden  enthusiasm  seized  them,  and  they  tried  to 
take  their  benefactor  by  force  and  make  Him  king. 

From  which  of  the  Gospels  is  it  that  we  get  this  trait 
so  exactly  true  to  the  situation — a  trait  so  true  to  the 
situation  then,  but  by  no  means  true  permanently  and  at 
all  times  ?  It  was  not  at  once  that  even  the  disciples  were 
weaned  of  their  expectation  of  temporal  sovereignty.  Yet 
they  were  weaned  of  it.  The  decisive  and  final  lesson  was 
taught  by  the  fall  of  Jerusalem.  From  that  time  onwards 
we  cannot  but  feel  not  only  that  such  temporal  expectations 
were  impossible,  but  that  it  must  very  soon  have  come  to 
be  forgotten  that  they  had  ever  existed.  By  that  time  the 
Christian  idea  of  the  Messiah  was,  if  not  wholly,  yet  so 
largely  purged  and  clarified  that  the  very  memory  of  a  state 
of  things  in  which  all  the  dross  of  the  Jewish  expectation 
still  clung  to  it  must  have  perished.  We  ask  what  Gospel 
it  is  which  has  so  caught  the  flying  moment,  and  we  find 
that  it  is  the  Fourth. 

But  a  touch  like  this  is  very  far  from  standing  alone. 
Let  me  recall  a  few  more  scenes  from  the  same  Gospel. 


294  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 


A  deputation  from  the  priestly  members  of  the  Sanhe- 
drin,  or  rather — as  we  are  expressly  and  precisely  told — 
from  the  Pharisaic  party  in  that  body,  comes  down  to  John 
the  Baptist  at  Bethany  beyond  Jordan  to  make  a  formal 
report  upon  his  baptism  for  the  guidance  of  their  colleagues. 
They  ask,  Who  is  he  ? 

"  And  he  confessed,  I  am  not  the  Christ.  And  they  asked  him,  What 
then  ?  Art  thou  Elijah  ^  And  he  saith,  I  am  not.  Art  thou  the  pro- 
phet ?  (ci:  Deut.  xviii.)  And  he  answered,  No.  They  said  therefore  unto 
him.  Who  art  thou,  that  we  may  give  an  answer  to  them  that  sent  us  ? 
.  .  .  And  they  aslced  him,  and  said  unto  him,  Why  then  baptizest 
thou,  if  thou  art  not  the  Christ,  neither  Elijah,  neither  the  prophet?"  ' 

The  Jews  well  understood  that  this  baptism  of  John's 
was  no  mere  form,  but  that  it  symbolized  a  thorough  moral 
reformation  such  as  they  connected  with  certain  prophetic 
figures  who  were  associated  in  their  minds  with  the  Mes- 
sianic time.  But  how  long  can  we  suppose  that  this  vivid 
recollection  of  John's  baptism,  and  of  the  attitude  of  leaders 
and  people  towards  it  would  remain  after  the  generation  to 
which  it  had  been  preached  had  perished '? 

A  more  advanced  stage  in  the  public  ministry  of  Christ 
has  been  reached.  There  is  a  mingled  state  of  almost 
feverish  uncertainty  and  expectation  about  Him.  It  is  the 
feast  of  tabernacles. 

"The  Jews  therefore  sought  him  at  the  feast,  and  said,  Where  is 
he  ?  -  And  there  was  much  murmuring  among  the  multitudes  concern- 
ing him  :  some  said,  He  is  a  good  man ;  others  said,  Kot  so,  but  he 
leadeth  the  multitudes  astray.  Howbeit  no  man  spake  openly  of  him 
for  fear  of  the  Jews.  But  when  it  was  now  the  midst  of  the  feast, 
Jesus  went  up  into  the  temple  and  taught.  The  Jews  therefore  mar- 
velled, saying.  How  knoweth  this  man  letters,  having  never  learned?"* 

The  threatening  temper  of  the  Sanhedrin  is  known,  so 

»  St.  Jubn  i.  20-22,  2.j. 

-  I  hope  it  will  not  be  tboufilit  a  want  of  reverence  if  I  jnint  this  not  in  such 
a  way  as  to  express  L'liristiati  feelings  uow,  but  in  such  a  way  as  to  show  that  it 
is  really  history  rullectiug  the  feelings  actually  entertained  at  the  iieriod  to 
which  it  refers,  *  vii.  11-1.">. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  QUESTION.  295 

that  people  speak  under  their  breath.  Is  this  really  an  im- 
postor or  not  ?  Does  He  satisfy  the  conditions  laid  down  for 
the  Messiah  ?  It  is  wonderful  that  He  should  have  such 
insight,  having  never  passed  through  any  of  the  regular 
Kabbinical  schools. 

"  Some  of  the  mnltitiule  tliereforo,  wlieu  tliey  licard  these  Avords, 
said.  This  is  of  a  truth  the  prophet.  Otliers  said,  This  is  the  Christ. 
But  some  said,  What,  doth  the  Christ  come  out  of  Galilee  ?  Hath  not 
the  Scripture  said  that  the  Christ  cometh  of  the  seed  of  David,  and 
from  Bethlehem,  the  village  where  David  was  ?  So  there  arose  divi- 
sion in  the  multitude  because  of  him.  And  some  of  them,  would  hare 
taken  him ;  but  no  man  laid  hands  on  him.  The  officers  thei'efore  came 
to  the  chief  priests  and  Pharisees,  and  they  said  unto  them,  Why  d(j 
ye  not  bring  him  ?  The  officers  answered,  Never  man  so  spake.  The 
Pharisees  therefore  answered  them.  Are  ye  also  led  astray?  Hath 
any  of  the  rulers  believed  on  him,  or  of  the  Pharisees.''  But  this 
multitude  which  knoweth  not  the  law  are  accursed.  Nicodemus  saith 
unto  them,  Doth  our  law  judge  a  man  except  it  first  hear  from  himself 
and  know  what  he  doeth  ?  They  answered  and  said  unto  him,  Art 
thou  also  of  Galilee?  Search  and  see  that  out  of  Galilee  ariseth  no 
prophet."  ' 

Not  only  Judaism,  but  Palestinian  Judaism,  not  only 
Palestinian  Judaism,  but  contemporary  Palestinian  Judaism 
— not  the  shattered  and  broken  school  of  Jamnia,  but  the 
Sanhedrin  of  Jerusalem  in  all  its  pride  and  power — is  here. 

Just  one  picture  of  another  kind. 

"  Is  this  your  son,  who  ye  say  was  born  blind  ?  how  then  doth  he 
now  see  ?  His  parents  answered  and  said,  We  know  that  this  is  our 
son,  and  that  he  was  born  blind ;  but  how  he  now  seeth  we  know  not, 
or  who  opened  his  eyes  we  know  not :  ask  him ;  he  is  of  age  ;  he  shall 
speak  for  himself.  These  things  said  his  parents  because  they  feared 
the  Jews ;  for  the  Jews  had  agreed  already  that  if  any  man  should 
confess  him  to  be  Christ  he  should  be  put  out  of  the  synagogue. 
Therefore  said  his  parents,  He  is  of  age ;  ask  him.  So  they  called  a 
second  time  the  man  that  was  blind,  and  said  unto  him,  Give  glory  to 
God  :  we  know  that  this  man  is  a  sinner."  " 

'  vii.  40-52.     Oa  the  small  esteem  ia  •which  Galilee  was  held  at  Jeras.ileui 
see  Neubauer,  Geojraphie  da  Talmud,  p.  T'l  f. ;  Stud.  Bibl.,  i.  01. 
-  ix.  10-2t. 


296  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 

The  whole  of  this  narrative  is  redolent  of  Jewish  ideas:  at 
the  outset  the  notion  that  the  man's  blindness  must  be  a 
punishment  for  sin,  his  own  or  his  parents ;  the  interpreta- 
tion given  to  the  name  Siloam  (which  really  means  "  send- 
ing forth,"  "  jet,"  or  "  discharge"  of  waters)  ;  and  then  the 
whole  controversy,  the  idea  that  only  wise  and  good  men 
could  work  wonders  (on  which  see  the  Talmudic  parallels  in 
^\unsche),^  excommunication  and  the  final  advice,  "Give 
glory  to  God  :  we  know  that  this  man  is  a  sinner." 

But  what  is  to  be  observed  is  not  only  that  the  ideas  are 
Jewish,  but  that  they  relate  to,  and  fit  in  exactly  with,  a 
particular  state  of  things.  It  is  exactly  the  sort  of  contro- 
versy which  would  inevitably  arise  when  such  works  as 
Jesus  did  and  such  claims  as  Jesus  made  came  into  collision 
with  the  fixed  ideas  of  the  Pharisees. 

But  one  more  example  of  a  page  taken  straight  from  the 
life. 

"  Jesus  therefore  walked  no  more  openly  among  the  Jews,  but  da- 
parted  thence  into  the  country  near  to  the  wilderness  into  a  city  called 
Ephraim  ;  and  there  he  tarried  with  his  disciples.  Now  the  passover 
of  the  Jews  was  at  hand,  and  many  went  up  to  Jerusalem  out  of  the 
country  before  the  passover  to  purify  themselves.  They  sought  there- 
fore for  Jesus,  and  spake  one  with  another  as  they  stood  in  the  temple, 
What  think  ye  ?  That  he  will  not  come  to  the  feast  ?  ISTow  the  chief 
priests  and  the  Pharisees  had  given  commandment  that  if  any  man 
knew  where  he  was,  he  should  show  it  that  they  might  take  him."  - 

Be  it  remembered  that  with  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem  the 
Jewish  ritual  system  came  to  an  end.  There  seems  to  have 
survived  a  practice  of  going  up  at  festival  times  to  the  Kab- 
binical  centre  at  Jamnia  and  consulting  the  doctors  there.'' 
But  this  can  only  have  been  the  merest  shadow  of  the 
former  pilgrimages  to  the  feasts  at  Jerusalem.  What  ex- 
perience of  these  could  suggest  to  a  writer  of  the  second 

1  Krlliutcrungcn  d.  EvangcUcn  (Gottingeu,  187t^)  ad  loc, 

-  xi.  54-57. 

3  See  Reuan,  Les  I'^vangilcs,  p.  21,  and  authorities  there  quoted. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  QUESTION.  297 


century  that  graphic  picture  of  the  stream  beginuing  to 
flow  towards  the  city  (not  from  the  Dispersion  but)  from 
the  surrounding  country,  with  a  detail  which  would  never 
have  occurred  but  to  one  with  special  knowledge,  "to  purify 
themselves  "  for  the  passover? 

But  then,  argues  Mr.  Cross,  there  are  parallels  to  some  of 
the  allusions  in  the  controversy  with  the  Jews  in  Justin. 
True,  there  are  such  parallels  :  the  instance  is  aptly  chosen 
because  Justin  is,  I  think,  the  only,  or  almost  the  only, 
writer  in  which  parallels  with  any  point  in  them  could  be 
found.  We  may  perhaps  let  pass  the  appellation  "  Gentile 
Christian,"  which  Mr.  Cross  gives  to  Justin,^  because  though 
he  calls  himself  a  Samaritan,  and  though  he  was  born  at 
Neapolis  (Sichem)  in  the  heart  of  the  Holy  Land,  he  was 
brought  lip  as  a  heathen.  Still  with  him  the  controversy 
of  the  Jews  was  a  real  controversy  :  he  had  been  engaged 
in  it  much  and  often  :  and  the  Dialogue  with  TnjpJio  con- 
tains the  literary  harvest  of  actual  living  experience.-  In 
this  it  differs  from  most  subsequent  treatises  against  the 
Jews  which  are  as  a  rule  artificial  and  rhetorical,  in  which 
the  writers  do  not  aim  so  much  at  the  conversion  of  the 
Jews  as  at  commending  the  argument  from  prophecy  to 
their  own  co-religionists.' 

But  Justin  deals  with  the  Jewish  controversy  in  one 
manner,  the  author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  deals  with  it  in 
another.  We  have  seen  how  consistently,  bow  pointedly, 
with  how  many  minute  side-touches  of  subsidiary  detail, 
the  latter  always  places  himself  at  the  true  standpoint  of 
the  situation  with  which  he  is  dealing.  If  I  am  asked 
whether  it  was  impossible  for  a  writer  well  acquainted  with 
his  subject  to  throw  himself  imaginatively  into  these  posi- 

1  Crit.  Bev.,  Feb.,  1891,  p.  157  n. 

-  Trypho  says  that  eK  ttoW^x  -rrpoarpixfeus  ttjs  Trpos  ttoWoi's,  he  had  an  answer 
ready  for  every  objection  (c.  50). 

^  Harnack  iu  Te.rte  ti.  UntcrsucJi.,  i.  2,  C3  ff. 


298  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 


tions  and  describe  them  as  the  Evaugehst  does,  I  would  not 
say  that  it  is  absolutely  impossible.  I  may  have  used  the 
word  before  this,  but  in  deference  to  Mr.  Cross'  arguments 
I  withdraw  it  and  modify  the  opinion  to  that  extent.  But 
if  I  am  asked  whether  it  is  probable,  and  the  solution  thus 
suggested  of  the  phenomena  of  the  Gospel  a  satisfactory 
solution,  I  should  answer  mihesitatingly  in  the  negative. 

What  has  just  been  said  may  be  taken  to  cover  the  further 
question  as  to  whether  the  author  of  the  Gospel  was  an 
eye-witness.  If  he  was  a  contemporary,  he  was  in  all  prob- 
ability an  eye-witness  as  well.  I  will  concede  a  little  more 
to  Mr.  Cross  under  this  head.  The  narrative  is  studded 
with  features  which  receive  a  natural  explanation  if  it  is  the 
work  of  an  eye-witness ;  but  it  would  be  too  much  to  say 
that,  taken  by  themselves,  they  prove  it  to  be  the  work  of  an 
eye-wutness.  Conceivably  they  may  be  a  "counterfeit  pre- 
sentment" drawn  from  the  imagination  and  not  from  life. 
Mr.  Cross  has  made  something  of  a  point  when  he  maintains 
that  it  is  not  probable  that  St.  John  was  present  at  all  the 
scenes  which  he  relates  with  such  graphic  detail.  It  would 
be  rather  too  much  to  assume  that  he  was  not :  he  may  have 
been  present  at  Jacob's  well,  or  in  the  chamber  during  the 
visit  of  Nicodemus,  and  on  several  other  occasions  to  which 
Mr.  Cross  takes  exception,  still  the  chances  are  against  his 
having  been  present  at  all  of  them.  I  am  quite  satisfied 
with  the  way  in  which  Mr.  Cross  states  the  case  for  me, 
viz.,  "  that  the  writer,  having  witnessed  most  of  the 
scenes  which  he  describes,  naturally  carries  into  other 
scenes  which  did  not  come  within  his  own  observation  the 
habit  of  presenting  the  well-known  figures  as  if  he  was  still 
looking  at  them  with  his  bodily  eyes."  ^  I  will  not  say  that 
the  proof  is  stringent,  that  it  is  the  kind  of  proof  on  which 
we  should  hang  a  man ;  but  I  do  say  that  taken  along  with 

'    IVestminslcr  lieiieir,  Aug.,  1800,  p.  ITj. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  QUESTION.  299 

the   other    considerations    ah'eady   stated   it    is    the    best 
account  of  the  facts  within  our  reach. ^ 

If  we  frankly  accept  the  Johannean  authorship  of  the 
Gospel,  then  it  seems  to  me  that  all  the  characteristics  of 
it  which  we  have  noted  fall  easily  and  duly  into  their 
places.  Even  those  which  are  adverse  to  its  complete 
historical  accuracy  seem  to  me  to  find  a  better  explanation 
on  this  hypothesis  than  on  any  other.  A  second-century 
romance-writer,  even  supposing  that  he  had  the  learning 
and  the  imagination,  would  not  have  had  the  weight  and 
depth  and  force  and  sublimity  to  produce  a  Gospel  such  as 
this.  It  is  equally  difficult  to  beheve  that  one  possessed  of 
these  commanding  qualities,  in  near  proximity  to  an  age  of 
great  literary  productiveness,  should  have  passed  away 
entirely  without  a  name.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the  dis- 
courses in  particular  have  been  unconsciously  shaped  and 
moulded  by  the  writer,  it  is  just  because  he  had  too 
powerful  and  creative  a  mind  for  them  to  come  out  of  it 
exactly  as  they  were  taken  in.  A  mind  like  St.  John's  was 
not  a  sheet  of  white  paper,  on  which  impressions  once  made 
remained  just  as  they  were  ;  it  must  needs  impart  to  them 
some  infusion  of  its  own  substance  ;  and  if  there  is  some- 
thing of  masterfulness  in  the  process,  who  had  a  better 
right,  or  who  was  more  likely  to  exercise  this  freedom,  than 
the  last  surviving  Apostle,  who  had  himself  lain  upon  the 
bosom  of  the  Lord '? 

W.  Sanday. 

'  Of  the  detailed  criticisms  ■which  Mr.  Cross  directs  agaiust  my  youtliful 
essay  {W.It.,  pp.  177-181)  I  will  only  say  that  the  majority  of  them  relate 
rather  to  what  might  be  called  "  picturesque  accessories  "  than  arguments.  I 
set  no  great  store  by  the  order  in  the  expulsion  from  the  Temple  (St.  Mark  is 
relatively  the  most  graphic  of  the  Synoptics  and  comes  I  should  say  next  to  St. 
John) ;  I  have  uo  wish  to  press  di'aTrfo-u!;',  or  "  and  it  was  night,"  if  my  view  of 
them  is  questioned;  but  I  still  hold  stoutly  to  fxtra.  yuyaiKJs,  and  I  think  tbat 
most  Greek  scholars  will  agree  with  mc  ;  iu  this  instance  I  do  not  think  the 
argument  unimportant. 


300 


THE   HISTOIUCAL    GEOGRAPHY  OF   THE   HOLY 

LAND. 

III. 
The  Central  Eakge,  and  the  Borders  of  Jud.ea. 

Over  the  Maritime  Plain  and  Shepbelab,^  we  advance  upon 
the  Central  Eanfre.  After  the  Shephelah,  our  immediate 
goal  should  be  that  part  of  the  Eange  which  is  called  the 
hill  country  of  Judaea.  But  it  is  necessary  first  to  say 
something  of  the  Eange  as  a  whole. 

A  long,  deep  formation  of  limestone,  bounded  on  the  east 
by  the  Jordan  valley,  extends  all  the  way  from  Lebanon  on 
the  north  to  a  line  of  cliffs  opposite  the  gulf  and  canal  of 
Suez,  the  southern  wall  of  the  great  Desert  of  the  Wandering. 
In  Lebanon  this  limestone  is  disposed  mainly  in  lofty  ranges 
running  north  and  south ;  in  Upper  Galilee  it  descends  to  a 
plateau  surrounded  by  hills  ;  in  Lower  Galilee  it  is  a  series 
of  still  less  elevated  ranges  running  east  and  west.  Then 
it  sinks  to  the  Plain  of  Esdraelon,  not,  however,  without 
signs  of  having  once  crossed  this  plain  in  a  series  of  ridges."-' 
South  of  Esdraelon  it  rises  again,  and  sends  forth  a  high 
branch  in  Carmel  to  the  sea,  but  the  main  range  continues 
parallel  to  the  Jordan  valley.  Scattering  at  first  through 
Samaria  into  separate  mountain  groups,  it  consolidates  to- 
wards Bethel  upon  the  narrow  tableland  of  Judasa,  with  an 
average  height  of  2,200  feet,  continues  so  to  the  south  of 
Hebron,  and  then  by  broken  and  sloping  strata  lets  itself 
down,  widening  the  while,  on  to  the  plateau  of  the  Desert 
of  the  Wandering." 

1  See  Expositor  for  February  and  March. 

^  e.p.  at  Slieldi  Abrek  aud  at  Lejjun. 

^  The  clearest  and  most  suiuinary  acconut  of  the  geology  of  Palestine  will  be 
found  in  the  Jlemoir  prepared  for  the  Palestine  Exploration  Fund  by  Prof. 
Hull  (Ijondou,  1888).  The  maps  are  very  heljiful,  so  are  the  sections  at  the 
end  of  the  volume.  I  may  take  this  opportunity  of  remarking  how  much  less 
used  the  publications  of  the  Pal.  Expl.  Fund  are  than  they  ought  to  be.     The 


HISTORICAL  GEOGRAPHY  OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  301 


Of  this  backbone  of  Syria  the  portion  between  Esdraelon 
and  the  desert  plateau  is  the  most  definite,  as  it  is  histo- 
rically the  most  famous.  Those  ninety  miles  of  narrow 
hifrhland,  from  Mount  Gilboa  to  Beersheba,  were  the  chief 
theatre  of  the  history  of  Israel.  As  you  look  from  the  sea, 
they  form  a  persistent  mountain  wall  of  nearly  uniform  level 
rising:  clear  and  blue  above  the  low  hills  which  buttress  it 
to  the  west.  How  the  heart  throbs  as  the  eye  sweeps  that 
long  and  steadfast  sky-line  !  For  just  behind,  upon  a  line 
nearly  coincident  with  the  waterparting  between  Jordan 
and  the  Mediterranean,  lie  Shechem,  Shiloh,  Bethel,  Jeru- 
salem, Bethlehem  and  Hebron.  Of  only  one  of  all  these 
does  any  sign  appear.  Towards  the  north  end  of  the  range 
two  bold  round  hills  break  the  skyline  with  evidence  of  a 
deep  valley  between  them.  The  hills  are  Ebal  and  Gerizim, 
and  in  the  valley  lies  Xubulus,  the  ancient  Shechem. 

That  the  eye  is  thus  drawn  from  the  first  upon  the  posi- 
tion of  Shechem,  while  all  the  other  chief  sites  of  Israel's 
life  lie  hidden  away  and  are  scarcely  to  be  seen  till  you  come 
upon  them,  is  a  very  remarkable  fact.  It  is  a  witness  to 
the  natural,  an  explanation  of  the  historical,  precedence, 
which  was  enjoyed  by  this  capital  over  her  more  famous 
sister,  Jerusalem.  We  shall  return  to  the  contrast  again. 
Meantime  it  is  enough  to  note  that  cleft  between  Ebal  and 
Gerizim  as  the  one  sign  of  a  pass  cutting  through  the 
Central  Kange. 

But  uniform  as  that  persistent  range  appears  from  the 

chief  results  of  the  great  Survey,  aloug  \vith  a  whole  library  of  historical  infor- 
mation, are  to  be  had  in  a  cheap  and  attractive  form.  I  ought  to  have  men- 
tioned before  that  the  best  map  for  the  ordinary  student  is  the  last  edition 
published  by  the  Fund  of  the  reduced  Survey  map  (2^  miles  to  the  inch),  with 
O.  T.  names  in  red,  N.  T.  in  blue,  etc.  If  the  student  or  the  traveller  exercises 
caution  with  regard  to  the  somewhat  too  numerous  identifications,  he  will  find 
this  map  by  far  the  most  informing  and  suggestive.  The  Neue  Ilandharte  von 
PaUi.ithKi,  by  Fischer  and  Guthe,  on  a  scale  of  1 :7OO,0OU,  with  an  alphabetical 
index  and  list  of  authorities  (Leipzig  :  Wagner  &  Debes,  1890),  is  very  good 
indeed,  and  costs  only  two  shillings.  But  when  shall  we  get  a  good  orographi- 
cal  map  of  Palestine,  or  a  reliable  relief  map  ? 


302  THE  IIISTOIUCAL   GEOGRAPHY 

coast,  almost  the  first  thing  you  remember  as  you  look  at 
it  is  the  prolonged  political  and  religious  division  of  which 
it  was  capable, — first  into  the  kingdoms  of  Northern  Israel 
and  Judah,  and  then  into  the  provinces  of  Samaria  and 
Juda?a.  Those  ninetj^  narrow  miles  sustained  the  arch- 
schism  of  history.  Fields  of  the  same  Divine  revelation, 
they  are  perhaps  the  strongest  proof  of  liow  little  room  men 
need  to  keep  bitterly  apart, — men  of  the  same  family,  and 
standing  together  in  the  very  face  of  the  I^ight.  Where 
did  the  line  of  this  schism  run?  l)id  it  correspond  to  any 
natural  division  in  the  range  itself? 

A  closer  observation  shows  that  there  was  a  natural 
boundary  between  northern  and  southern  Israel.  But  its 
ambiguity  is  a  curious  symbol  of  the  uncertain  frontier  of 
their  religious  differences. 

We  have  seen,  first,  that  the  bulk  of  Samaria  is  scat- 
tered mountain  groups,  while  Judnea  is  a  tableland;  and, 
secondly,  that  while  the  Samaritan  mountains  descend  con- 
tinuously through  the  low  hills  upon  the  Maritime  Plain, 
the  hill  country  of  Judaea  stands  aloof  from  the  Shephelah 
Range,  with  a  well-defined  valley  between.^  Now  these  two 
physical  differences  do  not  coincide  :  the  tableland  of  Judaea 
runs  farther  north  than  its  isolation  from  the  low  hills. 
Consequently  we  have  an  alternative  of  frontiers.  If  we 
take  the  difference  between  the  relations  of  the  two  pro- 
vinces to  the  Maritime  Plain,  the  natural  boundary  will  be 
the  Vale  of  Ajalon,  which  penetrates  the  Central  Range, 
and  a  line  from  it  across  the  waterparting  to  the  Wady 
Suweinit,  the  deep  gorge  of  Michmash,  which  will  continue 
the  boundary  to  the  Jordan  at  Jericho.  If  we  take  the 
distinction  between  the  scattered  hills  and  the  tableland, 
then  the  natural  boundary  from  the  coast  will  be  the  river 
'Auja,  the  Wadies  Deir  Balut  and  Nimr,  and  a  line  across 
the  waterparting  to  the  Wadies  Samieh  and  El  'Aujah, 
'  ExrosiTOR  for  Febrnarj-,  p.  VM. 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  303 


which  will  continue  the  houndary  to  the  Jordan,  eight 
miles  ahove  Jericho.^  For  it  is  just  where  this  second  line 
crosses  the  waterparting,  about  the  Eobber's  ^Yell  on  the 
high  road  from  Jerusalem  to  Nubulus,  that  travellers  coming 
north  find  the  country  change.  They  have  descended  from 
the  plateau,  and  their  road  onward  lies  through  valleys  and 
plains,  with  ridges  between.  A  little  farther  north,  how- 
ever, there  is  a  third  and  even  more  evident  border  in  the 
Wady  Ishar,  a  northerly  branch  of  the  Wady  Deir  Balut 
that  runs  north-east,  deep  and  straight  to  Akrabbeh. 

Thus  we  have  not  one,  but  three  possible  frontiers  across 
the  range  :  south  of  Bethel,  the  line  from  the  head  of  Ajalon 
to  the  gorge  of  Michmash ;  north  of  Bethel,  the  change 
from  tableland  to  valley,  with  deep  wadies  running  both  to 
Jordan  and  to  the  coast ;  and,  more  northerly  still,  the 
Wady  Ishar.  None  of  these  is  by  any  means  a  "  scientific 
frontier,"  and  their  ambiguity  is  reflected  in  the  fortunes  of 
the  political  border.  The  political  border  oscillated  among 
these  three  natural  borders. 

Thus,  to  begin  with,  in  the  days  of  Saul,  Israel  and  the 
Philistines  faced  each  other  across  the  gorge  at  Mich- 
mash ;  -  and  while  David  was  king  only  of  Judah,  his 
soldiers  sat  down  opposite  to  Abner's  at  Gibeon,  on  a  line 
between  Ajalon  and  the  Michmash  valley.^  The  same  line 
seems  to  have  been  the  usual  frontier  between  the  kingdoms 
of  Northern  Israel  and  Judah,  for  Bethel  was  a  sanctuary 
of  the  former  under  Jeroboam  and  Jehu,  and  in  the  days  of 
Amos  and  Hosea.'^  But  while  the  vale  of  Ajalon  and  the 
gorge  of  Michmash  are  strong  frontiers,  the  plateau  between 
them  offers  no  line  of  division  at  all,  but  stretches  away 
quite  level  to  the  north  of  Bethel.     Hence  we  find  Bethel, 


'  Trelawney  Saunders,  Intvnd.  to  Surrey  of  W.  Palestine,  p.  229. 

-  1  Sam.  xiii.,  xiv.  ^  2  Sam.  ii.  13. 

■•  1  Kiugs  xii.  2'J  ;  2  Kings  x.  29  ;  Amos  iii.  14,  iv.  4,  vii.  10,  13  ;  Hosea  x. 


304  THE  HISTORICAL   GEOGRAPHY 

passing  more  than  once  from  the  northern  to  the  southern 
power.  Soon  after  the  disruption  of  the  kingdoms,  Abijah 
won  it  for  Judah/  but  it  reverted  to  the  north.  When  the 
kingdom  of  Israel  fell,  and  the  land  held  only  scattered 
colonies  of  foreigners,  Bethel  seems  to  have  come  once  more 
into  the  power  of  Judah  ;  but  it  was  a  tainted  place,''  and 
Geba,  to  the  south  of  Michmash,  is  mentioned  as  the 
northerly  limit  of  Josiah's  kingdom.-'^  After  the  Exile,  the 
border  of  Judaea  lay  to  the  north  of  Bethel,  which  was  a 
well-known  Judasan  village,*  and  was  fortified  by  the  Macca- 
bees.' From  this  time  the  Jews  must  have  encroached  upon 
Samaritan  territory;  till,  according  to  the  few  data  given  by 
Josephus,  the  frontier  was  pushed  north  to  the  Wady  Ishar, 
as  much  as  twelve  miles  from  Bethel  and  only  eight  from 
Shechem.'^  This  left  a  very  narrow  strip  to  the  Samaritans, 
but  the  strip  probably  extended  to  Jordan.  Therefore  to  go 
through  Samaria,  our  Lord  and  His  disciples  had  only  some 
twenty-three  miles  to  cover,''  while  if  they  wished  to  avoid 
Samaria  altogether,  they  must  needs  cross  Jordan. 

The  real  border  between  Samaria  and  Judaea  lay,  there- 
fore, sometimes  to  the  north,  sometimes  to  the  south,  of 
Bethel.  Having  defined  it,  we  may  now  pass  to  a  survey  of 
the  Kange  to  the  south  of  it, — the  province  of  Judaea. 

JUD.EA   AND   ITS   BOEDERS. 

Physically  the  most  barren  part  of  the  Holy  Land, 
Judcea,  is  morally  by  far  the  most  sacred  and  glorious. 
Taken  in  pledge  for  God's  people  by  the  dust  of  their  patri- 
archs— dust  which  still  sleeps  in  one  of  its  caves — Judaea 

'  2  Chron.  xiii.  19.  -  2  Kings  xxiii.  4,  l;j. 

^  From  Geha  to  Beersheha  :    2  Kings  xxiii.  8. 

•>  Ezra  ii.  28 ;  Neb.  vii.  32.  ^  i  jxacc.  ix.  50. 

«  Josephus,  Bell,  iii.  3,  5.  4  ;  Conder,  Humlbool;,  pp.  306,  307.  Tlie  deter-' 
miuation  of  this  boundary  between  Samaria  and  Jadica  is  due  to  the  Pal. 
Explor.  Fund  Survey.     Cf.  their  Statement  for  1881,  p.  48. 

7  That  is  by  the  present  high  road  from  the  W.  Ishar,  past  Sychar,  to  Jeunin 
or  En-Gannim. 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  305 


for  the  most  of  their  history  remained  the  only  region  as- 
signed them  by  God,  on  which  their  liberty  was  secm'e,  or 
their  patriotism  triumphant.  It  was  the  seat  of  their  sacred 
dynasty,  the  site  of  their  temple,  the  platform  of  all  their 
chief  prophets.  After  their  great  Exile  they  were  rallied 
round  its  capital,  and  upon  its  fortresses  they  expended, 
centuries  later,  the  final  efforts  of  their  freedom.  From  2000 
B.C.,  when  Abraham  encamped  at  Hebron,  to  70  a.d.,  when 
at  Masada,  only  sixteen  miles  away,  the  reinnant  of  the 
garrison  of  Jerusalem  slaughtered  themselves  out  rather 
than  fall  into  Roman  hands,  or  till  136  a.d.,  when  at  Bother, 
but  five  miles  from  Bethlehem,  the  revolt  of  Bar-cochba 
was  crushed  by  Hadrian, — Judaea  was  the  birthplace,  the 
stronghold,  the  sepulchre  of  God's  people.  It  is,  therefore, 
not  wonderful  that  they  should  have  taken  from  it  the 
name,  which  is  now  more  frequent  than  either  their  ances- 
tral designation  of  Hebrews,  or  their  sacred  title  of  Israel. 
"  The  Jew  "has  suffered  from  the  contempt  of  the  foreigners 
who  first  used  the  term,  as  well  as  from  the  sordid  associa- 
tions of  much  of  modern  Judaism ;  but  surely  it  is  glorious 
to  inherit  the  name  of  a  land  in  which  Abraham,  Samuel, 
David,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  and  the  Maccabees  prayed  and 
prophesied,  built  and  fought  and  reigned. 

For  us  Christians  it  is  enough  to  remember  that  Judaea 
contains  the  places  of  our  Lord's  Birth  and  Death,  with  the 
scenes  of  His  Temptation,  His  more  painful  Ministry,  f  nd 
His  Agony. 

Judaea  is  very  small.  Even  when  you  extend  it  to  its 
ideal  border  at  the  sea,  and  include  all  of  it  that  is  desert,  it 
does  not  amount  to  more  than  2,000  square  miles,  or  the 
size  of  one  of  our  average  counties.  ^  But  Judaea,  in  the 
days  of  its  independence  never  covered  the  whole  Maritime 
Plain,  and  even  the  Shephelah,  as  we  have  seen,  was  fre- 
quently  beyond   it.      Apart    from     Shephelah   and   Plain, 

'  Aberdeenshire  is  1,970  square  miles;  Torl;shire,  about  4,500. 
VOL.    V.  20 


306  THE  HISTORICAL   GEOGRAPHY 

Judsea  was  a  region  55  miles  long,  from  Bethel  to  Beer- 
sheba,  and  from  25  to  30  broad,  or  about  1,350  square 
miles,  of  which  nearly  the  half  was  desert. 

It  ought  not  to  be  difficult  to  convey  an  adequate  impres- 
sion of  so  small  and  so  separate  a  province.  The  centre 
is  a  high  and  broken  table-land  from  two  to  three  thousand 
feet  above  the  sea,  perhaps  thirty-five  miles  long  by  twelve 
to  seventeen  broad.  ^  But  before  I  describe  this  central 
plateau,  let  us  get  some  idea  of  the  even  more  important 
boundaries  which  buttress  and  defend  it — boundaries  which 
have  so  largely  made  the  land  what  it  is  and  press  them- 
selves so  constantly  upon  the  feelings  of  the  inhabitants. 

1.  To  THE  East. — You  cannot  live  in  Judsea  without 
being  daily  aware  of  the  presence  of  that  awful  valley 
which  bounds  it  on  the  east — the  lower  Jordan  and  the 
Dead  Sea.  From  Bethel,  from  Jerusalem,  from  Bethlehem, 
from  Tekoa,  from  the  heights  above  Hebron,  and  from 
fifty  points  between  you  see  that  gulf;  and  sometimes  you 
feel  Judsea  rising  from  it  about  you,  as  a  sailor  feels  his 
narrow  deck  or  a  sentinel  the  sharp-edged  platform  of  his 
high  fortress.  From  the  hard  limestone  of  the  range  on 
which  you  stand,  the  land  sinks  swiftly,  and,  as  it  seems, 
shuddering,  through  softer  formations,  desert  and  chaotic,  to 
a  depth  of  which  you  cannot  see  the  bottom,  but  you  know 
that  it  falls  far  below  the  level  of  the  ocean  to  the  coasts 
of  a  waste  and  bitter  sea.  Beyond  this  emptiness  rise  the 
hills  of  Moab,  high  and  precipitous,  and  it  is  their  bare 
edge,  almost  unbroken,  aud  with  nothing  visible  beyond  it, 
save  a  castle  or  a  crag,  which  forms  the  eastern  horizon  of 
JudEBa.  The  depth,  the  haggard  desert  through  which  the 
land   sinks    to   it,   the   uniqueness  of  that  gulf  and  of  its 

'  From  the  centre  of  the  Wady  Ali  to  the  Eastern  base  of  the  Mount  of  Olives 
(1,520  feet  above  the  sea)  is  fourteen  miles.  From  the  VV.  en  Nagil  on  the 
Shephelah  border  to  the  descent  from  the  plateau  east  of  Mar  Saba  is  about 
seventeen  miles  ;  and  a  1  ne  across  Hebioa  from  edge  to  edge  of  the  p'ateau 
gives  about  fourteen  milts. 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  307 

prisoned  sea,  and  the  deep  barrier  beyond,  conspire  to  pro- 
duce upon  the  inhabitants  of  Judaea  a  moral  effect,  such  as, 
I  suppose,  is  created  by  no  other  boundary  in  the  world. 

It  was  only,  however,  when  I  had  crossed  into  Moab  that 
I  fully  appreciated  the  significance  of  that  frontier  in  the 
history  of  God's  separated  people.  The  table-land  of  Moab 
to  the  east  of  the  Dead  Sea  is  about  the  same  height  as 
the  table-land  of  Judaea  to  the  west,  and  is  almost  of 
exactly  the  same  physical  formation.  On  both  of  them 
there  are  landscapes  on  which  it  would  be  impossible  for 
you  to  gather,  whether  you  were  in  Judah  or  in  Moab — im- 
possible but  for  one  thing,  the  feeling  of  what  you  have  to 
the  east  of  you.  To  the  east  of  Judah  there  is  that  great 
gulf  fixed.  But  Moab  to  the  east  rolls  off  almost  imper- 
ceptibly into  Arabia — a  few  low  hills,  and  no  river  or 
valley,  between  her  pastures  and  the  great  deserts  out  of 
which  in  all  ages  wild  and  hungry  tribes  have  been  ready  to 
swarm,  Moab  is  open  to  the  east ;  Judah,  with  the  same 
formation,  imposing  the  same  habits  of  life  on  a  kindred 
stock  of  men,  has  a  gulf  between  her  and  the  east,  and 
in  this  broad  fact  lies  a  very  large  part  of  the  reason 
why  Judah  was  chosen  as  the  home  of  God's  peculiar 
people. 

The  wilderness  of  Judaea,  which  rises  from  the  Dead  Sea 
to  the  centre  of  the  land,  will  be  best  studied  in  connec- 
tion with  its  influence  on  the  people.  Here  it  is  neces- 
sary only  to  ask  what  passes  lead  up  through  it  from 
the  Jordan  and  the  Dead  Sea.  There  are,  to  begin  with, 
the  roads  up  from  Jericho, — north-west  to  Bethel,  and 
south-west  to  Jerusalem — roads  which  do  not  keep  to  any 
great  lines  of  valley,  for  here  the  mountains  are  cut  only 
by  deep  gorges,  but  for  the  most  part  traverse  the  ridges 
between  the  latter.  It  was  by  the  more  northerly  of 
these  easily  defended  roads  that  Israel  invaded  the  central 
plateau.     Joshua  came  up  from  Jericho  to  the  north  of  the 


308  THE  HISTORICAL   GEOGRAPHY 

Michmash  Gorge.  But  we  do  not  read  of  any  other  inva- 
sion of  Judfca,  either  here,  or  by  any  gorge  leading  up  from 
the  Dead  Sea,  except  twenty-eight  miles  north  of  Jericho, 
at  En-Gedi.  It  was  at  En-Gedi  that  the  Kenites  succeeded 
in  establishing  themselves  in  a  fortress,  from  which  they 
afterwards  conquered  the  south  of  Judah,^  and  it  was  by  the 
pass  of  En-Gedi  that  the  children  of  Moab  and  the  children 
of  Ammon  came  up  against  King  Jehoshaphat  to  battle. " 
Farther  south  in  the  dreary  desert,  as  it  falls  towards  the 
precipices  of  the  Dead  Sea,  the  traveller  comes  across  un- 
mistakable traces  of  a  great  military  road.'^  But  this,  even 
if  it  was  made  before  the  Eomans  came,  was  a  purely 
inland  passage — a  connecting  way  between  the  Juda3an 
fortress  of  Masada  and  the  centre  of  the  land. 

2.  The  South. — The  survey  of  the  southern  border  of 
Jadoea  leads  us  out  upon  a  region  of  immense  extent  and  of 
great  historical  interest — the  Negeb,  translated  The  Soutli 
in  our  version,"*  but  literally  meaning  the  Dry  or  Parched 
Land.  The  character  and  the  story  of  the  Negeb  require  a 
separate  study :  here  we  are  concerned  with  it  only  as  the 
southern  border  of  Judaea. 

From  Hebron  the  Central  Eange  lets  itself  slowly  down 
by  broad  undulations,  through  which  the  great  Wady  Khulil 
winds,  as  far  as  Beersheba,^  and  then,  as  Wady  es-Seba 
turns  sharply  to  the  west,  finding  the  sea  near  Gaza.  It 
is  a  country  visited  by  annual  rains,  with  at  least  a  few 
perennial  springs,  and  in  the  early  summer  abundance  of 
flowers  and  corn.    We  descended  from  Hebron  to  Dhaheriy- 

1  Num.  xxiv.  21.  ^  2  Cliroii.  xx. 

3  We  found  tliese  fragments  in  a  line  making  stiaight  for  tlie  edge  of  tlie 
precipice  above  Masada  ;  but  how  it  ever  passed  down  the  cliffs  it  was  impossible 
to  discover.  It  bad  been  a  road  suitable  for  wheeled  vehicles,  but  mules  can 
scarcely  get  down  to  Masada  now. 

••  e.g.  Gen.  xiii.  1;  1  Sam.  xxx.  1  ;  Psa.  cxxvi.  4. 

*  El-Khiilil,  "  the  friend,"  that  is,  of  God,  a  title  of  Abraham,  is  also  the 
modem  name  of  his  city,  Hebron,  near  which  the  Wady  starts. 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  309 

ah,  probably  the  site  of  Kiriath-Sepher,  through  wheatfields, 
arranged  in  the  narrower  wadies  in  careful  terraces,  and 
lavishly  spread  over  many  of  the  broader  valleys.  A  rank 
scrub  covered  most  of  the  slopes.  There  were  olive  groves 
about  the  villages,  but  few  trees  elsewhere.  We  passed  four 
springs,  two  with  tracts  of  marshy  ground,  and  though 
it  was  the  end  of  April,  some  heavy  showers  fell.  South  of 
Dhaheriyah  the  country  is  more  bare,  but  travellers  coming 
up  from  the  desert  delight  in  the  verdure  which  meets  them 
as  soon  as  they  have  passed  Beersheba  and  the  AVady  es- 
Seba.^  The  disposition  of  the  land  —  the  gentle  descent 
cut  by  the  broad  Wady — and  its  fertility  render  it  as  open  a 
frontier  and  as  easy  an  approach  to  Judaea  as  it  is  possible 
to  conceive.  But  it  does  not  roll  out  upon  the  level  desert. 
South  of  Beersheba,  before  the  level  desert  is  reached  and  the 
region  of  roads  from  Arabia  to  Egypt  and  Philistia,  there 
lie  sixty  miles  of  mountainous  country,  mostly  disposed  in 
"steep  ridges  running  east  and  west,-  whose  inaccessible- 
ness  is  further  certified  by  the  character  of  the  tribe  that 
roam  upon  it.  More  wild  and  isolated  sons  of  Ishmael  are 
not  to  be  found  on  all  the  desert.^  The  vegetation,  even 
after  rain,  is  excessively  meagre,  and  in  summer  totally 
disappears.  "  No  great  route  now  leads,  or  ever  has  led, 
through  this  district";'*  but  the  highways  which  gather 
upon  the  south  of  it  from  Egypt,  Sinai,  the  Gulf  of  Akabah 
and  Arabia,  it  thrusts  either  to  the  east  of  it  up  the  Wady 
Arabah  to  the  Dead  Sea,  or  to  the  west  towards  Gaza  and 
Philistia.  Paths  indeed  skirt  this  region  and  even  cross  its 
corners,  but  they  are  not  war  paths.  When  Judah's  frontier 
extended  to  Elath,  Solomon's  cargoes  from  Ophir,^  and  the 
tribute  of  Arabian  Kings  to  Jehoshaphat  ^  were  doubtless 
carried  through  it.     When  any  one  power  held  the  whole 

'  Eobinson  :  Biblical  Ees''aiches  (1st  ed.),  305,  30G. 

-  liobinsou,  Id.,  275.         *  The  Azazimeli ;  cf.  Trumbull:  Kadesli-Barnea. 

^  Robinson,  as  above.  ^  1  Kings  ix.  16.  '^  1  Kings  ix.  20. 


310  rilE  IIISTOniCAL   GEOGRAPHY 

land,  merchants  traversed  it  from  Petra  to  Hebron  or  Gaza, 
or  skirted  it  by  the  Roman  road  that  ran  up  the  west  of  it 
from  Akabah  to  Jerusalem;^  and  even  whole  tribes  might 
drift  across  it  in  days  when  Jiidah  had  no  inhabitants  to 
resist  them.  When  the  Jews  came  back  from  exile,  they 
found  Edomites  settled  as  far  north  as  Hebron.  But  no 
army  of  invasion,  knowing  that  opposition  awaited  them 
upon  the  Jadjuan  frontier,  would  venture  across  those 
steep  and  haggard  ridges,  especially  when  the  Dead  Sea 
and  Gaza  routes  lie  so  convenient  on  either  hand,  and 
lead  to  regions  so  much  more  fertile  than  the  Judoean 
plateau. 

Hence  we  find  Judeea  almost  never  invaded  from  the 
south.  Chedorlaomer's  great  expedition,  on  its  return  from 
the  desert  of  Paran,  swept  south  by  the  Arabah  to  the  cities 
of  the  plain,  sacking  En-Gedi  by  the  way,  but  leaving  He- 
bron untouched.-  Israel  themselves  were  repulsed  seeking 
to  enter  the  Promised  Land  by  this  frontier;  and — perhaps 
most  significant  of  all — the  invasion  by  Islam,  though  its 
chief  goal  may  be  said  to  have  been  the  Holy  City  of  Jeru- 
salem, and  though  its  nearest  road  to  this  lay  past  Hebron, 
also  swerved  to  the  east,  and,  like  Israel,  entered  Judah 
from  the  Jordan  valley  after  the  conquest  of  eastern 
Palestine.  The  most  likely  foes  to  swarm  upon  Judah  by 
the  slopes  of  Hebron  were  the  natives  of  this  wild  desert, 
the  Arabians,  or,  as  they  were  called  from  the  Bed  Sea'^  to 
Philistia,^  the  Amalehites  ;  but  it  is  to  be  remarked  that 
though  they  sometimes  invaded  the  Negeb,'"  they  must  have 
been  oftener  attracted,  as  they  still  are,  to  the  more  fertile 
and  more  easily  overrun  fields  of  the  Philistines.  It  was 
7iine  furlongs  from  Javviia  that  Judas  Maccabeus  defeated 
in  a  great  battle   the  nomads  of  Arabia.'^     The  proper  de- 

*  Tabulse  Peutingeriana.  *  Gen.  xiv.  ^  Exod.  xvii.  8. 

*  1  Sam.  XXX.  1.  *  1  Sam.  xxx.  1.  ;  2  Chron.  xxvi.  1. 
«  2  Mace.  xii.  11. 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  311 

fences  against  these  impetuous  swarms  of  warriors  are  strong, 
towers,  such  as  still  protect  the  great  Hajj  road  from  Syria 
to  Mecca  from  the  Bedouin,  and  of  these  Uzziah  built  a 
number  in  the  desert  to  the  south  and  east  of  Judah.  The 
symbolic  use  of  towers  in  the  Bible  is  well-known.^ 

The  most  notable  road  across  this  border  of  Judah  was- 
the  continuation  of  the  great  highway  from  Bethel^  which 
kept  the  watershed  to  Hebron,  and  thence  came  down  to 
Beersheba.  From  here  it  struck  dae  south  across  the 
western  ridges  of  the  savage  Highland  district,  and  divided 
into  several  branches.  One,  the  Boman  road  already 
noticed,  curved  round  the  south  of  the  Highland  district  to 
Akabah  and  Arabia  ;  another,  the  way  perhaps  of  Elijah 
when  he  fled  from  Jezebel,^  and  much  used  by  mediaeval 
and  modern  pilgrims,  crossed  to  Sinai ;  while  a  third  struck 
direct  north  upon  Egypt,  the  loaij  to  Shiir.  By  this  last 
Abraham  passed  and  repassed  through  the  Negeb,''  Hagar, 
the  Egyptian  slave  woman,  fled  from  her  mistress,  perhaps 
with  some  wild  hope  of  reaching  her  own  country;*  and 
Jacob  went  down  into  Egypt  with  his  waggons.'^  In  times 
of  alliance  between  Egypt  and  Judah,  this  was  the  way 
of  communication  between  them.  So  that  fatal  embassy 
must  have  gone  from  Jerusalem,  which  Isaiah  describes 
as  struggling  in  the  land  of  trouble  and  anguish,  whence 
are  the  young  lion  and  the  old  lion,  the  viper  and  fiery  flying 
serpent;^  and  so  in  the  time  of  the  Crusades,  those  rich 
caravans  passed  from  Cairo  to  Saladin  at  Jerusalem,  one 
of  which  Bichard  intercepted  near  Beersheba,^  It  is  an 
open  road,  but  a  wild  one,  and  was  never,  it  would  seem, 
used  for  the  invasion  of  Judaea  from  Egypt. ^  The  nearer 
way  to  Syria  from  Egypt  lay,  as  we  have  seen,  along  the 

1  Cf.  Do  iglity:  Arabia  Dcserta  i.  13.  ^  1  Kings  xix. 

3  Gen  xiii.  1.  *  Gen.  xvi.  7.  ^  Gen.  xlvi.  1. 

^  Isa.  XXX.  6.  '  Expositor  for  February,  p.  298. 

®  We  do  n')t  know  how  Shishak  came  up  in  Jerusalem. 


312  THE  HISTORICAL  GEOGRAPHY 

coast,  and  passing  up  the  Maritime  Plain,  left  the  hill 
country  of  Judaea  to  the  east. 

This  then  was  the  southern  frontier  of  Judah,  in  itself 
an  easy  access,  with  one  trunk-road,  but  barred  by  the 
great  desert  ridges  to  the  south  of  it,  and  enjoying  even 
greater  security  from  the  fact  of  its  more  lofty  and  barren 
position  between  two  regions  of  such  attractiveness  to 
invaders  as  the  valley  of  the  Jordan  and  the  Plain  of 
Philistia.  Before  we  leave  this  region,  it  is  well  to  notice 
that  the  broad  barrier  of  rough  highlands  to  the  south  of 
Beersheba  represents  the  difference  between  the  ideal  and 
the  practical  borders  of  the  Holy  Land.  Practically  the 
land  extended  from  Dan  to  Beersheba,  where,  during  the 
greater  part  of  history,  the  means  of  settled  cultivation 
came  to  an  end ;  but  the  ideal  border  was  the  River  of 
Egypt,  the  present  Wady  el  Arish,  whose  chief  tributary 
comes  right  up  to  the  foot  of  the  highlands  south  of 
Beersheba,  and  passes  between  them  and  the  level  desert 
beyond. 

3.  The  West. — The  ideal  boundary  of  Judoea  on  the 
west  was  the  Mediterranean,  but,  as  we  have  seen,  the 
Maritime  Plain  was  never  in  Jewish  possession  (except  for 
a  short  time  in  the  days  of  the  Maccabees),  and  even  the 
Shephelah  was  debatable  ground  and  as  often  out  of  Judah 
■as  within  it.  The  most  frequent  border  therefore  of  Judah 
to  the  west,  was  the  edge  of  the  Central  Bange.  In  the 
previous  paper  on  the  Shephelah  it  was  pointed  out  in 
•detail  how  real  a  frontier  this  was.  A  long  series  of  valleys 
running  south  from  Ajalon  to  Beersheba  separate  the  low 
loose  hills  of  the  Shephelah  from  the  lofty  compact  range 
to  the  east — the  hill  country  of  Judcca.  This  great  barrier, 
which  repelled  the  Philistines,  even  when  they  had  con- 
quered the  Shephelah,  is  penetrated  by  a  number  of  defiles, 
none  more  broad  than  those  of  Beth-Horon,  of  the  Wadi 
Ali  along  which  the  present  high-road  to  Jerusalem  travels, 


OF  THE  HOLY  LAND.  313. 


aud  of  the  Wady  Surar  up  which  the  railway  is  to  run. 
Few  are  straight,  most  of  them  sharply  curve.  The  sides 
are  steep,  and  often  precipitous,  frequently  with  no  path 
up  them,  save  the  rough  torrent  bed,  arranged  in  rapids 
of  loose  shingle,  or  in  level  steps  of  the  limestone  strata, 
which,  particularly  at  the  mouth  of  the  defile,  are  tilted 
almost  perpendicularly  into  easily  defended  obstacles  of 
passage.  The  sun  beats  fiercely  down  upon  the  limestone ; 
the  springs  are  few,  though  sometimes  very  generous  ;  a 
low  thick  bush  fringes  all  the  brows,  and  caves  abound  and 
tumbled  rocks. ^ 

Everything  conspires  to  give  the  few  inhabitants  easy 
means  of  defence  against  large  armies.  It  is  a  country  of 
ambushes,  entanglements,  surprises,  where  large  armies 
have  no  room  to  fight,  and  the  defenders  can  remain 
hidden  ;  where  the  essentials  for  war  are  nimbleness  and 
the  sure  foot,  the  power  of  scramble  and  of  rush.  We  see 
it  all  in  the  eighteenth  Psalm  :  By  thee  do  I  run  througli 
a  troop,  and  by  my  God  do  I  leap  over  a  wall;  the  God 
that  girdeth  me  ivith  strength  and  maJceth  my  way  perfect. 
He  maketh  my  feet  like  hinds"  feet  and  setteth  me  on  my 
high  places.  Thou  hast  enlarged  my  steps  under  me,  and 
my  feet  have  not  slipped. 

Yet  with  negligent  defenders  the  western  border  of 
Judaea  is  quickly  penetrated.  Six  hours  at  the  most  will 
bring  an  army  up  any  of  the  defiles,  and  then  they  stand 
on  the  central  plateau,  within  a  few  easy  miles  of  Jeru- 
salem or  of  Hebron.  So  it  happened  in  the  days  of  the 
Maccabees.  The  Syrians,  repelled  at  Beth-horon,  and  at 
the  Wady  Ali,  penetrated  twice  the  unwatched  defiles  to 
the  south,  the  second  time  with  a  large  number  of  ele- 
phants, of  which  we  are  told  that  they  had  to   come  up 

^  I  describe  from  my  observation  of  the  Wady  el-Kiif  from  Beit-Gibrin  to 
Hebron,  and  of  three  defiles  that  run  up  from  the  W^.  en.  Nagil  to  the  plateau 
about  Beit,  Atab. 


314  THE  HISTORICAL   GEOGRAPHY 


the  narrow  gorges  in  single  file.^  Wluit  a  sight  the  strange, 
huge  animals  must  have  been,  pushing  up  the  narrow  path, 
and  emerging  for  the  first  and  almost  only  time  in  history 
on  that  plateau  above  !  On  both  occasions  the  Syrians  laid 
siege  to  Beth-sur,  the  stronghold  on  the  edge  of  the  plateau, 
which  Judas  had  specially  fortified  for  the  western  defence 
of  the  country.  The  first  time  they  were  beaten  back 
down  the  gorges;  but  the  second  time,  with  the  elephants, 
Beth-sur  fell,  and  the  Syrian  army  advanced  on  Jerusalem. 
After  that  all  attacks  from  the  west  failed,  and  the  only 
other  successful  Syrian  invasion  was  from  the  north. - 

4.  The  North. — The  narrow  tableland  of  Judoea  con- 
tinues ten  miles  to  the  north  of  Jerusalem,  before  it  breaks 
into  the  valleys  and  mountains  of  Samaria.  These  last 
ten  miles  of  the  Judasan  plateau — with  steep  gorges  on  the 
one  side  to  the  Jordan  and  on  the  other  to  Ajalon — were 
the  debatable  land  across  which,  as  we  have  seen,  the  most 
accessible  frontier  of  Juda3a  fluctuated;  and,  therefore,  they 
became  the  site  of  more  fortresses,  sieges,  forays,  battles 
and  massacres,  than  perhaps  any  other  part  of  the  country. 
Their  appearance  matches  their  violent  history.  A  desolate 
and  fatiguing  extent  of  rockj'  platforms  and  ridges,  of  moor- 
land strewn  with  boulders  and  fields  of  shallow  soil  thickly 
mixed  v^ith  stone — they  are  more  fit  for  the  building  of 
barriers  than  for  the  cultivation  of  food.  They  were  the 
territory  of  Benjamin,  in  whose  blood,  at  the  time  of  the 
awfal  massacre  of  the  tribe  by  Judah,''  they  received  the 
baptism  of  their  history.  As  you  cross  them  their  aspect 
recalls  the  fierce  temper  of  their  inhabitants.  Benjamin 
shall  ravin  as  a  wolf,  father  of  sons,  w'ho,  noble  or  ignoble, 
w'ere  always  passionate  and  unsparing, — Saul,  Shimei,  Jere- 
miah, and  he  that  breathed  out  threatenings  and  slaughter 
against  the  disciples  of  the  Lord,  and   icas  exceeding  mad 

'  Josephus,  AiitiqniliiH,  xii.  '.).  -  IJy  Baccliides,  in  IGO. 

^  Judges  XX.  5. 


OF   THE  HOLY  LAND.  315 

against  tliem.  In  such  a  region  of  blood  and  tears 
Jeremiah  beheld  the  figure  of  the  nation's  woe  :  A  voice 
is  heard  in  Ramah,  lamentation  and  hitter  tceeping,  Rachrl 
weeping  for  her  cliildren:  she  refuseth  to  he  comforted  for  her 
children,  hecause  they  are  not. 

But  it  is  as  a  frontier  that  we  have  now  to  do  with  those 
ten  northmost  miles  of  the  Judosan  plateau.  Upon  the  last 
of  them  three  roads  concentrate — an  open  highway  from  the 
west  by  Gophna,  the  great  north  road  from  Shechem,  and 
a  road  from  the  Jordan  valley  through  the  passes  of  Mount 
Ephraim.  Where  these  draw  together,  about  three  miles 
from  the  end  of  the  plateau,  stood  Bethel,  a  sanctuary 
before  the  Exile,  thereafter  a  strong  city  of  Judah.^  But 
Bethel,  where  she  stood,  could  not  by  herself  keep  the 
northern  gate  of  Judaea.  For  behind  her  to  the  south 
emerge  the  roads  we  have  already  followed — that  from  the 
Jordan  by  Ai  and  those  from  Ajalon  up  the  gorges  and  ridge 
of  Beth-horon.  The  Ai  route  is  covered  by  Michmash, 
where  Saul  and  Jonathan  were  entrenched  against  the 
Philistine,  and  where  the  other  Jewish  hero  who  was  called 
Jonathan-MaccabfBus,^ — held  for  a  time  his  headquarters.- 
The  Beth-horon  roads  were  covered  by  Gibeon,^  the  frontier 
post  between  David  and  Saul's  house. "^  Between  Mich- 
mash and  Gibeon  there  are  six  miles,  and  on  these  lie 
others  of  the  strong  points  that  stood  forth  in  the  invasion 
and  defence  of  this  frontier  : — Geba,  long  the  limit  of  Judah 
to  the  north ;  '"  Kamah,  which  Baasha,  king  of  Israel,  built 
for  a  blockade  against  Judah  ;  ^  Adasa,  where  Judas  Macca- 
beus pitched  against  Nicanor,  coming  up  from  Beth-horon.^ 
These,  with  Michmash  and  Gibeon,  formed  a  line  of 
defence  that  was  valid  against  the  Ajalon  and  Ai  ascents, 
as  well  as  against  the  level  approach  from  the  north. 

1   1  Mace.  ix.  50.  ^  Josephns,  XIII.  Aritiqiiities,  i.  6.  •''  Josh.  x.  1-12. 

■»  2  Sam.  ii.  12,  13.  *  2  Kings  xxiii.  8.  '^1  Kings  xv.  17. 

"  Joseplius,  XII.  Antiquitiei',  x.  5. 


31G  HISTORICAL  GEOGRAPHY  OF  THE  HOLY  LAND. 


The  earlier  invasions  delivered  upon  this  frontier  of  Judah 
are  difficult  to  follow.  Before  it  was  a  frontier,  in  the  days 
of  Saul,  the  Philistines  overran  ib  probably  from  Ajalon  ; 
Saul's  centre  was  in  Michmash.  AVhether  in  their  attacks 
upon  Jerusalem  ^  Joash  or  Kezin  and  Pekah  crossed  it,  it 
is  impossible  to  say  ;  probably  the  latter  at  least  came  up 
from  the  Arabah.  Isaiah  pictures  a  possible  march  this  way 
by  the  Assyrians  after  the  fall  of  Samaria.  He  is  come  upon 
Ai ;  marcheth  tlirough  Mlgron,  at  Michmash  musters  his 
baggage;  they  have  passed  the  Pass;  "Let  Geha  he  our 
bivouac."  Terror-struck  is  Baviah ;  Giheah  of  Saul  liath 
fied.  Make  shrill  thy  voice,  oh,  daughter  of  Gallim.  Listen, 
Laishah,  answer  her  Anathoth ;  in  mad fliglit  is  Madmenah; 
the  dwellers  in  Gebim  gather  their  stuff  to  flee.  This  very  day 
he  halteth  at  Nob  ;  he  waveth  his  hand  at  the  mount  of  the 
daugliter  of  Zion,  the  hill  of  Jerusalem."  This  is  not  actual 
fact — for  the  Assyrian  did  not  then  march  upon  Zion,  and 
when  he  came  twenty  years  later  it  was  probably  by  the 
Beth-horon  route — but  this  is  what  might  have  happened 
any  day  after  the  fall  of  Samaria.  The  prophet  is  describing 
how  easily  the  Assyrian  might  advance  by  this  open  route 
upon  Zion;  and  yet,  if  he  did,  Jehovah  would  cut  him  down 
in  the  very  sight  of  his  goal.^  All  the  places  mentioned  are 
not  known ;  and  of  those  that  are,  some  are  off  the  high- 
road. How  Nebuchadnezzar  came  up  against  Jerusalem 
is  not  stated ;  *  but  we  can  follow  the  course  of  subsequent 
invasions.  In  the  great  Syrian  war  in  160  B.C.  Nicanor 
and  Bacchides  both  attempted  the  plateau — the  former  un- 
successfully by  Beth-horon,  the  latter  with  success  from  the 
north.  In  64  Pompey  marched  from  Beth-shean  through 
Samaria,  but  could  not  have  reached  Judaea  had  the  Jews 
only  persevered  in  their  defence  of  the  passes  of  Mount 
Ephraim.     These  being  left  open,  Pompey  advanced  easily 

>  2  Kings  xiv.  8  ;  xvi.  5.  2  Isaiah  x.  28-32.  ^  j^  _  y^,^^_  32^  33. 

••  2  Kings  xxiv.  10. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  OLD   TESTAMENT.         317 

by  Korete  upon  Bethel,  and  thence  unopposed  to  the  very 
walls  of  Zion.  In  37  B.C.  Herod  marched  from  the  north 
and  took  Jerusalem.^  In  68  A.D.  Cestius  Gallus  came  up  by 
Beth-horon  and  Gibeon  to  invest  Jerusalem,  but  speedily 
retreated  by  the  same  way.  In  70  Titus  marched  his 
legions  to  the  great  siege  past  Gophna  and  Bethel.  It 
seems  to  have  been  by  Pompey's  route  that  the  forces  of 
Islam  came  upon  Jerusalem  ;  they  met  with  no  resistance 
either  in  Ephraim  or  Judah,  and  the  city  was  delivered 
into  their  hands  by  agreement,  637  a.d. 

In  1099  the  first  Crusaders  advanced  to  their  successful 
siege  by  Ajalon  ;  in  1187  Saladin,  haviDg  conquered  the  rest 
of  the  land,  drew  into  his  power  Hebron,  Ascalon  and  the 
north. 

This  paper  has  been  occupied  with  the  borders  of  Judcea. 
I  must  leave  to  the  opening  of  the  next  the  general  con- 
clusions to  be  drawn  from  them  with  regard  to  the  isolation 
and  security  of  the  province ;  and  then,  after  describing  the 
rocky  plateau  itself,  I  shall  state  the  three  features  of  its 
geography  that  are  most  evident  in  its  famous  history,  viz., 
its  pastoral  character ;  its  unsuitableness  for  the  growth  of 
a  great  city ;  and  its  neighbourhood  to  the  desert. 

George  Adam  Smith. 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.^ 

Students  will  find  this  an  exti'emely  useful  book.  There  is 
not  a  subject  connected  with  the  text  of  the  Old  Testament,  its 
history  and  condition,  on  which  it  does  not  afford  all  needful  in- 
formation. It  is  written  with  great  clearness  and  commendable 
brevity,  and  is  by  far  the  best  manual  that  exists  on  the  subjects 
of  which  it  treats. 

1  Josei^bus,  I.  Wars,  xvii. 
2  Cannn  and  Text  of  the  Old   Testament,  by  Dr.  Frantz  Bub],  translated  by 
Eev.  John  Macpberson.     Edinburgh,  T.  and  T.  Clark,  1892. 


318         THE  CANON  OF  THE  OLD   TESTAMENT. 

The  work  consists  of  two  parts,  devoted  to  the  Canon  and  the 
Text  respectively.  The  second  part,  on  the  Text,  is  naturally 
much  the  longer,  treating  of  the  printed  editions  and  MSS.,  the 
Massorah,  the  translations,  the  various  kinds  of  script  employed 
at  different  times,  the  vocalization,  and  other  things.  Hitherto 
the  student's  best  guide  on  such  questions  was  Wellhausen's  edition 
of  Bleek's  Introduction,  and  various  articles  in  Herzog  ;  but  the 
present  work  gathers  all  the  best  in  these  scattered  essays  together, 
and  supports  the  conclusions  drawn  with  a  wealth  of  references  to 
literature  which,  leaves  nothing  more  to  be  desired. 

The  first  division  on  the  Canon  is  perhaps  of  greatest  interest, 
partly  owing  to  the  obscurity  which  hangs  over  the  question  of 
the  Canon,  and  partly  because  of  the  greater  importance  of  that 
question  in  reference  to  more  general  interests.  The  subject  is 
treated  in  three  sections  :  the  Canon  of  the  Palestinian  Jews,  that 
of  the  Alexandrian  Jews,  and  the  Canon  in  the  Christian  Church. 
The  first  question  is  the  most  important :  the  other  two,  owing  to 
the  great  influence  of  the  Septuagint  in  the  early  Church,  are 
closely  connected  together,  for,  though  Jerome  was  inclined  to 
adopt  the  Palestinian  Canon  and  recommend  it  to  the  Church, 
prevailing  custom  was  too  powerful  to  be  overcome,  and  teachers 
of  great  influence  differed  fi'om  him.  It  has  only  been  in  some 
churches  of  the  Reformation  that  his  view  has  come  to  prevail. 

Buhl  considers  the  reading  of  the  Law  book  by  Ezra  and  the 
acceptance  of  it  by  the  people  to  have  been  the  first  step  in  canon- 
izing the  Old  Testament  (b.c.  444).  Without  any  reference  to  the 
somewhat  similar  procedure  in  the  case  of  Deuteronomy  in  the 
time  of  Josiah,  he  calls  this  the  canonization  of  the  Law.  It  is,  of 
course,  doubtful  how  much  of  the  present  Pentateuch  Ezra  read, 
and  there  may  be  elements  in  it  later  than  his  time  ;  but  the 
author  speaks  generally,  leaving  these  special  questions  to  be 
settled  by  Introduction. 

He  is  inclined  to  allow  some  value  to  the  tradition  (2  Mace.  ii. 
13)  that  Nehemiah  "founded  a  library,"  and  thinks  that  this  may 
have  been  a  preliminary  step  to  the  canonizing  of  the  other  two 
divisions,  the  Prophets  and  Writings.  On  the  evidence  of  Ecclus. 
ch.  xlix.,  he  regards  the  canonizing  of  the  prophets  to  have  been 
not  later  than  B.C.  200;  he  would  put  it  considerably  earliei', 
though  the  way  in  which  the  Chronicler  refers  to  uncanonical 
l)Ooks    makes  him   hesitate   to   place  it  so    early   as    this    writer 


THE  CANON  OF   THE   OLD    TESTAMENT.         319 

(c.  300).  It  is  not  quite  certain  what  precise  idea  was  attached  to 
canonicity  among-  the  Palestinians.  Practically  it  differed  little 
from  suitability  to  be  read  in  the  synagogue,  though  the  two 
things  were  not  always  the  same,  as  certain  minor  reasons  might 
weigh  against  public  reading  of  books,  or  parts  of  books,  though 
these  might  still  be  I'etained  in  the  sacred  collection.  It  is  not 
difficult  to  conjecture  the  reasons  which  led  to  the  reading  of  the 
Prophets.  Apart  from  the  feeling  that  prophecy  had  ceased,  the 
prophetic  books  had  been  greatly  read  even  when  the  Prophets 
still  existed,  for  Ezekiel  and  Zechariah  both  refer  formally  to 
their  predecessors,  and  the  religious  instincts  of  the  pious  in  the 
congregation  would  turn  to  them  in  preference  to  the  Law  ;  and 
possibly  the  official  doctors  only  set  their  seal  to  the  practice  that 
had  gradually  been  adopted.  It  is  certain  that  the  doctors  raised 
questions  about  the  books  which  did  not  trouble  the  minds  of  the 
congregation,  and  had  only  theoretical  interest.  The  book  of 
Ezekiel,  for  example,  created  difficulties  to  the  learned,  because 
the  prophet's  ritual  was  not  in  harmony  with  the  Law.  The 
anxiety  shown  to  reconcile  the  diiferences  is  proof  of  the  firmness 
of  the  position  of  Ezekiel  in  the  sacred  collection ;  a  certain 
Hananiah,  a  contemporary  of  Hillel  and  the  elder  Gamaliel,  the 
master  of  St.  Paul,  had  300  measures  of  oil  brought  him,  and  he 
sat  in  his  upper  r-oom  and  reconciled  the  differences.  It  is  not 
said  that  Hillel  himself  took  any  part  in  the  operation,  or  tliought 
it  of  much  consequence  (p.  24,  1.  10  of  the  transl.  should  read  : 
However,  Hananiah,  a  contemporary  of  Hillel  and  of  the  elder 
Gamaliel,  succeeded,  etc.) 

Information  in  regard  to  the  canonization  of  the  third  division, 
the  Writings,  is  much  less  precise.  "  David "  is  already  men- 
tioned in  connection  with  the  "  library  "  of  Nehemiah.  Sirach 
(f.  190)  refers  to  Chronicles,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  the  Psalms, 
and  his  translator  (c.  130)  speaks  of  the  Law,  Prophets,  and  other 
Writings.  In  1  Mace.  (c.  100)  Psalm  Ixxix.,  and  in  a  writer  some- 
what later,  Ecclesiastes  are  quoted  as  "  scripture."  In  the  New 
Testament  most  of  the  books  are  quoted  also  as  "  scripture  "  ;  and 
before  100  a.d.  two  Jewish  writers  testify  to  the  completed  Canon, 
the  Apocalypse  of  Ezra  and  Josephus  against  Apiou.  The  view 
of  both  these  writers  is  peculiar,  but  the  point  in  regard  to  both 
is  that  they  regard  the  limits  of  the  sacred  collection  as  having 
been  fixed  centuries  before  their  time.     The  conclusion  to  which 


320         THE  CANON  OF  THE  OLD   TESTAMENT. 


Buhl  comes  is  "that  the  third  part  of  the  Old  Testament 
writings  .  .  .  had  its  Canon  finally  closed  before  the  time  of 
Christ  .  .  .  that  the  Canon  and  the  clear  idea  of  the  Canon 
was  there,  and  formed  the  basis  of  a  definite  theory  of  the  sacred 
writings."  The  author  speaks  cautiously ;  but  so  advanced  a 
scholar  as  Cornill  does  not  hesitate  to  fix  100  B.C.  as  the  time  by 
which  the  Canon  must  have' been  closed  (Introd.,  p.  280).  Objec- 
tions continued  to  be  urged  in  some  quarters  against  certain 
books,  but  such  objections  are  no  evidence  that  the  books  objected 
to  had  not  yet  found  a  place  in  the  collection,  any  more  than 
objections  existing  still  among  ourselves  prove  such  a  thing ;  at 
the  most  they  raised  the  question  whether  the  books  had  been 
I'ightly  included  in  the  Canon.  In  point  of  fact,  objections  con- 
tinued to  be  urged  against  some  books  long  after  the  Synod  of 
Jamnia  (90  a.d.)  had  authoritatively  declared  them  canonical. 
These  final  discussions  at  Jamnia  were  not  an  isolated  thing ;  they 
were  part  of  the  general  effort  of  the  Jewish  mind  after  the  fall  of 
Jerusalem  to  clearly  define  its  position,  both  in  regard  to  its  own 
internal  life  and  in  opposition  to  Christian  thought  without ;  and 
the  fixing  of  the  text,  belonging  to  the  same  period,  was  part  of 
the  same  effort. 

There  is  one  thing  in  which  every  one  will  agree  with  Buhl, 
viz.,  the  regret  he  expresses  that  our  Bibles  have  not  followed  the 
Jewish  Canon  in  the  arrangement  of  the  different  books.  Such 
an  arrangement  would  have  shown  the  reader  that  the  Canon  was 
not  completed  at  once,  but  arose  by  a  historical  process,  and  would 
have  suggested  that  such  a  book  as  Daniel,  wdiich  is  not  placed 
among  the  prophets,  belongs,  at  least  in  its  present  form,  to  a  time 
posterior  to  the  closing  of  the  prophetic  Canon. 

The  translation  is  bright  and  readable,  though  occasionally  a 
little  wanting  in  precision ;  p.  30,  1.  .'33,  "inconsistency  .  .  . 
other  passages,"  would  better  be  :  "  difference  in  kind  .  .  .  the 
other,"  etc.  A  disturbing  press  error  occurs  p.  36,  1.  23,  where  for 
"  there  are  teachers,"  read,  than  our  teachers.  P.  80,  1.  24  is  hardly 
intelligible;  read,  "that  no  real  variation,  though  corrected  away 
at  a  later  time  according  to  the  original  text,  may  be  lost,"  etc. 
On  p.  91,  I.  27,  read,  "  this  list  must  be  corrected." 

A.  B.  Davidson. 


KLOSTEBMANN  ON  THE   PENTATEUCH. 

In  the  autumn  of  1890,  Professor  Aug.  Klostermann,  of 
Kiel,  published  in  the  Neue  Jiirchliche  Zeitschrift,^  two 
articles  entitled  Beitriige  zur  Entstehuugsgeschichte  des  Pen- 
tateuches.  The  occasion  of  these  articles  appears  to  have 
been  the  appearance,  in  1888,  of  Kautzsch  and  Socin's  con- 
venient edition  of  the  text  of  Genesis  (in  German),  with 
the  different  sources  of  which,  according  to  the  best  modern 
writers,  it  is  composed  distinguished  typographically  ;  for, 
after  stating  at  some  length,  though  not  always  very 
distinctly,  his  own  theory  of  the  origin  of  the  Pentateuch, 
he  closes  with  a  criticism  of  the  work  of  these  scholars, 
whom  he  censures  for  performing  their  task  in  disregard  of 
certain  principles  which,  he  asserts,  they  ought  to  have 
uniformly  kept  before  them.  From  references  which  have 
been  made  in  this  country  to  these  articles — most  recently 
by  a  writer  in  the  Church  Quarterly  Bevieiv,-  it  would  seem 
that  their  import  has  been  somewhat  misapprehended  ;  and 
hence  it  has  occurred  to  me  that  it  might  be  worth  while  to 
explain  to  readers  of  the  Expositor  what  Klostermann's 
position  is,  and  how  he  conceives  the  Pentateuch  to  have 
arrived  at  its  present  form. 

Klostermann  begins  ^  by  objecting  to  the  functions 
assigned  by  modern  critics  to  the  "Kedactor":  he  is  a 
personage,  he  says,  who  is  "  everywhere  and  nowhere," 
who  eludes  our  grasp,  for  he  possesses  no  definite  character 
or  method  by  which  he  may  be  recognised.  Critics  have 
too    often   begun   their   investigations   with    Genesis ;    the 

1  Xos.  9,  10.         -  Jan.,  1892,  pp.  355,  3G(;,  367.  ^  p.  (;22  f. 

VOL.  V.  ^"'^  21 


322         KLOSTERMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 

"  fixed  point  "  with  which  they  ought  rather  to  have 
started  is  Deuteronomy.  Here  there  is  a  Redactor  whose 
individuahty  is  perfectly  distinct.^  The  Deuteronomic 
editor,  who  incorporated  in  the  Pentateuch  the  Deutero- 
nomic law-book,  discovered  under  Josiah  {i.e.  Deut.  v.-xxvi., 
xxviii.),  together  with  the  section  of  "  JE  "  containing  the 
Song  of  Moses  (Deut.  xxxi.  16-22;  xxxii.  1-43,  44),  and  who 
prefixed  to  that  law-book  Deuteronomy  i.-iv.  for  the  pur- 
pose of  connecting  it  with  Numbers,  and  added  at  the  end 
the  hortatory  and  other  matter  contained,  in  Deuteronomy 
xxix.,  xxx.,  xxxi.  1-15,  23-30  and  xxxii.  45-47,^'Js  a  "living 
person,"  whose  style  and  aims  can  be  readily  ascertained. 
Twenty  years  ago,^  Klostermann  laid  down,  once  for  all,"* 
the  canons  for  distinguishing  what  belongs  to  Deuteronomy 
proper  (Deut.  v.-xxvi.),  and  what  is  due  to  this  Deutero- 
nomizing  editor  (Deut.  i.-iv.,  xxix.,  etc.) :  Hollenberg,  in 
1874,  applied  these  canons  with  much  success  to  the 
analysis  of  the  Book  of  Joshua,'  and  nothing  which  has 
materially  advanced  our  knowledge  of  the  literary  history  of 
Deuteronomy  has  since  been  written.''' 

According  to  the  view  of  the  older  critics,  the  Elohistic 
document  (P),  because  Genesis  happens  to  begin  with  an 
extract  from  it  (Gen.  i.  1-ii.  4),  was  reputed  the  earliest  of 
the  Pentateuchal  sources  :  it  is  one  of  "the  most  brilliant 
proofs  "  of  Wellhausen's  iuBight  and  sagacity,  that  he  per- 
ceived  that    the    narrative   of  P,    as    it   is   disengaged   by 

1  p.  625. 

2  These  particulars  are  not  stated  in  Klosteriuanu's  present  article,  but 
they  are  contained  in  the  article  in  the  Studien  unci  KrUUcciu  1871,  p.  219  If.,  to 
wliicli  he  refers. 

•''  In  the  article  just  referred  to. 

■»  "Endgiiltigfestsestelh." 

■'  Studien  nnd  Kritihen,  1871,  p.  1G2  ff.  Hollenberg,  adopting  the  distinction 
laid  down  by  Klostermann,  argues  here  that  the  Deuteronomic  passages  of 
Joshua  (D-  in  my  Introduction)  are  the  work  of  the  same  hand  which  added  to 
the  original  Deuteronomy  the  passages  mentioned  in  the  text.  Hollenberg's 
conclusion  is  endorsed  by  Kueuen,  Ih-.vuteucli,  p.  131  i(. 

«  P.  02G. 


KLOSTERMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH.         323 


criticism,  never  existed  as  an  original  independent  source, 
but  could  only  be  accounted  for  by  the  supposition  that 
it  was  written  with  direct  reference  to  "  JE,"  and  conse- 
quently that  it  is  later  than  JE.^  Klostermann,  however, 
made  this  discovery  twenty-five  years  ago,  before  even 
Graf  saw  the  truth  clearly,  and  before  Wellhausen  had 
written  a  word  ;  and  he  has  watched  with  interest  the 
course  of  Pentateuch  analysis  since  ;  for  instead  of  having 
to  unlearn  anything,  he  has  seen  it  confirm  more  and 
more  strongly  the  conclusion  which  he  had  himself  then 
reached  independently."  He  only  regrets  that  AVellhausen 
has  not  gone  further,  and  seen  with  him  that  the  author  of 
P,  whose  literary  characteristics  are  so  clearly  defined,  and 
whose  narrative  is  written  with  constant  reference  to  JE, 
and  as  it  were  "  encloses  it,"  is  the  true  long-sought 
"Kedactor":  J  and  E,  as  Wellhausen  has  very  acutely  seen, 
are  throughout  two  parallel  narratives,  which  for  this  very 
reason  could  be  readily  united  into  one.  P  pre-supposes 
JE,  and  is  based  upon  it,  being  simply  compiled  as  a  kind 
of  margin,  or  framework,  in  which  to  place  JE.^  Imagine 
that  there  existed  two  Greek  texts  of  the  Book  of  Judges — 
as  in  fact  there  actually  exist,  in  the  ordinary  LXX.  and  in 
Lucian's  recension  ■* — each  similar,  but  at  the  same  time 
each  marked  by  certain  peculiarities  of  diction,  and  imagine 
further  that  all  copies  of  the  book  were  lost  except  two,  which 

'  P.  627. 

-  P.  731.  Klostermanu,  however,  while  thus  accepting  Wellhausen's  view 
of  the  relative  dates  of  JE  and  P,  expressly  remarks  that  he  does  not  agree 
with  him  in  the  absolute  dates  which  he  assigns  to  them. 

^  P.  G27. 

■•  But  Klosterniaun's  theory,  which  he  here  refers  to,  that  the  LXX<  version 
of  Ecclesiastes  is  derived  from  Aquila,  has  been  shown  recently  to  be  untenable. 
Dillmann,  in  the  Sit^ungaherichte  der  Kon-Prcuss,  Akad.  der  Wissenschaften, 
1892,  p.  3  ff.,  proves  from  a  minute  and  exhaustive  study  of  its  peculiarities, 
that  it  is  really  an  older  version,  which  has  merely  been  revised  on  the  basis  of 
Aquila's  translation.  (An  interesting  parallel,  to  which  Dillmann  refers,  la 
Holmes'  MS.  02  of  the  Prophets,  belonging  to  the  library  of  New  College, 
Oxford:  see  Cornhill's  Ezechiel,  pp.  104-8). 


324         KLOSTERMANN  ON  THE   PENTATEUCH. 


were  partly  fragmentary,  and  partly  exhibited  a  mixed  text, 
and  that  an  editorial  committee  undertook  to  construct  out 
of  these  a  single  consecutive  text  of  the  entire  book,  the 
method  followed  by  them  would  surely  be  to  supply  any 
failure  and  obscurity  of  the  one  from  the  other,  in  particular 
passages  to  let  that  one  speak  which  was  most  complete,  or 
most  legible  or  intelligible,  and  where  the  choice  was  diffi- 
cult, to  set  side  by  side  the  expressions  of  both.  What 
philologist,  when  he  came  to  study  the  result  of  their 
labours,  would  infer,  from  the  existence  of  the  mixed  text 
which  it  would  present,  that  it  was  the  work  of  two 
separate  historians  ?  What  he  would  infer  would  be  merely 
the  existence  of  two  j'ecensions  of  one  and  the  same  text.^ 

What  has  just  been  assumed,  now,  as  a  hypothetical  case 
has  actually  taken  place  in  our  Hebrew  Bible.  None  of  the 
writings  contained  in  the  Hebrew  Bible  have  come  to  us  in 
the  form  in  which  they  left  their  authors'  hands ;  they  have 
reached  us  with  all  the  alterations  which  the  Jewish  com- 
munity and  its  teachers,  by  long  use,  introduced  into  them 
for  the  practical  purpose  of  edifying  the  hearer.^  "  The 
Hebrew  text  is  no  railroad,  along  which  one  only  has  to  move 
in  order  to  be  landed  safely,  without  exertion,  in  the  period 
when  the  Biblical  writings  were  in  process  of  formation. 
It  is  rather  a  pass,  which  prescribes  to  the  pedestrian  the 
places  to  be  passed  on  the  way,  but  affords  him  no 
guarantee  that  he  will  arrive  at  his  goal — at  the  point,  viz. 
whence  slowly  wandering,  with  change  of  colour  and  of 
original  garb,  the  sacred  writings  have  finall}^  come  to  our 
hands."     And  this  is  especially  true  of  the  Law.' 

The  Pentateuch  arose  thus."^     Passages  such  as  Exodus 

'  p.  G28.  Though  Klostermann  does  not  say  it  in  so  many  words,  the 
inference  which  he  appears  to  suggest  by  this  comparison,  and  which  is  drawn 
also  by  the  reviewer  in  the  Church  Quarierhj  (p.  355,  note,  at  the  end),  is  that 
J  and  E  are  not  (as  Wellhauseu  and  most  other  critics  have  supposed)  two  in- 
dependent narratives,  but  two  recensions  of  one  and  the  same  narrative. 

2  r.  628.  3  p.  632.  4  p.  701-a. 


KLOSTERMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH.         325 


xxiv.  7,  Deuteronomy  xxxi.  0  ff.,  show  that  at  the  time 
when  they  were  written  pubhc  readings  of  the  Law  were  an 
old-estabhshed  institution.  These  readings,  however,  would 
not  be  confined  to  the  "  Law,"  in  the  narrower  sense  of 
the  term  ;  they  would  include  historical  matter  as  well. 
Explanatory  narratives,  for  instance,  would  be  needed,  for 
the  purpose  of  giving  some  information  respecting  the 
occasions  on  account  of  which  particular  ceremonies  were 
to  be  observed,  and  of  bringing  the  worshippers  into  a  right 
frame  of  mind  for  taking  part  in  them  worthily  ;  and  the 
histories  of  the  patriarchs  would  be  recounted  for  the  sake 
of  the  moral  and  religious  lessons  which  they  contained. 
The  narratives  compiled  for  such  purposes  were  recited 
principally  at  the  great  festivals,^  which  for  a  while,  how- 
ever, had  a  local  or  "communal"  character;"  and  hence 
the  narrative  also  would  assume  naturally  a  variety  of 
types  in  different  localities.  As  soon,  however,  as  the 
sanctuary  at  Jerusalem  began  more  and  more  to  command 
the  veneration  of  Israelites,  and  worship  became  centra- 
lized, the  priests  there  perceived  the  importance  of 
offering  to  the  pilgrims  frequenting  it  all  that  they  pos- 
sessed before  at  their  local  sanctuaries  ;  accordingly  they 
turned  their  attention  to  collecting  and  harmonizing  these 
various  types  of  narrative,  and  combining  them  with  the 
"Law,"  strictly  so  called.  And  so  the  first  draft 
("  Urbild  ")  of  our  Pentateuch  took  shape."  It  consisted 
of  the  local  traditions  combined  with  the  accompanying 
laws  into    a   continuous  narrative,^  the    whole    being   sur- 

'  Klostermann  understands  the  C'lp  X~lpO  of  Lev.  xxiii.  3,  etc.,  iu  the 
sense,  not  of  a  "  holy  convocation,"  but  of  a  "  sacred  readtiuj." 

-  And  so  Klostermann  (p.  70.-5)  renders  Hos.  xii.  ib  [Heb.  5/>  :  "He  (the 
angel)  let  him  reach  [-"lilXVPM  Bethel;  and  there  he  speaks  with  us,  saying 
{/■.  6  Heb.  7]),  Keep  mercy  and  judgment,  and  wait  continually  on  thy  God" 
— the  history  of  Jacob  was  read  to  the  jjilgrims  visiting  the  holy  place  at  Bethel 
in  such  a  manner  that  it  seemed  as  if  the  dead  patriarch  himself  preached  to 
them  the  principles  which  his  life  illustrated. 

■''  P.  701.  ■*  i.e.  (presumably)  JE. 


32G         KLOSTEliMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 

roiuuled  by  a  learned  priestly  margin,^  which  provided 
the  reader  or  preacher  with  such  fuller  explanations  as 
were  necessary.  Klostermann  is  conscious  here  of  the 
objection  that  this  hypothesis  seems  to  expose  the  truth 
of  the  Divine  word  to  arbitrary  human  alteration  :  but  he 
meets  it  by  remarking  that  it  is  not  the  bare  word  as  such 
which  is  spiritually  operative,  but  the  word  as  assimilated 
hy  tlie  believing  communitij;  and  hence  the  community,  once 
brought  effectively  under  its  influence,  may  "  re-act  "  upon 
the  documents  which  declare  it,  and  modify  them  for 
purposes  of  edification. 

But  between  this  draft  of  the  Pentateuch  and  Ezra, 
"  much  water  has  run  down  the  hill."  ■-  The  original 
standard  codex  thus  fixed  by  the  priests  might  be  super- 
seded by  new  standard  editions  ;  by  the  side  of  it  there 
were,  moreover,  the  manuscripts  of  the  schools  and  of  rich 
private  persons,  which  were  naturally  still  more  exposed  to 
annotations,  insertions  of  parallel  passages,  alterations  of 
style,  and  other  accidents  :  the  original  standard  copy  (or 
copies)  perished  with  the  other  archives  of  the  Temple  when 
Jerusalem  was  destroyed  by  the  ChaldcT?ans.  Between  this 
catastrophe  and  Ezra,  through  the  lack  of  organization  of 
the  people  and  the  absence  of  any  standard  text,  the 
copies  saved  by  single  communities  or  families  must  by 
use  have  undergone  at  least  as  much  change  as  Luther's 
Bible  has  done.  The  work  of  Ezra  must  have  been  to  seek 
among  the  schools  of  the  priests,  Levites,  and  other  Temple 
ministers,  for  such  copies  or  fragments  of  the  Pentateuch 
as  seemed  most  trustworthy,  and  to  combine  these  into  a 
whole  with  all  the  care  that  he  could  command,  making  his 
selection,  where  they  differed,  according  to  the  best  of  his 
judgment." 

The  radical  fault  which  Klostermann  finds  with  all  critics 
of  the  present  generation  is  accordingly  this:  they  take  as 

'  i.e.  V.  2  p,  704.  3  p_  705. 


KLOSTEliMAXX  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH.  327 

the  basis  of  their  iuvestigations  tlic  existing  ^fassoretic  text  ; 
they    assume    practically    tlic    identitij    of   tliat    with   the 
original  form  of  the  Pentateuch}      Hence    their   analysis, 
particularly  in  the  case  of  "  JE,"  is  liable  to  be  inconclu- 
sive, being  founded  upon  distinctions  which  had  no  place  in 
the  original  text.     Modern  critics  ignore  the  long  period, 
with  the  many  textual  modifications  which  it  brought  with 
it,  between  the  original  writers  and  Ezra;  they  forget  that 
Ezra — or  whoever  else  collected  the  sacred  writings  together 
in  the  manner  just  indicated — "  had  no  autographs  at  his 
disposal ;  he  had  only  what  had  been  transferred  from  those 
autographs  in  the  form  of  notes,  reduced  and  altered,  into 
the  books   of  religious   instruction   belonging   to   different 
circles,  and  accordingly  modified  in  different  directions  :  his 
text  consequently  must  have  been  a  harmony  of  different 
forms  of  text  synoptically  combined."  ~ 

Klostermann  next  gives  illustrations  of  the  changes 
which  the  text  of  Genesis  may  have  undergone,  and  which 
he  thinks  are  not  duly  allowed  for  by  modern  critics.  One 
Divine  name,  for  instance,  may  have  been  substituted  for 
another ;  the  old  historical  style,  especially  in  dialogue, 
often  simply  wrote  the  verb  or  pronoun  {e.g.  "  and  he  said," 
"  and  he  said  to  him),''  which,  being  ambiguous,  was  filled 
in  by  a  later  scribe,  sometimes  incorrectly ;  ^  the  variation 
in  the  names  of  the  patriarch,  Jacob  and  Israel,  in  the  latter 
part  of  Genesis  (which  have  been  pointed  out  as  character- 
istic of  E  and  J  respectively)  is  due  to  the  same  cause  ; 
the  original  author  would  have  used  uniformly  the  name 
"  Israel  "  after  the  change  of  name  by  God,  but  there  w'ere 
places  in  which  this  was  awkward,  and  so  "  Jacob  "  was 
substituted  :    old  expressions,  again,  were    translated   into 

1  Pp.  710,  711,  731. 

2  p.  711. 

■''  The  addition  of  the  "  explicit"  subject,  or  object,  sometimes  in  the  LXX., 
sometimes  in  the  Hebrew  text,  is  a  point  which  was  much  insisted  on,  and  con- 
vincingly illustrated,  by  'NVellhausen  in  his  Text  der  Biicher  Samuelis  (1871). 


328         KLOSTERMANN  OX  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


modem  phraseology,  the  explanation  sometimes  being  in- 
troduced into  the  text  beside  them  :  glosses,  corrections, 
various  readings,  etc.,  noted  originally  on  the  margin,  often 
afterwards  found  their  way  into  the  text.  It  is,  of  course, 
no  doubt  true  that  the  Hebrew  text  has  sometimes  suffered 
corruption  from  the  causes  here  indicated ;  but  it  is  to  be 
observed  that  of  the  examples  adduced  by  Klostermann, 
very  few  indeed  are  cogent,^  and  the  majority  rest  upon 
nothing  but  conjecture.  Two  of  his  examples  will  be  found 
below,  pp.  332,  333. 

Such  is  Klostermann's  view  of  the  origin  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, stated,  as  far  as  possible,  in  his  own  words.  It  is 
not  my  intention  to  criticise  it  :  the  grounds  upon  which 
it  rests,  and  other  details  respecting  it,  are  not  developed 
with  sufficient  fulness  for  a  criticism  to  be  satisfactory. 
Like  most  of  Klostermann's  work,  if  apt  to  be  arbitrary, 
it  is  also  original  and  suggestive ;  and  though  constructed 
largely  upon  a  purely  speculative  basis,  it  may  not  impossibly 
contain  elements  of  truth.  But  the  question  that  I  desire 
to  ask  is  this  :  AVhat  advantage,  from  a  conservative  point 
of  view,  does  Klostermann's  theory  possess  above  that  of 
Wellhauseu,  or  (to  make  the  issue  more  definite)  above 
that  which  I  have  myself  adopted  ?  It  is  probable  that 
Klostermann  recognises  in  the  law  a  larger  Mosaic  element 
than  Wellhausen  does ;  whether  he  recognises  a  larger  ele- 
ment than  I  do,  I  am  unable  to  say,  for  he  has  not  (so  far 
as  I  am  aware)  expressed  himself  explicitly  on  the  subject. 
But  Klostermann  is  a  critic,  and  adopts  critical  methods, 
just  as  much  as  Wellhausen  does  :  he  recognises  the  same 

'  We  cannot,  for  instjince,  feel  any  assurance  in  xv.  0,  because  the  Hebrew 
has  "  in  Jehovah  "  and  the  LXX.  "  in  God,"  that  the  original  text  had  simply 
"  in  him  "  :  the  LXX.  may  have  rendered  inexactly,  xxvii.  28  D\"l?Xn  1?  jJlM 
mail  ^I'l'v*^  ''^^"i  originally  1?  irT*  IHI.  IH  being  afterwards  swallowed  up  in  the 
preceding  mnV  and  DM^'Ni"!  being  then  added  as  a  subject  to  jn* ;  but  there 
is  no  proof,  or  even  need,  of  such  an  assumption.  (As  inscriptions  show,  the 
oldest  orthography  of  NIH  would  have  been  NH,  not  IH.) 


KLOSTERMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH.         329 


phenomena  as  other  critics  do,  though  he  explains  some  of 
them  differently.  Thus  he  does  not  doubt  that  "  P  "  is  both 
distinct  from  "  JE,"  and  added  to  it  afterwards  :  *  he  does 
not  deny  that  "  JE  "  is  composite,  though  he  denies  that 
the  elements  of  which  it  consists  are  any  longer  distinguish- 
able :  "  he  even  recognises  strata  in  J  and  E,^  though  he 
holds  them  to  have  been  introduced  into  the  text  at  a  stage 
other  than  that  which  Wellhausen  supposes  :  in  Deuter- 
onomy, he  recognises  in  the  discourses  two  distinct  hands, 
and  was  also  one  of  the  first  to  perceive,  what  has  since 
been  generally  accepted  by  critics,  that  the  Song  in  chap, 
xxxii.  came  originally  into  the  book  as  part  of  a  section  of 
JE.  Again  Ivlostermann,  it  is  true,  is  dissatisfied  with 
Wellhausen's  "  redactor"  ;  but  he  has  a  couple  of  redactors 

'  The  reviewer  in  the  Church  Quarterly  writes:  "  Klostermann  objects 
that  Kautzsch  and  Soeiu  disthiguish  "  typographical!}',  in  their  edition  of  Gene- 
sis, "  P,  JE,  J',  J-,  and  R,  as  though  the  whole  thing  were  plain  as  noonday  " 
(p.  355),  and  "Klostermann  has  a  right  to  dispute  that  the  origin  of  the  sec- 
tions ascribed  to  P  is  certain  "  (p.  367).  These  statements  are  incorrect.  The 
reviewer  lias  written  hastilj',  and  not  observed  that  t]ie  delimitation  of  F  is  not 
included  in  Kloatermann'f:  criticism.  He  tlioroughly  accepts  P  as  the  work  of 
a  distinct  hand.  His  criticism  of  Kautzsch  and  Socin's  analysis  is  confined  to 
the  manner  in  wliich  they  have  dealt  with  JE  and  the  "  Redactor. "  (A  sub- 
ordinate point  is  his  objection  that  by  their  method  of  translation  these 
scholars  have  sometimes  introduced  distinctions  not  existing  in  the  original 
Hebrew,  and  obliterated  distinctions  which  are  there.  There  is  force  in  this 
criticism  ;  but  as  it  concerns  only  the  translation,  it  is  irrelevant  to  the  present 
issue.) 

'^  Klostermann  does  not  enter  into  details  :  hence  it  is  not  clear  whether  he 
holds  them  to  be  uniformly  and  throughout  inseparable.  But  unless  they  could 
in  some  degree,  and  in  particular  cases,  be  distinguished,  it  is  not  apparent 
what  ground  would  exist  for  holding  "  JE,"  as  Klostermann  does  hold  it,  to 
be  composite.  In  so  far  as  Klostermann  merely  insists  that  beyond  a  certain 
point  the  analysis  of  JE  becomes  doubtful,  he  contirms  the  o2)inion  which  I 
had  expressed  myself  in  my  Introduction  some  months  before  his  articles  ap- 
peared (p.  12  note,  with  reference  to  Kautzsch  and  Socin  themselves,  p.  18  note, 
pp.  35,  oG,  and  elsewhere).  Wellhausen,  also,  in  particular  cases,  frequently 
speaks  similarly.  The  merit  of  Kautzsch  and  Socin's  volume  is  that,  without 
claiming  finality  for  this  part  of  their  work,  they  present  lucidly  a  definite 
view  of  the  structure  of  JE,  suitable  to  form  a  practical  basis  for  further  study. 

^  He  speaks  of  J',  J'-,  E',  E-,  etc.,  as  "  unleugbare  Fiirbungen,"  which  Well- 
hausen's delicate  literary  feeling  ("  der  feinfiihlige  Wellhausen")  has  discrimi- 
nated (p.  023). 


330         KLOSTEliMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 

himself,  who  perform  precisely  similar  offices  ;  and  what  is 
more,  he  postulates]  hesides  a  multitude  of  scribes,  whose 
name  is  Legion,  and  who  were  engaged  during  many  cen- 
turies in  modifying,  partly  for  purposes  of  edification,  partly 
for  the  sake  of  securing  literary  intelligibility  and  consist- 
ency, the  original  text  of  the  Law.  In  what  respect  are 
Klostermann's  scribes — whose  functions  (their  existence 
once  granted)  are  of  a  character  that  cannot  be  arbitrarily 
limited — less  objectionable  than  Wellhausen's  redactors,  who 
at  least  are  very  much  less  numerous,  and  whose  work  is 
definite,  and  assigned  to  them  on  definable  grounds  ? 
What  advantage,  from  a  historical  point  of  view,  does  the 
theory  that  J  and  E  are  two  recensions  of  one  and  the  same 
text,  which  by  gradual  change  have  come  to  differ  from  one 
another  as  they  now  do,  possess  above  the  theory  that  they 
are  two  narratives  written  independently?  If  the  former 
theory  be  the  true  one,  by  what  criterion  can  we  determine 
which  of  the  two  recensions  represents  the  narrative  in  its 
primitive  form,  or  what  guarantee  do  we  possess  that  this 
is  done  by  either  ?  To  myself,  I  must  own,  it  seems  in- 
credible that  the  phenomena  displayed  by  J  and  E  can  be 
attributed  to  the  causes  which  Klostermann  indicates ; 
but  to  examine  the  theory  upon  its  merits  is  not  my  present 
purpose.  The  writer  of  the  article  in  the  Church  Quarterly 
Revieiv  appears  to  be  under  the  impression  ^  that  Kloster- 
mann's articles  have  "  not  a  little  'fluttered  the  Volscians 
in  Corioli '  "  {i.e.  the  critics)  ;  but  the  "fluttering"  ought 
rather,  it  would  seem,  to  be  in  the  camp  to  which  the  Ke- 
viewer  belongs  himself;  for  if  Klostermann's  utterances 
possess  tlie  authority  and  decisiveness  which  he  seems 
plainly  disposed  to  attach  to  them,  the  traditional  position 
cannot  any  longer  be  consistently  maintained. 

So  much  for  Klostermann's  theory  of  the  origin   of  the 
Pentateuch,  as  he  himself  holds  it.     I  now  proceed  to  offer 

'  P.  ?A]r,,  note. 


KLOSTERMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH.  331 

the  reader  some  illustrations  of  liis  methods  of  textual 
criticism.  In  my  Notes  on  the  Hebrew  Text  of  Samuel^  (as 
afterwards  in  my  Introduction),-  I  had  ventured  to  caution 
the  student  that  Klostermann  was  often  to  be  distrusted 
as  a  textual  critic  ;  and  Prof.  Cheyne,  in  a  note  in  the  Ex- 
positor,"  referred  to  what  I  had  there  said  in  support  of  his 
very  moderately  expressed  judgment  on  the  same  subject. 
For  this  reference  to  myself  he  is  somewhat  severely  taken 
to  task  by  the  Eeviewer  in  the  Cliurch  Quarterly;^  wlio, 
"with  all  respect,"  claims  the  right  to  question  my  "  in- 
fallibility"  on  this  point,  and  adds  that  "it  appears  quite 
within  the  range  of  possibility  that  Klostermann  may  be 
right  in  thinking"  my  "textual  criticism  a  little  at  fault." 
What  Klostermann's  opinion  on  this  subject  is,  I  cannot 
certainly  say  :  in  all  probability,  if  he  has  seen  what  I  have 
written  relating  to  it,  while  taking  a  different  view  of  parti- 
cular passages,  on  the  whole  he  would  agree  with  me  so  far 
as  I  go,^  but  would  consider  that  I  was  not  nearly  radical 
enough  in  assuming  that  the  Hebrew  text  needed  correction. 
But,  without  laying  any  claim  to  "  infallibility  " — which,  it 
is  needless  to  remark.  Prof.  Cheyne  had  no  intention  of 
imputing  to  me — I  anticipate  no  difficulty  in  showing  that, 
if  the  Eeviewer  seriously  holds  that  Klostermann's  methods 
are  sound,  he  must  be  a  textual  critic  sul  generis,  at  least 
in  this  country.  For  Klostermann's  textual  criticism, 
where  he  follows  lines  of  his  own,  is  remarkable  for  its 
arbitrariness  and  extravagance.  Not  only  is  he  apt  to 
assume  corruption  of  the  Hebrew  text  upon  very  insuffi- 
cient grounds,  but  he  often  proposes  corrections  both 
violent  in  themselves,  and  also,  as  Hebrew,  forced  and 
unidiomatic.     That  he  is  independent  and  original,  no  one 

•  r.  V.  -  Pp.  1G2,  175. 

•'  Aug.,  1891,  p.  157.  ■*  P.  367,  note. 

'••  I  infer  this  from  the  fact  that  lie  accepts  a  large  number  of  the  restorations 
of  Theuius  and  Wellhausen  (based  upon  the  Versions),  wliich  I  accept  likewise. 


332          KLOSTERMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 

will  deny  ;  that  among  the  immense  number  of  emenda- 
tions which  he  has  proposed  some  are  clever  and  probable, 
there  is  also  no  reason  to  dispute  :  but  that  he  follows 
false  clues,  has  an  imperfect  feeling  for  Hebrew  modes  of 
expression,  and  extends  to  unreasonable  limits  the  licence 
of  purely  conjectural  emendation — of  emendation,  that  is, 
unsupported  by  the  testimony  of  any  ancient  version,  is 
abundantly  clear  from  the  examples  which  his  writings 
supply. 

Let  me  justify  what  I  have  said  by  placing  some  concrete 
illustrations  before  the  reader.  The  first  two  shall  be 
taken  from  the  articles  which  have  been  already  referred  to. 

In  Genesis  xv.  2,  3,  Klostermann  severely  censures  the 
critics  for  finding  in  the  name  Eliezer  a  criterion  of  E. 
He  does  not,  it  is  true,  appear  to  apprehend  correctly  the 
ground  on  which  they  do  this  ;  but,  whether  the  ground 
be  sufficient  or  not,  under  Klostermann's  treatment  the 
name  disappears  from  the  text  altogether,  with  the  whole 
oiv.  3  at  the  same  time.^  The  words  in  v.  2,  which  now 
read  "  The  steward  of  my  house  is  (K.V.)  Dammesek 
Eliezer,"  or  (Dillmann)  "  .  .  .  is  Damascus  (the  city) 
of  Eliezer,"  read  originally,  according  to  Klostermann, 
"  The  steward  of  my  house  has  furnished  me  with  help  " 
pry  '"pNt  P'^^^")) ;  ~  the  first  part  of  v.  3  is  a  gloss  on  "  child- 
less "  in  V.  2,  and  the  second  part  a  gloss  on  the  words 
that  have  been  just  translated,  after  they  had  become 
corrupted  to  their  present  form.  P'^^"^  is  a  word  with 
which  the  Hebrew  student  will  be  unfamiliar;  it  is  the 
Arabic  damshaqa,  with  the  meaning  deproperavit,  cito  ex- 
pedivit.  "Dammesek"  in  this  verse  is  a  well-known 
difficulty,  and  many  suggestions  have  been  made  about  it ; 
but  I  feel  I  may  predict  with  confidence  that  no  Hebrew 

'  Pp.  71'.),  729. 

-  '  Hat  mir  (^?N)  mit  liingebendem  Eifer  die  von  Eigenen  Kinderu  zu  er- 
warteude  Hilfe  pTJ?)  gelcistet." 


KL08TERMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH.  333 

scholar  qualified  to  form  an  independent  judgment  will 
endorse  Klostermann's  "restoration":  quadriliteral  verbs 
are  exceedingly  rare  in  Hebrew,  and  the  importation  into 
Hebrew  of  such  a  word  from  the  Arabic  is  alone  sufficient 
to  condemn  it. 

Genesis  xxi.  7.  We  read  in  the  existing  Hebrew  text  : 
"  And  she  said,  Who  would  have  said  to  x\braham,  Sarah 
shall  give  suck  to  children?"  These  words  are  apparently 
clear  and  simple  enough  ;  the  perfect  tense  77)2  is  a  little 
unusual,  but  there  are  analogies  which  seem  to  support  it ;  ^ 
and  any  one  who  still  entertains  grammatical  scruples 
could  easily  remove  them  by  supposing  that  "^  had  fallen  out 
after  \'D,  and  reading  for  77i2  \t3,  ?y>2\  \p.  In  Klostermann's 
hands,-  however,  the  verse  reads  :  "  [v.  6,  Every  one  that 
heareth  will  laugh  at  me,)  Saying,  Who  is  managing  for 
Abraham  the  business  of  begetting  ?  who  has  cleared  the 
honour  of  Sarah's  womb  ?  "  ^  Is  it  possible  that  the  author 
of  this  remarkable  emendation  can  be  gifted  with  the  "  keen 
sense  of  humour"  which  the  Reviewer  discovers  in  his 
writings  ?  ^ 

The  following  examples  are  taken  from  Klostermann's 
elaborate,  and  in  many  respects  meritorious,  commentary 
on  the  books  of  Samuel  and  Kings,  in  Strack  and  Zockler's 
Kurzgefasster  Kommentar  (1887). 

1  Samuel  i.  9.  "  And  Hannah  arose,  after  (their)  eating 
in   Shiloh."     For  these   words   Klostermami  reads — with- 


'  See  my  Hebrew  Tenses,  §  19,  2. 

-  P.  720. 

3  Lest  I  should  be  thought  to  have  misrepresented  Klostermann,  I  append  the 
Gennan,  "  War  besorgt  f  iir  den  Abraham  das  Geschiift  der  Zeugung  (ihz 
[sic']  for  ?7Q),  wer  hat  den  Mutterschoss  der  Sara  wieder  zu  Ehren  gebracht" 
JOn  np3  *D  for  C^:3  np^:^:]  or  p,  LXX.)?  (n^S  is  of  course  a  misprint 
presumably  for  "l^b).  "lOXDI,  "  and  she  said,"  at  the  beginning  of  the  verse 
is  sui^posed  to  have  been  substituted  for  "iDX?,  "  saying,"  after  the  following 
words  had  reached  their  present  corrupt  state. 


334         KLOSTERMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 

out  any  authority  in  antiquity  whatever — "  And  she  arose, 
and  left  her  food  behind  her  in  the  dining-parlour." 

1  Samuel  i.  15.  Here  Hannah  says  to  Eli,  "  Nay,  my 
lord,  I  am  a  woman  nil  PilD\> ;  I  have  drunk  neither  wine 
nor  strong  drink,  but  I  poured  out  my  soul  before  the 
Lord."  The  expression  HTI  rW\>  presents  a  difficulty  :  it 
would  mean  by  analogy  "  of  a  hardened  spirit  "  ;  but  as 
this  is  unsuited  to  the  context,  most  modern  commentators, 
following  the  guidance  of  the  LXX.,  which  has  t)  crK\i]pd 
I'l/jiipa,  read  DV  /l^p,  lit.,  hard  of  day,  i.e.  unfortunate — an 
expression  which  occurs  (in  the  masc.)  in  Job  xxx.  26. 
This  however  does  not  satisfy  Klostermann  ;  he  proposes 
"•DJlSt  nyi  D't^p  r\Wi^ — a  phrase,  the  meaning  of  which  I  will 
leave  the  Hebrew  student  to  divine  for  himself.  When  he 
has  discovered  it,  I  venture  to  think  he  will  agree  with  me 
that  it  is  not  only  grammatically  very  strained,  but  also 
singularly  tasteless  and  out  of  place. 

1  Samuel  xi.  12.  "And  the  people  said  unto  Samuel, 
Who  is  he  that  said.  Shall  Saul  reign  over  us?  "  Kloster- 
mann :  "And  the  people  said  unto  Samuel,  AVho  is  he 
that  said,  Let  the  devil  rather  reign  over  us!"  "Devil," 
it  is  fair  to  say,  is  only  Klostermann's  accommoda- 
tion to  modern  notions  of  "  Sheol "  (-^  Hades),  which 
is  obtained  from  b^^t  "  Saul,"  by  a  simple  change  of 
punctuation.  But  though  the  personification  of  Sheol 
might  bo  suitable  in  a  highly  poetical  context  (Isa.  xiv.  9), 
it  is  wholly  inappropriate  in  a  popular  exclamation.  And 
it  seems,  moreover,  that  even  this  is  not,  in  Kloster- 
mann's  view,  the  original  form  of  the  verse :  from  the 
note  it  appears  that  he  holds  this  to  have  been,  "  And  the 
people  said  unto  Saul,  Do  not  rule  (I'^^/l  bi^  for  bM^'Z^ 
']'?Q'')  over  us." 

1  Samuel  xiv.  25.  Here  the  LXX.  have  kui  irdaa  rj  yfj 
r)piara  Kal  laaX  Bpvfi6<;  -qv  fjieXLaa-MVO'i  Kara  irpocrwiTOV  rov 
dypov.     It  may  readily  be  granted  that  laaX  Bpvfj.o'i  are  a 


KLOSTERMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH.         335 

couple  of  doublets  to  j.in\iaacovo^,  or  various  representations 
of  the  ambiguous  word  li"/  and  may,  therefore,  in  a 
restoration  of  the  Hebrew  text  on  which  the  Greek  version 
is  based,  he  disregarded.  Klostermanu  however  goes 
further,  and  emending  ijpia-Ta,  somewhat  violently,  into 
ep^drai  or  ^pyaaia,  reads  by  ^11  njL?^  nni^  IJ^H  b2^ 
Tnt^r\  ''J19,  a  lame  and  questionable  sentence,  which  how- 
ever is  rendered,  "  And  all  the  country  were  makers  of 
honey  upon  the  open  field  "  {i.e.  were  devoted  to  bee- 
culture).- 

xiv.  32.  Heb.  text :  "  And  he  said,  Ye  have  dealt 
treacherously  :  roll  a  great  stone  unto  me  this  day  "  (viz. 
for  the  altar,  vv.  3-1-5).  Klost.  :  "And  he  said,  Eoll  their 
transgression  upon  me.  Here  will  I  prepare  (a  table)  for 
God."  ■' 

XV.  29  :  "  And  also  the  glory  of  Israel  will  not  lie  nor 
repent."  Klost. :  "And  even  though  we  both  plead  against 
Him,  God  is  upright ;  ^  He  will  not  lie  nor  repent."  H^'J, 
rendered  on  the  margin  of  the  Ke vised  Version,  victor ij  or 
glory,  is  a  somewhat  peculiar  word  ;  but  it  seems,  to  judge 
from  the  usage  of  the  corresponding  root  in  Aramaic,^  to 
denote  Jehovah  as  the  splendour  or  majesty  of  Israel.  At 
any  rate,  even  if  this  word  be  corrupt,  Klostermann's  em- 
endation is  far  too  forced  and  prosaic  to  be  probable. 


'  Which  means  both  "forest  "  and  "flowing  honey"  (Cant.  v.  1). 

-  "  Und  betrieb  die  ganze  Gegend  Bienenwirtbschaft  auf  dem  Blachfeld." 
There  is  another  example  of  an  emendation  founded  upon  an  arbitrary  altera- 
tion of  the  Greek  text  in  v.  24.  The  restoration  in  i.  15  (above,  p.  334)  is  obtained 
similarly,  yvvy)  j]  aKXrjpa.  iinipa^  or,  as  the  clause  reads  in  Lucian's  recension, 
yvvT)  iv  cxKK-qpa  -n/J-epq.,  is  assumed  to  be  a  corruption  of  yvu}]  iv  <TK\7]paip.oppolq., 
a  word,  which,  though  formed,  as  Klostermann  observes,  on  the  analogy  of 
(rKXrfpo(p6akfj.ia,  is  not,  so  far  as  I  am  aware,  otherwise  known. 

3  i.e.  D^nbx^  px  □'pn  I'ps'  'ih:  an"i;2 
for  n'pinj  ps  uvh  •'^a  "b:^  onni?. 

^  i.e.  hii.  y^'i  i30'l^'  i"?  n3:  cji 

Yor  'PXX"  HiJ  D31. 
•'  To  shine,  to  be  hrii/ltt  or  fanioits,  and  especially  to  he  victorious, 


336         KLOSTERMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 


XV.  32  :  "  Surely  the  bitterness  of  death  is  past."  Klost.  : 
"If  it  must  be  so,  then,  come  on,  0  death  !  "  '  The  first 
part  of  this  emendation  is  supposed  to  be  based  upon  the 
LXX.,  but  their  d  outw^  merely  implies  the  misreading  of 
PSI  as  prr.  2b  however  (properly  "turn  round  ")  is  incor- 
rectly rendered  "  come  on  "  [homm  lieran)  :  it  is  true,  it  is 
used  by  a  king  bidding  his  attendants  perform  their  bloody 
work  (xxii.  18)  :  but  there  it  clearly  retains  its  proper  force 
of  turn  round  (viz.  to  attack  another)  :  it  could  not  be 
used  by  a  person  bidding  his  assailant  approach  to  attack 
himself. 

One  more  example  will  be  sufficient,  from  the  opening 
words  of  David's  lament  over  Saul  and  Jonathan  in 
2  Samuel  i.  The  Hebrew  text  there  reads  :  (18)  "  And  he 
bade  [lit.  saidj  to  teach  the  children  of  Judah  (the)  bow  : 
behold,  it  is  written  in  the  book  of  Jashar. 

(19)  The  beauty,  0  Israel,  is  slain  upon  thy  high  places : 

How  are  the  mighty  fallen  !  " 
In  Klostermann's  hands  this  becomes  :—"  (18)  And  he 
said  : 

Attend,  0  Judah,  to  hard  things, 
(19)  And  be  grieved,  0  Israel ; 

Slain  ones  (lie)  upon  thy  high  places, 
How  are  the  mighty  fallen  !  " 

The  supposed  present  corruption  of  v.  18  is  due  to  a 
learned  reader,  who,  comparing  the  song  as  it  stood  in  the 
book  of  Jashar,  added  the  reference  to  that  book,  transcrib- 
ing at  the  same  time  the  technical  expression  "  to  teach  " 
prefixed  to  it  there  (cf.  Ps.  Ix.  title) :  he,  however,  com- 
mitted, in  what  follows,  the  "  slight  mistake  "  of  taking  the 
first  three  words  of  the  song  (nii'p  Hlin;  '12,  "  Attend,  0 
Judah,  to  hard  things  ")  as  the  object  of  "to  teach  "  (pro- 
nouncing them  nV\)^  niin"  '33,  i.e.  "  the  children  of  Judah 

'  i.e.  niron  ib  \2  dx  for  m>3n  -\j:  id  ps*. 


KLOSTERMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH.  337 


(the)  bow").  In  v.  lU,  ^liJil  (the  beauty,  or,  less  probably, 
the  gazelle)  is  a  corruption  of  ^"^^VJ)  (Gen.  xlv.  5),"be 
grieved."  Many  Hebrew  scholars  will  admit  that  the  words 
rendered  "bow,"  and  "beauty"  (or  "  gazelle  "),  especially 
the  former  (which  is  omitted  in  the  LXX.),  are  a  little 
singular,  and  may  possibly  be  due  to  some  error ;  but  there 
is  no  ground  for  supposing  such  a  wholesale  correction  as 
this  to  be  necessary  :  the  rest  of  v.  18  was  read  by  the 
LXX.  as  it  is  read  now,  and  in  v.  19  the  text  used  by  them 
had  the  consonants  of  ''2iirT  '  as  well. 

Of  course  I  cannot  suppose  that  the  Reviewer  would  seek 
to  extol  Klostermann  for  his  sobriety  and  sound  sense  with- 
out possessing  a  competent  knowledge  of  what  he  had 
written ;  and  hence  I  must  conclude  that  emendations  such 
as  these  have  his  approval,  and  that  he  would  wish  to  see 
English  students  adopt  the  methods  of  textual  criticism 
which  they  exemplify.  The  preceding  illustrations  will,  I 
trust,  satisfy  most  readers  of  the  Expositor  that  I  was 
justified  in  expressing  the  caution  ~  which  to  the  Reviewer 
seemed  so  superfluous.  I  dwell  reluctantly — for  the  task,  I 
am  sensible,  is  an  ungracious  one — upon  the  defects  of  an 
able  and  conscientious  scholar :  but  the  necessity  has  been 
forced  upon  me  :  it  is  a  duty  that  is  owing  to  students  who 
might  otherwise  be  misled  to  point  out  that,  whatever 
Klostermann's  abilities  may  be,  a  misdirected  ingenuity 
and  unregulated  judgment  lead  him  often  into  false  tracks, 
and  make  him  for  the  inexperienced  an  unsafe  guide. 

I  may  be  allowed  to  conclude  by  referring  to  one  or  two 
other  points  relating  to  Hebrew  scholarship,  noticed  in  the 
same  article.  The  writer  brings  against  me  in  one  place 
a  somewhat  grave  charge  :  — 

1  The  translators  only  vocalizeJ  it  differeutl}',  viz.  *?-V0  {ffT-qXuaov ;  see 
2  Sam.  xviii.  18). 

-  As  I  have  done  elsewhere  in  similar  instances  (e.g.  Introduction,  p.  253 
note,  254  note,  260,  337,  458). 

VOL.  V.  22 


338         KLOSTERMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 

"We  should  not  be  doing  justice  to  oui'  subject  if  we  did  not 
call  attention  to  the  remarkable  recklessness  of  statement  occasionally 
found  in  the  higher  criticism.  Thus  when  we  find  Canon  Driver, 
referring  to  the  phrase  '  beyond  Jordan,'  quotes  Dent.  i.  1,  5,  iii.  8, 
iv.  41,  and  Josh.  is.  10,  as  implying  that  the  author  was  resident  in 
Western  Palestine,  can  he  possibly  be  ignorant  of  the  fact  that  the 
same  phrase  (n">^n  ~lDy3)  is  used  in  Dent.  iii.  20,  xi.  30  for  the  xvestem 
side  of  Jordan,  and  similarlj^  in  Josh.  v.  1,  ix.  1,  xii.  7  (cf.  v.  1),  xxii.  7,  or 
lliat  in  Num.  xxxii.  19  a  phrase  almost  precisely  similar  (p">^n  "I^VD) 
is  used  for  hoth  sides  of  Jordan  in  the  same  verse  ?  AVe  do  not  pretend 
that  this  fact  is  decisive  either  way  on  the  question  of  authorship,  but 
it  at  least  shows  either  great  carelessness  or  a  rooted  determination  to 
look  at  only  one  side  of  a  question,  when  the  passages  mentioned  above 
ai'e  cited  as  decisive  without  the  slightest  hint  that  there  is  any  diffi- 
culty  in  the  matter"  (p.  359). 

The  Reviewer  demands  of  me  impossibilities.  For  a 
volume  in  which  many  different  subjects  have  to  be  treated, 
he  demands  the  fulness  of  a  special  commentary.  In  the 
present  instance,  however,  I  happen  to  possess  a  complete 
reply  to  his  objection.  I  had  fully  examined  the  use  of  the 
phrase  here  referred  to  seven  or  eight  years  ago  :  and  the 
following  passage  describing  it  has  been  in  type  for  nearly 
four  years,  although,  owing  to  circumstances  beyond  my 
control,  it  has  not  yet  been  published  : — 

The  use  of  the  phrase  "  beyond  Jordan "  for  E.  Palestine  in 
Dent.  i.  1,  5,  iv.  41,  46,  47,  49  (as  elsewhere  in  the  Pentateuch :  comp. 
Num.  xxii.  1,  xxxiv.  lo),  exactly  as  in  Josh.  ii.  10,  vii.  7,  ix.  10,  etc., 
Judg.  V.  17,  X.  8,  is  said  to  imply  that  the  author  was  resident  in  W. 
Palestine.  It  is  indeed  difficult  to  resist  this  inference.  On  the  one 
hand,  Deut.  iii.  20,  25,  xi.  30,  and  Josh  v.  1,  ix.  1,  xii.  7,  show  that  the 
assumption  sometimes  made,  that  p1\"I  131;  had  a  fixed  geograpliical 
sense  (like  Gallia  Transalpina,  etc.),  and  was  used  as  a  standing  desig- 
nation of  the  Transjordanic  territory,  irrespectively  of  the  actual 
position  of  the  speaker  or  writer,  is  incorrect ;  on  the  other  hand,  if 
its  meaning  was  not  thus  fixed,  its  employment  by  a  writer,  whether  in 
E.  or  W.  Palestine,  of  the  side  on  loldch  he  himself  stood,  is  difficult  to 
understand,  unless  the  habit  had  arisen  of  viewing  the  regions  on  the 
two  sides  of  Jordan  as  contrasted  with  each  other;  '  and  this  of  itself 

'  Hence  its  use  in  Josh.  V.  1;  ix.  1;  xi'.  7,  written  (presumaLh)  in  W. Palestine. 


KLOSTERMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH.         339 

implies  residence  in  Palestine.  The  question  thus  resolves  itself  into 
a  prior  one  :  was  this  a  habit  of  the  Cauaanites,  and  did  the  usage 
suggested  by  it  pass  from  them  to  the  Israelites,  before  the  latter  had 
set  foot  in  the  land,  and  experienced  the  conditions  likely  to  naturalize 
it  amongst  them  ?  The  possibility  of  this  cannot,  perhaps,  be  denied  ; 
at  the  same  time  it  may  be  doubted  whether  it  is  probable.  The  use 
of  the  phrase  in  the  Pentateuch  generally,  exactly  as  in  Josh.  ii.  10, 
etc.,  creates  a  presumption  that  the  passages  in  question  were  written 
under  similar  local  conditions.  ' 

I  venture  to  think  that  this  passage  completely  rebuts 
the  charge  of  ''^recklessness"  which  the  Keviewer  some- 
what gratuitously  brings  against  me.''  His  excuse,  no 
doubt,  will  be  that  he  was  not,  and  could  not  be,  aware  of 
what  I  had  written.  But  he  might  have  inferred  from  the 
footnote  on  page  80  that  I  had  discussed  the  matter  more 
fully  elsewhere  :  and  it  is  perhaps  hardly  reasonable  in  a 
critic  to  assume  that  an  author  possesses  no  grounds  for 
his  conclusions  because  he  does  not  happen  to  state  them 
at  length. 

It  is  true  Numbers  xxxii.  19  is  not  referred  to  (though 
it  was  noticed  in  the  original  draft  of  the  extract)  ;  for  I 
did  not  suppose  that  any  Hebrew  scholar  would  quote  it 
as  having  a  bearing  on  the  question.  The  Transjordanic 
tribes  say  there  to  Moses,  "  We  will  not  inherit  with 
them  (the  9h  tribes)  on  the  side  across  Jordan  and  beyond, 
for  our  inheritance  has  fallen  to  us  on  the  side  across 
Jordan  eastwards.'"  The  usage  here  harmonizes  with  the 
statement  in  the  extract  that  the  phrase  "  across  Jordan  " 
had  not  a  fixed  geographical  sense ;  but  it  falls  further 
into  the  category  of  passages  in  which,  in  accordance  with 

'  In  Dcut.  iii.  20,  25,  the  (assumed)  position  of  the  speaker  is  uaturally  main- 
tained. In  V.  8,  on  the  contrary,  in  a  jihrase  of  common  occurrence  (iv.  47 ; 
Josh.  it.  10,  ix.  10),  as  in  Josh.  i.  14,  15,  the  point  of  view  is  that  of  the  narra- 
tor, Dot  of  the  speaker. 

-  If  a  corroborative  opinion  be  desired,  it  may  be  found  in  an  article  by  the 
present  Bishop  of  Worcester  in  the  Contemporar])  lleview,  January,  18H8, 
\:>.  143  f.,  who  draws  from  the  expression  exactly  the  same  inference. 


340         KLOSTERMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 

Hebrew  idiom,  the  same  expression  repeated  acquires  a 
contrasted  meaning  in  virtue  of  the  juxtaposition.  So 
1  Samuel  xxiii.  26,  we  read  (Hterally)  "  on  the  side  of  the 
mountain  off  here,  and  on  the  side  of  the  mountain  off 
here  "  =  (Auglice)  "on  the  one  side  of  the  mountain,  and 
on  the  other  side  of  the  mountain."  1  Samuel  xx.  21,  22, 
"  Behold,  the  arrows  are  from  thee  and  hither  .  .  .  ; 
behold,  the  arrows  are  from  thee  and  beyond"  =  "  tJiis  side 
of  thee  "  and  "  that  side  of  thee  "  ;  and,  with  the  same 
word  as  in  Numbers,  1  Samuel  xiv.  4. (literally)  "a  rocky 
crag  off  the  side  across,  off  here ;  and  a  rocky  crag  off  the 
side  across,  off  here,"  i.e.,  "  a  rocky  crag  on  the  one  side, 
and  a  rocky  crag  on  the  other  side."  From  the  use  of  the 
term  in  Numbers  xxxii.  19,  nothing  can  be  inferred  as  to  its 
force  when  used  absolutely,  as  is  the  case  in  Deut.  i.  1,  5,  etc. 
The  Keviewer  is  surprised  (p.  363)  that  I  have  taken  no 
notice  in  my  Introduction  of  such  facts  as  the  traces  of 
ancient  case-endings  in  Genesis,  which  are  supposed  to  be 
evidence  of  the  antiquity  of  the  book.  I  have  taken  no 
notice  of  them  because  their  evidence  is  too  insignificant 
to  possess  any  weight.  Did  we  indeed  find  in  Genesis — 
or  in  the  Pentateuch — case-endings  habitually  employed 
as  such,  while  in  other  books  they  had  disappeared  from 
use,  their  existence  would  be  strong  evidence  of  the 
antiquity  of  the  books  in  which  they  occurred.  But  we 
find  nothing  of  the  -sort.  In  Genesis  there  are  only  five 
examples  of  case-endings  altogether,'  three  in  prose,-  and 
two  in  poetry ;  '^  and  in  these  the  termination  is  not  used 
with  the  force  of  a  case,  but  is  simply  attached  as  a  binding 


'  I  disregard,  of  course,  the  H  locale  (which  corresponds  to  the  Arabic 
accusative) ;  for  this  is  met  with  constantly,  at  every  period  of  the  language 
(e.g.  2  Chron.  xxix.  18,  22,  xxxii.  9,  xxxiii.  11,  1-1,  xxxvi.  6,  10). 

2  0  ill  Genesis  i.  24  ]nX  IHTI,  heast  of  the  earth  (but  not  in  vr.  25,  30,  or 
elsewhere  in  the  Pentateuch  with  the  same  word)  ;  /  in  Genesis  xsxi.  39, 
twice. 

^  i  twice  in  Genesis  xlix.  11. 


KLOSTERMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH.  341 

vowel  to  a  substantive  in  the  construct  state/  apparently 
as  a  poetical  or  rhetorical  ornament,  precisely  as  happens 
from  time  to  time  in  other  books  of  the   Old  Testament. 
The  fact    that   these   terminations   are  used  without   any 
consciousness  of  their  true   significance  does  not  support 
the  theory  that  the  books  in  which  they  are  found  belong 
to  a  specially  early  stage   in   the  history  of  the  language, 
and  tends  rather  to  prove,  if  it  proves  anything,  that  they 
are  not   earlier  than  other   books    in   which  the  usage  is 
similar.    Were  these  terminations  really  marks  of  antiquity, 
it  would  be    natural    for  them  to  be  both  more  frequent 
themselves,  and  also  to  be  accompanied  by  other  archaic 
forms,  which  is  just  what  we  do  not  find.    The  i  of  Genesis 
xxxi.  39,  xlix.  11,  is  found  twice  besides  in  the  Pentateuch — 
Exodus  XV.  6,  Deuteronomy  xxxiii.  16  (both  poetical  pas- 
sages), but  it  occurs  some  twenty-five  times  in  other  books, 
— for  instance,  Hosea  x.  11,  Isaiah  i.  21,  xxii.  16  (twice); 
Obadiah  3  ;  Micah  vii.  14  ;  six  times  in  Jeremiah,  as  well 
as  in  several  later  writings.     It  is  difficult,  when  it  is  used 
so  often  in  books  of  the   middle  or  later  age  of  Hebrew, 
to  argue  that  its  occurrence  in  Genesis  is  a  mark  of  anti- 
quity.    The  0  of  Genesis  i.  24  is  rarer ;  this  occurs  three 
times    in   poetry   in    Numbers   xxiii.    18,  xxiv.   3,   15  (the 
prophecies  of  Balaam)  ;   in  Psalm  cxiv.  8 ;  and,  with  the 
same  word  as  in  Genesis  i.  24  (but  followed,  except  in  Psalm 
Ixxix.  2,  by  different   genitives),   seven   times  in  passages, 
none   of  them  early,  viz.,   Zephaniah  ii.  14,  Isaiah  Ivi.   9 
(twice).  Psalms   1.   10,  Ixxix.   2,   civ.  11,  20.     Those   who 
adduce  this  example  as  a  mark  of  antiquity  commonly  say 
that  it  is  borrowed  in  these  other  passages  from  Genesis 
i.  24 ;  but  we  have  no  means  of  knowing  this  to  have  been 

'  i  corresponds  to  the  Arabic  genitive  ;  but,  to  be  a  true  genitive,  it  should 
be  attached  to  the  word  under  government,  not  to  the  word  governing ;  i.e., 
it  should  be  "'DV  DDJ^  (a  type  of  construction  which  never  occurs  in  Hebrew), 
not  (as  it  is)  Dr  ^ri33:. 


342         KLOSTERMANN  ON  THE  PENTATEUCH. 

the  case  other  than  the  assumption  that  Genesis  i.  24  is 
older  than  they  are  :  the  argument  is  consequently  circular ; 
and  the  supposition  that  an  anomalous  form  remained  in 
use  in  a  particular  word/  and  could  thus  be  used  at 
pleasure  by  different  writers,  is  equally  probable,  and  would 
equally  account  for  the  phenomenon  to  be  explained.  The 
occurrences  of  ancient  case-endings  in  the  Pentateuch  are 
too  isolated,  and  too  closely  parallel  to  their  appearance  in 
admittedly  later  books,  for  an  argument  of  any  value  to  be 
founded  upon  them. 

The  case  is  substantially  the  same  with  other  supposed 
marks  of  antiquity  which  have  been  pointed  to  in  the 
Pentateuch.  On  the  verdict  of  comparative  philology,  and 
the  testimony  of  inscriptions,  regarding  the  use  of  the  pro- 
noun Kin  for  the  feminine,  I  will  not  anticipate  what  I 
have  written  in  another  place. 

S,  K.  Driver. 

•  Comp.  npv,  ni(jht,  the  accent  of  which  shows  that  it  is  au  olJ  accusative; 
wliich  is  used  ahnost  uuifonnly,  iiri^iy  (or  T^TpV),  iniquit!/,  which  occurs  five 
times,  nD"in,  sun,  which  occurs  once  (Judges  xiv.  18).  See  Kautzsch's  2;jth 
edition  of  Gesenius'  Grammar,  §  90.  2,  3,  or  my  Hebrew  Tenses,  §  182. 


543 


ST.  PAUL'S  XAPIS. 

There  are  many  places  of  the  New  Testament  in  which 
the  Revisers  have  made  alterations  which  to  most  readers 
it  has  seemed  hardly  worth  while  to  make ;  and  there  are 
many  in  which  they  have  refrained  from  making  alterations 
which  critical  readers  wish  they  had  made.  But  I  do  not 
know  of  more  than  one  place  in  which  they  seem  to  me  to 
have  altered  any  rendering  of  the  Authorized  Version  for 
the  worse  through  misapprehension. 

The  place  to  which  I  refer  is  Philippians  i.  7:  "  Even  as 
it  is  right  for  me  to  be  thus  minded  in  behalf  of  you  all, 
because  I  have  you  in  my  heart,  inasmuch  as,  both  in  my 
bonds  and  in  the  defence  and  confirmation  of  the  gospel, 
ye  all  are  partakers  with  me  of  grace."  So  the  Revisers 
give  the  last  clause.  But  the  Authorized  Version  has,  "  Ye 
all  are  partakers  of  my  grace."  I  shall  endeavour  to  show 
that  the  Authorized  is  right  here,  and  that  St.  Paul  was 
speaking  of  a  particular  grace  bestowed  on  himself. 

The  Greek  is  crvvKotvwvov^  /j.ov  tP]<;  -y^apiTO'^  irdvTa'^  vfxd<; 
ovTa'i.  The  article  before  %a/9tT09  is  not  conclusive,  but  it 
agrees  better  with  the  Authorized  rendering  than  with  the 
Revised.  That  St.  Paul  was  accustomed  to  think  of  him- 
self as  having  received  a  special  xap^?  is  to  be  inferred  from 
several  passages  of  Epistles  written  at  different  times.  The 
word  %a/3t?  he  uses  abundantly  and  in  most  of  its  senses. 
Its  primary  meaning,  I  suppose,  is  an  act  or  movement 
which  gives  pleasure,  something  which  charms.  In  its  New 
Testament  usage  it  means,  (1)  kindness,  (2)  active  kind- 
ness, (3)  beneficent  spiritual  influence,  (4)  a  gift  or  boon  ; 
and  also  (5)  gratitude  or  response  awakened  by  kindness, 
and  (0)  thanks.  The  word  is  sown  lavishly  over  a  section 
of  *2  Corinthians,  chaps,  viii.  and  ix.,  in  which  it  occurs  ten 
times,  in  addition  to  ev-^apLarlav  and  ev^apiaTiwv.     In  viii. 


344  ST.   PAUL'S  XAPI2. 


9  it  means  kindness  or  love ;  in  viii.  1,  and  ix.  8,  14,  it  has 
the  famihar  sense  of  the  Divine  goodness  acting  with 
spiritual  influence  upon  human  souls.  In  viii.  4,  tjjv  %«/5"' 
is  perhaps  equivalent  to  charity,  the  sympathetic  charity 
of  the  benevolent ;  in  6,  7,  and  10,  "  this  "  charity  is  more 
definitely  the  collection  for  the  poor  at  Jerusalem.  In  viii. 
1(3  and  ix.  15,  %«/3t9  is  thanks,  "  Thanks  be  to  God." 
"When  St.  Paul  is  speaking  of  his  %apt9,  he  means  by  the 
word  a  gift  or  privilege  conferred  by  God  upon  himself. 

He  dwells  upon  this  most  fully  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Ephesians,  which  was  written  in  the  same  year  and  under 
the  same  circumstances  as  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians, 
so  that  the  one  may  reasonably  be  a  guide  to  the  thoughts 
of  the  other.  In  the  third  chapter  we  read,  "  For  this 
cause  I  Paul,  the  prisoner  of  Christ  Jesus  in  behalf  of  you 
Gentiles, — if  so  be  that  ye  have  heard  of  the  dispensation 
of  that  grace  of  God  which  was  given  me  to  you- ward ;  how 
that  by  revelation  was  made  known  unto  me  the  mystery, 
to  wit,  that  the  Gentiles  are  fellow-heirs  and 
fellow-members  of  the  body,  and  partakers  of  the  promise 
in  Christ  Jesus  through  the  gospel,  whereof  I  was  made  a 
minister,  according  to  the  gift  of  that  grace  of  God  which 
was  given  me  according  to  the  working  of  His  power.  Unto 
me,  who  am  less  than  the  least  of  all  saints,  was  this  grace 
given,  to  preach  unto  the  Gentiles  the  unsearchable  riches 
of  Christ."  Nothing  could  be  more  explicit  than  these  last 
words  ;  but  the  whole  passage  sets  forth  the  wonderful 
privilege,  the  grace,  that  had  been  conferred  upon  St.  Paul, 
when  be  was  called  to  be  the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles.  His 
particular  grace,  then,  was  his  apostleship,  his  commission 
to  proclaim  the  good  news  of  Christ  to  the  Gentiles. 

When,  some  years  earlier,  he  was  writing  to  the  Eomans, 
he  was  already  accustomed  to  speak  of  the  commission 
given  to  him  as  his  grace.  There  is  a  not  quite  definite 
use  of  the  term  in  i.  5,  "  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  through 


ST.   PAUVS  XAPI5.  345 


whom  -we  received  grace  and  apostleship,  unto  obedience 
of  faith  among  all  the  nations."  In  xii.  H,  "  I  say,  through 
the  grace  given  unto  me,  to  every  man  that  is  among 
you,  not  to  think  of  himself  more  highly  than  he  ought  to 
think,"  it  is  tolerably  certain  that  St.  Paul  is  referring 
distinctly  to  the  authority  with  which  his  commission  in- 
vested him.  This  is  still  plainer  in  xv.  15,  "I  write  the 
more  boldly  unto  you  in  some  measure,  as  putting  you 
again  in  remembrance,  because  of  the  grace  that  was  given 
me  of  God,  that  I  should  be  a  minister  of  Christ  Jesus  unto 
the  Gentiles."  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  written  at 
nearly  the  same  time,  there  are  two  places  in  which  he 
connects  the  word  grace  with  his  call  and  commission ;  but 
in  i.  1.5  the  grace  is  the  Divine  will  to  give  rather  than  the 
gift  itself, — "When  it  was  the  good  pleasure  of  God  who 
.  .  .  called  me  through  His  grace,  to  reveal  His  Son  in 
me,  that  I  might  preach  Him  among  the  Gentiles  "  ;  in  ii. 
7-9,  it  again  means  distinctly  the  apostohc  commission, 
"  When  they  saw  that  I  had  been  entrusted  with  the 
gospel  of  the  uncircumcision,  even  as  Peter  with  the  gospel 
of  the  circumcision  ;  .  .  .  and  when  they  perceived  the 
grace  that  was  given  unto  me,  James  and  Cephas  and  John 
.  .  .  gave  to  me  and  Barnabas  the  right  hands  of  fellow- 
ship, that  we  should  go  unto  the  Gentiles,  and  they  unto 
the  circumcision." 

We  see  then  that  it  was  habitual  to  St.  Paul  to  describe 
his  apostolic  commission  as  a  special  privilege  and  favour 
for  which  God's  goodness  had  selected  him;  in  a  single  word, 
he  called  it  the  %a/3i9  or  grace  given  to  him.  To  the  Philip- 
pians  he  feels  deeply  grateful  because  they  had  associated 
themselves  with  his  apostolic  work.  This  association  is 
what  strikes  the  note  of  joy  throughout  the  Epistle.  It  was 
chiefly  by  the  sending  of  gifts,  first  in  the  beginning  of  the 
gospel,  and  then  during  the  imprisonment  at  Rome,  that 
the  Christians  of  Philippi  had  made  themselves  his  partners 


346  ST.   PAUL'S  XAPIS. 


in  the  work  of  spreading  the  gospel ;  their  gifts  of 
money  had  been  consecrated  to  him  by  their  being  thus 
devoted  to  the  cause  of  the  gospel  of  which  he  was  the 
commissioned  preacher.  And  he  pours  forth  his  gratitude 
iu  these  cordial  words,  "I  thank  my  God  upon  all  my 
remembrance  of  you,  always  in  every  supplication  of  mine 
in  behalf  of  you  all  making  my  supplication  with  joy,  for 
your  fellowship  in  furtherance  of  the  gospel  from  the  first 
day  until  now ;  being  confident  of  this  very  thing,  that  He 
which  began  a  good  work  in  you  will  perfect  it  until  the 
day  of  Jesus  Christ  :  even  as  it  is  right  for  me  to  be  thus 
minded  on  behalf  of  you  all,  because  I  have  you  in  my  heart, 
inasmuch  as  both  in  my  bonds  and  in  the  defence  and  con- 
firmation of  the  gospel  ye  all  are  partakers  of  my  grace." 
They  had  proved  their  fellowship  with  St.  Paul  in  the 
furthering  of  the  gospel ;  they  had  made  themselves 
partners  of  his  apostleship — of  his  special  grace — in  the 
imprisonment,  and  in  the  defending  and  establishing  of  the 
gospel.  If  grace  in  this  passage  is  taken  to  mean  the 
spiritual  influence  shed  on  all  believers,  the  preceding 
words  lose  their  point.  How  had  the  Philippians  shown 
themselves  to  be  partakers  of  Divine  grace  in  St.  Paul's 
imprisonment  ?  The  share  in  furthering  the  gospel,  the 
association  with  the  imprisonment  and  with  the  active 
work  on  behalf  of  the  gospel,  involved  in  the  sympathetic 
assistance  they  had  given  him,  made  the  Philippians  his 
partners,  not  only  in  the  general  Divine  grace  bestowed  on 
all  Christians,  but  in  his  apostleship.  And  St.  Paul  so 
cherished  the  office  entrusted  to  him  that  to  claim  a 
partnership  in  it  was  the  surest  way  to  his  heart. 

J.  Llewelyn  Davies. 


347 


THE   FIBST   MIRACLE. 

It  is  a  true  saying  of  Reiian  that  "  the  essential  condition 
of  the  creations  of  art  is  to  form  a  system,  of  which  all  the 
parts  correspond  and  have  mutual  relations.  In  histories 
of  this  kind,  the  grand  sign  of  having  found  the  truth  is  to 
have  contrived  to  comhine  the  accounts  in  a  manner  which 
forms  a  narrative  consistent,  credible,  where  nothing  jars  " 
{Vie  de  J.,  Introduction  ci.).  Few  English  thinkers,  at  all 
events,  will  now  pretend  that  Kenan  has  himself  done  this ; 
while,  on  the  other  hand,  nothing  is  more  impressive  than 
the  harmony  of  tone  and  temper  which  pervades  the  Gos- 
pels, taken  frankly  and  as  we  find  them. 

The  person  who  speaks  in  parts  which  are  almost  univer- 
sally accepted,  is  one  who  seems  to  require  the  miracles  in 
order  to  become  intelligible.  The  Thaumaturgist  acts  and 
speaks,  most  exactly,  as  the  beautiful  Teacher  could  not 
have  failed  to  do,  on  the  hypothesis  that  He  possessed 
miraculous  power.  Legend  and  reminiscence  have  some- 
how "  contrived  to  combine  the  accounts "  precisely  as 
the  French  artist  requires,  although  he  has  not  been  able 
himself  to  meet  his  own  requirement. 

Now  this  is  emphatically  true  of  the  opening  of  the 
ministry  of  Jesus.  In  all  the  Gospels  we  find  Him  full 
of  benign  and  suave  attractiveness.  The  people  marvel  at 
His  gracious  words.  He  is  in  the  synagogue,  or  by  the 
sea,  or  on  grassy  slopes  :  He  sits  down  among  His  followers 
and  utters  a  seven-fold  benediction  :  He  astonishes  a 
Samaritan  and  a  woman  by  asking  a  courtesy  from  her. 
Explain  the  miraculous  draught,  as  Keim  hints,  by  suggest- 
ing that  a  shoal  of  fish  was  visible  from  where  He  stood, 
or  the  feeding  of  the  multitudes,  like  Ewald,  by  supposing 
that  His  influence  led  the  provident  to  share  their  supplj' 
with  the  hungry  :  yet  you  do   not  succeed  in  obliterating 


348  THE  FIRST  MIRACLE. 


from  the  record  the  character  of  precisely  such  a  person  as 
would  naturally  perform  a  work  at  a  marriage  feast.  The 
disputed  marvel  is  harmonious  with  the  admitted  tempera- 
ment, which  loves  in  its  parables  to  speak  of  a  great  feast, 
of  a  marriage  supper,  of  oxen  and  fatlings,  of  the  fatted  calf, 
of  music  and  dancing. 

Kenan,  however,  tells  us  that  Jesus,  despite  His  profound 
originality,  was,  at  least  for  some  weeks,  a  copyist  of  John 
the  Baptist.  "  The  superiority  of  John  was  too  great  for 
Him,  still  little  known,  to  dream  of  disputing  it.  He  was 
quite  content  to  grow  up  under  his  shadow,  and  felt  Him- 
self compelled,  if  He  would  gain  the  crowd,  to  use  the  ex- 
ternal means  which  had  led  him  to  so  amazing  a  success  " 
(pp.  112,  113). 

But  the  Baptist  was  an  ascetic.  His  food  was  coarse. 
His  clothing  was  rude.  He  had  lived  far  from  society,  "  in 
the  deserts,"  until  publicity  was  forced  on  him  by  his  voca- 
tion, and  even  then  he  scarcely  crossed  the  stream  which 
bounded  the  settled  land.  The  people  "went  out"  unto 
him. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  judge  whether  the  notion  that  Jesus 
copied  his  methods  is  more  artistic  in  its  harmony  with  the 
context,  than  the  story  of  His  behaviour  at  a  wedding  feast. 
For  Kenan  exhibits  Jesus,  immediately  before  His  baptism, 
endowed  with  a  tenderness  of  heart  which  transformed 
itself  into  infinite  sweetness,  vague  poesy,  universal  charm, 
(whatever  these  phrases  may  definitely  mean)  as  exhaling 
from  His  person  such  a  fascination  that  His  acquaintances 
no  longer  recognised  Him,  and  as  ready  to  bring  Paradise 
to  earth,  if  only  His  notions  had  not  been  chimerical  (pp. 
76-84).  Not  long  after  His  baptism,  again,  Kenan  dwells 
upon  His  profound  affection.  His  loving  manners.  His  abode 
in  the  house  with  Peter  and  Peter's  family, — upon  the 
mode  of  life  which  was  a  perpetual  charm,  upon  a  scandal 
which  He  caused   by  accepting  a  dinner  from  Levi,   and 


THE  FIRST  MIRACLE.  349 

several  times  upon  His  smile  and  His  infinite  charm  (156, 
158,  162,  168,  161)). 

Violently  wedged  in  between  two  periods  of  this  charac- 
ter, a  time  when  Jesus  condescended  to  copy  a  rugged 
Baptist,  whom  Eenan  compares  to  a  Hindoo  Zogi  beside 
the  Ganges,  does  not  help  to  make  a  narrative  consistent, 
credible,  where  nothing  jars. 

But  when  a  little  that  is  rather  Parisian  than  Galilean 
has  been  allowed  to  evaporate  from  these  descriptions,  they 
bear  a  strong  witness  in  favour  of  our  own  Jesus,  the  Jesus 
who  came  almost  straight  from  the  wilderness  of  temptation 
to  share  a  rustic  festival,  and  to  repair  the  bankruptcy  of 
its  supplies. 

We  are  intended  to  observe  the  period  at  which  this 
event  occurred.  It  was  the  beginning  of  miracles.  The 
days  are  carefully  reckoned  since  He  won  His  first  dis- 
ciples. Renan's  notion  of  His  subjection  to  the  spirit  of 
the  Baptist  is  highly  suggestive,  and  even  instructive,  for 
it  reminds  us  that  all  His  first  disciples  had  been  under 
that  influence,  and  the  most  powerful  of  them  had  appar- 
ently been  among  John's  stated  followers.  They  came  to 
Jesus  from  that  school,  expecting  no  doubt  to  find  its 
methods  and  principles  carried  to  a  greater  height  of  per- 
fection. But  He  at  once  conveyed  them  to  a  wedding. 
The  whole  tone  of  their  lives  was  changed.  They  must 
have  noticed  also  that  although  the  week  of  feasting  had 
begun  (for  this  is  the  natural  and  simple  meaning  of  the 
statement  that  the  mother  of  Jesus  was  already  there),  and 
although  it  soon  became  clear  that  the  supplies  were  scanty, 
yet  the  arrival  of  Jesus  was  very  welcome  to  these  humble 
folk  who  knew  Him  ;  "  both  Jesus  was  bidden  and  His 
disciples  to  the  marriage  feast. ^ 

*  "  The  use  of  the  singular  {^kXijOtj)  implies  that  they  were  invited  for  His 
sake,  not  He  for  theirs." — Farrar,  Life,  chap.  xi.  At  least,  it  refutes  the 
ancient  notion  that  Nathaniel  may  have  been  the  paranymph. 


350  THE  FIRST  MIRACLE. 

The  deliberate,  pauticulariziug  minuteness  of  all  this, 
regarded  as  coming  from  the  Apostle  John,  is  a  natural 
consequence  of  the  surprise  and  interest  with  which  he 
found  himself  just  then  in  such  a  place. 

To  us,  therefore,  it  suggests  the  difference  between  two 
kinds  of  piety — the  ascetic  and  the  distinctively  Christian. 

The  Baptist  represents  all  who  strive  to  overcome  the 
world  by  avoiding,  not  by  converting  it.  He  was  the 
greatest  outside  the  kingdom,  the  ripest  fruit  of  that 
ancient  system  which  bade  Israel  dwell  alone  among  the 
nations.  All  the  ceremonial  restrictions  which  isolated  his 
race,  lest  they  should  be  infected  by  the  paganism  which 
they  were  unable  to  leaven  for  God,  were  carried  to  the 
uttermost  in  his  hermit-like  seclusion.  And  we  must  not 
deny  that  such  piety  is  often  real  and  earnest.  It  is  better 
to  enter  into  life  maimed  than,  for  lack  of  renunciation,  to 
be  cast  into  hell  fire.  But  maimness  is  not  the  ideal  of  life, 
and  the  lonely  Baptist,  in  his  hair-cloth,  "neither  eating 
nor  drinking,^'  has  need  to  be  baptized  by  the  wearer  of  the 
seamless  robe,  who  came,  as  He  fearlessly  avowed,  "  both 
eating  and  drinking."  Thus,  from  the  very  first,  the  dis- 
ciples of  Jesus  were  encouraged  to  mingle  boldly  in  the 
social  life  of  their  time.  It  was  natural  therefore  that 
St.  Paul  should  instruct  his  Corinthian  converts,  when 
bidden  by  an  unbeliever  to  a  feast,  that  they  were  free  to 
go,  and  only  bound  to  behave  as  Christians  there,  walking 
charitably.  The  Church  cannot  be  a  conservatory  of  heavy 
perfumes  and  stifling  sweetness,  since  the  rushing  wind  of 
heaven,  blowing  over  great  spaces,  broad  and  free,  is  the 
chosen  type  of  the  spirit  of  Jesus.  We  recognise  it  in  this 
opening  narrative.  AVe  find  it  again  in  the  parable  of  the 
leaven  which  is  to  leaven  all  the  lump,  in  the  rebuke  of 
that  slothful  servant  who  hid  his  talent  in  a  napkin,  and 
in  all  the  reproaches  levelled  at  Him  who  ate  and  drank 
with  publicans  and  sinners. 


THE  FIRST  MIRACLE.  351 

Scepticism,  equally  with  the  Church,  recognises  the  spirit 
of  Jesus  in  the  story,  but  it  misuses  the  recognition.  Keim 
acknowledges  its  verisimilitude  :  "  According  to  the  earlier 
Gospels,  Jesus  had  certainly  spoken  words  appropriate  to 
this  narrative.  ...  *  Can  the  children  of  the  bride- 
chamber  fast  as  long  as  the  bridegroom  is  with  them  ?  ' 
And  'new  wine  is  not  put  into  old  wine-skins.'  .  .  . 
From  this,  and  from  the  actual  joyous  and  friendly  feasts 
which  Jesus  held  .  .  .  could  easily  be  derived  the 
picture  of  a  wedding  festival  at  which  Jesus  was  the 
bringer  of  joy"  (iv.  208). 

And  Schenkel  tells  us  that  in  its  essential  features  it  is 
certainly  not  an  invention  and  was  probably  witnessed  by 
John  (p.  84.) 

It  must  be  owned,  that  such  controversialists  are  hard  to 
deal  with.  If  the  miracles  were  stern,  and  the  ordinary 
life  festive,  we  should  be  told  that  they  were  inconsistent. 
But  when  Jesus  uses  language  harmonious  with  the  record 
of  His  actions,  we  are  told  that  the  former  is  the  origin  of 
the  latter,  and  not  a  thought  is  vouchsafed  to  the  problem 
suggested  by  such  harmonies,  extending  over  such  various 
manifestations  of  character. 

Much  ingenuity  has  been  spent  upon  the  question.  What 
did  Mary  expect  from  Jesus  when  she  said.  They  have  no 
wine  ?  Perhaps  she  herself  could  not  have  answered  so  defi- 
nitely as  many  who  have  spoken  for  her.  And  at  least  we 
may  be  certain  that  hers  was  not  the  admirably  Calvinistic 
notion  of  Calvin,  that  attention  might  be  diverted  by  the 
preaching  of  a  sermon.  What  is  plain  is  that  she  looked  to 
Jesus  for  relief,  either  by  some  happy  device  or  else  some 
manifestation  of  His  hitherto  latent  power.  But  which  was 
it?  For  half  a  lifetime  she  had  known  the  resources  of  an 
absolutely  unclouded  judgment,  a  perfectly  developed  faculty 
and  an  entirely  unselfish  heart.  She  had  enjoyed  the  peace 
and  trustfulness  inspired  by  loving  contact  with  an  ideal  life. 


352  THE  FIRST  MIRACLE. 

And   it   was   inevitable  that  in  every  embarrassment  she 
must  have  turned  to  Him.     As  we  consider  those  sinless 
obscure  years  which  are  the  pledge  of  His  sympathy  with 
all  our  obscure  lives,  the  years  which  (like  those  of  the  best 
women  in  the  aphorism)    "have  no  history,"    we  are  as- 
sured of    their  lovingkindness,    their  universal  sympathy. 
We  know  that  they  were  not  spent  in  dreamy  reveries  ;  for 
His   teaching,    so   marvellously   practical,    His    broad  and 
general  principles,  which   always  go  with  such  wonderful 
directness  to  the  details  of  life,  reveal  His  interests.     lienan 
has  ventured  to  assert  that  "  He  lived  entirely  in  the  super- 
natural," and  that  "it  pleased  Him  to  display,  in  His  very 
infancy,  a  revolt  against    paternal  authority  "    {Vie  de  J., 
pp.  43,  44).     But  this  is  contradicted  not  only  by  the  ex- 
plicit assertion  that  "  He  was  subject  unto  them,"  but  also 
by  all  the  events  which  throw  light,  directly  or  indirectly, 
upon  the  period  of  seclusion.     Of  these,  the  most  obvious  is 
the  astonishment  of  His  mother  at  having  to  seek  for  Him, 
upon  whose  discretion  she  had  reckoned  with  such  implicit 
confidence,  though  he  was  but  a  boy  of  twelve,  and  who 
was  surprised  in  turn  at  her  supposing  that  He  could  have 
idly    wandered,    or    lingered    anywhere    but    in   His   true 
Father's  house.      He  was  a  child    who  might  have   been 
tracked  by  asking  where  the  call  of  God  had  led  Him.     A 
second  hint  is  the  Baptist's  avowal  of  his  own  profound 
inferiority,  before  any  supernatural  revelation  had  enforced 
it.     A  third  indication  may  be  found  in  the  enthusiasm  of 
those  who  knew  His  whole  life,  when  all  Nazareth  bare 
Him  witness,  until  exasperated  by  finding  that  special  privi- 
leges were  refused  to  them.     Such  another  is  surely  here, 
in  the  instinctive  appeal  to  Him,  as  to  a  long-tried  helper, 
even  before  it  was  actually  fitting  that  He  should  interfere. 
This  inference  from  Mary's  appeal  is  obvious. 

But  more  than  this  is  probable.     She  knew  not  only  His 
readiness  to  help,  but  also  that  His  hour  of  manifestation  to 


THE  FIRST  MIRACLE.  353 

the  world  was  at  last  come.  Is  it  to  be  supposed  that  He 
had  returned  from  the  forty  days  of  seclusion,  and  from 
the  public  witness  of  the  Baptist,  with  a  new  unction  on 
His  brows,  and  five  disciples  following  His  steps,  without 
awakening  great  hopes,  most  of  all  in  the  bosom  of  her  who 
had  so  long  guarded  the  mighty  secret,  keeping  it  and 
pondering  it  in  her  heart  ?  It  was  impossible  that  Mary 
should  not  expect,  now,  at  last,  a  renewal  of  the  wonders 
of  His  infancy. 

And  the  noblest  and  most  unselfish  woman  could  not  fail 
to  wish  to  direct  their  operation,  so  as  to  remove,  unnoticed, 
the  distress  of  her  own  friends. 

But  this  was  the  very  temptation  which  first  of  all  as- 
sailed Jesus  in  the  desert,  namely,  the  use  of  His  special 
gifts  for  merely  private  ends.  Not  to  lift  Himself  above 
hunger,  nor  His  own  circle  above  inconvenience  and  dis- 
comfiture, but  to  witness  for  God  and  the  mission  of  His 
Christ  to  human  souls,  Jesus  "  came  forth."  Therefore  His 
opportunity  did  not  exactly  coincide  with  the  first  appre- 
hensions of  dearth  ;  His  "  hour  "  was  not  yet.  And  a  cer- 
tain sharpness  of  decision  is  always  audible  in  His  words, 
as  often  as  what  is  private  and  individual  seeks  thus  to 
modify  His  public  action.  In  the  remonstrance  of  Peter  He 
heard  the  voice  of  Satan.  When  His  mother  and  brethren 
would  interrupt  His  teaching.  He  declared  that  the  claim  of 
His  disciples  lay  as  close  to  His  heart ;  theij  were  His 
nearest  and  dearest.  It  is  now  that  the  sword  began  to 
pierce  Mary's  gentle  breast,  since  now  first  it  became  neces- 
sary to  subordinate  His  natural  affection  to  His  vocation,  a 
process  which  should  increase  in  stringency,  until,  expiring 
upon  the  cross.  He  said  to  her  who  had  dreamed  such 
happy  dreams,  "  Woman,  behold  thy  Son  !  " 

The  epithet,  Woman,  used  at  the  last  as  well  as  now,  has 
no  stain  of  the  disrespect  and  harshness  which  it  would 
imply  from  one  of  us  to  his  mother. 

VOL.  V.  23 


354  THE  FIRST  MIRACLE. 

It  was  thus  that  Jesus  addressed  Mary  Magdalene,  weep- 
ing beside  His  tomb.  Thus,  in  the  classics,  persons  of  the 
highest  rank  are  accosted.  But,  though  disrespect  is 
absent,  a  certain  aloofness  is  undeniable ;  it  is  assuredly  a 
different  word  from  Mother,  and  it  proves  that  the  earthly 
tie  should  not  control  His  official  action,  even  on  earth, 
although  Mariolatry  declares  it  to  be  predominant,  even  in 
heaven.  "  She  was  the  mother,"  said  St.  Augustine,  "of 
His  flesh.  His  humanity.  His  weakness ;  .  .  .  but  the 
miracle  which  He  was  about  to  do.  He  was  about  to  do  as 
O^od,  .  .  .  and  He  did  not  recognise  the  human  womb, 
saying  in  effect,  "  That  in  Me  which  works  the  miracle  was 
not  born  of  thee."  The  assertion  of  His  independence  is 
also  clear  in  His  words,  "  What  have  I  to  do  with  thee  ?  " 
This  phrase  occurs  elsewhere,  not  only  where  disrespect  is 
out  of  the  question,  but  even  where  superiority  is  conceded. 
"  What  have  we  to  do  with  thee?"  goes  with  the  prayer 
of  the  demoniacs  to  be  tormented  not  (Matt.  viii.  29).  And 
in  the  Old  Testament,  where  it  is  not  rare,  the  widow  of 
Sarephath  spoke  thus  to  Elijah  when  her  son  died ;  and 
the  king  of  Egypt  to  Josiah  when  dissuading  him  from 
hostilities  (1  Kings  xvii.  18;  2  Chron.  xxxv.  21 ;  LXX.). 

Again,  therefore,  we  find  no  disrespect,  but  a  very  distinct 
refusal  to  admit  her  to  a  directorship  or  partnership  in  His 
action ;  and  the  assertion  that  He  must  await  another  call 
than  hers,  and  an  "  hour  "  that  is  all  His  own. 

"Mine  hour"  is  often  taken  to  mean  His  supreme 
manifestation  in  death  and  resurrection,  so  that  He  said, 
This  is  no  time  for  Me  to  manifest  Myself.  "  Still  He  can 
and  does  give  a  picture  and  type  of  the  manifestation  of 
His  glory,"  adds  Luthardt,  unconsciously  condemning  bis 
own  exposition.  For  John  says,  not  that  He  gave  some 
faint  premonition,  but  that  He  manifested  His  very  glory ; 
that  His  hour,  in  this  sense,  did  presently  arrive.  Besides, 
if  the  time  of  which  He  spoke  was  at  a  distance  of  years. 


THE  FIRST  MIRACLE.  855 


Mary  was  refused  indeed,  and  could  scarcely  have  pro- 
ceeded to  make  arrangements  for  the  expected  help.  This 
she  did,  and  it  is  worthy  of  remark  that  the  only  recorded 
mandate  of  her,  whom  some  exalt  into  a  rival  deity,  is, 
"  Whatsoever  He  saith  unto  you,  do  it."  Clearly  she 
understood  Him  well.  His  "not  yet"  told  her  that  His 
opportunity  only  awaited  some  further  development,  per- 
haps the  very  deficiency  which  she  would  fain  avert,  and 
the  pressure  of  which  is  quite  discernible  in  the  instant 
bringing  of  the  new  supply  to  the  president  of  the  feast. 
The  disciples,  at  least,  would  then  be  in  a  position  to 
understand  the  "sign." 

The  cleansing  of  hands  and  vessels  was  very  necessary 
at  a  Jewish  feast  (Mark  vii.  3),  and  accordingly  six  large 
vessels  were  in  the  room,  probably  borrowed,  and  not 
exactly  of  the  same  size,  but  containing,  at  the  lowest 
estimate  of  what  is  meant,  from  forty  to  fifty  gallons,  and 
at  the  largest  more  than  twice  as  much.  That  they  were 
"  set  there  "  explains  how  the  disciples,  with  their  atten- 
tion fixed  upon  their  Master,  knew  whence  the  wine  was. 
They  could  not  be  mistaken ;  and  the  large  quantity,  and 
the  nature  of  the  vessels  whence  it  was  drawn,  forbade  any 
possibility  of  fraud. 

Let  it  be  observed  that  Jesus,  who  never  gave  luxuries 
of  a  kind  unusual  among  His  rustic  followers,  always  be- 
stows lavishly,  fish  that  break  the  net,  and  again  an 
hundred  and  fifty  and  three  great  fish,  and  when  He  gives 
bread  more  broken  pieces  are  left  over,  prepared  for  dis- 
tribution, than  the  loaves  which  He  began  to  break.  It 
is  the  manner  of  Him  who  crowns  the  year  with  His  good- 
ness, who  fills  the  valleys  with  corn,  who  pours  down 
blessings  until  there  is  not  room  to  receive  them.  In  this 
case  timid  moralists  take  fright ;  they  raise  prudent  theories 
about  the  nature  of  this  wine,  without  reflecting  that  the 
very  qualifications  they  seek  to  insinuate  are  a  censure  on 


35G  THE  FIRST  MIRACLE. 


the  narrative  for  introducing  no  qualifications  whatever, 
since  whatever  sophistications  may  be  attempted  with  the 
Hebrew  words  for  wune,  the  Greek  word  stands  here  un- 
guarded, unashamed,  the  same  as  when  Paul  said.  Be  not 
drunken  with  wine.  "  It  must  have  been  unintoxicating 
wine,'^  says  the  heedless  theorist.  But  that  is  precisely  the 
necessity  which  St.  John  omits  to  recognise  ;  he  leaves  the 
question  open,  even  though  he  is  obliged  to  record  the 
somewhat  vulgar  jest  of  the  governor  of  the  feast,  about 
what  is  usual  when  men  are  tipsy. 

Even  Keim  is  not  ashamed  to  swell  the  cry  that  this 
strong  phrase  {orav  ^edvaOwcn)  implied  excess  on  the  actual 
occasion.  As  if  the  governor  of  the  feast  could  possibly 
assert  that  the  guests  were  intoxicated,  a  misfortune  which 
would  reflect  shame  most  of  all  upon  himself,  whose  duty 
was  to  check  any  individual  who  showed  the  least  dispo- 
sition to  exceed.  The  exaggerated  expression  is  more 
probably  a  bucolic  attempt  to  show  courtesy  by  insinuating 
(without  direct  mention  of  so  delicate  a  matter)  that  there 
had  never  been  any  lack  at  all ;  plenty  had  been  given 
already.  But  in  any  light,  it  ill  supports  the  theory  that 
at  the  feast  which  Jesus  attended  there  was  only  non- 
intoxicating  wine. 

The  anxious  moralist  would  be  much  more  successful  if 
he  were  content  to  observe  that  circumstances  are  now 
entirely  altered  ;  that  the  invention  of  distilled  liquors  has 
revolutionized  both  the  nature  of  the  evil  and  the  stringency 
of  the  remedies  demanded  ;  that  Jesus  is  never  recorded  to 
have  needed  to  rebuke  a  drunkard  ;  that  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment wine  is  mentioned  sometimes  kindly,  sometimes 
bitterly,  according  to  contemporary  social  usages,  ^  and  that 


*  So  that  the  very  "  wine "  which  Melcliizedek  f,'ave  to  Abraham  became  "a 
mocker,"  and  the  "  strong  drink  "  which  was  poured  upon  the  altar  of  God  was 
"raging"  and  they  were  denounced  as  such  by  inspiration  to  the  children  of  a 
more  corrupt  generation  (Gen.  xiv.  18  ;  Lev.  xxviii.  7  ;  Prov.  xx.  1). 


THE  FIRST  MIRACLE.  357 


our  Lord  enjoined  all  that  reasonable  abstainers  need  for 
their  justification  when  He  ordered  that  what  offended, 
even  if  it  were  dear  and  useful  as  a  member  of  the  body, 
should  be  cut  off  and  cast  away. 

This  miracle  stands  admirably  at  the  threshold  of  our 
Saviour's  ministry,  though  Keim  and  others  have  laboured 
to  remove  it  to  a  later  period,  for  the  more  convenience  of 
explaining  it  away.  The  character  of  it  is  still  unobtrusive, 
and  almost  domestic,  so  that  the  Gospels  of  the  public 
ministry  did  not  record  it,  nor  could  they  rightly  have  done 
so.  It  is  in  fact  transitional,  and  is  redeemed  from  the 
suspicion  of  being  merely  private,  as  Mary  would  fain  have 
made  it,  by  the  recorded  effect  on  the  disciples,  whom  it 
prepared  to  follow,  with  added  confidence.  His  stormy  and 
persecuted  course.  Here  they  saw  His  power  working  in 
a  direction  the  most  unexpected,  condescending  and  be- 
nevolent, very  unlike  the  blood-splashed  warrior  with  dyed 
garments  whom  they  expected.  He  manifested  forth  His 
glory,  says  the  same  evangelist  who  had  already  recorded,  of 
the  AVord  made  flesh,  that  He  dwelt  in  a  tent  among  us  full 
of  grace,  and  we  beheld  His  glory. 

When  they  looked  back,  they  saw  in  this  miracle  also  a 
glorious  symbolism.  The  Jewish  religion,  and  the  domestic 
happiness  of  mankind,  well  typified  by  a  marriage  feast, 
what  had  come  over  both  ?  Men's  worship,  men's  daily  life, 
alike  required  to  be  renovated,  lifted  above  itself.  To  their 
longing,  their  aspiration,  nay,  their  consciousness  of  what 
ought  to  be,  the  reality  was  as  water  unto  wine.  And 
Christ  came  to  elevate  and  deepen  both.  He  did  not  thrust 
old  things  aside,  and  substitute  others  altogether :  He 
transformed,  deepened,  and  elevated  what  was  there.  Alike 
in  religion  and  in  daily  life — 

"  'Tis  life,  of  which  our  veins  are  scant. 
More  life,  and  fuller,  that  we  want.' 


358  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 


Now  this  beginning  of  the  signs  tells  us,  what  He  after- 
wards plainly  said  : 

"I  am  come  that  ye  might  have  life,  and  that  ye  might 
have  it  more  abundantly." 

G.  A.  Chadwick. 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE   ATONEMENT  IN  THE 
NEW  TESTAMENT. 

IV.     KoMANS  iii.  24-26. 

In  earlier  papers  we  have  seen  that  each  of  the  four  Gospels 
represents  Christ  as  deliberately  purposing  to  go  up  to 
Jerusalem  in  order  there  to  be  slain  by  His  enemies,  and  as 
teaching  that  His  death  was  needful  for  man's  salvation, 
and  that  it  was  made  needful  by  man's  sin.  The  same 
teaching  we  found  re-echoed  in  the  Book  of  Acts,  and 
asserted  in  plain  language  in  the  Epistles  of  Peter  and  John, 
and  in  the  book  of  Eevelation.  Wherein  lay  the  need  for 
this  costly  means  of  salvation,  i.e.  why  God  could  not 
pardon  sin  apart  from  the  death  of  Christ,  we  did  not  learn. 
For  an  answer  to  this  pressing  question,  we  turn  now  to 
the  writings  of  the  greatest  of  the  apostles,  to  the  epistles 
of  St.  Paul. 

Among  these  epistles,  that  to  the  Romans  claims  our 
first  attention.  For  the  absence  of  any  specific  topic  need- 
ing discussion,  such  as  the  various  topics  dealt  with  in  the 
First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  left  St.  Paul  free  while 
writing  it  to  give  an  orderly  statement  of  the  Gospel  as  he 
was  accustomed  to  preach  it  in  its  various  parts  and  as  one 
organic  whole.  In  it  we  shall  find  a  full  and  clear  account 
of  the  purpose  and  significance  of  the  death  of  Christ,  and 
of  its  relation  to  the  good  news  of  salvation  announced  by 
Him. 


IN   THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  359 

After  an  apostolic  greeting  in  Komans  i.  1-7,  and  an 
expression  of  interest  in  his  readers  in  verses  8-15,  the 
writer  goes  on  in  verse  IG  to  describe  the  gospel  he  is  eager 
to  preach  at  liome.  "  It  is  a  power  of  God  for  salvation  to 
every  one  that  believeth  "  ;  and  it  is  so  because  "  a  right- 
eousness of  God  is  revealed  in  it,  by  faith,  for  faith."  These 
last  words  are  supported  and  in  part  explained  by  a  quo- 
tation from  Habakkuk :  "  The  righteous  man  by  faith  will 
live." 

At  this  point  St.  Paul  turns  suddenly  round  from  right- 
eousness to  unrighteousness,  and  from  faith  to  idolatry  and 
gross  sin.  In  a  moment  the  light  of  the  Gospel  has  vanish- 
ed from  our  view,  and  we  find  ourselves  in  a  world  in  which 
every  one,  Jew  or  Greek,  stands  guilty  and  silent  before  an 
angry  God.  Fortunately,  from  behind  this  deep  shadow 
soon  shines  forth  in  more  conspicuous  brightness  the  light  of 
the  Gospel  of  Christ.  In  chapter  iii.  21  we  emerge  from  the 
darkness  as  suddenly  as  in  chapter  i.  18  we  entered  it ;  and 
on  doing  so  we  find  ourselves  almost  where  we  were  when 
the  darkness  fell  upon  us.  We  hear  the  welcome  sound  of 
words  practically  the  same  as  those  in  chapter  i.  17  :  "  but 
now  apart  from  law  a  righteousness  of  God  has  been  mani- 
fested, testimony  being  borne  to  it  by  the  Law  and  the 
Prophets,  a  righteousness  of  God  through  "  belief  of  Jesus 
Christ  for  all  that  believe."  This  conspicuous  and  fuller 
repetition,  after  a  long  digression,  assures  us  that  in  these 
words  we  have  the  foundation-stone  of  the  Gospel  as  St. 
Paul  understood  and  preached  it.  And  this  inference  is 
confirmed  by  the  re-echoes  of  the  same  thought  in  verse 
24,  "justified  freely";  in  verse  25,  "propitiation  through 
faith";  in  verse  2(5,  "justifying  him  that  is  of  faith  of 
Jesus  "  ;  and  by  the  plain  restatement  of  the  same  teaching 
in  verse  28,  "  a  man  is  justified  by  faith  "  ;  in  verse  30, 
"  God  will  justify  the  circumcision  by  faith,  and  the  uncir- 
cumcision  through  faith  "  ;    and  in  chapter  iv.  5,   11,  24. 


3G0  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 

Indisputably  we  have  here  found  the  very  kernel  of  the 
Gospel  of  Paul. 

Across  this  bright  vision  of  salvation  is  once  more  for  a 
moment  flung  the  deep  shadow  which  rests  so  heavily  upon 
chapters  i.  18-iii.  20.  But  only  for  a  moment.  Evidently 
it  is  but  a  counterfoil  to  the  brightness  which  is  now  every- 
where around  us.  The  sad  words,  "  all  have  sinned,  and 
fall  short  of  the  glory  of  God,"  are  introduced  only  to  sup- 
port the  universal  purpose  asserted  in  the  foregoing  words, 
"for  all  that  believe."  St.  Paul  then  introduces,  in  a  par- 
ticipial sentence  dependent  on  the  words  just  quoted,  a  new 
topic  quite  different  from,  though  closely  related  to,  the 
previous  teaching  of  the  epistle. 

Now  for  the  first  time  the  death  of  Christ  comes  into  view. 
Only  after  St.  Paul  has  proved  that  all  men  are  under  con- 
demnation, and  has  announced  justification  for  all  through 
faith  in  Christ,  can  he  speak  of  justification  through  the 
death  of  Christ.  For  apart  from  these  earlier  doctrines,  this 
costly  means  of  salvation  is  needless  and  meaningless.  In 
verses  24-26  we  have  an  exposition,  the  fullest  which  the 
Bible  contains,  of  the  great  doctrine  that  salvation  comes 
to  believers  through  the  death  of  Christ  upon  the  cross. 

That  this  doctrine  is  introduced,  not  in  an  independent 
assertion,  but  in  a  subordinate  clause,  may  surprise  us. 
But  it  is  in  complete  harmony  with  St.  Paul's  mode  of 
thought.  By  uniting  in  one  sentence  and  in  logical  con- 
nection the  doctrine  that  "all  have  sinned"  with  justifi- 
cation by  the  free,  undeserved  favour  of  God,  and  through 
the  death  of  Christ,  he  teaches  that  the  one  doctrine 
implies  and  supports  the  other.  The  costliness  of  the 
blessing  is  here  represented  as  proving  how  far  man  had 
fallen.  Just  so  the  doctrine  of  universal  sin  is  adduced  in 
verse  23  as  an  explanation  of  justification  through  faith. 
By  thus  linking  these  doctrines  together,  St.  Paul  shows 
that  they  are  inseparably  connected. 


7.V  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  3G1 

The  meaning  of  the  word  jiistijied  is  placed  beyond  doubt 
by  its  frequent  use  in  the  LXX.  and  elsewhere  in  the  New 
Testament.  It  is  a  technical  legal  term  for  a  judge's  sen- 
tence, just  or  unjust,  in  a  man's  favour.  So  Deuteronomy 
XXV.  1,  "If  there  be  a  controversy  between  men  and  they 
come  to  judgment  .  .  .  then  they  shall  justify  the 
righteous  and  condemn  the  wicked  "  ;  and  Proverbs  xvii.  15, 
"  He  that  justifieth  the  wicked  and  he  that  condemneth  the 
righteous,  both  of  them  alike  are  an  abomination  to  the 
Lord."  Similarly  Isaiah  v.  23,  1  Kings  viii.  32,  2  Chronicles 
vi.  23,  Exodus  xxiii.  7,  Isaiah  1.  8.  Also,  as  a  rendering  of 
another  form  of  the  same  Hebrew  word,  Job  xxxii.  2,  "  He 
justified  himself  rather  than  God."  In  Matthew  xii.  37, 
Romans  ii.  13,  it  describes  the  acquittal  of  the  righteous  in 
the  day  of  judgment.  Compare  Luke  x.  29,  "  Wishing  to 
justify  himself";  chapter  vii.  20,  "They  justified  God"; 
ver.  35,  "  Wisdom  justified  by  her  children " ;  chapters 
xvi.  15,  xviii.  14. 

In  the  above  passages,  and  wherever  it  is  used  in  the 
Bible,  except  possibly  Daniel  xii.  3,  Isaiah  liii.  11,  leaving 
out  of  account  the  phrase  "justified  through  faith"  now 
under  investigation,  the  word  justify  cannot  possibly  mean 
to  make  a  man  actually  righteous ;  but  evidently  means 
by  thought,  word,  or  act,  to  treat  or  receive  him  as 
such. 

In  the  passage  before  us,  Romans  iii.  24,  St.  Paul  asserts 
that  we  are  justified,  as  a  free  gift,  by  the  undeserved  favour 
of  God,  and  by  means  of  the  redemption  which  is  in  Christ 
Jesus. 

The  word  rendered  redemption  is  cognate  to  that  rendered 
ransom  in  Matthew  xx.  28,  ]\Iark  x.  45.  It  is  found  in 
Romans  viii.  23,  1  Corinthians  i.  30,  Ephesians  i.  7,  14,  iv. 
30,  Colossians  i.  14,  Hebrews  ix.  15,  xi.  35,  Luke  xxi.  28; 
but  apparently  not  in  the  LXX.  The  corresponding  verb 
is  found  in  Exodus  xxi.  8,  "  He  shall  let  her  go-free-for-a 


3G2  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 

ransom  ;  and  in  Zephaniah  iii.  1,  but  not  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament. 

Already,  on  pages  6-8,  we  have  seen  that  the  word  ransom 
always  denotes  liberation,  and  usually  liberation  by  payment 
of  a  price.  The  verb  corresponding  to  the  word  now  before 
us  means  indisputably  in  Exodus  xxi.  8  liberation  on  pay- 
ment of  a  price  ;  and  this  seems  to  be  its  usual  meaning. 
But  both  substantive  and  verb  are  very  rare.  The  meaning 
of  the  word  in  the  New  Testament  must  be  determined  by 
its  context,  and  by  its  cognates  which  are  common  both  in 
New  Testament  and  in  LXX.  In  all  these  and  always,  as 
we  have  seen,  we  have  conspicuously  the  idea  of  liberation, 
and  frequently  that  of  liberation  by  a  price  paid. 

In  Komans  iii.  24  the  idea  of  liberation  is  already  sug- 
gested by  the  word  justified.  For  we  have  here  the  justi- 
fication of  those  whom  the  Law  condemned.  And  a  judge's 
sentence  in  a  criminal's  favour  is  followed  by  release. 
Consequently,  since  the  Gospel  announces  the  justification 
of  all  who  believe,  for  them  there  is  liberation.  In  this 
sense  justification  implies  redemption. 

The  use  of  this  last  word  by  St.  Paul  in  the  passage  be- 
fore us  recalls  at  once  Matthew  xx.  28,  "  To  give  His  life 
a  ransom  for  many  ";  and  1  Peter  i,  18,  19,  expounded  on 
page  185,  "  Ransomed  not  with  silver  or  gold  .  .  .  but 
with  precious  blood,  even  that  of  Christ."  In  these  pas- 
sages we  have  expressly  liberation  by  price.  At  the  close 
of  this  exposition  and  in  future  papers  we  shall  find  that 
this  idea  was  also  present  to  the  thought  of  St.  Paul. 

In  verse  25  the  Apostle  goes  on  to  speak  further  about 
Him  in  whom  this  redemption  takes  place,  "  Whom  God 
set  forth  as  a  ^propitiation.''  The  word  iXaar/jpiov  is  cog- 
nate to  i\a<T^i6<;  in  1  John  ii.  2,  iv.  10,  and  denotes  a  means, 
or  something  pertaining  to  a  means,  of  propitiation,  i.e. 
as  expounded  on  pages  122,  12;j,  a  means  by  which  a  sinner 
may  escape  from  the  penalty  due  to  his  sin.     As  such,  St. 


ly    THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  3G3 


Paul  now  asserts  that  God  set  fortli  Christ,  i.e.  set  Him 
conspicuously  before  the  eyes  of  men. 

The  phrase  iiropitiation  through  faith  asserts  that  the 
propitiation  becomes  effective  through  each  one's  own  faith, 
i.e.  that  through  faith  each  one  escapes  from  the  penalty 
due  to  his  sin.  This  is  but  a  restatement  of  the  foundation 
doctrine  of  verses  21,  22.  For,  if  God  receives  as  righteous 
all  who  believe,  then  by  faith  they  escape  punishment. 
The  insertion  of  the  words  through  faith  keeps  before  us 
the  great  doctrine  asserted  in  verse  22,  and  thus  reveals  its 
importance  in  the  thought  of  Paul. 

The  words  in  His  blood  recall  at  once  the  violent  death 
of  Christ  upon  the  cross.  They  may  be  connected  either 
with  faith,  or  with  propitiation,  or  again  with  set  forth  as 
a  propitiation.  The  word  faith  is  followed  by  the  pre- 
position eV  in  Ephesians  i.  15,  1  Timothy  iii.  13,  2  Timothy 
i.  13,  iii.  15,  but  not  elsewhere  in  the  New  Testament. 
Moreover,  nowhere  in  the  New  Testament  is  the  blood  of 
Christ  represented  as  the  object  of  saving  faith.  It  is 
therefore  better  to  join  these  words  (as  in  P.V.  text  though 
not  margin)  with  the  main  assertion  of  this  clause,  and  to 
understand  it  to  mean  that  God  set  forth  Christ,  covered 
with  His  own  blood,  before  the  eyes  of  men  that  He  might 
be  a  means  by  which  sinners  should  escape  the  due  punish- 
ment of  their  sins,  a  means  made  effective  by  each  one's 
own  faith.  But,  whatever  be  the  grammatical  connection, 
these  words  assert  plainly  and  conspicuously  that  the 
efficacy  of  the  means  of  salvation  used  by  God  lay  in  the 
shed  blood  and  violent  death  of  Christ.  Had  not  that  blood 
been  shed  on  Golgotha,  there  had  been  neither  faith  nor 
propitiation  "in  His  blood." 

The  word  i\aari]ptov  is  used  in  Exodus  xxv.  17,  18,  19, 
20,  22,  and  elsewhere  for  the  lid  covering  the  Ark  of  the 
Covenant.  This  use  of  the  word  derives  great  appropriate- 
ness  from  the  fact  that  before  and   upon  this  cover  was 


364  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 


sprinkled  the  blood  of  the  goat  slain  on  the  great  Day  of 
Atonement,  as  prescribed  in  Leviticus  xvi.  2,  13,  14,  15, 
v»'here  we  have  again  the  same  word.  In  this  sense,  with 
express  reference  to  the  tabernacle,  it  is  used  in  Hebrews 
ix.  5.  And  it  has  been  suggested,  e.g.  recently  by  Oltra- 
mare  in  his  valuable  commentary  on  the  epistle,  that  this 
is  its  reference  here.  This  exposition  implies  that  the 
mercy-seat  was  in  some  sense  a  symbol  of  Christ  as  set 
forth  in  His  blood.  But  of  such  symbolic  significance  we 
have  no  hint  in  the  Bible.  There  is  no  reference  here  to 
the  Ark  or  the  Tabernacle,  And  it  is  not  easy  to  see  what 
enrichment  such  reference  would  give  to  St.  Paul's  thought. 
And,  as  we  have  seen,  the  simple  sense,  as  expounded  above, 
makes  the  whole  passage  intelHgible.  Indeed,  if  we  accepted 
the  symbolic  sense,  we  should  only  have  to  look  upon  the 
mercy-seat  as  the  place  at  which  propitiation  was  annually 
made  by  the  sprinkling  of  blood  for  the  sins  of  the  people. 
So  that  either  exposition  would  give  practically  the  same 
result. 

Next  follows  a  statement  of  the  purpose  for  which  God 
set  forth  Christ  to  be  a  propitiation  in  His  blood,  viz.  "  for 
a  proof  of  His  righteousness."  These  last  words  can  be  no 
other  than  God's  attribute  of  righteousness,  as  His  purpose 
is  further  expounded  in  verse  2G,  "Himself  just  and  justi- 
fying." Similarly,  in  verse  5,  the  same  phrase  is  contrasted 
with  "our  unrighteousness,"  and  is  expounded  by  the  ques- 
tion, "  Is  God  righteous  who  inflicts  His  auger?"  Evidently 
St.  Paul  wishes  to  say  that  God  set  forth  Christ  covered 
with  His  own  blood  in  order  to  'give  proof  that  in  His 
government  of  the  world  He  acts  according  to  the  principles 
embodied  in  His  own  law.  For  this  is  the  righteousness 
of  a  ruler.  These  words  thus  differ  in  meaning  from  the 
same  phrase  in  verses  21,  22,  "  Pighteousness  of  God 
manifested  .  .  .  righteousness  of  God  through  faith," 
But  the  meaning  in  each  case  is  made  clear  by  the  context. 


IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  3G5 


The  word  rendered  proof  may  be  studied  in  2  Corinthians 
viii.  2-4,  "The  proof  of  your  love";  and  in  Philippians  i. 
28,  "  Proof  of  perdition  .  .  ,  of  salvation."  The  fear- 
lessness of  the  Christians  under  persecution  was  a  proof 
that  God  was  with  them  and  therefore  that  they  were  in 
the  way  of  salvation,  and  that  their  enemies  were  fighting 
against  God  and  were  therefore  in  a  way  leading  to  destruc- 
tion. 

To  the  purpose  just  asserted,  St.  Paul  now  adds  a  motive 
prompting  God  to  give  this  proof  of  His  righteousness, 
viz.  His  own  forbearance  towards  sins  committed  in  days 
gone  by  :  "  Because  of  the  passing  over  of  sins  before-com- 
mitted in  the  forbearance  of  God."  The  rare  word  Trdpeai^, 
seems  to  denote  a  letting  go  by,  as  distinguished  from  the 
not  uncommon  word  o(/)eo-t?  which  denotes  forgiveness,  or 
an  indulgent  delay  of  punishment ;  a  meaning  suggested 
by  the  words  following,  "In  the  forbearance  of  God." 
"  The  before-committed  sins  "  can  only  be  those  committed 
before  the  death  of  Christ.  The  due  and  announced 
punishment  of  sin  is  death.  And  justice  always  demands 
an  early  infliction  of  punishment.  To  permit  needless 
delay  of  punishment,  is  unjust  and  is  injurious  to  the  State. 
Yet  for  long  ages  sin  had  run  riot  on  earth,  even  among  the 
people  to  whom  God  had  given  a  written  law  prescribing 
death  as  the  penalty  of  sin.  That  those  whom  the  law 
condemned  to  die  were  permitted  to  live,  seemed  to  show 
that  the  punitive  justice  of  God  was  asleep.  St.  Paul  says 
that  this  long  forbearance  in  the  past  moved  God  to  set 
forth  Christ  as  a  propitiation  in  His  blood  in  order  to  give 
proof  in  the  present  time  of  His  righteousness,  which 
seemed  to  have  been  obscured  by  this  long-continued  for- 
bearance. That  this  purpose  is  stated  twice,  before  and 
after  the  mention  of  God's  forbearance,  reveals  its  im- 
portance in  the  thought  of  St.  Paul  and  in  his  present 
argument. 


3GG  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 

This  divine  purpose  b}^  no  means  implies  that  God  was 
under  obhgation  to  give  up  Christ  to  die,  but  only  that  in 
ages  gone  b}^  God  acted  as  He  would  not  have  done  had  He 
not  resolved  to  give  in  later  ages  this  great  manifestation 
of  His  righteousness  which  He  had  permitted  to  remain  for 
a  time  in  some  measure  overshadowed.  The  words  "  in 
the  present  season  "  contrast  conspicuously  His  action  in 
St.  Paul's  day  with  the  sins  committed  in  earlier  days. 

The  long  sentence  I  am  in  this  paper  endeavouring  to 
expound  concludes  with  a  statement  of  the  ultimate  pur- 
pose for  which  God  set  forth  Christ  as  a  propitiation  : 
"  That  He  may  be  Himself  righteous  and  a  justifier  of  him 
who  hath  faith  in  Jesus."  These  last  words  are  incapable 
of  exact  rendering  into  English.  "  Faith  of  Jesus  "  is,  as 
in  verse  22,  a  faith  of  which  He  is  the  personal  object. 
Practically  it  is  belief  of  the  word  and  promise  of  Jesus. 
The  man  whom  God  justifies  is  rov  iic  irla-reo)';  'Ir^aov,  i.e. 
one  whose  relation  to  God  is  determined  by,  and  in  this 
sense  derived  from,  faith  in  Christ.  So  verse  30  :  "  Who 
will  justify  the  circumcision  by  faith,"  BiKatcoaec  irepLrofMijv 
e/c  Trio-Tfo)?.  Of  such,  God  is  a  justifier  :  StKatouvTa  top  e-c 
TTiareco^;  lijaou.  St.  Paul  asserts  that  the  ultimate  aim  for 
which  God  gave  up  Christ  to  die  was  to  unite  in  Himself 
the  two  characters  of  being  "  Himself  righteous,"  and  re- 
ceiving as  righteous  those  who  have  faith  in  Christ.  In 
other  words-,  God  gave  Christ  to  die  in  order  to  reconcile 
with  His  own  justice  the  justification  of  believers. 

Notice  here  an  aim  slightly  different  from  that  set  forth 
in  the  words  foregoing,  "for  a  proof  of  His  righteousness." 
These  earlier  words  imply  that  apart  from  the  death  of 
Christ  the  righteousness  of  God  would  be  obscured  by  the 
justification  of  believers.  The  concluding  words  of  verse  2G 
imply  that  to  justify  sinners  without  some  such  propitiation 
as  that  here  described  would  be  actually  unrighteous. 

This  development  of  thought  is  a  legitimate  inference. 


7iV  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  3G7 

For  justice  ever  demands  to  be  made  conspicuously  mani- 
fest. A  judge  who,  without  strong  reason,  permits  his 
justice  even  to  be  obscured  is  no  good  pattern  of  justice. 

The  above  exposition  imphes  that  the  death  of  Christ  was 
absolutely  needful  for  man's  salvation,  and  that  this  neces- 
sity lay  in  the  justice  of  God,  which  forbad  the  justification 
of  sinners  except  by  means  of  the  propitiation  found  in  the 
blood  of  Christ.  For  God  cannot  possibly  be  unjust.  Con- 
sequently, if  by  the  death  of  Christ  God  harmonized  with 
His  own  justice  the  pardon  of  sin,  He  thus  made  possible 
that  which  otherwise  would  have  been  impossible.  More- 
over, if  this  end  could  have  been  attained  by  a  less  costly 
sacrifice,  we  may  infer  with  confidence  that  God  would  not 
have  paid  for  it  a  price  infinitely  and  needlessly  great. 
Indeed,  had  He  done  so,  it  would  have  been  no  proof  of  His 
love;  for  genuine  love  never  prompts  a  needless  sacrifice. 
In  other  words,  the  passage  before  us  implies  that  to  fallen 
man  the  only  way  of  salvation  was  through  the  cross  of 
Christ,  and  that  every  other  way  was  closed  by  the  justice 
of  God ;  that  in  the  very  nature  of  God  there  was  a  barrier 
to  the  justification  of  sinners,  and  that  God  Himself  broke 
down  this  barrier  by  giving  Christ  to  die. 

This  plain  inference  cannot  be  evaded  by  expounding  the 
words  eU  to  elvcu  aurbv  hiKcuov  as  describing  not  a  purpose, 
but  only  an  actual  result  of  God's  surrender  of  Christ  to 
die,  "  so  that  He  is  Himself  just  and  a  justifier,"  etc.  For 
the  preposition  et?  followed  by  an  infinitive  mood  with  the 
neuter  article  is  constantly  used  in  Greek  and  in  the  New 
Testament  to  describe  a  purpose  ;  so  Komans  i.  11,  "That  ye 
may  be  strengthened";  chapter  viii.  29,  ei^  to  elvcu  Trpcor., 
"  That  He  maybe  first-born  among  many  brethren"  ;  xi.  11, 
"In  order  to  provoke  them";  xii,  2;  and  elsewhere  fre- 
quently. To  denote  a  mere  result,  the  Greek  language  has 
the  common  conjunction,  coare  with  infinitive  or  indicative, 
as  in  chapter  vii.  4  and  6.     In  verse  25,  €l<:  H^Sei^Lv  indis- 


368  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 


putably  denotes  a  purpose  ;  and  it  is  dil'licult  to  give  to  the 
same  preposition  another  sense  in  verse  26.  Moreover,  this 
exposition,  even  if  grammatically  admissible,  would  not 
greatly  change  the  practical  significance  of  the  sentence. 
For  if  the  death  of  Christ  has,  as  matter  of  mere  result, 
harmonized  the  justification  of  believers  with  the  justice  of 
God,  then  through  His  death  that  which  without  it  would 
have  been  unjust  and  therefore  impossible  has  become  just 
and  actual.  So  remarkable  a  result  could  hardly  have  come 
without  a  deliberate  design  of  God,  In  other  words,  the 
result  implies  the  design. 

Nor  would  the  practical  significance  of  these  words  be 
much  altered  if  we  gave  to  them  a  merely  logical  sense,  "  in 
order  that  He  may  be  seen  to  be  just  and  a  justifier,"  etc. 
For  if  to  justify  sinners  by  mere  prerogative  was  not  in 
itself  inconsistent  with  the  justice  of  God,  it  is  difficult  to 
conceive  that  its  justice  was  incapable  of  demonstration 
except  at  the  infinite  cost  of  the  death  of  Christ.  In  any 
case,  God  could  not  possibly  permit  His  justice  to  be  per- 
manently obscured.  And  if,  as  St.  Paul  here  asserts,  God 
gave  Christ  to  die  in  order  to  vindicate  His  justice,  we  infer 
with  confidence  that  for  this  end  nothing  less  than  this 
costly  sacrifice  was  sufficient,  and  that  consequently  the 
death  of  Christ  was  demanded  by  the  justice  of  God.  This 
being  so,  there  is  no  reason  why  we  should  not  give  to  these 
plain  words  their  simple  meaning. 

We  have  now  learnt,  by  careful  exposition  of  his  own 
words,  that  St.  Paul  taught  that  God  gave  Christ  to  die  in 
order  to  harmonize  with  His  own  justice  the  justification  of 
believers.  If  so,  their  justification  was  impossible  apart 
from  the  death  of  Christ ;  and  the  impossibility  lay  in  the 
essential  righteousness  of  God. 

These  results,  derived  from  our  examination  of  the  ulti- 
mate purpose  of  the  death  of  Christ  as  set  forth  in  verse  26, 
will  explain  the  language  used  in  verses  25  and  24,  and  the 


IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  369 

New  Testament  teaching  expounded  in  my  earlier  papers. 
For  if,  as  we  have  just  seen,  St.  Paul  taught  that  the  justi- 
fication of  sinners  was  impossible  apart  from  the  death  of 
Christ,  and  that  God  gave  Christ  to  die  in  order  to  remove 
this  impossibility  and  to  save  all  who  believe,  then  is  His 
death  the  divinely  given  means  of  their  salvation  ;  and  St. 
Paul  could  correctly  say  that  God  set  forth  Christ  to  be  a 
propitiation  through  faith  in  His  blood.  For  through  His 
death  and  by  God's  design  believers  escape  the  due  penalty 
of  their  sins.  We  understand  also  1  John  ii.  2,  "  and  Him- 
self is  a  propitiation  for  our  sins,  and  not  for  ours  only,  but 
also  for  all  the  world  "  ;  and  chapter  iv.  10,  "  sent  His  Son 
to  be  a  propitiation  for  our  sins." 

We  understand  now  "  the  redemption  which  is  in  Christ 
Jesus "  in  verse  24.  For  we  have  learnt  that  whereas 
apart  from  the  death  of  Christ  forgiveness  was  impossible, 
now  through  His  death  all  who  believe  are  justified.  Con- 
sequently in  Him  there  is  liberation  from  the  guilt  and 
stain  and  bondage  of  sin,  and  this  liberation  has  cost  the 
price  of  (Matthew  xx.  28,  Mark  x.  45)  His  life  and  of  (1 
Peter  i.  19)  His  precious  blood.  These  are  our  ransom  as 
being  the  costly  means  of  our  salvation. 

This  exposition  relieves  us  from  the  difficulty  of  saying 
to  whom  was  paid  the  ransom  price  of  our  salvation.  It 
was  paid  to  no  one.  The  phraseology  before  us  is  only  a 
metaphorical  and  expressive  mode  of  asserting  the  costli- 
ness of  our  salvation.  The  metaphor  underlying  this 
phraseology  is  one  of  the  most  frequent  in  human  language 
and  thought.  Whatever  is  obtained  with  difficulty,  with 
effort  or  toil  or  pain,  we  speak  of  as  costing  this  effort  or 
toil  or  pain,  even  when  no  one  receives  the  price  we  pay. 
And  only  in  this  sense  is  the  death  of  Christ  the  ransom  of 
our  life. 

We  understand  also  the  absolute  necessity  of  the  death 
of  Christ  as  asserted  in  Matthew  xvi.  21,  "  He  must  needs 

VOL.  V.  24 


370  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 


go  awiiy  to  Jerusalem  .  .  .  and  be  put  to  death."  For 
if,  apart  from  the  death  of  Christ,  the  justice  of  God  forbad 
the  justification  of  sinners,  His  death  was  absolutely 
needful  for  the  work  He  came  to  accomplish.  This  neces- 
sity moved  the  great  Teacher  to  put  Himself,  of  His  own 
free  will  and  in  the  prime  of  life,  in  the  hands  of  men  who 
He  knew  would  kill  Him.  Thus  are  explained  all  the 
passages  expounded  in  my  earlier  papers  which  assert  or 
imply  the  necessity  of  the  death  of  Christ  for  our  salvation, 
of  those  which  speak  of  Him  as  deliberately  laying  down 
His  life,  and  of  those  which  call  attention  to  His  death 
as  in  a  special  sense,  and  as  distinguished  from  His 
example  and  teaching,  a  means  of  our  salvation.  In  other 
words,  the  passage  now  before  us  is  a  key  which  unlocks 
the  teaching  of  the  entire  New  Testament  about  the  death 
of  Christ  in  its  relation  to  the  salva,tion  of  men. 

The  correctness  of  our  exposition  of  this  passage  will  be 
confirmed  in  subsequent  papers  by  the  logical  and  practical 
inferences  which  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  St.  Paul 
derives  from  the  fundamental  statement  now  expounded, 
and  by  other  passages  in  other  epistles  in  which  we  shall 
find  similar  teaching. 

It  must  be  admitted  that  the  above  explanation  needs  to 
be  itself  explained.  It  raises  questions  as  serious  as  those 
which  it  answers.  We  still  ask.  Why  cannot  a  just  ruler 
pardon  by  mere  prerogative  ?  And  with  still  greater  per- 
plexity we  ask,  How  does  the  death  of  the  Innocent 
harmonize  with  the  justice  of  God  the  pardon  of  the 
f uilty  ?  These  difficult  questions  we  must  postpone  until 
we  have  completed  our  study  of  the  teaching  of  the  New 
Testament  on  the  purpose  and  the  significance  of  the  death 
of  Christ. 

Meanwhile  something  has  been  accomplished.  We  have 
found,  in  St.  Paul's  most  systematic  exposition  of  the 
Gospel  of  Christ  and  immediately  following  his  enunciation 


IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  371 

of  his  fundamental  doctrine  of  justification  through  faith, 
a  careful  statement  setting  forth  the  relation  of  the  death 
of  Christ  to  this  great  doctrine.  And  we  have  seen  that 
this  statement  gives  unity  and  intelligibility  to  the  teaching 
on  this  subject  of  the  four  Gospels,  the  Book  of  Acts,  the 
Epistles  of  Peter,  and  the  Book  of  Revelation.  In  other 
papers  we  shall  find  that  the  teaching  of  St.  Paul  just 
expounded  underlies  his  entire  thought  touching  the  death 
of  Christ  in  its  relation  to  the  salvation  of  men. 

In  my  next  paper  we  shall  consider  the  teaching  of  the 
remainder  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  and  that  of  the 
Epistles  to  the  Galatians  and  the  Corinthians. 

Joseph  Agar  Beet. 


372 


THE   PBESENT  POSITION   OF   THE   JOHANNEAN 
QUESTION. 

VI.  Partition  and  Derivation  Theories. 

The  position  of  things  in  the  Liberal  camp  at  the  present 
moment  is  this.  There  is  a  small  group  of  Irreconcilables 
whose  literary  defence  of  their  views  is  really  not  such  as 
to  claim  serious  consideration.  Thoma  is  the  most  volu- 
minous ;  Pfleiderer  the  most  distinguished.  There  are 
however  two  Pfieiderers,  the  theologian  and  the  critic. 
Pfleiderer  the  skilful  and  lucid  exponent  not  so  much  of 
the  history  as  of  the  logical  relations  of  doctrine  is  one 
thing,  Pfleiderer  the  historical  critic  is  another.  In  this 
latter  capacity  I  am  afraid  that  if  all  criticism  were  like 
his,  the  character  which  it  bears  in  some  quarters  would 
not  be  undeserved.  For  any  power  of  estimating  historical 
evidence  or  discriminating  between  the  relative  value  of 
verified  fact  and  hypothesis  we  look  in  vain.  Confident 
assertion  does  duty  for  proof  where  proof  is  most  needed. 
I  may  have  been  unfortunate,  but  in  the  parts  of  Urchris- 
tenthum  which  I  have  read  there  were  more  disputable  pro- 
positions than  paragraphs,  sometimes  even  than  sentences. 
Only  some  eleven  pages  (pp.  77(3-780)  are  given  directly 
to  the  question  of  the  authorship  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 
In  this  Dr.  Pfleiderer  sees  neither  mystery  nor  difficulty. 
He  will  not  hear  of  any  half  measures.  The  Gospel 
clearly  comes  after  a  group  of  Deutero-Pauline  writings 
which  belong  to  the  first  decades  of  the  second  century — 
the  writings  attributed  to  St.  Luke  and  the  Epistles  to  the 
Hebrews  and  Ephesians. 

We  remember  by  the  way  that  the  first  of  these  Epistles 
is  quoted  at  length  in  the  Epistle  of  Clement  of  Bome, 
which  the  great  majority  of  critics  with  clearly  preponderant 
probability  place  in  the  year  95  or  96  ;  but  the  mere  fact 


THE  JOHANNEAN  QUESTION.  373 

that  it  quotes  Hebrews  makes  Pfleiderer  remove  it  into  the 
second  century,  though  he  has  only  a  "perhaps"  for  the 
date  of  Hebrews  itself. 

The  Fourth  Gospel  was  written  between  Barcochba  and 
Justin  (135-158  a.d,  according  to  Pfleiderer's  dating ;  a 
recent  writer,  Kriiger,  places  the  First  Apology  on  which  the 
question  turns  in  183  a.d..  Dr.  Horfc  c.  14G).  The  Gospel 
was  written  at  Ephesus^  by  a  single  author,  who  from  the 
miracles  to  which  he  gives  admission  cannot  have  been 
either  the  Apostle  or  a  disciple  of  the  Apostle,  but  was 
a  nameless  person  who  sought  to  invest  his  work  with 
Apostolic  authority ;  the  ideas  are  largely  derived  from 
Philo,  and  a  great  part  of  the  narrative  is  pure  allegory. 

Again  I  would  ask  the  reader  to  recall  and  compare  with 
this  the  external  and  internal  evidence  as  it  has  been  stated 
in  previous  papers. 

The  great  mass  of  Liberal  opinion  in  its  more  reasonable 
exponents  is  so  alive  to  the  weight  of  the  arguments  for 
the  genuineness  of  the  Gospel  that  it  is  trending  more  and 
more  in  the  direction  of  a  compromise  ;  it  is  more  and 
more  seeking  for  some  solution  which  shall  not  cut  the 
Gospel  adrift,  but  shall  connect  it  by  some  tie,  stronger  or 
weaker,  with  the  beloved  Apostle. 

I  spoke  in  my  lirst  paper  of  the  double  form  which  this 
solution  was  taking.  There  are  some  who  divide  up  the 
Gospel  into  sections  and  assign  by  far  the  greater  number 
directly  to  St.  John,  but  the  remainder  away  from  him. 
There  are  others  who  contend  that  no  part  of  the  Gospel 
was  actually  committed  to  writing  by  the  Apostle,  but  that 
the  whole  is  the  work  of  one  of  bis  disciples,  drawing  upon 
the  tradition  which  he  had  heard  from  his  master. 

When  it  is  a  question  of  dividing  the  Gospel,  and  saying 
that  this  part  is  genuine  and  that  not,  we  naturally  think 
of  the  narratives  and  the  discourses,  and  we  are  reminded 
of  the  way  in  which  the  two  most  eminent  literary  critics 


374  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 


who  have  dealt  with  the  Gospel  took  opposite  sides  on  this 
point. 

"  M.  Kenan,"  writes  our  own  j\Litthcw  Arnold,  "  often  so  ingenious  as 
■well  as  eloquent,  says  tliat  the  nai-rative  and  incidents  iu  the  Fourth 
(rospel  arc  probably  in  the  main  historical,  the  discourses  invented ! 
Eeverse  the  proposition  and  it  Avould  be  more  plausible.  The  narra- 
tive, so  meagre,  and  skijiping  so  unaccountably  backwards  and  for- 
wards between  Galilee  and  Jerusalem,  might  well  be  thought,  not 
indeed  invented,  but  a  matter  of  inflnitely  little  care  and  attention  to 
the  writer  of  the  Gospel,  a  mere  slight  framework  in  which  to  set  the 
doctrine  and  discourses  of  Jesus.  The  doctrine  and  discoui'ses  of 
Jesus,  on  the  other  hand,  cannot  iu  the  main  be  the  writer's,  because 
iu  the  main  they  arc  clearly  out  of  his  reach."' 

It  is  easy  to  see  what  is  in  the  mind  of  both  writers. 
M.  Kenan,  the  skilled  Orientalist,  who  had  himself  made 
the  pilgrimage  to  Palestine,  and  who  has  always  a  quick 
though  not  always  a  sure  eye  for  the  play  of  human  nature, 
cannot  resist  the  indications  in  the  Gospel  of  true  local 
colour  and  reality.  On  the  other  hand,  Matthew  Arnold, 
the  charm  of  whose  writings  consists  in  his  instinctive 
delight  in  and  unfailing  response  to  the  higher  expression 
of  the  things  of  the  spirit,  sees  at  once  that  the  Johannean 
discourses  have  in  them  something  which  is  above  the  level 
even  of  an  Apostle. 

The  recent  attempts  to  work  out  in  detail  the  separation 
of  the  two  elements,  that  which  is  original  from  that  which 
is  not  original,  in  the  Gospel  of  St.  John,  do  not  follow  the 
dividing  line  of  discourse  and  narrative.-  And  yet  it  is 
rather  remarkable  that  the  most  important  of  these 
attempts  all  seem  to  make  a  point  of  removing  the  chief 
stumbling-block  in  the  eyes  of  Matthew  Arnold,  the  skip- 
ing  of  the  narrative  backwards  and   forwards  from  Jeru- 

'  Literature  and  Dogma  (London,  1873),  p.  170. 

2  The  earlier  partition  theories  of  Weisse  and  Scbeukel  seem  to  liave  gone 
on  the  principle  of  keeping  the  discourses  and  rejecting  the  history,  or  at 
least  referring  it  to  a  disciple  :  vid,  Bleelc-Mangold,  EinleitiDi'i,  p.  202  f. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  QUESTION.  375 


salem  to  Galilee  and  from  Galilee  to  Jerusalem.  They 
do  it  however  hardly  for  this,  or  for  the  same  reason. 
Wendt  gets  rid  of  the  Galiloean  episodes  in  order  that  he 
may  throw  all  the  discourses  to  the  end  of  our  Lord's  life, 
where  he  thinks  that  they  are  in  place  and  in  keeping 
with  the  main  outlines  of  the  narrative  in  the  other 
Gospels.^  There  is,  I  confess,  to  me  something  attractive 
in  this,  though  we  may  question  whether  it  justifies  the 
use  of  the  knife  quite  so  freely.  It  is  a  less  violent  method 
to  explain  the  facts  by  what  I  have  ventured  to  call  the 
process  of  foreshortening,  or  anticipation  of  later  utter- 
ances on  earlier  occasions,  to  which  the  mind  of  the  aged 
Evangelist  might  naturally  be  liable. 

Delff  is  not  thinking  of  the  distinction  between  earlier 
and  later,  but  he  has  arrived  at  the  conclusion  that  the 
author  was  a  native  of  Jerusalem,  a  member  of  one  of  the 
high-priestly  families  ;  and  it  is  therefore  natural  to  him 
to  make  the  range  of  vision  bounded  by  the  horizon  of 
Jerusalem.  He  thinks  that  additions  were  made  to  the 
original  document  with  the  view  of  harmonizing  it  (1) 
with  the  Galilasan  tradition,  established  through  the  other 
Gospels ;  (2)  with  the  current  Chiliastic  expectations ;  (8) 
with  the  philosophy  of  Alexandria.-  There  is  a  touch 
here  of  the  "vigour  and  rigour"  which  Matthew  Arnold 
noted  as  a  tendency  of  German  criticism.  Even  if  we 
believed  that  the  author  of  the  Gospel  was  a  dweller  in 
Jerusalem,  it  still  would  not  be  beyond  the  bounds  of 
possibility  that  he  should  know — and  that  from  personal  ex- 
perience— what  passed  in  Galilee.  It  is  also  not  so  unheard 
of  for  the  same  mind  to  entertain  trains  of  thought  on  two 
different  planes  at  the  same  time,  one  it  may  be  inherited, 
the  other  a  product  of  its  own  inward  reflexion  and  develop- 
ment. And  lastly,  we  have  seen  it  to  be  not  so  certain  that 
the  author  introduces  the  Alexandrian  philosophy  at  all. 

'  Lchrc  Jesu,  p.  289.  -  Das  vlcrte  Evang.,  p.  13. 


376  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 


These  considerations  go  far  to  do  away  with  the  necessity 
of  assuming  that  the  Gospel  has  heen  interpolated.  Still 
it  may  be  of  some  interest  in  itself  and  may  possibly  serve 
a  useful  purpose  in  the  future  to  compare  the  schemes 
arrived  at  by  two  different  writers  quite  independently.  As 
there  is  a  still  further  coincidence  with  the  older  writer, 
Schweizer,  I  add  his  scheme  from  Archdeacon  Watkins' 
Bampton  Lectures,  p.  249. 

Taiulak  YiEfl'  OF   Pautitiox   Theories   as  Applied  to   tue   ForuTu 

Gospel. 

Sections  Su]iposed  to  he  Interpolated. 

Alex.  i.  21f.,  Elias  or  the  Prophet. 

Schweizer,  ii.  1-12,  Marriage  at  Cana. 

1841.  iv.  4-i-51,  Keception  in  (ialilee  ;  Xoble- 

man's  Son. 
tI.  1-26,  Miracle  of  5,000. 
xvi.    30,    "Now    we    know    that    Thou 

kuowest  all  things." 
xviii.  9,  Xone  lost. 

xix.  35-37,  Witness  of  Blood  and  Water, 
xxi..  Supplemental  Chapter. 
H.H.AA^endt.      i      0-8,     15,      i.  19-34,  Witness  of  Baptist. 
1880.  Witness  85,  52,  Messiahship  exhibited. 

of  Baptist.      ii.  1-12,  Marriage  at  Cana,  a    Sign  of 
Messiahs])  ip. 
21,  Comment  by  Evangelist, 
iii.  26,  "None  can  do  these  signs." 
>5,  vbaros  KM. 

22-iv.  3,  Baptist's  Discourse, 
iv.    10  part,    11,    1-5-18    (?),    Samaritan 
Husband. 
25-20,  Messiahship  declared. 
276-30,  356,  39-42,  Narrative  Setting. 
43-54,  Eeception  in  Galilee. 
V.    1-16,    Modified    from    Original     by 
Reminiscence  of  Mark  ii.  10  If. 
28,  29,  Bodily  Eosurrection. 
33,  34  (.'*),  Deputation  to  John. 
vi.  1-26,  Miracle  of  5,000. 

39,  40,  44,  54,  "  I  will  raise  him  at  the 
last  dav." 


THE  JOHANNEAN  QUESTION.  377 


H.  H.  Wciidt,     i.     (3-8,    15,      vi.  59,  Syuagogue  at  Cai)ei'ii;uini. 
1886.  Witness  62,  Ascension  a  Scandal. 

of  Baptist.  646,  70,  71,  Tlie  Traitor. 

vii.  1,  2,  8-14,  Expanded  Narrative. 
20,  21a,  "  Thou  hast  a  devil." 
30-32,   36f.,   37a,    39,    44-52,    mostly 

Narrative  Insertions. 
63-Tiii,  11,  Tericope  AclaUerce. 
viii.   20a,   Treasury;    30,  31,  Mar}-  Be- 
lieves. 
ix.  1-3,  6-31,  Narrative  of  Blind  Man. 
X.  19-21  (perhaps),  22,  23  (perhaps),  39, 

40-42,  Narrative  Insertions,  etc. 
xi.,  l-7a,  11-15, 17-20,  24,  28-46  (mainly), 
Raising    of     Lazarus    (narrative 
portion). 
47-xii.     19,     Epliraim  ;     Supper     at 
Bethany,  etc. 
xii.  286-30,  Voice  from  Heaven. 

37,  39-43,  476,  40,  "Last  Day." 
xiii.    11,  18f.,  21-31rt,   The   Traitor  (cf. 

Mark  xiv.  17-21). 
xvi.  13,  Koi  TO  tpx^ofieva  dvayytXti  vfjuv. 
xviii.-xx.  (except  xviii.  3Db-'-'>8a,  xix.   9- 
11a). 
Hugo  Delff,        i.    1-6,    The      ii.  1-11,  Marriage  at  Cana. 

1890.  Logos    as  17,  20,  21,  Comments  of  Evangelist 

Life     and      iv.  44,  Reception  in  Galilee. 
Light.  46-54,  Nobleman's  Son. 

9-19,       The      V.  19-30,  Judgment  and  Resurrection. 
Logos  In-      vi.  1-30,  Miracle  of  5,000.     [Wanting  in 
caruate.  Celsus'  Copy,  l)as  vicrte  Evang., 

p.  14.] 
37-40,  Judgment  and  Resurrection. 
44,  Resurrection. 
54, 

59,  Synagogue  at  Capernaum, 
vii.  39,  Comment, 
xii.  16,  Comment. 

26-31,  Voice  from  Heaven. 
33,  Comment, 
xiii.  20,  "He  that  receiveth  whomsoever 

I  shall  send."' 
XX.  11-19,  Mai-y  at  the  Sepulchre, 
xxi.,  Sujiplemental  Chapter. 


378  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 

We  have  seen  that  the  arguments  for  the  hypothesis  of 
interpolation  are  far  from  convincing.  It  remains  to  ask 
whether  there  are  not  also  valid  arguments  against  the 
hypothesis.  The  v^^eight  of  opinion  is  clearly  against  it. 
Schiirer  must  be  reckoned  on  the  adverse  side.^  On  the 
same  side  we  might  for  once  quote  Pfleiderer,  though  the 
second  half  of  his  sentence  contains  an  unpardonable  ex- 
aggeration, abundantly  refuted  in  Wendt's  recent  volume  : 

"  These  Jolianuean  discourses  are  so  much  of  one  i^iece  (aus  einem 
Guss),  form  and  substance  are  so  inseparable,  and  the  discourses  again 
are  so  entirely  one  with  the  narratives  which  introduce  or  illustrate 
them  that  it  is  impossible  to  separate  the  one  from  the  other  :  if  one 
does  eliminate  from  these  discourses  all  that  does  not  suit  the  jjcrsou- 
ages  of  the  history  because  it  belongs  to  later  theological  reflexion, 
what  then  will  Ije  left  of  them  still  remaining?  "  - 

But  the  most  weightily  expressed  opinion  is  that  of 
Holtzmann : 

"  However,  all  attempts  to  draw  a  clearly  distinguishable  line  of  de- 
marcation, whether  it  be  between  earlier  and  later  strata,  or  between 
genuine  and  not  genuine,  historical  and  unhistorical  elements,  must 
always  be  wrecked  against  the  solid  and  compact  unity  which  the 
work  presents,  both  in  regard  to  language  and  in  regard  to  matter. 
Apart  from  the  interpolations  indicated  Ijy  the  history  of  the  Text  (v.  4, 
vii.  o3-viii.  11),  and  from  the  last  chapter  added  by  way  of  supplement, 
the  work  is,  both  in  form  and  substance,  both  in  arrangement  and  in 
range  of  ideas,  an  organic  whole  without  omissions  or  interpolations, 
the  "seamless  coat,"  which  can  be  parted  or  torn,  but  only  by  a  happy 
cast  allotted  to  its  rightful  owner  (so  especially  Hilgeufeld  and 
Strauss)."  •'' 

This  "solid  and  compact  unity"  alike  in  language,  in 
structure,  and  in  thought,  is  indeed  the  keynote  of  the 
Gospel,  and  marks  the  fatal  objection  to  any  theory  of  parti- 
tion. I  have  little  doubt  that  the  more  closely  the  Gospel 
is  studied  the  more  conclusively  will  this  be  proved.  I 
cannot  stay  to  go  into  much   detail  at  present,  but  a  few 

1  ]\,rln\(j,  pp.  LQ,  ;j(>.  -  VrchrhiiTAhum,  p.  781. 

•'  EiitlcititiKj  (2nd  cd.),  )>.  157. 


THE  JOIIANNEAN  QUESTION.  379 

remarks  may  be  made  to  show  the  general  direction  that  the 
argument  would  take. 

In  the  first  place,  it  may  be  noted  that  Wendt  by  getting 
rid  of  so  much  of  the  narrative  portion  of  the  Gospel  sacri- 
fices just  that  which  comes  to  us  with  the  highest  cre- 
dentials as  history.  It  sacrifices  all  the  first  chapter  after 
the  prologue  with  the  admirable  scene  between  St.  John  and 
the  deputation,  and  the  other  scene  hardly  less  graphic  and 
natural,  which  shows  how  disciples  gathered  round  a 
master.  It  sacrifices  not  all,  but  many  features  in  the  strik- 
ing seventh  chapter  which  takes  us  down  among  the  crowd 
and  up  into  the  conclave  of  the  Pharisees  and  lets  us  hear 
their  comments.  It  sacrifices  a  fresh  and  lifelike  sketch,  full 
of  Jewish  touches,  the  healing  of  the  blind  man  in  chapter 
ix.  It  sacrifices  not  only  much  of  the  earlier  part  of  chapter 
ix.,  but  the  last  section  which  is  on  a  par  with  chapter  vii. 
as  a  picture  of  the  surroundings  among  which  Jesus  moved. 
It  sacrifices  the  hearing  before  Annas,  so  probable  and  so 
characteristic ;  it  sacrifices  many  characteristic  details  in 
the  hearing  before  Pilate,  and  indeed  leaves  but  little  remain- 
ing of  the  story  of  the  Passion.  Along  with  these  larger 
pieces  of  narrative  it  cuts  out  a  number  of  smaller  parti- 
culars on  which  we  rely,  and  have  seen  reason  to  rely  : 
Bethany  beyond  Jordan,  ^Enon  and  Salim,  the  pool  of 
Bethesda  or  Bezetha  with  its  five  colonnades,  the  treasury, 
the  feast  of  dedication,  perhaps  Solomon's  porch,  Kedron, 
and  so  on.  All  these  are  points  which,  it  seems  to  me,  that 
a  historian  with  an  eye  for  facts  would  be  least  willing  to  let 

go- 

Delft  does  not  make  this  mistake,  and  less  exception  can 
be  taken  to  his  procedure  on  a  broad  view  of  the  case.  But 
he  cuts  off  the  prologue  which  forms  such  a  fitting  and 
majestic  vestibule  to  the  rest  of  the  Gospel.  He  inverts 
the  view  of  Baur  and  his  school,  which  made  all  the  rest  of 
the  Gospel  a  dramatizing  or  embodying  in  action  of  the 


380 


THE  PRESENT  POSITION   OF 


great  leading  ideas  of  the  prologue.  And  yet  stripped  of 
its  exaggeration,  there  was  too  much  truth  in  that  view  for 
it  to  be  lightly  abandoned.  It  is  impossible  to  take  up  Delff's 
version  of  the  Gospel  without  a  sense  of  mutilation. 

An  argument  like  this  may  be  thought  somewhat  sub- 
jective in  its  character.  But  when  these  supposed  interpo- 
lations are  examined  they  will  be  found  to  be  full  of  cross- 
references  pointing  backwards  or  forwards  and  indissolubly 
linking  the  portions  rejected  to  those  received  as  genuine. 
The  narrative  of  St.  John  is  so  direct  and  simple  that  cha- 
racteristic expressions  are  less  easily  detected  in  it;  but  even 
so  the  passages  which  are  alleged  to  be  interpolations  yield 
too  many  to  be  safely  set  aside.  It  would  be  wearisome  and 
I  confess  I  think  unnecessary  to  go  over  the  whole  ground, 
but  a  few  specimens  may  be  given  from  the  first  two 
chapters. 

Cross-Referexces 


from  passages  supposed  to  be  ix- 

terpolated  to 
Delff. 

i.  4.     "  In  Him  was  life." 


i.  4.     "  The  light  of  men." 


i.  r>.     Lis^ht  in  darkness. 


i.  5.      T]  (TKOTia  ov  Karfka^ev. 

i.  10.  "  He  was  in  the  world, 
and  the  world  was  made  by 
Him,  and  the  world  knew 
Him  not." 

The  structure  in  triplets  ivhich  is 
very  viarlied  in  this  context, 
also  underlies  many  other 
passages. 


PASSAGES   RETAINED    AS    GEN'UIXE. 


xi.  25,  xiv.  6.  "I  am  the  life." 
cf.  V.  40,  vi.  35,  X.  10,  etc. 
fcor;  occurs  36  times  and  is  very 
characteristic. 

viii.  12,  ix.  5.  "I  am  the  light  of 
the  world."  (pas  22  times  in 
■    the  Gospel. 

xii.  46.  Light  and  darkness  :  cf. 
iii.  19,  viii.  12,  xii.  35.  a-Korla 
also  characteristic. 

xii.  35.     nf]  aKOTui  KaToXd^i]. 

xvii.  25.  "  The  woi'ld  hath  not 
known  Thee,  but  I  have  known 
Thee,  and  these  have  known 
that  Thou  hast  sent  Me." 


THE  JOHANNEAN  QUESTION. 


381 


i.  10.     *'  He  ■\vas  in  the  world." 


i.  10.     "  The  world  knew    Him 
not." 


i.  11.      €tj  TO.  i'Sta. 

i.  11.     o'l  tSiot. 

i.  12.     TiKva  Q(ov  yfvicrdai. 


i.  13.     "  Born  not  of  blood,"  etc. 

i.  14.     "  Was  made  flesh." 

i.  1-i.     '•  We  beheld  His  glory." 


i.  14. 


/lioj/oyfi/ovs  napa  narpos. 


1.  17.     "The  law  Avas  given  by 

Moses." 
i.  17.     "Truth  by  Jesus  Christ." 


i.  18.     "  No      man     hath     seen 

God." 
i.  18.     "  Only-begotten." 
i.  18.      "  He       hath       declared 

Him." 

i.  18.      eKflfos  (^rjyrjvaTO, 


ii.  4.     "  Woman,  what  have  I  to 
do  with  thee?" 


iii.  10.  "Thej  light  is  come  into 
the  world  ;  cf.  ix.  5,  39,  xi.  27, 
xvi.  28,  etc.  Koafios  77  times 
■in  the  Gospel,  3  times  each  in 
St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke. 

xiv.  7.  '"The  Avorld  cannot  re- 
ceive .  .  .  neither  knoweth 
Him:  cf.  xiv.  19,  xv.  18,  xvii. 
14. 

xvi.  32,  xix.  27.    eis-  ra  Ibia;  viii.  44, 

(K  TOiV  l8io)V. 

xiii.  1.     Tovs  l8iovs  ;  cf.  xv.  10. 

1  John  iii.  1.  'iva  TtKva  Qeov 
KXrjBcopfv ;  cf.  John  xi.  52. 
[Dr.  Delff  ivould  probably  re- 
fer the  Ep.  not  to  the  author  hut 
to  the  redactor  of  Gospel : 
still  the  coincidence  is  interest- 
ing.'] 

iii.  5.  "  Except  a  man  be  born 
.     .     .     of  the  Spirit,"  etc. 

viii.  40.  "  A  man  (Jwdpairov)  that 
hath  told  you  the  truth. 

xi.  40.  "  Thou  shouldst  see  the 
glory  of  God";  cf  ii.  11  [re- 
jected],  xii.  41,  xvii.  5,  22,  44. 

iii.  16.  Tov  vlov  avTov  top  popoyfvr/  -. 
cf.  iii.  18. 

vii.  19.  "  Did  not  Moses  give  you 
the  law  ?  " 

xiv.  6.  "  I  am  the  truth  " ;  truth 
a  characteristic  toord,  25  times 
in  all. 

V.  37.  "  We  have  not  .  .  .  seen 
His  shape." 

See  on  i.  14. 

xiv.  9.  "  He  hath  seen  the 
Father  "  ;  cf.  xii.  45. 

Characteristic  form  of  phrase  ;  cf. 
i.  33,  6  nip-^^as  .  .  .  (Kf'ivos 
poi  uTTfv,  V.  11,  ix.  37,  X.  1,  xii. 
48,  xiv.  21,  26,  xv.  26. 

xix.  26.  "  Woman,  behold  th}* 
son  ! " 


382 


THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 


ii.  4.     "Mine    hour   is    not    yet 
come." 

ii.  0.     '•  But  the  servants  which 
drew  the  water  knew." 


ii.  11.     "  This      beginning      of 
signs." 

ii.  11.     "Manifested   forth    His 
glory." 


ii.  11.  Glory  collided  tvith  mani- 
festation. 

ii.  11.  Glory  in  juxtapoaltion 
with  belief. 


Characteristic  iihrase ;  cf.  vii.  ?>0, 
viii.  20,  xii.  23,  xiii.  1,  xvi.  21 ; 
also  vii.  6,  8. 

This  mode  of  farentlictic  qualifica- 
tion or  restriction  is  character- 
istic ;  cf.  iv.  2:  "Though 
Jesus  Himself  baptized  not," 
[vi.  2.3 :  "  Howbeit  thei'e  came 
other  boats,"  etc.,  is  rejected.'] 

vii.  22.  "  Not  because  it  is  of 
Moses." 

xii.  6.  "  This  he  said,  not  that  he 
cared  for  the  poor,"  etc. 

"  Signs "  ill  this  sense  is  well- 
known  as  a  characteristic  ivord, 
occurring  17  times  in  the  Gos- 
pel. 

i.  11.  •'  "We  saw  His  glory  "  [re- 
jected hij  Delff,  not  hy  Wendt]. 

vii.  4.  "  When  \i-ather  Because]  he 
saw  His  glory." 

xvii.  5,  22,  24. 

xvii.  4-6.  The  Son  glorified,  the 
Father's  Name  manifested. 

xvii.  21-25  similar  juxtaposition. 


"VVkxdt. 
i.  19. 


1)  fxaprvpLa. 


i.  20. 


Characteristic  idea  and  word ,-  29 
times  in  Johannean  writings 
{inch  Apoc),  only  7  times  be- 
sides in  N.  T. 
"  Confessed  and  denied  I^ur  emphatic  combination  of  posi- 
tive and  negative,  cf.  i.  3,  iii.  Iti, 
vi.  50,  oL 

[Wendt  excises  all  historical  notes, 
or  ice  might  compare  for  mode 
of  introduction ,  viii.  20,  and  for 
■place,  X.  40.] 

Characteristic  word ;  9  times  in  St; 
Jolnl,  oiihj  3  times  in  Snuopltrs 
(including  disputed  verses  of 
St.  Mark). 

See  above  on  i.  19; 


not.' 


1;  28.     "  These  things,"  etc. 


i.  31.      (f^avfpwBfi. 


i.  32,  34.     "  Bare  record.'* 


THE  JOIIANNEAN  QUESTION. 


383 


1.  0>>.       fKClVOS. 

i.  38,  50.     "  Eabbi." 

i.  30.     "  Teuth  hour." 

i.  U.     "  Xow     Philip 

Avas 

of 

Bethsaida,      the 

city 

of 

Andrew  and  Peter." 


i.  46.     "  Any  good  thing  out  of 
Nazareth." 


i.  oO.     "  Greater     thinf 

these." 
ii.  1-12.     See  above. 


tlian 


See  above  on  i.  IH. 

Standing  title  (8  times)  in  St.  John, 

not  In  St.  Luke. 
[iVo^es  of  time  are  characteristic  of 

the   Johannean   narrative,  but 

are  struck  out  by  Wendt. 
xii.  -21,  22  [left  by  Wendt].     "  The 

same   came   to   Philip  Avhich 

Avas    of     Bethsaida 

Philip        .       .         .         takcth 

Andrew." 
vii.  41.      "  Shall  the  Christ  come 

out    of     Galilee  ? "     [left     by 

Wendt,  though  not  vii.  52.] 
V.    20.       ''  Greater     works     than 

these  "  ;  rf.  xiv.  12. 


In  view  of  this  evidence,  which  it  is  clear  might  be  ex- 
tended indefinitely,  I  do  not  think  that  many  of  us  will 
hesitate  to  reject  decidedly  all  the  partition  theories  before 
us,  and  indeed  to  go  a  step  beyond  this,  and  assert  with 
Holtzmann  the  essential  and  indissoluble  unity  of  the 
Gospel. 

But  now  the  farther  question  arises  :  Is  not  Holtzmann 
also  right  in  refusing  to  share  the  contents  of  the  Gospel 
between  disciple  and  ISIaster  ?  The  vertical  dividing  up  of 
the  Gospel  is 'found  to  be  untenable;  is  the  horizontal 
dividing  of  it  any  more  tenable  ? 

We  saw  in  our  original  survey  that  this  was  the  direction 
in  which  many  of  the  best  critics  were  tending.  We  may 
e.xclude  writers  like  Ewald  who  does  not  seem  to  want  any 
more  extensive  editing  by  the  Ephesian  Church  than  most 
of  us  would  be  ready  to  grant.  We  also  need  not  go  back 
to  writers  like  Schenkel  and  Tobler.^  But  Schilrer  himself 
is  in  favour  of  this  hypothesis.  Keuss  and  Renan  are  both 
in  favour  of  it.     And  above  all  it  is  strongly  supported  by 


1  Bleek-Mangokl,  Einl;  p.  298f;;  Watkins,  Bampt.  Led.,  p.  248ff. 


384  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 


Weizsiicker  in  a  very  able  piece  of  constructive  criticism.^ 
Can  we  j'ield  to  the  authority  of  these  certainly  important 
names  ? 

The  object  is,  as  has  been  said,  a  compromise.  The 
writers  in  question  are  so  much  impressed  by  the  signs  of 
historic  accuracy  in  the  Gospel,  that  they  are  compelled  to 
regard  it  as  embodying  a  good  tradition ;  and  they  find  no 
valid  reason  against,  but  rather  every  reason  for,  referring 
that  tradition  to  St.  John.  Both  Schiirer  and  Weizsacker 
quietly  put  aside  the  doubts  which  have  been  raised  as  to 
the  Apostle's  residence  in  Asia  Minor.  "  For  this,"  says 
Weizsacker,  "  we  have  in  fact  proof  which  cannot  up  to  the 
present  time  be  regarded  as  shaken."  ^  For  the  supposition 
of  a  confusion  between  the  Apostle  and  any  other  John, 
Schiirer  thinks  that  there  is  no  good  ground.^  Assuming 
the  truth  of  this  Ephesian  tradition,  it  is  then  natural  to 
draw  the  picture  which  Weizsacker  draws  of  the  school 
which  gathered  there  round  the  Apostle,  and  produced 
under  the  influence  of  his  teaching  first  the  Apocalypse  and 
afterwards  the  Gospel.  Between  these  two  works,  what- 
ever their  difference,  there  is  one  great  connecting  link,  the 
doctrine  of  the  Logos.  In  the  Apocalypse  this  is  put 
forward  as  a  new  and  mysterious  revelation.  The  rider 
on  the  white  horse.  Faithful  and  True,  who  judges  and 
makes  war  in  righteousness,  has  a  name  written  that  no 
man  knew  but  He  himself.  .  .  .  "  and  His  name  is 
called  the  Word  of  God."  *  The  solemnity  with  which  this 
revelation  is  made  marks  its  importance.  At  the  same 
time  in  the  Apocalypse  its  meaning  is  undeveloped ;  its 
further  development  is  reserved  for  the  Gospel.  Taking 
this  central  point  with  the  others  which  surround  it,  though 

1  Apost.  Zeitalt.,  pp.  531-558. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  498. 

3  Vortrag,  p.  71 :  for  a  list  of  authorities  for  antl  against  the  traditional  view 
see  Holtzmann,  EiiiL,  p.  ■47of.  (ed.  2). 

*  Rev.  xix.  11-13. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  QUESTION.  ".S: 


•the  differences  may  be  so  great  as  to  involve  a  difference  of 
authorship,  yet  the  affinity  is  also  great  enough  to  locate 
them  in  the  same  home  and  in  the  same  school.  The 
•Oospel  belongs  to  a  later  stage  in  its  history.     That  is  all. 

By  keeping  upon  these  lines,  the  writers  I  have  men- 
tioned desert  the  ecclesiastical  tradition  as  little  as  pos- 
sible. They  only  carry  down  the  Gospel  a  little  lower  in 
the  stream  of  time  ;  they  make  it  a  work  of  the  second  and 
not  of  the  first  generation  ;  and  they  obtain  room  in  it  for 
.a  greater  freedom  of  handling. 

I  think  we  may  say  that  if  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  not  by 
St.  John,  then  distinctly  next,  in  order  of  probability,  is 
this  theory  of  Weizsucker's,  very  much  in  the  form  in 
which  Weizsiicker  has  stated  it.  It  seems  to  me  however 
4hat  even  this  theory  is  incompatible  with  the  facts.  It 
fails  to  satisfy  the  conditions  which  our  previous  inquiry 
has  laid  down.  The  arguments  on  which  we  have  hitherto 
arelied,  and  which  have  indeed  a  very  great  mass  of  detail 
behind  them,  prove,  if  they  prove  anything,  that  the  author 
■of  the  Gospel  himself  was  a  Jew,  a  Jew  of  Palestine,  a  con- 
temporary, an  eye-witness,  an  Apostle.  Their  force  is  not 
met  by  the  supposition  that  some  Gentile  or  even  Jewish 
■Christian  of  Ephesus  made  use  a  generation  later  of  know- 
ledge derived  at  second-hand  from  one  who  possessed  these 
•qualifications.  For  the  striking  thing  about  the  Gospel  is 
that  its  characteristics  are  not  those  of  a  second-hand  work. 
The  kind  of  details  which  it  contains  is  not  such  as  would 
survive  in  a  tradition.  What  tradition  could  do  we  see  in 
the  Synoptic  Gospels,  especially  in  St.  Mark.  There  we 
have  tradition  seen  to  great  advantage — ^jottings  from  the 
occasional  teaching  of  a  leading  actor  in  the  events — St. 
Peter,  09  '7rpb<;  ra?  XP^^^^  eiroLelro  ra?  dtSaaKaXia<;.  Accord- 
ingly we  find  a  good  and  faithful  report  of  a  number  of 
incidents  in  the  life  of  our  Lord,  dialogues,  sayings,  brief 
discourses,  parables.     But  the  setting  in  which  all  this  is 

vuL.  V.  25 


38G  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 

placed  is  loose  and  vague  ;  notes  of  time  and  place  are  veiy 
indistinct ;  some  expression  of  surprise  and  emotion  on 
the  part  of  the  speaker  is  almost  the  only  transient  and 
subordinate  detail  that  is  noted.  The  Fourth  Gospel,  on 
the  other  hand,  is  full  of  these  accessories.  The  scenes. 
there  described  are  such  as  the  author  has  clearly  and 
vividly  presented  before  him.  Two  alternatives  only  are 
possible.  Either  these  scenes  derive  their  vividness  and 
particularity  from  the  fact  that  the  author  is  reporting^ 
what  he  had  himself  heard  and  seen,  or  in  which  he  had 
stood  in  connexion  so  close  that  it  is  as  if  he  had  heard  and 
seen  them,  or  they  are  the  product  of  pure  imagination.  A 
middle  link,  like  tradition,  does  not  help  us.  The  author 
might  as  well  be  six  generations  removed  as  one.  For 
instance,  we  can  understand  how  tradition  might  hand 
down  the  five  barley  loaves  and  two  small  fishes,  the  twO' 
hundred  denarii  worth  of  bread,  the  five  thousand  people 
and  the  twelve  baskets  of  fragments  of  the  miracle  of 
healing,  because  all  these  have  a  direct  bearing  on  the  mag- 
nitude of  the  miracle.  AVe  can  understand  even  the  six 
water-pots  of  stone  at  the  marriage  feast,  because  the 
water-pots  at  least  were  essential,  and  that  might  cause 
their  number  to  be  remembered  and  transmitted.  These 
are  all  details  of  the  same  type  as  those  in  the  Synoptics. 
But  why  should  it  be  noted  that  it  was  the  tenth  hour 
when  the  disciples  left  John  to  follow  Jesus,  or  the  sixth 
hour  when  He  sat  down  by  the  well  ?  Why  should  we  be 
told  that  John  baptized  in  .^Fnon  because  of  its  plentiful 
springs  ?  Why  that  such  and  such  a  speech  was  made  in 
Solomon's  porch  at  the  feast  of  dedication  in  the  winter  ? 
Why  that  Jesus  retired  to  the  place  where  John  at  first 
baptized  ?  or  that  He  went  to  Ephraim  while  the  Jews 
were  going  up  to  purify  themselves  before  the  Passover? 
Why  that  the  Sanhedrists  would  not  enter  Pilate's  house 
for  fear   of    defilement?  or   that   the  purpose  with  which 


THE  JOB  ANNE  AN  QUESTION.  387 

Judas  was   supposed   to   have    made  bis  exit  was   to    buy 
necessaries  for  tbe  feast  ? 

It  would  be  instructive  to  work  out  continuously  some  of 
tbe  ideas  wbicb  tbese  passages  suggest — all  of  a  character 
wbicb  in  tbe  second  century,  wben  the  primitive  entangle- 
ment of  Christianity  and  Judaism  bad  been  forgotten,  and 
when  Judaism  itself  had  changed  its  complexion  through 
the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  would  have  lost  their  interest.  Take 
for  instance  an  idea  like  that  of  Levitical  purity.  What 
had  Christians  of  tbe  second  century  to  do  with  that '?  Can 
we  believe  that  allusions  to  it  would  have  been  preserved 
in  passing  from  mouth  to  mouth  ?  Yet  first  we  have  tbe 
waterpots  at  Cana ;  then  the  dispute  between  the  disciples 
of  John  and  a  Jew  (in  the  correct  text)  on  some  question  of 
purification — naturally  arising,  as  we  might  suppose,  out  of 
the  practice  of  baptism  ;  then  we  have  that  singular  touch, 
the  mustering  of  tbe  pilgrims  in  the  country  before  the 
Passover,  that  they  might  go  up  to  Jerusalem  in  good  time 
and  get  their  purification  over  {I'va  ayvlaoicnv  eavrou^) ;  ^  and 
lastly,  the  scrupulous  avoidance  of  defilement  by  the  San- 
bedrists.  , 

Or  take  another  set  of  points,  which  would  also  have 
passed  out  of  remembrance — the  baptism  of  John,  not  in 
its  relation  to  any  possible  survival,  like  that  of  Apollos 
and  the  disciples  at  Ephesus,  but  in  its  relation  to  the 
Jewish  conception  of  Messiah — the  necessity  of  an  Elias- 
ministry  and  of  the  moral  reformation  which  it  v/as  to 
work  before  the  Messiah  could  come.  Hence  such  verses 
as  "  Why  baptizest  thou  them  if  thou  art  not  the  Christ, 
neither  Elijah,  neither  the  prophet?"  Or  "  but  that  He 
should  be  made  manifest  to  Israel,  therefore  am  I  come 
baptizmg  with  water."  Would  a  second-century  tradition, 
even  that  of  a  disciple,  have  preserved  touches  like  these  ? 
Many  similar  points  might  be  taken — the  Jewish  sects 

'  St.  Joliu  xi.  ij'j. 


388  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 


aiul  parties,  priests,  Levites,  Sanhedrists,  Pharisees,  the 
two  high  priests  Annas  and  Caiaphas,  all  in  their  mutual 
relations  delicately  and  accurately  delineated  ;  the  Jewish 
feasts  in  regard  to  which  the  Evangelist  mentions  so  many 
characteristic  particulars — all,  he  it  remembered,  belonging 
to  a  state  of  things  which  had  entirely  passed  away. 

We  have  already  seen  how  consistently  the  Gospel 
maintains  the  standpoint  of  the  first  disciples ;  how  it 
repeats  the  kind  of  thoughts  which  would  actually  pass 
through  their  minds ;  how  it  describes  the  debates  and 
discussions  and  controversies  which  went  on  around  them. 
AYe  can  see  that  those  debates  and  controversies  were 
exactly  such  as  must  have  gone  on,  and  yet  what  we  can 
•see  must  have  been  by  no  means  so  obvious  to  a  Christian 
in  the  second  century.  All  that  we  know  of  early  litera- 
ture, Christian  or  pagan,  leaves  it,  I  cannot  but  think,  in 
a  high  degree  improbable  that  so  consistent  a  picture 
•could  have  been  painted  out  of  pure  invention.  There 
would  inevitably  have  been  far  more  serious  flaws  to  be 
found  than  any  which  criticism  has  discovered. 

This  is  my  first  reason  for  not  being  content  to  refer  the 
phenomena  of  the  Gospel  simply  to  tradition.  They 
include  a  number  of  points  which  tradition  would  not 
have  preserved.  My  second  reason  is  that  tradition  would 
almost  necessarily  be  a  series  of  fragments,  as  the  Synoptic 
Gospels  are.  In  St.  John  it  is  true  that  we  have  a  selec- 
tion of  narratives,  but  it  is  a  selection  taken  from  a 
continuous  history.  They  are  strung,  so  to  speak,  upon 
a  single  thread.  We  feel  that  there  is  a  duly  articulated 
history,  precisely  mapped  out  both  in  time  and  place,  lying 
behind  them.  In  the  one  case  the  narrator  looks  back 
•over  the  scene  as  a  whole,  and  selects  what  incidents  he 
pleases  out  of  it ;  in  the  other  case  the  narrator  has  no 
such  survey,  no  such  command  of  his  materials,  but  must 
meeds  put  together  the  incidents   as  they  come  to  him,  as 


THE  JO  H ANNE  AN  QUESTION.  38^ 

best  he  can.  This  means  that  in  the  one  case  there  is,  and 
in  the  other  case  there  is  not  direct  personal  contact  with 
the  facts. 

Thirdly,  when  we  look  at  the  Gospel  we  see  that  it  is 
not  the  product  of  a  dry  intellectual  light.  It  palpitates 
throughout  with  warm  emotion.  The  keynote  of  it  is. 
love  :  first  the  love  of  the  Master  for  the  disciple  calling 
forth  the  love  of  the  disciple  for  the  Master,  and  then 
that  love  implanted  as  a  principle  of  the  Christian 
life,  and  become  the  dominant  motive  which  binds 
one  Christian  to  another.  Where  was  all  this  emotion 
generated?  It  is  by  far  the  most  natural  to  attribute  it 
to  the  relation  in  which  the  author  of  the  Gospel  stood  to 
his  subject.  A  personal  feeling  like  this  is  not  easily 
transmitted.  That  St.  John,  the  beloved  disciple,  should 
be  animated  by  it  is  just  what  we  should  expect.  That 
an  unnamed  disciple  in  the  second  century  who  had  not 
"  seen  Christ  in  the  flesh  "  should  be  as  impressible,  is 
less  likely.     I  speak  here  only  of  competing  probabilities. 

Weighing  these  probabilities  side  by  side,  they  are  to  my 
mind  irresistibly  in  favour  of  the  direct  apostolic  author- 
ship. Let  us  think,  by  way  of  recapitulation,  what  the 
problem  demands.  It  demands  one  who  is  firmly  planted 
at  the  point  of  view  of  the  immediate  disciples  of  Jesus  ; 
one  who  looked  at  things  as  they  looked  at  them  ;  who 
was  familiar  with  the  expectation  which  they  entertained 
and  which  those  around  them  entertained  before  they  came 
to  recognise  Jesus  as  the  Messiah ;  one  apparently  taken 
from  the  very  entourage  of  the  Baptist ;  one  who  treads 
with  a  sure  step  among  all  the  intricate  conditions  of  the 
time  ;  one  who  is  at  home  in  all  the  scenes  and  places  and 
customs  and  ways  of  thought  of  Palestine  when  Christ 
lived  ;  one  who  has  caught  truly  the  main  lines  of  Christ's 
teaching ;  who  understands  the  relation  in  which  He  stood 
to  the  Old  Testament,   based  upon  it  and  yet  exercising 


390  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF 


command  over  it,  mingling  the  old  and  new  in  that  wonder- 
ful way  and  with  that  wonderful  halance  which  the  first 
generation  of  Christians  possessed,  and  which  their  succes- 
sors seemed  so  soon  to  lose.  AVe  must  think  of  the  author 
as  one  who  stood  directly  under  the  influence,  the  close 
personal  influence,  of  Jesus,  who  took  in  deep  draughts 
from  that  "living  water,"  and  who,  if  he  in  after  life 
sought  to  impart  to  others  something  of  the  impression 
which  he  had  himself  received,  did  so  not  so  much  through 
any  process  of  intellectual  speculation  as  through  strong 
and  deeply  stirred  emotion  wrought  into  the  inner  self  by 
years  of  vitally  realized  religious  experience. 

We  cannot  wonder  if  a  mind  like  this,  not  discursive  but 
concentrated,  not  given  to  wandering  over  a  wide  field  of 
impressions,  but  content  with  a  few  of  singular  power  and 
intensity,  and  letting  these  sink  into  it  as  far  as  ever 
they  would  go,  should  yet,  as  the  Church  moved  on,  let  itself 
move  with  it,  applying  its  own  great  ruling  principles  to 
the  progressive  phases  of  the  Church's  history,  and  to  a 
certain  extent  interpreting  those  principles  by  the  teaching 
of  fact  and  by  their  practical  realization.  We  cannot 
wonder  if  in  this  way,  when  the  time  came  to  give  out  as 
well  as  to  drink  in,  there  should  be  some  infusion  of  all 
this  later  reflexion  and  experience  with  the  original 
material  of  objective  fact.  We  are  dealing  with  a  strong, 
creative  personality  which  could  not  help  acting  upon  the 
deposit  committed  to  it,  not  a  mere  neutral  medium 
through  which  it  might  pass  without  alteration.  A  smaller 
nature  might  have  reproduced  its  first  impressions  more 
exactly ;  a  more  flexible  and  many-sided  nature  would 
have  had  a  weaker  or  less  tenacious  grip  upon  them ;  but 
a  mind  like  this  acts  powerfully  in  proportion  as  it  acts 
slowly,  and  transmutes  what  it  retains  the  more  surely, 
because  the  lines  on  which  it  works  are  not  many  but 
few. 


THE  JOIIANNEAN  QUESTION.  391 

At  the  same  time  all  the  phenomena  that  are  character- 
istic of  the  Fourth  Gospel  may  be  got  well  within  the 
■compass  of  the  time  assigned  to  the  life  of  the  Apostle  John. 
May  be,  and  indeed  vnist  be.  As  to  the  possibility  there  can 
be  no  question.  It  is  a  simple  rule  of  proportion.  If  the 
Epistles  to  Corinthians  and  Eomans  could  be  reached  by 
the  years  57,  58  ;  if  Philippians  by  the  year  Gl ;  if  Hebrews 
by  about  68  or  69 ;  ^  then  certainly  the  Fourth  Gospel 
•could  be  reached  some  fifteen  or  twenty  years  later.  And 
•on  the  other  hand  we  have  seen  that  it  cannot  be  cut  loose 
from  the  apostolic  age  and  from  immediate  contact  with 
the  life  of  Christ.  Those  are  the  limits  within  which  the 
Gospel  ranges.  The  tcnni)ius  a  quo  is  not  the  schooling  of 
a  second  generation,  but  the  living  experience  of  the  first ; 
the  terminus  ad  quern  is  not  the  region  of  Gnosticism  or 
Montanism,  but  the  seed-plot  out  of  which  those  develop- 
ments grew  as  more  or  less  abnormal  growths.  It  is  the 
first  generation  in  its  fullest  extent,  the  richest  generation 
which  the  world  has  ever  seen. 

There  have  been  great  ages,  "  spac^ious  times,"  up  and 
down  the  world's  career — the  age  of  Pericles,  the  age  of 
Augustus,  the  years  which  date  from  the  Hegira  of 
Mahomet  or  from  the  Fall  of  Constantinople,  the  outburst 
of  genius  and  national  life  under  our  own  Queen  Elizabeth 
But  in  internal  significance,  if  not  in  external  splendour, 
there  is  no  age  to  compare  with  that  which  began  in  the 
iifteenth  year  of  Tiberius  with  a  set  of  obscure  events  in 
iin  obscure  corner  of  Judaea,  and  which  came  to  its  close 
with  the  death  of  the  last  apostle,  St.  John. 

W.  Saxday. 

'  I  do  not  pledge  myself  absolutely  to  this  date,  thongli  I  think  it  ou  the 
whole  probable  :  iu  any  case  the  Epistle  was  written  daring  the  lifetime  of 
Timothy  (Heb.  xiii.  23),  and  well  before  the  date  at  which  it  is  quoted  by 
< 'lenient  of  Rome.  This  one  fact  seems  to  me  to  be  a  landmark  of  great 
importance  in  the  history  of  Christian  doetrine. 


392 


SURVEY  OF  BE  CENT  ENGLISH  LITERATURE 
ON  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

T.vn.'nDi.cnoN. — Among- recent  works  in  the  department  of  Intro- 
duction none  will  be  more  highly  prized  than  the  volume  issued! 
by  Messrs.  Hodder  and  Stoughton  on  The  Fourth  Gospel,  Evidences- 
External  and  Internal  of  its  Johannean  Authorship,  by  Ezra  Abbot,. 
D.D..  Andrew  P.  Peabody,  D.D.,  and  J.  E.  Lightfoot,  D.l).  Dr. 
Peabody  edits  the  volume,  and  contributes  a  sensible  and  acute- 
essay,  in  which  perhaps  the  freshest  paragraph  is  that  in  which 
he  depicts  the  characteristics  of  an  old  man's  memory.  The  other 
essays  comprised  in  the  volume  are  well  known,  and  on  that 
account  will  be  all  the  moi-e  coi'dially  welcomed.  Dr.  Abbot'.s 
contribution,  which  has  already''  appeared  both  as  a  .separate 
publication  and  in  the  author's  Critical  Essays,  is  the  best  me- 
morial which  that  eminent  and  admirable  scholar  has  left.  In 
some  of  his  minor  papers  his  Unitai'ian  creed  may  unconsciously 
have  biassed  his  judgment.  But  in  this  essay,  in  which  he  has 
put  it  beyond  question  that  in  the  time  of  Justin  the  Fourth 
Gospel  was  generally  received  as  the  work  of  the  Apostle  John,, 
his  Unitarian  creed  only  serves  to  illustrate  his  impartiality,  and 
to  strengthen  the  reader's  assurance  of  the  soundness  of  his  result.s. 
Certainly  no  more  thoi'ough  piece  of  work  has  ever  been  contri- 
buted to  the  settlement  of  this  great  question.  Of  Dr.  Lightfoot's 
essay,  which  originally  appeared  in  this  magazine,  little  need  be 
said.  It  is  worthy  of  its  author,  and  sets  some  points  of  the 
intei'nal  evidence  in  a  striking  light. 

Many  will  be  grateful  to  the  trustees  of  the  Lightfoot  Fund  for 
reprinting  the  late  Bishop  of  Durham's  volume  On  a  Fresh  Revision 
of  the  English  New  Testament  (ilacmillan  &  Co.).  The  Revision  of 
the  New  Testament  is  indeed  a  thing  of  the  past — in  some  respects- 
too  much  .so — but  much  of  the  literatui-e  it  evoked  has  permanent 
value,  and  unquestionably  it  would  be  a  loss  to  the  student  of  the- 
Xew  Testament  were  Bishop  Lightfoot's  contributions  to  revision 
allowed  to  remain  out  of  print.  Xo  doubt  a  large  number  of  the 
suggestions  made  in  this  volume  have  been  embodied  in  the 
Revised  Version,  but  it  is  instructive  to  see  the  reasons  for  the 
alterations  made,  and  these  reasons  are  in  general  hei-e  given. 
The  volume  is  indeed  a  most  useful  apj)endi.\;  to  the  lexicon  and 


SUnVEY  OF  nECEXT  EXGLISir  LITEIUTUIIE.  3!);J- 

gi-imimii-.  iiud  should  \\v  near  tlie  li;ni<l  of  the  stucloiit.  We  trust 
that  the  author's  somewhat  ilcsponding  view  of  tlie  prospects  of 
Greek  scliolarship  in  Kng'hiud  may  be  falsified.  He  is  of  oi)iiiioii 
that  Greek  seliolarsliip  never  stood  higher  in  Enghind  than  it  now 
docs,  but  that  other  l)ranches  of  learning  arc  likely  frona  tliis  tinu^ 
onwards  to  make  their  claims  heard  to  the  detriment  of  classical 
study.  He  seems  also  to  have  formed  the  opinion,  judging  from 
the  fortunes  of  the  Vulgate  and  of  the  Authorized  Versiini,  that  the- 
Revised  Version  might  not  at  once  be  received  into  favoui-.  In  cal- 
culating the  chances  of  the  popular  reception  and  universal  use  of 
tlie  Revised  Version  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  its  predecessor 
has  held  the  field  for  'l'^)  years,  and  has  tinged  the  literature  of 
the  last  two  centuries  with  its  phraseology.  But  whether  the 
Revised  Version  is  destined  to  win  popular  acceptance  or  not,  it 
must  remain  as  the  best  help  English-reading  people  have  to  the- 
nnderstanding  of  what  the  Avriters  of  the  New  Testament  actually 
wrote. 

Dr.  T.  K.  Abbott,  of  Dublin  University,  has  collected  into  a 
volume,  and  published  through  [Messrs.  Longmans,  Green  &  Co., 
eight  E.isays  cMefly  on  the  Original  Texts  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments.  One  of  these,  on  Xew  Testament  Lexicography,  is  intended 
as  a  correction  of  some  statements  made  by  Dr.  Hatch  in  his 
Essays  on  Biblical  Greek;  Avhile  another,  on  the  Language  of  Galilec^ 
in  the  Time  of  Christ,  criticises  Dr.  Xeubaner's  paper  on  the  same 
subject  in  the  Studia  Bihlica.  Both  these  papers  are  written  in  a 
very  spirited  manner,  and  are  based  on  exact  scholarship  and  care- 
ful research.  Li  the  former,  while  most  of  the  criticism  is  sound- 
there  is  jDcrhaps  a  tendency  to  underrate  the  value  of  the  .Septua- 
gint  as  an  aid  to  the  Xew  Testament  lexicographer.  Nothing 
however  could  be  more  helpful  to  students  than  that  Dr.  Abbott 
should  continue  research  for  which  this  essay  proves  him  to  be 
unusually  competent  and  exceptionally  equipped,  and  furnish  us 
with  what  is  so  urgently  needed  as  a  complete  exposition  of  the- 
i-clation  of  the  lexicography  of  the  Septuagint  to  that  of  the  New 
Testament.  The  tribute  he  pays  to  Prof.  Thayer  and  Dr.  Field  is 
in  each  ca.se  thoroughly  deserved.  Tt  is  their  Avork  Avhich  marks 
the  advance  made  in  this  department  of  study  during  the  last 
generation.  Dr.  Abbott "s  answer  to  the  question,  "  To  what 
extent  was  Greek  the  language  of  Galilee  in  the  time  of  Christ?  " 
is  that  (ireek  was  very  generally  spoken,  that  the  Apostles  were- 


.Hi)4     HURVEY  OF  RECENT  ENGLISH  LITERATURE 


able  to  speak  (ircck  fluently  and  to  write  it,  and  tliat  it  is  not 
likely  they  liad  equal  command  over  any  other  language.  This 
■conclusion,  in  so  far  as  it  affirms  a  general  knowledge  of  Greek, 
will  probably  be  accepted;  and  the  arguments  by  which  Dr. 
Abbott  seeks  to  establish  it  are  convincing  and,  if  not  always 
new,  fi-eshly  j^ut.  But  lie  underrates  the  likelihood  of  men  in  the 
■circumstances  of  the  Apostles  being  bilingual.  Had  he  written  in 
Scotland  instead  of  in  Ireland,  he  would  probably  have  come  to  a 
<lifferent  conclusion,  and  allowed  them  a  knowledge  of  Aramaic 
.as  well.  However,  we  have  nothing  better  than  this  essay  on  the 
point ;  and  the  whole  volume  is  one  of  considerable  importance. 

A  xerj  useful  handbook  on  The  Epistles  of  the  Apostle  Paid  has 
been  drawn  up  by  Professor  Findlay,  of  Headingley  College,  and 
is  published  by  C.  H.  Kelly.  It  forms  one  of  a  series  of  '^  Books 
for  Bible  Students,"  and  is  admirably  adapted  for  its  purpose. 
■"  It  seeks  to  weave  the  epistles  together  into  an  historical  unity, 
to  trace  out  the  life  that  pervades  them,  alike  in  its  internal 
elements  and  external  movements  and  surroundings  ;  and  to  do 
this  in  a  volume  of  small  compass  and  free  from  technical  detail 
and  phraseology."  It  thus  occupies  a  place  of  its  own,  and  it 
•occupies  it  well.  Professor  Findlay,  in  his  perfect  commentary  on 
the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  has  given  proof  of  his  competency  to 
handle  Pauline  doctrine,  and  here  he  utilizes  his  o-reat  knowledge 
for  the  use  of  beginners  ;  and  while  his  volume  does  not  supersede 
or  rival  that  of  Sabatier,  it  will  prove  a  more  convenient  text 
•book,  and  in  some  respects  a  better  introduction  to  the  Pauline 
writings.  We  trust  he  may  some  day  gi\-e  us  an  introduction  to 
the  Epistles  as  full  and  thorough  as  his  contribution  on  the 
Pastoral  Epistles. — A  Harmony  of  the  Gospels,  arranged  by  C.  C. 
.James,  M.A.,  Rector  of  "VVortham  (Cambridge  University  Press), 
may  not  have  great  critical  value,  but  is  very  convenient  for 
English  readers,  and  may  be  expected  to  help  forward  the  study 
■of  the  Gospels. 

Whatever  comes  from  the  pen  of  the  Bisho])  of  Devry  and 
Raphoe  is  welcome.  We  know  that  we  shall  find  sympathetic 
intelligence,  devout  feeling,  fancy,  and  graceful  English  in  what- 
•ever  beai-s  his  signature.  These  qualities  abundantly  appear  in 
The  Leading  Ideas  of  the  Gospels,  which  he  has  recently  published 
with  Messrs.  Macmillan  &  Co.  This  is  a  revision  of  a  volume 
jjublished  twenty  years  ago,  but,  as  the  author  says  in  the  preface, 


ox  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  395 


it  is  virtually  a  new  book.  The  aim  of  the  writer  is  to  aid  us  in 
iipprehendiiig  the  distinctive  charactei-istics  of  each  Gospel.  In 
doino;  so  he  has  occasion  to  make  many  observations  which  are 
.apt  to  escape  the  notice  of  a  reader,  and  from  time  to  time  his 
i-emarks  go  deeply  into  the  substance  of  the  narratives.  These 
remarks  are  often  weighty,  as  when  he  touches  upon  the  similarity 
of  the  style  of  the  Apostle  John  to  that  of  Jesus.  The  whole 
volume  is  at  once  delightful  reading  aiid  permanently  instructive  ; 
.a  volume  to  read  and  re-read  and  keep  beside  one. 

Exposition. — In  Exposition  there  is  not  much  to  record.  To  the 
Cambridge  Greek  Testament  there  has  been  added  a  volume  on 
The  Second  Epistle  of  Paul  the  Apostle  to  the  Corinthians,  by  the 
Rev.  J.  J.  Lias,  M.A.,  Emmanuel  College,  Cambridge.  This  is  a 
carefully  executed  piece  of  work.  For  linguistic  purposes  it  is 
perhaps  scarcely  up  to  the  high  standard  set  in  Mr.  Carr's 
Matthew,  but  the  intei-est  attaching  to  many  of  the  Apostle's  words 
is  effectively  exhibited.  In  every  chajiter  there  is  evidence  of  the 
advantage  arising  from  putting  work  of  this  kind  into  the  hands 
■of  well-read  theologians  and  accurate  scholars.  In  Mv.  Lias' 
work,  the  intelligent  reader  Avill  soon  be  aware  that  underneath 
the  smooth  surface  there  is  a  strongly  built  substructure  of  intelli- 
gent inquiry. — From  Melbourne  (Petherick  &  Co.)  come  notes  on 
ihe  first  eight  chapters  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  by  John  "W. 
Owen,  B.A.  (Oxon).  Mr.  Owen  names  his  volume,  somewhat 
indefinitely,  The  Common  Salcaiion  of  our  Lord  and  Savioiir  Jesns 
Christ.  The  notes  follow  the  lines  laid  down  by  the  late  Canon 
Liddon  in  lectures  given  to  Oxford  undergraduates.  In  his  inter- 
pretation of  the  epistle  Mr.  Owen  shows  himself  to  be  a  proficient 
Pauline  student,  and  although  not  very  attractive  in  form,  the 
•commentary  here  furnished  Avill  afford  substantial  assistance  to 
the  reader  of  this  epistle. — The  Redemption  of  the  Body,  by  William 
Fitzhugh  Whitehouse,  M.A.  (Elliot  Stock)  is  an  attempt  to  show 
that  in  Romans  viii.  18-23  the  word  Krt'crts  means  the  human 
creatui'e,  an  interpretation  which  seems  to  introduce  more  diHi- 
culty  than  it  removes. 

]\Ii8CKiJ.ANE0US. — Professor  ^lilligan  has  published  with  Messrs. 
Macmillan  &  Co.  his  Baird  Lectures  for  18*J1  on  The  Ascension  and 
Hcavenli/  Priesthood  of  our  Lord.  They  are  intended  to  form  a 
.sequel  to  his  well-known  and  valued  lectures  on  the  Resurrection 
of  oui- Lord,  and  in  tliemselves  the}'  are  no  inconsiderable  eontri- 


39()     SUJn'EY  OF  11  EC  EXT  ENGLISH  LITER  ATUUE 

bution  to  Biblical  Theology.  Dr.  .Milligan  discusses  the  various, 
questions  wliich  liave  been  raised  I'egarding  oar  Lord's  priesthood^ 
its  nature  and  its  functions,  the  date  of  its  commencement  and 
the  place  of  its  ministr\-.  its  results  and  its  reproduction  in  His- 
])eople.  For  ordinary  readers  the  A'olume  may  be  found  somewhat 
too  teclinical — althougli  there  are  passages  of  felicitously  expressed 
Christian  truth  Avhich  it  is  a  pity  any  readers  should  miss — but 
those  whose  thoughts  about  religion  arc  moulded  by  Biblical 
forms  will  find  in  it  a  great  deal  that  is  both  fresh  and  true.  It 
miglit  indeed  be  difficult  to  name  any  discussion  of  the  priesthood 
of  Christ  Avhich  is  so  full  and  satisfactory.  Necessarily  the  Ej^istlo 
to  the  Hebrews  is  much  referred  to,  and  frequently  with  useful 
hints  of  interpretation.  Dr.  Milligan's  interpretations  cannot 
indeed  be  uniformly  accejjted,  and  sometimes  he  seems  to  exagge- 
rate the  difference  between  the  view  he  proposes  and  that  which 
has  previously  been  held  by  Biblical  scholars.  In  regard  to  the 
question  regarding  the  time  at  which  our  Lord's  priesthood  began„ 
Dr.  Davidson's  note  in  his  Commentary  on  the  Ilehreics  Avill  be 
found  a  safer  guide  than  ;Dr.  Milligan's  remarks  ;  and  his  theory 
of  atonement  is  not  sufficiently  justified,  and  if  not  contradicted 
by  Old  Testament  ritual  is  irreconcilable  with  the  language  of 
St.  Paul. 

From  Messrs.  Macmillan  &  Co.  wo  liavc  received  three  volumes- 
of  their  repi'ints  of  Archdeacon  Farrar's  minor  works.  Of  these- 
Ave  can  most  cordially  aird  unreservedly  recommend  The  Wit^iess  of 
History  to  Christ,  the  Hulsean  lectures  for  the  year  1870.  Dr.  Farrar 
has  written  many  valuable  books,  but  his  omnivorous  reading  and 
clear  perception  of  what  is  vital  in  Christianity  were  never  used 
to  better  purpose  than  in  this  small  volume.  The  brief  criticism 
which  is  here  given  of  various  theories  of  the  oi'igin  of  our  religion^ 
may  not  sati.sfy  the  inquirer  who  is  steeped  in  Hegelianism,  but 
it  directly  and  strongly  appeals  to  the  average  educated  man. 
The  intelligence  and  the  spirit  with  which  the  Avhole  volume  i.s- 
Avritten  aie  Avorthy  of  all  praise.  Even  older  than  this  is  the 
A'olume  of  sermons  entitled  The  Fall  of  Man,  preached  before  the- 
University  of  Cambridge  and  first  published  in  1868.  The  shy- 
ness of  publication  revealed  in  the  preface  is  amusing  in  the- 
light  of  Dr.  Farrar's  subsequent  prodigality.  For  our  own  part 
Avc  prefei-  this  first  A'enture  to  any  of  his  more  recent  sermons^ 
eloquent   as   these   undoubtedly   ai-e.      And   then   we   have   tht- 


ON  THE  XEW  TESTAMENT.  307 


thirtieth  thousand  of  Eternal  Hope,  a  volume  which  c-au  neither 
be  aided  b}^  approval  nor  checked  in  its  circuhxtion  bj  disapproval. 
Whether  approved  or  disappx-oved,  it  must  be  read.  To  this  latest 
•edition  the  author  has  prefixed  an  explanatory  and  self-defensive 
note.  It  seems  that  it  has  come  to  Dr.  Farrar's  ears  that  since 
this  volume  was  lirst  published  in  1878  he  has  changed  his 
views  regarding'  the  important  matter  of  Avhieh  it  treats.  This  he 
<lenies.  The  preface  also  contains  two  interesting  lettei-s  from  the 
late  Dr.  Pusey.  In  one  of  these  the  following  wortls  occur:  "  If  I 
had  time,  I  would  have  re-written  my  book,  and  would  have  said, 
*  You  seem  to  deny  nothing  which  I  believe.  You  do  not  deny  the 
eternal  punishment  of  "souls  obstinately  hard  and  finally  im- 
penitent." I  believe  the  eternal  punishment  of  no  other.  Who 
they  are,  God  alone  knows.' "  In  the  other  letter  Puse}'  makes 
two  strong  points  against  Dr.  Farrar.  The  effect  of  the  volume 
is  lessened  and  the  reading  of  it  is  made  somewhat  painful  by  the 
extreme  warmth  with  which  the  author  expresses  himself,  a 
warmth  which,  considering  the  subject,  may  be  considered  legiti- 
mate and  even  commendable,  but  seems  at  times  to  betrav  him  into 
■exaggeration  of  statement.  The  orthodox  position  is  depicted  from 
the  language  of  extremists  such  as  Spurgeon.  Dr.  Farrar's  own 
belief  is  that  the  fate  of  man  is  not  finally  sealed  at  death.  He  be- 
lieves neither  in  conditional  immortality  nor  in  universal  restora- 
tion, but  in  a  purifying  Gehenna.  His  remarks  both  upon  Jewish 
opinion  in  the  time  of  Christ  and  upon  the  meaning  of  the  words 
used  by  our  Lord  are  in  our  opinion  misleading.  And  every  one 
who  reads  Dr.  Fan-ar's  volume  should  read  as  a  counteractive  the 
articles  recently  published  in  this  magazine  by  Professor  Beet 
nnd  others. — Among  reprints  by  the  same  publishing  house,  mav 
also  be  mentioned  Lincoln  s  Inn  Sei-mons,  by  Frederick  Denison 
^Maurice.  Six  volumes  of  these  will  not  seem  too  many  for  his 
disciples.  For  they  do  indeed  stand  entirely  by  themselves  in 
sermon  literature ;  and  readers  Avho  are  captivated  by  tliei;- 
originality  and  are  sensitive  to  their  fine  spiritual  aroma  will  not 
soon  weary  of  so  rare  a  treat  as  these  volumes  afford.  Year  by 
3'ear  the  number  of  readers  Avho  can  appreciate  Maurice  is  in- 
creasing, and  there  was  so  much  in  his  sermons  of  permanent 
truth  and  so  little  that  was  due  to  the  thought  or  mannerism  of  a 
period  that  it  is  quite  possible  they  may  now  have  a  larger  cir- 
culation tlian  ever.    Certainly  nothing  could  be  a  healthier  sign  of 


398     SURVEY  OF  RECENT  ENGLISH  LITERATURE. 

the  religious  appetite  than  if  sucli  an  expectation  were  realized. 
— A  Revised  Theology,  hj  Dr.  George  Jamieson,  of  Old  Machar 
(Hodder  and  Stongliton),  i.s  so  entirely  the  frank  utterance  of  a 
marked  individuality  that  it  will  not  secure  many  readers ;  but 
those  who  do  read  and  ponder  will  find  much  food  for  thought, 
together  with  something  they  cannot  utilize.  Professor  Beet's 
Firm  Foundation  of  the  Christian  Faith  (Wesleyan  Sunday  School 
Union)  is  intended  to  serve  as  a  handbook  of  Christian  evidences- 
for  Sunday  School  teachers,  and  we  do  not  know  any  book  so  well 
suited  foj-  this  purpose.  One  or  two  expressions  may  be  objected 
to.  On  p.  2.3  he  fosters  a  mischievous  delusion  when  he  say.s 
that  "  good  and  bad  effects  in  the  present  life  follow  for  the  most 
part  right  and  wrong  action.''  Good  and  bad  effects  uniformly 
follow  riglit  and  wrong  action.  On  p.  14  "  this  is  all  that  we 
mean  by  a  personal  God  "  is  defensible  but  requires  explanation. 
But  as  a  whole  this  will  be  found  a  most  suggestive  and  com- 
petent handbook.  Would  Professor  Beet  not  give  us  also  a  hand- 
book of  Christian  doctrine  on  the  same  scale  ? — The  Rev.  George 
^lilne  Rae,  of  Madras,  has  written  a  very  interesting  and  much 
needed  history  of  The  Syrian  Church  in  India  (Messrs.  William 
Blackwood  &  Sons).  The  history  is  remarkable  and  it  is  remark- 
ably well  told.  It  is  surprising  that  a  branch  of  Church  history 
which  has  so  many  interesting  minor  ramifications  should  have 
been  till  now  almost  entirely  neglected.  But  any  regret  that 
might  be  felt  for  this  neglect  is  absorbed  in  the  satisfaction  of 
finding  it  at  last  taken  up  by  so  competent  a  writer. 

Mai;cus  Dods. 


309 


ON   THE   DAY   OF   THE    CBUCIFIXION. 

Di:.  Sanday  deals  with  tliis  (incstioii  in  tlie  January  number  of  the- 
Exi'OSlTOP,  and  in  tlie  ]\Iarc]i  numbei-  returns  to  it  witli  extracts 
from  a  correspondence  wliich  he  has  held  with  Dr.  Hort.  With 
liis  admission  in  ^larch  that  the  explanation  favoured  in  January 
has  failed,  I  entirely  agree.  Perhaps  your  readers  may  like  to  see- 
a  suggestion  which  I  made  on  the  subject  in  December  before  this- 
controversy  had  appeai'cd.  I  copy  the  following  from  my  manu- 
script. 

That  St.  Peter  or  St.  John  could  have  made  a  mistake  on  such 
a  question  is  surely  almost  impossible.  But  we  must  remember 
that  we  have  not  got  St.  Peter's  Gospel  but  only  St.  Mark's 
edition  of  it.  And  St.  Mark  did  not  obtain  it  from  St.  Peter 
complete  or  in  chronological  order,  but  in  scattered  sections  which 
he  put  together  to  the  best  of  his  ability,  while  the  other  two 
Evangelists  simply  accepted  his  arrangement. 

One  peculiarity  in  his  arrangement  is  particularly  patent.  St. 
Mark  never  brings  our  Lord  to  Jerusalem,  until  a  few  days  before 
the  Passion.  Whatever  therefore  St.  Peter  had  recorded  as 
happening  in  Jerusalem  must  either  be  omitted  by  St.  ^Mark  or 
crowded  into  the  last  few  days  or  transferred  to  Galilee. 

Now  it  is  certain,  even  from  St.  Mark's  incidental  observations, 
that  St.  John  is  historically  right  in  representing  our  Lord  as 
making  several  visits  to  Jerusalem  and  doing  much  woi'k  there  of 
which  the  other  Evangelists  take  no  account. 

In  particular  St.  John  says  that  Christ  spent  two  passovers  at 
Jerusalem,  one  near  the  commencement  of  His  ministry,  as  re- 
corded in  the  second  chapter,  another  at  its  close.  These  two 
passovers,  I  would  suggest,  have  been  blended  into  one  by  St. 
Mark,  St.  Peter's  recollections  about  the  former  having  been  un- 
wittingly transferred  to  the  latter. 

It  was  at  the  former  that,  as  St.  John  rightly  says,  the  cleansing 
of  the  temple  took  place,  though  St.  Mark  has  transferred  that 
cleansing  to  the  latter.  It  was  at  the  former,  I  hold,  that  He  par- 
took of  the  passover  with  His  disciples,  at  the  latter  He  instituted 
the  Eucharist.  St.  ]\Iark  has  unconsciously  combined  the  tvvo' 
events. 

If  this  be   so,  all   discrepancies   about  the    day   of    the  month 


400  OX  THE  DAY  OF  THE  CRUCIFIXION. 


vanish,  St.  John,  as  in  every  other  instance  where  he  traverses 
the  synoptic;  chronology,  is  seen  to  be  I'ight.  He  probably  was 
acquainted  with  St.  Mark's  record  in  oral  or  written  form,  and 
when  St.  Mark  and  the  other  witnesses  were  dead,  took  this  means 
«of  cori'ecting  fi-oiu  his  personal  recollections  the  imperfections  o£ 
iheir  chronology. 

AuTiui;  WiMcnr. 
Queens'    College,   Cainh ridge. 


FIDES  mVINA  ET  FIDES  HUMANA  ; 
on,  FAITH  ACCORDING  TO  CHRIST. 

Words  are  at  best  symbols,  the  paper  currency  of  human 
thought.  It  is  surely  well,  then,  to  pause  from  time  to 
time  and  set  about  realizing  our  actual  moral  and  spiritual 
wealth,  by  "converting"  current  terms  into  valid  ideas. 
The  task  is  never  an  easy,  and  seldom  a  pleasant  one.  Yet 
it  is  the  very  condition  of  true  progress  towards  the  truth, 
which  not  only  sets  free,  but  also  must  one  day  unite  in 
conscious  harmony  brethren  as  yet  estranged  in  mind. 
For  as  we  are  often  reminded,  half  the  controversies  in 
our  midst  would  cease  with  the  definition  of  the  terms 
employed.  Accordingly  the  present  study  will  seek  to 
attain  in  a  form  suited  to  the  spiritual  sphere,  which  evades 
all  "Strict  definition,  what  will  serve  the  practical  ends  of 
definition,  as  regards  a  term  of  decisive  moment  for  reli- 
gious thought.  The  term  is  "faith,"  with  "truth"  as  its 
correlate. 

But  how  avoid  the  vagueness  and  inconclusiveness  of 
abstract  discussion  which  oftenest  leaves  the  disputants  as 
far  apart  as  ever?  Definition  ultimately  rests  upon  an  in- 
tuition or  immediate  experience,  which  determines  thought 
and  language,  and  yet  can  hardly  be  communicated  to 
another  in  the  ordinary  course  of  argument.  Each  must 
hark  back,  then,  to  the  real  source  of  the  other's  thought, 
the  intuition  to  which  any  idea  must  be  capable  of  being 
reduced,  on  pain  of  forfeiting  the  right  to  pass  current 
under  a  given  term.     In  the  present  instance  such  a  course 

VOL.  V.  '"'  26 


402  FIDES  DIVIXA  ET  FIDES  HUMANA; 

seems  as  easy  as  it  is  appropriate.  For  if  there  be  one 
legitimate  and  essential  meaning  attaching  to  the  term 
"faith,"  Christians  at  least,  of  every  sort  and  condition, 
will  on  reflexion  be  ready  to  agree,  that  this  must  be  the 
one  which  dwelt  in  the  mind  of  Christ  and,  underlay  His 
ministry  and  its  attitude  to  the  soul  of  man.  The  ques- 
tion therefore  is  capable  of  a  treatment  primarily  historical 
and  exegetical.  But  it  has  seldom  been  so  treated.  At 
any  rate,  in  this  form,  it  may  well  be  discussed  afresh  in 
The  Expositor. 


I  do  not  here  purpose  giving  a  catalogue  of  all  the  pas- 
sages in  which  the  woid  faitJi  and  its  congeners  occur  in 
the  Gospels,  examining  the  etymological  meaning  of  the 
Hebrew  and  Greek  forms,  together  with  their  mutual  rela- 
tions in  Old  Testament  usage,  as  shown  by  the  Septuagint 
and  other  versions,  and  so  striving  to  fix  the  sense  in 
which  the  Lord  viust  have  used  the  term.  This  has  been 
done  in  lexicons  already,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  lexico- 
graphers at  least ;  and  undoubtedly  it  has  its  value  in  its 
own  place.  But  it  is  at  best  an  a  j^^'^ori  method,  and 
cannot  do  more  than  add  a  certain  probability  to  results 
reached  contextually.  It  has  too  its  disadvantages.  It 
tends  to  obscure  or  prejudice  the  "  newness  "  of  the  gospel. 
And  it  is  apt  to  become  scholastic,  making  theologians 
cease  to  reflect  just  at  the  point  where  they  ought  rather 
to  begin. 

In  contrast  then  to  all  that  tends  to  engross  attention 
upon  the  mere  letter,  to  the  neglect  of  the  psychological 
aspect  of  the  narrative— appreciation  of  which  is  dependent 
on  a  vivid  and  overmastering  sense  of  the  context — it  seems 
best  to  focus  our  study  upon  one  representative  passage, 
regarded  both  in  its  narrower  and  wider  context.  By  this 
I   mean  that   we   must   realize,   not   only  the   immediate 


07.',   FAITH  ACCORDING   TO   CHRIST.  403 

historical  situation,  but  also  the  general  historical  setting 
of  Christ's  ministry  and  its  environment. 

The  passage  referred  to  is  John  v.  '60-4,1 }  Here  in  strict- 
ness ver.  30  goes  rather  TV'ith  what  precedes  (vers.  19-29), 
re-enforcing  the  thought  underlying  ver.  19,  viz.  that  the 
secret  of  the  Son's  authority,  whether  in  deed  or  word, 
is  His  perfect  receptiveness  towards  the  Father,  to  whom 
His  inner  eye  is  ever  turned.  His  inward  ear  ever  open. 
But  the  words,  "  Because  I  seek  not  My  own  will,  but  the 
will  of  Him  that  sent  Me,"  supply  a  lesson  as  to  the  moral 
conditions  of  spiritual  receptivity,  which  will  prove  of  great 
moment  when  the  question  emerges,  as  to  what  determines 
predisposition  to  faith  or  the  reverse. 

In  the  earlier  part  of  the  chapter  we  are  told  how  the 
Jews  saw  in  Christ's  analogy  between  His  Father's  con- 
tinuous activity  in  the  world,  untrammelled  by  institutional 
restrictions,  and  His  own  freedom  in  beneficent  and  pro- 
phetic action,  spite  of  Sabbath-day  usages,  a  blasphemously 
individual  claim  to  the  relation  of  sonship  {irarepa  ISiov 
eXeye  rov  ©eov),  whereby  He  "made  Himself  equal  with 
God"  i^laov  kavTov  iroiwv  tm  0e&5).  Their  charge  Jesus 
met  by  correcting  their  crude  notion  that  rivalry  was 
inherent  in  the  sonship  which  His  words  implied,  in 
signalising  perfection  of  dependent  receptiveness  as  the 
unique  quality  which  made  His  action  the  analogue  of  the 
Father's.  This  done,  He  is  free  to  pass  on  to  justify  His 
personal  "  witness  "  by  witness  other  than  that  of  His  own 
subjective  consciousness  ;  for,  on  this  occasion,  nothing  but 
independent  evidence   will    suffice   to    convince  them  that 

'  Without  going  into  the  Johauniue  question  as  a  whole  (on  which,  see  Pro- 
fessor Sanclay's  articles  now  appearing  in  The  Expositok),  it  is  enough  here 
to  remark  that,  taking  the  passage  on  its  own  merits,  it  commends  itself  as 
authentic,  at  least  in  such  a  sense  as  to  justify  the  use  here  made  of  it.  On 
this  point  one  is  glad  to  be  able  to  refer  to  Dr.  Weudt's  judgment  as  to  its 
organic  unity  with  Synoptic  passages  of  the  first  weight  [Der  Inhalt  der  Lehre 
Jesu,  pp.  -151  ff). 


404  FIDES  DIVINA   ET  FIDES  HUMANA; 


one  who  bad  just  openly  ignored  their  Sabbath  could  be 
sent  of  God.  Accordingly,  Christ  is  confined  to  witness 
which  is  ad  hominem,  while  still  valid.  Yet  in  this  too 
there  are  degrees  of  value.  For  here  emerges  that  re- 
markable reserve,  in  acknowledging  rather  than  appealing 
to  human  attestation,  which  explains  the  wording  of  our 
title,  and  merits  closer  attention. 

The  thought  underlying  the  abrupt  turns  and  transitions 
which  abound  in  our  evangelist,  plainly  seems  to  be  as 
follows.  Self-witness  apart,  there  is  One  to  whose  witness 
confident  appeal  is  made  by  Jesus  Himself.  Lest  then  the 
Jews  should  imagine  that  the  Forerunner  was  thereby  in- 
tended, he  adds:  "  Ye  yourselves  (u^et?)  have  sent  embas- 
sage to  John,  and  he  has  given  his  witness  to  the  truth. 
But  as  for  Me  (e^co),  the  witness  that  I  accept  is  not  from 
man  {ov  irapd  avOpcoirov  tijv  /xapTvpLuv  Xafi/Sapco)  ;  howbeit 
I  refer  to  this  (John's  witness  in  answer  to  your  inquiries), 
that  ye  may  receive  salvation  {a-wOijre,  i.e.  even  on  basis  of 
trust  in  John's  testimony  rather  than  Mine  or  the  Father's). 
He  was  indeed  the  lamp  that  burneth  {Ka[.6/xevo<i)  and 
shineth  ;  and  as  for  you,  ye  were  glad  to  {ide\7]crar€)  exult, 
but  with  no  seriousness,  for  a  brief  hour  in  his  light. ^  But 
as  for  Me,  the  attestation  which  I  have  is  greater  than  that 
supplied  in  John  (/xet^w  tov  'Icodwov).  For  the  works 
which  the  Father  hath  given  Me  to  accomplish,  those  very 
works  which  I  do  testify  concerning  Me  that  it  was  the 
Father  who  sent  Me.  Ay,  and  the  Father  who  sent  Me, 
the  same  hath  testified  concerning  Me  {i.e.  in  the  Scrip- 
tures,"  mentioned  in  the  next   verse   but   one).      Neither 

1  Wcndt  compares  the  cliaugeful  mood  of  the  children  in  the  market-place, 
ready  to  respond  superficially  to  the  influence  of  the  hour.  But  Meyer  re- 
marks that  "  the  main  feature  of  the  perverted  desire  does  not  lie  in  Trpbs 
iopav,  .  .  .  but  in  dyaWiacrOrjvai.  itself,  instead  of  which  fitrdvoia  should 
have  been  the  object  of  their  pursuit."  "  Johanne  utenduin  erat,  nou  t'riien- 
dum  "  (Bengel). 

2  So  Meyer  and  Wendt  {I.e.,  p.  3G2,  note),  comparing  also  viii.  lG-19. 


0A^  FAITH  ACCORDING   TO  CIIllIST.  405 

voice  of  His  have  ye  ever  heard,  nor  form^  of  Him  have 
ye  seen ;  and  so  {koI  .  .  .  ov,  instead  of  ovre),  His 
word  ye  have  not  abiding  in  you,  for  He  whom  He 
commissioned  {aireareCkev) ,  Him  ye  do  not  beheve.  Ye 
search  the  Scriptures,  because  ye  yourselves  suppose  that 
in  them  ye  have  hfe  eternal ;  and  these  are  they  which 
testify  concerning  Me,  and  (yet)  ye  are  not  willing  to  come 
to  Me,  that  ye  may  have  life.  Think  not  that  this  is  the 
language  of  wounded  self-love.  Glory  from  men  I  accept 
not.  But  I  know  you,  that  the  love  of  God — the  very 
essence  of  your  law  (Mark  xii.  28  £f.) — ye  have  not  in 
your  hearts.  As  for  Me,  I  have  come  in  My  Father's  name 
(representing  Him  and  His  glory),  and  ye  accept  Me  not. 
If  another  shall  come  in  his  own  name  (with  no  such  zeal 
for  the  Father),  him  ye  will  accept.  How  can  men  such 
as  you  {vfieL<i)  believe,  seeing  that  ye  accept  glory  one  of 
another,  and  as  for  the  glory  that  cometh  from  the  only 
God,  ye  seek  it  not  ?  Suppose  not  that  it  is  I,  who  will 
accuse  you  before  the  Father.  Your  accuser  is  Moses, 
upon  whom  yourselves  have  set  your  hope.  For,  if  ye 
actually  believed  Moses, ^'  ye  would  believe  Me ;  for  he 
{iKecvo<;)  wrote  concerning  Me.  If,  however,  ye  believe 
not  Jiis  writings,  how  shall  ye  believe  My  words  ?  " 

Here  surely  we  have,  so  to  speak,  the  locus  classicus 
at  once  as  to  Christian  evidences,  and  as  to  authority,  so 
far  as  it  can  claim  Christ's  sanction,  as  being  "  witness  " 
worthy  of  Christian  "faith."  It  is  threefold.  First,  the 
ipse  dixit  of  a  great  man,  regarded  as  sent  of  God,  for  the 
bare  fact  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  the  Messiah,  to  whom 

1  Figurative  language  :  compare  our  own  "  voice  of  God  in  conscience  "  and 
"  vision  "  or  "  conception  of  God."  The  issue  in  either  case  is  God's  "  word  " 
in  the  heart,  a  relatively  non-figurative  expression. 

2  It  is  clear  that  the  reference  here  cannot  be  to  the  mere  promise  of  a 
Messiah  in  the  Prophet  of  Deuteronomy  xviii.  15.  For  it  was  not  the  fact  of  a 
Messiah  being  promised,  as  to  which  they  were  blind,  but  His  nature  and  char- 
acteristics. And  on  this  point  it  was  the  general  drift  of  the  Mosaic  ideal  to  be 
realized  in  Messiah  that  they  had  missed  (cf.  Luke  xvi.  29  ff.)- 


406  FIDES  DIVINA  ET  FIDES  HUMANA; 

the  prior  revelation  of  God  pointed:  "He  has  come." 
Secondly,  the  witness  supplied  by  the  works  of  this  Jesus, 
that  lie  is  indeed  the  Sent  of  God.  Finally  and  most 
impressively,  the  witness  of  God,  the  Sender,  represented 
as  Himself  testifying  directly  in  the  hearts  of  men,  yet  by 
means  of  the  older  Scriptures,  that  this  is  indeed  His  Son 
following  on  the  "  servants  "  already  sent  (Luke  xx.  9  ff.)  : 
that  this  is  Messiah,  who  unites  fully  and  personally 
the  attributes  contained  in  the  heart  of  those  Scriptures. 
With  the  second  aspect  of  the  witness  we  are  not  now 
concerned.  Suffice  it  to  note  its  place  in  the  organism  of 
witness.  There,  and  not  otherwise,  it  has  an  important 
function  to  perform,  though  one  necessarily  varying  in 
cogency  with  the  opportunities  enjoyed  by  an  age  or  indi- 
vidual for  assuring  itself  as  to  what  is,  in  form,  matter  of 
history.^  It  is  to  the  first  and  third,  therefore,  in  their 
mutual  relations,  and  to  the  "  faith  "  answering  to  each, 
that  we  must  address  our  inquiry. 

If  the  view  underlying  our  paraphrase  be  accepted,  then 
we  have  two  kinds  of  true  witness  contrasted  :  that  wherein 
the  source  emphasised  is  man ;  and  that  in  which  it  is  God. 
The  latter  is  superior,  decisive,  and  is  appealed  to.  The 
former  is  inferior,  provisional,  and  is  waived,  though  its 
useful  function  in  the  case  of  spiritual  minors  is  incidentally 
recognised.  The  contrasted  sources  of  witness  are  John 
and  the  Scriptures,  i.e.  a  man  and  a  "  book."  Why  then 
is  the  one  correlated  with  God,  while  the  other,  at  least 
formally,  is  not  so  related  ?  It  is  not  enough  to  say  that 
to  the  Jews  the  Scriptures  were  the  word  of  God  ;  while 
John,  though  equally  from  God,  was  to  them  at  best  an 

'  See  Latham's  Pastor  Pastorum;  or,  The  Schooling  of  the  Apontles  hy  our  Lord, 
in  which  the  "  works  "  of  Christ  are  jiut  in  their  correct  setting.  I  may  add 
that  the  "  works,"  particularly  when  taken  in  the  large  sense  in  which  Christ 
here  uses  the  term,  are  sensitive,  as  to  their  verisimilitude,  to  every  fresh  and 
deepened  insight  into  the  character  of  the  Worker  Himself.  And  this  latter 
depends  on  the  Father's  witness. 


OR,   FAITH  ACCORDING   TO  CHRIST.  407 

object  of  doubt.  This  does  not  go  to  the  root  of  the  matter. 
The  real  difference  is,  that  in  reference  to  the  book  their 
rehgious  conscience  was  essentially  involved ;  while  as  to 
John,  this  was  so  only  in  a  secondary  sense.  True,  their 
conscience  could  not  but  recognise  in  John  tokens  of  the 
prophet.  Still  not  only  did  such  derive  what  cogency 
they  had  from  John's  own  conformity  to  scriptural  ideals ; 
but  further,  and  more  emphatically,  even  acceptance  of 
Jesus  as  sent  of  God,  on  the  strength  of  John's  assertion, 
and  apart  from  a  sense  of  Christ's  quality  as  thus  sent,  was 
at  best  a  second-hand,  mechanical  sort  of  credence,  and 
had  the  fatal  defect  of  making  the  higher  depend  upon  the 
lower,  belief  in  the  Lord  upon  belief  of  the  servant. 

How  was  it  then  as  regards  the  attestation  in  the  Scrip- 
tures ?  They,  as  we  have  seen,  were  ultimate  norm  for 
recognition  of  the  Divine,  as  present  in  John.  They  would 
be  so,  therefore,  in  a  higher  degree,  touching  the  One  as 
to  whom  he  had  been  wont  to  cite  their  witness.  But  in 
what  sense  ?  Not  as  mere  written  record ;  not  even  as 
record  of  the  fact  that  Messiah  should  come.  No,  it  is 
not  upon  the  "  is  coming,"  but  upon  the  "He,"  that  the 
stress  falls,  in  the  scriptural  undertone  "  He  is  coming." 
Now  to  enter  into  the  character  of  the  person,  spiritual 
insight  is  requisite  ;  and  such,  says  Jesus,  can  come  from 
God  alone.  This  is  God's  witness,  whereby  His  "voice  "  is 
heard  echoing  through  the  Scriptures,  and  His  "form" 
is  seen  adumbrated  under  the  various  conceptions  of  the 
Divine  character.  This  is  His  "  word,"  the  essence  of 
His  thought  for  man,  in  virtue  of  which  alone  any  "  Scrip- 
ture-searching," however  painstaking,  can  conduct  to 
"  eternal  life  "  or  have  in  fact  any  religious  value.  More- 
over the  apprehension  of  this  "word"  is  vitally  connected 
with  the  "  love  of  God  "  in  the  heart,  each  being  the  con- 
dition for  progress  in  the  other. 

Dropping  now  direct  reference  to  the  historical  situation, 


408  FIDES  DIVINA  ET  FIDES  HUMANA; 

we  may  say  in  general  that  it  was  this  self-witness  in  the 
heart  God  creates  and  in  a  certain  sense  indwells  as  supreme 
authority,  that  the  prophets  of  the  Reformation,  ere  it 
passed  into  its  scholastic  stage,  indicated  by  the  testimonium 
Spiritus  sanctl  internum;  though  the  human  vehicle  con- 
ditioning His  witness  was  now  not  so  much  the  Old 
Testament  as  the  New.  The  priesthood — that  strangely 
changed  "John"  of  the  Middle  Ages — had  been  testifying 
clearly  enough  that  Christ,  the  Saviour  of  men,  was  come. 
But  their  testimony  was  one  which  made  little  or  no  appeal 
to  actual  Divine  witness,  and  indeed  supplied  but  little 
witness  that  befitted  such  august  co-operation.  But  now 
with  the  New  Testament,  the  Christ  had  been  re-discovered, 
and  the  conditions  for  truly  Divine  attestation  were  at 
hand. 

II. 

But  a  vital  question  remains  over  for  solution.  Why 
do  some  recognise  the  witness  of  God  in  their  heart  to  the 
Christ  of  the  Bible,  while  others  do  not?  In  other  words, 
what  is  the  condition  of  the  effectiveness  of  the  Divine 
testimony,  which,  with  Him  "  who  is  no  respecter  of 
persons,"  must  be  the  birthright  of  all  alike?  The  answer 
is  found  in  words  of  Christ,  such  as  "he  that  hath  ears 
to  hear,  let  him  hear";  "he  that  hath,  to  him  shall  be 
given"  of  aptitude  to  hear  God's  voice  in  conscience;  while 
as  for  him  "  that  hath  not  {i.e.  by  appropriative  obedience 
to  what  he  can  hear),  from  him  shall  be  taken  away  that 
which  he  hath"  (elsewhere  "  seemeth  or  thinketh  (So«?5) 
to  have  ").  This  represents  progress,  and  specifically  pro- 
gress into  the  present  Messianic  kingdom,  as  the  outcome 
of  a  prior  preparedness  of  heart.  In  its  realization,  initia- 
tive at  any  stage  is  of  God  who  "gives";  while  yet  if 
man  is  to  "  have,"  he  must  actively  receive  by  loyalty  to 
God's   whispered   yet    authoritative   will.      Thus    there   is 


07?,   FAITH  ACCORDING   TO   CHRIST.  409 

continuity  in  kind  between  the  preparation  and  the  issue, 
though  the  issue  may  often  be  of  the  nature  of  conscious 
crisis ;  and  the  kind  in  either  case  is  primarily  moral, 
though  of  that  inner  and  intense  quality  called  spiritual. 
For  the  process  is  that  of  the  whole  man,  focussed  in  his 
will,  with  two  ideal  poles  of  movement,  self  and  God.  Ho 
that  his  state  ultimately  determines  itself  as  self-centred 
(dead  to  God)  and  God-centred  (dead  to  self;  cf.  "saving" 
or  "  gaining  "  life,  and  "  losing  "  it).  It  is  this  and  nothing 
else,  that  finds  such  searching  expression  in  our  evangelist. 
Jesus  here  goes  behind  the  mere  fact  of  non-belief  upon 
Himself,  and  sees  therein  a  moral  inability,  having  its  roots 
in  a  habit  absolutely  at  variance  with  that  underlying  His 
own  life,  and  implying  an  ideal  of  self-seeking  in  the  subtle 
form  of  love  of  human  applause,  which  negatives  that  of 
filially  dependent  intercourse  with  the  Father,  so  manifest 
in  Him. 

"Faith,"  then,  according  to  Christ,  is  vital  trust,  spring- 
ing from  at  least  latent  moral  or  spiritual  affinity.  It  is 
morally  conditioned,  and  so  contains  an  element  of  responsi- 
bility. This  hint  the  evangehst,  pained  at  heart  by  reason 
of  the  general  unbelief  of  his  countrymen  the  Jews,  eagerly 
treasured  up  in  his  soul,  and  later  on  gave  forth  in  the 
form  of  a  sort  of  soliloquy,  following  on  the  unique  sum- 
mary of  the  gospel  message  to  erring  man  (John  iii.  16)  : 
"  Ay,  God  so  loved  the  world,  that  He  gave  His  Son  with 
saving  intent.  But  ah  !  how  few,  even  of  the  chosen  people, 
have  received  Him  by  believing  upon  His  name  !  Those 
judged  seem  to  outnumber  those  justified,  to  wit,  those 
brought  to  judgment,  here  and  now,  in  repentance,  and  so 
ushered  into  a  life  on  which,  as  such,  judgment  hath  no 
longer  effect  (ou  Kpiverai),  "  eternal  life."  What  then  is 
the  principle  of  judgment  latent  in  this  message  of  love  ? 
What  the  basis  of  distinction?  For  at  least  God,  who  is 
love,  must   have  no  willing  hand  therein.     That  were  to 


410  FIDES  DIVINA  ET  FIDES  HUMANA; 


deny  Himself.  It  must  be  man's  own  suicidal  act  that 
works  his  ruin.  Yet  how  ?  It  was  as  the  light  that  the 
Lord  came  unto  men.  And  man  was  made  to  recognise 
and  love  the  light,  forcgleams  of  whose  presence  had  been 
in  the  world  from  the  first — oft  ignored,  never  fully  com- 
prehended, yet  never  quenched.  But,  alas  !  to  "  recog- 
nise "  is  not  jper  se  to  "love."  For  what  man  loves, 
shapes  in  the  end  the  deeds  of  man.  And  man  has  deeds 
far  alien  from  the  deeds  of  light  :  deeds  that  as  done 
involve  his  sympathies,  deeds  that  still  he  hopes  to  do. 
Such  deeds,  preferred  as  promising  immediate  gratification, 
bias  the  man's  affections  and  will.  For,  after  all,  he  must 
in  certain  sense  love  his  own  cause,  however  bad,  just 
because  it  is  his  own.  When  then  the  light  so  shines  as 
to  make  evasion  vain,  man  can  force  himself  to  call  light 
darkness,  and  trace  its  works  to  evil  source.  It  was  this 
the  Master  called  sin  against  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  course 
which  in  the  end  quenches  His  rays  in  utter  darkness. 
Yes,  the  light  tests  the  deeds  of  each ;  laying  bare  their 
spring  in  self  or  in  God,  and  judging  all  by  secret  affinity. 
For  "  like  to  like "  is  still  the  law  that  rules  the  soul. 
Faith  after  all  is,  in  one  respect,  but  reaction  of  the  human 
spirit  to  stimulus  from  God.  Where  response  has  been 
as  it  should  be,  there  may  come  yet  higher  things.  Till 
the  supreme  crisis  is  reached,  in  which  Christ  is  recognised 
and  accepted  as  very  Message  of  God,  life  of  the  soul. 
Saviour  and  Lord."  ^ 

III. 

Such  would  seem  to  be  our  evangelist's  soliloquy  as  to 
the  genesis  of  "faith"  and  its  converse.  Do  we  not  need 
to  ask  ourselves  seriously,  whether  this  is  really  our  root- 

'  Jolm  iii.  ll)-21.  With  this  compare  the  Greek  Apologists'  doctriDC  of  the 
\6yoi  (TirepixaTiKos  in  men  before  Christ,  makiug  them  "  friends  of  Christ "  by 
anticipation  ;  as  also  TertuUiau's  "  anima  naturaliter  Christiana." 


OR,  FAITH  ACCORDING   TO  CHRIST.  411 

idea  in  the  matter ;  whether  after  many  ages  we  have 
entered  into  his  thought,  as  distinct  from  his  words,  and 
made  it  our  habit  of  mind  in  things  of  faith  ?  For  after  all, 
this  seems  to  be  the  veritable  thought  of  the  Master  Him- 
self. Can  it  be  wise,  then,  for  us  to  suffer  the  emphasis  of 
our  thoughts  and  words  as  to  faith,  and  the  authority  on 
which  it  must  rest,  to  fall  at  all  otherwise  than  fell  the 
stress  of  His  concern  as  to  men's  attitude  ?  Surely  none 
of  us  can,  least  of  all  those  who  lay  pre-eminent  claim  to 
the  name  evangelical.  Happily,  to-day  no  one  school  can 
or  should  claim  for  itself  a  monopoly  of  the  effort  to  reflect 
the  "gospel"  of  the  Gospels.  But  at  least  it  befits  those 
who  most  emphasise  this  aim,  which  yet  should  lie  clear 
before  all,  to  spare  no  effort  to  pierce  through  the  traditional 
form  which  a  term  so  sensitive  to  the  general  attitude  and 
outlook  tends  to  assume  in  our  instinctive  thought ;  and 
to  ask  what  right  "  faith,"  in  its  current  senses,  has  to 
be  called  the  thing  which  Christ  delighted  to  honour.  The 
feeling  cannot  then  be  long  resisted  that  here,  at  any  rate, 
we  are  in  sore  need  of  a  New  Reformation,  a  reformation 
which  shall  do  more  thoroughly  what  the  Old  was  too 
deeply  involved  in  the  past  to  do.  AVe  need  to  get  face  to 
face  with  the  New  Testament  as  authentic  mirror  of  Christ, 
and  from  Him,  and  none  less,  to  derive  what  is  bound  to 
determine  all  our  thought  on  things  of  faith,  the  very  notion 
of  "  faith  "  itself.  "  Faith  "  as  an  attitude  of  trust  is  defin- 
able through  its  object.  In  so  far  as  that  object  has  con- 
sisted, not  so  much  in  a  Person,  revealing  in  the  form  of 
man  another  Person,  God  His  Father,  as  in  an  organized 
body  of  dogmas,  to  this  degree  the  emphasis  of  "faith,"  as 
Christ  sought  and  evoked  it,  has  been  lost,  and  its  essence 
thereby  altered.  The  soul,  striving  to  realize  it,  is  thrown 
into  a  different  and  far  less  simple  attitude,  one,  also,  far 
less  indicative  of  its  real  character  and  moral  sympathies. 
The   result  tends   to  be  a  seeming  premium  placed  upon 


412  FIDES  DIVINA  ET  FIDES  HUMANA; 

mental  and  spiritual  torpor.  Not  the  man  of  truest  con- 
science, but  the  man  of  most  mindless  acquiescence  as  to 
terms  not  half  understood,  inevitably  becomes  the  average 
"man  of  faith,"  as  we  may  see  in  the  later  use  of  the  term 
"the  faithful,"  i.e.  those  in  whose  mind  the  phrases  of  the 
creed  excited  no  opposition.  Surely  this  is  but  a  negative 
virtue  at  best,  and  supplies  in  itself  no  guarantee  that  the 
"root  of  the  matter"  is  in  a  man.  "Whereas,  if  faith,  in 
its  true  Christian  sense,  be  in  a  man,  all  that  is  necessary 
as  to  orthodoxy  "  shall  be  added  "  thereunto.  Nor  can  we 
wonder  that  Christ  Himself  withheld  the  title  of  disciple 
from  none  who  thus  met  Him  with  an  open,  childlike  devo- 
tion, when  we  consider  that  it  was  just  among  those  of 
least  mental  attainments  (as  contrasted  with  the  reflexion 
which  goes  hand  in  hand  with  moral  earnestness),  that  He 
sought  and  found  believers  in  His  gospel.  Matthew  xi. 
25  ff.  is  here  decisive,  not  only  for  the  fact,  but  also  as  by 
anticipation  precluding  a  plausible  objection,  often  urged 
against  anything  like  the  use  of  such  cases  as  precedents 
for  all  time.  Conditions,  it  is  said,  change.  Things  become 
explicit  which  were  once  indeterminate,  and  obligation 
arises  to  submit  to  articles  of  faith,  at  least  formally  in 
excess  of  what  was  realized  by  the  men  whose  faith  Christ 
blessed.  But  surely  there  is  confusion  here.  To  realize 
such  articles  may  be  helpful,  when  one  has  the  mind  to 
achieve  this.  To  deny  them  when  understood  may  logi- 
cally be  fatal  to  true  Christian  faith,  even  of  the  primitive 
type.  But,  where  conviction  is  lacking,  to  leave  them  in 
abeyance  for  the  time — though  earnest  souls  cannot  be 
content  to  do  so  altogether  and  permanently — this,  surely, 
cannot  be  construed  as  forfeiting  a  man's  title  to  the  Chris- 
tian name.  Our  Lord's  own  interest  lies  in  the  fact  that  it 
is  the  Father  who  reveals  the  essential  truth  of  His  gospel, 
and  that  to  "babes."  The  "truth,"  too,  that  is  presented 
to  their  "faith,"  though  vitally  connected  with  a  Person, 


OR,  FAITH  ACCORDING   TO  CUEIST.  413 


to  whom  they  are  called  to  stand  in  a  certain  unique  rela- 
tion of  trust,  is  primarily  truth  as  practical.  It  is  "  truth  " 
of  the  kind  that  may  be  "done"  (John  iii.  21)  ;  truth  that 
a  man  is  to  learn  by  becoming  Christ's  yokefellow.  Ac- 
cordingly, to  use  modern  distinctions  alien  to  the  religious 
language  of  the  gospels,  the  "  truth  "  contemplated  is  moral 
rather  than  metaphysical.  So  then  we  must  be  content 
to  admit  that  true  "faith"  is  essentially  compatible  with 
no  small  indeterminateness  as  to  certain  philosophic  ques- 
tions as  to  how  and  why ;  that  even  as  regards  these, 
continuance  in  this  attitude  of  loyalty  may  keep  a  man 
practically  right;  and  that  the  manner  in  which  truths  are 
appropriated  is  the  thing  which,  religiously  speaking,  is  of 
value.  Convictions  as  to  speculative  aspects  of  the  life 
of  faith  should  represent  vital  outgrowth  of  the  spiritual 
life,  whereby  they  become  necessary  parts  of  the  soul's 
enlarging  horizon. 

IV. 

It  may  be  well,  however,  before  closing,  to  bring  to  a 
head  what  has  been  said,  by  means  of  a  concrete  example. 
Peter's  confession  is  a  crucial  case.  Its  historical  setting 
should  be  carefully  borne  in  mind.  During  a  prolonged 
intercourse,  Jesus  had  been  careful  not  to  force  an  artificial 
faith  by  explicit  dogmatic  utterances  as  to  His  own  Person. 
In  keeping  with  His  general  parabolic  method,  He  had 
chosen  rather  to  evoke,  by  suggestive  word  and  deed,  a  living 
and  spontaneous  trust,  such  as  by  vital  necessity  finds  itself 
gradually  attaining  a  clearer  consciousness  as  to  the  signifi- 
cance of  His  Person  in  relation  to  His  ministry.  And  now 
He  brings  this  faith  to  birth  by  a  sudden  personal  ques- 
tion.    "Thou  art  the  Christ,"^  ejaculates  the    apostle  of 

1  That  this  is  the  essence  of  the  confession  is  proved  by  the  fact  that  it  is 
the  common  element  in  the  three  forms  in  which  the  confession  is  found  in  the 
Synoptists  (Mark  viii.  29,  Matt.  xvi.  16  Luke  ix.  20). 


414  FIDES  DIVINA  ET  FIDES  HUMANA; 


impulsive  utterance.  But  how  deep  a  preparation  of  heart 
has  here  its  outcome,  is  shown,  not  only  in  the  joyous 
emi^hasis  of  the  Master's  "  Blessed  art  thou,  Simon  son 
of  John ;  for  flesh  and  blood  revealed  it  not  unto  thee, 
hut  My  Father  who  is  in  heaven";  but  also  in  the 
glimpse  we  get  in  John's  gospel  of  the  inner  experience 
which,  on  the  human  side,  was  therein  implied.  "  Lord, 
to  whom  shall  we  go  ?  Words  of  life  eternal  Thou  hast ; 
and  we  have  beheved  (are  *  convinced,'  ireTncnevKa^ev),  and 
know  (or  '  recognise '  =  eyvMKa/j,ep,  not  o'lSa/iev)  that  Thou 
art  the  Holy  One  of  God."  "Depart  from  me:  for  I 
am  a  sinful  man,  0  Lord,"  is  not  the  goal,  though  it 
marks  the  start.  "No  man  can  {Svyarai)  come  to  Me, 
except  it  be  given  him  of  My  Father,"  is  the  general 
account  rendered  of  such  "  faith."  Note  this  emphasis 
in  its  bearing  on  what  follows  the  blessing.  Thus  the 
Eock  will  be  fides  divina,  both  subjective  and  objective, 
amid  the  shifting  sands  of  human  tradition  and  specula- 
tion, which  enter  so  largely  into  the  formation  of  the  mere 
fides  humana}  Doubtless  such  a  view  will  appear  arbi- 
trary to  some ;  to  those  especially  whose  eyes  are  rivetted 
immovably  upon  the  related  terms,  TTerpo^  and  irhpa, 
in  the  impressive  turn  of  language  attributed  to  the 
Master.  But  perhaps  a  deeper  feeling  for  the  pulse,  as  it 
were,  of  the  context  would  see  in  Peter,  spite  of  his 
impulsive  nature,  the  typically  loyal  man,  when  steadied 
by  the  very  fibre  of  another's  rock-like  immutability. 
AVhile  as  to  the  Eock  itself,  the  whole  genius  of  the  Chris- 
tian system,  as  seen  not  only  in  the  gospels,  but  also  in 
the  epistles,  including  that  of  Peter  himself,  cries  out  aloud 
against  its  being    other    than  "  the    Christ   of   faith  "   en- 

'  For  the  formal  definition  of  these  terms,  see  Martensen's  Christian  Dogmatics 
(Introduction),  and  Dorner,  System  of  Christian  Doctrine,  vol.  i.,  in  his  section 
on  "  Tiie  Doctiine  of  Faith  as  the  Postiilate  in  the  Cognition  of  Christianity  as 
Truth." 


07?,  FAITH  ACCORDING   TO  CHRIST.  415 

shrined  in  human  hearts,  as  here  in  Peter's.^  It  is  His 
to  bear  the.  weight  of  the  Church-kingdom,  of  which  it  can 
be  truly  said,  "  ubi  Christus,  ibi  ecclesia."  It  was  Peter's 
as  key-bearer  in  a  special  sense,  to  formally  open  the  gospel 
dispensation  of  the  Spirit,  as  well  as  to  define  the  condi- 
tions of  entrance,  as  may  be  seen  from  the  Acts. 

There  are  one  or  two  corollaries  which  seem  to  attach 
themselves  naturally  to  the  discussion  now  ended. 

(a)  It  is  certainly  becoming  increasingly  difficult  to  be- 
lieve in  either  Bible  or  Church,  apart  from  their  relation 
to  the  self-attesting  Person  of  Christ,  whose  lineaments  are 
enshrined  in  the  former,  and  who  is  presupposed  as  the 
key  to  the  riddles  of  both  alike.  But,  on  the  other  hand, 
it  is  becomjng  increasingly  possible,  through  the  greater 
precision  and  delicacy  of  the  historical  method,  to  get  face 
to  face  with  Jesus  Christ.  Accordingly  the  docile  can  gain 
a  deeper  insight  than  ever  into  Him  who  "  bears  witness 
to  Himself"  in  satisfying  the  now  deepened  needs  of  men. 
Thus  enabled,  they  can  say,  humbly  but  exultantly,  to  each 
of  the  vehicles  which,  amid  the  human  imperfection  of  the 
"letter,"  yet  direct  men's  eyes  to  Christ,  "No  longer  is  it 
on  account  of  th}^  speech  that  we  believe  :  for  ourselves  have 
heard  and  know  that  this  is  of  a  truth  the  Saviour  of  the 
world"  (John  iv.  42).  Christ,  as  perfect,  guarantees  both 
Church   and  Bible,  not  vice  versa.     This  is   recognised  by 

'  The  references  above  made  are  to  Matt.  vii.  24  ff.  (''My  words"  =  "a 
rock"),  1  Cor.  iii.  10  ff.  (Christ  the  one  6e/x^\tov),  and  1  Pet.  ii.  -i-G,  where 
even  the  strange  idea  of  stones  constituted  living  by  relation  to  a  fundamental 
"  living  stone,"  seems  to  explain  the  relation  between  llerpos  and  wtrpa  in 
Matthew.  Lightfoot  ("  St.  Peter  in  Rome,"  in  his  Clement,  vol.  ii.  p.  487) 
remarks  that  "  as  a  matter  of  exegesis,  it  seems  to  be  more  strictly  explained 
7iot  of  Peter  himself :  for  then  he  should  expect  eiri  aot  rather  than  ewi  TavTrj 
rrj  Trerpgt."  But  when  he  proceeds  to  refer  the  promise  to  the  historical 
inauguration  of  the  Church  on  the  basis  of  Peter's  "constancy,"  we  feel  that 
this  is  to  limit  to  a  single  historic  fact  the  bearing  of  a  principle  which  really 
expresses  the  process  or  condition  of  Christ's  continuous  luildinii. 


416  FIDES  DIVINA   ET  FIDES  HUMANA. 


the  best  thinkers  in  all  Churches.  But  greater  emphasis 
on  it  in  public  is  much  to  be  desired. 

(i)  In  arguing  for  such  direct  faith  as  the  truly  Christian 
faith,  one  is  not  extolling  faith's  primal  rudimentariness 
as  such.  AVhat  is  urged  is  that  the  sense  of  the  immediate 
witness  of  God,  as  the  living  God,  so  present  in  conscience 
as  to  make  His  witness  the  supreme  reality,  is  of  vital 
religious  import.  And  that  in  so  far  as  this  implies  the 
necessity  of  a  gradual  growth  in  the  fulness  and  clearness 
of  the  content  of  faith,  which  again  implies  initial  vague- 
ness, the  gain  outweighs  the  loss.  This  aspect  of  the 
subject  has  been  admirably  worked  out  by  Mr.  Latham, 
and  so  need  not  be  dwelt  on.  That  in  its  development 
such  faith  costs  not  a  little,  in  the  way  of  patience  and 
self-discipline,  may  even  be  regarded  as  a  watermark  of 
its  true  quality. 

Our  subject  so  far  has  been  one  ideal  of  Christian  faith 
as  contrasted  with  another.  But  we  cannot  close  without 
a  reference  to  the  bearing  of  "faith  in  Christ"  according 
to  Christ,  upon  an  age  of  widespread  doubt.  This  will 
help  us  to  realize  how  rich  and  positive  a  possession  such 
faith  is.  Broadly  speaking  then,  while  the  world  is  becom- 
ing to  us  more  rational,  an  old  and  inveterate  problem  is 
daily  assuming  a  more  acute  form.  This  is  the  problem  as 
to  the  relation  of  the  physical  and  spiritual  orders,  viewed 
especially  in  its  human  and  moral  aspect.  The  validity  of 
moral  ideals  is  in  question.  Duty,  freedom,  immortality, 
are  in  doubt;  and  to  this  extent  life  is  being  paralysed. 
When  men  scrutinize  the  borderland  between  the  material 
and  the  mental,  faith  in  the  spiritual  waxes  low.  But  when 
they  dwell  on  the  points  at  which  the  contrast  is  greatest, 
such  faith  tends  to  revive,  and  that  in  proportion  to  the 
spirituality  of  a  man's  own  life  and  effort.  Yet  even  with 
the  best  there  are  moments  far  below  the  ideal,  when  the 
flesh  would,  as  it  were,  annex  the  spirit.     At  such  times, 


JUDjEA.  417 

what  a  world  of  meaning  and  hope  would  lie  in  the  assur- 
ance that  One  in  our  nature  did  once  live  free  from  bondaefe 
to  the  flesh,  even  in  its  sublimated  forms,  as  befitted  One 
from  above,  who  j^et  represented  the  true  destiny  of  His 
fellows.  But  has  such  really  been?  "Come  and  see," 
reply  the  gospels  :  "  come  with  your  deepened  sense  that 
He  who  could  live  a  perfect  life  amid  imperfect,  earthy 
men,  must  be  superhuman,  supernatural,  not  from  below, 
but  from  above."  If  then  men  come,  and  read  His  life 
through  their  own  inmost  consciences,  and  find  Him  like 
as  man,  yet  as  the  Perfect  all  unlike,  what  may  be  the 
issue?  May  they  not  ask  Him,  saying,  "Perfect  in  life, 
august  yet  humble,  what  hast  Thou  out  of  the  perfect 
mirror  of  Thy  heart  to  tell  us  of  Thy  Source,  Thy 
Whence"?  And  He  make  answer:  "From  the  Father, 
from  My  Father  and  your  Father  ;  I  know  My  Whence  and 
Whither."  And  may  not  His  self- witness,  which  yet  is  of 
Another,  convince  the  earnest  heart  and  kindle  "faith" 
that  shall  brighten  to  the  perfect  day  ? 

Vernon  Bartlet. 


THE  HISTOBICAL  GEOGRAPHY  OF  THE  HOLY 

LAND. 

IV.     JUD.EA. 

Having  gone  round  about  Judsea,  and  marked  well  her 
bulwarks,^  we  may  now  draw  some  conclusions  as  to  the 
exact  measure  of  her  strength.  Judaea  has  been  called  im- 
pregnable, but,  as  we  must  have  seen,  the  adjective  exag- 
gerates. To  the  north  she  has  no  frontier ;  her  southern 
border  offers  but  few  obstacles  after  the  desert  is  passed ; 
with  all   their  difficulties,  her  eastern  and  western  walls 

'  ExposiTou  for  April.     The  Central  Range  and  the  Borders  of  Juda?a. 
VOL.  V.  27 


418  JUD^A. 

have  been  carried  again  and  again  ;  and  even  the  dry  and 
intricate  wilderness,  to  which  her  defenders  have  more 
than  once  retired,  has  been  rifled  to  its  furthest  recesses. 
Judam,  in  fact,  has  been  overrun  as  often  as  England. 

And  yet,  like  England,  Judoea,  though  not  impregnable, 
has  all  the  advantages  of  insularity.  It  is  singular  how 
much  of  an  island  this  inland  province  really  is.  With  the 
gulf  of  the  Arabah  to  the  east,  with  the  desert  to  the  south, 
and  lifted  high  and  unattractive  above  the  line  of  traffic 
that  sweeps  past  her  on  the  west,  Judcea  is  separated  as 
much  as  by  water  from  the  two  great  continents,  to  both 
of  which  she  otherwise  belongs.  So  open  at  many  points, 
the  land  is  yet  sufficiently  unpromising  and  sufficiently 
remote  to  keep  unprovoked  foreigners  away.  Thus  Judrea 
was  designed  to  produce  in  her  inhabitants  the  sense  of 
seclusion  and  security,  though  not  to  such  a  degree  as  to 
relieve  them  from  the  attractions  of  the  great  world,  which 
throbbed  closely  past,  or  to  relax  in  them  those  habits  of 
discipline,  vigilance  and  valour,  which  are  the  necessary 
elements  of  a  nation's  character.  In  the  position  of  Judaea 
there  was  not  enough  to  tempt  her  people  to  put  their 
confidence  in  herself;  but  there  was  enough  to  encourage 
them  to  the  defence  of  their  freedom  and  a  strenuous  life.^ 
And  while  the  isolation  of  their  land  was  sufficient  to  con- 
firm the  truth  of  their  calling  to  a  discipline  and  a  destiny, 
separate  from  other  peoples,  it  was  not  so  complete  as  to 
keep  them  in  barbarian  ignorance  of  the  great  world,  or 
to  release  them  from  those  temptations  to  mix  with  the 
world,  in  meeting  which  their  discipline  and  their  destiny 
could  alone  be  realised. 

All  this  receives  exact  illustration  from  both  Psalmists 
and  Prophets.     They  may  rejoice  in  the  fertility  of  their 

'  In  the  Leant  of  all  Lands,  Princiijal  IMillcr  has  some  very  valuable  re- 
marks upon  the  influence  of  the  physical  geography  of  Palestine  upon  tho 
character  of  the  people. 


JUDyEA.  419 

land,  but  they  never  boast  of  its  strength.  On  the  contrary, 
of  the  real  measure  of  the  latter  they  show  a  singularly 
sagacious  appreciation.  Thus,  Isaiah's  fervid  faith  in  Zion's 
inviolableness  does  not  blind  him  to  the  openness  of  Judah's 
northern  entrance  :  it  is  in  one  of  his  passages  of  warmest 
exultation  about  Zion  that  he  describes  the  easy  advance  of 
the  Assyrian  to  her  walls. ^  Both  he  and  other  prophets 
frequently  recognise  how  swiftly  the  great  military  Powers 
will  overrun  Judah  ;  and  when  they  except  Jerusalem  from 
the  consequences,  it  is  not  because  of  her  natural  strength, 
but  by  their  faith  in  the  direct  intervention  of  God  Him- 
self. So  at  last  it  happened.  In  the  great  crisis  of  her 
history,  the  invasion  by  Sennacherib,  Judah  was  saved,  as 
England  was  saved  from  the  Armada,  neither  by  the 
strength  of  her  bulwarks,  for  they  had  all  been  burst,  nor 
by  the  valour  of  her  men,  for  the  heart  had  gone  from  them, 
but  because,  apart  from  human  help,  God  Himself  crushed 
her  insolent  foes  in  the  moment  of  their  triumph."  The 
most  concise  expression  of  this  is  found  in  the  forty-eighth 
Psalm,  where,  though  beautiful  for  situation  is  Mount  Zion 
in  the  sides  of  the  north,-^  and  established  for  ever,  it  is  God 
Himself  who  is  Jcnown  in  her  j^^tlaces  for  a  refuge ;  and 
when  the  writer  has  loalhed  about  Zion  and  gone  round 
about  her,  and  told  the  towers  thereof,  marlied  well  her  bid- 
warhs  and  considered  her  palaces,  it  is  yet  not  in  all  these 
that  he  triumphs,  but  this  is  the  result  of  his  survey  :  this 
God  is  our  God  for  ever  and  ever,  He  -will  be  our  Guide  even 
unto  death.  Judah  was  not  impregnable,  but  she  was  better 
— she  was  in  charge  of  an  invincible  Providence. 

With  their  admission  of  the  weakness  of  Judah's  position, 
there  runs  through  the  prophets  an  appreciation  of  her  un- 
attractiveness,  and  that  leads  them,  and  especially  Isaiah, 

1  Isaiah  x.  .32.     See  Exi'OsiTor.  for  April,  p.  310. 

2  2  KinRS  xviii.,  xix.  ;  Isaiah  xxxiii. ,  xxxvii. 

^  Probably  a  phrase  for  the  sacredness  and  inviolableness  of  its  site. 


420  JUD^A. 

to  insist  that  under  God  her  security  hes  in  this  and  in  her 
people's  contentment  with  this.  Though  they  recognise 
how  vuhierable  the  land  is,  the  prophets  maintain  that  she 
will  he  left  alone  if  her  people  are  quiet  upon  her,  and  if 
her  statesmen  avoid  intrigue  with  the  great  foreign  powers. 
To  the  kings  of  Israel,  to  Ahaz,  to  Hezekiah's  counsellors, 
to  Josiah,  the  same  warnings  are  given  :  ^  Asshur  shall  not 
save  us  :  vje  ivill  not  ride  upon  horses."  Woe  to  them  that 
go  down  to  Egypt  for  help,  and  stay  on  horses  and  trust  in 
chariots.  In  returning  and  rest  sliall  ye  he  saved:  in  quiet- 
ness and  in  confidence  sliall  he  your  strength.^ 

Thus  we  see  how  the  physical  geography  of  Palestine  not 
only  makes  clear  such  subordinate  things  as  the  campaigns 
and  migrations  of  the  Old  Testament,  but  signahses  the 
providence  of  God,  the  doctrine  of  His  prophets,  and  the 
character  He  demanded  from  His  people.  It  was  a  great 
lesson  the  Spirit  taught  Israel,  that  no  people  dwells  secure 
apart  from  God,  from  character,  from  commonsense.  But 
the  land  was  the  illustration  and  enforcement  of  this 
lesson.  Juda3a  proved,  but  did  not  exhaust,  nor  tempt  men 
to  feel  that  she  exhausted,  the  will  and  power  of  God  for 
their  salvation.  As  the  writer  of  the  Hundred  and  Twenty- 
first  Psalm  feels,  her  hills  were  not  the  answer  to,  but  the 
provocation  of,  the  question,  Whence  cometh  my  help  ?  and 
Jehovah  Himself  was  the  answer.  As  for  her  prophets, 
a  great  part  of  their  sagacity  is  but  the  true  appreciation 
of  her  position.  And  as  for  the  character  of  her  people, 
while  she  gave  them  room  to  be  free  and  to  worship  God, 
and  offered  no  inducement  to  them  to  put  herself  in  His 
place,  she  did  not  wholly  shut  them  off  from  danger  or 
temptation,  for  without  danger  and  temptation  it  is  im- 
possible that  a  nation's  character  should  be  strong. 

'  Ahaz,  cf.  2  Kiugs  xvi.  with  Isaiah  vii, 
2  Hosea  xiv.  3,  cf.  xii.  1. 
•'  Isaiah  xxxi.  1,  xxx.  15. 


JUDJEA.  421 

From  the  borders  and  bulwarks  of  Juda3a  we  pass  to 
survey  the  plateau  in  wbich  the  main  part  of  her  consists. 
This  plateau,  as  I  have  already  said,  is  little  more  than 
thirty-five  miles  long,  reckoning  from  Bethel  to  the  group  of 
cities  south  of  Hebron — Carmel,  Maon,  Eshtemoh,  Juttah, 
Zanoah,  and  Kiriath-sepher.  The  breadth  varies  from 
fourteen  to  seventeen  miles,  reckoning  from  the  western 
edge  of  the  plateau  above  the  valley  which  separates  it  from 
the  Shephelah,  to  where  on  the  east  the  level  drops  below 
1,700  feet  and  into  desert. 

A  large  part  of  this  plateau  consists  of  level  moors,  tree- 
less and  stony,  upon  which  rough  scrub  and  thistle,  rein- 
forced by  a  few  dwarf  oaks,  contend  with  multitudes  of 
boulders,  and  the  limestone,  as  if  impatient  of  the  thin  pre- 
tence of  soil,  breaks  out  into  bare  scalps  and  prominences. 
Some  patches  there  are  of  cultivation,  but  though  the  grain 
springs  bravely  from  them,  they  seem  more  beds  of  shingle 
than  of  soil.  The  only  other  signs  of  life,  besides  the  wild 
bee,  are  flocks  of  sheep,  or  goats,  or  a  few  cattle,  cropping 
far  apart  in  melancholy  proof  of  the  scantiness  of  the  herb- 
age. There  is  no  water :  no  tarns  breaking  into  streams 
enliven  the  landscape  as  upon  even  the  most  desolate  moors 
of  our  north,  but  at  noon  the  cattle  go  down  by  dusty  paths 
to  some  silent  cistern  within  the  glaring  walls  of  a  gorge. 
Where  the  plateau  rolls,  the  shadeless  slopes  are  for  the 
most  part  divided  between  brown  scrub  and  grey  rock  ;  the 
hollows  are  stony  fields  traversed  by  torrent  beds  of  dirty 
boulders  and  gashed  clay.  AVhere  the  plateau  breaks  into 
ridge  and  glen,  the  ridge  is  often  crowned  by  a  village,  the 
greystone  walls  and  mud  roofs  looking  from  the  distance 
like  a  mere  outcrop  of  the  rock  ;  yet  round  them,  or  below 
in  the  glen,  there  will  be  olive-groves,  figs  and  perhaps  a 
few  terraces  of  vines.  Some  of  these  breaks  in  the  table- 
land are  very  rich  in  vegetation,  as  at  Bethany,  the  Valley 
of  Hinnom,  the  Gardens  of  Solomon,  and  other  spots  round 


422  JUD^A. 

Bethlehem,  and  especially  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Hebron, 
the  famous  Vale  of  Eshcol,  or  "  the  Vine  Cluster."  There, 
indeed,  are  verdure  and  shade  as  much  as  heart  could  wish. 
With  these  exceptions  to  the  general  character  of  the  hill- 
country  of  Judfea,  goes  another  of  a  different  kind.  Be- 
tween Hebron  and  the  wilderness  there  are  nine  miles 
by  three  of  plateau,  where  Maon,  Ziph  and  the  Judcean 
Carmel  stood,  where  David  hid  himself  in  the  thicket  ^  and 
the  farms  of  Nabal  lay."-  Here  the  soil  is  almost  free  from 
stones,  and  the  red  and  green  fields,  broken  by  a  few  heathy 
mounds,  might  be  a  scene  of  upland  agriculture  in  our  own 
country. 

But  the  prevailing  impression  of  Judtea  is  of  stone — the 
dry  torrent  beds,  the  paths  as  stony,  the  heaps  and  dykes  of 
stones  gathered  from  the  fields,  the  fields  as  stony  still,  the 
moors  strewn  with  boulders,  the  obtrusive  scalps  and  ribs 
of  the  hills.  In  the  more  desolate  parts,  which  had  other- 
wise been  covered  by  scrub,  this  impression  is  increased 
by  the  ruins  of  ancient  cultivation — cairns,  terrace-walls, 
and  vineyard  towers. 

Now  if  you  add  to  this  bareness  two  other  deficiencies  of 
feature,  you  complete  that  dreariness  which  so  many  bring 
away  as  their  chief  memory  of  Judaea.  On  all  her  stony 
tableland  the  only  gleams  of  water  are  the  few  pools  at 
Jerusalem,  Bethlehem,  and  Hebron  ;  and  I  do  not  suppose 
that  from  Beersheba  to  Bethel  there  are  more  than  six  or 
seven  tiny  rills.  There  is  no  lake,  river,  or  cascade.  No 
water  to  soothe  the  eye,  there  are  also  no  great  hills  to  lift 
it.  There  is  no  edge  or  character  upon  the  horizon.  From 
the  western  boundary  of  the  plateau,  of  course,  you  see 
the  blue  ocean  with  its  border  of  broken  gold,  and  from  the 
eastern  boundary  the  Moab  Hills,  that  change  their  colours 
all  day  long  above  the  changeless  blue  of  the  Dead  Sea. 
But  in  the  centre  of  the  hill  country,  there  is  nothing  to 

*  1  Fam,  ^xiii.  liJ.  -  Id.  xxiv. 


JUDJEA.  423 

look  to  past  the  featureless  roll  of  the  moorland,  and  the 
low  blunt  hills  with  the  flat-roofed  villages  upon  them. 

Was  the  land  always  like  this  ?  For  answer,  we  have 
three  portraits  of  ancient  Judah.  The  first  is  perhaps  the 
most  voluptuous  picture  in  the  Old  Testament.^ 

Binding  to  the  vine  his  foal 

And  to  tlve  choice  vine  his  ciss's  colt, 

He  hath  ivashed  in  wine  his  raiment, 

And  In  the  Hood  of  the  grape  his  vest  are : 

— Heavy  in  the  eyes  from  ivlne, 

And  while  of  teeth  from  mill: 

This  might  be  the  portrait  of  a  Bacchus  breaking  from 
the  vineyards  of  Sicily ;  but  of  Judah  we  can  scarcely 
believe  it,  as  we  stand  in  his  land  to-day.  And  yet  on 
those  long,  dry  slopes  with  their  ruined  terraces — no  barer 
after  all  than  the  brinks  of  the  Ehine  in  early  spring — and 
in  the  rich  glens  around  Kebron  and  Bethlehem,  where  the 
vine  has  been  restored,  we  perceive  still  the  possibilities  of 
such  a  portrait.  Heavy  in  the  eyes  from  wine,  and  he  hath 
'Washed  in  icine  his  raiment :  but  Judah  now  has  no  eyes, 
and  his  raiment  is  in  rags.  The  landscape  of  to-day  is  liker 
the  second  portrait — that  drawn  by  Isaiah — of  what  Judah 
should  be  after  his  enemies  had  stripped  him.  In  that  clay 
shall  the  Lord  shave,  with  a  razor  that  is  hired,  the  head  and 
the  hair  of  the  feet  and  the  beard.  And  it  shall  be  in  that 
day,  a  man  shall  nourish  a  young  cow  and  a  couple  of  sheep  ; 
and  it  shall  be,  because  of  the  abundance  of  the  making  of 
milk,  he  shall  eat  butter, — for  butter  and,  honey  shall  all  eat, 
that  is  left  in  the  midst  of  the  land.  And  it  shall  be  in  that 
day,  that  every  ^jZace  in  which  there  tvere  a  thousand  vines 
at  a  tJiousand  silverlings—for  briars  and  for  thorns  shall  it 
be.  .  .  .  And  all  the  hills  that  were  digged  with  the 
mattock,  thou  shall  not  come  thither  for  fear  of  briars  and 

^  Gtn.  xliw  ^-12. 


424  JUDjEA. 

thonis ;  but  it  shall  he  for  tJie  sending  forth  of  oxen  and  for 
the  treading  of  sheep?  With  the  exceptions  named  above, 
this  is  exactly  the  Judah  of  to-day.  But  we  have  a  third 
portrait,  by  the  prophet  Jeremiah,'-'  of  what  Judah  should 
be  after  the  Eestoration  from  Exile,  and  in  this  it  is  re- 
markable that  no  reversion  is  promised  to  a  high  state  of 
cultivation,  with  olives  and  vines  as  the  luxuriant  features 
of  the  country,  but  that  her  permanent  wealth  and  blessing 
are  conceived  as  pastoral.  .  .  .  For  I  will  bring  again 
the  captivitij  of  the  land  as  in  the  beginning,  saith  Jehovah. 
Thus  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts:  Again  shall  there  be  in  this 
place — the  Desolate,  tvithout  man  or  even  beast — and  in  all 
its  cities,  the  habitation  of  shepherds  couching  their  flocks. 
In  the  cities  of  the  Mountain, — or  Hill-Country,— of  Judah, 
in  the  cities  of  the  Shcphelah,  and  in  the  cities  of  the  Negeb, 
and  in  the  land  of  Benjamin,  and  in  the  suburbs  of  Jeru- 
salem, and  in  the  cities  of  Judah,  again  shall  the  flocks  pass 
upon  the  hands  of  him  that  tclleth  them,  saith  Jehovah. 
Now,  though  other  prospects  of  the  restoration  of  Judah 
include  husbandry  and  vine  culture,^  and  though  the  Jews 
after  the  Exile  speak  of  their  property  as  vineyards,  olive- 
yards  and  cornland,  along  with  sheep,'*  yet  the  prevailing 
aspect  of  Judah  is  pastoral,  and  the  fulfilment  of  Jacob's 
luscious  blessing  must  be   sought   for  in   the   few  fruitful 


1  Isa.  vii.  20  ff. 

-  Jeremiah  xxxiii.  12-13.     The  passage  begins  with  ver.  10. 

^  Micah  iv.  -4  and  1  Kings  iv.  25  give  the  ideal  state,  as  every  man  under  his 
oicii  cine  and  Jig-tree.  Jeremiah  xxxi.  24,  in  his  picture  of  the  future,  places 
husbandmen  before  them  that  go  forth  with  flocks.  Habakkuk  puts  vines,  figs, 
and  olives  before  flocks,  iii.  17.  Isaiah  Ixv.  10  says,  Sharon  shall  be  a  fold  of 
flocks,  and  the  valley  of  Achor  a  place  for  herds  to  conch  for  My  people  that  have 
sought  Me  ;  but  in  ver.  21,  they  shall  plant  vineyardx,  cf.  Isaiah  Ixi.  5,  strangers 
xhall  stand  and  feed  your  flocks,  and  the  sons  of  the  alien  shall  be  your  ploK men 
and  vinedressers. 

*  Nehemiah  v.  Haggai  speaks  only  of  husbandry.  Malachi  sees  both  flocks 
and  vines.  Joel  catalogues  corn,  wine  and  oil,  figs,  pomegranates,  palms,  and 
apples  (chap.  i.).  Cattle  and  herds  with  him  are  in  the  background.  New 
wine  and  milk  are  the  blessings  of  the  future,  iii.  18. 


JUD^A.  425 

corners  of  the  land,  and  especially  at  Hebron,  which,  as 
Judah's  first  political  centre,  would  in  the  time  of  her  su- 
premacy be  the  obvious  model  for  the  nation's  ideal  figure.^ 

But  this  has  already  brought  us  to  the  first  of  those  three 
features  of  Juda?a's  geography,  which  are  so  significant  in 
her  history :  her  pastoral  character ;  her  neighbourhood  to 
the  desert ;  her  unsuitableness  for  the  growth  of  a  great 
city. 

1.  If,  as  we  have  seen,  the  prevailing  character  of  Judosa 
be  pastoral,  with  husbandry  only  incidental  to  her  life,  it  is 
not  surprising  that  the  forms  which  have  impressed  both 
her  history  and  religion  upon  the  world  should  be  those  of 
the  pastoral  habit.  Her  origin ;  more  than  once  her  free- 
dom and  power  of  political  recuperation ;  more  than  once 
her  prophecy ;  her  images  of  God,  and  her  sweetest  poetry 
of  the  spiritual  life,  have  been  derived  from  this  source. 
It  is  the  stateliest  shepherds  of  all  time  that  the  dawn  of 
history  reveals  upon  her  fields  :  men  not  sprung  from  her 
own  remote  conditions,  nor  confined  to  them,  but  moving 
across  the  world  in  converse  with  great  empires,  and  bring- 
ing down  from  Heaven  truths  sublime  and  universal  to 
wed  with  the  simple  habits  of  her  life.  These  were  the 
patriarchs  of  the  nation.  The  founder  of  its  one  dynasty, 
and  the  first  of  its  literary  prophets,  were  also  take)i  from 
following  the  flocks.~  The  king  and  every  true  leader  of 
men  was  called  a  shepherd.  Jehovah  was  the  Shepherd 
of  His  people,  and  they  the  sheep  of  His  pasture.  It 
was  in  Juda3a  that  Christ  called  Himself  the  Good  Shep- 
herd,— as  it  was  in  Judaea  also,  that,  taking  the  other  great 
feature  of  her  life,  He  said  He  w'as  the  True  Vine.'' 

'  One  is  tempted  to  ask  whether  any  inference  as  to  the  date  of  Gen.  xlix.  can 
be  drawn  from  its  representation  of  .Judah  as  chiefly  a  wine-growing  country  ; 
but  I  do  not  think  any  such  inference  wouUl  be  at  all  trustworthy,  as  may  be 
seen  from  a  comparison  of  the  passages  cited  in  the  above  notes. 

-  2  Sam.  vii.  8;  Amos  vii.  15. 

'  Stanley,  Sinai  and  Palestine,  xiii. 


426  JUDJEA. 

Judaea  is,  perhaps,  as  good  ground  as  is  in  all  the  East 
for  observing  the  grandeur,  the  indispensableness  of  the 
shepherd's  character.  An  Eastern  pasture  is  very  different 
from  the  narrow  meadows  and  dyked  hillsides  with  which 
we  are  familiar  at  home.  It  is  vast  and  often  practically 
boundless ;  it  has  to  be  extensive,  for  the  greater  part  of  it 
is  barren — in  fact  the  Hebrew  word  for  desert  and  for 
pasture  is  the  same.  The  mass  of  it  consists  of  dry  stony 
soil,  out  of  which,  for  a  great  part  of  the  year,  the  sun  has 
sucked  all  life.  In  this  monotony  the  breaks  are  few,  and 
consist  of  paths  more  or  less  fitful,  gorges  or  thickets  where 
wild  beasts  lurk,  and  oases  of  pleasant  grass  and  water. 
Now  in  such  a  landscape  of  mirage,  illusive  paths,  lurking 
terrors,  and  infrequent  herbage,  it  is  evident  that  the  person 
and  character  of  the  shepherd  must  mean  a  great  deal  more 
to  the  sheep  than  it  means  to  sheep  with  us.  With  us  a 
flock  of  sheep  without  a  shepherd  is  a  common  experience  : 
every  day  we  may  see  them  left  to  themselves  in  a  secure 
field,  or  scattered  over  the  side  of  a  hill,  with  a  far-travel- 
ling wire  fence  to  keep  them  from  straying.  But  I  do  not 
remember  ever  to  have  seen  in  the  East  a  flock  of  sheep 
without  a  shepherd.  On  such  a  landscape  as  Judsea  he 
and  his  character  are  indispensable.  He  must  be  vigilant 
and  sleepless,  a  man  who  knows  his  ground  from  horizon 
to  horizon,  and  who  knows  every  one  of  his  sheep  :  the 
shelter  as  well  as  the  guide  of  his  flock,  and  ready  every 
day  to  risk  his  life  for  them. 

On  some  high,  desolate  moor,  across  which  at  night  the 
hyaenas  howl,  as  you  meet  him,  sleepless,  weather-beaten, 
supple,  far-sighted,  armed,  with  his  sheep  around  him,  you 
understand  why  the  shepherd  of  Judfea  sprang  so  often  to 
the  front  in  his  people's  history ;  why  they  gave  his  name 
to  their  king,  and  made  him  the  symbol  of  Providence  ; 
why  Christ  took  him  as  the  type  of  self-sacrifice. 

Sometimes  we  enjoyed  our  noonday  rest  beside  one  of 


JUD^A.  427 

those  Judasan  wells,  to  ■which  three  or  four  shepherds  come 
down  with  their  flocks.  The  flocks  mixed  with  each  other, 
and  we  would  wonder  how  each  shepherd  could  get  his 
own  again.  But  after  the  watering  and  the  playing  were 
over,  the  shepherds  one  by  one  went  up  different  sides  of 
the  valley,  and  each  called  out  his  peculiar  call.  And  the 
sheep  of  each  drew  out  of  the  crowd  to  their  own  shepherd, 
and  so  the  flocks  passed  away  as  orderly  as  they  had  come. 
The  shepherd  of  the  sheep  .  .  .  when,  he  putteth  forth 
his  own  sheep,  he  goeth  before  tJiem,  and  tJic  sheep  follow 
him,  for  they  know  his  voice,  and  a  stranger  will  they  not 
follow.  I  am  the  good  Shepherd,  and  know  My  sheep,  and 
am  known  of  mine. 

2.  With  the  pastoral  character  of  the  hill-country  of 
Judtea  w^e  may  take  its  neighbourhood  to  the  desert — the 
wilderness  of  Judaea.  In  the  Old  Testament  this  land  is 
called  The  Jeshimon,  a  word  meaning  devastation,  and 
no  term  could  better  suit  its  haggard  and  crumbling 
appearance.  It  covers  some  thirty-five  miles  by  eleven. 
We  came  upon  it  from  Maon.  The  cultivated  land  to  the 
west  of  Hebron  sinks  quickly  to  rolling  hills  and  water- 
less vales,  covered  by  broom  and  grass,  across  which  it  took 
us  all  forenoon  to  ride.  The  wells  are  very  few,  and  almost 
all  reservoirs  of  rainwater,  jealously  guarded  through  the 
summer  by  their  Arab  owners.  For  an  hour  or  two  more 
we  rode  up  and  down  steep  ridges,  each  barer  than  the 
preceding,  and  then  descended  rocky  slopes  to  a  wide  plain, 
where  we  left  behind  the  last  brown  grass  and  thistle — the 
last  flock  of  goats  we  had  passed  two  hours  before.  Short 
bushes,  thorns,  and  succulent  creepers  were  all  that  relieved 
the  brown  and  yellow  bareness  of  the  crumbling  limestone 
and  scattered  shingle  and  sand.  The  strata  were  contorted  ; 
ridges  ran  in  all  directions ;  distant  hills  to  north  and  south 
looked  like  gigantic  dustheaps ;  those  near  we  could  see  to 
be  torn  as  if  by  waterspouts.     When  we  were  not  stepping 


428  JUD^A. 

ou  detritus  the  limestone  was  blistered  and  peeling.  Often 
the  ground  sounded  hollow ;  sometimes  rock  and  sand 
slipped  in  large  quantity  from  the  tread  of  the  horses  ; 
sometimes  the  living  rock  was  bare  and  jagged,  especially 
in  the  frequent  gullies  that  therefore  glared  and  beat  with 
heat  like  furnaces.  Far  to  the  east  ran  the  Moab  hills,  and 
in  front  of  them  we  got  glimpses  of  the  Dead  Sea,  the  deep 
blue  a  most  refreshing  sight  across  the  desert  foreground. 
So  for  two  hours  we  rode,  till  the  sea  burst  upon  us  in  all 
its  length,  and  this  chaos  which  we  had  traversed  tumbled 
and  broke  down  twelve  hundred  feet  of  limestone,  flint  and 
marl, — crags,  corries  and  precipices, — to  the  broad  beach  of 
the  water.  Such  is  Jeshimon,  the  wilderness  of  Judtea.  It 
carries  the  violence  and  desolation  of  the  Dead  Sea  valley 
right  up  to  the  heart  of  the  country — to  the  roots  of  the 
Mount  of  Ohves,  to  within  two  hours  of  the  gates  of  Hebron, 
Bethlehem,  and  Jerusalem. 

When  you  realise  that  this  howling  waste  came  within 
reach  of  nearly  every  Jewish  child  ;  when  you  climb  the 
Mount  of  Olives,  or  any  hill  about  Bethlehem  or  the  hill  of 
Tekoa,  and  looking  east  see  those  fifteen  miles  of  chaos, 
sinking  to  a  stretch  of  the  Dead  Sea — you  begin  to  under- 
stand the  influence  of  the  desert  on  Jewish  imagination  and 
literature.  It  gave  the  Jew,  as  it  gives  the  foreigner  of 
to-day,  the  sense  of  living  next  door  to  doom ;  the  sense 
of  how  narrow  is  the  border  between  life  and  death  ;  the 
awe  of  the  power  of  God,  who  can  make  contiguous  regions 
so  opposite  in  character.  He  turneth  rivers  into  a  wilder- 
ness, and  toatersprings  into  a  thirsty  ground.  The  desert  is 
always  in  face  of  the  prophets,  and  its  howling  of  beasts 
and  its  dry  sand  blow  mournfully  across  their  pages  the 
foreboding  of  judgment. 

But  this  is  not  the  only  influence  of  the  desert.  Meteoric 
effects  are  nowhere  in  Palestine  so  simple  or  so  brilliant. 
And  there  is  the  annual  miracle,  when,   after  the  winter 


JUDJEA.  429 

rains,  even  these  wastes  take  on  a  glorious  green.  Hence 
the  sudden  rushes  of  light  and  life  across  the  prophet's 
vision  ;  it  is  from  the  desert  that  he  mostly  borrows  his 
imagery  of  the  creative,  instantaneous  Divine  grace.  The 
wilderness  and  the  soUtarij  place  shall  he  glad  for  them  : 
the  desert  shall  rejoice  and  blossom  as  the  rose. 

Two,  at  least,  of  the  prophets  were  born  in  face  of  the 
wilderness  of  Judah, — Amos  and  Jeremiah, — and  on  both 
it  has  left  its  fascination.  Amos  lived  to  the  south  of  Jeru- 
salem, at  Tekoa.  No  one  can  read  his  book  without  feelinf^ 
that  he  haunted  heights  and  lived  in  the  face  of  very  wide 
horizons.  But  from  Tekoa  you  see  the  exact  scenery  of  his 
visions.  The  slopes  on  which  Amos  herded  his  cattle  show 
the  mass  of  desert  hills  with  their  tops  helow  the  spectator, 
and  therefore  displaying  every  meteoric  effect  in  a  way  they 
could  not  have  done  had  he  been  obliged  to  look  up  to 
them: — the  cold  wind  that  blows  off  them  after  sunset; 
through  a  gap  the  Dead  Sea  with  its  heavy  mists ;  beyond 
the  gulf  the  range  of  Moab  cold  and  grey,  till  the  sun  leaps 
from  behind  its  barrier,  and  in  a  moment  the  world  of  hill- 
tops below  Tekoa  is  flooded  with  hght.  Lo  He  that  for meth 
the  mountains,  and  createth  the  wind,  and  declareth  u?ito 
man  what  is  his  thought;  that  maheth  the  morning  dark- 
ness, and  treadeth  on  the  high  places  of  the  earth,  Jehovah, 
God  of  Hosts  is  His  name;  that  maheth  the  Seven  Stars 
and  Orion,  and  turneth  the  shadoio  of  death  into  morning, 
and  maheth  the  day  dark  tcith  night ;  that  calleth  for  the 
waters  of  the  sea,  and  poureth  them  out  on  the  face  of  the 
ear  til — Jehovah  is  His  name. 

Jeremiah  grew  up  at  Anathoth,  a  little  to  the  north-east 
of  Jerusalem,  across  Scopus  and  over  a  deep  valley.  It  is 
the  last  village  eastward,  and  from  it  the  land  breaks  and 
falls  away  in  desert  hills  to  the  north  end  of  the  Dead  Sea. 
The  vision  of  that  maze  of  hills  was  burnt  into  the  prophet's 
mind  in  contrast  with  the  clear,  ordered  word  of  God.     0 


430  JUDjEA. 

generation,  see  ye  the  word  of  the  Lord :  Have  I  been  a 
wilderness  unto  Israel,  a  land  of  darkness  ?  ^  He  had  lived 
in  face  of  the  scorching  desert  air — A  dry  ivind  of  the 
high  places  in  the  icilderness  toivard  the  daughter  of  My 
Xoeople,  not  to  fan  nor  to  cleanse.  And  in  face  of  the  chaotic 
prospect,  he  described  judgment  in  these  terms  :  I  beheld 
the  earth,  and  lo  it  teas  witliout  form  and  void  ...  J 
beheld,  and  lo  the  fruitful  place  teas  a  icilderness  .  .  .  at 
the  presence  of  Jehovah,  by  His  fierce  anger? 

The  wilderness  of  Juda3a  ]3layed  also  a  great  part  in  her 
history  as  the  refuge  of  political  fugitives  and  religious  soli- 
taries— a  part  which  it  still  continues.  The  story  of  Saul's 
hunt  after  David,  and  David's  narrow  escapes,  becomes  very 
vivid  among  those  tossed  and  broken  hills,  where  the 
valleys  are  all  so  alike,  and  large  bodies  of  men  may  camp 
near  each  other  without  knowing  it.  Ambushes  are  every- 
where possible,  and  alarms  pass  rapidly  across  the  bare 
and  silent  bills.  You  may  travel  for  hours  and  feel  as  soli- 
tary as  at  sea  without  a  sail  in  sight,  but  if  you  are  in  search 
of  any  one,  your  guide's  signal  will  make  men  leap  from 
slopes  that  did  not  seem  to  shelter  a  rabbit ;  and  if  you 
are  suspected,  your  passage  may  be  stopped  by  a  dozen  men, 
as  if  they  had  sprung  from  the  earth. 

Of  Engedi  and  of  Masada — after  Jerusalem  fell,  the  last 
retreat  of  the  Zealots,  to  which  the  Eomans  followed  them 
— there  is  no  room  in  this  paper  to  speak. 

But  we  cannot  pass  from  the  wilderness  of  Judoea  without 
remembering  two  hoher  events  of  which  it  was  the  scene. 
Here  John  was  prepared  for  his  austere  mission,  and  found 
his  figures  of  judgment.  Here  you  understand  his  descrip- 
tion of  his  preaching — like  a  desert  fire  when  the  brown 
grass  and  thorns  on  the  more  fertile  portions  will  blaze  for 
miles,  and  the  unclean  reptiles  creep  out  of  their  holes 
before  its  heat:    0  generation  of  vipers,  who  hath  taught 

'  Jer.  ii.  31.  -' Jcr.  iv.  11,  23,  2G. 


JUDJEA.  431 

yoiL  to Jiee  from  the  wrath  to  come!  And  here  our  Lord 
suffered  His  Temptation.  Straightivaij  the  Spirit  driveth 
Him  into  the  wilderness.  For  hours  as  you  travel  across 
these  hills  you  may  feel  no  sign  of  life,  except  the  scorpions 
and  vipers  which  your  passage  startles,  in  the  distance  a 
few  wild  goats  or  gazelles,  and  at  night  the  wailing  of  the 
jackal  and  the  hyo?na's  howl.  He  icas  alone  witli  the  wild 
beasts. 

3.  But  the  greatest  fact  with  which  JudoBa  impresses 
you,  is  her  unsuitableness  for  the  growth  of  a  great  city. 
There  is  no  harbour,  no  river,  no  trunk  road,  no  convenient 
market  for  the  nations  on  either  side.  In  their  commerce 
with  each  other,  these  pass  by  Judasa,  finding  their  em- 
poriums in  the  cities  of  Philistia,  or,  as  of  old,  at  Petra  and 
Bosra  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan.  Gaza  has  outdone  Hebron 
as  the  port  of  the  desert.  Jerusalem  is  no  match  for 
Shechem  in  fertility  or  convenience  of  site.  The  whole 
land  stands  aloof,  waterless,  on  the  road  to  nowhere. 
There  are  none  of  the  natural  conditions  of  a  great  city. 

And  yet  it  was  here  that  She  arose  who  more  than 
Athens  and  more  than  Kome,  taught  the  nations  civic 
virtue,  and  gave  her  name  to  the  ideal  city  men  are  ever 
striving  to  build  on  earth,  to  the  City  of  God  that  shall  one 
day  descend  from  heaven — the  New  Jerusalem.  Her 
builder  was  not  nature  nor  the  wisdom  of  men ;  but  the 
Word  of  God,  by  her  prophets,  laid  her  eternal  foundations 
in  justice  and  reared  her  walls  in  her  people's  faith  in  God. 

Geokge  Adam  Smith. 


432 


THE  DOCTBINE   OF   THE  ATONEMENT  IN  THE 
NEW  TESTAMENT. 

V.  The  Further  Teaching  of  the  Epistle  to  the 

KOMANS. 

In  our  last  paper  we  saw  that  in  the  great  exposition  of  the 
Gospel  contained  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  the  death 
of  Christ  is  first  mentioned  in  a  dependent  sentence  follow- 
ing closely  upon  a  comprehensive  statement  of  St.  Paul's 
fundamental  doctrine  of  Justification  through  Faith.  This 
collocation  suggests  that  the  two  great  doctrines  of  Justifi- 
cation through  Faith  and  Justification  through  the  Death 
of  Christ  are  indissolubly  connected  ;  and  that  the  latter 
is  in  some  sense  subordinate  to  the  former.  The  precise 
relation  of  these  doctrines  is  clearly  stated  in  the  enuncia- 
tion of  the  second  doctrine  contained  in  Romans  iii.  24-26. 
St.  Paul  teaches  that  Christ  died  not  by  accident  but  by 
the  deliberate  design  of  God,  and  that  God  gave  Christ  to 
die  in  order  to  harmonize  with  His  own  justice  the  justifica- 
tion of  believers. 

We  also  saw  that  this  conception  of  the  purpose  of  the 
death  of  Christ  explains  and  justifies,  and  is  the  only  ex- 
planation of,  the  teaching  of  the  entire  New  Testament  on 
this  mysterious  topic. 

These  results  I  shall  now  endeavour  further  to  test 
and  to  elucidate  by  examination  of  other  references  to  the 
death  of  Christ  in  the  remainder  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans. 

After  the  enunciation  in  Romans  iii.  21-26  of  the  two 
great  doctrines  just  mentioned,  St.  Paul  goes  on  to  discuss 
further  in  chapters  iii.  27-iv.  24  the  former  of  these  doc- 
trines, viz.  faith  as  a  condition  of  justification.  He  then 
discusses  in  chapter  v.  the  blessed  consequences  of  justifica- 
tion through  the  death  of  Christ.     The  transition  from  the 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT.         433 

one  doctrine  to  the  other  is  made  in  chapter  iv.  25  :  "  who 
was  given  up  because  of  our  trespasses,  and  was  raised 
because  of  our  justification." 

The  word  irapaSiSoy/xi,  which  we  may  render  give  up,  is 
frequently  used  in  the  sense  of  handing  over  to  a  hostile 
power  or  into  some  form  of  adversity.  So  Matthew  v.  25, 
"  lest  the  adversary  give  thee  up  to  the  judge,  and  the  judge 
to  the  ofticer,  and  thou  be  cast  into  prison  "  ;  and  chapter 
X.  17,  "they  shall  give  you  np  to  councils,  and  in  their  syna- 
gogues they  will  scourge  you  .  .  .  but  when  they  give 
you  vp,  be  not  anxious  .  .  .  brother  will  give  up  brother 
to  death."  The  same  word  as  a  participle  is  used  in 
chapters  xxvi.  25,  46,  48,  xxvii.  o  to  describe  Judas  who 
gave  up  Jesus  into  the  power  of  His  enemies. 

Very  instructive  is  the  reiteration  in  Eomans  i.  24,  26, 
28,  "for  which  cause  God  gave  them  up  to  uncleanness 
.  .  .  to  passions  of  dishonour  ...  to  a  rejected 
mind."  St.  Paul  means  that  God  surrendered  to  the 
dominion  and  bondage  of  their  own  depraved  nature  those 
who  turned  from  Him  to  idols. 

On  the  other  hand  the  same  word  is  frequently  used  for 
treasure  committed  to  the  care  of  others.  So  in  Matthew 
XXV.  14  we  have  a  master  who  gave  up  his  goods  to  his 
servants,  went  into  a  far  country,  and  then  came  to  demand 
an  account  of  the  money  put  in  their  charge.  In  each 
case  the  word  means  to  hand  over  into  the  power  or  custody 
of  another. 

In  Komans  iv.  25  we  read  that  Christ  "  was  given  up 
because  of  our  trespasses."  St.  Paul  thus  asserts  that  in 
consequence  of  our  sins  He  was  surrendered  to  a  hostile 
power.  Similarly  in  chapter  viii.  32  :  God  "spared  not  His 
own  Son,  but  gave  Him  up  for  us  all."  Notice  here  the 
preposition  virep,  the  most  frequent  term  to  describe  the 
relation  of  the  death  of  Christ  to  those  for  whom  He  died. 
Its   meaning  has  been  already  explained  on  p.  186.      In 

VOL.   V.  28 


434  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 

Galatians  ii.  20,  with  exultant  gratitude  St.  Paul  speaks  of 
Him  "  who  loved  me  and  gave  up  Himself  for  me."  Tlie 
argument  following  in  verse  21,  "if  righteousness  be  through 
law,  then  Christ  died  in  vain,"  suggests  irresistibly  that  he 
refers  to  Christ's  self-surrender  to  death.  Similarly,  and 
in  close  agreement  with  Matthew  xxvi.  2,  15,  16,  23,  24,  25, 
45,  4G,  48 ;  xxvii.  2,  3,  4,  18,  26,  St.  Paul  speaks  in  1  Corin- 
thians xi.  23  of  "  the  night  in  which  He  was  given  iip." 
This  frequent  use  of  the  word  in  this  connection  leaves  no 
room  to  doubt  that  in  Eomans  iv.  25  St.  Paul  refers  to  the 
death  of  Christ.  And  he  asserts  that  His  death  was  in 
consequence  of  our  sins. 

In  the  same  connection  we  have  a  similar  but  less  definite 
word  in  Galatians  i.  4,  "  who  gave  Himself  for  our  sins  that 
He  may  rescue  us  from  the  present  evil  age";  in  1  Timothy 
ii.  6,  "  who  gave  Himself  a  ransom  for  all  "  ;  and  in  Titus 
ii.  14,  "  who  gave  Plimself  for  us  that  He  may  ransom  us 
from  all  lawlessness."  These  passages  recall  the  same  word 
in  John  iii.  16,  "  God  so  loved  the  world  that  He  gave  His 
only-begotten  Son  in  order  that  whoever  believeth  in  Him 
may  not  perish."  The  simpler  word  here  used,  eScoKev, 
conveys  the  idea  of  free  surrender  ;  but  does  not  suggest,  as 
does  irapkowicev  in  Ptomans  viii.  32,  the  power  into  whose 
hands  the  surrendered  one  was  given  up. 

The  group  of  passages  just  discussed  does  not  add  much 
to  our  conception  of  the  purpose  of  the  death  of  Christ. 
But  it  affords  further  proof  that  St.  Paul  looked  upon  it  as 
a  result  of  a  deliberate  purpose  and  surrender  of  God. 
And  it  reveals  the  large  place  which  this  thought  occupied 
in  the  mind  of  the  great  Apostle. 

In  Eomans  v.  1,  the  verse  immediately  following  that 
which  I  have  just  in  part  expounded,  St.  Paul  goes  on  to 
speak  of  "  peace  with  God  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 
These  words  imply  that  prior  to  justification  there  was  war 
between  God  and   man    and  that   through  the  agency  of 


IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  435 


Christ  the  hostility  has  been  removed.  Touching  the  exact 
nature  of  this  hostility  and  the  means  of  its  removal,  we 
seek  further  information. 

In  verse  5  St.  Paul  speaks  of  "the  love  of  God,"  of  which 
in  verse  G  he  gives  an  historical  proof,  viz.  that  "  for  un- 
godly persons  Christ  died."  The  significance  of  the  death 
of  Christ  as  a  manifestation  of  the  love  of  God,  he  expounds 
by  comparing  it  with  the  greatest  sacrifice  which  occasionally 
man  will  make  for  man.  The  love  thus  manifested,  St.  Paul 
then  makes  a  sure  ground  of  hope  of  future  salvation.  From 
the  costliness  of  the  blessing  already  received,  he  infers  that 
greater  blessings  await  us.  In  this  argument,  as  stated  in 
verse  9,  he  sums  up  what  we  have  already  received  in  the 
phrase  "justified  in  His  blood."  This  is  a  compact  restate- 
ment of  the  teaching  in  chapter  iii.  24,  25,  where  we  read 
that  justification  comes  through  redemption  which  is  in 
Christ  whom  God  set  forth  in  His  own  blood.  The 
summing  up  in  chapter  v.  9  implies  most  clearly,  (as  does 
chapter  iii.  25,)  that  our  pardon  was  in  some  sense  brought 
about  by  the  violent  death  of  Christ  on  the  cross. 

In  Romans  v.  10,  which  is  evidently  a  restatement,  in  a 
form  suggested  by  the  words  "  peace  with  God  "  in  verse  1, 
of  the  argument  in  verse  9,  the  phrase  "  reconciled  to  God 
through  the  death  of  His  Son"  is  given  as  an  equivalent  of 
"justified  in  His  blood."  And  in  verse  11  we  read  "through 
whom  we  have  now  received  the  reconciliation."  Similarly 
in  2  Corinthians  v.  18-20  we  read  "  who  reconciled  us  to 
Himself  through  Christ  .  .  .  the  ministry  of  the  recon- 
ciliation .  .  .  God  was,  in  Christ,  reconciling  the  world 
to  Himself  ...  Be  reconciled  to  God."  In  all  the  above 
passages  we  have  the  same  word  KaraWdcrcro) ;  and  the  same 
grammatical  construction,  viz.  men  the  direct  objects  of 
reconciliation,  "  who  reconciled  iis,"  God  its  indirect  object, 
"reconciled  to  God,"  and  in  2  Corinthians  v.  18,  19,  God  the 
Author  and  Christ  the  Agent  of  reconciliation. 


436  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 


In  Ephesians  ii.  16,  the  assertion  "  He  is  our  peace  "  is 
expounded  to  mean  that  Christ's  purpose  was  "  to  reconcile 
both  {i.e.  Jews  and  Gentiles)  to  God  through  the  cross, 
having  slain  the  enmity  by  it."  St.  Paul  thus  teaches  that 
there  was  hostility  between  man  and  man  and  between  man 
and  God,  and  that  in  order  to  destroy  it  and  bring  about 
peace  Christ  died  on  the  cross.  This  thought  he  embodies 
in  strong  language  by  representing  the  cross  as  the  instru- 
ment by  which  Christ  destroyed  the  enmity  and  made 
peace.  In  Colossians  i.  20-22  the  same  purpose  and  the 
same  instrument  are  ascribed  to  God  :  "  He  was  pleased  to 
reconcile  all  things  to  Himself,  having  made  peace  by  the 
blood  of  His  cross."  The  Christians  at  Colosste  were  them- 
selves once  aliens  and  enemies;  but  "God  hath  reconciled 
them  in  the  body  of  His  flesh  through  His  death."  In 
these  passages  we  have  a  stronger  form  of  the  verb  used  in 
Romans  v.  10,  aTroKaraWdaaco,  suggesting  perhaps  restora- 
tion of  a  lost  friendship.  As  before,  sinners  are  the  direct, 
and  God  the  indirect,  objects  of  reconciliation.  In  the 
Epistle  to  the  Colossians,  God  is  again  its  Author.  That 
in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  it  is  attributed  to  Christ, 
creates  no  difficulty.  For,  whatever  the  Father  does,  He 
does  through  the  agency  of  the  Son. 

In  the  above  passages  we  have  another  conception  of  the 
death  of  Christ  in  its  relation  to  man's  salvation,  viz.  as  a 
means  of  reconciliation  to  God.  And,  like  the  conception 
embodied  in  Romans  iii.  2G,  also  this  conception  is  in  the 
New  Testament  peculiar  to  St.  Paul.  It  implies  clearly 
that  God  gave  Christ  to  die  in  order  to  break  down  a 
barrier  between  Himself  and  man  erected  by  man's  sin,  and 
that  the  means  used  for  this  end  was  the  death  of  Christ. 

This  teaching  deserves  further  attention.  Already  we 
have  seen  that  in  Romans  v.  10  the  words  "reconciled 
to  God  through  the  death  of  His  Son  "  are  given  as  an 
equivalent  to  "justified  in  His  blood  "  in  verse  9.     And  we 


IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  437 


have  seen  on  page  361  that  the  word  just  if ij  as  used  by 
St.  Paul  has  no  direct  reference  to  any  inward  change  in 
man's  disposition  towards  God  but  only  or  at  least  chiefly 
to  a  changed  relation  of  guilty  man  to  the  Eighteous  Judge. 
Moreover,  in  Romans  i.-v.  we  read  nothing  about  the  effect 
of  the  death  of  Christ  on  the  moral  life  of  man.  Similarly, 
in  2  Corinthians  v.  19,  the  assertion  that  "  God  was,  in 
Christ,  reconciling  the  world  to  Himself"  is  at  once  fol- 
lowed and  supported  by  the  words  "not  reckoning  to  them 
their  trespasses."  And  the  exhortation  "  Be  reconciled  to 
God  "  in  verse  20  is  in  verse  21  supported  by  the  statement 
that  "  Him  who  knew  no  sin,  on  our  behalf  He  made  to  be 
sin."  In  other  words,  St.  Paul's  teaching  that  believers 
are  reconciled  to  God  is  an  inference  from  his  teaching  that 
they  are  justified. 

This  inference  is  strictly  correct.  Every  man  who  breaks 
laws  is  at  war  with  the  state  :  for  he  is  using  his  powers  to 
injure  it.  And  the  state  is  at  war  with  him.  The  king's 
officers  arrest  and  punish,  and  if  needs  be  his  soldiers  shoot 
down,  the  king's  own  subjects,  whose  welfare  he  greatly 
desires,  when  they  disturb  the  public  peace.  He  is  com- 
pelled to  treat  them  as  enemies  ;  and  they  have  to  count 
upon  him  as  their  enemy.  And,  if  transgression  involves 
war,  forgiveness  brings  peace.  The  pardoned  transgressor 
no  longer  has  reason  to  fear  the  power  of  the  king.  All 
this  we  cannot  but  transfer  to  our  conception  of  God's 
government  of  the  world.  Consequently  those  whom  in 
Romans  v.  9  St.  Paul  has  described  as  "justified  in  His 
blood  "  he  may  in  verse  10  correctly  speak  of  as  "  reconciled 
to  God  through  the  death  of  His  Son." 

Once  more.  St.  Paul  teaches  in  Romans  iii.  26  that  God 
gave  Christ  to  die  in  order  to  harmonize  with  His  own 
justice  the  justification  of  those  who  beheve  in  Christ.  If 
so,  by  the  death  of  Christ  is  removed  an  obstacle  to  justifi- 
cation which  has  its  root  in  the  moral  nature  of  God.    This 


438  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 


implies  that  God  has  something  against  the  sinner  which 
makes  needful  for  his  salvation  this  costly  sacrifice.  And 
in  the  light  of  this  divine  hostility  to  sin  and  in  some 
sense  to  the  sinner  so  long  as  he  persists  in  sin,  must  be 
interpreted  the  assertion  "  we  were  reconciled  to  God 
through  the  death  of  His  Son."  In  other  words,  by  the 
death  of  Christ  is  removed  not  only  the  sinner's  hostility 
to  God  but  the  sinner's  exposure  to  God's  anger  against 
all  sin. 

The  sinner's  hostility  to  God  is  expressly  mentioned  in 
Romans  viii.  7  :  "  the  mind  of  the  flesh  is  enmity  to  God." 
But  to  this  aspect  of  sin  we  have  no  reference  in  the  first 
five  chapters  of  the  Epistle.  In  them  St.  Paul  is  dealing 
with  sin  only  as  exposing  man  to  punishment. 

To  the  above  exposition  may  be  objected  the  grammatical 
construction,  already  noticed,  of  the  word  reconcile,  viz. 
that  God  is  never  said  to  be  reconciled  to  the  sinner,  but 
always  the  sinner  reconciled  to  God.  From  this,  some 
have  inferred  that  the  only  obstacle  to  peace  is  in  man. 

That  this  inference  is  incorrect,  we  learn  from  the  use 
elsewhere  of  the  same  word.  In  Matthew  v.  23,  24  we 
find  a  cognate  and  equivalent  term  SLaWdcraco.  A  man 
coming  to  sacrifice  remembers  that  his  brother  "hath 
something  against  "  him.  Here,  manifestly,  the  obstacle 
to  peace  is  not  in  the  sacrificer  but  in  the  offended  one. 
Else  there  would  be  no  need  to  leave  his  gift  and  go  away 
in  order  to  be  reconciled.  For,  any  personal  animosity 
against  the  other  man,  the  offerer  might  himself  at  once 
lay  aside.  Our  Lord  evidently  means  that  he  must  go  and 
do  his  utmost  to  persuade  the  offended  man  to  lay  aside 
his  feelings  of  hostility.  Yet  the  offerer  is  bidden,  "be 
reconciled  to  thy  brother."  Similarly,  in  1  Corinthians 
vii.  11,  a  woman  separated  from  her  husband  is  bidden 
either  to  remain  alone  or  to  "be  reconciled  to  her  husband." 
A  Christian  woman  could  have  no  option  about  laying  aside 


IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT,  439 

any  hostile  feelings  of  her  own.  The  only  question  for  her 
is  whether  she  can  persuade  her  hushand  to  lay  aside  his 
hostility  to  her.  Very  instructive  is  1  Samuel  xxix.  4, 
LXX.  Some  Philistines  objected  to  David  going  with 
them  to  war.  They  said  that  he  was  a  servant  of  Saul ; 
and  asked,  "  wherewith  will  he  be  reconciled  to  his  master? 
will  it  not  be  with  the  heads  of  these  men  ?  "  They  feared 
that  he  would  try  to  regain  the  favour  of  Saul  by  betraying 
and  destroying  the  men  with  whom  he  had  taken  refuge. 
Yet  this  supposed  removal  of  the  anger  of  Saul  is  described 
as  David  being  reconciled  to  his  master.  Of  any  enmity  of 
David  to  Saul,  there  is  no  mention  or  thought.  A  similar 
use  of  the  word  KaraWdaaco  is  found  in  Josephus,  Anti- 
qiiities  bk.  v.  2.  8.  These  examples  prove  that  St.  Paul's 
language  does  not  imply  or  suggest  that  the  hindrance  to 
peace  removed  by  the  death  of  Christ  was  wholly  or  chiefly 
in  man. 

On  the  other  hand,  in  2  Maccabees  i.  5  we  read,  **  may 
God  hear  your  petitions  and  h&  reconciled  to  you,  and  not 
forsake  you  in  the  evil  time."  So  chapter  vii.  33,  "if  the 
Lord  be  angry  for  a  short  time,  He  will  again  he  reconciled 
to  His  own  servants  "  :  also  chapter  viii.  29. 

This  double  use  of  the  same  phrase  warns  us  that  St. 
Paul's  words  now  before  us  do  not  in  themselves  determine 
whether  the  hindrance  to  peace  removed  by  the  death  of 
Christ  is  in  man  or  in  God.  This  must  be  determined  by 
the  context.  And  we  have  seen  that  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans  the  context  determines  that  in  the  phrase  "  re- 
conciled to  God  through  the  death  of  His  Son"  St.  Paul 
refers  wholly  or  chiefly  to  the  sinner's  deliverance  from  the 
righteous  anger  of  God. 

To  express  this  meaning,  the  grammatical  construction 
used  by  St.  Paul  is  very  appropriate.  For  the  phrase, 
"  God  has  reconciled  us  to  Himself"  emphasises  the  truth 
that  reconciliation  began  with  God  and  is  His  work ;  and 


440         THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT 


that  He  is  only  the  indirect  object  of  it,  whereas  man 
is  its  direct  object.  J^'or  man  is  chiefly  affected  by  it.  The 
real  hindrance  is  in  man's  sin ;  and  this  hindrance  God 
removes  by  the  gift  of  His  8on  to  die.  But,  as  St.  Paul 
has  plainly  taught,  the  reason  why  this  hindrance  can  be 
removed  only  by  means  of  the  death  of  Christ  is  in  God, 
and  specially  in  His  justice. 

The  phraseology  of  St.  Paul  which  refuses  to  make  God 
the  direct  object  of  reconciliatioii  is  in  complete  harmony 
with  the  phraseology  of  the  New  Testament  and  of  the 
LXX.  which,  as  we  shall  see  in  a  subsequent  paper,  refuses 
to  make  God  the  direct  object  of  propitiation. 

Notice  carefully  that  the  propitiation  and  reconciliation 
and  the  harmonizing  of  forgiveness  with  the  justice  of  God 
are  ever  attributed  to  the  Father's  love.  He  provided,  at 
infinite  cost  to  Himself,  the  means  which  His  own  justice 
demanded  as  the  necessary  condition  of  the  justification  of 
the  ungodly.  To  represent  the  Father  as  implacable  and 
as  pacified  only  by  the  intercession  and  death  of  Christ,  is 
to  contradict  both  the  letter  and  the  spirit  of  the  teaching 
of  St.  Paul. 

The  references  to  the  death  of  Christ  in  Komans  vi.  3,  4, 
5,  6,  8,  9,  10,  we  shall  postpone  till  a  later  paper,  in  order 
to  place  them  in  relation  to  other  important  teaching  in 
the  third  group  of  the  Epistles  of  Paul. 

In  Eomans  vii.  4,  the  unsaved  are  compared  to  a  married 
woman,  who  is  forbidden  by  the  law  to  be  united  to  anyone 
other  than  her  still  living  husband ;  and  the  justified,  who 
are  set  free  by  death,  viz.  by  the  death  of  Christ,  are  com- 
pared to  a  woman  set  free  by  death,  viz.  the  death  of 
her  first  husband,  from  the  law  which  forbad  her  second 
marriage.  This  comparison  is  of  great  importance.  For 
it  implies,  especially  the  words  "  dead  to  the  law  through 
the  body  of  Christ,"  that  through  the  death  of  Christ  has 
been  removed  a  hindrance  to  our  saving  union  with  Christ 


ly  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  441 

having  its  root  in  the  Law  of  God.  It  is  thus  a  remarkable 
coincidence  with  the  assertion  in  Romans  iii.  26  that  God 
gave  Christ  to  die  in  order  to  harmonize  with  His  own 
justice  the  justification  of  behevers.  For  the  Law  is  the 
authoritative  utterance  of  the  justice  of  God.  A  legal 
barrier  is  therefore  a  barrier  which  has  its  foundation  in 
the  justice  of  God.  In  other  words,  Eomans  vii.  4  is  but 
a  restatement,  in  view  of  the  law  of  God  which  was  ever 
present  to  the  thought  of  St.  Paul,  of  the  fundamental 
teaching  in  Eomans  iii.  24-26. 

The  same  idea  meets  us  again  in  Galatians  ii.  19 : 
"  through  law  I  died  to  law,  that  I  may  live  for  God  :  I 
am  crucified  with  Christ."  This  can  only  mean  that 
through  a  legal  process  they  who  believe  in  Christ  have 
escaped  from  the  condemnation  of  the  law,  and  from  the 
hindrance  which  it  presented  to  their  salvation.  That  the 
death  of  Christ  is  the  mysterious  means  of  this  liberation 
from  the  claims  of  the  law,  is  made  quite  clear  by  the 
words  "  crucified  with  Christ  "  and  by  the  argument  follow- 
ing, "if  through  law  cometh  righteousness,  then  hath 
Christ  died  to  no  purpose." 

The  relation  between  the  death  of  Christ  and  the  law  of 
God,  meets  us  again  in  Galatians  iii.  13,  14,  where  we  read 
that  through  His  death  upon  the  cross  and  the  curse 
involved  therein  Christ  bought  us  off  from  the  curse  pro- 
nounced by  the  Law  upon  all  who  fail  to  obey  all  its 
commands,  in  order  that  through  faith  we  may  obtain  the 
blessings  promised  to  Abraham.  This  implies  that  the 
Law  presented  a  hindrance  to  the  fulfilment  of  the  promise, 
and  that  this  hindrance  was  removed  by  the  death  of 
Christ. 

Similar  teaching  is  found  in  a  later  group  of  the  Epistles 
of  St.  Paul.  In  Colossians  ii.  13  we  read  that  God  has 
made  us  "  alive  together  with  Christ,  having  forgiven  us  all 
trespasses."     This  forgiveness,  involving  spiritual  resurrec- 


442  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  ATONEMENT. 


tioii,  St.  Paul  further  describes  by  saying  that  God  blotted 
out  the  handwriting  which  with  its  decrees  was  against  us ; 
and  adds  that  He  nailed  it  to  the  cross,  and  thus  took  it 
out  of  the  way.  Evidently  he  means  that  through  the 
death  of  Christ  upon  the  cross  God  removed  a  barrier  to 
our  salvation  which  had  its  foundation  in  the  written  law. 
In  Ephesians  ii.  14  we  read  of  the  middle  wall  of  partition 
which  Christ  has  broken  down  ;  and  of  the  enmity  which 
He  has  made  inoperative  by  making  inoperative  the  law  of 
commandments  in  decrees.  St.  Paul  adds  that  Christ's 
purpose  was  to  reconcile  to  God  both  Jews  and  Gentiles, 
formerly  at  enmity  each  with  the  other  and  both  with  God, 
by  means  of  the  cross ;  and  that  by  the  cross  Christ  had 
slain  this  enmity.  These  somewhat  difficult  words  imply 
that  the  enmity  between  man  and  God  was  removed  by 
means  of  the  death  of  Christ :  and  the  context  suggests 
that  in  so  doing  Christ  made  inoperative  the  condemnation 
of  the  written  law. 

These  five  very  different  passages  reveal  the  firm  hold  on 
the  thought  of  St.  Paul  of  the  idea  that  through  the  death 
of  Christ  was  removed  a  hindrance  to  the  salvation  of  men 
having  its  root  in  the  Law  of  God.  And,  since  the  Law 
is  the  authoritative  expression  of  the  justice  of  God,  this 
teaching  is  implied  in,  and  implies,  the  teaching  in  Komans 
iii.  26  that  God  gave  Christ  to  die  in  order  He  might  be 
"  Himself  just  and  a  justifier  of  him  that  hath  faith  in 
Jesus."  We  have  also  seen  in  this  paper  that  the  same 
fundamental  teaching  is  embodied  in  another  mode  of 
expression  familiar  to  St.  Paul,  viz.  that  through  the 
death  of  Christ  sinners  have  been  reconciled  to  God.  The.se 
different  modes  of  presenting  one  fundamental  conception 
of  the  relation  of  the  death  of  Christ  to  our  salvation,  are 
decisive  proof  that  this  conception  was  actually  held  by  the 
great  Apostle;  and  they  reveal  its  controlling  influence  over 
his  thought  and  life. 


THE  NOBLEMAN'S  SON.  443 


The  remaining  teaching  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Eomans 
need  not  detain  us.  In  chapter  xiv.  9  we  read  that  "for 
this  end  Christ  died  and  lived,  in  order  that  both  of  dead 
and  living  He  may  be  Lord."  This  implies  that  Christ 
died  of  His  own  deliberate  will,  and  with  a  definite  pm'pose. 
So  in  verse  15  we  read,  "  destroy  not  him  for  whom  Christ 
died."  These  passages  are  in  complete  harmony  with 
others  already  expounded. 

To  sum  up.  So  far  as  we  have  yet  examined  it,  St. 
Paul's  teaching  about  the  death  of  Christ  is  a  logical 
development  of  one  fundamental  idea,  viz.  that  God  gave 
Christ  to  die  in  order  to  remove  a  hindrance  to  the  salva- 
tion of  sinful  man  which  has  its  root  in  the  justice  of  God. 
And  we  have  already  seen  that  this  conception  of  the  pur- 
pose of  the  death  of  Christ  explains  the  teaching  of  all  the 
other  writers  of  the  New  Testament. 

In  my  next  paper  we  shall  consider  other  teaching  of  the 
great  Apostle  on  the  same  subject. 

Joseph  Agar  Beet. 


THE  NOBLEMAN'S  SON  AND  THE  CENTUEION'S 

SERVANT. 

(John  iv.  46  ;  Matt.  viii.  5  ;  and  Luke  vii.  1. 

At  the  threshold  of  the  ministry  of  Christ,  and  in  the  very 
act  of  passing  from  seclusion  to  His  immortal  publicity,  we 
saw  Him  pause  to  bless  the  marriage  of  two  obscure  and 
forgotten  villagers.  It  was  a  natural  and  exquisite  inagu- 
ration  of  His  career,  a  pure  and  fit  expression  of  the  love  in 
the  heart  of  Jesus. 

But  no  sooner  does  His  work  begin  to  grapple  with  the 
sad  conditions  of  humanity,  no  sooner  is  a  "Saviour"  mani- 
fested, than  salvation  is  demanded  from  evils  far  direr  and 


444  THE  NOBLEMAN'S  SON 

more  stern  than  the  failure  of  a  wedding-feast,  so  that  the 
whisper  "they  have  no  wine"  is  quickly  exchanged  for  the 
wail  of  anguish,  "  Sir,  come  down  ere  my  child  die." 

In  truth  it  is  the  radical  defect  of  all  sentimental  religions 
and  all  dreamy  philosophies,  that  however  they  may  appease 
our  minor  complainings,  they  have  no  solace  for  bleeding 
hearts.  Yet  these  are  everywhere.  Stern  disease,  imminent 
bereavement,  the  importunity  of  a  parent  in  his  anguish, 
these  give  their  tone  to  the  second  record  of  a  miracle.  This 
was  not  however  the  second  that  was  actually  performed, 
for  in  Jerusalem,  at  the  passover,  many  had  believed,  be- 
holding the  signs  which  Jesus  wrought  (John  ii.  23,  iv.  45). 

This  miracle,  the  healing  of  the  son  of  the  nobleman, 
must  be  studied  along  with  that  of  the  healing  of  the  slave 
of  the  centurion.  Rationalism  makes  this  necessary,  by 
insisting  on  the  identification  of  the  two  stories,  to  the  con- 
fusion of  both.  And  the  true  answer  to  its  cavils  leads  us 
so  far  into  the  heart  and  spirit  of  the  second,  that  a  com- 
plete examination  of  it  cannot  then  be  postponed  without 
involving  intolerable  repetition. 

It  is  plain  that  if  the  two  miracles  are  indeed  independent 
they  bear  witness  to  one  another.  The  same  tone,  the 
same  spirit  and  character  pervade  the  narrative  in  the  two 
synoptics  and  that  in  John.  Our  witnesses  (if  this  be  so) 
will  then  be  the  rationalists  who  have  actually  mistaken 
one  story  for  the  other,  Strauss  and  Schenkel,  Ewald  and 
De  Wette,  Baur  and  Weizsiicker,^  besides  Renan,  who  uses 
in  this  connection  language  of  much  interest  and  signifi- 
cance. "  It  is,"  he  says,  "  a  miracle  of  healing,  closely  re- 
sembling those  which  fill  the  synoptics,  and  answering,  with 
some  variations,  to  that  which  is  related  in  Matthew  viii.  5, 
and  in  Luke  vii.  1.     This  is  highly  remarkable,  for  it  proves 

'  It  is  by  a  mere  slip,  apparently,  that  Iren^eus  wrote,  "  Filium  ceiUurionis 
abaens  verbo  curavit,  tlicens,  Vade  filing  tiuis  vivit." 


AND   THE  CENTURION'S  SERVANT.  445 

that  the  author  did  not  imagine  his  miracles  according  to 
his  own  conceit,  but  in  relating  them  followed  a  tradition. 
In  fact  of  the  seven  miracles  in  John,  there  are  only  two, 
the  marriage  in  Cana  and  the  raising  of  Lazarus,  which  are 
without  a  trace  in  the  synoptics.  The  other  five  can  be  re- 
cognised with  differences  in  detail."  (F.  de  J.,  15th  ed.,  ap- 
pendice  p)-  495.)  Now  if  it  be  considered  how  early  a  date 
this  appendix  assigns  to  John,  the  prior  tradition  which  he 
used  must  have  been  primitive  indeed.  And  the  later  modi- 
fications of  Kenan's  theory  become  very  intelligible,  not  as 
harmonizing  better  with  the  phenomena  which  suggested 
its  earlier  form,  but  as  evading  inexorable  consequences 
afterwards  discovered,  and  fatal  to  unbelief. 

Now  what  are  the  statements  which  have  to  be  dealt 
with  ?  The  rationalistic  theories,  as  of  the  records  in 
general  so  of  these  stories  in  particular,  all  require  the 
Johannine  narrative  to  be  the  last  outcome  of  progressive 
improvements  in  legend,  and  advances  of  the  tradition. 
Strauss  makes  the  improvements  deliberate  and  calculated. 
By  placing  Jesus  in  Cana,  "  an  increase  of  the  distance,  and 
consequently  an  exaggeration  of  the  miracle  was  obtained." 
The  return  of  the  father  a  day  later  left  room  for  investiga- 
tion, and  showed  that  the  hour  of  improvement  was  that  of 
the  interview  with  Jesus  {Neio  Life,  ii.  201). 

Keim  also  insists  on  the  greater  distance,  the  greater 
promptitude  ("  mysterious  telegram  of  the  Lord  !  ")  and  the 
conversion  of  the  household — "  a  detail  of  which  the  earlier 
writers  know  nothing  "  (iii.  220-1). 

But  it  must  be  clear  that  in  all  cases  of  restoration  from 
desperate  illness,  the  persuasion  of  the  household  is  as- 
sumed. We  are  told  nothing  of  the  state  of  mind  of 
Jairus  and  his  wife  after  the  miracle  ;  but  who  doubts  it  on 
that  account '? 

Here  it  is  expressly  mentioned  simply  because  John  is 
engaged  in  tracing  the  beginnings  of  belief  wherever  Jesus 


446  THE  NOBLEMAN'S  SON 

went,  at  Cana  as  well  as  in  Capernaum,  and  in  Samaria 
without  any  miracle  at  all.  "  Now  we  believe,  not  because 
of  Thy  speaking,  for  we  have  heard  for  ourselves,  and 
know."  So  far  is  John  from  supposing  that  faith  is  a 
gauge  for  measurement  of  the  relative  bulk  of  prodigies. 
And  when  two  miracles  are  said  to  have  been  wrought 
from  a  distance,  it  is  almost  a  jest  to  appraise  their  com- 
parative greatness  by  the  number  of  miles  between  the 
operator  and  the  patient. 

In  truth  a  much  stronger  case  could  be  made  out  for 
precisely  the  inverse  of  their  position,  for  reversing  the 
order  of  the  narratives,  and  pronouncing  the  story  in  the 
synoptics  to  be  the  later  and  more  developed  marvel.  It 
could  be  argued  that  the  faith,  by  which  Jesus  obtains 
honour,  which  was  so  wavering  and  unsteady  in  St.  John,  is 
confirmed  and  unhesitating  now,  the  doubts  of  the  early  story 
having  come  to  be  regarded  as  unworthy  and  an  insult. 
He  is  glorified  by  a  confession,  as  formal  as  if  it  were  a 
fragment  of  some  creed,  that  all  human  ailments  are  to 
Him  as  the  subordinates  in  a  well-disciplined  army,  a 
position  undreamed  of  by  John.  Above  all,  a  hint  which 
has  been  dropped  by  the  earlier  story,  when  it  made 
the  applicant  a  courtier,  a  Jew  as  yet,  but  contaminated 
by  official  relations  with  the  foreigner,  has  since  received 
the  most  significant  exaggerations.  The  suppliant  is  now 
a  faithful  Gentile,  a  centurion  ;  and  even  the  notion  that 
he  was  recommended  by  some  courtesies  shown  to  Juda- 
ism, which  evidently  prevailed  for  a  while,  is  formally  con- 
troverted by  St.  Matthew,  who  declares  that  the  children 
of  the  kingdom  are  to  be  cast  into  outer  darkness,  and  that 
it  is  from  the  outmost  limits  of  the  heathen  world  that  the 
true  recruits  of  the  Church  are  to  be  drawn. 

Are  these  not  indications  of  the  latest  recension  of  the 
story,  after  the  Church  had  ceased  to  have  any  hope  of  the 
Jews,  and  when  the  gospel  had  already  proved  successful  in 


AND   THE  CENTURION'S  SERVANT.  447 

the  remotest  realms?  All  this,  and  much  more  could  have 
been  plausibly  urged,  if  the  requirements  of  the  sceptical 
case  had  been  reversed.  And  it  conclusively  proves  the  folly 
of  paying  any  regard  to  arguments  of  the  kind,  which  can  be 
tossed  about,  from  one  side  to  the  other,  like  tennis-balls. 

But  it  is  not  enough  for  us  merely  to  insist  that  there 
are  marked  differences  between  the  narratives  (which  will 
be  met  by  an  assertion  that  they  have  simply  drifted  far 
away  from  each  other),  nor  to  show  that  the  evidence  for 
growth,  from  the  synoptics  to  John,  has  broken  down.  "We 
must  account  for  the  resemblances  between  them,  which  are 
too  striking  to  be  entirely  accidental. 

These  are  three  :  the  working  of  both  miracles  from  a 
distance  ;  the  official  station  of  both  petitioners  (however 
great  the  difference  in  their  rank),  and  the  really  startling 
fact  that  both  were  resident  in  Capernaum.  In  these  is  the 
strength  of  the  hostile  position  ;  but  a  closer  consideration 
will  show  that  the  official  and  local  proximity  of  the  appli- 
cants can  explain  all  the  details  of  the  second  narrative, 
including  the  repetition  of  a  cure  from  a  distance  ;  and  that 
a  comparison  of  the  accounts  is  a  heir)  instead  of  a  hindrance 
to  our  faith. 

It  is  obvious  that  in  such  a  life  as  that  of  Jesus,  one  in- 
cident must  often  lead  to  another,  and  certain  events  would 
tend  to  reproduce  themselves,  in  the  broad  outline,  yet 
with  many  differences  in  detail.  Consider,  for  example, 
how  hard  it  was  for  a  woman,  trammeled  by  oriental  usages, 
to  find  any  suitable  expression  for  her  loyalty ;  and  then 
decide  whether  the  fact  that  Jesus  allowed  one  woman, 
and  even  a  sinner,  to  anoint  Him  would  not  embolden  a 
happier  sister  also  to  anoint  her  Master,  when  eager  to  do 
what  she  could,  being  at  once  grateful  for  a  stupendous 
miracle,  and  foreboding  His  burial,  which  was  at  hand. 
The  suspicion  of  some  confusion  in  two  narratives  of  the 


448  THE  NOBLEMAN'S  SON 

same  event  soon  gives  place  to  a  sense  of  natural  and 
beautiful  connection  between  two  acts  of  love,  different,  but 
not  wholly  independent.  We  might  almost  divine,  even  if 
it  were  unrecorded,  that  such  homage,  having  been  accepted, 
would  more  probably  happen  twice  than  once  only.  And 
thus  it  is  with  the  two  miracles  before  us:  they  also  are 
separate  but  not  independent.  Instead  of  wondering  that 
both  occurred  in  the  same  place,  it  would  have  been  far 
more  surprising  if  the  second  had  happened  elsewhere,  if 
the  centurion  had  conceived  such  extraordinary  confidence 
without  any  knowledge  of  the  experience  of  his  neighbour, 
who  had  already  learned  how  Jesus  was  obeyed  when  He 
said  to  a  disease.  Depart. 

The  faith  at  which  Jesus  marvelled  becomes  intelligible, 
without  ceasing  to  be  admirable,  when  we  reflect  that  the 
centurion  was  evidently  aware  of  the  miracle  formerly 
wrought  for  another  inhabitant  of  the  same  city,  an  eminent 
person,  one  of  the  court  which  his  own  sword  protected. 
That  the  two  miracles  performed  from  a  distance  should 
bear  the  same  address  would  no  doubt  be  strange  if  the 
manner  of  the  first  had  not  inspired  the  centurion  to  urge 
with  remarkable  insistence  the  manner  of  the  second.  It 
ceases  to  be  surprising  when  we  read  that  the  second  was 
suggested  by  an  inhabitant  of  the  town,  deeply  impressed 
by  what  had  already  been  done,  and  very  reluctant  to  over- 
tax the  generous  condescension  which  would  perform  a 
miracle  for  the  slave  of  a  Gentile.  The  faith  of  the  cen- 
turion, which  was  startling,  even  where  the  nobleman 
dwelt,  would  have  been  almost  incredible  elsewhere.  And 
the  natural  sequence  of  the  two  narratives,  as  the  Church 
receives  them,  may  best  be  appreciated  by  reversing  their 
order,  and  observing  how  strange  would  seem  the  in- 
credulity of  the  noble,  if  already,  in  his  town,  the  faith  of 
the  centurion  had  been  rewarded.  In  exactly  the  same 
degree  had  the  confidence  of  the  latter  been  assisted. 


AND   THE  CENTURION'S  SERVANT.  449 


And  thus,  adopting  the  Christian  view,  all  is  order  and 
consistency,  while  the  sceptical  recension  rends  the  fabric 
into  pieces  without  even  making  a  harmonious  pattern  of 
the  patchwork. 

It  is  now  time  to  consider,  in  more  detail,  the  first  of 
these  narratives,  that  of  John.  Who  was  the  petitioner? 
The  term  ^aa-LKiic6<;  might  possibly  denote  one  of  royal 
blood,  but  then  he  would  surely  have  been  named  ;  or  per- 
haps no  more  than  a  member  of  the  Herodian  faction,  but 
it  is  not  in  John's  manner  to  mention  so  irrelevant  and 
trifling  a  detail  as  this.  It  is  reasonable  to  infer  that  he 
was  simply  a  courtier.  And  here  John  is  in  agreement 
with  Luke,  who  names  Chuza  and  Manaan,  in  quite  dif- 
ferent connections,  as  having  relations  both  with  Jesus 
and  with  the  court.  A  little  later  we  find  Herod  himself 
excited  by  the  miracles  of  Jesus,  first  to  the  slavish  dread 
which  believed  Him  to  be  "  John  whom  I  beheaded," 
and  when  this  fear  wore  away  with  impunity,  then  to 
desire  to  see  Him,  with  that  idle  curiosity  to  which  no 
sign  is  given. 

From  the  court  of  Herod,  then,  comes  a  man  of  sufficient 
rank  to  expect  that  Jesus,  for  his  sake,  should  willingly 
undertake  a  journey,  and  to  expostulate,  with  some  impa- 
tience, when  He  delays  to  discuss  the  terms  on  which  men 
should  believe.  There  is  no  lack  of  sympathy  in  the  first 
reply  of  Jesus  to  the  prayer  that  He  would  come  and  heal 
a  child  at  the  point  of  death.  The  Syro-Phcenician  woman 
would  have  been  quick  to  detect,  in  His  words,  a  hint  that 
the  sign  should  be  vouchsafed. 

But  there  is  a  keen  discernment  of  the  weakness  of  that 
belief  which  some  would  think  strong  enough,  since  it  led 
the  nobleman  to  undertake  a  journey,  and  to  appeal  to  the 
Prophet  of  Nazareth  for  his  son's  life.  Many  who  forget 
religion  in  prosperity  take  refuge,  when  afflicted,  in  passion- 

voL.  V.  29 


450  THE  NOBLEMAN'S  SON 

ate  appeals  to  heaven,  and  it  is  supposed  to  show  how 
much  latent  rehgion  men  possess,  that — 

"  E^'cs  Avhich  the  teacher  eaiiuot  school 
By  -u-ayside  graves  are  raised, 
And  lips  say  '  God  be  pitiful ' 

"Which  ne'er  said  '  God  be  praised.'  " 

But  our  Lord  thought  otherwise.  The  passionate  energies 
of  despair  are  not  spiritual  in  their  strength.  And  Jesus, 
fresh  from  His  stay  with  the  Samaritans,  who  believed  be- 
cause they  heard,  complained,  "  Except  ye  see  signs  and 
wonders  ^  ye  will  not  believe."  Persons  who  sigh  because 
the  age  of  miracles  is  past,  and  who  think  that  a  revival  of 
faith  would  regain  signs  and  wonders  for  the  Church,  ought 
to  observe  that  the  very  object  of  the  miracles  was  to  render 
themselves  unnecessary,  to  bring  on  a  condition  of  faith  in 
which  they  can  be  put  away  as  childish  things.  And  so 
Jesus  at  the  outset  makes  this  courtier  aware  that  He  is  no 
mere  Thaumaturgist  but  a  Divine  Teacher,  who  requires 
faith  in  its  simplest  and  most  direct  forms.  This  faith  He 
absolutely  exacts,  for  when  the  trembling  father  cries  out 
against  a  delay  which  may  prove  fatal,  it  is  peremptorily 
demanded  that  without  seeing  he  shall  believe,  contented 
with  an  assurance,  without  any  sign,  except  indeed  what 
shone  upon  the  heavenly  face  of  Jesus.  Thus  was  elicited, 
e-ducated,  more  faith  than  the  man  was  conscious  of,  so 
that  his  heart  left  him  free,  either  to  transact  other  busi- 
ness, or  else  to  visit  friends  upon  the  road  home,  which 
he  might  easily  have  reached,  had  he  been  impatient,  be- 
tween "  the  seventh  hour,"  and  nightfall. 

It  is  impossible  not  to  be  struck  by  the  similarity  between 
this  conduct  of  Jesus  and  that  of  Elisha  in  sending  away 
Kaaman,  who  also  received  only  a  promise,  which  took  effect 

'  Note  that  the  word  Wpas  never  occurs  alone,  except  in  Peter's  quotation 
from  the  Old  Testament,  Acts  ii.  19.  Even  there  the  "  wonders  "  in  heaven 
are  closely  connected  with  the  "  signs  "  on  earth. 


AND   THE  CENTURION'S  SERVANT.  451 

when  the  applicant  showed  faith  in  it.  In  both  cases  it  was 
a  man  of  rank  who  was  thus  treated,  a  man  to  whom  any 
observer  of  persons  would  have  been  specially  obsequious. 
And  we  may  well  suppose  that  the  ancient  story  helped  the 
nobleman  to  believe  the  word  which  Jesus  spake  unto  him. 

The  words  of  Jesus  are  in  deep  harmony  with  the  bless- 
ing in  this  gospel  for  those  who  have  not  seen  yet  have 
believed,  and  also  with  the  declaration  elsewhere,  that  if 
moral  agencies  have  entirely  failed,  men  will  not  believe 
though  one  rose  from  the  dead.  In  form  that  declaration 
goes  beyond  this.  Here  we  read  that  only  signs  will  bring 
the  people  to  believe  ("ye"  not  "thou);  there  a  supreme 
sign  will  fail.  But  there  is  only  a  formal  inconsistency,  for 
this  passage  speaks  of  the  difficulty  of  inspiring  a  new  faith, 
the  other  of  the  impossibility  of  converting  men  who  are 
false  to  the  truth  which  they  profess.  The  sadness  of 
Christ's  statement  was  more  than  justified  afterward,  when, 
having  done  among  them  the  signs  which  none  other  man 
did.  He  declared  that  they  had  both  seen  and  hated  both 
Him  and  His  Father. 

There  is  something  very  natural  in  the  simple  close  of 
this  story.  The  servants,  surprised  at  their  Master's  delay, 
met  the  nobleman  with  good  news  ;  and  though  he  had 
relied  upon  Christ's  assurance,  yet  it  was  reasonable  that 
he  should  test  the  miracle  by  asking  at  what  hour  began 
the  gradual  amendment  which  was  all  that  he  expected, 
and  all  that  earthly  medicine  can  bestow.  But  on  learning 
that  at  the  hour  of  his  interview  with  Jesus  the  fever 
entirely  left  him,  the  man,  already  a  believer,  believed. 
One  is  always  expecting  some  person  to  parade  this  paradox 
as  an  inconsistency.  In  truth  it  is  what  happens  whenever 
we  make  larger  proof  of  our  privilege  and  of  the  power  of 
prayer,  and  from  happy  experience  draw  a  deeper  and  richer 
persuasion,  a  more  spontaneous  and  adequate  faith  in  Him, 
in  whom  we  believed  before. 


452  THE  NOBLEMAN'S  SON 


It  is  a  process  which  can  be  fatally  inverted.  After  the 
sop  Satan  entered  into  Judas.  But  Satan  had  entered  into 
him  already  when  he  first  opened  negociations  with  the 
priests.  And  even  before  that,  he  was  a  devil  (John  xiii.  27, 
vi.  70  ;  Luke  xxii.  8). 

Some  months  later,  when  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  had 
been  preached  and  several  miracles  wrought,  the  ease  of 
this  one  inspired  a  centurion  in  the  same  town  to  make  a 
bold  request.  Contemptible  as  a  slave  might  be,  this 
soldier  was  weak  enough  to  love  one.  What  he  asked 
would  imply  condescension  indeed,  but  no  labour,  since 
Jesus  was  nearer  now  (as  the  sceptics  so  carefully  remind 
us)  than  when  he  healed  a  child  by  a  mere  word.  It  is 
worth  notice  that  until  His  arrest,  when  He  healed  the 
ear  of  Malchus,  this  is  His  only  recorded  contact  with 
that  unhappy  class,  whose  yoke  He  came  to  break,  and 
for  one  of  whom  His  apostle  wrote  the  most  exquisite  and 
urbane  epistle  in  all  literature.  We  may  infer  indeed  that 
slaves  were  among  those  who  insulted  Him,  since  they 
were  prominent  among  those  who  overawed  Peter  (John 
xviii.  18,  26).  Yet  the  fact  remains  that  nothing  of  the 
kind  is  written  :  we  only  know  of  two,  the  two  occasions, 
on  both  of  which  He  worked  miracles  for  their  relief. 

Evidently  he  did  not  mean  to  ask  of  Jesus  much  exertion 
for  such  a  person,  and  was  astonished  when  the  Lord  Him- 
self drew  near.  No  one  dreams  of  saying  a  word  about 
any  merit  of  the  sufferer.  He  had  become  "  dear  "  to  his 
master,  but  that  was  a  feeling  which  he  does  not  expect 
to  weigh  with  others.  And  indeed  the  national  pride  and 
scorn  of  the  Jew  is  exhibited  without  a  touch  of  exaggera- 
tion or  caricature,  in  the  sole  merit  that  is  ascribed  to  the 
centurion  himself,  worthy  because  he  loveth  our  nation, 
and  hath  built  our  synagogue.  It  is  otherwise,  in  the 
Acts,    when    a    Christian    writer    describes    the    virtue    of 


AND   THE  CENTURION'S  SERVANT.  453 


Cornelius,  a  devout  man  and  one  that  feared  God  with  all 
bis  bouse.  Tbus  everywhere  tbese  narratives  welcome  tbe 
minutest  tests  of  tbeir  veracity. 

What  then  are  we  to  make  of  tbe  assertion  in  St.  Matthev/ 
that  the  centurion  came,  while  St.  Luke  tells  us  that  he 
"  sent  elders  of  the  Jews  "  to  plead  for  him,  and  after- 
wards "sent  friends"  (naturall}^  since  he  had  not  another 
olbcial  deputation  in  reserve)  to  stop  the  personal  approach 
of  Jesus  ? 

No  one  is  perplexed  by  a  discrepancy  of  quite  the  same 
kind,  where  a  miracle  is  not  in  question.  In  Matthew  it 
is  Salome  who  asks  the  chief  places  in  tbe  kingdom  for 
her  sons  ;  in  Mark  it  is  James  and  John  themselves  (Matt. 
XX.  20;  Mark  x.  So)  ;  but  we  understand  at  once  that  her 
action  was  also  theirs.  And  what  the  centurion  did  by 
delegates  he  did  himself,  even  if  he  did  not  in  bis  earnest- 
ness add  personal  expostulations  at  last.  Lord  Tennyson 
is  not  wrong  in  singing  that — 

"  Down  ive  swept  and  charged  and  overthrew     .     .     . 
In  that  world-earthquake  "Watoi'loo." 

Strict  discipline  is  an  excellent  school  for  character. 
From  rugged  and  stern  surroundings  have  often  emerged 
tbe  strongest  and  the  most  veracious  characters  ;  and  thus 
it  is  by  no  mere  accident  that  so  many  of  the  centurions, 
the  minor  of6cers  of  tbe  New  Testament,  are  favourably 
mentioned.  Tbe  second  is  be  who  discerned  beside  the 
Cross  the  righteousness  of  Jesus,  and  was  therefore  led  on, 
amid  tbe  supernatural  incidents  of  His  death,  to  confess 
that  He  was  tbe  Son  of  God.  And  in  tbe  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  we  have  Cornelius,  and  Julius,  who  courteously 
entreated  Paul.  This  man  bad  been  attracted  to  the  light 
which  Israel  held  up,  with  however  weak  a  band,  among 
the  nations.  He  was  one  of  tbe  many  God-fearing  Gentiles, 
penetrated    with  Hebrew  convictions,  and   j'et   free   from 


454  THE  NOBLEMAN'S  SON 

Jewish  prejudice,  who  formed  the  bridge  by  which  Paul 
was  presently  to  reach  the  Gentile  world.  And  Jesus  does 
not  hold  back,  nor  require  any  such  importunity,  as  when 
He  had  to  deal  with  a  mere  Gentile,  "  a  Greek,  a  Sj^ro- 
Phoonician."  The  level  from  which  she  needed  to  raise 
herself  by  a  memorable  effort,  the  centurion  had  already 
left  behind. 

It  is  interesting  to  remark  the  colour  given  by  his  own 
vocation  to  his  religious  convictions.  Taught  equally  by 
his  own  obedience  and  authority,  He  thinks  of  health  and 
sickness  coming  and  going  at  the  bidding  of  their  Master. 
It  is  a  high  conception,  and  implies  more  perhaps  than 
he  realized,  the  harmony  and  discipline  of  nature,  and  its 
obedience  to  a  presiding  intelligence. 

Hearing  it,  Jesus  marvelled.  Only  once  again  this  ex- 
pression is  used  of  Him,  and  then  also  from  a  moral  im- 
pulse ;  He  marvelled  at  the  unbelief  of  His  own  nation 
(Mark  vi.  G).  It  is  impossible  to  regard  such  expressions 
as  unreal.  They  must  be  taken  with  all  those  which  tell 
of  His  asking  questions,  of  His  advance  in  wisdom,  of  the 
day  which  He  knew  not.  The  inference  is  cumulative  in 
its  weight,  and  the  true  lesson  is  of  adoration  for  His 
intellectual  as  well  as  physical  self-sacrifice,  in  that  He 
condescended  not  only  to  suffer  pain,  but  to  be  like  His 
brethren  in  all  privation,  yet  without  sin.  But  it  does 
not  follow  that  Jesus  ever  erred.  Error  is  not  the  result 
of  ignorance  alone,  but  only  in  conjunction  with  over- 
confidence,  with  the  false  assumption  that  one  knows ;  and 
therefore  it  always  involves  some  modicum  of  presumption. 
The  chasm  is  deep  and  broad  between  a  frank  recognition 
of  the  ignorance  which  Christ  avowed,  and  any  imputation 
of  error  to  Him  who  is  the  Truth,  and  the  Word  made 
flesh. 

Jesus   then    marvelled,  and   proceeded  to    demolish   the 
vain-glorious  assumption  of  superiority  which  led  the  elders 


AND   THE  CENTURION'S  SERVANT.  455 

to  recommend  this  centurion  merely  as  a  client  of  their 
own.  He,  whom  human  faith  astonished,  since  lie  was 
man,  straightway,  as  anointed  teacher,  declares  the  secrets 
of  eternity,  the  coming  of  many  from  all  quarters  of  the 
world  to  a  kingdom  whose  natural  inheritors  shall  be  cast 
out,  not  merely  some  of  them,  but  "the  children"  in  bulk 
and  as  an  aggregate. 

This  is  the  first  clear  announcement  of  that  spiritual 
revolution,  the  loss  of  the  exclusive  privilege  of  Judaism, 
which  had  been  foreshadowed  in  the  discourse  at  Nazareth, 
by  the  stress  laid  upon  the  many  lepers  and  widows  of 
Israel  who  were  unrelieved,  while  the  prophet  was  sent  to 
a  Syrian  and  to  a  woman  of  Sidon. 

And  this  announcement  is  joined  with  the  very  first 
commendation  of  human  faith,  the  faith  of  a  Gentile 
soldier.^ 

The  approval  distinctly  accepts  the  rank  of  Master  of  all 
disease,  and  such  a  one  as  does  not  obtain  healing  by  His 
intercession,  but  sends  it  by  speaking  the  word  only. 

It  may  not  assert  His  divinity  in  so  logical  a  form  as  to 
forbid  evasion.  But  no  fact  can  be  more  significant  than 
this,  that  the  lowly  Jesus  never  refuses  any  elevation  what- 
ever that  is  offered  Him,  except  only  the  imputation  of 
a  goodness  which  is  not  divine.  Any  such  goodness  is  in- 
conceivable to  Him. 

Lastly,  we  observe  in  these  two  narratives  the  flexibility 
of  our  Saviour's  manner,  the  tact,  the  adaptation  to  circum- 
stances, which  His  followers  covet,  but  rarely  win. 

The  nobleman  who  would  carry  Him  away  to  attend 
like  a  physician  upon  his  child,  must  learn  his  place.  Jesus 
obliges  him  to  depart,  trustfully,  without  a  sign.  But  the 
centurion  and  the  patronizing  elders  must  learn  quite  a 

*  Eveuthe  word  Tr/cms  cannot  accurately  be  said  to  occur  before,  although  the 
idea,  and  the  name  of  it,  are  implied  iu  Mark  i.  lo  and  Matt.  vi.  30. 


45G  CARDINAL  NEWMAN. 

different  lesson,  the  condescension  of  Christ  to  men  of  low 
estate.  He  will  come  to  a  Gentile  and  heal  a  slave.  And 
5'et  there  is  an  earnest  humility  which  ought  not  to  be 
constrained.  Jesus  yields  to  the  urgency  of  lowliness,  and 
perhaps  feels  that  to  insist  further  on  a  personal  visit 
would  be  misconstrued  by  the  bystanders.  The  servant  is 
made  whole  at  once. 

G.  A.  Chadwick. 


CABDINAL   NEWMAN. 

Nearly  thirty  years  ago,  Mr.  Kingsley  accused  Dr.  New- 
man of  something  like  indifference  to  truth  and  sincerity. 
He  brought  into  the  field,  in  reply,  both  Newman's  extra- 
ordinary power  of  effective  statement,  and  his  dexterity  in 
seizing  an  opportunity,  Newman  virtually  said,  "  Well,  I 
will  retrace  the  history  of  my  mind,  I  will  show  how  my 
opinions  have  come  and  grown  ;  I  will  reveal  the  reaction 
created  in  my  mind  by  all  the  events  which  have  moulded 
my  history  ;  and  then  I  will  await  the  world's  judgment 
upon  my  integrity."  So  there  came  out  the  Apologia,  the 
history  of  his  Keligious  Opinions.  It  was  much  more  than 
an  answer  to  Kingsley.  It  was  an  appeal,  in  a  singularly 
effective  form,  as  to  the  worth  of  the  convictions  which 
had  mastered  his  life.  In  his  perspicuous,  nervous  English, 
Newman  told  his  tale,  and  allowed  the  story  to  ask  its  own 
questions  and  press  its  lessons  on  the  public  mind.  No- 
body thought  any  more  about  Kingsley's  charges.  The 
interest  and  the  pathos  of  an  unworldly  and  unique  life 
alone  remained.  The  book  is  one  of  those  rare  Confessions 
which  men  never  will  forget.  Ever  since  then,  Newman, 
who  was  remarkable  enough  before,  has  had  a  quite  special 
hold  of  the  interest  of  his  generation. 

Lately,  at  a  great  old  age,  the  Cardinal  passed  away.     Of 


CARDINAL  NEWMAN.  457 

course  his  death  once  more  called  general  attention  to  the 
efforts  and  experiences  of  his  life.  The  man  and  his  work 
have  been  canvassed  on  different  sides.  But  the  subject 
will  yet  bear,  perhaps,  to  be  rapidly  reviewed. 

Let  me  sketch  the  framework  of  the  story.  There  are 
three  main  landmarks  :  his  epoch  of  religious^  decision  in 
1816  ;  his  journey  with  Froude  in  1832;  his  reception  into 
the  Church  of  Kome  in  1845.  He  was  born  in  1801. 
Brought  up  under  a  Calvinistic  theology,  and  under  the 
influences  commonly  called  Evangelical,  both  of  them  in  a 
sincere,  but  not  an  extreme  or  rigid  form,  trained  to  "  take 
great  delight  in  reading  his  Bible,"  and  brought  into  con- 
tact with  books  of  practical  religion,  Newman's  religious 
life,  as  life  in  earnest,  began  at  the  age  of  fifteen.  The 
change  was  due  to  the  conversation  and  preaching  of  a 
clerical  friend — Mr.  Mayers,  I  believe — and  to  the  writings 
of  Thomas  Scott.  "  To  the  latter,"  he  said,  "  I  almost  owed 
my  soul."  Long  afterwards  he  spoke  of  this  change  as 
"  the  inward  conversion  of  which  I  was  conscious,  and  of 
which  I  still  am  more  certain  than  that  I  have  hands  or 
feet."  From  this  period  he  dates  his  impressions  of  dogma, 
especially  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinitj^,  and  a  profound 
sense  of  the  reality  of  the  Divine  existence,  the  facts  of 
heaven  and  hell,  divine  favour  and  divine  wrath. 

Some  other  characteristics  of  his  younger  days  should  be 
noted.  His  mental  development  was  precocious.  He 
stood  easily  at  the  head  of  his  schoolfellows.  He  took  no 
part  in  games,  but  at  ten  or  twelve  he  wrote  little  poems, 
masques,  idylls,  and  the  like,  and  later  he  brought  out  a 
weekly  school  newspaper.  He  has  recorded  that  before  the 
period  of  his  religious  decision,  he  had  a  strong  tendency 
to  superstitious  fancies.  Also,  with  a  vivid  realisation  of 
the  unseen  world,  he  combined,  as  imaginative  boys  have 
often  done,  the  disposition  to  question  the  reality  of  material 
things.     His  imagination  ran  upon  magical  powers.     He 


458  CARDINAL  NEWMAN. 

thought  "  Hfe  might  he  a  dream,  or  I  an  angel,  and  all  this 
world  a  deception,  my  fellow  angels,  by  a  playful  device, 
concealing  themselves  from  me,  and  deceiving  me  with 
the  semblance  of  a  material  world."  The  strong  impres- 
sions of  his  conversion  also  did  something  in  the  way  of 
"  isolating  me  from  the  objects  which  surrounded  me, 
confirming  me  in  my  mistrust  of  the  reality  of  material 
phenomena,  and  making  me  rest  in  the  thought  of  two, 
and  two  only,  supreme  and  luminously  self-evident  beings, 
myself  and  my  Creator."  Later,  at  the  University,  his 
thoughts  took  a  course  thus  explained.  "  The  material 
system  seems  to  be  economically  or  sacramentally  con- 
nected with  the  more  important,  the  spiritual  ;  and  of  this 
conclusion  the  theory  to  which  I  inclined  as  a  boy,  the 
unreality  of  material  phenomena,  is  the  ultimate  resolu- 
tion." He  found  that  the  Fathers  thought  some  fallen 
spirits  are  not  so  far  fallen  as  others  ;  and  as  Daniel  speaks 
of  each  nation  as  having  its  guardian  angel,  so  in  1837  Dr. 
Newman  began  to  regard  these  less  fallen  spirits  as  the  ani- 
mating principles  of  many  institutions  and  races.  "  Take 
England,  with  many  high  virtues,  but  a  low  Catholicism. 
It  seems  to  me  that  John  Bull  is  a  spirit  neither  of  heaven 
nor  hell."  I  specify  this  thought  because  it  reappears  again 
and  again  in  different  writings. 

In  noting  these  things,  I  have  anticipated  to  some  extent. 
Now  we  come  to  his  earlier  Oxford  life.  He  was  under- 
graduate and  scholar  of  Trinity,  became  in  1823  fellow  of 
Oriel,  which  was  then  the  college  of  independent  and 
advanced  thought,  and  in  1828  he  became  vicar  of  the 
Oxford  parish  of  St.  Mary's.  He  exchanged  some  of  the 
tenets  of  his  early  Evangelicism  for  beliefs  of  a  more 
"  Church  "  type  ;  but,  at  the  same  time,  in  his  own  opinion, 
the  atmosphere  of  Oriel,  as  it  then  was,  injured  his  faith, 
and  inclined  him  towards  theological  "  liberalism."  But 
his  liberalism  was  not  destined  to  go  far.      "  Illness  and 


CARDINAL  NEWMAN.  459 

bereavement,"  he  says,  awoke  him  in  1827 ;  and  other 
influences  were  about  to  come  into  play  to  intensify  his 
preference  for  a  very  different  hne  of  things. 

During  this  period  Newman  began  to  show  his  quahties. 
Modest}',  and  no  doubt  the  consciousness  of  a  high  and 
steadfast  mood,  not  often  shared  or  comprehended  by  those 
around  him,  may  have  isolated  him  in  the  earlier  years. 
He  was  "  rather  proud  of  Oriel  than  at  home  in  it  "  when 
he  first  became  a  fellow.  But  ere  long  ties  began  to 
multiply  for  him,  both  with  his  seniors  and  his  juniors. 
His  life  had  been  rather  silent  and  solitary.  But  "  things 
changed  in  1826."  His  tongue  was  loosened,  and  he  spoke 
spontaneously  and  without  effort.  Also  he  had  become  con- 
scious of  power;  and  that  led  him  to  lay  his  hand  on  men, 
to  divine  a  mission  for  them,  and  to  cheer  them  on  to  the 
accomplishment  of  it.  He  was  becoming  a  centre  of  in- 
fluence. At  the  same  time  Newman  already  began  to 
manifest  the  capacity  for  a  certain  hardness  and  ruthless- 
ness  in  steps  which  his  views  suggested  to  him ;  a  certain 
summariness,  too,  in  dismissing  men  out  of  his  life  when 
he  found  them  not  likely  to  co-operate  ;  and  this  even  in 
cases  where  old  ties  might  have  been  expected  to  suggest 
more  forbearance.  Newman  had  in  him  an  element  of 
imperiousness,  and  it  co-existed  curiously  enough  with  the 
undoubted  kindliness,  and,  in  most  ordinary  senses,  the 
unselfishness  and  humility  of  the  man. 

It  was  in  this  period  too,  especiall}''  from  1828,  that 
Newman  began  to  exert  influence  in  the  pulpit — as  vicar  of 
St.  Mary's. 

Some  features  of  his  preaching  may  be  indicated.  He 
contemplated  men,  as  living  in  a  dangerous  world,  assailed 
by  temptation,  and  in  too  many  cases  trifling  fatally  with 
their  opportunities  and  responsibilities.  He  had  a  vivid 
impression  that  Christian  attainment,  as  it  actually  existed, 
was  commonly  precarious  and  low.     Virtually  he  said  to 


4G0  CARDINAL  NEWMAN. 


men,  "  The  redemption  with  which  we  rightly  claim  con- 
nection as  baptized  Christians,  lays  ns  under  the  gravest 
obligations,  as  it  offers  us  the  needed  help,  to  depart  from 
sin  and  to  follow  Christ.  How  far  we  are  doing  so  shall 
be  clear  one  day,  but  let  us  look  to  it  now."  He  put  this 
question  in  many  forms  ;  but  always  two  things  remarkably 
appeared.  On  the  one  hand  he  apprehended  the  Lord's 
will  as  to  the  life  of  His  followers  with  an  intense  sim- 
plicity. The  ordinary  objections,  and  compromises,  and 
explainings  away,  seemed  to  have  no  power  to  divert  or 
bewilder  his  steady  contemplation  of  the  high  calling.  On 
the  other  hand  he  dealt  with  men  about  it,  as  one  who 
perfectly  understood  the  ordinary  way  of  thinking  on  these 
subjects,  the  moods,  the  temptations,  the  secularising  in- 
fluences of  the  average  life.  He  put  in  play  an  extra- 
ordinary perception  of  ordinary  life,  its  motives  and  its 
working,  and  unveiled  its  too  common  sincere  estrange- 
ment from  the  aims  and  the  rules  of  Christ.  In  all  this  the 
usual  pulpit  exaggerations  were  absent.  His  pictures  of 
the  common  character  and  way  of  living  came  home  to  men 
as  undeniabl}'  true.  And  always  beyond,  with  whatever 
encouragements  and  hopes  for  the  penitent,  came  the  pros- 
pect of  judgment.  It  was  the  austere  and  severe  side, 
mainly,  of  the  New  Testament,  which  he  set  himself  to 
compel  men  to  take  seriously. 

These  reasonings  and  remonstrances  were  conveyed  in 
an  English  style,  clear,  nervous,  characterised  sometimes 
by  a  surface  negligence,  and  by  the  freest  use  of  uncon- 
ventional language,  carrying  always  the  suggestion  of  a 
mind  that  lived  its  own  life  and  saw  from  its  own  view- 
point. It  was  lighted  up  by  just  as  much  allusion  and 
illustration  as  a  master  of  sentences  found  to  be  conducive 
to  put  and  press  bis  case,  and  it  rose  into  eloquence  when- 
ever some  sublime  or  beautiful  thought  required  it.  The 
hearer  felt  a  mind  to  which  worldly  interests  were  insigni- 


CARDINAL  NEWMAN.  461 


ficant,  and  spiritual  interests  supreme,  holding  the  most 
serious  converse  with  his  own  mind  about  its  history  and 
its  destiny. 

Newman's  style  strikes  one  as  a  perfect  instrument, 
wielded  with  the  utmost  ease  and  certainty.  It  is  in- 
teresting to  know  that  it  received  incessant  correction 
whenever  he  had  time  to  give  it.  I  have  heard  that  there 
was  the  most  complete  contrast  between  copy  for  the  press 
supplied  by  Faber  and  by  Newman.  Faber's  MS.  was  like 
copperplate,  unblemished ;  Newman's  was  crowded  with 
obliterations  and  corrections,  running  over  the  whole  sheet. 

A  great  speaker  has  described  Newman  in  the  pulpit, 
reading  his  sermons  "  with  not  much  inflection  and  no 
action,  but  with  a  stamp  and  a  seal  upon  him,  a  solemn 
sweetness  and  music  in  the  tone — a  completeness  in  figure 
and  tone  and  manner  which  made  even  such  a  delivery  sin- 
gularly attractive."  But  the  truth  is  Newman  was  able  to 
produce  effects  by  reading  in  a  way  peculiar  to  himself.  In 
speaking  he  was  not  successful ;  he  hesitated  and  was  in- 
effective :  but  he  could  read  so  as  to  produce  almost  any 
pitch  of  effect.  I  have  been  told  that  in  the  lectures  in 
which  he  attacked  Achilli,  the  audience  fairly  quivered  and 
shuddered  under  some  of  the  passages.  No  doubt  or- 
dinarily in  the  pulpit  he  might  impose  upon  himself  more 
restraint. 

I  have  mentioned  that  according  to  his  own  later  opinion, 
Newman,  about  the  third  or  fourth  year  of  his  Oriel  fel- 
lowship, was  verging  towards  "Liberalism."  By  liberalism 
he  means  that  way  of  looking  at  things  and  judging  of  them 
which  leads  or  tends  to  rationalism.  One  does  not  well 
know  in  what  this  "liberalism  "  consisted  in  his  case  ;  but 
it  soon  ceased.  His  religious  earnestness  was  deepened  by 
trials,  and  liberalism  in  politics  and  in  the  community  was 
taking  forms  which  speedily  repelled  him.  Newman  him- 
self recalled  as  a  kind  of  era,  the  part  he  took  against  Peel 


462  CARDINAL  NEWMAN. 

in  an  Oxford  election  in  1829.  But  he  also  tells  us,  which 
is  much  more  to  the  point,  that  he  had  come  under  the 
influence  of  Keble  and  of  Froude.  Each  of  these  remark- 
able men  impressed  him  in  his  own  way — the  one  full  of 
the  poetry  of  Christian  associations,  as  these  grew  up 
around  the  institutions  and  modes  of  thought  of  the  early 
Church ;  the  other  charmed  rather  with  the  vision  of  the 
Church  of  the  middle  ages,  as  it  dominated  the  world,  beat- 
ing down  the  pretensions  of  secular  ambition,  and  bridling 
the  wild  beast,  man,  v/ith  a  strong  hand.  Newman  had 
already  embraced  many  elements  of  his  final  scheme.  Now 
it  began  to  put  itself  firmly  together  in  his  mind.  Now  he 
began  to  read  the  Fathers  regularly  through ;  now  he  laid 
the  foundations  of  his  work  upon  the  Arians ;  and  now  he 
began  seriously  to  take  antiquity  as  the  true  exponent  of 
Christianity,  and  the  basis  of  the  Church  of  England. 

The  feelings  with  which  Newman  saw  the  stream  run- 
ning, as  it  then  ran  in  secular  and  ecclesiastical  politics,  can 
readily  be  understood.  That  was  the  time  when  popular 
rights  asserted  themselves  against  old  privileges,  and  seemed 
ready  to  sweep  away  all  that  stood  on  any  ground  but 
popular  right.  All  institutions  were  put  to  trial,  with 
this  for  a  first  principle,  that  no  form  of  religious  faith 
should  claim  advantage  over  another.  The  Church  of 
England,  as  a  great  State  institute,  seemed  liable  to  follow 
the  fluctuations  of  the  State,  and  it  was  directly  threatened. 
The  change  in  the  constitution  by  which  Koman  Catholics 
became  members  of  Parliament,  told  on  the  theory  of  legis- 
lation and  on  the  instincts  of  public  men.  Parliament  was 
no  more  a  parliament  of  Established  Churchmen.  It  was 
to  legislate  as  representing  all  faiths,  as  well  as  all  classes. 
Yet  it  still  legislated  for  the  Church ;  and  the  Crown, 
advised  by  the  leaders  of  such  a  parliament,  was  the 
Church's  supreme  governor.  What  was  to  hinder  the  prin- 
ciple of  no  monopolies,  of  fair  play  for  all  parties,  and  so 


CARDINAL  NEWMAN.  4G3 

forth,  sweeping  into  the  Church,  making  havoc  of  her  creed 
and  her  institutions,  and  turning  her  into  a  mere  reflex  of 
parhamentary  indifference?  Men  were  ah-eady  preaching 
up  the  unimportance  of  dogma,  and  advocating  the  widest 
liberty.  How  was  the  stream  to  be  turned?  How  was 
the  Church  to  be  kept  from  being  "  liberahsed  ?  " 

Froude's  health  was  failing  ;  in  1832  he  went  abroad, 
and  Kewman  accompanied  him.  During  this  foreign  sojourn 
the  fermentation  of  Newman's  mind  went  on,  and  his 
Church  principles  became  his  leading  thought  and  his 
ruling  passion.  Away  from  the  scene  of  conflict,  and  un- 
able to  strike  in,  he  could  still  hear  of  the  progress  of  prin- 
ciples he  detested.  The  fearless  decision  of  Froude's  mind 
reinforced  Newman's  own  convictions.  He  imagined  to 
himself  the  Church  of  England  swamped  by  liberalism  ;  and 
as  he  mused  the  fire  burned.  A  prophetic  consciousness  of 
a  mission  and  a  message  grew  on  him,  till  he  was  weary 
with  holding  in.  A  trumpet  call  should  wake  the  Church, 
and  he  would  sound  it.  One  clear  strong  principle  being 
unheard,  or  only  muttered  in  half  applications,  should 
rouse  her  to  rise  and  roll  back  the  invaders,  furnishing  her 
with  courage  and  with  weapons  both.  The  thought  thrilled 
through  him  that  "  deliverance  is  not  wrought  by  the 
many  but  by  the  few\"  Exoriare  Aliquis  sounded  in  his 
ears.  Froude  and  he  began  the  Lyra  Apostolica,  and  chose 
for  motto  the  words  of  Achilles,  "You  shall  know  the 
difference,  now  that  I  am  back  again."  Southey's  Thalaha 
("  Kemember  destiny  has  marked  thee  from  mankind") 
floated  before  his  mind.  As  the  consciousness  of  a  mes- 
sage and  the  presentiment  of  a  destiny  increased  it  played 
strange  pranks  with  his  health,  and  words  of  augury 
escaped  him  which  he  could  not  himself  interpret.  To  this 
period  the  composition  of  "Lead  kindly  light"  belongs. 
He  returned  to  England  in  July,  1833.  All  this  explains 
a  tone  of  conscious  importance  which  rings  through  many 


464  CARDINAL  NEWMAN. 


passages  of  Newman's  life.     He  felt  himself  to  be  a  man 
of  destiny. 

The  situation  he  had  to  deal  with  was  this.  One  evil 
dreaded  was  that  the  Church  might  be  disestablished.  For 
that  in  itself — except  that  he  was  ready  to  resist  the 
Church's  enemies  on  any  issue — Newman  cared  little,  and 
his  friend  Froude  still  less.  But  the  steps  taken,  whether 
ending  in  that  catastrophe  or  not,  were  likely  to  be  guided 
by  the  mere  politics  of  liberty  and  levelling,  and  the  Church 
might  be  transmogrified  on  principles  foreign  to  her  consti- 
tution and  her  faith.  On  the  other  side  the  Church  of 
England  possessed  immense  potential  resource,  but  she  was 
discouraged,  divided,  bewildered.  The  Evangelical  section, 
fresh  from  a  remarkable  experience  of  progress  and  success, 
had  yet  nothing  in  their  principles  to  furnish  a  line  on  which 
to  fight  a  great  ecclesiastical  battle.  Besides,  they  could 
have  no  influence  at  Oxford.  The  old  High  Church  had 
more  prestige,  and  a  stronger  ecclesiastical  tradition.  But 
speaking  generally  their  principles  at  this  time  were  for 
them  too  much  of  a  tradition,  and  too  little  of  an  inspira- 
tion. Yet  sentiments  of  attachment  to  Church  principles 
and  Church  piety,  memories  of  an  old  and  proud  part  in 
English  life,  traditions  which  had  run  for  ages  in  Church 
channels,  the  consciousness  of  a  type  of  feeling  and  cha- 
racter that  was  distinctive,  and  a  fixed  disdain  for  every 
way  of  rehgion  that  was  not  the  Church's  way — representa- 
tives of  thoughts  like  these  existed  everywhere,  only  they 
were  often  not  sure  how  much  they  could  stand  for.  All 
parties  were  habituated  to  a  parliamentary  way  of  viewing 
things  ;  they  had  become  accustomed  to  live  on  compro- 
mises, and  these  now  were  breaking  up. 

Newman  seemed  to  himself  to  know  where  the  remedy 
lay.  It  lay  in  the  realization  of  the  claims  and  the  true 
destiny  of  the  Church  of  God.  In  the  first  place,  Newman 
had  always  held  Christian  religion  in  the  form  of  dogmatic 


CARDINAL  NEWMAN.  465 

articles  which  expressed  its  essence.  Next,  he  had  moved 
steadily  in  the  direction  of  emphasizing  the  place  in  Chris- 
tianity of  the  visible  Church,  with  her  sacraments  and  insti- 
tutions, as  the  channels  of  grace.  That  carried  with  it  the 
notion  that  the  Church  is  never  suffered  to  go  fatally 
wrong  in  her  conception  of  Christianity.  On  the  contrary, 
what  she  deliberately  propounds  as  fundamental  revealed 
truth,  must  have  that  character.  That  was  the  true  Angli- 
canism ;  he  was  to  maintain  that  it  was.  The  grand 
thought  of  God's  Church,  freed  and  cleared  of  the  com- 
promises and  infidelities  of  politicians  and  worldly  wise  men, 
was,  he  said,  the  proper  inheritance  of  the  Church  of 
England  ;  only,  it  had  hardly  ever  been  explicitly  enough 
asserted ;  certainly  it  had  never  been  carried  consistently 
through.  It  had  been  lowered  and  corrupted  by  Protes- 
tantism and  private  judgment.  Men,  throwing  themselves 
professedly  on  the  Bible,  really  influenced  by  rationalism, 
had  been  judging  and  contemning  the  Church,  which  ought 
to  be  their  teacher  and  mistress.  It  was  time  to  sound  a 
higher  note.  A  great  rally  for  the  Church,  not  as  un- 
believers had  debased  her,  but  as  God  had  planned  her,  was 
what  the  age  needed.  Unfortunately,  at  this  point,  it  was 
impossible  to  escape  one  grave  question.  It  was  to  be  a 
rally  for  the  Church ;  but  men  might  say,  Which  Church '? 
The  claims  of  Rome  came  at  once  into  the  field.  However, 
this  could  be  met.  The  true  way  was  to  assert  one  Church 
of  Christ,  which,  after  long  maintaining  explicit  unity,  had 
suffered  some  loss  by  the  separation  of  its  branches.  The 
branches  were  mainly  three — Roman,  Greek,  and  Anglican. 
The  division  was  owned  to  be  an  evil  for  all  parties.  Still 
the  Anglican  was  Christ's  true  Church  in  England  ;  so  also 
were  the  others,  each  on  its  own  ground.  All  had  suffered 
decay  and  come  short,  Rome  sinning  most  deeply  and 
offensively.  Still  each  branch  on  its  own  ground  was 
essentially  Christ's  true  and  one  Church,  for  each  was  a 
VOL.  V.  30 


46G  CARDINAL  NEWMAN. 

branch  of  the  unity.  And  each  should  throw  itself  back  on 
the  true  ideal,  which  might  best  be  found  in  the  undivided 
Church  of  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries.  That,  at  all 
events,  was  the  message  of  the  troubled  times  to  the  Church 
of  England.  First,  she  had  to  believe  in  herself;  secondly, 
she  had  penitently  to  consider  what  faith  and  what  works 
such  belief  implied  ;  thirdly,  she  had  to  assert  herself,  by 
claims  indeed,  but  also  by  life,  by  service,  and  by  sacrifice, 
as  Christ's  only  sacred  ordinance  for  ministering  truth  and 
grace,  and,  in  His  name  and  strength,  defy  the  world.  God 
had  set  her  forth  to  be  the  sacred  ark  for  men,  and  the 
battle  was  the  Lord's.  Her  business  was  to  rise  to  her 
own  calling — to  be  true  to  herself  and  Him. 

I  will  not  dwell  on  the  immense  attractiveness  which  this 
scheme  has  for  many  devout  minds  born  within  a  hier- 
archical Church.  It  had  also  an  immense  recommendation 
in  that  it  was  so  conveniently  adapted  to  the  present  dis- 
tress. That  is,  it  at  once  singled  out  the  Established 
Church  as  the  Church  which  had  the  "  Apostolical  Succes- 
sion," separated  her  case  from  that  of  every  other,  and 
supplied  the  most  convenient  ground  for  defending  her  and 
all  that  was  hers  against  "  liberalism."  Yet,  let  it  be  re- 
membered, that  for  Newman,  and  for  the  movement  so  far 
as  Newman  inspired  it,  the  deepest  thought  of  all  was  bona 
fide  this,  the  calling  of  the  Church  to  be  out  and  out  true  to 
her  Lord  and  devoted  to  her  Lord.  It  was  because  this 
was  beheved  to  be  authentically  in  the  movement  that  so 
genuine  an  awakening  of  religious  life  followed  in  its  train. 

And  it  must  be  said  that  this  deeper  and  better  principle 
in  the  movement  found  one  of  its  strongest  supports  in 
Newman  personally.  His  remarkable  preaching  was  going 
on  with  growing  power.  The  unworldliness  of  his  life,  the 
sincerity  and  elevation  of  his  conversation,  joined  with  his 
ability,  his  sympathetic  power,  and  the  passion  with  which 
he  held  his  principles,  led  to  his  being  all  but  worshipped. 


CARDINAL  NEWMAN.  467 


This,  then,  was  in  Newman's  mind  the  heart  of  the  busi- 
ness. But  in  the  form  of  it  came  an  immense  and  startHng 
■development  of  doctrines  and  practices  alleged  to  have  the 
sanction  of  the  early  centuries,  tending  generally  to  empha- 
size the  highest  views  of  Church  and  sacraments,  and  lying 
in  the  direction  which  had  always  been  associated  with 
Kome.  Points  of  this  kind,  which,  with  particular  English 
divines,  had  been  matters  of  theoretic  approval,  or  had  been 
occasionally  indicated  as  defensible,  were  now  brought  to 
the  front,  systematised,  reduced  to  practice,  and  inculcated. 
This  was  all  in  the  line  of  that  via  media  which,  as  against 
(ultra)  Protestants  on  one  side,  and  against  Eomanists  on 
the  other,  was  set  forth  as  the  proper  glory  of  the  Church 
of  England.  Newman  and  party  pressed  on  into  the  wide 
patristic  field,  not  yet  clear  as  to  all  that  they  might  find, 
but  assured  that  all  would  be  triumphantly  right,  and  that 
all  would  reveal  more  and  more  satisfactorily  the  true 
genius  of  the  Church  of  England. 

It  was  Newman's  point  to  maintain  that  in  all  this  he 
had  not  taken  up  new  ground  but  old,  approved  by  great 
Anglicans.  I  shall  presently  have  to  say  a  word  on  this 
part  of  the  question. 

I  have  spoken  of  the  deep  fountains  of  faith  and  fervour 
from  which  Newman,  and  many  of  those  he  influenced, 
drew.  But  there  was,  of  course,  an  immense  variety  of 
elements  in  the  great  rally  for  Church  principles  and 
practices — conceived  on  this  type — which  went  on,  with 
Oxford  for  its  centre,  among  the  younger  clergy  and  the 
cultivated  classes.  The  principles  preached,  and  the  prac- 
tices that  embodied  them,  proved  able  to  gather  about  them 
a  good  deal  of  speculation  and  a  good  deal  of  poetry.  They 
were  able  to  bear  up  the  eagerness,  prejudices,  interests  of 
a  great  party.  They  could  combine  with  a  great  deal  of 
devoutness,  with  a  great  deal  of  sentimentalism,  and  with  a 
^reat  deal  of  passion.     You  could  fight  with  them  and  play 


468  CARDINAL  NEWMAN. 


with  them,  you  could  be  meek  or  arrogant  with  them,  pious 
or  unscrupulous.  It  is  a  great  thing  to  have  a  cause  which 
lends  itself  to  the  argumentativeness  of  the  disputatious, 
and  the  enthusiasm  of  the  excitable,  and  the  aspirations,  or 
even  superstitions,  of  the  devout.  The  work  went  prosper- 
ously on;  Newman  has  confessed  the  "fierce"  exhilaration 
of  that  time  ;  the  coach  was  driven  with  an  almost  rollicking 
confidence  ;  and  when  sober  churchmen  shook  their  heads, 
they  were  answered  with  a  fresh  whirl  of  the  whip,  and  a 
new  flourish  from  the  guard.  It  went  on  for  seven  years — 
"  in  a  human  point  of  view,"  Newman  says,  "  the  happiest 
years  of  my  life." 

Then,  in  1839,  a  ghost  arose  ;  a  great  dread  came  shud- 
dering over  Newman.  It  passed,  but  by  and  by  it  returned 
again.  Was  the  Church  of  England  Christ's  true  Church 
in  the  sense  of  those  principles  on  which  Newman  and  his 
friends  relied  ?  Did  not  those  principles  require  something 
very  different  ?  Did  they  not  point,  in  fact,  to  Eome  ?  It 
came  to  this :  the  objections  to  the  Church  of  England 
seemed  to  grow  in  weight  the  more  that  Newman  con- 
sidered the  scope  of  his  principles,  yet  this  was  not  con- 
clusive, for  there  were  also  objections  against  the  claims  of 
Eome.  Against  Eome  Newman  and  his  friends  conceived 
they  could  plead  antiquity.  Common  Protestantism,  in 
their  opinion,  fell  far  short  of  that  standard  ;  but  Eome 
went  beyond  it,  corrupting  Christian  truth  and  Christian 
worship,  as  these  are  seen  in  the  Church  of  Athanasius  and 
Chrysostom,  by  unwarrantable  additions  of  her  own.  The 
additions  could  hardly  be  denied.  But  were  they  unwar- 
rantable ?  Eventually  Newman  came  to  think  of  them  as 
not  unwarrantable.  The  theory  of  development  came  here 
to  his  aid.  The  Church  has  no  power  to  add,  in  the  strict 
sense,  but  she  has  immense  powers  of  developing.  The 
primitive  truth  and  worship  were  seeds  which  were  meant 
to  grow.     The  active  human  mind,  stirred  by  revelation. 


CARDINAL  NEWMAN.  469 

must  move,  it  ever  moves ;  but  the  Church's  part  is  to 
control  the  process.  She  chastens  the  petulance  of  erring 
minds,  and  she  consecrates  those  growths  which  she  judges 
to  be  genuine  and  authentic  developments.  What  had 
been  condemned  as  corruption,  might  pass  as  development. 
Newman's  doubts  ended  in  the  decision  to  enter  the  Church 
of  Rome  in  October,  1845.  He  had  not  hurried  the  final 
step ;  and  the  pain  and  weariness  of  the  long  debate  had 
been  patiently  and  piously  sustained. 

Newman's  impression  of  the  Church  of  England,  when  he 
looked  back  from  his  new  standing  ground,  was  not  compli- 
mentary. "  When  I  looked  back  upon  the  poor  Anglican 
Church,  for  which  I  had  laboured  so  hard,  .  .  .  and 
thought  of  all  our  attempts  to  dress  it  up  doctrinally  and 
esthetically,  it  seemed  to  me  to  be  the  veriest  of  nonentities. 
.  .  .  '  I  went  by,  and  lo  !  it  was  gone ;  I  sought  it,  but 
its  place  could  nowhere  be  found.'  " 

Was  this  step  of  Newman's  the  legitimate  result  of  the 
principles  which  his  friends  and  he  had  so  rigorously  main- 
tained ?  Many  men  of  high  character  and  great  accom- 
plishments refused  to  follow  him  here ;  and  some  of  them 
since  then  have  expressed  their  mind  on  the  whole  history. 
I  will  venture  to  say  what  it  is  that  I  miss,  when  they  come 
to  the  point  of  regretting  Newman's  departure,  and  posing 
as  more  considerate  men  who  have  better  kept  their  feet.  I 
want  to  know  how  far  they  go  with  their  Church  principles, 
and  with  their  deference  to  antiquity.  Newman  was  a  man 
who  was  in  earnest  with  principles,  and  the  question  is 
how  far  they  also  were  so.  It  is  one  thing  to  be  of  opinion 
that  the  visible  Church  was  intended  to  fulfil  essential 
functions  in  the  economy  of  salvation,  and  that  the  ancient 
and  undivided  Church  is  very  likely  to  have  been  right  in 
its  conception  of  Christianity,  and  in  its  ways  of  under- 
standing the  Bible,  so  that  it  may  be  counted  a  comfort 
and  advantage  to  have  the  ancient  Church  on  one's  side, 


470  -    CARDINAL  NEWMAN. 

and  so  that  the  Church  of  England,  so  far  as  it  agrees  with 
antiquity,  may  be  held  to  be  the  stronger  for  the  agreement. 
To  hold  all  this  is  simply  one  form  of  the  exercise  of  private 
judgment ;  and  in  that  case  it  warrants  no  man  to  take 
any  very  high  or  peculiar  position.  It  is  another  thing  to 
hold  that  the  visible  Church  has  been  commissioned  and 
qualified  to  ascertain  for  us,  in  what  it  finds  essential,  the 
meaning  of  God's  revelation,  as  well  as  to  be  the  channel  of 
grace  and  salvation ;  that  it  is  in  all  ages  Holy  Apostolic 
Catholic  and  one  ;  that  we  are  to  submit  our  private  judg- 
ment, and  are  never  to  separate  ourselves  from  its  teaching 
and  its  ministration  ;  that  this  was  true  of  the  undivided 
Church,  and  that  in  substance  it  must  hold  of  Christ's- 
visible  Church  to-day.  This  was  the  faith  of  the  move- 
ment, and  Xewman  found  himself  in  presence  of  questions 
rising  out  of  it.  I  find  no  sufiicient  account  of  how  those 
who  dechned  to  follow  him  extricate  themselves  upon  these 
questions. 

But  then — all  the  more  if  any  one  is  disposed  to  think 
that  Newman,  when  he  went  to  Kome,  interpreted  his  own 
principles  aright,  or  at  least,  as  little  wrong  as  the  oppres- 
sion of  circumstances  permitted — one  must  smile  at  the 
course  he  had  been  taking  all  these  years ;  and  one  must 
admit  the  censure  it  suggests  upon  the  good  conduct  of  his 
understanding  generally.  It  is  all  but  ludicrous  to  think 
with  what  confidence  he  and  his  friends  had  taken  in  hand 
to  instruct  the  world  as  to  the  foundations  of  Christian  faith, 
and  most  particularly  (for  nothing  was  more  prominent) 
as  to  the  true  and  safe  ground  for  the  Church  of  England 
as  against  the  Church  of  Kome.  In  the  first  place,  they 
had  not  understood  the  range  of  their  own  principles. 
Able  and  accomplished  as  many  of  them  were,  they  were 
far  behind  in  theology  proper.  They  had  not  worked  out 
the  theological  problems  on  which  they  pronounced. 
Neither  could  they  point  to  any  great  theological  school 


CARDINAL  NEWMAN.  471 

in  which  those  problems  had  been  coherently  wrought  out. 
Many  English  theologians,  whether  for  argument's  sake,  or 
as  matter  of  conviction,  had  adopted  or  hazarded  principles 
not  unlike  theirs.  But  the  unsystematic  character  which 
English  theological  literature  prefers  had  prevented  any 
clear  adjustment  of  results.  Newman  explains  all  this  him- 
self in  the  preface  to  the  Prophetical  Office  of  the  Church, 
pubhshed  in  1836.  And  he  says  that  book  was  of  a  tenta- 
tive and  empirical  character,  though  he  "fully  trusted  his- 
statements  of  doctrine  would  turn  out  true  and  important." 
Surely  those  who  undertake  to  guide  the  world  and  the 
Churches  should  know  first  the  range  of  their  own  princi- 
ples. But,  next,  neither  did  they  know  their  facts.  They 
assumed  antiquity  as  the  standard.  But  what  antiquity 
said  in  detail  they  knew  very  imperfectly.  This  also  New- 
man himself  plainly  states.  If  it  be  said  in  excuse  that  the 
writings  of  the  Fathers  are  so  vast,  that  is  the  concern  of 
those  who  take  them  for  a  rule.  A  man  is  bound  to  know 
what  he  authoritatively  prescribes.  As  to  this,  however, 
Newman  had  another  plea  to  offer.  He  says  the  Anghcan 
writers  misled  him.  He  had  assumed  that  the  ancient 
teaching  was  correctly  represented  in  the  writings  of  those 
great  Church  of  England  men  who  had  fought  with  the 
papists  on  the  ground  of  patristic  authority,  or  had  bran- 
dished the  Fathers  at  the  Puritans  and  Nonconformists. 
And  so  he  tells  us  that  when  he  began  himself  to  see 
antiquity  with  other  eyes,  he  became  "  angry  with  the 
Anglican  divines.  He  thought  they  had  taken  him  in." 
But  whatever  their  faults  in  this  respect,  the  whole  state- 
ment shows  that  here  again  Newman  and  his  friends 
mistook  the  case.  They  mistook  the  attitude  of  their  own 
divines.  All  the  Protestant  Churches  claimed  some  benefit 
from  the  Fathers.  It  suited  the  Church  of  England  to  lay 
special  stress  on  this,  and  with  the  development  of  High 
Church  views  in  the  seventeenth  century  Anglican  asser- 


472  CARDINAL  NEWMAN. 

tions  about  antiquity  grew  stronger.  But,  except  in  the 
case  of  a  few  extreme  men,  even  those  who  went  far,  re- 
vealed in  doing  so  only  one  side  of  their  minds.  The  bias 
of  their  school  enabled  them  to  advance  as  far  as  they  felt 
disposed,  and  some  of  them  felt  disposed  to  advance  a  long 
way,  in  the  line  of  patristic  thought  and  feeling.  But  there 
remained  behind  the  Protestant  tendency  to  use  their  own 
judgment  and  apply  Scripture  authority,  so  as  to  stop  when 
antiquity  threatened  to  carry  them  too  far.  Antiquity  in 
the  Church  of  England  has  generally  been  antiquity  cum 
grano.  To  construe  the  whole  body  of  writers  who  have 
offered  to  make  good  that  Church's  cause  from  antiquity,  as 
meaning  to  commit  her,  out  and  out,  to  the  traditional 
principle  with  all  its  consequences,  was  simply  a  mistake. 
Dr.  Newman  was  chargeable  not  merely  with  ignorance  of 
the  range  of  his  own  principles,  not  merely  with  ignorance 
of  the  facts  on  which  he  claimed  to  rely,  but  he  mistook 
the  true  consent  of  the  divines  of  his  own  Church.  He  had 
selected  one  school ;  and  even  as  to  them  he  overlooked 
the  thing  about  them  which  was  most  Anglican,  viz.,  their 
virtual  adherence  to  two  rules  of  faith. 

KOBERT  EaINY. 

( To  he  concluded.) 


INDEX. 

PASS 

Vernon  Bartlet,  M.A. 

Fides  Divina  et  Fides  Humana  .  .  .  .       '  .         .     401 

Rev.  Professor  Joseph  Agar  Beet,  D.D. 

Tlie  Doctrine  of  the  Atonement  in  the  New  Testament : 

I.  The  Synoptic  Gospels      ......  2 

II.  The  Johannean  Wi-itings         .....  115 

III.  St.  Peter 183 

IV.  Romans  iii.  24-20 358 

V.  The  Further  Teaching- of  the  Epistle  to  the  Komans  432 

Very  Rev.  G.  A.  Chadwick,  D.D. 

At  Midnight        .........  1 

The  Mii^acles  of  Christ : 

1 39 

IT 126 

III 27() 

The  First  Miracle 347 

The  Nobleman's  Son  and  the  Centurion's  Servant       .         .  443 

Rev.  Professor  T.  K.  Cheyne,  D.D. 

Abraham  Kuenen        ........  75 

Old  Testament  Notes 77 

Dr.  Driver's  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament  Literature  : 

1 81 

II 210 

III 241 

Rev.  Professor  A.  B.  Davidson,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

The  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament 317 

Rev.  J.  Llewelyn  Davies,  M.A. 

St.  Paul's  x«P''>  ........     343 

473 


474  INDEX. 

PAGE 

Rev.  Professor  Marcus  Dods,  D.D. 

Brief  Notices 157 

Survey  of  Recent  English  Literature  on  New  Testament  .     392 

Rev.  Professor  S.  R.  Driver,  D.D. 

Klostermann  on  the  Pentateucli  .         .         .         .         .     321 

The  late  Rev.  Professor  W.  G.  Elmslie,  D.D. 

Gideo7i 50 

I^ev.  Principal  Rainy,  D.D. 

Cardinal  Newman       ........     456 

Professor  "W.  M.  Ramsay,  M.A. 

Saint  Paul's  First  Journey  to  Asia  ]\Iinor  ....       29 

Kev.  Professor  "W.  Sanday,  D.D. 

The  Present  Position  of  the  Johannean  Question  : 

3.  Relation  to  the  Synoptic  Gospels        ....  12 

4.  The  Author 161 

5.  The  Author  {continued)       ......  281 

().  Partition  and  Derivation  Theories       ....  372 

Rev.  George  Adam  Smith,  M.A, 

The  Historical  Geograjihy  of  the  Holy  Land  : 

I.     Introductory .         .  .  .         .         .         .         .139 

II.     The  Low  Hills  or  Shephelah  .         .         .         .189 

HI.     The  Central  Range,  and  the  Borders  of  Judaea      .     300 
IV.     Juda\a 417 

Rev.  James  Stalker,  D.D. 

The  Book  of  Lamentations         ......       65 

Rev.  Arthur  Wright. 

Brevia 399 


INDEX    TO    TEXTS. 


■Genesis  xiii.  1 
xiv.  18 
XV.  2 
xxi.  7 

Exodus  xxiv.  7 

Numbers  xxxii. 
xxxiv. 

Deuteronomy  ix 

Joshua  x.  10 
XV.  33 
xvi.  3,  10 

-Judges 

XX.  5 

Ruth  . 

1  Samuel  i.  9 

i.  15 
iv. 

xi.  12 
xiii.  14 
XV.  82 
xvii.  2 

2  Sfimucl  i. 

2  Kings  xii.  17 
xxii. 

1  Chronicles 

2  Chronicles 

xiii. 


19 


xxvi. 
xxviii. 


18 


Esther 
Job  . 
Psalm  xviii. 

xvi.  1-4 

xxxvi.  9 

xli. 

xliii  3. 

xlviii. 
Proverbs 

xiii.  8 


PAGE 

311 
356 
332 
333 
325 
339 
146 
321 
196 
190 
200 

50 
314 
255 
333 
334 
402 
334 
303 
330 
205 
336 
156 

95 
261 
261 
304 
155 
196 
259 
245 
313 

77 
289 
178 
289 
419 
244 
7 


PAQB 

Ecclesiastes         .         .         .        . '  259 

Song  of  Solomon 

252 

Isaiah  vi.  10 

178 

X. 28-32    . 

316 

xvii.  12,  13 

146 

XX.     . 

155 

XXX.  6 

311 

hi.  13 

290 

Jeremiah  ii.  31    . 

430 

xxxi.  31 

9 

Lamentations 

65 
257 

Daniel 

262 

Jonah 

227 

Mieah 

228 

Habakkuk  . 

270 

Zechariah  xii.  10 

178 

Matthew  xi.  25-27 

26 

viii.  27 

4 

X.  38     . 

6 

xvi.  13-28 

4 

xvi.  27,  28 

8 

XX.  21   . 

6 

Mark  viii.  27 

413 

Luke  ix.  18-27     . 

4 

John  i.  20-22      , 

294 

i.  29  . 

116 

ii.  1-11       . 

347 

iii.  16 

409 

iii.  14-17    . 

117 

iv.  46 

443 

V.  30-47      . 

403 

vi.  4  . 

118 

vi.  15 

25 

vii.  11-15   . 

294 

vii.  40-52  . 

296 

ix.  19-24    . 

295 

xi.  54-57     . 

295 

xii.  22 

12a 

47G 


INDEX   TO    TEXTS. 


PAOB 

PAOB 

Johu  xiii.  1          .         .         .         .     183 

Philippians  i.  7 .          .        .         .     243 

xix.  14 

19 

1  Thessalonians 

iv.  14 

137 

xix.  17 

399 

1  Peter  i.  18,  19 

185 

xix.  :J7 

178 

ii.  21 

186 

XX.  31 

49 

iii.  18 

187 

Acts  ii.  23  . 

183 

2  Peter  ii.  1  •      . 

188 

Acts  xiii.     . 

30 

1  John  i.  7 

122 

xiv. 

30 

ii.  2. 

122 

XX,  28. 

184 

Revelation  i.  5 

124 

Komans  iii.  24-2(5 

358 

iv.  2 

124 

iv.  24    . 

432 

vii.  14 

125 

1  Corinthians  xii.  9,  10 

138 

xii.  10 

291 

2  Corinthians  viii. 

243 

BuMcr  4  Tanner,  Tho  Selwood  rrinting  Work3,  Fromc,  and  London.