Chapter 1

 •  10 min. read  •  grade level: 11
 
OF THE ‘BIBLE,' AND THE OLD TESTAMENT' IN PARTICULAR.
§ 1. Designations of Old Testament Scripture.
THE first question that presents itself in this inquiry is, the usual name of the collective revelation of God of which the Old Testament does but form a part. The common designation of the whole of sacred Scripture is The Bible,' a name derived from ecclesiastical Latin, and meaning The Book.' Plumptre says, Mediaeval Latin mistook the neuter plural [Biblia] for a feminine singular,' which appears to have been first used in the thirteenth century. The first portion of this, with which we are now concerned, regularly called The Old Testament,' we find in the interval between the close of the Hebrew Canon and the Birth of Christ described by The Law, and the Prophets, and the rest of the Books' (Prologue to Ecclesiasticus or Book of Jesus son of Sirach).
In the inspired Gospels and Epistles of the New Testament it is spoken of as follows:—
1. The Scriptures' (Matt. 22:2929Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. (Matthew 22:29)). The singular is applied only to single passages: cf. 2 Peter 1:2020Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. (2 Peter 1:20). Observe that the embodiment in writing of the Word of God is alluded to by this name. We moderns use it in a printed form, and are apt to forget the origin of a title so familiar to us.
In the early Church of the East we meet with it under the names of—
`The Old Covenant' (cf. 2 Cor. 23:4).
Books of the Old Covenant.'
`Ancient Scripture.'
The Old Testament (or Instrument).'
§2. Of What the Old Testament Consists.
The Old Testament is the collection of books, written almost entirely in Hebrew, which have come down to us from the ancient Jews and the first Christians, stamped with Jewish reception and New Testament Citation. Hebrew, by us the most cherished of what since the time of Eichhorn has been called the Semitic family of languages, may be called the mother-tongue of the Israelites, which they derived from the Patriarchs. Abram, if we may judge by comparative philology combined with the words of a Prophet, would seem when he entered the land to have adopted the language of Canaan' (Isa. 19:1818In that day shall five cities in the land of Egypt speak the language of Canaan, and swear to the Lord of hosts; one shall be called, The city of destruction. (Isaiah 19:18)),which would thus become the Hebrew language. He would have the less difficulty in doing so if, as seems probable, it were a Semitic dialect. There is no indication of Abram's having employed an interpreter in Canaan, as his descendants at a later period were obliged to do in Egypt (Gen. 42:2323And they knew not that Joseph understood them; for he spake unto them by an interpreter. (Genesis 42:23)). Renan gives as examples of Canaanite names of men or towns, being pure Hebrew, Abimelech, Adoni-bezek, Kirjath-sepher, Kirjathjearim.
Munk includes Melchisedek in his list. The Hebrews do not seem even to have translated names, but sometimes changed them: see Num. 32:3838And Nebo, and Baal-meon, (their names being changed,) and Shibmah: and gave other names unto the cities which they builded. (Numbers 32:38). Such oft-recurring words as God in the form El, of Baal, king, priest, sacrifice, pillar, are Canaanitish or Phoenician. The usual language of Laban, possibly akin to the mother-tongue of Abram himself, who was however a native of Babylonia, was not Hebrew, but Aramaic. This appears from Gen. 31:4747And Laban called it Jegar-sahadutha: but Jacob called it Galeed. (Genesis 31:47). Renan makes Hebrew the language also of the old stock, but only by treating this passage as unhistorical. The Chaldee,' which has come down to us as the original Text of Ezra 4:88Rehum the chancellor and Shimshai the scribe wrote a letter against Jerusalem to Artaxerxes the king in this sort: (Ezra 4:8) to 6:18, and 7:12-26, Dan. 2:44Then spake the Chaldeans to the king in Syriack, O king, live for ever: tell thy servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation. (Daniel 2:4) to 7:28, and Jer. 10:1111Thus shall ye say unto them, The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth, even they shall perish from the earth, and from under these heavens. (Jeremiah 10:11), by mistake called Syriac' in the A. V. of Dan. 2:44Then spake the Chaldeans to the king in Syriack, O king, live for ever: tell thy servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation. (Daniel 2:4), was the language the Jews of the Captivity brought with them from Babylon; it is another of the Aramaic dialects, and must not be confounded with the language of the Chaldeans spoken of in Dan. 1:44Children in whom was no blemish, but well favored, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans. (Daniel 1:4). This Chaldee seems to have been a principal ingredient in the vernacular of Palestine in the time of our Lord, though in the New Testament called The Hebrew dialect,' because spoken by Hebrew, as distinct from Hellenist or Greek-speaking Jews. The holy nation,' then, began and, in a sense, ended with a language not that of the long period during which it rightly took its place before the rest of the nations as the people of God. We shall resume the consideration of the history of the Hebrew language in a separate chapter.
The number of the Old Testament Books, which, we may here say, conduct us over a period of 1200 years at the least, is given by Josephus—representing Palestinian ideas—as twenty-two, being the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet; by the Talmud—representing rather the opinions of Babylonian Jews—as twenty-four: cf. amongst others, Leeser's Translation (Jewish) of the Old Testament. Some information will be given afterward as to the old Jewish authorities. In the number twenty-four, Ruth and Lamentations were reckoned as separate Books. The Christian Fathers ' that give lists of the Books generally reckon twenty-two. The number thirty-nine in the English Bible is due to the obvious fact that the Books of Ruth, 2 Samuel, 2 Kings, 2 Chronicles, Nehemiah, Lamentations, and each of the Minor Prophets are counted separately.
§ 3. The Division and Order of the Old Testament Books.
The order in which the Books appear in modern Bibles is based upon that of the Septuagint as far as the Canticles; but the arrangement of the Prophets—Daniel with Lamentations excepted—is that of the common Hebrew Bible.
Luke 24:4444And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. (Luke 24:44) supplies a classification of the Books acknowledged by our Lord. The ‘Law’ (in Hebrew, Torah) has long by Christians been called the Pentateuch, or five-fold book, a title borrowed from Greek. The later Jews called each Book Chumash, Fifth Part, and the whole five, Chumshin.
The Prophets' (Heb. Nebiim) were divided by the Jews into the earlier' and 'latter'; the earlier comprising Joshua, Judges, and the Books of Samuel and Kings, now together generally called the Historical Books,' to which, it may be, reference is made in Zech. 7:7,127Should ye not hear the words which the Lord hath cried by the former prophets, when Jerusalem was inhabited and in prosperity, and the cities thereof round about her, when men inhabited the south and the plain? (Zechariah 7:7)
12Yea, they made their hearts as an adamant stone, lest they should hear the law, and the words which the Lord of hosts hath sent in his spirit by the former prophets: therefore came a great wrath from the Lord of hosts. (Zechariah 7:12)
(see the Heb.); and the latter, Isaiah to Malachi, omitting Lamentations and Daniel. Of the latter' Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel were called the greater;' and the order observed in our Hebrew Bibles Of the Books bearing their names is that of the Spanish Hebrew MSS. The Talmudic or old Rabbinical arrangement places Jeremiah first. The other Prophets are called minor.'
All the rest of the Books, except Daniel, are supposed to have constituted the 'Psalms' in this classification. It is thought that the Lord, according to a Jewish custom, referred to a series of Books by naming only the first of such series, which would at the same time explain Matt. 16:14; 27:914And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. (Matthew 16:14)
9Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value; (Matthew 27:9)
: see Irrationalism of Infidelity.’ The ancient Hebrew hymnal, the Book of Psalms' (Acts 1:2020For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take. (Acts 1:20)), in the modern Hebrew Bible does come, as in the German MSS., at the head of the 'Hagiographa,' the name by which these Books, together with Daniel, are generally known amongst critics. Mr. Smith, in objecting to this view, cannot that the 'Psalms' may here at least be taken as representing the class of Books to which they belong. The division of the Psalms into five Books, respectively ending at Psa. 41; 72; 89; 106; 150, is of Jewish authority. The Miscellaneous Books are by the Jews designated Chetubim, or Writings; and Hagiographa, which is taken from Patristic Greek, means sacred writings. Of these again, Ruth, Canticles, Lamentations, Esther and Ecclesiastes are called Megilloth, Rolls (cf. Hebrew of Psa. 40:33And he hath put a new song in my mouth, even praise unto our God: many shall see it, and fear, and shall trust in the Lord. (Psalm 40:3); Jer. 36:1414Therefore all the princes sent Jehudi the son of Nethaniah, the son of Shelemiah, the son of Cushi, unto Baruch, saying, Take in thine hand the roll wherein thou hast read in the ears of the people, and come. So Baruch the son of Neriah took the roll in his hand, and came unto them. (Jeremiah 36:14)).
Different reasons are assigned for the Talmudic Jews having placed the Book of Daniel amongst the Hagiographa. A Jewish explanation is that the Book begins in a different way from other prophetical Books, which is quite true: compare J. N. Darby's Synopsis of the Books of the Bible.' But of the essentially prophetical character of the Book, Matt. 24:1515When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) (Matthew 24:15) should satisfy every Christian, even of the Arnold school; the testimony of Josephus (Ant. 10:11) every Jew. This Jewish annalist is indeed explicit as to the doctrine that the succession of prophets ceased with the reign of Artaxerxes, or roughly, 450 years B. C.; hence, if the Book of Daniel had been composed in the Maccabean period, as neologians contend, it is certain that the Palestinian Jews would have assigned it no place at all in the Canon; but this will be better understood when we unfold that part of our subject.
The chronological order of the Books must be ascertained, if desirable or possible, from the Books themselves. Sometimes an incidental expression reveals the period to which the Book belongs: e. g. in Josh. 11:2121And at that time came Joshua, and cut off the Anakims from the mountains, from Hebron, from Debir, from Anab, and from all the mountains of Judah, and from all the mountains of Israel: Joshua destroyed them utterly with their cities. (Joshua 11:21). As to the order of the separate prophecies of Jeremiah in particular, the reader should observe the different arrangement of chap. 15:15, 51:64, found in the Septuagint from that in, which they are presented in the Hebrew, and should read the remarks 'Synopsis,' of Mr. Darby in his Synopsis' (Jeremiah) . Transpositions are also observable in the LXX of Proverbs.
Occasionally the reader may think he detects in the Hebrew a transposition of a passage from one part of a Book to another: spiritual consideration in such cases will decide for a simple acquiescence in what we have received.
§ 4. The Titles of the Several Books.
The titles of the Mosaic Books in the English Bible are taken from the Septuagint. For Exodus' in particular, cf. the Greek of Luke 9:3131Who appeared in glory, and spake of his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem. (Luke 9:31). The Hebrew headings are respectively:—
Beginning:
These are the names.'
`And [he] called .'
In the wilderness.'
These are the words :
We find them already in Jerome's day (Prologue to 2 Kings). But it is clear that they could not be original titles, and that they result from the disintegration to which the Torah was subjected by those concerned in the translation called the Septuagint. The convenience thus afforded to interpretation is very apparent.
The rest of the titles for the most part follow the Hebrew. In the respective headings adopted by our translators of 1 and 2 Samuel, the additions otherwise called, The First Book of the Kings' and other wise called, The Second Book,' &c., and of 1 and 2 Kings, commonly called, The Third Book of the Kings' and commonly called, The Fourth Book,' &c. are dictated by the Greek titles. The Books of Chronicles were so called first by Jerome . 'Journals' would best represent the Hebrew designation. The Greek titles mean Supplements. Ecclesiastes ' is from the Greek.
A discussion of the authorship of the several Books not marked by names would lead us into too wide a field, affording scope for conjecture, which it is desirable to avoid. Again, the consideration of the materials employed by the several writers, as of historical' Books in particular, would raise questions possessing an importance too great to admit of any adequate outline being given of them. The reader is referred to Mr. Darby's critical writings in general for help upon the document-hypothesis', as it is called, of which rationalistic writers are full.