1. The Creation, chap. 1. 2.

2. Institution of the Sabbath, and Fall of Man, chap. 2. 3.

3. History of Adam and his Descendants till the Deluge, chap. 4.

4. Genealogy of the Patriarchs, chap. 5.

5. State of the World immediately preceding the Deluge, chap. 6,7. 1—5.

6.

The Deluge, chap. 7. 5, to end, 8. 1-13.

7. The Covenant with Noah, chap. 8. 13, to end, 9. 1-18.

8. Noah prophesies the Fate of his Sons, chap. 9. 18, to end.

9. The Confusion of Tongues, and Dispersion of Mankind, chap. 9. 1-10, 10. 11. 10-27.

10. The Life of Abraham, chap. 11. 27.-25. 11.

11. From the Death of Abaham to the Selling of Joseph, chap. 25. 11.-36. 13. History of Joseph and his Family in Egypt, chap. 37.-47. 27.

14. Death of Jacob and of the Patriarchs, chap. 47. 27.-50.

Almough it cannot reasonably be questioned that this book, as well as the rest of the Pentateuch was written by Moses, yet it is by no means agreed at what time it was written. Eusebius and some eminent critics after him have conjectured that it was written while he kept the flocks of Jethro his father-inlaw, in the wilderness of Midian. But the more probable opinion is that of Theodoret, that Moses wrote it after the exode from Egypt and the promulgation of the Law from Mount Sinai, as previous to the call related Ex. 3, he was only a private individual and not endowed with the spirit of prophecy. Without that spirit he could not, it is supposed, have recorded, with so much accuracy, the history of the creation and the subsequent events to his own time, nor could he have foretold so many signal events then future. But it is as impossible as it is of little consequence to determine the truth on this point. Sufficient is it for us to know, that Moses was under an influence of inspiration in the composition of his history, which secured the infallible truth of all his statements.

§ 2. Was the book of Genesis compiled from more ancient documents?

This is a question entirely distinct from that of the genuineness and authenticity of the book. Moses may have been its author, and all its statements absolutely true, and yet it may have contained passages which he did not write. In a historical work extending through a period of more than two thousand years, it would be very natural that quotations should be made from preceding writings of authentic character, provided any such were in existence; and though we are not expressly informed that any did exist, yet very plausible reasons may be urged in support of the hypothesis from the style and structure of the narrative itself. It is clear that Moses must have derived his knowledge of the events which he records in Genesis, either from immediate divine revelation, or from oral tradition, or from written documents. The nature of many of the facts related, and the minuteness of the narration, render it extremely improbable that immediate revelation was the source from whence they were drawn. That his knowledge should have been derived from oral tradition, appears morally impossible, when we consider the great number of names, ages, dates, and minute events, which are recorded. The conclusion then seems fair that he must have obtained his information from written documents coeval, or nearly so, with the events which they recorded and composed by persons intimately acquainted

with the subjects to which they relate. Such memoranda and genealogical tables written by the patriarchs or their immediate descendants, and prèserved by their posterity until the time of Moses, may have been the sources to which he had recourse in constructing his narrative. He may have collected these, with additions from authentic tradition or existing monuments, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, into a single book.

יהוה אלהים

Certain it is that several of the first chapters of Genesis have the air of being made up of selections from very ancient documents, written by different authors at different periods. The variety which is observable in the names and titles of the Supreme Being is appealed to among the most striking proofs of this fact. This is obvious in the English translation, but still more so in the Hebrew original. In Gen. 1-2. 3, which is really one piece of composition, as the title, v. 4, ‘These are the generations,' shews, the name of the Most High is uniformly Elohim, God. In ch. 2. 4—ch. 3, which may be considered the second document, the title is uniformly Yehovah Elohim, Lord God, and in the third including ch. 4, it is Yehovah, Lord, only, while in ch. 5, it is Elohim, God, only, except in v. 29, where a quotation is made and Yehovah used. It is hardly conceivable that all this should be the result of mere accident. The changes of the name correspond exactly to the changes in the narratives and the titles of the several pieces; and each document uniformly preserves the same name, except when a quotation is made, and then, as the fidelity of history requires, the name used by the person introduced as speaker, is inserted. It is impossible perhaps to decide definitely respecting the amount of quotations of this kind, but in the first fifteen chapters of the book it seems to be considerable. 'Now do all these accurate quotations,' says Prof. Stowe, 'impair the credit of the Mosaic books, or increase it? Is Marshall's Life of Washington to be regarded as unworthy of credit, because it contains copious extracts from Washington's correspondence, and literal quotations from important public documents? Is not its value greatly enhanced by this circumstance? The objection is altogether futile. In the common editions of the Bible the Pentateuch occupies about one hundred and fifty pages, of which perhaps ten may be taken up with quotations. This surely is no very large proportion for an historical work extending through so long a period.'

It is undoubtedly true that to an English reader the hypothesis of the compilation of the book of Genesis from pre-existent documents, may at first sight, appear strange and in some degree revolting. It will, however, bear the test of closer examination, and in proportion as our acquaintance with the book itself increases, our belief of the fact of its compilation will be apt also to strengthen. Pareau, a sober and moderate critic, uses the following strong language: 'Many have observed and proved beyond a doubt, that the book of Genesis is formed of various fragments, written by divers authors, and merely compiled by Moses, and thus prefixed to his own history.' (Inst. Interp. Vet. Test. p. 112.) He draws from the fact a strong argument in favour of the credibility and historical accuracy of the book. The inspired authority of the work is in nowise affected by this theory, for, as Jahn has well remarked, some of the documents are of such a nature, that they could have been derived only from immediate revelation; and the whole being compiled by an inspired writer, it has received the sanctier of the Holy Spirit in an equal degree with his original productions.

§ 3. Commentators.

It was the author's original intention to have given a detailed view of the principal commentaries, and other sources of illustration, of which he has availed himself in the preparation of the ensuing notes. These he had purposed to have accompanied with such characterising notices as might aid the biblical student in making a selection of the most valuable works in this department. But after devoting so much space as he had already done to the various prolegomena contained in the foregoing pages, he soon found that it would be impracticable to do justice to his design, without doing injustice to a portion at least of his authorities. Under these circumstances he determined to wave the minute specification which entered into his original plan, and to put before the reader, in the most compendious form, a catalogue of important biblical works, a large portion of which he has consulted in the course of his labors. The list is by no means complete, nor would it perhaps be possible to present one so ample but the question might still be asked why it did not include more. In fact, this department of sacred litera ture is enlarging itself so rapidly by accessions from innumerable sources, that its very bibliography is becoming voluminous, and a catalogue that would answer a very good purpose this year becomes decidedly defective the next. The following enumeration, in which regard has been had to the wants of others than mere English readers, comprises the titles of what may be considered as at least the nucleus of a tolerably extensive apparatus for the study and the exposition of the sacred volume, but more especially of the Pentateuch and the historical books of the Old Testament.

ABBREVIATIONS.

The Arabic version of the Polyglott.

Arab. Erpen. Another Arabic version published by Erpenius. The Chaldee version, or Targum of Onkelos.

Targ. Jon. The Targum of Jonathan.

Targ. Jerus. The Jerusalem Targum.

The Samaritan Pentateuch.

The Greek version of the Seventy.

The Syriac version of the Polyglott.

The Latin version commonly called the Vulgate.

THE BOOK OF GENESIS.