Изображения страниц
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

prophetic reformulation, and adaptation to new needs, of an older legislation
(p. 85). Another fact worthy of notice is that the historical retrospect in
chapters i. to iv. is based upon the narratives of JE. An illustration will
make clearer the position and point of view of Deuteronomy. In Exod. xx.,
xxiv. (J), it is said, “ An altar of earth thou shalt make to me, and thou shalt
sacrifice upon it thy burnt-offerings, &c.; in every place where I record my
name I will come unto thee and bless thee.” Observe, the place of sacrifice
is not defined, a simple altar may be reared at the pleasure of the worshipper,
so long as it is in some holy place. Now turn to Deut. xii. 1-28. There is
no ambiguity about the place of sacrifice. In significant contrast to the
practice of the Canaanites around, the Israelite worshipper is to come "unto
the place which the Lord your God shall choose out of all your tribes to put
his name there.

Thither shall ye bring your burnt-offerings, &c." (xii. 5, 6). Here we have a central sanctuary with a central altar, the only legitimate place of worship. This centralization of religious practice is closely bound up with the emphatic proclamation of the uniqueness of Israel's God. “Hear, O Israel : the Lord our God is one Lord” (vi. 4). In this characteristic feature of the Deuteronomic Code we have an undoubted indication of date. Its prophetic counterpart is the teaching of Jeremiah ; its political result is the reformation of Josiah carried out in the interests of a central sanctuary. Thus the terminus ad quem will be “the eighteenth year of Josiah (B.C, 621), the year in which Hilkiah made his memorable discovery of the book of the law' in the temple” (p. 81). It is difficult to say how much earlier than this we are to place the composition of the book ; Dr. Driver will not allow it to be later than the reign of Manasseh.

4. Before we can enter into the region of the Priests' Code, we are confronted with a small group of chapters, Lev. xvii.-xxvi, which form what is known as the “ Law of Holiness.” This group is introduced into the Priests' Code as a foreign element. The distinguishing characteristic, which suggests its title, is the supreme importance attached to the principle of holiness, distinguishing Israel from the other nations, demanded of Israel by Jehovah, and regulating the life of the community. This corpus of very miscellaneous legislation has points of contact with the book of the Covenant and with Deuteronomy; but its contents, its reiterated insistence on its central doctrine, its abrupt and concise style, give it a character of its own, and determine its position as a stepping stone to the Priests' Code (P). It is this Priestly Code that forms the groundwork of the Hexateuch. The aim of the author" is to give a systematic view, from a priestly standpoint, of the origin and chief institutions of the Israelitish theocracy” (p. 118). Content with giving merely an abstract of the history, only warming into fuller detail when the origin of some existing institution excites his interest, his method is to measure out history by dates and genealogies in the manner of an analyst rather than a historian. He is most comprehensive in his description of the Tabernacle and the ceremonial system; those parts of Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers which are concerned with these form the staple of his work.


[ocr errors]

The literary style of P is strongly marked: “stereotyped, measured, prosaic,” with a strong preference for “standing formulæ and expressions,” as Dr. Driver puts it, adding a list of P's characteristic words and phrases. These lists, which we find at the end of chapters on Deut., Sam., Kings, Isaiah, Jer., and Ezek., will be found invaluable to the Hebraist.

Though the narrative of P is closely interwoven with the other documents, it can be separated from them with very considerable precision. A most successful piece of analysis will be found in the account of the rebellion of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram (Numb. xvi.). The following scheme exhibits the structure of the chapter: (Р 16, 1*. 20-7"(7-11).

(16-17). 18-24. 27*. 32. ПЈЕ 10-2. 12-15.


27-34. Read JE consecutively, and it will be seen that “Dathan and Abiram, Reubenites, give vent to their dissatisfaction with Moses, complaining that his promises have been unfulfilled, and resenting this authority and lordship possessed by him : they, with their tents and households, are swallowed up by the earth. This is a rebellion of laymen against the civil authority of Moses." In P there are two strata. Korah, at the head of 250 princes of the congregation, not themselves all Levites, opposes Moses and Aaron in the interests of the community at large, protesting against the limitation of priestly rights to the tribe of Levi, on the ground that all the congregation are holy.' Invited by Moses to establish their claim by appearing with censers at the sanctuary, they are consumed by fire from Jehovah.” This narrative appears to have been rather altered at a later time, and a somewhat different view is given in the verses enclosed in brackets. Here Korah at the head of 250 Levites opposes Aaron, and the interests of the tribe of Levi generally are supposed to clash with the rights claimed by the sons of Aaron (pp. 59 ff.).

Instances of this kind might be multiplied. A simpler and equally suggestive illustration may be taken from the two accounts of the Creation, that of P in Gen. 1-2, 44, and that of J in 2, 46-25. A few words about the date of P. Compared with the other documents which make up the Hexateuch, and with the other parts of the Old Testament, the Priestly Code is discovered to be the latest of the sources of the Hexateuch, and to belong "approximately to the period of the Babylonian captivity” (p. 129). “The pre-Exilic period shows no indications of the legislation of P being in operation.” For instance, the strict enactments about the place of sacrifice, the officiating priests, the maintenance of the Tabernacle, &c., are found to be ignored in the books of Judges, Samuel, and Kings, for the simple reason that they were not known. The same is the case with the Day of Atonement, the Jubilee Year, the Levitical cities, and the elaborate system of sacrifices. Again, it has been shown above that Deuteronomy marks a stage of legislation in advance of that of JE; in the same way "the legislation of P is presupposed by Deuteronomy." The whole spirit and attitude of the former document is that of a later period, when the Jewish monarchy had

[ocr errors]

given place to the Jewish Church, and the nation had become exclusively theocratic. At the same time, it must not be supposed that the whole of the Priests' Code was simply an invention of the priests during the Exile. Dr. Driver is very emphatic upon this point, and thereby notifies distinctly what his critical position is. He says (p. 135), “The Priests' Code embodies some elements with which the earlier literature is in harmony, and which indeed it presupposes.

The chief ceremonial institutions of Israel are in their origin of great antiquity; but the laws respecting them were gradually developed and elaborated, and in the shape in which they are formulated in the PriestsCode, they belong to the Exilic or early post-Exilic period."

The question may have occurred to the reader before this, What had Moses to do with the law after all? What are we to believe about him ? Prof. Driver gives us an answer which will commend itself to every one who has studied the facts placed before him in this volume. “It cannot be doubted that Moses was the ultimate founder of both the national and the religious life of Israel." It is only reasonable to suppose that he would have formed, at any rate, the nucleus of system of civil government and religious duties. We naturally turn to the Decalogue and the Book of the Covenant (Exod. xx.-xxiii.) to find out what Moses actually left behind him of positive enactment. Dr. Driver goes further, and finds good reason for believing that the hereditary priesthood, with its accompanying ceremonial lore, may be traced to a Mosaic origin. JE certainly seems to imply an ark and “tent of meeting” in the age of Moses, and there are early allusions to the “ tribe of Levi” exercising priestly functions (pp. 144 f.).

It has been necessary to deal with the Hexateuch at this length, on account of the fundamental importance of the subject, and because Prof. Driver is seen here at his best. Unhappily, however, we must pay the penalty of not being able to do equal justice to the rest of the book. We must content ourselves with noticing only a few points which deserve special attention. The remaining books are arranged in the order of the Hebrew Bible-the “Former Prophets," the “ Latter Prophets,' and the “Hagiographa.” This at once simplifies matters, and assists the critical treatment. In dealing with the Historical Books (Judges, Samuel, Kings), Dr. Driver is particularly successful in separating the early and often contemporary narratives from the later additions of the compiler, whose idiosyncrasies and partialities are carefully detected and pigeonholed. We must not be surprised to find the compiler figuring largely in the pages on Kings; it is of the utmost importance to get a grasp of his purpose and a quick eye for his handiwork; for it is he who is the interpreter of Israel's past, who can read between the lines as he transcribes his bare materials, never losing sight of the higher significance of them all.

Dr. Driver's earlier work has made most students familiar with his convincing criticism of the prophecies grouped under the name of " Isaiah." It is rather disappointing to find that he makes no allusion in the present

[ocr errors]

volume to the views that are held as to the composite structure of chaps. xl.lxvi., especially as this is a subject which is receiving a good deal of attention just now. Ewald, Prof. Cheyne, and Mr. G. A. Smith support their views with arguments of great force; certainly chaps. lviii. 3-10, lix. 1-15, lxv. and lxvi. require a good deal of " adjustment" and explanation before they can be attributed to the author of xl.-lii. 11.

After a useful discussion of the nature and form of Hebrew Poetry, Dr. Driver takes us through the Psalter along a path which we cannot help feeling is somewhat hard and mechanically clipped. Nowhere is his habitual caution more unflinchingly maintained. He alludes to Professor Cheyne's Bampton Lectures with something like ominous reserve.

If only they had come out six months earlier we should have enjoyed the satisfaction of a more definite judgment on some points where Dr. Driver's opinion would be specially valuable. We may, perhaps, conclude that he is not disposed to place the Psalter as a whole in the time of the Exile and after; he would probably ascribe a good many Psalms to the age of the later prophets.

The treatment of the book of Job will prove most helpful. The argument, often so difficult to follow, is traced with great clearness and sympathy. The purpose of the book, controversial, ethical, practical, is carefully summarized. Job is taken to be " a type of the suffering godly Israelite,' in an age of advanced civilization, observant reflection, literary culture, with a gloomy background of disorder and misery. These and other conditions point to the Babylonian Exile as the birth-time of this dramatic poem.

A brighter and more obvious drama is revealed in Dr. Driver's delightful treatment of the Song of Songs. He follows Ewald's scheme of the poem ; and his interpretation carries conviction with it. The essential feature of this exposition is that the fair Shulamite has two lovers, her absent shepherd, and the persistent Solomon, whose addresses she consistently rejects. This exquisite little drama is, in fact, a poem of the triumph of true love. One of the keys to its right understanding is Dr. Driver's interpretation of the recurring verse, “I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem (i.e., the ladies of the court), that ye stir not up, nor awaken love, until it please "do not, that is, excite it artificially in Solomon's favour.

We cannot do more than allude to the admirable way in which the enigmas of Daniel are made to tell their secret, which after all turns out to be an intelligible and attractive prophecy. Perhaps this is one of the most admirable portions of the whole work. At any rate, Dr. Driver's criticism is quite irresistible.

It is time to draw to a conclusion. Enough has been said to show the high importance and permanent value of this first English Introduction to the Old Testament, based on the best critical methods of the day. It is a sign of the vitality and vigour of the Church that she can thus meet the requirements of the age, and joyfully appropriate the careful results of reverent criticism. Nothing remains but to study, with zeal and patience,

. what has been so richly given to us. This is, indeed, an obligation which we dare not escape, as we would love and reverence God’s revelation.



By Rev. T. B. KILPATRICK, B.D. The central position of Dr. Hatch's Hibbert Lecture is that, under the influence of Greek ideas, Christianity has been falsely intellectualized. doctrine of the Person of Christ, and of the Trinity, are no part of primitive Christianity. Conceptions which we have held to be essential to Christian faith are importations from an alien world. Christianity will not regain its power till these ideas are relegated to the sphere of mere speculation, and men are recalled from them to the consideration of conduct and character, which alone are essential to the maintenance of Christian life. Such a thorough emptying out of the ancient creeds of the Church has a bewildering and paralysing effect on the mind. We have gone on the supposition that these doctrines were essential to Christianity. We have been prepared to discuss them, but in doing so we have been convinced that we were discussing Christianity itself. To be told that is not the case, that we have been fighting for a dream, and that Christianity as an historical fact lies wholly apart from such ideas, is sufficiently startling. The whole fabric of theology, the whole organization of the Church, and the whole circle of ordinary Christian thought and experience, are shown to hang in the air, with no basis in fact, if the historical work of the school to which Hatch belongs is held to be sound and its conclusions valid. Apologetic may well pause in its business of refuting materialism, pantheism, deism, and other imagined foes, to deal with the questions raised by this school of critics, lest it find itself without a position to defend, and its occupation consequently gone. To deal thoroughly with such a book as this would require learning, which I do not possess; and all that I can attempt is at most a very general estimate.

A.-STATEMENT. It is needless to attempt any reproduction here of the immense material that the learned author has collected in these lectures. It is enough to say that he shows himself at home in the Greek world, to which he attributes so mighty an influence. His information is copious, and readers less learned than the author must be content to accept it as accurate. Without anticipating criticism, it may be said that the faults of the book will be found not so much in what it contains as in what it omits to state, either ignoring it or silently presupposing it. Of the undoubted earnestness of the author, of the subdued and restrained, yet most moving, eloquence of the book, of the practical religious purpose which dominates the whole endeavour, it is not necessary to speak. Probably no theologian of modern times has so fascinated his readers, and grappled them to himself with feelings of such strong respect. In giving a summary of the book, let us notice: 1. The author's statement of his problem. 2. The method which he pursues. 3. The results which he reaches.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »