Читать книгу The Expositor's Bible: Index - Ayres Samuel Gardiner - Страница 2

By W. H. Bennett, M. A., D. D

Professor of Old Testament Exegesis at New College, London

I. – PLAN OF THE SERIES

The Expositor's Bible is unique. There have been innumerable commentaries, homiletical, didactic, exegetical, and critical; mostly dealing with the books text by text, or paragraph by paragraph. This series adopts a different method. It aims at bringing out the general teaching of each book, and of each of the divisions into which the book naturally falls. The reader is furnished with all the information necessary to enable him to understand the history, philosophy, and theology, the practical wisdom and devotional poetry of the Sacred Scriptures; but his mind is not bewildered by abstruse technicalities, and his attention is not distracted from the main issues by long discussions on minor details. This plan has, of course, been partially anticipated, there have been similar expositions of books or portions of books; such expositions have usually been sections of elaborate works; but in the Expositor's Bible we have for the first time a series exclusively devoted to such exposition, and embracing the whole Bible. The series illustrates the catholicity of scholarship; its contributors represent several Evangelical churches, and various schools of Biblical Criticism. There are Anglicans like the Bishop of Derry, Presbyterians like Prof. G. A. Smith, and English Free Churchmen like Dr. Maclaren.

II. – THE NEED FOR A NEW EXPOSITION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT

"Of old time God spake unto the fathers in the prophets by divers portions and in divers manners."1

In the Old Testament we have the record of this Revelation so far as the mind could grasp the Divine utterance and so far as words could describe the Heavenly Vision. Ever since the Epistle to the Hebrews was written, and for that matter even earlier, devout Jews and Christians have been busy with the interpretation of the Scriptures of the Old Covenant. Not only so, but also the inspired words of prophets and psalmists, sown in the good soil of believing hearts, have brought forth an abundant harvest of theological and devotional literature. The Old Testament and the literature of which it has been the occasion form an important portion of the Christian inheritance.

Each new generation needs to take stock afresh of this sacred legacy, so that it may obtain from ancient learning, study and inspiration the true message for its own times. The tares must be gathered out from the wheat, and the chaff separated from the grain. Truth, too, constantly needs re-statement; language and ideas are always changing; words and phrases do not convey to us the same meaning as they did to our grandfathers. Religious teaching deals largely in metaphors, and a metaphor may be a guiding light to one generation, and a will-o'-the-wisp to the next. As times change, aspects of the truth once prominent may be passed over lightly, and new views of the same truth must be emphasized to suit the needs of a new dispensation. The church in its age-long pilgrimage ever attains new heights from which it beholds a wider range of the vast expanse of sacred truth; for the most part it is the same landscape which was seen of old; but something is lost to sight, some tracts which once filled the field of vision have become dim and small; new glories are revealed, and the true relations of mountain, valley, and plain, of river, lake, and sea are discerned as they never were before. Commentators and expositors have not merely to repeat the shibboleths of forgotten controversies, they have the more onerous task of making the new view of the Heavenly Vision an intelligible, living, speaking picture for the men and women of their day.

At the time when the publication of this series began there was urgent need for a new exposition of the Old Testament. The nineteenth century had obtained wonderful results from research in science and history, and from the progress of thought in philosophy, criticism, and theology; men were dazzled with new facts and new ideas. How were they to understand the Bible in the light – one might almost say in the glare – of this new truth?

The scientific researches associated with the names of Wallace and Darwin, and with the term Evolution, have altogether changed our ideas of Nature and man, and of their relation to each other. Our knowledge of the history of the race is fuller and deeper than it was, and goes back to a far more remote antiquity. Democracy both as an idea and as a practical system is affecting thought, feeling, and character as it never did before, both for good and evil. This latter feature is perhaps one cause of the modern tenderness towards acute physical pain, and this tenderness, again, has done much to modify the sterner doctrines of the old theology. In many other ways too theology has become, as some would say, more vague; or, as others would prefer to put it, more elastic and better able to adapt itself to the varied circumstances of life.

We may now turn to departments of research specially connected with the Old Testament. We may begin with Egyptology and Assyriology, it being understood that the latter is even more concerned with the literature, history, and religion of Babylon than with that of Assyria. During the middle of the nineteenth century the excavations in the East have restored its buried empires to the light of history; they have enabled us to study the Sacred story in connection with the great international system of Egypt and Western Asia; and they have shown us how closely Israel was connected with the peoples of the Nile and the Euphrates in commerce, politics, and religion. But the study of the faith and worship of Israel side by side with those of Egypt and Babylon is only part of the science of comparative religion. Recent research has taught us many things concerning the faiths of the world; and the unique character of the Old Testament Revelation can only be understood when it is compared with the religious practices and ideas of other peoples. Moreover, the discoveries in Egypt and Assyria, and the study of Eastern life, furnish many new illustrations of the manners and customs of Israel; and the new knowledge of Semitic languages enables us to correct many defects in the Authorized Version of the Old Testament. Indeed the publication of the Revised Version clearly demanded a revised exposition.

Again, the new exegesis had to consider results in other departments of study, e. g., the Lower and the Higher Criticism. Something had been done in the Lower Criticism, or the discussion in detail of the text of the Sacred Books; but here the changes were comparatively unimportant; and even now our knowledge of this subject is very inadequate from the point of view of scholarship, though the text is determined with an accuracy sufficient for practical purposes. It was very different, however, in what is known as the Higher Criticism, i. e., the discussion of the date, authorship, and composition of the books of the Old Testament. Higher critics of one school, following those of former generations, were inclined, for the most part, to assign the books as they stood to the authors whose names were given as their titles. For instance the whole of the Pentateuch, with the exception of Deuteronomy, xxxiv, 5-8, was ascribed to Moses; the whole of Isaiah to the prophet of the time of Hezekiah; and all the Davidic Psalms to David. But for about a century this subject had been studied from another point of view, by a school of critics who were inclined to neglect tradition, and to take for their motto "Prove all things." The principles of this school are clearly and eloquently set forth in the following quotation from Prof. Sayce;2 the passage refers to the sacred books of Babylonia, but the principles are of universal application.

"Before we can understand it (a collection of sacred books) properly, we must separate the elements of which it consists, and assign to each its chronological position.

"The very fact, however, that religious texts are usually of immemorial antiquity, and that changes inevitably pass over them as they are handed down in successive editions, makes such a task peculiarly difficult. Nevertheless it is a task which must be undertaken before we have the right to draw a conclusion from the texts with which we deal. We must first know whether … they are composite or the products of a single author and epoch; whether, lastly, they have been glossed and interpolated, and their primitive meaning transformed. We must have a chronology for our documents … and beware … of interpreting the creations of one age as if they were the creations of another."

The application of these principles to the Hebrew Scriptures has had startling results. If two tables were compiled showing the date and authorship of the various books, one according to the traditional school of higher criticism,3 the other according to the school with which we are now dealing,4 the two would present a marked contrast to each other. The new school would hold, for instance, that the bulk of the Pentateuch is not in its present form the work of Moses; that the last twenty-seven chapters of our Book of Isaiah were not composed by that prophet; and that very few of the Davidic Psalms were really written by David. At the time when the first volumes of the Expositor's Bible were published this school had become large and influential; and public attention had been called to their teaching by the attacks on Prof. W. Robertson Smith, one of their leading representatives. The new criticism affected not only purely literary questions but also the views to be taken of the history and religion of Israel. The history before Saul, it was maintained, was not so fully and definitely known as had been supposed; and the religion of Israel had developed, under the influence of Revelation, from a primitive faith which had much in common with that of other Semitic peoples. Here again we can illustrate the alleged results of the new criticism by a passage from Prof. Sayce: "It is to Babylonia, therefore, that we must look for the origin of those views of the future world and of the punishment of sin5 which have left so deep an impression on the pages of the Old Testament… They were views from which the Israelite was long in emancipating himself. The inner history of the Old Testament is, in fact, in large measure a history of the gradual widening of the religious consciousness of Israel in regard to them and their suppression by a higher and more spiritual form of faith."6

In the Expositor's Bible both the old and the new schools of criticism are represented. Thus a great opportunity was offered to critics; and a crucial experiment was tried which was of the utmost importance to all Christian Churches. When the books of the Old Testament were read in the light of the new criticism, would it still be possible to derive from them a consistent and reasonable account of the history and religion of Israel; would they still stimulate and nourish Christians' faith, piety, and devotion, and minister to the needs of the spiritual life? The volumes of this series written by representatives of the new school of criticism have enabled us, it is claimed, to answer this question with an emphatic affirmative. For the general public the first volume of Prof. Geo. Adam Smith's Isaiah was an epoch-making book, revealing undreamed-of possibilities in the way of fresh light breaking forth from the ancient Scriptures. The British Weekly wrote of this work, "Isaiah is for the first time made perfectly intelligible to the people… Mr. Smith has opened out a new line of work … which will do more than many arguments to reconcile a timorous and misguided public to scientific scholarship and the newer criticism."

Another modern tendency which influences the interpretation of the Old Testament is the decay of ecclesiastical authority. There are still, and always will be, those who are willing to believe anything on the bare word of their favorite preacher. But in the long run this kind of faith does not count. On the other hand there are many, religious or capable of religion, to whom it would seem absurd to suggest that the decrees of Churches had any great value in matters of faith. As regards the Old Testament, for instance, neither the creeds of ancient councils nor the resolutions of modern synods, neither papal bulls nor episcopal edicts could seriously affect the attitude of such men to, say, Canticles, Ecclesiastes and Esther. The testimony of the Church Universal – of which creeds, confessions, and other standards are the least important part – induces inquirers to read the Bible. But in religion, an authority is only effective by its own inherent force; it must be able to assert itself so as to win sympathy, to produce conviction, and to secure obedience. A distinguished Cambridge scholar is in the habit of saying, when he is asked how he "takes" a passage, that he does not take the passage, but the passage takes him. So the great sayings, discourses, and narratives of the Old Testament take hold of their readers and compel acknowledgment of the authority of Revelation. The best we can do for the Bible is to let it speak for itself; the only essential doctrine of Scripture is that it is the duty and privilege of every man to read it, and to read intelligently, taking advantage of all the light afforded by history, archæology and criticism. The great object of the Expositor's Bible has been just this – to let the Bible speak for itself.

III. – RECENT RELIGIOUS LITERATURE – GENERAL

Criticism has powerfully stimulated public interest in the Bible, and the wealth of new information and new ideas has produced an extensive popular literature on the Sacred Scriptures. The traditional etiquette which demanded that the Bible should be marked off from all other books by its sombre binding and its arrangement in chapters and verses has been rudely set aside. Almost every possible variety of editions have been published of late years – Bibles of every shape and size, from the portly quarto for the lectern to the dainty series of duodecimo volumes for the pocket; Bibles with and without notes or illustrations; Bibles treated as classic literature; Bibles bound in cheerful colors with æsthetic tooling. It has become possible to read the Scriptures in a railway train without being guilty of pharasaic ostentation. At the same time there has been a deluge of "Helps," "Companions," "Teachers' Notes," etc., etc., intended to supply the latest information in popular, but sometimes a little misleading as to the critical results of modern, Biblical study.

But the most important feature of recent literature for ordinary Bible students is the publication of standard works of reference in which the real results of modern research are made accessible. For nearly thirty years Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, in its English and American editions, rendered invaluable service; and a revision of this work was published some time since. But just recently two entirely new Bible Dictionaries have been published in which British, American, Dutch, German and Swiss scholars of all the Evangelical Churches, together with one or two learned Jews, co-operate.

Dr. Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible7 represents the more conservative position, while somewhat more advanced views find expression in the Encyclopædia Biblica,8 edited by Prof. Cheyne and Dr. J. Sutherland Black.

In all this literary activity, the various Bible Societies have taken an important part; chiefly through their instrumentality the Bible in whole or in part has been translated into over 400 languages, and probably since the invention of printing about 300,000,000 copies of the Scriptures or of portions have been put into circulation. An important feature in this work is the decision of the British and Foreign Bible Society to circulate the Revised Version – a step all the more significant as it followed shortly after the publication of the American edition of the Revised Version, and the vote of the Anglican Convocation approving of the reading of the new translation in the services of the English Established Church.

The last fifteen or twenty years have seen a great growth of religious journalism. Popular periodicals have multiplied; and several important theological reviews have been started in England and America, notably the Critical Review, the Hibbert Journal, and the American Journal of Theology.

IV. – THE PROGRESS OF ARCHÆOLOGY

The years since the publication of our series began, in 1887, have witnessed marked progress in the study of the Old Testament, of which we propose to give a brief sketch, beginning with the Archæology, i. e., chiefly the results of excavations in Egypt, and in Syria, Assyria, Babylonia, and Arabia. The last fifteen years have made immense additions to the known facts which have a bearing on the history and religion of Israel, and the interpretation of the Hebrew Scriptures. Assiduous exploration is continually pushing back our knowledge of the ancient East to a more and more remote antiquity, so that already we discern the dim outlines of history in what we have been wont to call prehistoric times. We seem to know something of life in Egypt in B. C. 7000 or it may be even B. C. 10,000. At the same time our knowledge of later periods is continually increasing, though comparatively little is found that directly and explicitly either confirms or contradicts the Old Testament. Perhaps the most relevant amongst recent discoveries is an inscription of Meneptah II. This king is often spoken of in popular handbooks as the "Pharaoh of the Exodus," and his father and predecessor Rameses II is referred to as the "Pharaoh of the Oppression." But in this newly found inscription Meneptah claims to have subdued Israelites in Syria.

But the most striking amongst recent discoveries is the collection known as the Tell el'Amarna Tablets, found at Amarna in the Nile Valley in 1887. They form a connecting link between Egyptology and Assyriology, and bring forth their relation with Palestine. For, though they are part of the archives of the Foreign Office of Amenophis IV, B. C. 1400, they are, for the most part, written in the cuneiform Babylonian, and consist of despatches to the Pharaohs from Babylonian, Hittite, and other Eastern kings, and from the Egyptian officials, and tributaries in Palestine, and the rest of Syria. These letters throw a flood of light on the condition of Western Asia. We see, for instance, that at that time Palestine and Phœnicia were provinces of the Egyptian Empire.

It is also maintained by many scholars that certain invaders of Palestine, the Habiri, who figure largely in these letters, are the Hebrews, although the period is at least a century earlier than the time of the so-called "Pharaohs of the Oppression and the Exodus."

In Palestine, at Lachish and Gezer, the explorers have unearthed the remains of the successive races which one after another ruled in the land.

In Babylonia, there has been quite recently a great "find" of the laws, official letters and other documents of Hammurabi, B. C. 2300, usually identified with the Amraphel of Genesis XIV, the contemporary of Abraham. These and other discoveries have led Paul Haupt, Winckler, Sayce, Fried. Delitzsch and other scholars to attribute to Babylon a predominant influence, social, political, and religious in the ancient East. Hence Fried. Delitzsch's famous lectures before the German Emperor, in which that distinguished Assyriologist treated the religion of Israel almost as an inferior offshoot from that of Babylon, and initiated a controversy which is still raging. These discoveries are so frequent and so extensive that there is little encouragement to anyone to attempt to write an adequate and comprehensive account of them. However complete it might be when written, fresh discoveries would probably come to hand even before it was published, and it would rapidly become more and more out of date. Nevertheless a full statement up to certain dates may be found in the works of the scholars mentioned above and others such as Hommel, Jastrow, Jensen, Budge, Zimmern, Flinders Petrie, etc.; in the proceedings and transactions of the various American, English, French, and German Exploration Societies; in the most recent commentaries and works on the History and Religion of Israel.

What is specially known in Germany as Archæology, viz., the study of manners and customs, has been brought up to date in two standard German works by Nowack and Benzinger, respectively.

We may briefly refer here to the rapid development in recent times of the science of Comparative Religion, to which amongst others, Prof. C. H. Toy, of Harvard, has rendered important services. A marked feature has been the tendency to emphasize the legends and ritual of savage tribes, and their survivals in the literature and services of more advanced religions. Attempts are made to ascertain from such data how religions in general, and any given religion in particular, have developed; and thus lay down principles by which to interpret the available information in any special case. In reference to this branch of learning Prof. Morris Jastrow of the University of Pennsylvania writes thus9: "J. G. Frazer's great work more particularly, The Golden Bough, marks an epoch in the study of religious rites."

V. – PROGRESS IN PHILOLOGY, ETC

Many important additions have recently been made to the student's apparatus for the linguistic and textual study of the Old Testament. Numerous grammars, reading-books and lexicons of Assyrian and other Semitic languages have been published. In Hebrew itself a standard grammar has been provided by the translation of the twenty-fifth and twenty-sixth editions Gesenius revised by Kautzsch. Dr. Solomon Mandelkern has published a new Concordance to the Hebrew Text of the Old Testament. A new standard edition of Gesenius Lexicon by Profs. Brown, Driver, and Briggs is being issued by the Clarendon Press.

Biblical Hebrew has also had light thrown on it by the discovery of the original Hebrew text of large portions of Ecclesiasticus. It was indeed maintained by Margoliouth that the documents discovered were a retranslation into Hebrew from Greek and other versions; but, after much controversy, the verdict of scholarship is in favor of the originality of the Hebrew text in these documents.

As regards the Septuagint: Prof. Swete has edited a small edition in three volumes with the readings of the most important manuscripts, together with a fourth volume containing the Introduction. A large edition which will give the same text10 "with an ample apparatus criticus intended to provide material for a critical determination of the text," is being prepared. Messrs. Hatch and Redpath have compiled a new Concordance to the Septuagint; but a modern grammar and lexicon are still "felt wants."

VI. – RECENT CRITICISM AND EXEGESIS

The progress of Biblical knowledge has necessitated the publication of new series of commentaries. In English there is the International Critical Commentary;11 and some of the later volumes of the Cambridge Bible, e. g., Prof. Driver's Daniel, are rather first-class commentaries for scholars than elementary works for general readers. In German there are Prof. Nowack's Handkommentar zum Alten Testament;12 Prof. Karl Marti's Kurzer Handkommentar zum Alten Testament,13 and the Old Testament sections of Profs. Strack and Zöckler's Kurzgefaszter Kommentar.14 Later on reference will be made to some volumes of these series.

In addition to the above works, there are others specially intended to show how criticism has divided up the books of the Old Testament into the various older documents from which they are believed to have been compiled. This analysis is shown in the German translation edited by Kautzsch by means of initials in the margin; Dr. Haupt's Sacred Books of the Old Testament (Hebrew text) and Polychrome Bible,15 by means of colored backgrounds on which the text is printed; and in the Oxford Society of Historical Theology; The Hexateuch16 by means of parallel columns. The introduction to the last named work is the most complete popular statement of the grounds for the modern theory of the Pentateuch. Technical details and a formal contrast of the arguments for and against this theory may be found in the discussion between Profs. W. R. Harper and W. H. Green in Hebraica, 1888-90. Numerous Introductions to the Old Testament have expounded the current critical views, notably for English and American readers the successive editions of Prof. Driver's Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament.

Naturally these various works represent not merely the position of criticism and exegesis twenty years ago, but also the progress made since then. As regards the Historical Books critics have chiefly been engaged in the application of modern methods and principles which are now very generally accepted. Development has taken place in three directions. First, much labor has been given to the more exact distribution of the contents of the Hexateuch between the main documents used by its compilers, e. g., Prof. B. W. Bacon's analysis of Exodus. Secondly, attempts have been made to divide up these main documents into still older documents from which they have been compiled. Steuernagel, for instance, regards Deuteronomy as a mosaic of paragraphs and clauses from earlier codes, and finds a criterion between different sources in the use, respectively, of the singular or the plural form of address. So far his views have not met with much acceptance.17 Thirdly, the theory has been very widely advocated that the historical books of Judges-I Kings are partly compiled from the documents used by the editors of the Hexateuch.18 Gunkel's commentary on Genesis19 is of special importance; it pleads for a fuller recognition of the indebtedness of Israel to the religions of its neighbors, and maintains that, as the stories of the Creation, the Fall, and the Flood were derived from Babylon, so the Patriarchal narratives were mostly borrowed from the Canaanites after the settlement of Israel in Palestine. The account of Joseph, however, is largely taken from Egyptian sources.

As regards the Prophetical Books, there is little of general interest to record; the composite authorship of Isaiah XL-LXVI is more widely held.

When we come to the Hagiographa, or third or closing section of the Hebrew Canon, Esther has been the subject of interesting speculations. Chiefly because Mordecai and Esther are the names of the Babylonian gods Merodach and Ishtar, it has been suggested that the book is based on a Babylonian myth which the Jews appropriated and adapted, as in earlier days, according to Gunkel, they made use of the legends of the Canaanites.

The origin and history of the Psalms is still made the ground of much controversy, and the tendency of criticism is to deny the existence of any Pre-exilic Psalms;20 and to assign a large number to the Maccabean period. It is even held21 that, in the time of the Maccabees, the Psalm was the organ of political invective, and played the part of the leading article in a modern newspaper.

In connection with Canticles a theory put forward some time since has been revived in an emended form, and with a fuller discussion of the evidence.22 This view is that "the book is a collection of songs, connected with a Syrian custom, called the 'King's Week.' During the first week after marriage the bride and bridegroom play at being king and queen, and are addressed as such by a mock court, in a series of songs similar to those of Canticles. Thus Canticles would contain a specimen of the cycle of songs used at a seven days' village feast in honor of a peasant bride and bridegroom, the latter being addressed as 'Solomon,' the type of a splendid and powerful king."23

VII. – THE HISTORY OF ISRAEL AND ITS RELIGION

Many works have appeared expounding these subjects in the light of modern criticism.24 Here again recent work has largely been a development on lines already laid down.25 Much attention has been given to the hints furnished by the Pentateuch as to the early history of Israel, and these have been compared with recent discoveries from the monuments. Many scholars26 maintain that the Twelve Tribes of later history represent groups of ancient nomadic clans who wandered in Western Asia long before the time of Moses; that only a section of these groups went down into Egypt and escaped with Moses, and that these invaded Canaan at one period, while other kindred clans reinforced them at a later time. Israel and the Twelve Tribes, as we know them, arose in Palestine after the conquest, by the subdivision and regrouping of the invading clans, and their combination with the Canaanites.

Cheyne and Winckler have lately advocated theories which almost revolutionize the history of Israel. The grounds of these theories are largely as follows: The cuneiform inscriptions mention a kingdom of Musri in Northwestern Arabia. For this reason, and for various technical considerations of textual and historical criticism, it is proposed in many passages to substitute Musri for Egypt, Geshur for Assyria (Asshur) and to restore very numerous references to Jerahmeel– according to our present text an obscure tribe to the south of Palestine.27 With such alternatives and resources at the critic's disposal, history would seem to become anything that a taste or fancy may dictate; so far these views28 have not met with much acceptance. In the later history the more recent developments are chiefly concerned with the interval between the Return and the Maccabees. Some time since Prof. Kosters denied that the account of the Return in Ezra was historical. According to him there was no Return in 538 B. C., and the Temple was rebuilt by the remnant of Jews left behind in Judea at the time of the Captivity. Kosters has had many followers and many adverse critics, but opinion inclines to accept the substantial historicity of the account of the Return.29 It is also maintained that various sections of Ezra-Nehemiah do not stand in correct chronological order, and that the first mission of Nehemiah preceded that of Ezra. Another interesting discussion has arisen in connection with Zerubbabel, Haggai, and Zechariah.30 Zerubbabel is supposed, at the instigation of Haggai and Zechariah, to have declared Judah independent of Persia, and to have ascended the throne as the promised Messiah. He was promptly crushed and put to death by the Persian government, and – according to this view – he is the "Servant of Jehovah" whose fate is described in Isaiah LIII. There may be a measure of truth in all this, but these views are not likely to be adopted in their entirety.

Another important suggestion as to the history of Israel after the Exile comes from Prof. Cheyne, following to some extent in the footsteps of Robertson Smith and earlier scholars. It is that the Jews took part in the great rebellion against Artaxerxes III, Ochus circa B. C. 350; that their rising was caused by religious enthusiasm, and led to the desecration of the Temple. This calamity is supposed to have been the occasion of the composition of certain Psalms and other passages,31 which most scholars either connect with the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar or refer to the Maccabean period.

The progress of the historical study of Old Testament Theology is hindered by the lack of agreement, even amongst scholars of the modern school, as to the date of many important passages. It is impossible to write certainly as to the teaching, for instance, of Isaiah and Amos, or as to the stages of development of the Religion of Israel while authorities of the first rank are divided as to whether the Messianic sections in Isaiah and the monotheistic verses in Amos were composed by those prophets, or are post-exilic additions. Moreover there is no immediate prospect of a settlement of these questions, for the data are meagre and ambiguous, and the grounds on which individual writers arrive at decisions are largely subjective.

Nevertheless a great deal is clear and certain; and even where dates are doubtful, much of the teaching is independent of chronology. Within these limits the Expositor's Bible and other works have done much to bring popular theology into line with the results of larger knowledge and fresh research and discussion. This process has now reached a point which may enable us to say with the Bishop of Winchester,32 "The period of transition, the period of anxious suspense of judgment, is drawing to a close. It is seen and felt that the interpretation of Holy Scripture is not less literal, not less spiritual, not less in conformity with the pattern which the Divine Teacher gave, when it is rendered more true to history by the fiery tests of criticism and literary analysis."

VIII. – CONCLUSION

This brief survey has necessarily been occupied for the most part with the developments of recent research. But in these years as in previous periods the Old Testament has been the subject of much searching, preaching and writing which has taken little or no account of changes in criticism, or, indeed, of any criticism at all; but have taken the narratives as they found them, and, as far as authorship has been concerned, have made the assumptions which seemed easiest and most edifying. Such work, too, is most valuable. The spiritual life which speaks to us through the Hebrew Scriptures is so full of energy, variety, and truth that even the simplest methods of treatment yield great results. These results, moreover, have sometimes a special quality which is absent from more studious exposition. Even after many centuries the inspired books are like rich virgin soil which yield a harvest even to the crudest methods of cultivation. Thus the scribes of our day, instructed unto the Kingdom of Heaven, are still bringing out of their treasures things new and old; and both alike minister to the coming of the Kingdom, both the new and the old, both the influence of ancient association and venerable tradition, and the new life and power and hope that spring to birth in dawning light of a new day of the Lord.

That the Old Testament will still hold its place of power in any new dispensation is guaranteed by its significance for Christ and His Gospel. As Prof. G. A. Smith has said in a work which states the religious position in the light of recent Biblical study,33 Christ accepted the history recorded in the Old Testament "as the preparation for Himself, and taught His disciples to find Him in it. He used it to justify His mission and to illuminate the mystery of His Cross… Above all, He fed His own soul with its contents, and in the great crises of His life sustained Himself upon it as upon the living and sovereign Word of God. These are the highest external proofs – if indeed we can call them external – for the abiding validity of the Old Testament in the life and doctrine of Christ's Church. What was indispensable to the Redeemer must always be indispensable to the redeemed."

W. H. Bennett.