BS 1171 .W42 1896 Weidner, Revere Franklin,

1851-1915. Biblical theology of the Old

T /^a i- om/^rTii-

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY

OF thp:

OLD TESTAMENT

BASED ON OEHLER.

BY

REVERE FRANKLIN WEIDNER, D. D., LL D.

Professor of Dogmatic Theology in the Chicago Lutheran Theological Seminary;

Author of "Studies in the Book^\ "Commentary on Mark", "Biblical

Theology of the New Testament", " Theological Encyclopcedia" ,

"An Introduction to Dogmatic Theology", "Netv Testament

Greek Method", "Christian Ethics", etc.

SECOND EDITION, REVISED AND ENLARGED.

FLEMING H. REVELL CO.,

NEW YORK. CHICAGO. TORONTO.

<-J

c?

Copyright 1896,

BY

REVERE FRANKLIN WEIDNER.

PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION,

Biblical Theology is one of the more recent branch- es of Theology. Our older theologians did not dis- tinguish between Dogmatic and Biblical Theology. During the whole development of Church doctrine down to the middle of the present century, no distinct line w^as drawn between the essential contents of revela- tion as they are laid down in the Scriptures and the doctrinal formulas elaborated from them ; and still less were the successive stages of revelation and the types of doctrine which are presented in Scripture, rec- ognized. The Bible was supposed to attest equally, in the Old and New Testaments, the truths which the Church has accepted as doctrines,— the Old Testament being used in all its parts, just like the New Testa- ment, for proofs of doctrine.

But our modern theologians maintain that the Old and New Testament stand to each other in the rela- tion of preparation and fulfilment,— that their unity must not be understood as identify,— that the Old Testament itself acknowledges that the manifestation of God's kingdom at that time was imperfect and temporary,— that still more distinctly does the New Testament emphasize the difference from the Old which subsists within the unitv of the two Testaments,—

IV PREFACic.

that the eternal counsel of salvation, although an- nounced by the prophets, is nevertheles^not complete- ly revealed till after its actual realization,— that the tuition of the law reached its goal in the grace and truth of Christ,— that the unity of the Old and New Testament must not be conceived of as an identitj^ of doctrine, but as a gradually advancing process of development of doctrine,— that in setting forth the doctrines of the Bible systematically we must recog- nize the general development which revelation passes through in Scripture itself, —and that the old atomistic system of Scripture proof must be superseded by one which shows that the truths of salvation formulated in doctrinal statements are the result of the whole process through which revelation has passed.

We distinguish, therefore, between Biblical Theology and Systematic Theology. For Christian Dogmatics or Systematic Theology is a historico-philosophical science, in which the results of historical exegesis are unified and systematized. It is the sum of the truths embraced in the Christian faith in their organic con- nection ^dth the facts of religious consciousness. Bib- lical Theology, on the other hand, has for its aim to represent the religious ideas and doctrines which are contained in the Bible, and is a purely historical dis- ciphne. Systematic Theology takes the results of Biblical Theology for granted, and works with them as its material. Some even go so far as to distinguish between Bibhcal Theology and Bibhcal Dogmatics, in

PREFACE. V

which the former has to do with the variety of bibU- cal forms of teaching, and the latter with the examina- tion of the doctrines and ideas of the sacred writers which BibUcal Theology brings out and with their presentation in a systematic form. According to this view, Christian Dogmatics or Systematic Theology must be based upon Biblical Dogmatics, which again must be based upon the results of Biblical Theology.

Of late Systematic Theology has been somewhat neglected in certain parts of the Protestant w^orld, and indeed has fallen into disrepute, more stress being laid upon the results of Biblical Theology. We are told that in Systematic Theology we have the deduc- tions and speculations of men while in Biblical The- ology we have the pure teaching of the Word of God. But let us not forget that the man who takes up the Bible now without reference to what has been done towards its elucidation in the past, and without being guided by the development of doctrine, is exactly as foolish as the man who w^ould undertake to take up any branch of science without regard to what has been done before.

Biblical Theology naturally divides itself into that of the Old Testament and that of the New, and there is no discipline of theological science which is more important, and on which more depends. Our aim, in this work, is to present in a concise and still full form the Theology of the Old Testament. No one can pre- sent such a theology in its fullness and scientific preci-

PREFACE.

sion unless he has repeatedly gone over all the Books of the Old Testament with this special object in view. It implies a critical and exegetical study of the Hebrew original, and the results of such close exegetical stud}^ would onl}^ take their proper shape after years of study. Though the writer for the last twelve years has paid especial attention to thestudy of the Hebrew Scriptures, and has studied in course, all the books of the Old Testament, and has had the great privilege of lecturing on the most important of them during the last four years to his theological classes, and has dur- ing all this time been accumulating material, still when the question arose of presenting the Theology of the Old Testament in a scientific form, the writer deemed it best to rewrite the work of the Master of this branch of Theology, hoping in this way to con- tribute most to a more exact knowlege of the doctrines of the Old Testament.

Since the first appearance of "The Theology of the Old Testament" hj Gustav Friedrich Oehler in 1873, it has de- servedly been regarded as the most important work on this subject, and it is a question whether it ever will be superseded. The author had especial gifts and qualifications for this branch of theology, and his rank as an expositor of the Old Testament is very high. For thirty years he lectured on this subject, and almost every topic presented in his system has been most elaborately treated by him in the first edi- tion of Horzog's Real'Encyklopcedie (1854-1868), and

PREFACE. VII

of such excellence were these articles that they have been retained, Avith scarcely any changes, in the second edition of this work. In his Theology of the Old Testa- ment Oehler incorporated the latest results of his re- searches and those who have repeatedly studied his work are surprised at his erudition and the exegetical skill that he displays. To a large extent this book takes the place of a critical commentary. For several years the writer has used this work as a text-book in his class-room, and has learned to appreciate its great merits. But there are serious objections to its use as a text-book, especially on account of its fulness of treatment, as the work is better adapted for a book of reference for the scholar and pastor.

The attempt, therefore, has been made to reproduce this valuable work for use in the class-room, and for private students. It is an abridgment, and yet it is more. It aims at condensation, and yet seeks to give all that is of importance in Oehler's original work. Those who have had any experience in work of this kind know how difficult it is to condense and reproduce without omitting what is important. We would call special attention to the scripture references. The plan has been, after careful study of all the passages cited by Oehler, to select the most important, and these references are made to conform to the English Version. We have made constant use of the excellent edition published by Funk and Wagnalls, under the editorial supervision of Dr. Day of Yale Divinity

Vill PREFACE.

School, and take this occasion of recommending this edition which is superior to the Edinburgh edition (save in typography, the type being smaller), and in several respects even to be preferred to the original second edition of the German.

As is well-known, in such a large field of research, where the task is so great and difficult, there will be differences of opinion as to the interpretation of diffi- cult passages. Even our most conservative theolog- ians reach different results. And although Oehler represents the most conservative tendency of the Lu- theran Theology of Germany, still there are various points on which the writer differs with him. In all such cases Oehler's views are distinctly stated, but the position of the writer is also indicated. But in almost all cases Oehler has been allowed to speak for the ^mter, so that what is here presented is the view that the writer himself holds of the truths as present- ed in the Old Testament.

R. F. W.

Ascension Day, June 3, 1886.

PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION,

For several years this abridged reproduction of Oehler's Theology of the Old Testament has been out of print, as no time could be found for a careful revision. A renewed study of the whole subject during the last few years has only deepened the conviction of the writer that no new light pertaining to the true the- ological meaning of the Old Testament can come from the new theories, or so called discoveries, emerging from the fertile minds of our negative Old Testament critics. On the appearance of the first edition of this work inquiries were made why more attention had not been paid to the results obtained by the literary analysis of the Old Testament. The answer then as now is simply thi-s— these theories have not been estab- lished, they are in fact nothing but speculations. We grant that there has been a most remarkable display of minute scholarship on the part of these critics, in the discussion of words and phrases in which they have often lost themselves,— but after all, the most of it is mere fanciful conceit. A scientific presentation of their marvelously compHcated theories, divergent as they are, is to most thoughtful persons, a sufficient answer, and a demonstration of their falsity. It is

2 PEEFACE.

positively refreshing to read some of the works of these critics and to come in contact with such posi- tiveness of assertion and self-confidence in dissecting passages and books, the like of which has never been equalled in the whole realm of literary criticism. In nearly all cases their an alysis is subjective and opinion- ated and rests upon certain preconceived views which have no settled and sure basis. For several years this negative school has been making rapid progress, but the tide of battle is turning in Germany, in England, and in this country. We need but refer to the labors of Zahn, Rupprecht, and the writers in the Beweis cfes Glaubens, in Germany, — ^to the works of Cave, Douglas, Ellicott, Girdlestone, Leathes, Sayce, and Lias, in Great Britain,— and to the writings of Green, in this country.

We, therefore, still maintain tha^t Oehler's Biblical Theology, the third German edition of which appeared in 1891, has not been superseded, and that what w^e said concerning it in the preface to the first edition of this present work, still holds true. In this second edition we have aimed to make this abridgment still more serviceable to students by a careful revision of the whole, and by appending an analysis to each sec- tion, thus also conforming it to my Biblical Theology of the New Testament. In the Appendix we have aimed to give the best select literature of the subject up to date. The analytical Index has been newly prepared and much enlarged, and can be also used by students in

PREFACE. 3

reviewing for examination. I am greatly indebted to the Rev. R. Morris Smith for the care with which he has read the final proof-sheets.

R, F. W.

CHICAGO LUTHEBAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY.

Reformation Day, Oct. 31, 1836.

CONTENTS.

INTRODUCTION.

Bection. Page,

1. Summary of the Introduction 17

2. Definition of Old Testament Theology 17

3. Relation to other Old Testament Branches 18

4. Sources of Old Testament Theology 21

5. Old Testament Theology considered from a Christian Theological Standpoint 22

6. The Biblical Idea of Revelation 23

7. The Gradual Progress of Revelation 24

8. The Relation between the Old and New Testaments... 25

9. How the Early Church and the Middle Ages regarded

the Old Testament 26

aO. The View held in the Age of the Reformation 27

'11. The View held by the Older Protestant Theologians. . . 28

12. The View held during the Eighteenth Century 29

13. Rise of a Biblical Theology distinct from Dogmatic... 30

14. Theological View of the Old Testament in recent Lit- erature 30

15. Characteristics of the Historico-Genetic Method 32

16. Divisions of Old Testament Theology 33

PART I.

MOSAISM. SECTION I.

THE HISTORY OF REVELATION FROM THE CREATION TO THE OCCUPA- TION OF CANAAN.

17. Division of this History 37

CHAPTER I.

THE PRIMEVAL AGE.

13. The Account of the Creation 37

19. The Origin of Evil 39

20. The First Offering 40

) CONTENTS.

CHAPTER II.

THE SECOND AGE OF THE WORLD.

21. Covenant with the World 43

22. The Foundation of a People of God 45

CHAPTER III.

THE TIME OF THE PATEIARCHS.

23. Abraham 47 .

24. Isaac and Jacob 5(| r

25. The Twelve Patriarchs 53/

CHAPTER IV. K

THE TIME OF MOSES AND JOSHUA.

26. Condition of Israel in Egypt 5<B

27. The Course of Deliverance from Egypt 54

28. Educational Aim of the March through the Wilderness 55

29. From Egypt to Canaan 56

30. The Wandering in the Wilderness 57

31. Moses and the Book of Deuteronomy 58

32. Occupation of Canaan 60

33. The Promised Land 6(

SECTION II.

THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

34. Survey 62

CHAPTER y.

THE MOSAIC DOCTRINE OF GOD. /

35. Survey 63

36. The most General Names of the Divine Being 63

37. El-Shaddai 66

38. Pronunciation and Explanation of the name Jehovah 6C

39. Signification of the Name 67

40. Age and Origin of the Name 37

41. Comparison of the name Jehovah with Elohim and El 68

42. Attributes of God which are derived immediately from

the Idea of Jehovah 69

43. The Unity of God 70

44. Formal Definition of God as the Holy One 71

45. Fuller definition of the Idea 73

46. Characteristics connected with the Divine Holiness : Impossibilitv of Picturing God, Omnipresence, Spiritu- ality 73

CONTENTS. i

47. The Divine Eighteousness, Faithfulness, and Truth.... 75

48. The Jealous God 76

CHAPTER VI.

THE MOSAIC DOCTRINE OF THE CREATION AND PRESERVATION OF THE

WORLD.

49. General Survey '^8

50. Creation by the Word 78

51. The Divine Spirit in the Creation 79

52. On the Preservation of the World 80

CHAPTER VII.

THE MOSAIC DOCTRINE OF DIVINE PROVIDENCE.

53. The Design of Creation and its Realization through Providence 82

54. Relation of the Divine Causality to Moral and Phys- ical Evil 83

CHAPTER VIII.

THE MOSAIC DOCTRINE OF REVELATION.

r 55. General View 85

56. The Revelation of the Divine Name 85

57. The Revelation of the Divine Countenance and the Di- vine Glory 86

58. The Divine Voice as a form of Revelation 87

59. The Doctrine of the Angel of the Lord exegetically stated 88

60. The different Interpretations 89

61. Other points of the Mosaic Angelology 91

62. The Shekhina 92

.; 63. The Doctrine of Miracle 93

64. More exact Definition of Miracle 94

- 65. On the Spirit of God 94

66. The Psychical States of the Organs of Revelation 96

CHAPTER IX.

'THE MOSAIC DOCTRINE OF THE NATURE OF MAN IN ITS MAIN UNCHANGEABLE FEATURES.

67. General View 98

68. TheldeaofMan 98

69. Man in Relation to Sex and Race 99

70. Body, Soul, and Spirit as the Constituent Parts of Man 101

71. The Heart and its Relation to the Soul 10^

I

^ CONTENTS. i

CHAPTER X. '

THE ^lOSAIC DOCTRINE OF MAN WITH REFERENCE TO SIN.

72. The Primitive State of Man 105

73. The Formal Principle of Sin 106

74. The Material Principle of Sin 107

75. Sin as an Inclination and State 108

76. Degrees of Sin 109

CHAPTER XI.

THE MOSAIC DOCTRINE OF DEATH AND THE STATE AFTER DEATH, j

77. The Connection between Sin and Death 112

78. The Doctrine of Mosaism on the Condition after Death 118

79. The Condition of the Soul in Sheol 115

SECTION III.

THE ORDINANCES OF MOSAISM.

80. The Nature of the Covenant 117

CHAPTER XII.

THE DIVINE ELECTION

81 . Israel's Election as the Free Act of God's Love 118

82. Forms in which the Election of the People is expressed 118

CHAPTER XIII.

man's OBLIGATION.

83. The Servant of Jehovah 121

81. The Law 122

85. The Decalogue 123

86. The Division of the Decalogue 125

87. The Historical Origin of Circumcision 126

88. Religious Import of Circumcision 126

CHAPTER XIV.

DIVINE RETRIBUTION.

89. Blessing and Curse 128

90. Apparent Contradiction between Divine Election and

the Doctrine of Retribution 129

SECTION IV.

THE THEOCRACY.

91. The Idea of the Divine Kingship 130

CHAPTER XV.

THEOCRATIC ORGANIZATION OF THE PEOPLE.

02. The Division into Tribes 131

CONTENTS. 9

93. The Mode and Meaning of the Representation oflsrael

by theLevites 132

94. Official Functions and Social Position of the Levites.. 133

95. The Priesthood 134

96. The High Priest 136

CHAPTER XVI.

THE THEOCRATIC AUTHORITY.

97. The Legislative Authority 139

98. The Principle and Organization of the Administration

of Justice 140

99. The Course of Justice and Punishment 141

100. The Executive Power 142

CHAPTER XVn.

THE ORGANIZATION OF THE FAMILY.

101. The Subdivisions of the Tribes 144

102. The Law of the Marriage Contract 144

103. Bars to Marriage 145

104. The Dissolution of Marriage 146

105. The Relation of Parents to Children 147

106. The Law of Inheritance 148

107. Provisions concerning the Preservation of the Family Inheritance 149

108. The Avenging of Blood 150

109. Bondage in the Time of the Patriarchs 151

110. The Regulations concerning Hebrew Servants 152

111. The Position of Servants not Israelites 152

SECTION V.

THE MOSAIC PUBLIC WORSHIP.

112. The Essential Character of Public Worship 154

113. The Place of the Word in Public Worship 155

CHAPTER XVIII.

THE PLACE OF WORSHIP.

114. The Requisites for a Place of Worship 157

115. The Arrangement of the Mosaic Sanctuary 158

116. The Meaning of the Sanctuary 159

117. The Sacred Vessels in the Court and in the Sanctuary 160

118. The Ark of the Covenant, with the Kapporeth and the Tables of the Law 162

119. The Cherubim, 163

10 CONTENTS.

CHAPTER XIX.

THE ACTIONS OF THE MOSAIC WORSHIP.

120. On the Idea of OfiferiDgs in General 165

121. Pre-Mosaic Sacrifice and the Mosaic Covenant Sacrifice 165

122. Bloody and Bloodless Offerings 167

123. The Material of Animal Offerings 168

124. The Ingredients of the Vegetable Offerings 168

125. The Principle on which the Material of Offerings was fixed 169

126. The Ritual of Animal Sacrifice 171

127. The Use made of the Shed Blood 172

128. The Burning of the Offering 174

129. The Ritual of the Food-Offering 175

130. Various kinds of Offerings with reference to their Pur- pose 176

131. The Burnt-Offering 176

132. The Peace-Offering 177

1.33. The Ritual of the Peace-Offering 178

134. Of Vows 180

135. Nazaritism 181

136. The Theocratic Taxes 183

137. The Difference between the Trespass-Offering and the Sin-Offering with respect to the End in View 184

138. The Ritual and Import of the Trespass-Offering 185

139. The Ritual of the Sin-Offering 185

140. The RitualoftheDay of Atonement 188

141. Signification of the Ritual and the Antiquity of the Day of Atonement 191

142. The Levitical Purifications 193

143. Acts of Purification for removing the Suspicion of Guilt 194

CHAPTER XX.

THE SACRED SEASONS.

144. Survey of the Sacred Seasons and their Designations.. 196

145. Reasons which determine the Times of the Feasts 197

146. The Celebration of the Holy Days 197

147. The Antiquity and Origin of the Sabbath 198

148. The Idea of the Sabbath , 199

149. The Celebration of the Sabbath 200

150. The New Moon Sabbath 202

151. The Sabbatical Year and the Year of Jubilee ,, 201

CONTENTS. 11

152. Import and Practicability of these Institutions 203

153. The Passover 204

154. Significance of the Feast of the Passover 205

155. The Feast of Weeks 207

156. The Feast of Tabernacles... 207

PAKT II.

Prophetism.

SECTION I.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE THEOCRACY FROM THE DEATH OF JOSHUA TO THE CLOSE OF THE OLD TESTAMEN'^' REVELATION.

CHAPTER I.

THE TIMES OF THE JUDGES

157. Course of Events. Import of the Office of Judge 211

158. Decline of the Theocratic Institutions 212

159. Religious Syncretism of this Period 214

CHAPTER II.

FOUNDATION OF THE MONARCHY.

160. The Philistine Oppression. Samuel 216

161. Nature, Importance, and first Beginnings of the Pro- phetic Office , 217

162. The so-called Schools of the Prophets 219

163. The Foundation of the Israelitish Kingdom 220

CHAPTER III.

PERIOD OF THE UNDIVIDED KINGDOM.

164. Saul 221

165. David 221

166. The Form of Worship under David 223

167. Solomon. The Building of the Temple 225

168. Significance and Dedication of the Temple 226

169. Hebrew Proverbial Poetry 227

170. Solomon's External Organizations 228

CHAPTER lY.

THE KINGDOM OF THE TEN TRIBES.

171. Preliminary Remarks 230

172. Jeroboam I. to Omri 230

173. The Dynasty of Omri 232

12 CONTENTS.

174. The Prophetism of the Period. The Rechabites 233

175. The Dynasty of Jehu 234

176. From Zachariah to the Captivity of the Ten Tribes 235

177. Origin of the Samaritans 237

CHAPTPJR V.

THE KINGDOM OF JUDAH.

178. Preliminary Remarks and Survey 239

179. Rehoboam to Jehosaphat , 240

180. Jehoram to Jotham 240

181. Ahaz and Hezekiah 241

182. Manasseh and Amon 243

183. Josiah 243

184. Profane History of this Period 244

185. Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin 244

186. Zedekiah. Fall of Jerusalem 246

187. Gedaliah and the Remnant of the People 247

CHAPTER VI.

THE EXILIC AND POST-EXILIC HISTORY OF THE JEWS.

188. Condition of the People during the Captivity 248

189. Return of the Jews from Babylon 249

190. The Period from Cyrus to Darius Hystaspes 250

191. The Jews under Xerxes 251

192. Ezra and Nehemiah. The Close of Prophecy 251

193. The Scribes. Public Worship 252

SECTION II.

THE THEOLOGY OF PROPHETISM.

194. Summary 254

CHAPTER VII.

THE DOCTRINE OF THE LORD OF HOSTS AND OF ANGELS.

195. The Meaning of Jehovah Sabaoth 254

196. The Host of Heaven 256

197. The Host of the Heavenly Spirits 256

198. The Significance of the Doctrine of Jehovah Sabaoth.. 258

199. Angels of Higher Order and their Special Calling 258

200. The Doctrine of Satan 260

CHAPTER VIII.

man's RELIGIOUS AND MORAL RELATION TO GOD.

201. Distinction between the Ceremonial and the Moral Law 264

202. The Ruinous Nature of Sin 265

CONTENTS. l;] -

203. The Old Testament Form of Faitb 2G7

204. The Old Testament Exxjerience of Salvation 2G8

SECTION III.

OF PROPHECY.

CHAPTER IX.

THE PROPHETIC CONSCIOUSNESS.

205. Negative Propositions 270

206. Positive Propositions 270

207. Psychological Definition of the Prophetic State in An- cient Times 272

208. View of this Subject in the Older Protestant Theology 273

209. Continuity and Elevation of the Individual Life in the Prophetic State 275

210. Prophecy an Inward Intuition 276

211. The Prophetic State illustrated by Analogies 278

212. The Conceptions of Genius and the Natural Powers of Divination 279

CHAPTER X

OF PROPHECY.

213. Its Office in General 281

214. The Prediction of Particular Events an Essential Ele- ment of Prophecy 281

215. The Peculiarities of Old Testament Prophecy 282

216. Prophecy and Fulfiment 284

SECTION IV.

OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD.

217. Survey 288

CHAPTER XI.

THE PURPOSE OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD

218. The Design of God's Kingdom 288

219. The Relation of the Present to God's Purpose 290

220. The Judgment upon the Covenant People 290

221. The Judgment upon the Heathen Nations 292

CHAPTER XII.

THE DELIVERANCE AND RESTORATION OF THE COVENANT PEOPLE.

222. The Restoration of Israel a Necessary Event 295

223. The New Covenant an Everlasting One 29G

14 CONTENTS.

224. other Features of the Times of Eedemption 298

225. Death destroyed 299

226. The Kesurreetion 300

CHAPTER XIII.

THE ADMISSION OF THE HEATHEN INTO THE KINGDOM OF GOD.

227. The Extension of the Kingdom of God in the Times of Redemption ." 302

228. The Conditions under which the Heathen are admit- ted into the Kingdom of God 303

CHAPTER XIY.

THE MESSIAH.

229. The Messianic Hope 305

230. The Messianic Psalms 306

231. The Development of the Idea of the Messiah in the Prophets 307

232. The Office and Work of the Messiah 309

233. The Servant of Jehovah 310

234. The Messiah is the Atoning High Priest 312

PART III. Old Testament Wisdom.

235. The Nature of Old Testament Wisdom 315

236. The Contents of Old Testament Wisdom 316

CHAPTER I.

OBJECTIVE DIVINE WISDOM.

237. The Personification of Wisdom 318

238. The Old Testament View of Nature 319

239. The Control of Wisdom in Human Affairs 319

CHAPTER II.

SUBJECTIVE HUMAN WISDOM.

240. The Fear of the Lord the Subjective Principle of Wis- dom 321

241. Practical Wisdom 322

242. The Ethics of the Proverbs 322

CHAPTER III.

MORAL GOOD.

243. Its Realization in the Individual Life 324

244. Realization of Moral Good in the various Social Spheres 325

CONTENTS. 15

CHAPTER IV.

THE ENIGMAS OF HUMAN LIFE.

245. The Enigmas themselves 327

246. The Struggle to solve the Enigmas relating to this Subject in the Psalms 327

247. Solution of the Enigmas in the Book of Job 329

248. The Doctrine of Immortality in the Book of Job 331

CHAPTER V.

THE SOLUTION ATTEMPTED INtHE BOOK OF ECCLESIASTES.

249. Standpoint of the Book of Ecclesiastes 333

250. Moral Teaching of the Book 334

Select Literature 336

Index 345

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY

OF THE

OLD TESTAMENT.

INTRODUCTION.

§ 1. Summary of the Introduction.

The Introduction has for its aim

1) To define the Theology of the Old Testament, and its relation to the cognate branches of Biblical Science ;

2) To present the conception of the Old Testament religion presupposed in our exhibition of the subject, together with the scientific standpoint of Old Testa ment Theology therebj^ given ;

3) To present a brief history of this branch of the- ology;

4) To discuss the method of Old Testament Theol- ogy, and present its divisions.

§ 2. Definition of Old Testament Theology.

Biblical Theology^ of the Old Testament has for its

task the historical exhibition of the religion contained

1 "To the term 'Biblical Theology' we do not attach any special importance. It has become current through the works of Gabler, Schraid, and Oehler, and it seems to us decidedly preferable to the other term, 'Biblical Dogmatics', which De Wette and Hagenbach defend." (Schultz, p. 3.)

18 INTRODUCTION.

in the canonical books of the Old Testament, accord- ing to its progressive development and the variety of the forms in which it appears. It cannot, therefore, limit itself to the directly didactic matter in the Old Testament, but must also embrace the chief features of the history of the divine kingdom in the Old Testa- ment. It has to handle as such whai is only in germ, and to show how the Old Testament, in the narrow- ness and unfinished state which characterizes in many parts its doctrinal contents, points from itself to something higher.

Schultz defines Biblical theology as "that branch of theological science which gives a historical presenta- tion of revealed religion during the period of its growth."

[Analysis: 1) Aim of the science ; 2) definition of Schultz; 3) is a historical science ; 4) revelation is progressive.]

§ 3. Relation to other Old Testament Branches.

1) The study of what is called Introduction to the Old Testament precedes the study of Old Testament Theol- ogy, but the two stand to each other in a relation of mutual dependence. To the former science we leave all critical investigations as to the authenticity, authorship, and integrity, of the Old Testament writings. 1

1 Oehler: "If a critic takes a view^ of revelation which is far from harmonious with the biblical one, and devises a scheme of sacred history which the history itself does not acknowledge, he will from these presuppositions judge of the time when these books originated, and of other things quite differently from what they themselves testify. ... If the Bible is the record of Revelation, and if it is only through the Bible that the theologian receives the impression of the majesty of revelation as a mighty historical fact we should expect of him that, before he criticises the Bible, he should first surrender himself to its contents without precon- ceived opinions — should let the revelation in its majesty work directly upon him, in order, as Rothe (Zur Dogmatik, p. 329) strik- ingly expresses it, 'to make it a constant factor in the experience of his personal life.' He who has won in this way the conviction

RELATION TO OLD TESTAMENT BRANCHES. 19

2) Old Testament Theology has a part of its con- tents in common with Biblical ArchcBology, which latter treats of the \vhole natural and social condition of the people of Israel. The discussion of ail purely technical questions, however, must be left to Archse- ology, and even in those topics which are common— the field of morals and of public worship,— there must be a treatment differing not merely in fulness, but in some measure also in form. On all such matters Biblical Theology has simply to take from Archseol- ogy its results as accepted facts.

3) There is a close relation between Old Testament Theology and Israelitish History, and yet the two branch- es are entirely distinct. Old Testament Theology is bound to reproduce faithfully, and without admixture of modern ways of looking at history, the view which the holy Scriptures themselves give of the purpose of salvation which is carried out in Israel.^ The History

that Holy Scripture is the truly witnessing record of the divine purpose of salvation, and of the historical facts which serve to its realization, — in the joyful consciousness ol his faith in revela- tion, will certainly refuse to be bound by human traditions con- cerning Holy Scripture, w^hether these originated with the Jewish Scribes, or with the ancient church, or with our older Protestant theology, whatever be the respect which he may feel due to them; but neither will he surrender himself to a criticism in which he can everywhere see that it does not rest upon the consciousness of faith which Rothe commends."

1 Oehler: "The history of Israel contains a series of facts which form the basis of the Old Testament religion. If we deny the Exodus of Israel from Egypt, and the giving of the law from Sinai, the Old Testament religion floats in the air. Such facts can no more be separated from the religion of the Old Testament than

the historical facts of Christ's person from Christianity Here

there must be .strife between those who acknowiege as facts what the Old Testament lays down as such, and are consequently con- vinced that the thing believed w^as also a thing which took place, and between those who see in the Old Testament faith mainly a product of religious ideas, the historical basis of which can be ascertained only by a critical process resting on rationalistic pre- suppositions Whoever occupies the historico-critical stand- point on this subject should endeavor to get at the point of view

20 INTRODUCTION.

of Israel, on the other hand, has not only to present all sides of the historical development of the people of Israel, but to sift and vindicate, by historico-critical research, the real historical facts which the Theology of the Old Testament reproduces as the contents of faith.

4) Biblical Theology has of necessity a close con- nection with the Exegesis of Scripture. As a necessary preliminary to our science, one must study the ex- pository works which deal with the doctrinal ideas of specially important single books or groups of books. Taken along Avith the works which trace single doctrines through all the different Biblical books, such writings would, if complete, provide us with almost all the material we require. We should then have the war]:) and the woof, out of which we could without much trouble weave the web of Biblical Theology.^

5) This science has also a close connection with Systematic Theology (which includes the three sciences of A]3ologetics, Dogmatics, and Ethics), for it pro- vides a form of Scripture proof on a larger scale than can be got from single texts. But Biblical Theology is distinct in form and contents from S^^stematic The- ology.^ It is the historical counterpart of Dogmatics

oi the Bible itself in its purity, without admixture of modern views No criticism has as yet robbed of its force the judg- ment of Herder respecting the history of the Old Testament: 'A thing of that kind cannot be invented; such history, with all that depends on it, and all that is connected with it— in short, Buch a people cannot be a fiction. Its yet uncompleted providen- tial guidance is the greatest poem of the ages, and advances probably (we say certainly, on the ground of Rom. 11: 25, 26) to the solution of the mysterious riddle of the world's history.' "

1 SeeSchultz: p. 4.

2 Schultz: "No result of 0. T. Theology can become a constitu- ent part of Systematic Theology till its further development in Christianity has been recognized, in other words, except through the medium of N.T. Theology,— for there is not a single Christian

SOURCES OF OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 21

and Ethics, not their substitute, and precedes the study of Dogmatics. We may also add that Dog- matic Theology should balance and correct Biblical Theology, first, because the latter, as a rule, is based only upon certain parts of Scripture, and its method is fractional, and secondly, because it is more easy to introduce subjective individual opinions into a part of the Bible, than into the whole of it.^

6) Biblical Theology, therefore, lies wholly within the circle of historical theology and has a well-defined province of its own, and is one of the most indispens- able branches of theological science.

7) As Old Testament Theology must report what men in the Old Testament believed, in what faith they lived and died, as it has to exhibit the history of rev- elation and to reproduce the view which Holy Script- ure itself has, we have nothing to do with ethnological and geographical research, and with attempts of harmonizing the Old Testament history of creation and other things of this kind with the propositions of the newer physical sciences.

[Analysis: 1) Its relation to Biblical Introduction; 2) the true Biblical critic; 3) its relation to Biblical Archaeology; 4) to Sa- cred History; .5) Negative Higher Criticism; 6) Biblical Theology closely related to Exegesis; 7) to Systematic Theology; 8) is a historical science; 9) does not aim to reconcile science and the- ology.]

§ 4. Sources of Old Testament Theology.

These sources must be limited to the books of the 0/d Testament Canon as received by the Scribes in Palestine, acknowledged by the Protestant Church, thus excluding the Old Testament Apocrypha. That the Canon of the Protestant Church is that of the

conception but has its roots in the O. T., and which Christianity does not set in a new light,— and not till then is it rendered per- fect (p. 6). 1 See Weidner, Introduction to Dogmatic Theology. 2nd ed., p. 37,

22 INTRODUCTION.

Judaism of Palestine, as established in the last centu- ry before Christ, and then re-sanctioned after tempor- ary hesitation at the Sanhedrim in Jamnia about a. d. 90, is not disputed. According to the declarations of Christ in Luke 24: 44; Matt. 11: 13, 14, and the whole Apostolic doctrine, there can remain no doubt as to where the Old and New Testaments are connected, since even the beginning of the New Testament history of revelation attaches itself directh' to the close of Old Testament prophecy in Malachi (Matt. 11: 13,^ 14).

[Analysis: 1) The Old Testament the only source; 2) the Protes- tant Church accepts the Canon of the Jevrs.]

§ 5. Old Testament Theology considered from a Ch»'istian theological standpoint. The view we have of the Theology of the Old Testa- ment is already expressed in the name we give to this branch of theology, for we will not treat simply of the

( Jewish religion, but of the divine revelation of the Old Testament, which on the one hand is fundamentally different from all heathen religions, and on the other forms the preliminary stage to the revelation of the New Testament, which is witli it comprehended in one divine economy of salvation.^ The entire Old Testa- ment remains a sealed book, if we fail to see that the

, subduing of the natural character of the people is the

whole aim of the divine tuition.

1 Oehler: "The view of the Old Testament which is now promi- nent and which claims that it seeks to understand the Old Testa- ment historically, is, that Israel by virtue of a certain genius tor , religion was more successful in the search of true religion than the other nations of antiquity, and soared higher than the rest toward the purest divine thoughts and endeavors Yet, al- though individual contributions made to the matter of 0. T. the- ology h'om this standpoint have great value, the 0. T. can never be historically understood in this way. Does even a single page of the 0. T. agree with this view, by which Israel is represented as a i)eo])le of such genius in the production of religious thought, and the 0. T. religion as a natural product oi the Israelitish spirit?"

THE BIBLICAL IDEA OF REVELATION. 23

[Analysis: 1) The revelation of the O. T. differs from heathen religions; 2) is closely related to the N. T.; 3) the modern critical view of the O. T.; 4j but the O. T. religion is not a natural product ot Israel.]

§ 6. The Biblical Idea of Revelation. General and Special Revelation.

The Biblical idea of Revelation has its root in the idea of Creation. The production of different classes of beings advances teleologically, and reaches its goal only when God has created man in his own image. In this progression the foundation of revelation is laid. For revelation is, in general, God's witness and com- munication of Himself to the Avorld for the realiza- tion of the end of Creation and the re-establishing of the full communion of man with God.i God testifies, partly in nature and the historical guidance of man- kind, and partly in each one's conscience, of His power, goodness, and justice, and thus draws man to seek God (Isa. 40: 21-26; Jer. 10: 1-25; Ps. 19: 1 -6; 94: 8-10).

The original communion of man with God destroyed by sin, is not recovered by means of this general reve- lation. The living God remains to the natural man, in all his searchings, a hidden God (Isa. 45: 15; Jer. 23: 18; John 1: 18). It is only by God's stoop- ing to man in personal testimony of Himself, and by the objective presentation of Himself, that a vital communion is actually established between God and man. This is the special revelation which first appears in the form of a covenant between God and a chosen race, and the founding of a Kingdom, of God among

1 Phllippi : "God can only place Himself in fellowship with man through revelation. . . In our Christian consciousness we know only of two central and fundamental acts of Revelation on the part of God, the act of Creation and the act of Redemption. i (Glaubenslehre 1. 12,13).

24 INTRODUCTION.

the latter culminates in the manifestation of God in the flesh, advances from this point to the gathering of a people of God in all nations, and is completed in the making of a new heaven and a new earth (Isa. 65: 17; 66: 22; Rev. 21: 1, 2), where God shall be all in all (1 Cor. 15: 28). The relation between general and special revelation is such, that the former is the contin- ual basis of the latter, the latter the aim and com- pletion of the former.

[Analysis: 1) Revelation has its root in Creation ; 2) there are only two fundamental acts of revelation; 3) general revelation ; 4) special revelation; 5) the relation between the two.]

§ 7. Historical Character and gradual progress of Revela- tion. Its supernatural character.

The special revelation of God does not at a bound enter the world all finished and complete, but as it enters the sphere of human life, it observes the laws of historical development which are grounded in the general divine system of the world. And because revelation aims at the resto'ration of full communion between God and man, it is directed to the whole of man's life, and not exclusively or mainly to man's faculty of knowledge. Biblical revelation, as here de- fined, is distinguished from the view of the older Protestant Theology in two respects : 1) in the older Protestant Theology revelation was essentially, and almost exclusively, regarded as doctrine. But Revela- tion cannot possibly confine itself to the cognitive side of man. Biblical Theology must be a theology of divine facts. 2) The Older Theology failed to recog- nize the general development which revelation passes through in Scripture itself. The Bible was supposed to attest equally, in the Old and New Testaments, the truths which the Church has accepted as doc- trines.

THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS. 25

Revelation makes itself known as differing from the natural revelations of the human mind, not only by the continuity and the organic connection of the facts which constitute the history of salvation, but also in its special character (miracle), which points distinctly to a^ divine causality. A miracle is revelation in the form of a divine act, prophecy is revelation in the form of a divine word.

The living experience of salvation is first found com- plete on the basis of the New Testament revelation.

[Analysis: 1) Revelation is progressive ; 2) its aim; 3) this pre- sentation differs in two respects from the view of the older Protestant theolog^^; 4) its difference from natural revelation.]

§ 8. The Old and New Testaments in their relation to each

other.

Revelation falls into two principal divisions, the Old and the New Testament, which stand to each other in the relation of preparation and fulfilment, and are thus, as a connected dispensation of salvation, dis- tinguished from all other religions (Eph. 2: 12). But the unity of the Old and New Testament must not be understood as identity. T\ie Old Testament /Vse// acknowl- edges that the manifestation of God's Kingdom at that time Avas imperfect and temporary, and, indeed, at the very time in which the old form of the theocracy was overthrown, it predicted the new eternal covenant w^hich God would make with his people (Jer. 31: 31- 34). vStill more distinctly does the New Testament emphasize the difference from the Old which subsists Avithin the unity of the two Testaments. The eternal counsel of salvation, although announced hj the prophets, is nevertheless not completely revealed till after its actual realization (Rom. 16: 25, 26; 1 Pet. 1: 10-12; Eph. 1: 9, 10; 3: 5). The tuition of the law reached its goal in the grace and truth of Christ

26 INTRODUCTION.

(John 1: 17; Rom. 10: 4; Gal. 3: 24, 25). In the saving benefits of the new covenant, the shadow of the old dispensation passes into reality (Col. 2: 17; Heb. 10: 1-4); therefore the greatest man in the old covenant is less than the least in the kingdom of Christ (Matt. 11:11).

[Analysis: 1) Relation between the Old and New T.; 2) their unity; 3) their difference; 4) aim of the O. T.]

§ 9. Theological View of the Old Testament in the Early Church and Middle Ages.

Old Testament Theology, as an independent branch of study, is, like Biblical Theology in general, a mod- ern science. During the whole development of Church doctrine down to the middle of the present century, no distinct line was dra^Mi between the essential con- tents of revelation as they are laid down in the Scriptures and the doctrinal formulas elaborated from them ; and still less were the successive stages of revelation and types of doctrine which are presented in Scripture recognized. The proposition, "the New Testament lies hidden in the Old, the Old Testament lies open in the New,"i which is in itself correct, was so perverted as to be made to mean that the Avliole of Christian theology, veiled indeed, but already fully formed, could be shown to exist in the Old Testa- ment.

The New Testament references to the Old Testament are limited by the occasions afforded in the Gospel his- tory and the apostolic trains of thought, but especial- ly valuable for this purpose are the Epistle to the He- brews and the Gospel of Matthew. A more sj^stematic discussion of the representations concerning Christ in. the Old Testament begins with the Epistle of Bar-

- 1 Novum Testamentura in Vetere latet, Yetus Testamentum in Novo patet.

THEOLOGICAL VIEW OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 27

nabas (71-120 a. d.), and in Justin's Dialogue with Tryplio (died about 163 a. d.). We may regard the three books (Lib. xv-xvii) in Augustine's great work De Civitate Dei, as in a certain sense the first treatment of the Theology of the Old Testament. The study of the Old Testament in the Ancient Church reaches its close with Gregory the Great. The cultivation of Biblical Theology as a historical science Avas not possible under the influence of the theology of the Middle Ages. True, much detached matter valuable for the Old Testament was brought to light in the Middle Ages, and especially on the Song of Solomon, in which the M3^sticism of the Middle Ages lives and moves, as Bernard of Clairvaux's lectures on Canticles show, — but this belongs not to Biblical Theology.

[Analyses: 1) 0. T. Theology a modern science; 2) formerly no stages of revelation recognized: 3) Augustine; -4) the Middle Ages.]

§ 10. Theological View of the Old Testament In the Age of the Reformation. ,

TheKeformation principle of the supreme authority of Scripture drew the attention of theologians to the Old Testament as w^ell as the New. To Johann Keuch- lin {d. 1522), the uncle of Melanchthon, must be given the credit not simply of opening a path for the study of Hebrew in Germany, but also for so firmly main- taining that it is the duty of the expositor of Scripture to go back to the original text expounded according to its literal sense, and to refuse to be dependent on the Vulgate and the traditional expositions of the Church which are connected with it.

The recognition of the difference between the Law and ihe Gospel derived from Paul's Epistles was the first thing that gave the Reformers a key to the theological

^8 INTRODUCTION.

meaning of the Old Testament. They also correctly recognized, that even in the Old Testament a revela- tion of God's gracious will in the promise of salvation goes side by side with the revelation of the demands of the divine mil in the law. Of all that is connected with this practical sphere in the Old Testament, Luther especially shows a profound understanding, springing from a lively personal experience. In the view which the Reformers (and especially Melanch- thon) were fond of developing, that the Church began in Paradise and continues throughout all time, the whole emphasis is laid on the doctrinal unity of revelation, existing under all change of outward forms. The theological principle of exposition by the analogy of faith, that Scripture should be explained by Scripture, is a principle in itself perfectly correct, and to have stated it, is one of the greatest merits of Protestant theology, but the Reformers did not properly apply it; the unity of the Old and New Testaments w^as conceived of, not as produced by a gradually advancing process of development, but as a harmony of doctrine. .

[Analysis: 1) Reuchlin; 2) Luther; 3) Melanchthon; 4) the analogy of faith; 5) the practical-theological exposition of the Reformers does not do full justice to the historical meaning of the Old Testament.]

§ 11. Theological Conception of the Old Testment in the Older Protestant Theology.

The treatment of the Old Testament in the older Protestant Theology Avas determined by the principles just stated. The contents of the Scriptures were set forth with strict regard to the systematic doctrines of the Church, and without respect to the historical manifoldness of the Scriptures themselves. The Old Testament Avas used in all its parts, just like the Ncav

THEOLOGICAL TREATMENT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 2^

Testament, for proofs of doctrine. In opposition to the Romish theologians, especially Bellarmine, it was taught on the side of Protestants, that in respect to the fundamental doctrines, the Old Testament was in no Avay incomplete ; and that these Avere only repeat- ed more distinctly in the New Testament.

FAnalysis: 1) Seventeenth century theologians governed by same principles; 2) in fundamental doctrines the 0. T. was m no way incomplete.]

§ 12. Theological Treatment of the Old Testament from 1700 to 1800.

In the Lutheran Church, Collegia Biblica, or topical lectures became common from the end of the seven- teenth century onward. These lectures, which con- tained exegetico-dogmatical discussions of the most important proof-texts of the doctrines of the Church, gave some impulse to the study of BibUcal as dis- tinguished from Doctrinal Theology, but cannot be regarded as of much consequence. In this connection must be mentioned the influence of Spener (1685— 1705) and of Bengel (1687-1751). The latter in- sisted on an organic and historical conception of biblical revelation A\ith strict regard to the difference of its stages. In this connection we may also men- tion the names of Roos, Burk, Hiller, Oetinger, and Crusius, who all have written profoundly on this sub- ject, though in a plain and simple form.

The writings of the apologists Lardner, Warburton,

and others, directed against EngUsh Deism, cton-

tributed also much important matter to the biblical

branches of theology, but made little headway

against their opponents, because they agreed with

them in placing the 0. T. institutions on the ground

of bare utility.

[Analysis: 1) Topical lectures; 2) influence of Spener; 3) of Bengel; 4) the school of Bengel ; 5) the English Apologists.]

30 INTRODUCTION.

§ 13. Rise of a Biblical Theology distinct from Dogmatic. Treatment of the Old Testament by Rationalism.

John Philip Gabler^ is regarded as the first who distinctly spoke of Biblical Theology as an historical science. George Lorenz Bauer (1755-1806) may be viewed as a leading representative of the rationalistic treatment of the Old Testament at this period. ^ The hints respecting a treatment of the Old Testament as an organic history, which had been offered by Herder (1744-1803), 3 were taken up by De Wette (1780- 1849) vdth discriminating appreciation. Ewald (1803 —75) in his various works* has interwoven with his narrative a full account of the growth of the Old Testament religion, but his vague notion of revela- tion does not raise him essentially above the ration- alistic method which he despises. Various attempts have also been made to throw light on the narrative of Genesis and the institutions of Closes from the comparative history of religion.

[Analysis: 1) G abler; 2) Bauer; 3) EAvald.]

§ 14. Theological View of the Old Testament in the most Recent Literature.

The first to exert a decisive influence on the theolog- ical treatment of the Old Testament was Hengst en- berg ((/. 1869).^ The position which Hengst enberg first took in treating the Old Testament, and which

1 In his academic oration, De justo discrimine theologiae biblicae et dogmaticae, 1787.

2 He wrote on nearly all the departments of Old Testament study.

3 See his Letters on the Study of Theology.

4 History of the People of Israel (8 volumes); Antiquities of Israel (1 vol.); Commentaries on the Prophets (5 vols.); Revelation (1 vol.); Old and New Testament Theology (1 vol.).

5 Mainly by his Christology of the Old Testament. 2Dd ed., 1854 — 57. (English trans, in 4 vols. Edinburgh, 1854—58.)

THEOLOGICAL VIEW OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 3l

he never except partially relinquished, is essential- ly that of the old Protestant theology; for while not accepting all the tenets of the latter, he yet very distinctly aimed at finding all the fundamental New Testament doctrines in the Old Testament, not in a process of g^o^^i]h, but ready made. The work of Hsevernicki contains much that is good. Valuable contributions to the theology of the Old Testament are found in the works of Hof- mann, ^ Auberlen, 3Beck,*Delitzsch, ^ and F. W.Schultz. ^ The works of Herman Schultz,^ Eiehm,^ and Piepen- bring ^ contain a valuable collection of material on almost every topic connected with the Old Testa- ment, but are written from the standpoint of the modern critical and analytical view of the Old Testa- ment, according to which the priestly legislation of the middle books of the Pentateuch is a post-exilic production. 1 0 As suggestive compends we would rec-

1 Vorlesungen ueber die Theologie des A. T. Second ed., with ad- ditions by Herman Schultz, 1863.

2 Weissagung etc., 1841—44; Schriftbeweis, second ed., 3 vols., 1857—60.

3 In his Divine Revelation. Edinburgh, 1867.

4 Christliche Lehrwissenschaft. 1841.

5 Biblical Psychology. Edinburgh, 1869; Old Test. Hist, of Redemp- tion. Edinburgh, 1881; Messianic Prophecies. Edinburgh, 1891.

6 In Zockler's Handbuch der theol. Wissenschaften.

1 Alttestamentliche Theologie. 4th ed., completely revised, 1889. English transl. in 2 vols. Edinburgh, 1892.

8 Alttestamentliche Theologie. Halle 1889. Compare also his Einleitung in das A. T. 2 vols. 1889, 1890.

9 Theology of the Old Testament. Transl. from the French. New York, 1893.

10 The position of Herman Schultz can be inferred from the fol- lowing quotation: "Genesis is the book of sacred legend, with a mythical introduction. The first three chapters of it, in particular, present us with the revelation-myths of the most important kind, and the following eight with mythical elements that have been recast more in the form of legend. From Abraham to Moses we have national legend pure and simple, mixed with a variety of mythical elements which have become almost unrecognizable.

32 INTRODUCTION.

ommend the work of Sclilottniann,^ and the small

Avork on this subject which has appeared in the Theolo-

gische Repetiiorien.- But the most important work on

this subject that has as vet appeared is the famous

work of Gustav Fred rich Oehler,^ and it is a question

Avhether it ever will be su]3erseded.

[Analysis: 1) The position of Heugstenberg: 2) HoflFman; 3) Delitzscb; 4) Herman Schultz; 5) Scblottmann ; G) Oehler.]

As a historical science. Biblical Theology rests on the results of grammatico -historical exegesis,t\ie business of which is to reproduce the contents of the Biblical books according to the rules of language, ^^itli due regard to the historical circumstances under which the books originated, and the individual relations of sacred writers. Biblical Theology, however, must view the Old Testament in the light of the completed revelation of God in Christ for which it formed the preparation,— must show how God's saving purpose, fulfilled in Christ, moved through the pi-eliminary stages of this history of revelation. Theological exegesis, in the right sense of the word, is not affected by the fact that Stier and other AM'iters have brought theological interpretation into bad repute, by their habit of finding a second, third, and fourth subor-

From Moses to David we have history still mixed with a great dpal of the legendary, and even partly with mythical elements that are no longer distinguishable. From David onwards we have history, with no more legendary elements in it than are everywhere present in history as written by the ancients"' (page 31).

1 Kompendiiim der bibl. Theologie des A. und X. T. Leipsic, 18S9; 2nded.,189i.

2 Published by Schnltze's Verlag. Berlin. 1890.

3 The first German edition appeared in 1873-4; the first English edition in 1874:-5. 1 he second German edition in 1882; Revised English edition by Day. 1883; the first edition of my abridgement in 1886: and the third German edition in 1891.

DIVISIONS OF OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 33

dinate and secondary sense in the Old Testament be- sides the historico-gTammatical sense.

[Analysis: 1) Biblical Theology rests on grammatico-historical exegesis; 2) the N. T. is the true interpreter ol the 0. T.; 3) Scripture has not a multiple sense.]

§ 16. Divisions of Old Testament Theology.

The proper divisions are given by the follo^ving considerations : The basis of the Old Testament re- hgion is the Covenant with the chosen people, into which God entered for the accomphshment of his sav- ing purpose. This covenant, for which the way is prepared in the first two ages of the world, is carried out in two stages: 1) The patriarchal covenant of promise; and 2) The Mosaic covenant of the law, on the basis of which the theocracy is founded. This whole sphere may be summed up in the nameA/osa/s/w.^

The second part of Old Testament Theology, which w^e win briefly call Propheiism, deals with those ele- ments in the history of the people of Israel from their entrance into the Promised Land which are important for the development of God's Kingdom, considering these as they appear in the light of prophecy, and also discusses the theology of prophecy itself.

The third division embraces Old Testament Wisdom,

1 It is not the aim of a work on Biblical Theology to answer the objections raised bv the analytical school of Wellhausen, Driver, and others. These critics may distribute the Pentateuch and Joshua among as many different authors as they please, and rearrange the whole Old Testament Canon to suit their own views, still this does not prove their assertions, and a mere presentation of their marvelously complicated theory of the origin of the Old Testament, to most persons is a sufficient answer, and a demon- stration of its falsity. Though there has been a remarkable dis- plav of minute scholarship on the part of these critics, and their positiveness and self-confidence in dissecting passages and books has never been equalled in the whole realm of theological scholar- ship,—most of it is pure speculation and mere lanciful conceit. We write this deliberately with a full acquaintance of all the latest phases of this controversy.

34 INTRODUCTION.

which equally with prophecy has its root in the law,

but devolops itself independently of prophecy.

The division of the Old Testament Canon into Law,

Prophets, and Hagiographa, though not entirely agreeing

with this division, points at least toward it.

[Analysis: 1) Mosaism; 2) Prophetism; 3) Old Testament Wis- dom ; 4) the modern analytical view does not affect this method of presentation.]

PART I

MOSAISM

PART I.

MOSAISM.

SECTION I.

THE HISTORY OF REVELATION FROM THE CREATION TO THE OCCUPATION OF CANAAN.

§ 17. Division of this History.

The Pentateuch plainly distinguishes four periods in the history of revelation :

1) The Primeval Age, mth ten patriarchs, closing with the deluge.

2) The second age of the world, beginning with the world-covenant in Noah's time, also vnth ten genera- tions.

3) The .time of the three great patriarchs, begin- ning with the covenant of promise made with Abra- ham, and ending with the sojourn of the chosen peo- ple in Egypt.

4) The time of Moses and Joshua, including the giving of the covenant of the law, and the establish- ment of the theocracy, with its regulations.

CHAPTER I.

THE PRIMEVAL AGE.

§ 18. The Account of the Creation.

The Old Testament begins with the account of the Creation of the world, which is the result of the Word and the Spirit of God. We have here, on the thresh-

38 MOSAISM.

old of the revelation of God to man, an account of creation free from m^^thological additions, and the Bible narrative, by its simplicity, its chaste, positive historical character, is in sharp contrast with the fan- ciful, allegorical, intricate cosmogonies of all heathen religions.^

Since God by His Word calls all things into being, He is placed above the beginning of all time as the eternal and absolutely independent One; since He animates the universe by His Spirii, all dualistic sepa- ration of God and the world is excluded. ^

The production of beings advances continually to- ward higher organisms, and we cannot fail to observe a parallel between the first three and the last three days' work. Still the divine creative power is not satisfied till it reaches its ultimate end in the creation of man.^

The paragraph Gen. 2: 4-25 is by no means a second record of creation, but shows, in supplement- ing the first chapter, that the earth was prepared for

1 A comparison of the early history of the Bible with the cunei- form inscriptions is extremely interesting,both on account of their remarkable resemblance and their characteristic difference. See Savce: Fresh Light from the Ancient IVIonuments; Walsh: Echoes of Bible History. 1891.

3 Cuvier: "A sublimer passage than this from the first word to the last never can or will come from a human pen, 'In the begin- ning God created the heaven and the earth.' "

Murphy in his Commentary on Genesis: "This simple sentence denies atheism; for it assumes the being of God. It denies polytheism, and, among its various forms, the doctrines of two eternal prin- ciples the one good and the other evil,— for it confesses the one eternal Creator. It denies materialism, for it asserts the creation of matter. It denies pantheism, for it assumes the existence of God before all things, and apart from them. It denies fatalism, for it involves the freedom of the Eternal Being."

Delitzsch : The creation which is here intended is the first begin- ning, which was not preceded by any other, hence the creation of the universe, which also embraces the heaven ol heavens. (0. T. Hist, of Redemption, p. 13).

3 For further study see Guyot: Creation, or the Biblical Cosmog- ony in the Light of Modern Science. 1884.

THE ORIGIN OF EVIL. 39

a habitation for man—a sphere for his activity, and a place for the revelation of God to man.i

[Analysis: 1) Biblical account of creation differs from heathen cosmogonies; 2) testimony of Cuvier; 3) deductions of Murphy; 4) a progress in creation ; 5) not two records of creation ; 6) differ- ence between the two accounts.]

§ 19. The Origin of Evil.

The world as a divine creation is good (Gen. 1: 31); every development of life in it is a divine bless- ing (Gen. 1: 22, 28); there is no room here for a principle which, in its original nature, is wicked and inimical to God. Man is called to be a free being ; therefore a command is given to him for self-decision (Gen. 2: 16), in order that he may pass from the con- dition of innocence to that of free obedience. Man falls under the temptation addressed to him from with- out. ^ Through sin the bond of child-like communion with God is broken ; and now man is in a sense inde- pendent like God (Gen. 3: 22); but fear resting in the feeling of guilt, dominates from this time forward his position toward God (Gen. 3: 8-10). The life in Paradise with its peace is forfeited, and man sinks henceforth under the service of perishable things and of death (Gen. 3: 17-24). Nevertheless conscience, which testifies of guilt, shows also man's capability of being redeemed ; and side by side \\ith the curse a divine word points forward to a victorious end of the conflict (Gen. 3: 15). The seed of the serpent, which by cunning overcame the woman, shall be vanquished

1 Delltzsch : The difference between the two accounts is, that Geu. 1: 1—2: 3 relates the origin of the human race, and Gen. 2: 4— 25 that of the first man and of the first human pair; in the former man appears as the object and end of the line of creation, in the latter as the centre of the circle of creation. (Genesis).

2 Some maintain that the fall of the spirit-world took place be- fore the beginning of the six days' creation, placing it between verses 1 and 2, of the first chapter of Genesis, and such a view cannot be confuted, nor, on the other hand, can it be proved,

40 MOSAISM.

in open combat by the seed of the woman. Oehler maintains, however, that the older theology erred when it sought to find here (in Gen. 3: 15) the Mes- siah, the great destroyer of the serpent, direct// promised, although he is willing to grant that it did not err in the general conception of ,the thought in the passage. 1

[Analysis: 1) The origin of evil is not in man; 2) the time of the fall of Satan; 3) the effect of sin; 4) man's capability of being re- deemed; 5) Delitzsch lays stress on four points; 6) Oehler's ex- planation of Gen. 3. 15; 7) the exposition of Delitzsch.]

§ 20. The First Offering. Cainites and Sethites. Tradition of the Flood. The first offering (Gen. 4) is not to be regarded as a proper sin-offering, but rather an offering of supplica- tion as well as of gratitude, or, in a wider sense of the Avord we may designate it a propitiatory offering."^ The

1 Delitzsch : We must hold fast to the following as .realities: 1) that there was a demoniacal evil one, before evil had taken posses- sion of man ;_2) that the demoniacal evil one was the power of temptation before which man fell; 3) that God after mankind had fallen punished them, but at the same time opened a way of salvation, by which they could again secure communion with God: 4) that he placed before them in prospect the victory over that power of temptation through which they had lost the com- munion with God in Paradise. (Messianic Prophecies, 1891, p. 32).

On Gen. 3: 15 Delitzsch says: The entire history and order of salvation are unfolded in the protevangelium. Like a sphinx, it crouches at the entrance of sacred history. Later in the period of Israelitish Prophecy and Chokhma, the solution of this riddle of the sphinx begins to dawn ; and it is only solved by Him through whom and in whom that has been revealed towards which this primitive prophecy w^as aimed. (Idem, p 37). Again: The mur- der of Abel by Cain is the first bruise in the heel which the seed of the woman suffers from the seed of the serpent. (0. T. Hist, of Redemption, p. 30).

2 Abridged from Delitzsch: 1) Sacrifice in its origin is not the satisfaction of a divine command, but of an inward need; 2) the sacrifice is in all its kinds a gift, an offering. It is founded in the consecration (sacratio), and is completed in the oblation (oblatio); 3) it IS the first step in the re-estabhshment of the original rela- tion between man and God on the one side, and the natural world on the other, occupying with reference to both a mediatorial rela- tion; 4) the bloody offering contains the expiator;y element,

THE FIRST OFFERING. 41

difference in the nature of the offerings was due to the difference of the employments of the tAvo brothers; so that the reason that Abel's offering pleased God, was not that it was a bloody sacrifice. The reason can only be found in the different states of heart of the two offerers. This is indicated in Gen. 4: 3, where it is evident that Abel made choice of the best to express his gratitude, while Cain offers his gift of the fruit of the ground without selection.

At the very opening of the Bible, therefore, empha- sis is laid upon the pious disposition of the one making the sacrifice, as the indispensable condition of its being acceptable to God (compare Heb. 11: 4).

While among the descendants of Cain,^ the life of sin

rises to insolent defiance (Gen. 4: 23, 24), in Seth, who

takes the place of the murdered Abel, is propagated

the race of patriarchs who seek the living God (Gen.

4: 26). Enoch^ by his translation testifies of a way

of life which raised him above the law of death (5:

24), and Lamech^ announces the hope of a Saviour

which is wanting in the vegetable offering, and therefore takes the precedence of it; 5) every offering is worthless without the right internal state oi the one bringing it. (O.T. Hist, of Redemption, 1881. pp.31, 32).

1 Cain's wife was one of his sisters, for the marriage with sisters first became incest at a later period.

2 This Enoch, according to the tradition which has been put in form in the Book of Enoch, was a prophet, and according to Jude vv. 14, 15, foretold the parousia of the Lord in judgment. The end of Enoch's life shows that man, if he had proved true in the pro- bation of free will, could have gone over into another stage of existence without death and corruption. . . . The translation of Enoch, as well as of Elijah, is a prophecy in act of the future end of death (Isa. 25:8; 1 Cor. 15:54). (Delitzsch: Messianic Prophecies, 1891, p. 41).

3 Delitzsch: Lamech's hope is directed to the ultimate comfort, and was also fulfilled in Noah, not indeed finally, but in a glorious manner, for the rainbow after the flood was a comfort, the bless- ing of which extended from that time on until the end. It pledged mankind, after the wrathful visitation in judgment, of the dawn of a better time, in which, instead of wrath, a blessing predomi- nates, a time of favor, patience, and long-suffering of God (Acts

42 MOSAISM.

from the curse weighing on mankind as a consequence of sin (5:29).

After the wickedness of man had reached its height by the intermarriage of the sons of God (Sethites) with the daughters of men (Cainites) (Gen. 6: 1, 2), and the time granted for repentance had passed with- out result, the judgment of extermination was exe- cuted in the Flood,! from which Noah as the righteous one (Gen. 6: 9) was saved, along with his family. ^

It is the first judgment on the world executed by the holy God, who, according to Gen. 6: 3, will no longer permit His Spirit to be profaned by man's sin. But for Noah and his family the event means that the chosen ones shall be saved because of their faith in the word of threatening and promise (see Heb. 11: 7). ^

[Analysis: 1) The first offering was propitiatory; 2) five points developed by Delitzsch; 8) the reason why Abel's offering pleased God; 4) what constitutes a true offering; 5) Enoch; 6) Noah, a mediator of comfort; 7) distinction between the Cainites and the Sethites; 8) their intermarriage; 9) the universality of the flood ; 10) thefirstjudgment on the world; 11) a type of baptism.]

17: 30; 14: 17; Rom. 3: 26). Noah is the first mediator of sacred history, a mediator of comfort. (Idem, p. 43).

1 Delitzsch : The Biblical narrative does not demand an abso- lutely universal deluge. The flood was so far universal as it de- stroyed the entire human race then living. That was its only object. (0. T. Hist, of Redemption, 1881, p. 36).

2 The tradition of the flood is found in several religions of an- tiquity; but in these traditions each religion evidently expresses a distinct idea of its own. The universality of the tradition of the flood is a powerful proof of the historical unity of the human race.

3 The flood is a type of baptism (1 Pet. 3: 21), and the ark is a type of the church.

i

CHAPTER II.

THE SECOND AGE OF THE WORLD.

§ 21. Covenant with the World. Noah's Saying. Division of Mankind.

The second age of the world begins with the new form taken by revelation, in presenting itself as God's covenant with man, and in the first instance, as a covenant with the world, in which God gives to crea- tion a pledge of its preservation (Gen. 9: 8-17).^

Sacrifice precedes the institution of the covenant (Gen. 8: 20), ^ which offering is mainly thanksgiving for the deliverance experienced, while at the same time man thereby approaches God, seeking grace for the future, after having seen the severity of God's penal justice.

The words of Noah in Gen. 9: 25-27 are of the greatest importance for the conception of the general history of mankind as given in the Old Testament,

1 This Noachian covenant is until the present the gracious power which preserves the world, which assures the continuance of the human race; and the bow in the clouds is still the sign of the victory which grace won over wrath. . . . The Synagogue reckons seven Noachian commandments, the fulfilment of which was demanded by the so-called proselytes of the gate,— 1 ) the prohibition of idolatry; 2) of blasphemy; 3) of incest; 4) of murder; 5) of theft; 6) of the flesh of animals which are yet alive; 7) the institution of magisterial power. Of these seven com- mandments, Gen. 9: 1 — 7 contains only the fourth, sixth, and seventh (Delitzsch: 0. T. Hist, of Redemption, pp. 37, 38).

2 Delitzsch : Paradise, and the presence of God upon the thresh- old of Paradise, have now vanished from the earth. The suppliant hereafter looks upward; the one bringing a sacrifice raises on high therefore a place upon the earth. The offering is called 'ola, that which ascends. Earth and heaven are now separated. (Idem, p. 87).

44 MOSAISM.

for here is indicated the type of development of the human race. The race of Shem, to whom Jehovah is God, is chosen as the bearer of divine revelation ; on Japheth the blessing is conferred through Shem ; on Ham, and mainly on Canaan, the curse of slavery is to press. ^

The establishment of that world-kingdom which is at enmity to God, proceeds from the Hamites (Gen. 10: 8-10), 2 whose first seat seems to have been Babel. Here begins the distinction between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of the world which runs through the whole Bible.

The register of nations (Gen. 10: 1 — 32) is intended to keep in memory the original brotherhood of all the na- tions of the earth (cf. Acts 17: 26), which are again to be united in time to come, by one blessing of God (cf. Gen. 12: 3; 18: 18; etc.).

The importance of this "register of the nations" can scarcely be over-estimated. The vast increase of hu- man knowledge in recent time has proved the truth of its statements. It concerns people and not individ- uals, and stands at the end of grand traditional rec- ords of the mighty past, giving us a picture of the world at a time when nations and kingdoms had be- come settled and their boundaries fixed. The docu- ment, however, must be prior to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 10: 19). The table works backwards, and not forwards. Taking the nation at some particular time, it groups them together, and

1 The pages of history are the best illustration of the fulfilment of these predictions.

2 When the descendants of Japheth were wandering over Europe with no better weapons than implements of flint and bone, the descendants of Ham were building mighty oities,— such as Egyp- tian Thebes, Nineveh, and Babylon, — and founding the great empires of the East. Compare the valuable series of books pub- lished under the general title: By Paths of Bible Knowledge. See also Geikie: Hours with the Bible, vol. 1; Weidner: Studies in Genesis.

THE FOUNDATION OF A PEOPLE OF GOD. 45

classifies them according to the line to which they be- longed.

[Analysis: 1) The second age of the world begins with a covenant with man; 2) this covenant assures the continuance of the hu- man race; 3) the seven Noachian commandments; 4) the sig- nificance of Noah's offering; 5) the meaning of Gen. 9: 25—27: 7) civilization first developed among the Hamites ; 7) the object of the register of nations; 8) the importance and nature of this register.]

§ 22. The Foundation of a People of God.

In order to give a historical basis to the work of salvation, a people is to be chosen as the bearer of rev- elation. When God assigned to the nations of the earth the territory where they were to develop themselves, He had in view the place which his chosen people should afterward possess in order to fulfill their his- torical calling (Deut. 32: 8).^

In connection, probably, with the mighty moving of the nations at this early period, the Terahites leave the ancestral dwelling-place of the Chaldeans in northern Assyria and wander first to Haran in northern Mesopotamia (Gen. 11: 31). Here, where idolatry, designated as the worship of Teraphim, be- gins to break out even in this family (Josh. 24: 2; Gen. 31: 19), the basis of the Old Testament dispen- sation is laid by the calling of Abram (Gen. 12:- 1). While the nations of the earth walk in their own ways, in which they develop their natural peculiarities, an everlasiing people is to be founded in Abram's descen- dants (Isa. 44: 7), Avhich in its peculiar national type is to be not a product of natural development, but of the creative power and grace of God (Deut. 32: 6). It is only in this idea of the people of God that the key is given to the Old Testament history, which would

1 This passage refers to the division of the nations as given in Gen. 11: 1-9.

46 MOSAISM.

otherwise remain an insoluble riddle, i The view

that the Old Testament dispensation is a natural

production of religious genius of the people of Israel

must be absolutely rejected.

[Analysis: 1) A special nation was chosen as a bearer of salva- tion; 2) the wandering of the Babylonian Shemites; 3) the call of Abraham; 4) the Old Testament religion is not to be regarded as a natural growth of the Semitic character.]

1 Delitzsch : The call of Abram had in view a family of God, and in this family a people of God, and in this people the God-man. The ethical character of the new beginning is determined by this. (0. T. Hist, of Redemption, p. 43).

CHAPTER III.

THE TIME OF THE PATRIARCHS.

§ 23. Abraham.

Obedient to the divine call, Abram leaves Mesopo- tamia, accompanied by Lot, the ancestor of the Moabites and Ammonites, to go to Canaan, which is already (Gen. 12: 6) possessed by the tribes bearing this name. In solemn revelation God closes with him the covenant of promise (Gen. 15: 1-21), and Abram, several years later, takes upon himself the obligations of the covenant through circumcision (Gen. 17: 1—27).

Three points are contained in the promises given to Abram (Gen. 12: 2, 3, 7; 13: 15, 16; 17: 5-8; 22: 16 -18): 1) Unto him is to be given for an everlasting possession to his descendants, all the land of Canaan; 2) He who remains childless till his old age shall have an innumerable posterity; 3) In his seed shall all the earth be blessed.

Abraham, by his faith, which is reckoned to him for righteousness, becomes the father of all believers (cf. Rom. 4 and Gal. 3), and his name stands at the head of the three monotheistic religions of the world (Jewish, Christian, and Mohammedan) even when looked at in a purely historical way.

The character of God's people is eihically determined from the first, and Gen. 18: 19 shows that not all natural descendants belong to the true sons of Abra- ham and to the heirs of the promise.

48 MOSAISM.

On the relation of the religion of the patriarchs to the surrounding heathenism, the narratives in Gen. 14: 18—22 and Chap. 22 shed the most important light. The former passage contains the story of Melchizedek, king of Salem. This Salem is mthout doubt Jerusa- lem, and Abraham in the way which he does homage to Melchizedek manifestly acknowledges the God whose priest Melchizedek is. We have here traces of an older purer monotheism on Canaanitish ground, which at first sight is remarkable, because elsewhere the relation of the Old Testament God to the Canaan- itish religion is sharply antagonistic. No doubt we have here a remnant of an older and pure religion, preserved in the midst of the Canaanitish religion by a Semitic race dwelling among Canaanites.

Abraham accepted from Salem's priest and king, Melchizedek, not only bread and wine for the invigor- ation of his exhausted warriors, but a priestly bless- ing also, and gave him in return the tenth of all his booty, as a sign that he acknowledged this king as a priest of the living God, and that he submitted to his royal priesthood. And although we can see in Melchi- zedek nothing more than one, perhaps the last of the witnesses and confessors of the early revelation of God, coming out into the light of history from the dark night of heathenism ; yet this appearance does point to a priesthood of universal significance, and to a higher order of things, which existed at the com- mencement of the world, and is one day to be restored again. In all these respects, the noble form of this King of Salem and Priest of the Most High God was a type of the God-King and eternal High Priest. Jesus Christ; a thought which is expanded in Heb. 7, on the basis of this account, and of the divine utterance revealed to David in the Spirit, that the king of Zion

ABRAHAM. 49

sitting on the right hand of Jehovah should be a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek (Ps. 110: 4). 1

With reference to the second narrative, ihe tempta- tion of Abraham, Kurtz in his History of the Qld Covenant, seems to have given the right explanation. He says : ''Abraham must have been conscious that the way that led to the perfecting of his faith was the way of renunciation and self-denial. The sight of the Canaanite sacrifices of children must have led Abra- ham to self-examination, whether he would be strong enough in renunciation and self-denial to do what those heathen did, if his God desired it from him. But if the question was once made the subject of discussion in Abraham's heart, it had also to be brought to a definite and real decision." But the remarks of Keil in his Commentary are equally true : "The command to offer up his only son Isaac did not come from Abraham's own heart, — Avasnot a thought suggested by the sight of the human sacrifices of the Canaanites, that he would offer a similar sacrifice to his God ; nor did it originate with the tempter to evil. The word came from Ha-Elohim, the personal true God, who tried him, who demanded the sacrifice of the only, beloved son, as a proof and attestation of his faith. The issue, however, shows, that God did not desire the sacrifice of Isaac by slaying and burn- ing him upon the altar, but his complete surrender, and a willingness to offer him up to God even by death." Oehler makes the follomng deductions from this point of view : The culminating point of worship in the religions of nature was human sacrifice. The covenant had to separate itself in this respect from heathenism ; the truth in it had to be acknowledged,

1 See Keil in Ms Commentary on Gen. 14: 18—22.

50 MOSAISM.

and the falsehood denied. In the command to offer up Isaac, the truth of the conviction that human Hfe must be sacrificed as an unholy thing, is acknowl- edged ; and by the arresting intervention of God, the hideous distortion of this truth ^Yhich had arisen in heathenism is condemned and rejected.

[Analysis: 1) The covenant with Abraham; 2) three points are contained in the promises to Abraham ; 3) Abraham, the father of all believers ; 4) Melchizedek ; 5) a type of Christ ; 6) the sig- nificance of the temptation of Abraham.]

§ 24. Isaac and Jacob.

Very little is recorded of the life of Isaac ; he walked in the footsteps of his father, and the divine promises given to the latter w^ere renewed to him (Gen. 26: 2- 5). Of his twin-sons, Jacob, the second-born son, was chosen as the bearer of the promise (Rom. 9: 11). The fundamental thought connected with the divine guidance of Jacob's life is, that in spite of all human hindrances, the divine counsel reaches its goal, and that even human sins must serve for its realization, although they are punished none the less. By the sin of Jacob and his mother, Isaac's purpose, which was in opposition to the promise to Jacob (Gen. 25: 23), is thwarted; yet Jacob's sin is visited on him in the straits he experienced in his wanderings (Gen. 27: 42-45), which were occasioned by his artifice against Esau,^ and particularly in the sorrows after- wards prepared for him by his sons, w^hen he who himself had preached deception must himself in a like manner be deceived. The covenant promise given to

1 Delltzsch: Jacob received the four-fold blessing of the first- born; 1) The possession of the land of Canaan under the divine benediction (Gen. 27; 27, 28); 2) the subjection of nations (27: 29 a); 3) the primacy over his brothers (27: 29 b); 4) the highest position in redemptive history,— so that blessings and curses are conditioned by the attitude which men take to him. (Messianic Prophecies 1891, p. 48).

THE TWELVE PATRIARCHS. 51

him at the beginning of his journey to Mesopotamia, in the theophany at Bethel, in order to strengthen him for the years of exile (Gen. 28: 10-15), is con- firmed at the same place on his return (Gen. 35: 9- 15), after he had gained for himself and his race in the night-long wrestling at Jabbok, which forms the turning-point of his life, the new and holy name of Israel, characteristic of his divine calling (Gen 32: 24 -28). It is common, especially in the practical use of this latter passage, to limit one's self to seeing in Jacob's struggle a symbol of wrestling in pra^^er, which does not become wearied until it mns the bless- ing. But it is better to distinguish a tw^o-fold wrest- ling. Jacob's combat, when he first wrestles with bodily strength, is perhaps a picture of the perverseness of his former life, and his becoming lame is then meant to show that God does not permit Himself to be forced by natural strength. But then Jacob becomes victo- rious by the weapon of prayer (Hos. 12: 4, 5).

[Analysis: 1) Isaac; 2) the lesson of Jacob's life; 3) his sins visited upon him: 4) receives a four-fold blessing; 5) the the- ophany at Bethel ; 6) the name Israel : 7) the significance of Ja- cob's wrestling with the Angel.]

§ 25. The Twelve Patriarchs.

That there are twelve tribes is explained by the Old Testament from the number of the sons of Jacob. A long period of expectation in exile and slavery is first prescribed (Gen. 15: 13, 14) to Jacob's descendants before they enter upon their possession of the land of Canaan. The completion of the divine decree is intro- duced by the providential history of Joseph. Jacob dies in Egypt after having predicted the future of the tribes descending from his sons, in his prophetic bless- ing (Gen. 49), which looks far beyond the time in w^hich his descendants continue strangers. The twelve

52 MOSAISM.

tribes are here portrayed, partly according to their geographical relationship, while at the same time Jacob's words rest on ethical and psychological con- siderations.* With regard to the theo/og/ca/ meaning of these sayings, it is taught by this blessing, that in the divine kingdom things do not occur in the way of nature, but according to divine choice. Neither he who should have taken the lead by right of birth, nor yet the father's darling, is called to stand at the head of the Kingdom of God.

Among the twelve Joseph is especially prominent, who is to become a mighty double tribe in his twx) sons Manasseh and Ephraim (Gen. 48: 5). It is Judah, on the other hand, who is especially chosen as the bearer of the promise.

[Analysis: 1) Why twelve tribes? 2) the history of Joseph; 3) the signiicance of Jacob's prophetic blessing; 4) Judah, the bearer of the promise.]

1 Herder: Jacob's mind ie strengthened from heaven to note the slumbering destiny in the soul of his sons, and to open this hidden book of their separate traits of character and action.

i

i

CHAPTER lY.

THE TIME OF MOSES AND JOSHUA.

§ 26. Condition of the People of Israel in Egypt.

At the close of the time of the Patriarchs, the biblic- al account passes silently over a long period, in which Israel gTows up into a people. The simple tribal life, such as we must suppose Israel's to have been in those centuries, really forms no history.

The Old Testament gives us some intimations of the condition of the people in Egypt. They seem, on the whole, to have kept to the pastoral life of their fathers in Goshen. As the Egyptians and Israelites hved together (Ex. 3: 22; 12: 33-36), the people could not have remained unaffected by the Egyptian culture, which was at that time already very far advanced, and it is a mistake to regard the Israelites at their Exodus fi'om Egypt as a rude race of no- mads, in whom we may not presuppose even the smallest beginning of culture. They appear in the Pentateuch as an unmanageable, but not as an uncul- tured people. The pohtical organization of the people had developed itself in a genealogical way, which cor- responds to the natural character of the Semites, who are characterized by strong family attachment. With regard to the religious condition of the nation, we find that among the mass of the people the remembrance of the God of their fathers, and of the promises given to them, had to be awakened. The purer worship of God which we find among the patriarchs had been

54 MO^AISM.

displaced by idol-worship,, as may be concluded partly from express testimony (Josh. 24: 14; Ezek. 20: 7-9; 23: 8, 19), and partly from the idol-worship to which the people gave themselves during their wandering in the wilderness (the worship of the calf at Sinai, Ex. 32; the service of the he-goats. Lev. 17: 7; the ser- vice of the fire-god Moloch, Lev. 18: 21; 20: 2). There is no ground whatever for the view that the Israelitish monotheism was developed from a lower stage of natural religion.

[Analysis: 1) Israel grows up into a nation in Egypt; 2) the Israelites were not an uncultured people; 3) their religious con- dition ; 4) addicted to idol-worship.]

§ 27. The Course of Deliverance from Egypt.

The deliverance from Egypt is related in the book of Exodus. The divine instrument for this was Moses. AVhat Moses failed to do when trying in his OAvn might, he w^as to accomplish forty years after as an instru- ment in God's hand. The ten plagues which are sent on the Egyptians (Ex. 7-12, compared with Ps. 78: 43 -51; 106: 21, 22) are mostly connected ^^-ith natural events and conditions which frequently recur in Egypt. The order of their succession stands in close connec- tion with the natural course of the Egyptian year. But partly the severity of the plagues, and partly their connection with the word of Moses (Ex. 8: 5, 6), make them signs of Jehovah's power. The plagues rise from step to step until, after the tenth plague (the kilhng of the first-born of the Egyptians, which takes place the same night as the substitution of the Pass- over in Israel), the Egyptians, full of fear, drive the people from the land. ^ Because the people are not

1 The passages in Ex. .3: 21, 22; 11: 2, 3; 12: 35, 36, have been celebrated on account of misinterpretation and njistranslation. No robbery is here implied, but a simple taking away. The Revised

THE EDUCATIONAL AIM. 55

yet matured for war with the nations of Canaan,

Moses does not lead them to Canaan by the nearest

road, but chooses the round-about way through the

wilderness of Sinai. Their faith was tested at the

passage of the Red Sea (Ex. 14). *

[Analysis: 1) Moses, the deliverer of Israel ; 2) the ten plagues; 3) the Passover; 4) the length of Israel's sojourn.]

§ 28. The Educational Aim of the March through the Wilderness. The Covenant of the Law established.

The people, scarcely escaped from the rod of correc- tion, from the flesh-pots and idols of Egypt, must be educated, sifted, and purified for their calling; and this educational aim is secured by the march through the wilderness, where the people are thrown entirely on their God, where they become aware of their need of help through want and privation, and are to be exercised in obedience and trust; and to prove at the same time, in the experience of the divine leading and help, what they have in their God (Deut. 8: 2—5, 14 — 18). In Hos. 2: 16, the future restoration of Israel

English Version translates correctly. The sense of the passages is, that the Egyptians are glad to get rid of the Israelites at this price, no that we have here an act of remuneration, that the chil- dren of Israel might receive at least some compensation for all their labor and suffering.

1 A difficult question here arises, whether we are to make the duration of the sojourn in Egypt from the entrance of Jacob into Egypt 215 years, or 430 years. The Hebrew text in Ex. 12 ; 40, 41 compared with Gen. 15: 13 seems to make the duration 430 years, while St. Paul in Gal. 3: 17 favors the shorter period, which appears to be the true solution. Not only Helenistic tra- dition, butr also Palestinian, testifies that the sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt lasted 215 years. Much may be said on both sides, and the best critics are divided on this question. Egyp- tian history can not aid us in the solution on account of the ex- treme uncertainty of its chronology, and to this day Egyptolo- gists are not agreed as to the date of the 18th dynasty within two centuries (specialists giving dates ranging from 1703 B. C. to 1520 B. C), nor as to its duration within a century (Brugsch assigns to it 300 years; Mariette, 241; Bunsen, 221; Wilkinson, 196).

56 MOSAISM.

is represented as a new guidance through the Tvdlder-

ness. In the third month (Ex. 19: 1), on the first of

the month, the people reached Sinai, where Jehovah,

as the Holy One, founds the theocracy and enters on

His Kingship. Then follows the promulgation of the

fundamental law by which Jehovah binds Israel's

race to a holy constitution. By the covenant offering

(Ex. 24), the entrance of the people into communion

with the Holy God is sealed. With regard to grace

and judgment, Israel is from this time forward the

privileged people of God.

[Analysis: 1) Israel must be purified; 2) significance of their march through the wilderness; 3) the giving of the law; 4) the sig- nificance of the covenant offering.]

§ 29. The First Breach of the Covenant. Order of the Camp. Departure from Sinai. Sentence on the People.

The people soon break the covenant by falling into idolatry in the absence of Moses (Ex. 32: 1-6). Moses executes judgment on the idolaters, and on this occasion the tribe of Levi obtains its consecra- tion (Ex. 32: 26-29). One of the most beautiful sec- tions of the Pentateuch, in which Moses appears in all his greatness, is the story of his offering himself as anathema, if God will only forgive the people,-a thought which has been uttered by only one other than Moses, namely Paul (Rom. 9: 3).* During the stay at Sinai, which was for about a year, the holy tabernacle is set up and dedicated, the ordinances of worship are regulated, and a number of the laws are given. 2 Finally, the order of encampment is fixed,

1 In Genesis we have a mediatorial intervention, when Abra- ham wishes to intervene lor Sodom and Gomorrah; but more re- markable is the intervention ol Moses, who proposes to be blotted out of the book of Life.

2 According to the negative Higher Critics the tabernacle is a pure fiction of the post-exilic period, a false position which we cannot here discuss.

THE WANDERING DURING THIRTY SEVEN YEARS. 57

by which the relation of Jehovah to the people as

His army, and at the same time their relation to each

other, are distinctly expressed (Num. 2 and 3).

In the second year, on the twentieth of the month,

the removal from Sinai takes place. They succeed,

under repeated outbreaks of their stiffneckedness and

chastisements suffered on this account, in reaching

Kadesh-Barnea, the southern boundary of Canaan.

From this point Moses causes the land to be searched

by twelve spies. The accounts which they bring back

raise a general insurrection. A wandering of forty

years long in the mlderness is decreed against the

people, during which time the whole body of men who

were capable of war is to be swept away, except

Joshua and Caleb, who had no share in the offense

(Num. 14). Hence the history of the march through

the wilderness is treated as a type of warning for all

times (Ps. 78; 1 Cor. 10: 1-12; Heb. 3: 7-11).

Analysis: 1) The first breach of the covenant; 2) the tribe of Levi obtains its consecration ; 3) Moses as mediator; 4) the erec- tion of the tabernacle; 5) the order of the camp; 6) march from Smai; 7) the twelve spies; 8) the rebellion ; 9) the punishment; 10) the march a type oi warning for all time.]

§ 30. The Wandering during Thirty-seven Years in the

Wilderness, and the Events up to the Occupation of the Land

on the east side of Jordan.

The history of the Pentateuch passes over the fol- lowing thirty-seven years almost wholly in silence. Ac- cording to Deut. 1: 46, a long stay of the people in Kadesh must be presupposed. The seventeen places of encampment which are mentioned in Num. 33: 19 -36 between Rithmah and Kadesh are those at which the Israelites pitched their camps during the thirty-seven years of Avandering in the wilderness. In the first month of the fortieth year, the people are

58 MOSAISM.

again in Kadesh-Barnea. The new-grown race shows the same stubbornness as the earlier one ; they con- tend with Moses and Aaron ; and as at this time even the faith of these two wavers, to them also entrance into the land of rest is denied (Num. 20: 10-12). ^ A new outbreak of the people's stubbornness draws upon them another chastisement. The brazen saraph (a fiery serpent) which was suspended, is a symbol of the doing away of evil through the power and grace of God (Num. 21: 4-9). To this the typical use in John 3: 14 attaches itself. Then follow, in the land on the east side of the Jordan, successful combats, as a testi- mony of Jehovah's faithfulness and a pledge of future victory. Especially interesting is the history of Balaam and Balak (Num. 22: 1-24: 25). It is in this connection that the well-known prophetic pas- sage concerning the star and sceptre arising out of Is- rael, occurs (Num. 24: 17-19). ^ The new numbering of the people, which was made in the plains of Moab (Num. 26), shows the new-gro^^^l race to be numer- ically almost the same as before (601,730 men fit for war, against 603,550).

[Analysis: 1) The 37 years of wandering; 2) the people arrive again at Kadesh-Barnea; 3) guilty of stubbornness; 4) the sin of Moses and Aaron ; 5) the significance of the brazen serpent; 6) the history of Balaam: 7) the famous prophecy, Num. 24: 17 -19.]

§ 31. Deuteronomy. Death of Moses. His position among the Organs of Revelation.

The people's wandering is completed, and Moses is to place the staff of leadership in Joshua's hands. The

1 The lesson of the narrative is, that unbroken obedience was demanded by God from his chosen instruments, and that they were thus punished as a warning to the people.

2 The oracles of Balaam are divided into four sections, which unroll the future history of the kingdom of God in its relation to the kingdoms of the world.

DEUTERONOMY. 59

last testament of the departing leader to Ws people is given in Deuteronomy . This, although one of the most disputed books in the Old Testament, is one of the most beautiful.^ When Moses has finished blessing his people, he mounts to the top of Pisgah, in order to cast yet one look on the longed-for land, and appears no more on earth. His end is related in a mysterious way, but is indicated by the same expressions as the common end of man's life (Deut. 34: 5, 7; compared with Dent. 32: 50). ^

The position of Moses as divinely ordained to exer- cise all the powers of the theocracy, is a unique one, which did not descend to Joshua, who had only to execute inherited commands, and administer a law already given. Joshua is simply a leader, and has no other theocratic power.

[Analysis: 1) The last will of Moses given in Deuteronomy; 2) this beautiful book one of the most disputed; 3) the mysterious death of Moses ; 4) his position a unique one.]

1 The view of some modern critics, that the finding of the book of the law at the repairing of the temple under Josiah, in the year 624 B. c. (2 Kings 22), was-in truth the publication of Deuteron- omy, which was only written a short time before, is contrary to the fact that even the oldest prophets presuppose Deuteronomy, its legislative provisions, and also its speeches. But the examin- ation of the critical question of Deuteronomy, must be left to Old Testament Introduction.

2 There are two men in the 0. T. of whom it is not said that they died,— Enoch and Elijah. The Jewish legends sought to give Moses a place beside these two persons. The position of the New Testament to the death of Moses is peculiar. While Heb. 11: 40 says of the Old Covenant fathers, "that apart from us they should not be made perfect," making their perfection dependent on the completion of the New Testament work of redemption, — the New Testament history of the transfiguration, where Moses ap- pears with Elijah, Matt. 17: 3; Luke 9: 30, 31, presupposes Moses as perfected for the heavenly life. If justice is done to all the passages, we must say with Stier: "A wonderful exception is made with the bodies of these two from the common lot of death ; although the lawgiver actually died on account of sin, and the prophet was already more nearly raised to the victory over death" (Oehler).

^0 M0SAI8M.

§ 32. Occupation of Canaan. Extermination of the Canaanites.

The passage of Jordan ensued in a miraculous way, as a pledge to the people that the same mighty God who was ^vith. Moses would reveal himself also under the new leader (Josh. 4: 14, 22-24), and therefore this event is expressly placed side by side with the march through the Red Sea (Josh. 4: 23; Ps. 114: 3, 5). The key to the land was won by the conquest of Jericho (Josh. 6). The cherem (ban, devotion as a curse), enjoined in Deut. 7: 2; 20: 16-18, was execut- ed on a number of Canaanitish towns. The Old Tes- tament knows no other ground for the assignment of the land to Israel than the free grace of Jehovah, to whom it belonged ; and no other ground for the blot- ting out of the Canaanite tribes than the divine jus- tice which, after these tribes have filled up the measure of their sins in unnatural abominations (Deut. 12: 31), breaks in at last in vengeance, after long waiting. But Israel is threatened with exactly the same judg- ment (Deut. 8: 19, 20; Josh. 23: 15, 16) if it become guilty of the sins of the tribes on whom it executes the divine judgment with the sword. ^

[Analysis : 1 ) The miraculous passage of the Jordan ; 2) the con- quest of Jericho ; 3) the Cherem ; 4) the reason Canaan vvaB given to Israel; 5) the reason assigned for the extermination of the Canaanites.]

§ 33. Division of the Land. Character of the Promised Land. Israel at the Close of this Period.

In the seventh year after their entrance (Josh. 14: 10), the Israelites began the division of the land, al- though it was not yet in all parts completely van-

1 The extermination of the Canaanites has been defended in many cases on very doubtful grounds. The view presented above is alone in accordance with the Old Testament. It is quite un- necessary to add any artificial apologetical considerations.

DIVISION OF THE LAND. 61

quished (Josh. 13: 2-6). Eleazar the priest, and Joshua, with the chiefs of the tribes, managed the business of division. ^ The division of the land was carried out so that not merely the limits of the tribal territories were fixed, but inside these also the districts of the families. Thus the life of tribe and family re- mained the basis of civil society. The separation from the other peoples commanded in the law (see especially Lev. 20: 24, 26) was made easier by the se- cluded position of the land, which was enclosed on the south and east by great wildernesses, on the north by the high mountains of Lebanon, and which even on the west was unfavorably situated for maritime inter- course. On the other hand, by the situation of the land in the midst of the cultivated nations which figure in ancient history, as well as by means of the great highways of the old Avorld which led past its bor- ders, the future theocratic calling of the people was made possible. A first consequence of the position of Israel in the midst of nations was, that it courted the powers of the world, and was chastised by all, so that all became instruments of judgment on Israel. But on the other side, it was this central position which made this land fit for the starting-point of the religion of the world.

Two parts of the promise given to the patriarchs were fulfilled — the entrance of Israel into their rest in the promised land, and the increase of the people like the stars of heaven (Deut. 10: 22). But the dominion over the nations (Gen. 27: 29; 49: 10) was not yet ob- tained, the blessing of Abraham was not yet come to the heathen ; nay, a new cycle of history must arise in which centuries of contest for mere existence were ordained for the people.

[Analysis: 1) The division of the land; 2) its secluded position ; 3) and vet central ; 4) the promise given to the patriarchs part- ly fulfilled.]

1 The second part of the Book of Joshua is of immense value for Biblical Geography.

SECTION II.

THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

§ 34. Survey.

The general subject of the Doctrines and Ordinan- ces of Mosaism mil be discussed under the following heads :

1. The Doctrines of Mosaism.

1) The Mosaic doctrine of God.

2) The Mosaic doctrine of the Creation and Preservation of the world.

3) The Mosaic doctrine of Divine Providence.

4) The Mosaic doctrine of Revelation.

5) The Mosaic doctrine of the Nature of man.

6) The Mosaic doctrine of Death and the State after Death.

2. The Ordinances of Mosaism.

1) The Divine Election.

2) Man's Obligation.

3) Divine Retribution.

3. The Theocracy.

1) Theocratic Organization of the People .

2) The Theocratic Authority.

3) The Organization of the Family.

4. The Mosaic Public Worship.

1) The Place of Worship.

2) The Actions of Worship.

3) The Times of Worship.

CHAPTER V.

THE MOSAIC DOCTRINE OF GOD.

§ 35. Survey.

The most general designations of the Divine Being are El, Eloah, Elohim, El-Elyon, which names are also made use of outside of the religion of the Old Testa- ment. By these names Genesis gives only the general characteristics of the divine nature. It is a mistake to bring the theological divisions of a later period into Biblical Theology, and to treat God's attributes ac- cording to a preconceived scheme. Biblical Theology traces the religion of revelation in its rise and de- velopment, and finds for the definition of the idea of God a gradually advancing series of statements con- cerning the divine essence. But in these stages the idea of God is so unfolded that the higher stages do nqt destroy the lower, but embrace them.

The divine name El-Shaddai is the first that leads into the sphere of revelation, but the divine name which properly belongs to the Old Testament revela- tion is Yahwe, Jehovah.

Analysis: 1) The most general names of God; 2) there is a progress in revelation ; 3) El-Shaddai ; 4) Jehovah.]

§ 36. The Names El, Eloah, Elohim, El-Elyon.

1) El is the oldest Semitic name of God.^ As a name

of the true God, it is not frequent in the prose of tlie

1 Schultz: The 0. T. nowhere felt the need of proving the ex- istence of God. . . The very existence of the religion of Israel was, in fact, a proof of it. . . It could no more wish to prove the exist- ence of God than an ordinary man feels the need of proving that he himself exists (vol. 2, pp. 100, 101).

64 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAlSM.

Old Testament. It hardly ever appears except vdth. the article, or in connection mth a folio wing genitive, or an attribute annexed in some other way. Its original sense is "the pow^erful, the strong." The name £/ also appears in a number of the oldest names of men (Gen. 4: 18, Mehuja-el, Methusha-el) .

2) E/oah, the singular of Elohim, occurs in the Old Testament almost exclusively in poetical language, ^^ith the exception of the later books composed under Aramaic influence. It originally expresses the impres- sion made by powder. Eloah is, according to this, the power that awakens terror. That the natural man finds himself, when confronted by the Divinity, chiefly moved by a feeling of fear, is expressed in this designation of God.

3) The most common designation of the Divine Be- ing in the Old Testament is Elohim, the plural of Eloah. This plural form is peculiar to the Old Testament, and it appears as a name of God only in old Hebrew, and in none of the other Semitic languages. The meaning of the j^lural is not numerical, either in the sense in which some older theologians understand it, W' ho seek the mystery of the Trinity in the name ; ^ or in the sense that the expression had originally a pol- ytheisiic meaning, and only at a later period acquired a singular sense ; or that originally the plural indi- cated the one God together with the angels ; but it is much better to explain Elohim, as the quantitative plu- ral, which is used to denote unlimited greatness. The plural signifies the infinite fulness of the might and power which lies in the Divine Being, and thus passes over into the intensive plural, as Delitzsch has named

1 But even this view has some truth at its foundation, since the plural form, iudicating the inexhaustible fulness of the Divin- ity, serves to combat the most daring enemy of the doctrine of the Trinity— abstract monotheism.

THE NAMES EL, ELOAH, ELOHIM, EL-ELYON. 65

it.^ The plural contained in Adonai is to be explained in the same way ; indeed, this plural of majesty has also passed to other titles of God. Elohim remains all through the Old Testament the generalname of God; and is used with special emphasis in the Elohistic Psalms.

As the name of the irue God, Elohim is regularly joined with the singular. The exceptions are rare, and can be explained from the context of the passages.

Elohim is God in his omnipotence, and as such He is the God of the Gentiles also. He is designated Elohim as the one who is in the highest degree to be feared and reverenced, as absolute majesty and power.

4) The divine name El-Elyon (God Most High) is also

used outside of the sphere of revelation. It occurs in

the history of Melchizedek (Gen. 14: 18), and it is

characteristic that it appears in the mouth of the

king of Babylon (Isa. 14: 14), probably to designate

Bel.

[Analysis: 1) The meamng of El; 2) the 0. T. takes the existence oi God for granted; 3) the meaning of Eloah; 4) the significance oi the plural form Elohim; 5) the definition of Schultz ; 6) the significance of Elohim; 7) oi El-Elyon.]

1 Schultz: It is one of those plural forms by no means rare in the case of words denoting power and majesty, which help to in- crease the significance of the word, and to express the fulness of power and majesty which is exclusively connected with unity of person. Probably the significance of the word does not depend directly on the idea of the strength, but on the notion of that

which is terrible, majestic, and adorable When the God ot

Israel is called Elohim, He is thereby simply described as Deity, as possessor of a nature which is absolutely sublime, and to which obedience and adoration are due from mortals (vol. 2, pp. 126, 127).

66 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM

§ 37. El-Shaddai.

This name characterizes God as revealing Himself in

I Mis mights Delitzsch on Gen. 17: 1 forcibly says:

'^Elohim is the God who creates nature so that it is,

and supports it so that it continues ; El-Shaddai, the

God who compels nature to do what is contrary to

itself, and subdues it to bow and minister to grace."

But as soon as the name Jehovah unfolds its meaning,

the name El-Shaddai falls back on the one hand into

the list of the more general names of God.

[Analysis: 1) The meaning of El-Shaddai : 2) in what it differs from Elohim.]

§ 38. Pronunciation and Grammatical Explanation of the Name Jehovah. «

The word Jehovah in the Masoretic text of the Old Testament has the vowel pointing of Adonai.^ How old the dread of uttering the name is, cannot be ac- curately fixed. The Jews maintain that the knowledge of the true pronunciation has been entirely lost since the destruction of the temple. Ex. 3: 13—15 is the decisive passage for the pronunciation and gram- matical explanation of the name. We must read either J ah w eh or Jahwah. The first form is more probable, and we must regard the word as a noun

1 Schultz: This word is meant to denote God as the absolutely- mighty one whom no one can withstand, so that his followers may fearlessly and confidently trust in him, and build their faith upon him (vol. 2, p. 180).

2 SeeDalman: Studien zur biblischen Theologie, — der Gottesname Adonai und seine Geschichte. Berlin 1889.

3 Schultz: The history of the pronunciation of this word is singularly obscure. . , . The name "Jahve" was regarded by the later age as a secret name of miraculous virtue, and as too holy to be pronounced. . , . The growth of this awe, based perhaps on Lev. 24: 11, 16, can still be traced in the old Rabbinic literature. . . Even tradition throws little light on the original pronunciation (vol. 2, pp. 131, 132).

THE SIGNIFICATION OF THE NAME JEHOVAH. 67

formed from the third person of the imperfect of

haw ah, the older form of hay ah (he was).^

[Analysis: 1) Pronunciation of the name Jehovah; 2) gram- matical explanation] .

§ 39. The Signification of the Name Jehovah.

The name signifies He who is, according to Ex. 3: 14; more particularly, He who is what He is. God is Jahweh in as far as he has entered into an historical relation to mankind, and in particular to the chosen people, Israel.

1) The name carries us into the sphere of divine freedom. It expresses quite generally the absolute independence of God in His dominion.

2) The name further conveys the idea of the ab- solute//w/wtffa6/7/Y/ of God (Mai. 3: 6), and implies the invariable faithfulness of God (Dent. 7: 9; Isa. 26: 4),

[Analysis: 1) Literal signification of Jahweh; 2) the name more particularly expresses two ideas.]

§ 40. Age and Origin of the Name Jehovah.

Every attempt to derive the name from heathenism rests on arbitrary h^ypotheses. The more exact de- termination of the Old Testament origin of the name, depends on the explanation of the passage in Ex. 6: 3. We are not to explain this as if the name Jehovah had been entirely unknown to the patriarchs, and that we have here the first revelation of the name; but rather in this sense, that the name Jehovah had not

1 Schultz: xiccordingto Hebrew etymology the word must un- doubtedly be connected with hayah in its older form hawah. . . But the view of Schrader and Lagarde appears to me still more suit- able. . . . They would refer it to a secondary conjugation and take the Hiphil as the original form. Then J ah ve would be "he who causes to be," the Creator; or if the signification being is only the weakened form of the stronger "living," then "the be- stower of life." . . . But even this view cannot be termed certain (vol. 2, pp. 133, 134).

68 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

been yet understood by the patriarchs, and that they had not had the fu// experience of that \Yhichlies in the name.^ The name, therefore, reaches back to prime- val antiquity, and Avas not first introduced by Moses. 2

[Analysis: 1) The name Jehovah not of heathen origin; 2) not entirely unknown to the patriarchs; 3) though its full meaning was not known to them; 4) the meaning of Ex. 6; 3; 5) five reasons to prove the pre-Mosaic origin ol the name.]

§ 41. Comparison of the Name Jehovah with Elohim and EL

In general, all universally cosmical action of God, going out toward the heathen as well as toward Is- rael in the creation and preservation of the world, is traced to £/ and Elohim ; to Jehovah, on the other hand, f is traced every divine act Avhich is connected with the theocratic revelation and guidance, and which bears on the heathen only in so far as their history stands in relation to the aim of the divine kingdom. This difference, however, from the nature of the case, is not strictly kept up everywhere in the Old Testament in the use of the names of God. But still it is plainly apparent that the Old Testament writers had a very definite consciousness of the indicated difference. ^

1 This would make the meaning of the passage correspond exactly with Ex. 3: 15, and be analogous to the passage Ex. 33: 19.

2 In favor of this view we may present the iollowing reasons: 1) The name occurs in some of the most ancient documents in- serted by Moses into the Book of Genesis; 2) the occurrence of prop- er names compounded with Jah in Pre-Mosaic genealogies (Azariah, 1 Chron. 2: 8; Abiah, 1 Chron. 2: 24; Ahijah. 1 Chron. 2:25; Joche- bed, the mother of Moses); 3) Abraham used it as an element in a name, Gen. 22: 14; 4) it is most improbable that Moses should bring to the people a revelation of the God of their fathersunder a name of God quite unknown to them; 5) even Schultz, an expounder of the negative critical theory, grants that "it is in itself more likely that such a name was not invented but simplv found by Moses" (vol. 2, p. 137).

3 It is well known that the first book of Psalms (Ps. 1—41) is Jehovlstic, and the second (Ps. 42—72), Elohistic.

/

ATTRIBUTES OF GOD. 69

Theophany in general is predicated of Jehovah, who, and not Elohim, holds intercourse with man in the manner of men. Hence it comes that anthropo- morphisms are almost always applied to Jehovah, and not to Elohim.

[Analysis: 1) God is Elohim as his power is displayed in the creation and preservation of the world; 2) .Fehovah as the Re- deeming God; 3) theophany is predicated of Jehovah.]

§ 42. Attributes of God which are derived immediately from the Idea of Jehovah.

1) Jehovah is an eternal God, the Everlasiing God, as Abraham addresses Him in Gen. 21: 33 (compare Dent. 32: 40). God's eternity is involved in His ab- solute independence, in virtue whereof God is not con- ditioned by anything which originates or decays in time, but is the first and the last (Isa. 44: 6; 48: 12). While God as Jehovah is the eternal, God's eternity is defined as the unchangeableness of His being, continuing throughout every change of time and thus it becomes the basis of human confidence. ^

2) In the word Jehovah is involved the idea that He is a living God (Gen. 16: 14; Deut. 5: 26). ^ He is acknowledged as the living God in the midst of the

Delitzsch: "While Elohim is the more especially appropriate name of the Creator, Jehovah designates more particularly the God of history, and indeed of the history of Kedemption, hence God the Redeemer. The combination of the two names denotes, according to Ps. 100: 3, the oneness of the supermundane God and the God of history, the oneness of God the Creator and the God of Israel, or the God of positive revelation!" (Comm. on Gen. 2: 4).

1 Schultz: In the 0. T. conception of God, nothing stands out from the first so strongly and unmistakably as the personality of the God of Israel .... The God of the 0. T. ]s thoroughly self-con- scious, independent of the world, free, personal. The writer of Ex. 3: 14 takes the very name of the covenant God, Jehovah, to mean that he is unchangeable self-existence, absolute personality (vol. 2, p. 103).

2 On Gen. 16; 13 see my Studies in Genesis.

70 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

conoTegation by his deeds of revelation (Josh. 3: 10), and by his words of revelation (Jer. 23: 36). As a liv- ing God he also enters with man into a relation of fel- lowship which IS experienced by him inwardly, especial- ly as a God who hears prayer, and hence the longing- of the godly for the Hving God (Ps. 42- 2; 84: 2).^

3) Jehovah is the Lorcf,~my Lord (Adonai). Accord- ing to the original meaning of Adonai (-^my Lord"), there lies in it, not simply the acknowledgment of the divine sovereignty in general, but also the con- sciousness of specially belonging to God, the con- sciousness of standing under his immediate guidance and protection. 2

[Analysis: 1) Jehovah is the eternal God; 2) the name implies His independence, 3) His unchangeableness; 4) His absolute per- sonality; 5) the idea of the living God; 6) the meaning of Adonai.]

§ 43. The Unity of God.

Monotheism forms one of the fundamental doc- trines of Mosaism. Jehovah is one (Deut. 6: 4).

L) Some have maintained that the unity of God was developed gradually from a polytheistic religion, but for this there is no e\ddence whatever. ^ Passages like Gen. 1: 27; 11: 7; 3: 22, cannot be cited in support of this view.

2) Others again maintain that the Mosaic Jehovah does not exclude the existence of other gods.

1 Schultz: He is the living God, the God of life, in whom life is present as a property, and that, too, an inalienable property (Deut. 5. 26; 32: 40; .Jer. 10; 10). (Vol. 2, p. 112).

2 Schultz: Adonai describes God as the Master to whom man stands in the relation ot a servant. Gen. 18: 27. (Vol. 2, p. 129).

3 The whole exhibition of the Divine Being in the first ten chapters of Genesis assumes most distinctly the universality of the idea of God; and even after revelation has restricted itself to one race, the divine training aims continually at awakening the consciousness of this universality (Gen. 28: 15, 16).

FORMAL DEFINITION OF THE IDEA OF GOD. 71

It cannot be disputed that many of the Israelites ve- garded Jehovah only as a god beside other gods of the people, but it is equally clear, however, that this view is always combated by the organs of revelation as a perversion of the idea of Jehovah. Judaism is certainly right in continually proclaiming the pas- sage Deut. 6: 4 as the most holy word, which includes the fundamental doctrine of monotheism. Of the two admissible explanations of this passage, a) ''Hear, 0 Israel: the Lord our God is one Lord," and b) ''the Lord our God, the Lord is one," the latter seems the more correct. This passage together with Deut. 4: 35 and 4: 39, affirms the unity of God in the strictest sense.

Another question has also been raised, whether the gods of the heathen did not exist according to the Old Testament, if not as gods, at least as living beings, perhg.ps as demons, or evil angels. It is highly prob- able t.hat in 1 Cor. 8: 4, 5; 10: 19, 20, Paul, when he used the word demons in speaking of the Greek gods, takes it from the lxx of Deut. 32: 17. According to Paul the idols whom the Gentiles worshiped are the demons or the evil angels, the servants and organs of Sa ban; and it is through them, probably, that the Devil has especial dominion over heathendom. ^

[Analysis: 1) Monotheism a fundamental doctrine of Mosaism; 2) the idea of God was universal ; 3) the unity of God was not gradually developed from a polytheistic religion; 4) the 0. T. de- cidedly excludes the idea that other gods rule side by side with Jehovah; 5) the testimony of Deut. 4: 35, 39; 6: 4; 6) the gods of the heathens are the evil angels.]

§ 44. Formal Definition of the Idea of God as the Holy One. God is Kacfosh, the floly One. In virtue of its inex- haustible signification, the divine holiness is one of

1 Schultz: In such passages as Deut. 32: 17 and Ps. 106: 37, the heathen gods and demons seem to merge into one another. Azazel is also an instance of the same kind (vol. 2, p. 275 note).

72 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

the most difficult terms in the Bible to define. The first declaration of the divine holiness is found in Moses' song of praise, Ex. 15: 11 (glorious in holi- ness).

When holiness is predicated of the covenant people and covenant ordinances, two things are implied : 1) being taken out of worldliness ; 2) being appropria- ted by God. Whenever this character of holiness per- tains to an3^thing, this never rests on a natural qual- ity. The idea of natural purity and impurity does not coincide with that of holiness and unholiness. The holiness of the creature always goes back to an act of the divine will. It is ahvays a state in which the creature is bound to God by the appointment of God himself.^

Where kadosh (holiness) is a designation of a divine attribute, there evidently lies in it primarily a negative element, by which it designates a state of apartness, God raising Himself up above others. ^ God's holi- ness is God's self-preservation, by virtue of which He remains like Himself in all relations which either are in Him or on which He enters in anyway, and neither gives up any part of His divinity nor accepts any- thing ungodly. Two things lie in the divine holiness, 1) that He stands in opposition to the world, and again, 2) that He removes this opposition by choos- ing in the world some w^hom He places in communion with Himself (Isa. 57: 15).

All demonstrations of the divine covenant of grace are the issues of the divine holiness.

[Analysis: 1) God is the Holy One; 2) two things are implied when the word holy is applied to man ; 3) its meaning when ap- plied to God; 4) two things lie in the divine holiness.]

1 Diestel : In the most exact sense of the word, nothing is holy in and lor itself till the will of Jehovah declares it to be His prop- erty (cited by Oehler).

» See Ex. 15: 11; Isa, 40; '^5; Ps. 99; 3-5; X S^m. 3: ?,

THE DIVINE HOLINESS. 73

§ 45. Fuller Definition of the Idea.

If, in order to come at the concrete side of the mat- ter, we proceed from the question, what is the mean- ing of God's sanctifying a people to Himself? — the answer is, that it relates to a restoration of a perfect life, both inwardly and outwardly. Now, if we argue from this to the meaning of the divine holiness, it may be defined concretely as an absolute perfection of life, but essentially in an ethical sense. It is true, how- ever, that the notions of divine holiness and glory are related. We may say with Oetinger, holiness is hid- den glory, and glory disclosed holiness.

On the whole, we may define the divine holiness as mainly separation from the impurity and sinfulness of the creature, or expressed positively, the clearness and purity of the divine nature, which excludes all com- munion with what is wicked. In this sense the sym- bolical designation of the divine holiness is, that God is light (Isa. 10: 17). The divine holiness, as a revealed attribute, is not an abstract power, but is the divine self-representation and self-testimony for the purpose of giving to the world a participation in the perfec- tion of the divine life.

Analysis: 1) The meaning of God's sanctifying a people to Him- self; 2) the meaning of divine holiness; 3) divine holiness and glory related ; 4) definition of divine holiness; 5) its symbolical designation; 6) its significance as a revealed attribute.]

§ 46. Characteristics connected with Divine Holiness. 1. Impossibility of Picturing God, Omnipresence, Spirituality.

1) Inasmuch as the divine holiness is the separate- ness of the Divine Being from all finiteness of the creature, it includes the impossibility of forming an image of the Divine Being. From Deut. 4: 15-19 we learn tha^t th© prohibition of representing God by any

74 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

figure or form is absolute. ^ Neither can any argu- ment contradictory to the utterances of the Old Tes- tament as to the idea of God be drawn from anthropo- morphisms,^ for no religion can dispense with such an- thropomorphic expressions w^hen it enters into the sphere of representative thought, and everything depends on making it sure that the literal applica- tion of such expressions shall be corrected by the whole conception of the idea of God.^

2) It is self-evident that the Pentateuch regards God, to whom the heaven and the heavens of heaven, the earth and all that is upon it, belong (Deut. 10: 14), as omnipresent, even when such express delinea- tions of omnipresence as in Ps. 139, are not found in the Pentateuch. Compare, however, such passages as Gen. 16: 13; 28: 15-17; 46: 4; etc. Beyond this, the Pentateuch has mainly to do with the special presence which God gives by living among His people, when He localizes His face, His name, His glory— the so-called Shekhina (see § 63).

3) The express declaration that God is spirit does not occur in the Old Testament, which is rather ac- customed to say that God has the spirit, and causes it to go out from Him ; by which, however, the Spirit is indicated as the element of God's life (Isa. 40: 13; Ps. 139: 7; Isa. 31: 3). The absolute personalitj^ of God is weightily expressed in the word "I am He" (Deut. 32: 39; Isa. 43: 10).

[Analysis: 1) It is impossible to form an image of God; 2) also directly forbidden ; 3) why anthropomorphisms are used; 4) God is regarded as omnipresent; 5) His spirituality ; 6) His person- ality.]

iSee also Ex. 20: 4; Deut. 5; 8.

2 Those expressions in the Scriptures in which parts of the hu- man body, or more generally the senses, are transferred to God.

3 Schultz: In such expressions the activity of the living God is simply defined after the manner of human acts. ...The 0. T. writers sought to produce, in no doubtful fashion, the conception of a living, personal, acting Go^. (Vol. 2, pp. 104, 105).

THE DIVINE RIGHTEOUSNESS. 75

§47. 2. The Divine Righteousness, Faithfulness, and Truth.

With the Divine hoHness in its ethical character are connected the attributes of divine righteousness, divine faithfulness and truth. These attributes are united in the main passage, Deut. 32: 4.

1) God is righteous. The Hebrew word for righteous (tsaddiq), expresses what is straight and right, in the sense that God in His government always does what is suitable; namely 1) what answers fully to His aim ; and 2) what answers to the constitution of the object of the divine action. Specially, but not ex- clusively, the sphere in which this righteousness man- ifests itself is the judicial activity of God.^

2) As in the idea of Jehovah, who is absolutely im- mutable, so also in the idea of the Holy One in virtue of its ethical meaning, the attribute of truth and faith- fulness is given (compare Isa.49: 7; Hos. 11: 9).^ In

Schultz: The first attribute of moral perfection is righteous- n es, that moral exactitude with which God applies the standard (which He has within Himself) of perfect motives, without fear, partiality, or selfishness, wherever His revelation finds expression. Tsaddiq describes God as the mighty Rock on which the moral or- der of the universe is founded, in which the pious may safely trust for defence against the mighty wicked (Ps. 7: 9, 17). Faith in God's righteousness the godly man must retain, in spite of all the apparent success of injustice (Jer. 12:1). It is the pledge that justice will triumph in the world (Isa. 42: 21; Ps. 119: 137).... Where the righteousness of God is celebrated, it is combined w.ith His "goodness," because he who is faithful to the covenant may hope for salvation equally from both (Ps. 33: 5; 35: 28; 40: 10; 145: 7). There is never any antagonism between the goodness of God and His righteousness. But God as the righteous one is of course also the Judge of the world, before whom wickedness meets its doom (Deut. 32: 4; Ps. 9: 4, 7, 8; 96; 13); the God who sanctifies Himself by righteousness, and gives expression to His righteousness by punishment (Isa. 5: 16; 10: 22). (Vol. 2, pp. 152, 153).

2 Schultz: Trustworthiness and truthfulness, together with righteousness, are the main elements of human honesty, and are the necessary foundation of confidence. Thus God is trustworthy, in the very highest sense. He shows Himself so when He swears by himself (Gen. 22: 16). His word which He. pledged to the fathers He redeemed in every act of His providence.... He is true (2 Sam. 7;

76 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

the Old Testament this attribute is specially empha- sized in referring to the the divine word of promise, and the agreement of the divine action there^dth. One of the chief passages in the Pentateuch is Num. 23: 19. (Compare 1 Sam. 15: 29; Ps. 36: 5).

[Analysis: 1) God is righteous; 2) meaning of tsaddiq ; 3) state- ment of Scliultz; 4) God is the righteous judge; 5) God is trust- worthy; 6) the faithfulness of God; 7) righteousness and faith- fulness explain each other.]

§ 48. 3. The Jealous God.

In the idea of divine holiness is included that God is a Jealous God (Ex. 34: 14; Deut. 6: 15). The divine zeal is the energy of the divine holiness. The divine zeal has a twofold form :

1) It turns itself avengingly against every viola- tion of the divine will. God's jealousy turns especial- ly against idolatry (Deut. 32: 21), and generally against all sin by which God's holy name is desecrat- ed. Thus the divine yea/of/s/ manifests itself as divine wrath. For the wrath of God is the most intense energy of the holy will of God, the zeal of His wound- ed love. On the connection of the two ideas, jealousy and wrath, compare Deut. 6: 15; 32: 21, 22; Ps. 78: 58, 59.

As wrath is a manifestation of divine holiness, the occasion of its outburst does not lie in a capricious divine humor or natural malignity, but wholly in the person smitten by it. If man denies and rejects the testimony of the holy God which Avas given to him, justice must be executed upon him in his resistance of

28); His words are pure (Ps. 12: 6); He hateth falsehood (Prov. 15: 26); what he says he really means. On this depend both the the law and the prophecies. References to God's fidelity and truth are uncommonly frequent all through the O. T. In many instan- ces righteousness and faithfulness are synonymous, or, at any rate, they explain each other (Ps. 36: 5, 6; 96: 13: 143: 1). (Vol. 2, pp. 156, 157).

THE JEALOUS GOD. 77

God's will, which alone is in the right, by his being reduced to his own nothingness. But the manifesta- tion of wrath also receives its measure from divine hohness, which measure is ordained by the divine aim of salvation, and hence it is not the sway of blind passion (Hos. 11: 9; Jer. 10: 24; and the parable in Isa. 28: 23-29).

2) Jehovah is Jealous not for Himself alone, but also for His holy people, so far as they are in a posi- tion of grace, or are taken into favor again by Him. From this side His jealousy is the zeal of love as an energetic vindication of the unmatched relation in which God has placed His people to Himself. The anthropopaihies^ of the Old Testament come for the most part under this heading.

[Analysis; 1) Divine jealousy is the energy of the divine holiness; 2) this jealousy manifests itself as divine wrath; 3) definition of the wrath of God; 4) the occasion of its manifestation; 5) receives its measure from divine holiness; 6) His jealousy is the zeal of love; 7) the meaning of the anthropopathies of the 0. T.; 8) do not express a change in the divine nature.]

1 Those declarations concerning God in whieh human emo- tions, and changes in these emotions, are attributed to God. These expressions refer to a change of the relation in which the divme holiness, which is in itself changeless, enters into with changeable man The Old Testament does not suppose that a change m the divine nature itself takes place. Compare 1 Sam 15: 29 with V. 35. Such anthropopathies serve to keep wakeful and strong the consciousness of the living, holy God (Oehler).

CHAPTER VI.

THE MOSAIC DOCTRINE OF THE CREATION AND PRESER- VATION OF THE WORLD.

§ 49. General Survey.

The existence of the world as absolutely due to the divine causality is presented in three propositions :

1) When reflection is directed to ihe existence of the world, both as to its beginning and as to its subsis- tence, we reach the doctrine of the Creation and Preser- vation of the world.

2) When we consider how the world is so, and not othermse, we get the doctrine of the aim of the world and of divine Providence, with which is connected the question of the relation of the divine causality to the wickedness and evii in the world.

3) For the realization of His aim, God enters vn a peculiar relation to the world; the means by which (}od brings about this His special relation to the world are exhibited in the doctrine of Revelation.

These three topics vill be fully discussed in the next three chapters.

§ 50. Creation by the Word.

The Mosaic doctrine of creation rests on two fun- damental thoughts: 1) that the production of the world proceeded from the Word; and 2) from the Spirit of God.^

1 Schultz: God is represented as connected with existence out- side of Himself by the concept of "the Spirit and the Word of God." ....His Word creates the world,— that is, God's inner world ot thought becomes through His will, the source of life outside oJ himself. (Vol. 2, p. 184).

THE DIVINE SPIRIT IN CREATION. 79

The form of the creation of the world is the speak- ing, or the Word of God ; this means that the world originated through a conscious, free, divine act. This ex- cludes 1) every theory of the origin of the world by emanation; and 2) the assumption of an eternal elementary matter independent of God.

The first verse of Genesis is not to be considered as a title, a summary statement of the contents of the chapter, but rather a declaration of the primordial creation of the matter of the universe.

The central idea is creation, and the Hebrew word bara here used, always means the production of some- thing new which has not had a previous existence.

It is clear that Mosaism places itself above all natural religions by the declaration, ''In the begin- ing God created the heaven and the earth."

[Analysis: 1) The Mosaic doctrine of Creation rests on two tacts; 2) the form of the creation; 3) this excludes certain the- ories of the orig:in of the world; 4) Gen. 1: 1 is not a superscrip- tion; 5) the meaning of bara; 6) the 0. T. religion not a natural religion.}

§ 51. The Divine Spirit in Creation.

Since the world is placed outside of God, it origin- ated and subsists only by the life imparted to it by His Spirit; thus it is not separated from Him, al- though distinct from Him.^

1 Schultz: The teaching of the narrative in Genesis may be summed up as follows:

"1. God and the world are distinct. The sum of Being outside God is an object upon which God acts; it exists therefore apart from God.

2. God and the world are not independent.... The laws of the world are an expression of the divine will. The earth brings forth at God's Word and command, obeying his will and fulfilling it bv her order. Between the order of nature and the will of the living God there is no antagonism.

3. ^ God and the world are not antagonistic. It places itself at God's command, so that He can make everything 'very good;' and He, on His part, rejoices over it and blesses the creatures on it" (Vol. 2, pp. 188, 189).

80 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

The life of the creature, according to the record of creation does not proceed from the chaotic mass; but life comes from God (Ps. 3G: 9). That the Spirit of God really acts in the creative word, and that it is itself endued with the power of life, is indicated by the expression in Ps. 33: 6, where the Spirit is character- ized as the Spirit of the divine mouth ; it lies also in Isa. 40: 13, that the Divine Spirit acting in the crea- tion is a consciously Avorking and intelligent power, as, according to Ps. 139: 7, the divine omnipresence in the world acts by means of the all penetrating Spirit of God. Creature life proceeds from God, but it does not flow from God ; it is imparted freely by God to the creature (Isa 42: 5). It is not a life which God lives in the creature, but a relatively independent life of the creature, derived from God.

[Analysis: 1) God and the world are distinct; 2) God and the world are not independent; 3) God and the world in the act of creation are not antagonistic; 4) life conies from God; 5) the Spirit acting in creation is a consciously working and intelligent power; 6) the life in the creature, though derived from God, is a relatively independent life.]

§ 52. On the Preservation of the World.

1) The preservation of the world is, on the one hand, distinguished in the Old Testament from its creation, inasmuch, as, according to Gen. 2: 2, the production of the classes of creatures has a conclu- sion, which is formed by the Sabbath of creation; while on the other hand, the agency of God in this preservation is represented as a continuous creation.^

2) The continuance of this system of the world is established at each moment by the divine omnipo- tence. The preservation of the world rests continually on

1 Schultz: In the growth of individual creatures, creation and preservation run into each other.. ..The development and contin- ued existence of the creature is dependent on the continuance of God's creative activity (Vol. 2, p. 189).

ON THE PRESERVATION OF THE WORLD. 81

the same foundation as the creation, on God's Word of command, which He continually sends forth (Ps. 147: 15-18); and it rests just as continually on the Divine Spirit, which He causes ever to go forth (Ps. 104: 29, 30). This last passage shows how the preservation of the creature can be looked at from the point of view of a continuous creation; and this thought, that a creative working of God goes on in the preservation of creation, is in general imprinted in various forms on the Old Testament phraseology (Ex. 4: 11; Isa. 42:5). The Psalm of creation (Ps. 104), by using participles in verse 2, characterizes the creative agen- cy of God as an agency which continues to work in the preservation of the world.

[Analysis: 1) Preservation may be regarded as a continuous creation; 2) it rests on God's Word of command; 3) the Psalm of creation.]

CHAPTEK VII.

THE MOSAIC DOCTRINE OF DIVINE PROVIDENCE.

§53. The Design of Creation, and its Realization through Providence.

That a divine plan is to be realized in the world, and that the divine creation is therefore a teleological act, is shown in the account of the creation. In all His creat- ing God approves the works of His hands ; but still the creating* God does not reach the goal of His crea- tion until He has set over against Him His inifige in man. From this last fact it is plain that th/,* self- revelation of God, the unveiling of His Being, is the final end of the creation of the world ; or to ex|j)ress it more generally, that the whole world serves tc / reveal the divine glory, and is thereby the object of divine joy (Ps. 104: 31).

But in mankind the aim of the creation of the world, the glorifying of God, was disturbed \')y sin. But in spite of the dominion of sin, the divine e^im in the world shall come to its realization (Num. 14; 21 ). The choosing of the race through which God's bless- ing shall come on all races of the earth (Gen. 12: 3; 18: 18), serves this divine aim.

It is clear that the Old Testament teaches a provi- dence which embraces everything, since it subjecil^s everything to the divine direction (Ps. 65: 2). The divine providence extends also to the animals (Ps. 104: 21, 27; Job 38: 41; Ps. 147: 9). No sphere of chance exists in the Old Testament. From Ex. 21:

RELATION OF THE DIVINE CAUSALITY TO EVIL. 83

13, we infer that even what men call accidental death is under God's direction. Even in dra^Ying lots "the lot is cast into the lap ; but the whole disposing there- of is of the Lord" (Prov. 16: 33).

[Analysis: 1) The divine creation is a teleological act; 2) the final aim is the self-revelation of God; 3) and the manifestation ot the divine glory; 4) this gloriiying of God was disturbed by sin; 5) but the divine aim shall be realized; 6) the choosing of Israel serves this aim.]

§ 54. Relation of the Divine Causality to Moral and Physical Evil.

Moral and physical evil were not originally in the world. The latter was penally ordained (Gen. 3: 17- 19) after the former had entered the world by the free a,ct of man, and from this time forward both form aiU element of the order of the world.

1) Physical evil in the Old Testament is regarded as punishment for sin, or divine judgment. In the Pen- tateuch it is taught that the evil in man's life is also 8. means of proving him, especially of proving his obedi- ence and his trust in God, and thus a means of purify- ing him. According to Deut. 8: 2, 3, the privations endured in the wilderness were meant to be a school of humility and faith, that the people might learn to trust to the power of the Almighty God.

2) But also, even in moral evil, in man's sin, the di- vine causality operates, and this it does in various ways.

Man's sin cannot thwart the divine purpose of salva- tion ; it must rather serve to the realization thereof (Gen. 45: 8; 50: 20).

The wickedness of some must serve to prove and ])urify others, that it may be known whether they are strong to stand against it (Deut. 13: 3).

But a divine causality works also in regard to the

84 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

sinner himself, and for various ends. God permits one who habitually walks in God's ways to fall into sin in order to try him, to reveal to him a hidden curse in his heart, and so to bring to its issue a merited judg- ment, and thus bring God's justice to light. Compare 2 Sam. 24 (the numbering of the people); 2 Chron. 32: 31.

On another, who internally cherishes sin within him, and wilfullj^ strives against God, the divine caus- ality acts by giving him up to sin, so that sinning be- comes necessary to this man, and he must glorify God by the judgment which he has incurred. This is the hardening of the heart of a man, so often spoken of in the Pentateuch, Ex. 4: 21; 7: 3 (Pharaoh); Deut. 2: 30 (Sihon); etc.

The expressions used to denote hardening of the heart cannot be referred to a simply negative relation to T^ickedness ; but still man's sin is not removed be- cause a positive divine agency rules in his hardening. Man can indeed do nothing that would not on the one side be God's work (Lam. 3: 37, 38), and yet he must acknowledge sin as his guilt (Lam. 3: 39). Isa. 45: 7 (a passage possibly directed against the dualism of the Persian religion) shows especially how the Monism of the Old Testament permitted nothing to be Avith- drawn from the divine causality.

[Analysis: 1) Physical evil is punishment for sin ; 2) its aim is to purify man; 3) the divine causality operates even in moral evil ; 4) sin is made subservient to the purpose of salvation ; 5) hardening of the heart.]

CHAPTER yill.

THE MOSAIC DOCTRINE OF REVELATION.

§ 55. Introductory Remarks and General View.

1) Although God has made Himself known in genera revelation (see § 6), He nevertheless makes* Himself knoA^Ti in a more special sense, in which He is pleased to enter into the limits of the sphere of the creature, in order to present Himself personally, and to give testimony of Himself to man. This side of the revela- tion of the Divine Being is characterized as the divine name, the divine presence and the divine glory.

2) The forms and vehicles in which this divine self- presentation and self- witness reaches man from without are 1) the voice, 2) the Malakh or Angel, 3) the Shekhina in the sanctuary, and 4) miracle. The divine self- witness enters the heart of man by means of the Spirit.

[Analysis: 1) Distinction between general and special revelation ; j) tour ways through which revelation reaches man from without: »i) the internal revelation.]

§ 56. The Revelation of the Divine Name. The true God can be named by man only so far as He reveals Himself to man and discloses to him His nature. God names Himself according to the relation in which He has placed Himself to man, and accord- ing to the attributes by which He wishes to be ac- knowledged, known and addressed by man. In short, God names Himself, not according to what He is for Himself, but according to what He i§ for mgn; and there.

86 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

fore every self-presentation of God in the world is ex- pressed by a corresponding name of God, as we have already seen (see § 36-39). In the New Testament stage, when the only begotten Son has revealed God's name to man (John 17: 6), it is God's good pleasure to be named the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, or, to express universall}^ the now completed relation of salvation, by the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (Matt. 28: 19).

The expression "name of God" is not merely a title, but at the same time the whole divine self-presenta- tion by which God in personal presence testifies of Himself — the whole side of the divine nature which is turned toward man. It designates every manifestation of the Divine Being which attaches to places, institutions, and facts, in virtue of which God gives His people a direct experience of Himself. Wherever God is known and experienced in personal presence, there His name is.

Accordingly the name of God is certainly not the ideal existence of God in the consciousness of the cre- ated spirit, but an objective existence, independent of man's subjectivity.

[Analysis: 1) We can only name God in so far as he reveals Him- self; 2) God names Himself in what He is for man; 3) His most glorious name given in theN. T.; 4) signification of "name of God;" 5) where His personal presence is manifested there is His name.]

§ 57. The Divine Countenance and the Divine Glory.

That by which God is present among His people is further styled the divine countenance (presence). Ex. 33: 14-16 is the main passage.

By the face of God is meant, in distinction from His ti'anscendent and infinite nature, His coming down into the sphere of the created, whereby He can be brought with-

THE DIVINE COUNTENANCE. 87

in the immediate know/edge of man. Here belongs Deut.

4: 37, where it is said that Jehovah brought Israel

out of Egypt by His countenance (with His presence) .

Only from this, too, is the full meaning of the high

priest's blessing rightly understood. Num. 6: 24-26.

Finally, for name and countenance the indefinite

expression, g/ory of Jehovah is used (Ex. 33: 18). ^ In

the same way, it is the glory of Jehovah through which

Jehovah appears to His people on Mount Sinai, under

cover of the cloud (Ex. 24: 16), and which is present

in the holy tabernacle (Ex. 40: 34).

[Analysis: 1) Meaning of the divine countenance; 2) of Num. 6: 24—26; 3) meaning of "the glory of Jehovah."]

§ 58. The Divine Voice as a Form of Revelation.

As divine speech is in general the form of divine working in the world, so the Word is the most general form of divine revelation. So far as this Word of God comes internally to the organs of revelation, it coin- cides with the revelation which is effected by the Spirit (compare § 65). But the Old Testament speci- fies also among its mediums of revelation the out- wardly audible voice; indeed, in Deut. 4: 12, special weight is laid upon this form of revelation.

With this was connected in the latter Jewish theol- ogy the doctrine of the Bath-Kol, or revelations by means of heavenly voices, such as Elijah received. The expression ^aM-ATo/ (daughter of the voice) means that the divine voice itself is not heard, but only its working, or else that Kol designates the heavenly

1 Schultz: What the religion of Israel denotes by this word is certainly, in the first instance, the actual presence of the God of light— God's revealed glory as it appears to his favored ones in all its grandeur and majesty (Ex. 33; 22; 24: 16). ...Generally the phrase denotes the special majesty of God's revealed Being, the perfect fulness of his Godhead, which the creature has to acknowl- edge, praise and glorify (Vol. 2, pp. 172, 173).

88 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

voice itself, and Baih-Kol its echo. This form of reve- lation appears in the New Testament in Matt. 3 : 17; 17: 5; John 12: 28; and very frequently in the Apo- calypse.

[Analysis: 1) Revelation is generally by means of the Word ; 2) mention is made of the audible voice; 3) the doctrine of the Bath-Kol; 4) this form of revelation appears in the New Testa- ment.]

§ 59. The Doctrine of the Angel of the Lord, of the Covenant, of the Countenance.* The Exegetical State of the Case.

In a more concrete form God manifests Himself in the Malakh (angel), generally called Malakh Jehovah. The principal passages are :

1) Gen. 16: 7-14, where the Malakh appears to Hagar.

2) Gen. 18: 1-33, where one of the three men (angels) is expressly distinguished as Jehovah (vv. 20, 26, etc.) from the tAVO others who are called angels (Gen. 19: 1), and are said (Gen. 19: 13) to be sent by Jehovah.

3) Gen. 22: 11, 12, where the Malakh Jehovah calls to Abraham from heaven as if he were God Himself.

4) Gen. 31: 11-13, where the Malakh Jehovah calls himself "the God of Bethel."

5) Gen. 32: 29-31, where the man (angel) with which Jacob A\Testles is designated as an appearance of God.

6) Gen. 48: 15, 16, where God is identified with the Malakh.

7) Ex. 3: 2, and the follo^dng narrative, where the Malakh Jehovah is identified with Jehovah and Elohim.

1 The doctrine of the Angel of the Lord is one of the most import- ant and difficult points in the Old Testament, on which, even as early as the Church Fathers, there were various views, and about which, to this day, no agreement has been reached. The litera- ture is enormously rich.

THE ANGEL OF THE LORD. 89

8) in Ex. 13: 21 it is said that Jehovah went before Israel; on the other hand in Ex. 14: 19 we read that "^ it was the Malakh.

9) Josh. 5: 14, 15; 6: 2, where the prince of the army of Jehovah appears to Joshua.

§ 60. The Different Interpretations.

The following main views are to be distinguished :

1) The view taken in the early ages of the church by Augustine, Jerome, and Gregory the Great; in our day with special modifications by Hofmann, from whom it has been adopted by Kurtz and Delitzsch (though Delitzsch holds the view with peculiar indeci- sion)—that an angel is to be understood by the Ma- lakh, a finiie spirit under subjection to God, which ex- ecutes the divine command in the cases mentioned.

But this first view occurs in two forms, a) Some hold that the Malakh is an angel specially deputed by God from among the number of Malakhim for each separate occasion, and that we have no means of deciding whether he is always the same angel or not ; b) others maintain (principally Hofmann) that it is one and the same angel through whom God stands in relation to the people of revelation from the beginning to the end of the Old Testament— the special angel who rules in the commonwealth and history of this people, the archangel Michael of the book of Daniel.

2) The second principal view is that the Malakh of Jehovah is a self -representation of Jehovah entering into the sphere of the creature, and is one in essence with Je- hovah.^

1 Schultz: In all the passages where it is stated that the angel of God appeared and spoke, it is also assumed, without further ex- planation, that the personal covenant God Himself appeared and spoke ...When God wishes to communicate His will for the pur- pose of making men conscious of it, He requires the revealing form

y

90 THE DOCTRINE^ OB" MOSAISM.

There are different forms of this view, but the most important is the one ^Yhich regards the Malakh as the Logos, the second person of the Godhead in the sense of tlie Christian doctrine of tlie Trinity. This is the view of the most of the Greek Fathers, of Justin, Irenaeus? Tertullian, Cyprian, and Eusebius. At a later period this was the view of the Lutheran theologians ; and in our own day has been defended by Hengstenberg and others.

Oehler maintains that the doctrine of the Malakh in the Old Testament oscillates in a pecuhar manner between its conception of the angel, as a form and as a being, so that it seems impossible to bring the mat- ter to a definite intelligible expression. He states, however, that the case has a different aspect from the standpoint of the New Testament. From this (see especially 1 Cor. 10: 4) it is the Logos, the Son of God through whom revelations to Israel are made, and who therefore works in the Malakh. But nowhere in the New Testament is the Son of God so identified with the Malakh as if His incarnation had been pre- ceded by His permanently becoming an angel. The Logos, according to the New Testament view, works also in the other forms of revelation in the Old Cove- nant and in just the same Avay as in the form of the Malakh.

In the later Jemsh theology, the doctrine of the

Metathron (sharer of the throne),— the Prince of the

to be a person who thinks and speaks. He reveals Himself through "angels.". ...But the Angel of God is he in whom God makes known to man, for special ends, His whole being and will. The form of manifestation here also is a personal being, who is not God. But what this being is, is of absolutely no consequence ...There is however,undoubtedly in the angel of God something of that which Christian theology means to express by the doctrine of the Logos. Only the self-revealing life of God is not yet human, nor does it yet exist as a permanent personal life (Vol. 2, pp. 220—223).

OTHER POINTS OF THE MOSAIC ANGELOLOQY. ^1

countenance, who is the revealer of God, the mediator

between God and the creature,— is developed out of

the Old Testament doctrine of the Angel of the Lord.

[Analysis: 1) Some understand by the Malakh a finite, created angel; 2) two forms of this view ; 3) others regard the Malakh a self-representation of Jehovah ; 4) the view held by Schultz; 5) the Malakh may be regarded as a manifestation of the second person of the Trinity; 6) Oehler's view; 7) the New Testament interpretation.]

§ 61. Other Points of the Mosaic Angelology.

Even in the Pentateuch, though there comparative- ly seldom, other angels of God appear side by side with the^Malakh. Nothing is said about their crea- tion ; nor are they mentioned in the account of the creation of the earth, and its completion in man, al- though it is implied in Gen. 2: 1. On the contrary Job 38: 7 presupposes the existence of the angels when the earth was created. Gen. 6: 1-4 would be entirely without a parallel, not only in the Penta- teuch, but in the whole Old Testament, if higher spirits are to be understood by the Sons of God. The question is : Are the Sons of God, Sethites, or, are they higher spirits ? and is a fall of the angels here spoken of ? At present the hypothesis of the fall of the angels is the most widely spread (so Hofmann, Kurtz, Delitzsch), a view which originally sprang from the book of Enoch. But Oehler (with the Ke- formers, and in more modern times Hengstenberg, Keil, and others), rightly refers the expression "sons of God" to men, to the pious race descended from Seth, as the name "Sons of God" is used in Deut. 14: 1; 32: 5; Hos. 1: 10; Ps. 73: 15. i

In comparison with the later books of the Old Tes-

1 On this view the passage refers to the marriage of Seth's descendants with Cainitic women, by which means the corrup- tion of Cain's race spread among the Sethites.

92 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

tament, the angelology of the Pentateuch is but little

developed.

[Analysis: 1) The creation of angels implied in Gen. 2: 1; 2) created before the earth ; 3) meaning of Gen. 6: 1—4; 4) angelol- ogy but little developed in the Pentateuch.]

§ 62.TheShekhina.

The continuous localization of the divine presence was made in the Shekhina, {shakhan, he dwelt, resided), that is, the dwelling of God, distinguished from pass- ing theophanies by virtue of its countenance. The first abode of the divine Shekhina, according to the Old Testament, was Eden, as appears from the whole description in Gen. 2 and 3, but in particular from the mention of the cherubim (Gen. 3: 24), which Avere bearers of the divine presence. The book of Genesis seems to suggest the idea that the dwelling place of the glory and the countenance of God continued there upon the earth until the judgment of the flood came on the world. Then after the flood God revealed Himself for the first time from heaven. At a later time, God's dwelling among His people was in the sanctuary (Ex. 40: 34-38). Here now is God's coun- tenance (Ex. 23: 17; Deut. 31: 11; Ps. 42: 2; 63: 3). From passages such as Lev. 9: 24; 10: 2, the Shekhina shows its reality in the sanctuary by means of acts of power which go out from it. The Shekhina of God on earth corresponds to His dwelling in heaven (1 Kings 8: 30, 39, 49), which, like that in the sanctuary, is definitely distinguished from the pres- ence of God, which embraces the whole universe (1 Kings 8: 27).

According to this presentation, God's dwelling is outside the human subject. The idea of the divine habitation is not applied to the sending of the divine

THB DOCTRINE OT MIRACLE. 03

Spirit into the heart of man. The New Testament (John 1: 14) is the first to place the divine Shekhina in a human person, in the Logos become flesh, and then it speaks of God's making His abode with be- Hevers (John 14: 23). Still the proper Shekhina of God in heaven appears again in the Apocalypse (Rev. 7: 15), and the aim of the Divine Kingdom is said to be the dwelling of God on the glorified earth (Rev. 21: 3). See also Jer. 3: 16-18.

[Analysis: 1) Meaning of Shekhina; 2) God's first dwelling- place was Eden ; 3) later on in the sanctuary; 4) the teaching of the New Testament ; 5) of Revelation.]

§63. The Doctrine of Miracle. Its Appearance in History and Various Names.

By miracles, the Old Testament understands mani- festations of the divine power in the objective world, both in nature and history. 1 It is characteristic of the course of Old Testament revelation, that no real miracle — wrought by man's agency— is related in the time of the pafriarchs. Moses is the first organ of revela- tion endowed with the gift of performing miracles. They occur chiefly when the point in question is to give testimony for the reality of the God revealed in Israel, in opposition to heathenism.

The closer definition of the notion of miracles fol- lows mainly from the names for a miracle:

1) The most general expression pe-le, niphlaoth,

characterizes a miracle in its negative aspect, as an

occurrence withdrawn from the common course of

things, and thus an extraordinary occurrence. In the

New Testament this negative characteristic of a

1 Schultz: The whole 0. T. regards the miraculous as a matter of course.. ..The essence of a miracle is not that it is "unnatural," but that it is a specially clear and striking proof of God's power, and of the freedom he exercises in furthering his objects (Vol. 2, pp. 192, 193).

94 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

miracle is denoted by the expression teras [ierata, only in the plural) .

2) The positive side of a miracle is expressed in the term gebhuroth (mighty deeds), corresponding to the New Testament dy name is, indications of divine power. Side by side with which there appears the more gen- eral emphatic expression ma-asim, or more frequently, 'a/i/oth, the great deeds, corresponding to erga in John. According to this, a miracle w^ould mainly be a divine act of power, exempt from the common course of nature and history.

3) But the full idea is expressed only by its ieleo log- ical designation as 'oth (sign),i the semeion of the New Testament, according to which its meaning is, an in- dication of something higher and divine, and so to serve a definite divine aim.

[Analysis: 1) Definition of miracle; 2) time of occurrence; 3) ex- planation of names for miracles.]

§ 64. More exact Definition of Miracles.

The more exact definition of miracles in the more limited sense is given by the more exact definition of the aim of miracles, namely, that miracles serve to reveal God in His Kingdom. Miracles, in the stricter sense, are extraordinary manifestations and occurrences, in which God makes known His power for the purposes of His Kingdom in a unique manner,

§ 65. Of the Spirit of God.

God reveals Himself in the heart of man by His

Spirit (ruach). As the principle of cosmical life, els ruach

Elohim, as the mighty divine force of all things, the

J Schultz: The chief use of the miracle is to convince, to act as a sign ('oth) that the living God is in the midst of His people, as a pledge hy which God, as the absolutely supernatural, attests the commission of His messengers, and confirms their words (vol. 2, pp. 195, 196).

THE SPIRIT OF GOD. 95

Spirit is the principle of the life of man's soul, and every natural intellectual gift in man is traced back to it. (Joseph's msdom, Gen. 41: 38; Bezaleel's skill in art, Ex. 31: 3; 35: 31.) From Gen. 6: 3 Ave learn that the Spirit of God has also an ethical significa- tion; for, according to this passage, the government of God's Spirit is hampered by the errors of mankind.

The Spirit as ruach Jehovah only acts within the sphere of revelation. In the Old Testament, the Spirit's work in the divine kingdom is rather that of endowing the organs of the theocracy with the gifts required for their calling, and these gifts of office in the Old Testament are similar to the gifts of grace in the New Testament (1 Cor. 12). In the Pentateuch its working appears exclusively in this connection. The Spirit bestows on Moses and the 70 elders skill to guide the people (Num. 11: 17), also on Joshua (Num. 27: 18; Deut. 84: 9). As the Spirit of revelation. He produces in particular the gift of prophecy (Num. 11: 25); and even as ruach Elohim imparts ability to prophesy to the heathen Balaam (Num. 24: 2), by which means he is made an organ of the revealing God against his will (Num. 22: 38).

The Spirit, however, does not appear in the Penta- teuch as the principle of Sanctification in the pious; this is first spoken of in the Psalms (Ps. 51: 10-12; 143: 10). j

Now this Spirit is represented as a power proceeding from Jehovah, a something communicated by Him, which clings to the person to whom it is communicated ^ (Num. 11: 17, 25).

The relation of the Spirit of revelation to the human spirit

1 Though we must not read the New Testament doctrine of the Trinity into the Old Testament, it is yet undeniable that we find the way to the doctrine of the Trinity already prepared in the doctrine of the Malakh and of the Spirit.

96 THE DOCTRINES OP MOSAISM.

is characterized in a way that makes it clear why a full indwelling of the Spirit in man, a penetration of the human spirit by the Holy Spirit, is not reached in the Old Testament, but only a working on the human mind.

[Analysis: 1) The Spirit is the principle of the life of man's soul ; 2) distinction between ruach Elohim and ruach Jehovah; 3) the doctrine of the Spirit in the Pentateuch ; 4) the Psalms speak of the Spirit as the principle of sanctification; 5) distinction be- tween the divine Spirit and the human spirit.]

§ 66. The Psychical States of the Organs of Revelation.

As )OS/c^/ca/s/afes in which the reception of revela- tion by man takes place, the principal passage (Num. 12: 6-8) names 1) ihe dream; 2) the vision; 3) ihe im- mediate sight of the Divinity as given to Moses, which stands higher than the other two.

1) Dreams appear in the Old Testament, as in an- tiquity generally, as the vehicle of divine elevation, but only in a subordinate way, and as the lowest form of revelation (1 Sam. 28: 6; Jer. 23: 28).

2) Visions presuppose a previous revelation of the life of the soul into an extraordinary state, as is made prominent in the first narrative in which a vision appears (in Gen. 15, mth Abraham). Still the difference between a dream and a vision may be re- garded as not sharply marked. By these two forms God speaks, as is said in Num. 12: 8, only in rid- dles, that is, in a way which requires an explanation of the pictures presented to view.

3) The immediate view of ihe Divinity (mouth to mouth. Num. 12: 8) with which Moses was favored stands higher than these forms ;i that figureless, per- fect, clear communication of knowledge, which is to

1 In 1 Cor. 13: 12, that vision of the divinity which Moses had is designated by Paul as the form of knowledge with which we are not yet favored, but shall be in the future.

THE ORGANS OF REVELATION. 97

be distinguished also from the vision of God in em- blematical tokens, spoken in Ex. 24: 10 of Aaron and the elders of Israel. The principle that a clear con- sciousness when receiving revelation is placed higher than ecstasy is of great importance for the right view of the Old Testament religion (Num. 12: 6-8; 1 Cor. 13: 12). The idea that in the case of some persons a view into the future opens at the moment of death is expressed in the Old Testament in Gen. 49, and Deut. 33, (in the blessings of Jacob and Moses).

[Analysis: 1) The dream the lowest form of revelation; 2) the vision; 3) the immediate view of the divinity; 4) the ecstatic state: 5) glimpses into the future at the hour of death.]

CHAPTER IX.

THE MOSAIC DOCTRINE OF THE NATURE OF MAN IN ITS MAIN UNCHANGEABLE FEATURES.

§ 67. General View.

First of all the nature of man is to be described with- out reference to the contradictory elements which through sin entered into its development ; and then these contradictory elements are to be set forth as they appear in the difference between the original per^ fection of man on the one side, and the state of sin and death in which he now is on the other side. We have here to do only with the anthropology of Mosaism.^

[Analysis: 1) The topic of anthropology is to be discussed under three general heads: 2} the best work is that of Delitzsch; 3) Beck is also valuable.]

§ 68. The Idea of Man.

The idea of man is expressed in the statement, that he is created in the image of God (Gen. 1: 26, 27; 9: 6). This divine image is propagated (Gen. 5: 1, 3). The statement in Gen. 1: 26 ("in our image, after our likeness") does not mean that the divine image is two -fold, but it rather expresses the thought that the divine image which man bears is really one corre- sponding to the original pattern. ^

1 For the rich literature on Biblical Anthropology see the most complete work on this topic: Delitzsch, System of Biblical Psychol- ogy. Edinburgh, 1869. Valuable also is the small work by Beck, translated into English under the title: Outlines of Biblical Psychol- ogy. Edinburgh, 1877.

2 The patristic and the later ecclesiastical exposition attempted to draw an essential distinction between the ideas image and likeness, making the former denote the inalienable essence, the lat-

MAN IN RELATION TO SEX AND RACE. 99

But now whai is fo be understood by the divine image? 1) We are certainly not to think of the human body as if it were a copy of the divine form, for Elohim, the creative God, is without form. We might rather say, that the human figure was to be so formed that it might serve to represent God Himself when He re- vealed Himself. 2) It is equally erroneous to limit the divine likeness to the dominion over the animal world, as the Socinians did. 3) The divine likeness is rather to be referred to the whole dignity of man (Ps. 8: 5, 6), in virtue of which human nature is sharply dis- tinguished from that of the beasts; man as a free being is set over nature, and designed to hold communion with God, and to be His representative on earth. This image, therefore, lies in the spirit of man.

The spiritual dominion of man over the beasts is indicated in the giving of names (Gen. 2: 19, 20).

[Analysis : 1) Man is created in the image of God ; 2) this image is propagated ; 3) meaning of Gen. 1: 26; 4) this image is not that of the body: 5) nor does it consist in dominion over the animal world; 6) this image lies in his spirit.]

§ 69. Man in relation to Sex and Race.

1) The sexual relation of man and woman is originally ordained m Gen. 1: 27 ("male and female created He them").^ This does not mean that man was origin- ally created androgynous (a man who was at once a man and woman), but that man was created first, and the woman afterwards (Gen. 2: 22); as also the passage is understood in 1 Tim. 2: 13; 1 Cor. 11: 8, 9.

2) According to Gen. 2: 18, 24, marriage, that primitive form of human society from which all other forms of society arise, and for which man gives up

ter the likeness to God defaced by the Fall. But the two expres- sions tselem and demuth are substantially synonymous in Hebrew, and if there is any difference it is simply, as Schultz observes, the difference between the concrete and the abstract.

100 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

the others, did not spring from tlie bhnd sway of natural impulse, but from divine institution .

Its original form is monogamy (compare Matt. 19: 4-6). As indicative of character, pol^^gamy is traced to the Cainites (Gen. 4: 19). The law does indeed tolerate polygamy, but does not sanction it, and moreover, provides against the wrongs that easily spring from it (Ex. 21: 10; Deut. 21: 15-17). Big- amy, in the form in which Genesis represents it as forced on Jacob, was afterwards expressly forbidden in the law (Lev. 18: 18). In general, monogamy re- mained predominant among the people of Israel; in fact the description of a wife in Prov. 12: 4; 19: 14; 31: 10-31, and in particular the prophetic represen- tation of the covenant between Jehovah and His people as marriage, clearly presuppose that monoga- my is the rule.

The possession of children, by which the house is built up is looked upon as a divine blessing (Gen. 1: 28). Childlessness is looked upon as the greatest misfortune to a house (Gen. 30: 23). To hinder fruit- fulness is treated as an abomination worthy of death (Gen. 38; 9, 10).

3) All mankind is a connected race of brothers (Act. 17: 26). The differences between nations and orders of men do not rest on a diversity of physical origin, but upon the law of God, who made the nations to differ and set them their boundaries (Deut. 32: 8), and who reveals His retributive ordinances even in their natu- ral character (Canaan, Moab, Ammon, etc.).

[Analysis: 1) The sexual relation was ordained by God; 2) mar- riage is a divine institution; 3) its original form was monogamy; 4) children are regarded a divine blessing ; 5) the unity of the race.]

BODY, SOUL AND SPIEIT. 101

§ 70. Body, Soul, and Spirit as the Constituent Parts of

Man.

Man, like all beings endowed with life originated from iwo elemenis, 1) from earthly material (ground, dust), and 2) from the Divine Spirit (ruach), Gen. 2: 7, compared with Ps. 104: 29, 30; 146: 4. As in general the soul (nephesh) originates in the flesh (basar) by the union of spirit with matter, so in particular the human soul arises in the human body by the breath- ing of the divine breath into the material frame of the human body. The soul, which is common to man and beast, does not originate in the same way. The souls of animals arise like plants from the earth, as a consequence of the divine word of power, Gen. 1: 24 (''let the earth bring forth the living nephesh''). Thus the creating spirit which entered in the beginning (Gen. 1: 2) into matter, rules in them. But the hu- man soul does not spring from the earth ; it is created by a special act of divine inbreathing (Gen. 2: 7 compared with Gen. 1: 26). Thus the substance of the human soul is the divine spirit of life uniting with itself matter; the soul exists and lives only by the power of the spirit (ruach). In the soul, which sprang from the spirit, and exists con- tinually through it, lies the individuality of man, his personality, his self, his ego; because man is not spirit (ruach), but has it— he is soul. Man perceives and thinks by virtue of the spirit which animates him (Job 32: 8; Prov. 20: 27), but the perceiving and thinking subject itself is the soul (nephesh). The impulse to act proceeds from the spirit (ruach) (Ex. 35: 21), but the acting subject is the soul (nephesh)-, the soul is the subject which sins (Ezek. 18: 4). Love and attach- ment are of course a thing of the soul (Gen. 34: 3, 8). In many cases, however, soul and spirit stand indiffer-

102 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

ently, according as the personality is named after its special individual life, or after the living power which forms the condition of its special character.

From all this it is clear that the Old Testament does not teach a trichotomy of the human being in the sense of body, soul, and spirit, as being originally three co-ordinate elements of man; rather are we to regard the body and spirit of man as being of distinct natures, but the soul is of one nature wdth the spirit. The spirit is the inward being of the soul, and the soul is the external nature of the spirit.

In all ages a few passages in the Old Testament

have been supposed by some to teach a pre-existence

of the soul. But no such inference can be drawn from

the main passages adduced for such a doctrine (Ps.

139: 15; Job 1:21).

[Analysis: 1) Man has had his origin from two elementa ; 2) the soul had its origin in the union of spirit with matter; 3) the soul of man does not originate in the same way as the soul of the beast; 4) the human soul is created by a special act of inbreath- ing; 5) the essence of the human soul; 6) in the soul lies person- ality; 7) difference between the soul and the spirit; 8) the doc- trine of trichotomy ; 9) the 0. T. does not teach the pre-existence of the soul.]

§ 71. The Heart and its Relation to the Soul.

The soul of man has a double sphere of life:

1) It is anima, that on which rests the life belong- ing to the senses, the soul of the flesh in the more limited sense. As such it acts in the b/ood, and sup- plies life to the body through the blood ; hence the proposition, ''The life (soul) of the flesh is in the blood" (Lev. 17: 11); indeed, it is said directly, "The blood is life (soul)," Gen. 9: 4; Lev. 17: 14; Deut. 12: 23.

2) It is not simply anima, the principal of life be- longing to the senses, but it is at the same time animus

THE HEART AND ITS RELATION TO THE SOUL. 103

—the subject of all the acts of knowing, feeling, and willing,

and especially the subject of those acts and states of man that refer to his communion with God (Deut. 4: 29; 6: 5; Isa: 61: 10; Ps. 19: 7; etc).

In both its relations, as anima and animus, the soul centres in the heart. The heart, as the central organ of the circulation of the blood ("the pitcher at the foun- tain," Eccles. 12: 6), forms the focus of the life of the body. But the heart is also the centre of all spiritual functions ("keep th}^ heart mth all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life," Prov. 4; 23). In partic- ular, the heart is the place in which the process of self-consciousness goes on, in which the soul is at home with itself and is conscious of all its doing and suffer- ing as its own (Deut. 8; 5; Isa. 44; 18; etc). The heart is also the organ of the act of knowing in general, so that heart has often exactly the meaning of intellect, insight (Job 34; 10; Jer. 5; 21).

Now, because the heart is the central point of the person's life, the work-place for the personal appropri- ation and assimilation of everything spiritual, the moral and religious condition of man lies in the heart. Because of this, man is characterized by his heart in all his habitual and moral attributes. We read in Prov. 10: 8, of a wise heart; in Ps. 51: 12, of a pure (clean) heart ; etc. So, on the other hand, of a per- verse (fro ward) heart (Ps. 101: 4); of a stubborn and evil heart (Jer. 3: 17); etc. Accordingly the human heart is characterized in Jer. 17: 9 as "deceitful above all things" (properly rugged), and "desperately sick," so that God alone (but He completely, Prov. 15: 11) is able to fathom the depths of its perverseness ; and hence the prayer in Ps. 139: 23, 24. Hence all revela- tion addresses itself to the heart, even the revelation Qf the law, Deut. 6: 6; for it demands love to God

104 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

from the whole heart, and starting from this centre, also from the whole soul (Deut. 11: 18). The work of revelation is directed to rene^^^ng man from the heart; its aim is to circumcise the heart (Deut. 30: 6), -to establish God's will within the heart (Jer. 31: 33).

Also on man's side the process of salvation begins in the heart. Faith, in which man's personal life in its deepest basis takes a new direction, belongs entirely to the sphere of the heart, and is described as a mak- ing fast, a making strong (Ps. 27: 14; 31: 24), a staying of the heart (compare especially Ps. 112: 7, 8) on that foundation which is God, ''the Rock of my heart" (Ps. 73: 26): (Compare the same view in the New Testament— for example, Rom. 10: 9, 10).

[Analysis: 1) The bouI of man is anima; 2) and at the same time animus; 3) in both these relations the soul centres in the heart; 4) it is the centre of all spiritual functions; 5) the centre of self- consciousness; 6) the organ of knowing in general; 7) the re- ligious condition of man lies in the heart; 8) man's moral attri- butes are characterized by his heart; 9) revelation is addressed to the heart; 10) faith belongs to the sphere ol the heart.]

CHAPTER X.

THE MOSAIC DOCTRINE OF MAN WITH REFERENCE TO SIN.

§ 72. The Primitive State of Man.

The condition of man in his primitive state was one of innocence and childlike intercourse with God^ of harmo- nious relation to nature, and, conditionally, of exemption from death.

1) Man was created ^roo^/ (Gen. 1: 31), that is, con- formed to the divine aim. But this good must be de- veloped into free self-determination. The conception of the original state as a created condition of wisdom and sanctity contradicts the statement in Genesis; it would be much more in the sense of the Old Testa- ment to say, as Eccl. 7: 29 expresses it: "God made man upright" (right). The view that the original state was only an absence of actual sin, in the sense either of a state of pure indifference, or a state in which the evil was already latent, so that in the Fall the disposition which already existed in man only came forth, is equally irreconcilable with Genesis.

2) In the primitive condition, man lives in un- disturbed and peaceful union with nature and with God. The latter is made especially clear by the con- trast implied in Gen. 3: 8. The peaceful relation of man with nature is taught partly in the description of life in Paradise in general, and partly in the con- trast between the present relation of man to nature aad his condition before dnj since man must now

106 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

make nature of service to him by toiling and strugg- ling (Gen. 3: 17, 18; 5: 29), and since he exercises his dominion over the animals by deeds of violence and destruction of life (Gen. 9: 2, 3 contrasted mth Gen. 1: 29). Hence prophecy has depicted the termination of this hostile relation in its description of the time of salvation (Isa. 11: 6-8; 65: 25).

3) Lastly, in Gen. 2, immortality is ascribed to man, but conditionally, in the sense of to be able not to die (posse non mori). This idea, indeed, does not neces- sarily lie in the words of Gen. 2: 17, but it is quite clear from Gen. 3: 22, that the possibility of reach- ing immortality was annexed to the life in Paradise, and that immortality was destined for man so far as he should live in unbroken communion with God. Nor on the other hand can we infer from Gen. 3: 19, that by nature man must die ; the words only give the reason why the end of man's life, when once de- creed, is brought about in the manner described as a dissolution of the body.

[Analysis: 1) The primitive state of man; 2) the state of inno- cence must be developed into free self-determination; 3) the original state was not a created condition of wisdom and sanctity; 4) nor was it only an absence of actual sin; 5) man lived in peaceful relation with nature; 6) the teaching of prophecy; 7) man was able not to die.]

§ 73. The Formal Principle of Sin.

1) Man can pass from the state of innocence into the possession of moral character only by an act of self-determination. When the woman (Gen. 3: 2, 3) remembers the divine command, and knows that she is bound by it, and thus acknowledges its obligatory force, she has not yet sinned, and yet she shows that she has a conscience. Hence it follows that, accord- ing to the Old Testament sin is not a necessary fac-

THE MATERIAL PRINCIPLE OF SIN. 107

tor in the development of man, but a product of free choice.

2) The first inciiemeni to transgress the command of God came from Avithout. The account of the Fall presupposes an ungodly principle which had already en- tered the world, but does not give any further account of it.^ But the chief thing at issue is this, that the seduction does not at all act by compulsion on man, but is successful only when man voluntarily ceases to resist temptation.

[Analysis: 1) Man sins by an act of self-determination; 2) Eve shows that she has a conscience; 3) sin is a product of free choice; 4) an ungodly principle in the world before man sinned; 5) man is not compelled to sin.]

§ 74. The Material Principle of Sin. The Old Testament Names of Sin.

The real principle of sin, is, according to the Old Testament, 1) unbelief of the divine word, 2) the selfish elevation of self-will above the divine will, and 3) the presumptuous trampling upon the limits set by divine command.

Gen. 3 disproves the doctrine, that, according to the Old Testament, the real principle of evil lies in matter, in the body. It is a fundamental doctrine of the Old Testament that evil is originally the denial of the divine will ; that sin is sin because man selfishly exalts himself above God and His will.

Most probably such passages as Hos. 6: 7; Job 31: 33, refer to the Fall, and are correctly translated in the text of the Revised Version. The passage in Isa. 43: 27, "The first father sinned" refers evidently

1 The New Testament teaches that the seduction of the first man is the work of Satan, especially in Rev. 12: 9, where the devil is called the dragon, the old serpent; compare also the allusion in Rom. 16: 20 to Gen. 3: 15.

108 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

to Abraham, for Adam is not the ancestor of Israel, but of humanity.

The following are the most common Old Testament designations for Sin:

1) C/iata (first in Gen. 4: 7), a missing, a deviation from the divine way and goal prescribed for man by the divine will. It comprehends sins of weakness as well as sins of wickedness.

2) ^Avon, crookedness, perversion, primarily referring to the character of an action. It is the perversion of the divine law (anomia); then especially the guilt of sin, first in Gen. 15: 16 (iniquity). See Ps. 32: 5.

3) Pesha, sin in its intensification, apostasy, rebellion against God. Design and set purpose to sin are always implied in this word. Chief passage Job 34: 37.

4) Resha, the evil which has become an habitual fea- ture of the disposition and actions. The underlying idea in resha appears to be stormy excitement (Job 3: 17).

5) Aven, evil as in itself empty and worthless.

[Analysis: The three elements of sin ; '2) the real principle of evil does not lie in matter; 3) evil is originally the denial of the divine ■will; 4) the 0. T. names for sin.]

§ 75. Sin as an Inclination. Transmission of Sin.

In consequence of the Fall, sin appears as a state in mankind, that is, an inclination which rules man, and as a common sinful life which is transmitted partly in mankind in general, and partly in an especial de- gree in particular races.

1) The second sin, that of self -excuse and palliation of the offence, follows immediately on the first, the sin of disobedience (Gen. 3: 10). As sin thus joins to sin, it becomes a habitus, and in this way a definite feature of the heart (imagination of the heart, Gen. 8: 21), an inclination, which gives a perverted tendency

DEGREES OE SIN. 109

to man's will (Gen. 6: 5). Because this sinful inclina- tion (this is the meaning of the variously explained passage Gen. 8: 21) cleaves to man from his youth, the human race would lie under a continual sentence of destruction if God gave severe justice its course.

2) That this sinful inclination is hereditary is in- directly contained in the passages cited, although it is not expressly said. Ps. 51: 5, "Behold, I wasshapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me," directly says that evil is ingro^^Ti in man from the first moment of his origin,— for the explanation that here reference is only to the iniquity and sin of the parents, is untenable. So that even the newly-born child is not free from sin, or as Job 14: 4 expresses it, "Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one."

This transmission of sin takes place with special in- tensity in certain races, especially those that have fallen under the divine curse. This is implied in the history of the Cainites (Gen. 4); of Ham, and especially Canaan (Gen. 9: 25 onward); of Moab and Ammon (Gen. 19: 36 onward); and this is especially expressed in the repeated declaration that God visits the sins of the fathers on the third and fourth generation (Ex. 20: 5; 34: 7; Num. 14: 18; Deut. 5: 9).

[Analysis: 1) Sin is an inclination which rules man; 2) the first sin is that of disobedience; 3) the second that of self-excuse; 4) meaning of Gen. 8: 21; 5) of Ps. 51: 5; 6) of Job 14: 4; 7) of Ex. 20: 5.]

§ 76. Antagonism of the Good and the Evil in Man. Degrees of Sin. Possibility of a Relative Righteousness.

According to the Old Testament, the condition of man in consequence of the Fall is not that of an ab- solute subjection to sin, which destroys the power of

110 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM,

resistance, but it is an antagonism between man's sus- ceptibility to the good and the power of sin. In Gen. 4: 6, 7 are expressed the possibility and the duty of resisting the sinful inclination. According as men seek or do not seek to rule over sin, there arises a difference of relation to God and a difference in the degree of sinfulness.

The Old Testament calls the highest degree of sin obduracy or hardening of the heart. This is the condi- tion in AAhich a man, by continually cherishing sin, has lost the ability to withstand it ; and it is added that God can glorify Himself on such a one only by punishment. For it is God's ordinance, that as the power to do good grows by its exercise, so also sin is punished by continued sinning (Ps. 81: 11, 12). This hardening is both a divine act, and at the same time the sinner's own act, so that the two expressions are in- terchangeable (compare Ex. 7: 3 with 8: 15,28; etc.). In the first case, hardening is the effect of the divine wrath (Isa. 64: 5). We must here note as essential, that the Old Testament (like the New) always speaks of hardening only in connection vdth. a divine revela- tion offered to the sinner, but rejected by him. This is applicable to Pharaoh, who sees the miracles of Moses, but whose "heart was hardened" (Ex. 8: 19). In such passages the point is not (as understood by Calvinists) a dark and hidden decree of reprobation, but a divine decree of judgment, well grounded and perfectly manifest.

The course of hardening is described in Isa. 6: 10; incapability to hear the divine word and see God's way connects itself with dullness of heart, and this again reacts on the heart so that its insusceptibility becomes incurable.

On the other hand, in the midst of the sinful world,

ANTAGONISM OF THE GOOD AND THE EVIL OF MAN. Ill

a righteousness is attained by a cheerful resignation to the divine will, and by the loyalty with which a man accepts the witness of God, given to him in accord- ance with the then stage of revelation. Enoch walked with God (Gen. 5: 22); Noah is regarded as righteous in the general corruption (Gen. 7: 1); Abraham be- lieved the promise, and it was counted to him for righteousness (Gen. 15: 6). But the Old Testament knows nothing of absolutely righteous persons (1 Kings 8: 46; Ps. 143: 2; Isa. 43: 27; Prov. 20: 9; Eccles. 7: 20). The Mosaic Law attests this by excepting none from the need of atonement.

[Analysis: 1) The reason there are degrees of sin; 2) hardening of the heart both a divine act and the sinner's own act; 3)harden- ing of the heart always spoken of in connection with a divine revelation; 4) case of Pharaoh; 5) exposition of Isa. 6: 10; 6) the 0. T. knows of EO absolutely righteous persons]

CHAPTER XL

THE MOSAIC DOCTRINE OF DEATH AND THE STATE AFTER DEATH. 1

§ 77. The Connection between Sin and Death.

The consequence of sin is death. This is positive// ex- pressed in Gen. 2: 17. The issue of the punishment is at once placed foremost in the threat, as is generally the case in prophetical announcements. There is no difficulty here from the fact that death did not really follow immediately after the Fall, as in reality man en- tered on the path of death immediately on the com- mission of sin.

The punishment of death is connected with disobedience, not ^vith the effect of the fruit of the tree as many ex- positors infer from the contrast in Gen. 3: 22. The partaking of the fruit had death as its consequence solely because a decision of the mil was involved in it. The intimate connection of sin and death is clear from Gen. 6:3, though this passage primarily treats only of the shortening of the length of life through sin. According to this passage (the marginal trans- lation of the Revised Version is to be preferred "//7 their going astray they are flesh''), the divine spirit of life which supports man is enfeebled by sin, and thus man's vital strength is destroyed ; while, as Isaiah (63: 10) expresses himself, the Spirit of God is grieved by sin ; it is also repressed as to the physical principle of life, and thus man is subject to mortality.

1 There is no topic of 0. T. theology on which the literature is so rich as on the one in question. The literature of the subject up to the year 1844 is given in Bottcher's learned work, De In- feris, etc., 1846. See also Delitzsch, Biblical Psychology.

THE CONDITION AFTER DEATH. Il3

[Analysis: 1) The consequence of sin is death; 2) man immedi" ately entered on the path of death; 3) this punishment is con" nected with disobedience; 4) the meaning of Gen. 6: 3.]

§ 78. The Doctrine of Mosaism on the Condition after Death.

Death takes place when the divine spirit of life which sustains man is withdrawn by God (Ps. 104: 29), by which means man expires (Gen. 7: 21, 22), upon which the body returns to the dust from Avhence it was taken (Job 34, 14: 15; Eccles. 12: 7 compared with 8: 8). From the whole connection of Old Testament doctrine^ it is clear that as the origin so also the final destiny of man's soul is different from that of the soul of an animal (with which it seems to be identified in Ps. 104: 29), and that, when the sustaining spirit of life is withdrawn, although the band by which the nephesh (soul) is bound to the body is loosed, the soul itself, and man, so far as his personality lies in the soul continues to exist ; yet, he exists only as a weak shadow, which wanders into the kingdom of the dead (Sheol). Man's existence after death is treated in the Old Testament so much as a matter of course, that the reality of it is never the subject of doubt. The doubts with which the Israelitish spirit wrestled re- ferred only to the how of existence after death. It is the nephesh (soul) which wanders into the kingdoni of the dead (Ps. 16: 10; 30: 3; 86: 13; 89: 48; etc.); so also it is the nephesh which returns again to the body of the dead child on being restored to life (1 Kings 17: 21, 22). Oehler adduces the narratives of resur- rection from the dead (1 Kings 17: 21, 22; 2 Kings 4: 34, 35) as proofs that a close connection between the body just quitted and the soul still subsists immediate- ly after death, but maintains on the other hand, that there is no trace in the Old Testament of the Egyptian

114 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

notion that a continual connection subsists between the soul and body, in virtue of which the preservation of the body secures the continuance of the soul.

The p/ace into which man migrates ("the house ap- pointed for all living," Job 30: 23), is called Sheo/. The word (from shaa/, to ask) characterizes the king- dom of the dead as that Avhich is insatiable in its de- mands.

The following essentia/ features of the conception of Sheo I are distinctly presented in the Old Testament :

The kingdom of the dead is supposed to be in the depths (Ps. 86: 13) of the earth (Ps. 63: 10), deeper even than the Avaters and their inhabitants (Ezek. 26: 20; 31: 14; 32: 18). It agrees Avith this, that it is a region of thickest darkness, "AA^herethe light is as dark- ness" (Job 10: 22). The dead are there gathered in tribes ("gathered to his people," Gen. 25: 8; 35: 29; compare the picture of Sheol in Ezek. 32: 17-32).

These terms cannot possibly be referred to the grave. The kingdom of the dead and the grave are, on the contrary, definitely distinguished.^

The condition of men in the realm of death is repre- sented as the privation of all that belongs to life in the full sense; and so the realm of death is simply called Abaddon, that is destruction (Job. 26: 6; Prov. 15: 11; 27: 20). Without strength, dull, and like men in slumber, the dead rest in silence (Ps. 94: 17; 115: 17). Sheol is the land of forgetfulness (Ps. 88: 12). "There is no Avork, nor device, nor knoAvledge, nor wisdom, in Sheol, aa hither thou goest" (Eccles.

1 Schultz: Sheol is not the grave itself . For even where there is no grave Sheol is thought of as the abode of the departed (Gen. 37:35; Num. 16: 30, 33). It is the dwelling-place for the dead, who rest there after the joy and suffering of Hie. It is "the land of the departed spirits," in contrast to "the land of the living." (Ps. 18: 5; 16: 10).

CONDITION OF THE SOUL IN SHEOL. 115

9: 10). (Compare Eccles. 9: 5, 6). With; all this, however, their consciousness is not destroyed; their personal identity continues (compare such passages as Isa. 14: 9, 10; Ezek. 32: 21: 1 Sam. 28: 15, 16). It is not possible to ascend or return from the realm of the dead (Job 7: 9; 14: 12). (The Old Testament relates only one example of the appearing of a dead person, Samuel, 1 Sam. 28. This narrative is not to be explained as if we had here a record of a mere de- ception, as the older theologians interpreted it).

[Analysis: 1) The nature of death; 2) the destiny of man's soul different from that of an animal; 3) the soul continues to exist; 4) goestoSheol; 5) immortality of the soul never questioned in the 0. T.; 6) the question is simply how; 7) the nephesh leaves the body; 8) a close connection between soul and body immedi- ately after death; 9) but the Egyptian notion is not taught in the O. T.; 10) derivation of the word Sheol; 11) the conception of Sheol in the O. T.; 12) Sheol is not the grave itself; 13) it is the place of the departed spirits; 14) the condition of the soul in the Sheol; 15) consciousness of the soul is not destroyed ; 16) the appearance of Samuel.]

§ 79. Condition of the Soul in Sheol.

In no part of the Old Testament is a difference in the lot of those in the realm of death distinctly spoken of; only in Isa. 14: 15; Ezek. 32: 23, where the fallen conquerors are relegated to the uttermost depths, can we find an indication of different grades in the realm of the dead. Elsewhere, only a division into people and races, and not a division of just and un- just, is spoken of. In itself, the condition in Sheol, which is in the main the most indefinite existence pos- sible, is neither blessedness nor positive unblessedness. The Mosaic retribution has its sphere entirely on this side of the grave (§ 89).

On the traces of belief in a heavenly life beyond the grave which have been supposed to be found in the Penta- teuch, the translation of Enoch (Gen. 5: 24) can alone

116 THE DOCTRINES OF MOSAISM.

come into consideration. But that is not a testimony to a higher existence of the soul after death; for the meaning of the passage is that Enoch never died, — that is, his body and soul were never separated. In it, as in the history of Elijah's translation (2 Kings 2), there lies rather the declaration, that even before the coming of death's vanquisher some specially fa- vored men were excepted from the curse of death and of the kingdom of death which hangs over man.

But it is clearly expressed in the Pentateuch that the relation of the righteous to God is not cancelled after death. The relation into which God entered Avith the patriarchs continues (Ex. 3: 6 compared with Gen. 26: 24; 28: 13). "I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. God is not the God of the dead, but of the Kving" (Matt. 22: 32.)

[Analysis