The Bishop of Natal has published his seventh and final volume on the

Pentateuch (_The Pentateuch and Book of Joshua critically Examined_, by

the Right Rev. J. W. Colenso, D.D., Bishop of Natal. Part VII. Longmans:

1879). In the preface he notices the various works, including the

Speaker's Commentary, the work of Alford on the Pentateuch, and those of

Kalisch, Graf, and Kuenen, which have appeared of late years, together

with the New Table of Lessons, and explains the method of the present

volume. The body of the work consists of an examination of the

Scriptural books from Judges to the Canticles, undertaken with the view

of showing what testimony they yield to the views maintained by the

author in the earlier part of the work. Incidentally, however, the books

themselves come under review, and the opinion of the author on their

age, authorship, and purpose is given. The general results of this

laborious criticism may be given as follows:--

It is believed that five persons or sets of persons, at five different

periods, composed or rehandled the Pentateuch and the other historical

books. These are (1) the first Elohist (E), who was Samuel or one of his

scholars; (2) the second Elohist (_E_), who wrote about the end of

Saul's reign or early in that of David; (3) the Jehovist or Jahvist (J),

who wrote towards the end of David's or the beginning of Solomon's

reign, who may be identified with Nathan, and may possibly be the same

with _E_; (4) the Deuteronomist (D), who probably was Jeremiah; and (5)

the Levitical Legislators (LL), who wrote about 250 B.C., or even later.

The share which each of these is supposed to have had in the six first

books of the Bible is given in the final appendix, a "Synoptical Table

of the Hexateuch." In another appendix, the author explains the changes

in his views of numerous passages, which have led to the more precise

conclusions now put forward, and the task is attempted of giving (1) the

story of E alone in Exodus and Numbers, and (2) the story of _E_ and J

by themselves in Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Joshua. Thus the author gives

the reader the fullest means of judging of his theory.

It may be best to give the author's conclusions as to the authorship of

the various books in order:--

Genesis, chiefly written by E and J, with some additions by _E_ and D.

Exodus, mostly by J and D, with a shorter narrative by the earlier

authors.

Leviticus, a very late work, wholly by LL.

Numbers, mainly by J and D, but with considerable additions by LL.

Deuteronomy, almost wholly by D, but with a few verses by J and LL.

Joshua, shared between all the writers, but in the proportions indicated

by the numbers 1, 1, 4, 4, 7.

Judges, mostly by E.

1 Sam. to 1 Kings xi., by J.

The rest of the books of Kings, by D.

The books of Chronicles, Ezra, and half Nehemiah, by LL; a late,

hierarchical, and quite untrustworthy work.

Esther, a mere romance of a late date.

Job, written after the Captivity, about 450 B.C.

Psalms, at various times; great stress is laid on Ps. lxviii., which

is assigned to the age of David, "the golden age of Hebrew

literature," which produced also the Songs of Moses and Deborah.

Proverbs, written at various times from Solomon till after the Exile.

Ecclesiastes, in the age of Antiochus.

Canticles, in the time of Rehoboam II., about 800, and in the Northern

kingdom.

The Bishop believes that the name Jahveh was originally used by some of

the tribes of Canaan, that it was then merely a name like that of

Chemosh or Milum, but that it was adopted by _E_, the great writer of

the early days of David, as the name of the national deity of Israel,

and inserted by him in his narrative of the Exodus, and under the

influence of the Prophets came gradually to be associated with the noble

ideas of purity and righteousness.

The criticisms upon the authors of the latest books are severe and

vehement. In the books of Chronicles "the real facts of Jewish history,

as given in Samuel and Kings, have been systematically distorted and

falsified, in order to support the fictions of the LL, and glorify the

priestly and Levitical body, to which the Chronicler himself belonged."

In the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, not only the whole narrative (except

part of Nehemiah) but also the decrees of the kings of Persia, the

letters of the governor, and the prayers of Ezra and the Levites are

"pure fictions of the Chronicler;" and the book of Esther is an

unhistorical romance, suggested by a wish to account for the existence

of the Feast of Purim, which was probably no more than the commemoration

of the choosing by lot of the new inhabitants of Jerusalem in the days

of Nehemiah.

It was said by Dr. Arnold that the Old Testament required a Niebuhr; and

Bishop Colenso is not a Niebuhr. Indeed, it is but fair to him to say

that he is modest enough to disclaim functions such as those of the

great German, and to regard himself as preparing the way for their

future exercise. Many of his criticisms are telling and convincing. But

in his construction he is weak. Even if men can be persuaded that the

employment of fiction in the Old Testament histories is as extensive as

the Bishop supposes, and that at every turn they are to be on the watch,

not only for a Levitical colouring of the narrative but for the most

barefaced invention, yet they will hardly be persuaded that the name of

Moses should be "regarded as merely that of the imaginary leader of the

people out of Egypt, a personage quite as shadowy and unhistorical as

Æneas in the history of Rome or our own King Arthur." Indeed, when even

Kuenen attempts a reconstruction of the earlier history, his narrative

is merely a bald and meagre statement of the events as usually believed.

The impartial reader will close this book with the conviction that the

goal has not been reached, and will await the time when mere criticism

must give way to positive history.

The work of the Bishop of Natal has extended over eighteen years. It

closes in a different tone and amid different feelings on the subject

from those in which it was begun. It arose in a panic about the doctrine

of inspiration; and it created a panic. In the first volume sound

criticism could hardly see clearly or escape the series of absurdities

on account of the clouds of controversy. In the last volume all this is

changed. The author writes calmly and in the consciousness that many of

the views it propounds are no longer unacceptable. The present state of

theological thought in the English Church (how far brought about by the

work itself each man must judge for himself) is such that any serious

criticism will be weighed quietly and without prejudice.

* * * * *

The plan of the New Testament Commentary for English Readers (_A New

Testament Commentary for English Readers_.) By Various Authors. Edited

by C. J. Ellicott, D.D., Lord Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol. Vol. II.

Cassell, Petter and Galpin: 1879 has been given in our notice of the

first volume (CONTEMPORARY REVIEW for August, 1878). The second volume

is in every respect worthy of the first. The Acts of the Apostles and

the Second Epistle to Corinthians are taken by Professor Plumptre; the

Epistles to the Romans and Galatians by Mr. Sanday; the First Epistle to

the Corinthians by Mr. Teignmouth Shore.

The Acts of the Apostles afford Professor Plumptre a congenial field for

his powers. He considers that the main purpose of the book is "to inform

a Gentile convert of Rome how the Gospel had been brought to him, and

how it gained the width and freedom with which it was actually

presented." He admits, but justifies, the mediating or reconciling

character of the work. This is done successfully, for the most part; but

perhaps his vindication of the omission of the dispute between St. Peter

and St. Paul at Antioch will be felt to be somewhat constrained, both

when he remarks that "there is absolutely no evidence that he (St. Luke)

was acquainted with that fact," and when he says: "Would a writer of

English Church History during the last fifty years think it an

indispensable duty to record such a difference as that which showed

itself between Bishop Thirlwall and Bishop Selwyn at the Pan-Anglican

Conference of 1807?" The introduction, besides the usual dissertations

on the authorship, &c., contains some important and suggestive sections

on the relation of the work to the controversies of the time, to the

Epistles of St. Paul, and to external history, and on the sources from

which St. Luke probably derived his information. It contains also lists

of the coincidences between the Acts and St. Paul's and St. Peter's

Epistles, of their points of contact with the contemporary history of

the outer world, and of the incidents which show the naturalness and

veracity of the narrative. The introduction closes with an excellent

chronological table from A.D. 28 to 100.

The Book of the Acts is treated throughout as sound history, and this

enables the commentator to find himself at home in all the circumstances

of the contemporary world, both within and without the Church. In the

scene on the Day of Pentecost full scope is allowed to the physical

phenomena, the storm and darkness, the earthquake and the lightning.

Ananias' death is understood as in the familiar phrase "by the

visitation of God." The state of Peter in his deliverance from prison

(xii. 9) is understood by reference to the phenomena of somnambulism.

The "revelation" by which St. Paul went up to the Council at Jerusalem

is explained in harmony with the assertion of the Acts that he was sent

by the Church at Antioch, as "a thought coming into his mind, as by an

inspiration, that this was the right solution of the problem." The

healing of the sick by handkerchiefs and aprons that had touched the

body of St. Paul (xix. 12) is likened to that attributed to the relics

of saints. The accounts of Theudas, Judas, Gamaliel (v. 57), of Claudius

(xi. 28), of Herod (xii.), of the early life of St. Paul (vii. 58), of

the numbers composing the first congregation at Jerusalem (iv. 37), are

interesting and suggestive. Under the vivid realizations expressed in

these notes we seem to see the Apostles sitting in permanent conclave

(iv. 35), the daughters of Philip as members of an incipient, "order of

Virgins" (xxi. 9), or the rapacious Felix catching at the words "alms

and offerings" when uttered by St. Paul (xxiv. 26). The extreme

fertility of conjecture which we noticed in the Commentary on the

Gospels is somewhat chastened, and is exercised in a more legitimate

field. The possibility, for instance, of Stephen's having had some

connection with Samaria, as accounting for various statements in his

speech (note on vii. 16), the possibility that the words of St. Paul's

description of God's goodness at Lystra (xiv. 17) may have formed part

of an ancient sacrificial hymn, the conjecture that Apollos may have

been the author of the apocryphal Book of the Wisdom of Solomon, are all

interesting and worthy of consideration.

Turning to Mr. Sanday's portion of the work, on the Epistles to the

Romans and Galatians, we have in the introduction to the former Epistle

a vigorous and original conception of the object of both Epistles. We

give this in the words of the author:--

"The key to the theology of the Apostolic age is its relation to

the Messianic expectation among the Jews. The central point in the

teaching of the Apostles is the fact that with the coming of Christ

was inaugurated the Messianic reign. It was the universal teaching

of the Jewish doctors--a teaching fully adopted and endorsed by the

Apostles--that this reign was to be characterized by

righteousness.... The means by which this state of righteousness is

brought about is naturally that by which the believer obtains

admission into the Messianic kingdom,--in other words, Faith.

Righteousness is the Messianic _condition_, Faith is the Messianic

_conviction_. But by Faith is meant, not merely an acceptance of

the Messiahship of Jesus, but that intense and living adhesion

which such acceptance inspired, and which the life and death of

Jesus were eminently qualified to call out."

In accordance with this view, Mr. Sanday, in his analysis of the

Epistle, terms it "A treatise on the Christian scheme as a

divinely-appointed means for producing righteousness in man, and so

realizing the Messianic reign."

The simple view thus indicated, which is also borne out by the "Excursus

on Faith, Righteousness and Imputation," is somewhat impaired by another

Excursus (D), in which Sacrifice is regarded as the infliction of a

penalty. In the notes also this view exercises a weakening influence,

and, combined with some other similar features, produces a sense of

indistinctness. Otherwise, the notes are written with great care,

impartiality, and freedom. There is a devout sense of the greatness of

the subject, and much modesty in the treatment of it, while at the same

time the commentator does not hesitate to treat all the latter part of

Gal. ii. as St. Paul's afterthoughts or comments upon his own words (a

suggestion which has a wide application to other passages both in the

Gospels and in the Epistles); or to speak of words such as those of Gal.

v. 10: "I would that they were even cut off that trouble you," as

"momentary ebullitions" which "are among the very few flaws in a truly

noble and generous character." As regards the curious question suggested

by the MS. discrepancies in the last three chapters of the Epistle to

the Romans--namely, whether the Epistle was sent to the Romans

alone--Mr. Sanday follows Dr. Lightfoot in believing that its original

form was such as we now have it, with the exception of the last three

verses, and that these formed an appendix, added on at the end of

chapter xiv., when, during his captivity at Rome, St. Paul converted the

earlier part into a circular epistle. The interesting view of M. Renan,

who believes it to have been originally a circular epistle, and takes

the four endings (xv. 33, and xvi. 20, 24 and 27) as the endings of the

copies addressed respectively to the Churches of Rome, Asia, Macedonia,

and some other unknown, is rather too curtly discussed with the remark

that it fails when applied in detail. There is one more serious omission

in this part of the commentary. Though honourable mention is made of the

commentaries of Dr. Vaughan and Dr. Lightfoot, of Meyer and Wieseler,

Alford and Wordsworth, not a single allusion is made to that of

Professor Jowett. We can hardly believe that the old theological

prejudice against the author has blinded the present commentator to the

great exegetical and philosophical value of Professor Jowett's labours.

But we cannot account for this strange omission of a work to which all

English students of St. Paul's Epistles are so much indebted.

The two Epistles to the Corinthians are commented on respectively by Mr.

Teignmouth Shore and Professor Plumptre. It is hardly possible that

anything new or striking should be written on these Epistles, which in

our day have not only passed through the hands of writers like Alford

and Wordsworth, but have been a specially congenial field for the genius

of F. W. Robertson and of Stanley. But Mr. Shore and Dr. Plumptre have

well represented to English readers the sense and spirit of these

Epistles and the Church-life which they reveal to us. Mr. Shore's

judgment is, perhaps, at fault in a few special instances; he still

believes not only in a non-extant Epistle to the Corinthians, but in an

unrecorded visit of St. Paul to them; in which Professor Plumptre

differs from him (conf. p. 285 with note on 2 Cor. xii. 14 and xiv. 1);

he attributes the words, "It is good for a man not to touch a woman" (1

Cor. vii. 1) to St. Paul, not to those who wrote to him; and he thinks

the history of the Last Supper was revealed to the Apostle directly in a

trance--as to which he might be corrected by Professor Plumptre's

explanation of St. Paul's "going up to Jerusalem by revelation" in the

note on Acts xv. 2. But these are comparatively small blots, if they be

blots, in an exposition which is well worthy to take its place in this

most useful of modern Commentaries on the New Testament.

We are glad to hear that Professor Plumptre's "Commentary on the Acts"

has been reprinted for the use of schools, and we hope that the other

parts of the Commentary may be similarly treated.

* * * * *

The translation of Professor Cremer's "Biblico-Theological Lexicon,"

from the German, by Mr. Urwick (_Biblico-Theological Lexicon of New

Testament Greek_, by Hermann Cremer, D.D., Professor of Theology in the

University of Griefswald. Translated by W. Urwick, M.A. Edinburgh: T.

and T. Clark), supplies a great want in our helps to the study of the

New Testament. Parkhurst is out of date and limited in his range of

reference. Winer is a Grammar, not a Lexicon. Archbishop Trench's

Synonyms, with all their value, do not cover the whole ground. The

student turns, therefore, with eagerness to such a book as that of

Professor Cremer. And he will not be disappointed. The book is what it

professes to be. The author speaks modestly and truly of his work: "The

work which, after a labour of nine years, I have now brought to

completion is certainly an attempt only, and effort to do, not a result

accomplished; it simply prepares the way for a cleverer hand than mine."

He writes as an earnest believer, a pupil of Tholuck's, whose

commentaries he singles out as alone fully investigating the great

conceptions embodied in particular words of the New Testament Greek. He

seems to have been fired by an expression of Schleiermacher's, which

might be taken as the motto for his work: "A collection of all the

various elements in which the language-moulding power of Christianity

manifests itself would be an adumbration of New Testament doctrine and

ethics." Like so many of Tholuck's pupils, he has tested his theology by

the practical work of the ministry, not, however, neglecting the

student's part, which after many years' toil has issued in the important

work which has won him his professorship. The work has reached a second

edition, and it is from this second edition (which contains an addition

of 120 words) that the present translation is made.

Some words will, we may hope, be added in future editions. Such a word,

for instance, as [Greek: thrêskeia] (James i.), which is used for

religion itself; or, again, such a word as [Greek: pêroô], with its

compounds, which St. Paul makes the vehicle of so much teaching in

Rom. xi.; or [Greek: areskô], a word which may be said to have been

converted by the language-forming power of Christianity, and others of

equal or greater importance, have as yet no part in this Lexicon. The

classical use of the words is fully noticed; it is, he says, in many

cases "a vessel prepared to receive the Christian thought." The use of

Greek words in the Septuagint is also worked out, though the author

laments that the helps for this are so few. Of the Rabbinical or

Post-Biblical writings use is also made, and of some of the earlier

Fathers of the Church. But we miss the wide range of varied illustration

from mediæval and modern literature which charms us in the work of

Archbishop Trench. One source of illustration is deliberately put aside.

"The works of Philo and Josephus," he says, "afford little help, because

of their endeavour to import Greek ideas and Greek philosophy into

Judaistic thought." Most students will be surprised to find that, even

in reference to the conception of the [Greek: Logos], Professor Cremer

considers that Philo's use of the word has no bearing on its use by St.

John, which he considers to be simply an adaptation of the "Word of the

Lord," as commonly used in the Old Testament and the Rabbinical writers.

The object of the work is to discover the conceptions or ideas of the

New Testament (or, as the writer expresses it with Rothe, "the language

of the Holy Ghost"), by bringing together the passages in which the

words are used. Whether he has always succeeded in this, or whether, as

in the case of [Greek: aiôn] (where he says that [Greek: O aiôn mellôn]

is even in Matt. xiii. and xxiv. the new age of the world inaugurated by

the resurrection of the dead and the second coming of Christ), or as in

the case of [Greek: sôma] (where he does not even refer to the apparent

use of the word by St. Paul in 1 Cor. xv. and otherwise elsewhere as

implying hardly more than personality), he has not at times been

dominated by conventional views, each reader must judge. But every

student will find in the careful enumeration of passages, and the

discriminating and decided but not dogmatic judgment pronounced upon

them, materials which will assist him in working out (as each man must

do) his own theological conceptions.

* * * * *

An edition of the Septuagint, with a literal translation into English

(_The Septuagint Version of the Old Testament_; with an English

Translation, and with various Readings and Critical Notes: Samuel

Bagster and Sons), is a work attempted by no one, we believe, before Mr.

Bagster, and will be welcomed by the increasing number of thoughtful

students of the Bible. There is a short introduction, stating all that

is known of the origin of the Septuagint; the Greek text and English

translations are given in parallel columns, in neat and small type,

which enables the whole work to be comprised in a moderate quarto

volume; and short notes are added which notice variations of readings,

alternative translations, and the additions made by the Hebrew original,

and direct attention to the passages quoted from the Septuagint in the

New Testament. There is also an Appendix noticing a very few words as to

which some difficulty arises, and a few passages which are supplied from

the Alexandrine text. No mention is made of the Apocrypha.

The translation is for the most part exact and literal, yet made to read

fluently, where this was possible--perhaps more fluently than the Greek

text. The following passage from Isaiah ix. 1-5, is a good specimen of

the translation, and, being well known as the Lesson for Christmas Day,

will enable the reader to appreciate the singular discrepancies often

existing between the Septuagint and the original text as it stands in

our Bible. The passage begins in the English version with the words,

"Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation." In

the translation of the Septuagint it stands thus--

"Drink this first. Act quickly, O land of Zabulon, land of

Niphthalim, and the rest _inhabiting_ the seacoast and _the land_

beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles.

"O people walking in darkness, behold a great light: ye that dwell

in the region _and_ shadow of death, a light shall shine upon you.

The multitude of the people which thou hast brought down in thy

joy, they shall even rejoice before thee as they that rejoice in

harvest, and as they that divide the spoil. Because the yoke that

was laid upon them has been taken away, and the rod that was on

their neck; for he has broken the rod of the exacters as in the day

of Midian. For they shall compensate for every garment that has

been acquired by deceit, and _all_ raiment with restitution; and

they shall be willing, even if they were burnt with fire.

"For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose

government is upon his shoulder; and his name is called the

Messenger of great counsel; for I will bring peace upon the

princes, and health to him."

II.--ESSAYS, NOVELS, POETRY, &c.

(_Under the Direction of_ MATTHEW BROWNE.)

The Contemporary Review, Volume 36, September 1879 · 第 23 / 25 段