Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

The Hebrew language, in which the Old Testament was written, being the language of an antient people that had little intercourse with their neighbours, and whose neighbours also spoke a language which had great affinity with their own, would not change so rapidly as modern languages have done, since nations have been variously intermingled, and since arts, sciences, and commerce have been so greatly extended. Yet, since no language continues stationary, there must necessarily be some changes in the period of time1 that elapsed between Moses and Malachi. If, therefore, on comparing the different parts of the Hebrew Bible, the character and style of the language are found to differ (which critical Hebrew scholars have proved to be the case), we have strong internal criteria that the different books of the Old Testament were composed at different and distant periods; and consequently a considerable argument may thence be deduced in favour of their genuineness. Further, the books of the Old Testament have too considerable a diversity of style to be the work either of one Jew (for a Jew he must have been on account of the language), or of any set of contemporary Jews. If, therefore, they be all forgeries, there must have been a succession of impostors in different ages, who have concurred to impose upon posterity, which is inconceivable. To suppose part to be forged, and part to be genuine, is very harsh; neither would this supposition, if admitted, be satisfactory.

Again, the Hebrew language ceased to be spoken as a living language soon after the Babylonish captivity; but it would be difficult or impossible to forge any thing in it, after it was become a dead language. All the books of the Old Testament must, therefore, be nearly as antient as the Babylonish captivity; and since they could not all be written in the same age, some must be considerably more antient, which would bring us back again to a succession of conspiring impostors. Lastly, the simplicity of style and unaffected manner of writing, which pervade all the books of the Old Testament (with the exception of such parts as are poetical and prophetical), are a very strong evidence of their genuineness, even exclusively of the suitableness of this circumstance to the times of the supposed authors.

2. The very great number of particular circumstances of time, place, persons, &c. mentioned in the Old Testament, is an argument both of their genuineness and truth.

A statement of the principal heads, under which these particular circumstances may be classed, will enable the reader fully to apprehend the force of this internal evidence.

There are, then, mentioned in the book of Genesis, the rivers of

1 The departure of the Israelites from Egypt, under the direction of Moses, took place in the year of the world 2513, or before Christ 1491. Malachi delivered his predictions under Nehemiah's second government of Judea, between the years 436 and 420 before the Christian æra. The interval of time, therefore, that elapsed between them is between 1071 and 1055 years; or, if we reckon from the death of Moses (A. M. 2555) B. c. 1451, it is from 1015 to 1031 years.

2 An account of the various changes in the Hebrew language is given, infra, Vol. II. pp. 1-4.

Paradise, the generations of the antediluvian patriarchs, the deluge with its circumstances, the place where the ark rested, the building of the tower of Babel, the confusion of tongues, the dispersion of mankind, or the division of the earth amongst the posterity of Shem, Ham, and Japhet, the generations of the post-diluvian patriarchs, with the gradual shortening of human life after the flood, the sojournings of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, with many particulars of the state of Canaan and the neighbouring countries in their times, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the state of the land of Edom, both before and after Esau's time, and the descent of Jacob into Egypt, with the state of Egypt before Moses's time.

In the book of Exodus are the plagues of Egypt, the institution of the passover, the passage through the Red Sea, with the destruction of Pharaoh and his host there, the miracle of manna, the victory over the Amalekites, the solemn delivery of the law from mount Sinai, many particular laws both moral and ceremonial, the worship of the golden calf, and a very minute description of the tabernacle, priests' garments, ark, &c.

In Leviticus we have a collection of ceremonial laws, with all their particularities, and an account of the deaths of Nadab and Abihu.

The book of Numbers contains the first and second numberings of the several tribes, with their genealogies, the peculiar offices of the three several families of the Levites, many ceremonial laws, the journeyings and encampments of the people in the wilderness during forty years, with the relation of some remarkable events which happened in this period; as the searching of the land, the rebellion of Korah, the victories over Arad, Sihon, and Og, with the division of the kingdoms of the two last among the Gadites, Reubenites, and Manassites, the history of Balak and Balaam, and the victory over the Midianites; all of which are described with the several particularities of time, place, and persons.

The book of Deuteronomy contains a recapitulation of many things comprised in the three last books, with a second delivery of the law, chiefly the moral one, by Moses, upon the borders of Canaan, just before his death.

In the book of Joshua, we have the passage over Jordan, the conquest of the land of Canaan in detail, and the division of it among the tribes, including a minute geographical description.

The book of Judges recites a great variety of public transactions, with the private origin of some. In all, the names of times, places, and persons, both among the Israelites, and the neighbouring nations, are noted with particularity and simplicity.

In the book of Ruth is a very particular account of the genealogy of David, with several incidental circumstances.

The books of Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, contain the transactions of the kings before the captivity, and governors afterwards, all delivered in the same circumstantial manner. And here the particular account of the regulations, sacred and civil, established by David, and of the building of the temple by Solomon, the

genealogies given in the beginning of the first book of Chronicles, and the lists of the persons who returned, sealed, &c. after the captivity, in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, deserve especial notice, in the light in which we are now considering things.

The book of Esther, contains a like account of a very remarkable event, with the institution of a festival in memory of it.

The book of Psalms mentions many historical facts in an incidental way; and this, with the books of Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Canticles, allude to the manners and customs of antient times in various ways.

In the Prophecies there are some historical relations; and in the other parts the indirect mention of facts, times, places, and persons, is interwoven with the predictions in the most copious and circumstantial

manner.

From the preceding statements, we may observe, first, that, in fact, we do not ever find that forged or false accounts of things superabound thus in particularities. There is always some truth where there are considerable particularities related, and they always seem to bear some proportion to one another. Thus there is a great want of the particulars of time, place, and persons in Manetho's account of the Egyptian dynasties, Ctesias's of the Assyrian kings, and those which the technical chronologers have given of the antient kingdoms of Greece; and agreeably thereto, these accounts have much fiction and falsehood, with some truth: whereas Thucydides's history of the Peloponnesian war, and Cæsar's of the war in Gaul, in both which the particulars of time, place, and persons, are mentioned, are universally esteemed true, to a great degree of exactness.

Secondly, a forger, or a relater of falsehoods, would be careful not to mention so great a number of particulars, since this would be to put into his reader's hands, criteria whereby to detect him. Thus we may see one reason of the fact mentioned in the last paragraph, and which, in confirming that fact, confirms the proposition here to be proved.

Thirdly, a forger, or a relater of falsehoods, could scarcely furnish such lists of particulars. It is easy to conceive how faithful records kept from time to time by persons concerned in the transactions should contain such lists; nay it is natural to expect them in this case, from that local memory which takes strong possession of the fancy in those who have been present at transactions; but it would be a work of the highest invention and greatest stretch of genius to raise from nothing such numberless particularities, as are almost every where to be met with in the Scriptures.

Fourthly, if we could suppose the persons who forged the books of the Old and New Testaments, to have furnished their readers with the great variety of particulars above mentioned, notwithstanding the two reasons here alleged against it, we cannot however conceive but that the persons of those times when the books were published, must by the help of these criteria have detected and exposed the forgeries or falsehoods. For these criteria are so attested by allowed facts, as

[blocks in formation]

at this time, and in this remote corner of the world, to establish the truth and genuineness of the Scriptures, as may appear even from this chapter, and much more from the writings of commentators, sacred critics, and such other learned men as have given the historical evidences for revealed religion in detail; and, by parity of reason, they would suffice even now to detect the fraud, were there any: whence we may conclude, à fortiori, that they must have enabled the persons who were upon the spot, when the books were published, to do this; and the importance of many of the particulars recorded, as well as of many of the precepts, observances and renunciations enjoined, would furnish them with abundant motives for this purpose.

Upon the whole, therefore, we conclude, that the very great number of particulars of time, place, persons, &c. mentioned in the Old Testament, is a proof of its genuineness and truth, even independently of the consideration of the agreement of these particulars with history, both natural and civil, and with one another; which agreement will be discussed in the following chapter1 as a confirmation of the credibility of the writers of the Old Testament.

IV. Notwithstanding the conclusiveness of the preceding arguments for the genuineness of the Old Testament collectively, attempts have been made of late years to impugn it, by undermining the genuineness and antiquity of particular books, especially of the Pentateuch, or five books which are ascribed to Moses: for, as the four last of these books are the basis of the Jewish dispensation, which was introductory to Christianity, if the Pentateuch could be proved to be neither genuine nor authentic, the genuineness and authenticity of the other books of the Old Testament, in consequence of their mutual and immediate dependence upon each other, must necessarily fall.

That the Pentateuch was written by the great legislator of the Hebrews, by whom it was addressed to his contemporaries, and consequently was not, nor could be, the production of later times, we are authorised to affirm from a series of testimonies, which, whether we consider them together or separately, form such a body of evidence, as can be adduced for the productions of no antient profane writers whatever for, let it be considered what are the marks and characters which prove the genuineness and authenticity of the works of any antient author, and the same arguments may be urged with equal, if not with greater force, in favour of the writings of Moses.

of

1. "It is an undeniable fact, that Hebrew ceased to be the living language of the Jews soon after the Babylonish captivity, and that the Jewish productions after that period were in general either Chaldee or Greek. The Jews of Palestine, some ages before the appearance our Saviour, were unable to comprehend the Hebrew original without the assistance of a Chaldee paraphrase; and it was necessary to undertake a Greek translation, because that language alone was known to the Jews of Alexandria. It necessarily follows, therefore, that every book which is written in pure Hebrew, was composed either

1 See Chapter III. Section II. and Chapter V. Section II. infra.

before or about the time of the Babylonish captivity. This being admitted, we may advance a step further, and contend, that the period which elapsed between the composition of the most antient and the most modern book of the Old Testament was very considerable; or, in other words, that the most antient books of the Old Testament were written a length of ages prior to the Babylonish captivity. No language continues during many centuries in the same state of cultivation, and the Hebrew, like other tongues, passed through the several stages of infancy, youth, manhood, and old age. If, therefore, (as we have already remarked), on comparison, the several parts of the Hebrew Bible are found to differ, not only in regard to style, but also in regard to character and cultivation of language; if the one discovers the golden, another the silver, a third a brazen, a fourth the iron age, we have strong internal marks of their having been composed at different and distant periods. No classical scholar, independently of the Grecian history, would believe that the poems ascribed to Homer were written in the age of Demosthenes, the orations of Demosthenes in the time of Origen, or the commentaries of Origen in the days of Lascaris and Chrysoloras. For the very same reason it is certain that the five books, which are ascribed to Moses, were not written in the time of David, the psalms of David in the age of Isaiah, nor the prophecies of Isaiah in the time of Malachi. But it appears from what has been said above, in regard to the extinction of the Hebrew language, that the book of Malachi could not have been written much later than the Babylonish captivity; before that period, therefore, were written the prophecies of Isaiah, still earlier the Psalms of David, and much earlier than these the books which are ascribed to Moses. There is no presumption, therefore, whatsoever, à priori, that Moses was not the author or compiler of the Pentateuch." And the ignorance of the assertion, which has lately been made that the Hebrew language is a compound of the Syriac, Arabic, and Chaldee languages, and a distortion of each of them with other provincial dialects and languages that were spoken by adjoining nations, by whom the Jews had at various times been subdued and led captive, -is only surpassed by its falsehood and its absurdity.

[ocr errors]

2. But further, the five books of Moses contain " a system of ceremonial and moral laws, which, unless we reject the authority of all history, were observed by the Israelites from the time of their departure out of Egypt till their dispersion at the taking of Jerusalem. These laws therefore are as antient as the conquest of Palestine. It is also an undeniable historical fact, that the Jews in every age believed that their ancestors had received them from the hand of Moses, and that these laws were the basis of their political and religious institutions, as long as they continued to be a people."3 Things of

1 See Doederlein Institutio Theologi Christiani, sect. 38. tom. i. p. 105. Norimbergæ, 1778.

2 Bishop Marsh's Authenticity of the Five Books of Moses vindicated, pp. 6, 7. 3 Ibid. p. 7.

« AnteriorContinuar »