Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
[Table of Contents]
[Previous]
[Next]
|
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871)
|
INTRODUCTION
TO THE PENTATEUCH AND HISTORICAL BOOKS
by ROBERT JAMIESON
The Pentateuch, the name by which the first five books of the Bible are
designated, is derived from two Greek words, pente, "five," and
teuchos, a "volume," thus signifying the fivefold volume.
Originally these books formed one continuous work, as in the Hebrew
manuscripts they are still connected in one unbroken roll. At what time
they were divided into five portions, each having a separate title, is
not known, but it is certain that the distinction dates at or before
the time of the Septuagint translation. The names they bear in
our English version are borrowed from the Septuagint, and they
were applied by those Greek translators as descriptive of the principal
subjects--the leading contents of the respective books. In the later
Scriptures they are frequently comprehended under the general
designation, The Law, The Book of the Law, since, to give a
detailed account of the preparations for, and the delivery of, the
divine code, with all the civil and sacred institutions that were
peculiar to the ancient economy, is the object to which they are
exclusively devoted. They have always been placed at the beginning of
the Bible, not only on account of their priority in point of time, but
as forming an appropriate and indispensable introduction to the rest of
the sacred books. The numerous and oft-recurring references made in the
later Scriptures to the events, the ritual, and the doctrines of the
ancient Church would have not only lost much of their point and
significance, but have been absolutely unintelligible without the
information which these five books contain. They constitute the
groundwork or basis on which the whole fabric of revelation rests, and
a knowledge of the authority and importance that is thus attached to
them will sufficiently account for the determined assaults that
infidels have made on these books, as well as for the zeal and
earnestness which the friends of the truth have displayed in their
defense.
The Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch is established by the concurring
voices both of Jewish and Christian tradition; and their unanimous
testimony is supported by the internal character and statements of the
work itself. That Moses did keep a written record of the important
transactions relative to the Israelites is attested by his own express
affirmation. For in relating the victory over the Amalekites, which he
was commanded by divine authority to record, the language employed,
"write this for a memorial in a book" [Hebrew, the book],
(Ex 17:14),
shows that that narrative was to form part of a register already in
progress, and various circumstances combine to prove that this register
was a continuous history of the special goodness and care of divine
providence in the choice, protection, and guidance of the Hebrew
nation. First, there are the repeated assertions of Moses himself that
the events which checkered the experience of that people were written
down as they occurred (see
Ex 24:4-7; 34:27;
Nu 33:2).
Secondly, there are the testimonies borne in various parts of the later
historical books to the Pentateuch as a work well known, and familiar
to all the people (see
Jos 1:8; 8:34; 23:6; 24:26;
1Ki 2:3, &c.)
Thirdly, frequent references are made in the works of the prophets to
the facts recorded in the books of Moses
(compare
Isa 1:9
with Ge 19:1;
Isa 12:2
with Ex 15:2;
Isa 51:2
with Ge 12:2;
Isa 54:9
with Ge 8:21, 22;
compare
Ho 9:10
with Nu 25:3;
Ho 11:8
with Ge 19:24;
Ho 12:4
with Ge 32:24, 25;
Ho 12:12
with Ge 28:5; 29:20;
compare
Joe 1:9
with Nu 15:4-7; 28:7-14;
De 12:6, 7; 16:10, 11;
compare
Am 2:9
with Nu 21:21;
Am 4:4
with Nu 28:3;
Am 4:11
with Ge 19:24;
Am 9:13
with Le 26:5;
compare
Mic 6:5
with Nu 22:25;
Mic 6:6
with Le 9:2;
Mic 6:15
with Le 26:16,
&c.)
Fourthly, the testimony of Christ and the Apostles is repeatedly borne
to the books of Moses
(Mt 19:7;
Lu 16:29; 24:27;
Joh 1:17; 7:19;
Ac 3:22; 28:23;
Ro 10:5).
Indeed the references are so numerous, and the testimonies so
distinctly borne to the existence of the Mosaic books throughout the
whole history of the Jewish nation, and the unity of character, design,
and style pervading these books is so clearly perceptible,
notwithstanding the rationalistic assertions of their forming a series
of separate and unconnected fragments, that it may with all safety be
said, there is immensely stronger and more varied evidence in proof of
their being the authorship of Moses than of any of the Greek or Roman
classics being the productions of the authors whose names they bear.
But admitting that the Pentateuch was written by Moses, an important
question arises, as to whether the books which compose it have reached
us in an authentic form; whether they exist genuine and entire as they
came from the hands of their author. In answer to this question, it
might be sufficient to state that, in the public and periodical
rehearsals of the law in the solemn religious assemblies of the people,
implying the existence of numerous copies, provision was made for
preserving the integrity of "The Book of the Law." But besides this,
two remarkable facts, the one of which occurred before and the other
after the captivity, afford conclusive evidence of the genuineness and
authenticity of the Pentateuch. The first is the discovery in the reign
of Josiah of the autograph copy which was deposited by Moses in the ark
of the testimony, and the second is the schism of the Samaritans, who
erected a temple on Mount Gerizim, and who, appealing to the Mosaic law
as the standard of their faith and worship equally with the Jews,
watched with jealous care over every circumstance that could affect the
purity of the Mosaic record. There is the strongest reason, then, for
believing that the Pentateuch, as it exists now, is substantially the
same as it came from the hands of Moses. The appearance of a later
hand, it is true, is traceable in the narrative of the death of Moses
at the close of Deuteronomy, and some few interpolations, such as
inserting the altered names of places, may have been made by Ezra, who
revised and corrected the version of the ancient Scriptures. But,
substantially, the Pentateuch is the genuine work of Moses, and many,
who once impugned its claims to that character, and looked upon it as
the production of a later age, have found themselves compelled, after a
full and unprejudiced investigation of the subject, to proclaim their
conviction that its authenticity is to be fully relied on.
The genuineness and authenticity of the Pentateuch being admitted, the
inspiration and canonical authority of the work follow as a necessary
consequence. The admission of Moses to the privilege of frequent and
direct communion with God
(Ex 25:22; 33:3;
Nu 7:89; 9:8);
his repeated and solemn declarations that he spoke and wrote by command
of God; the submissive reverence that was paid to the authority of his
precepts by all classes of the Jewish people, including the king
himself
(De 17:18; 27:3);
and the acknowledgment of the divine mission of Moses by the writers of
the New Testament, all prove the inspired character and authority of
his books. The Pentateuch possessed the strongest claims on the
attention of the Jewish people, as forming the standard of their faith,
the rule of their obedience, the record of their whole civil and
religious polity. But it is interesting and important to all mankind,
inasmuch as besides revealing the origin and early development of the
divine plan of grace, it is the source of all authentic knowledge,
giving the true philosophy, history, geography, and chronology of the
ancient world. Finally, the Pentateuch "is indispensable to the whole
revelation contained in the Bible; for Genesis being the legitimate
preface to the law; the law being the natural introduction to the Old
Testament; and the whole a prelude to the gospel revelation, it could
not have been omitted. What the four Gospels are in the New, the five
books of Moses are in the Old Testament."
GENESIS, the book of the origin or production of
all things, consists of two parts: the first, comprehended in the first
through eleventh chapters, gives a general history; the second,
contained in the subsequent chapters, gives a special history. The two
parts are essentially connected; the one, which sets out with an
account of the descent of the human race from a single pair, the
introduction of sin into the world, and the announcement of the scheme
of divine mercy for repairing the ruins of the fall, was necessary to
pave the way for relating the other, namely, the call of Abraham, and
the selection of his posterity for carrying out the gracious purpose of
God. An evident unity of method, therefore, pervades this book, and the
information contained in it was of the greatest importance to the
Hebrew people, as without it they could not have understood the
frequent references made in their law to the purposes and promises of
God regarding themselves. The arguments that have been already adduced
as establishing the Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch prove of course
that Moses was the author of Genesis. The few passages on which the
rationalists grounded their assertions that it was the composition of a
later age have been successfully shown to warrant no such conclusion;
the use of Egyptian words and the minute acquaintance with Egyptian
life and manners, displayed in the history of Joseph, harmonize with
the education of Moses, and whether he received his information by
immediate revelation, from tradition, or from written documents, it
comes to us as the authentic work of an author who wrote as he was
inspired by the Holy Ghost
(2Pe 1:21).
EXODUS, a "going forth," derives its name from its
being occupied principally with a relation of the departure of the
Israelites from Egypt, and the incidents that immediately preceded as
well as followed that memorable migration. Its authorship by Moses is
distinctly asserted by himself
(Ex 24:4),
as well as by our Lord
(Mr 12:26;
Lu 20:37).
Besides, the thorough knowledge it exhibits of the institutions and
usages of the ancient Egyptians and the minute geographical details of
the journey to Sinai, establish in the clearest manner the authenticity
of this book.
LEVITICUS. So called from its treating of the laws
relating to the ritual, the services, and sacrifices of the Jewish
religion, the superintendence of which was entrusted to the Levitical
priesthood. It is chiefly, however, the duties of the priests, "the
sons of Aaron," which this book describes; and its claim to be the work
of Moses is established by the following passages:--
2Ch 30:16;
Ne 8:14;
Jer 7:22-23;
Eze 20:11
Mt 8:4;
Lu 2:22;
Joh 8:5;
Ro 10:4; 13:9;
2Co 6:16;
Ga 3:12;
1Pe 1:16.
NUMBERS. This book is so called because it
contains an account of the enumeration and arrangement of the
Israelites. The early part of it, from the first through the tenth
chapters, appears to be a supplement to Leviticus, being occupied with
relating the appointment of the Levites to the sacred offices. The
journal of the march through the wilderness is then given as far as
Nu 21:20;
after which the early incidents of the invasion are narrated. One
direct quotation only from this book
(Nu 16:5)
is made in the New Testament
(2Ti 2:19);
but indirect references to it by the later sacred writers are very
numerous.
DEUTERONOMY, the second law, a title which
plainly shows what is the object of this book, namely, a recapitulation
of the law. It was given in the form of public addresses to the people;
and as Moses spoke in the prospect of his speedy removal, he enforced
obedience to it by many forcible appeals to the Israelites, concerning
their long and varied experience both of the mercies and the judgments
of God. The minute notices of the heathen people with whom they had
come in contact, but who afterward disappeared from the pages of
history, as well as the accounts of the fertility and products of
Canaan, and the counsels respecting the conquest of that country, fix
the date of this book and the time of its composition by the hand of
Moses. The close, however, must have been added by another; and,
indeed, it is supposed by some to have formed the original preface to
the Book of Joshua.
JOSHUA. The title of this book is derived from the
pious and valiant leader whose achievements it relates and who is
commonly supposed to have been its author. The objections to this idea
are founded chiefly on the clause, "unto this day," which occurs
several times
(Jos 4:9; 6:25; 8:28).
But this, at least in the case of Rahab, is no valid reason for
rejecting the idea of his authorship; for assuming what is most
probable, that this book was composed toward the close of Joshua's long
career, or compiled from written documents left by him, Rahab might
have been still alive. A more simple and satisfactory way of accounting
for the frequent insertion of the clause, "unto this day," is the
opinion that it was a comment introduced by Ezra, when revising the
sacred canon; and this difficulty being removed, the direct proofs of
the book having been produced by a witness of the transactions related
in it, the strong and vivid descriptions of the passing scenes, and the
use of the words "we" and "us,"
(Jos 5:1-6),
viewed in connection with the fact, that, after his farewell address to
the people, Joshua "wrote these words in the book of the law of God"
[Jos 24:26]
--all afford strong presumptive proof that the entire book was the work
of that eminent individual. Its inspiration and canonical authority are
fully established by the repeated testimonies of other Scripture
writers (compare
Jos 6:26
with 1Ki 16:34;
compare
Jos 10:13
with Hab 3:11;
Jos 3:14
with Ac 7:45;
Jos 6:17-23
with Heb 11:30;
Jos 2:1-24
with Jas 2:25;
Ps 44:2; 68:12-14; 78:54-55).
As a narrative of God's faithfulness in giving the Israelites
possession of the promised land, this history is most valuable, and
bears the same character as a sequel to the Pentateuch, that the Acts
of the Apostles do to the Gospels.
JUDGES is the title given to the next book, from
its containing the history of those non-regal rulers who governed the
Hebrews from the time of Joshua to that of Eli, and whose functions in
time of peace consisted chiefly in the administration of justice,
although they occasionally led the people in their wars against their
public enemies. The date and authorship of this book are not precisely
known. It is certain, however, that it preceded the Second Book of
Samuel (compare
Jud 9:35
with 2Sa 11:21),
as well as the conquest of Jerusalem by David (compare
Jud 1:21
with 2Sa 5:6).
Its author was in all probability Samuel, the last of the judges (see
Jud 19:1; 21:25),
and the date of the first part of it is fixed in the reign of Saul,
while the five chapters at the close might not have been written till
after David's establishment as king in Israel (see
Jud 18:31).
It is a fragmentary history, being a collection of important facts and
signal deliverances at different times and in various parts of the
land, during the intermediate period of three hundred years between
Joshua and the establishment of the monarchy. The inspired character of
this book is confirmed by allusions to it in many passages of Scripture
(compare
Jud 4:2; 6:14
with 1Sa 12:9-12;
Jud 9:53
with 2Sa 11:21;
Jud 7:25
with Ps 83:11;
compare
Jud 5:4, 5
with Ps 7:5;
Jud 13:5; 16:17
with Mt 2:13-23;
Ac 13:20;
Heb 11:32).
RUTH is properly a supplement to the preceding
book, to which, in fact, it was appended in the ancient Jewish canon.
Although it relates an episode belonging to the time of the Judges, its
precise date is unknown. It appears certain, however, that it could not
have been written prior to the time of Samuel (see
Ru 4:17-22),
who is generally supposed to have been its author; and this opinion, in
addition to other reasons on which it rests, is confirmed by
Ru 4:7,
where it is evident that the history was not compiled till long after
the transactions recorded. The inspiration and canonical authority of
the book is attested by the fact of Ruth's name being inserted by
Matthew in the Saviour's genealogy
[Mt 1:5].
THE
FIRST AND
SECOND
BOOKS OF
SAMUEL.
The two were, by the ancient Jews, conjoined so as to make one book,
and in that form could be called the Book of Samuel with more propriety
than now, the second being wholly occupied with the relation of
transactions that did not take place till after the death of that
eminent judge. Accordingly, in the Septuagint and the
Vulgate, it is called the First and Second Books of Kings. The
early portion of the First Book, down to the end of the twenty-fourth
chapter, was probably written by Samuel; while the rest of it and the
whole of the Second, are commonly ascribed to Nathan and Gad, founding
the opinion on
1Ch 29:29.
Commentators, however, are divided about this, some supposing that the
statements in
1Sa 2:26; 3:1,
indicate the hand of the judge himself, or a contemporary; while some
think, from
1Sa 6:18; 12:5; 27:6,
that its composition must be referred to a later age. It is probable,
however, that these supposed marks of an after-period were
interpolations of Ezra. This uncertainty, however, as to the authorship
does not affect the inspired authority of the book, which is
indisputable, being quoted in the New Testament
(1Sa 13:14
in Ac 13:22,
and
2Sa 7:14
in Heb 1:5),
as well as in many of the Psalms.
THE
FIRST AND
SECOND
BOOKS OF
KINGS,
in the ancient copies of the Hebrew Bible, constitute one book.
Various titles have been given them; in the Septuagint and the
Vulgate they are called the Third and Fourth Books of Kings. The
authorship of these books is unknown; but the prevailing opinion is
that they were compiled by Ezra, or one of the later prophets, from the
ancient documents that are so frequently referred to in the course of
the history as of public and established authority. Their inspired
character was acknowledged by the Jewish Church, which ranked them in
the sacred canon; and, besides, it is attested by our Lord, who
frequently quotes from them (compare
1Ki 17:9;
2Ki 5:14
with Lu 4:24-27;
1Ki 10:1
with Mt 12:42).
THE
FIRST AND
SECOND
BOOKS OF
CHRONICLES
were also considered as one by the ancient Jews, who called them "words
of days," that is, diaries or journals, being probably compiled from
those registers that were kept by the king's historiographers of
passing occurrences. In the Septuagint the title given them is
Paraleipomenon, "of things omitted," that is, the books are
supplementary because many things unnoticed in the former books are
here recorded; and not only the omissions are supplied, but some
narratives extended while others are added. The authorship is commonly
ascribed to Ezra, whose leading object seems to have been to show the
division of families, possessions, &c., before the captivity, with a
view to the exact restoration of the same order after the return from
Babylon. Although many things are restated and others are exact
repetitions of what is contained in Kings, there is so much new and
important information that, as JEROME has well
said, the Chronicles furnish the means of comprehending parts of the
New Testament, which must have been unintelligible without them. They
are frequently referred to by Christ and the Apostles as forming part
of "the Word of God" (see the genealogies in
Mt 1:1-16;
Lu 3:23-38;
compare
2Ch 19:7
with 1Pe 1:17;
2Ch 24:19-21
with Mt 23:32-35).
EZRA was, along with Nehemiah, reckoned one book
by the ancient Jews, who called them the First and Second Books of
Ezra, and they are still designated by Roman Catholic writers the First
and Second Books of Esdras. This book naturally divides itself into two
parts or sections, the one contained in the first six chapters, and
which relates the circumstances connected with the return of the first
detachment of Babylonish exiles under Zerubbabel with the consequent
rebuilding of the temple and the re-establishment of the divine
service. The other part, embraced in the four concluding chapters,
narrates the journey of a second caravan of returning captives under
the conduct of Ezra himself, who was invested with powers to restore,
in all its splendor, the entire system of the Jewish ritual. The
general opinion of the Church in every succeeding age has been that
Ezra was the author of this book. The chief objection is founded on
Ezr 5:4,
where the words, "Then said we unto them after this manner, What are
the names of the men that make this building?" have occasioned a
surmise that the first portion of the book was not written by Ezra, who
did not go to Jerusalem for many years after. But a little attention
will show the futility of this objection, as the words in question did
not refer to the writer, but were used by Tatnai and his associates
[Ezr 5:3].
The style and unity of object in the book clearly prove it to have been
the production of but one author. The canonical authority of this book
is well established; but another under the name of Ezra is rejected as
apocryphal.
NEHEMIAH appears to have been the author of this
book, from his usually writing in his own name, and indeed, except in
those parts which are unmistakably later editions or borrowed from
public documents, he usually employs the first person. The major
portion of the book is occupied with a history of Nehemiah's twelve
years' administration in Jerusalem, after which he returned to his
duties in Shushan. At a later period he returned with new powers and
commenced new and vigorous measures of reform, which are detailed in
the later chapters of the book.
ESTHER derives its name from the Jewess, who,
having become wife of the king of Persia, employed her royal influence
to effect a memorable deliverance for the persecuted Church of God.
Various opinions are embraced and supported as to the authorship of
this book, some ascribing it to Ezra, to Nehemiah, or to Mordecai. The
preponderance of authorities is in favor of the last. The historical
character of the book is undoubted, since, besides many internal
evidences, its authenticity is proved by the strong testimony of the
feast of Purim, the celebration of which can be traced up to the events
which are described in this book. Its claim, however, to canonical
authority has been questioned on the ground that the name of God does
not once occur in it. But the uniform tradition both of the Jewish and
the Christian Churches supports this claim, which nothing in the book
tends to shake; while it is a record of the superintending care of
divine providence over his chosen people, with which it is of the
utmost importance the Church should be furnished. The name of God is
strangely enough omitted, but the presence of God is felt throughout
the history; and the whole tone and tendency of the book is so
decidedly subservient to the honor of God and the cause of true
religion that it has been generally received by the Church in all ages
into the sacred canon.
[Table of Contents]
[Previous]
[Next]
| Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871)
|
|