Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

Jehovah is represented as communicating His will through organs appointed by Himself. The ordinances of the Law are treated as His express commands; even the leadership of Israel's armies is ascribed to Him1. Indeed, the narratives were, in point of fact, compiled and edited by men to whom the thought of God's immediate sovereignty over His elect people was a self-evident truth, and to whom, consequently, Israel's demand for an earthly king appeared to be a rejection of Jehovah2. Certainly this idea seems to pervade the story of the exodus and the description of Moses' legislation. Moses was the vicegerent of Israel's unseen ruler, and accordingly to his express authority are ascribed all the ordinances and institutions in which the truth of Israel's special consecration to Jehovah was visibly embodied.

The question naturally arises how the completed priestly code stands related to the Sinaitic legislation. Roughly speaking, there are upwards of eighty chapters in the Pentateuch comprising the priestly law as it actually existed in a developed and codified form at a period subsequent to the return of the Jews from Babylon. They form the central portion of our present Pentateuch, and the picture they present of Israel's institutions embodies an ideal which was aimed at but not actually attained before the exile. The fundamental thought which inspires the sketch we have already noticed, viz. the idea of Israel's holiness as a consecrated community, in the midst of which Jehovah himself dwells as lawgiver and king. Now all the evidence confirms the supposition, antecedently probable, that the legislation of Moses himself was primitive and simple in its features and confined itself to the regulation of the most essential points, in the matter of cultus probably adopting some traditional usages of ancient Semitic worship. The most reasonable view is that in the detailed descriptions of the tabernacle and the sacri1 Exod. xiii 17. Cp. Judges v. 23.

2 I Sam. viii. 7.

ficial ordinances contained in the priestly code we have a highly idealized sketch of institutions which probably existed only in a rudimentary form during the wanderings of Israel in the wilderness. Thus, for example, the simple tent of Mosaic days known to the early narratives is represented as an elaborate and costly structure, such as can hardly be supposed to have existed under the difficult circumstances of life in the wilderness'. Nevertheless, when all reservations have been made, it cannot be fairly denied that in germ at any rate the idea of a theocracy was Mosaic, and that the first legislation was based on the idea of Jehovah's immediate sovereignty. It is impossible to account satisfactorily for the collapse of Canaanitish civilization before the advance of the invading hosts of Israel, except on the supposition that there was some inspiring idea which animated the nation, welded it into unity, and stimulated it to extraordinary efforts. Such an idea certainly was the kingship of Jehovah; Israel was conscious of being under the immediate rule and guidance of the God who had promised to their fathers the land of Canaan for their inheritance.

4. Once more the typical significance of the Mosaic narratives must not be overlooked. The New Testament writers habitually refer to the actual experiences and characteristic institutions of the church in the wilderness as foreshadowing the mysteries of the spiritual life and of the divine kingdom in its widest sense. The general principles of redemption as they are exhibited in the fortunes of the Church and in the experience of its individual members, the great characteristic conceptions of Christianity, the phraseology and imagery of the New Testament-all these are rooted in the Pentateuch.

1 Kittel, Hist. of the Hebrews, vol. i. p. 238. The description of P corresponds to the idea which people in later times, influenced probably by what they saw of the continually increasing costliness of their sanctuaries, formed of the sacred desert-tent of the days of Moses.' 2 Acts vii. 38.

We are in fact justified by the express authority of the New Testament in recognizing the symbolic character of the Pentateuchal history. The narratives, whether prophetic or priestly, come from the hands of men who loved to trace in history the action of eternal principles. Israel's deliverance from servitude, its maintenance in the wilderness and its victory over the hostile powers of heathendom exemplified fixed and constant laws of divine action. It was confidently expected that the future development of the kingdom of God would proceed on lines already laid down, and would be accompanied by conditions closely parallel to those which the nation had experienced in its youth. Moses was regarded as bearing a figurative and predictive relation to a prophet greater than himself, yet to come. Again, the compilers of the priestly law belonged to a period when men were becoming conscious of the sacramental character of the ancient ceremonial worship. They understood, at least in a measure, that the sanctuary and sacrificial system veiled under material forms spiritual mysteries hereafter to be revealed; that outward ceremonies, objects, and acts embodied the thoughts of God concerning salvation and His kingdom. It was, however, only an instructed faith, and a fully developed experience that could discern in the Mosaic system the shadow or outline sketch of heavenly realities, of which the Gospel presents a complete picture. The significance of the Pentateuch for Christians lies in the fact that the fundamental conceptions which pervade each Testament are the same: the redemptive action of Almighty God; the separation from an evil world of a people brought by grace into covenant-relationship with its divine King and consecrated to His service; the foundation of a kingdom of God upon earth; the setting up of His tabernacle among men

1 See Heb. x. I. Cp. Ambrose in psalm. xxxviii. 25: 'Umbra in lege, imago vero in evangelio, veritas in caelestibus.' The quotation is given by Willis, Worship of the Old Covenant, p. 14.

and the building of a city which bears the title, The Lord is there1.

Enough has been now said to indicate that in the Pentateuch we are not dealing with history in the ordinary sense of that term, but with an idealized and partly prophetic picture, the principal purpose of which is to convey certain religious thoughts and ideas which beyond doubt formed the permanent basis of Judaism. This is the positive point on which it is needful to insist. The possibility of wide differences of view in regard to the intrinsic character and value of the Pentateuchal narratives must be frankly recognized. It is only necessary to make two concluding observations. First, to question the strict historical accuracy of the Mosaic story involves no denial of its inspiration. Whatever be the nature of the narratives, they have unquestionably been selected by the wisdom of the divine Spirit as the vehicles of spiritual truth best adapted to human needs and capacities. Secondly, there is every reason to suppose that the Pentateuch, whatever be the date of its final compilation, is based on genuine historical traditions and embodies in their developed form very ancient institutions and usages. It seems not improbable that the prophet Ezekiel led the way in reducing to theory and formulating the traditional usage of the pre-exilic sanctuary, and that he thus practically became the founder of a school which devoted itself to the task of codifying the priestly ordinances and regulations 2. If, however, it is difficult to determine the precise antiquity of particular elements in the Mosaic system of worship, it is possible, under the guidance of the New Testament, to comprehend the typical significance of the system, regarded as a single complex product of a germ planted by the hand of

1 Ezek. xlviii. 35. Cp. Riehm, Einleitung in das A. T. vol. i. pp. 362 foll., especially his remark: Die in einem Institute verkörperte Idee ist das innere Band zwischen dem Typus und Antitypus.'

2

Cp. Wellhausen, Sketch of the History of Israel and Judah, p. 131 ; Ryle, The Canon of the O. T. p. 72.

Israel's inspired legislator at the very dawn of its history.

III.

In passing to the historical books and prophecies, we enter upon firm historical ground. For there is little reason to doubt that the documents which form the substratum of the books of Samuel and Kings were official notices of political events, and nearly contemporary narratives, some of which may reasonably be supposed to have been written by prophets like Gad, Nathan, Iddo, and others. These books, then, contain very ancient materials, although the framework is unquestionably due to later editors. The main influence that can be detected in the compilation is that of the book of Deuteronomy. Writers of the Deuteronomic school seem to have reduced the books of Judges, Samuel, and Kings to their present form between the death of Josiah and the exile. The books did not, apparently, 'escape further additions and interpretations in the post-exilic period; but their main character, the framework in which the facts are arranged, and the uniform lesson they are made to teach, were the product of the periods immediately before, and either during, or soon after, the exile 1.'

What, then, are the general features of these books? In the first place they are compilations, and in their work the compilers seem to have retained considerable freedom, incorporating their authorities as they stood with but few changes, arranging the material on some plan of their own, and adding comments.

1

Montefiore, Hibbert Lectures, pp. 231, 232. Cp. Wellhausen, Prolegomena, ch. vii. The book of Joshua is not particularly dealt with because it is closely connected both by its subject-matter and its literary structure with the Pentateuch. It describes the closing stage of the movement that began with the exodus. By the Jews, however, the book is classed among the 'former prophets.'

L

« AnteriorContinuar »