Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

tianity than the supposition, that some prediction of the future glory of the church of Christ had its accomplishment in the establishment of Christianity by Constantine; or that a prophecy of some occasion of exceeding joy to all the redeemed was realised in the overthrow of Napoleon Buonaparte.

Again, the Christian Scriptures are distinguished from the Jewish by their brief references to the elementary truths of religion, and by the prominent exhibition of the higher truths which conduce to the moral perfection of man. This book is plainly intended for those who have received instruction in the gospel of Christ. It pre-supposes this knowledge, as well as an acquaintance with the truths of natural religion. Considering it as a Christian poem and prophecy, we should conclude that it was not designed to teach principally the foreknowledge of God. It rather seems intended for the edification of those who already possess such views of the Divine perfections, that their reverence and confidence would not be much enhanced by any proof, however conclusive, that the Creator and Lord of the universe foresaw the dress of eastern warriors, the names of popes, and the number of years that would elapse between the rise of Togrul Beg and the taking of Constantinople. We might expect, therefore, that, leaving the first principles of the oracles of God, we should in such a work be led on to perfection. We may look for declarations the tendency of which will be to assimilate Christians to their Lord, to secure them from the temptations of the world to which they are exposed, to prepare them for that endurance of suffering and that conflict with evil to which they are called, and so to fill them with the glory of the kingdom of Christ, that by faith, love, and hope, they too shall overcome, following the Captain of their salvation.

We do not suppose that these considerations will convince any that the information which they have been accustomed to seek in the Apocalypse cannot possibly be found there. What is, or is not taught, can only be known by the careful study of the book itself. But we think that the expectation of finding historical and chronological information respecting particular nations and periods of time has been one great cause of the misunderstanding by many of these symbols. We believe that the interpretation which accords with the analogy of Old Testament prophecies, and with the general character of Christianity, will be found to be more suitable than any other to all the various parts of this book, whether regarded separately or in their connexion one with another.

II.

ON THE AGE OF THE BOOK OF JOB.*

In our own day, it has at length become impossible any longer to dispense with a searching criticism of the biblical records; and for this simple reason, that the spirit of criticism really governs the whole intellectual development of the age. We do not regard this as a matter to be lamented; for genuine criticism is by no means confined to negative, but ever strives essentially after positive results. It is only in those cases where it remains fixed in doubts and negations, that it undermines either faith or true knowledge: when, on the other hand, it strives with earnestness and dignity after positive truth, it always shows itself adapted to exhibit it in new phases and ever-increasing beauty. The present tendency of criticism differs from the former, chiefly in its love for the positive. But in this tendency it has to guard against errors quite as much as in its more negative aspect: inasmuch as the materials it affords must be handled with great prudence, if they are not to prove in any degree deceptive. To take a particular example-the character of the language, the progress of religious conceptions, the influence of heathen literature, and the political relations of the times, are all of great weight in determining the age of any of the Old Testament productions. These principles I have already attempted to apply to the very difficult question respecting the date of the Psalms; and trust that I have done so with some success. But at the same time I have found how strongly these points need to be guarded, and how impossible it is to come to any satisfactory results without observing the greatest caution.

Of all the Old Testament writings, the book of Job, as to its spirit, its contents, and its language, is the greatest production of the Hebrew people; it is the true Epopée of the nation; that in which the theocracy is exhibited in the clearest manner; and in which the deepest thoughts of the human soul clothed naturally and beautifully in a dress of the most gorgeous poetry, present themselves to our view, and struggle with intense earnestness for the solution of the great enigma of the world's history. In the case of such a book, the date of its composition must be of the greatest value; because, when placed in the light of its own age, it speaks to us a more intelligible language; and its full comprehension becomes so much the more perfect. How difficult it is to determine this point in the case before us, is proved by the simple

* Translated from an article in the Studien und Kritiken,' written by F. G. Vaihinger.

fact, that the critics of more recent times, from Eichhorn and Berthold, down to Vatke and Ernst Meier, vary respecting the date no less than a thousand years, inasmuch as the former place it in the period before Moses, and the others at some time after the Babylonish captivity, namely, in the fifth century before Christ. As I now propose to make some attempt at fixing the real age of the book of Job, I shall begin by endeavouring to place certain limits on both sides, by means of which the investigation can go forward with security. In this way we shall at length fix upon a given period, which still affords a tolerable latitude. Intelligent critics must not be vexed at this indefinite result, since even Ewald, who seeks to fix the time of its composition very precisely, says, 'The age of the book can only be known by approximation, even as regards centuries.'

I begin, then, by laying down, in the outset, these two propositions:

1. That the book of Job cannot have been composed before the time of Solomon. And,

2. That the book of Job must have been written before Jeremiah, consequently before the time of king Josiah.

Before I attempt to narrow this period, which comprehends full three centuries, I will offer some evidence for both propositions. And, first, the earlier critics, who fix the date of the composition before the time of Moses, or between Moses and Solomon, have almost all started with the common error of not separating the time of Job's life from that of the composition, which treats of him and of his destiny. The necessity of making this distinction, however, must be at once obvious. That Job, whose life most evidently belongs to the patriarchal times, himself wrote the document which bears his name, no one will now in good earnest maintain, much less undertake to prove. On this point, therefore, there is no need to insist. But there are positive marks, which render the idea of its being written before Solomon altogether impossible. These lie, (to pass by the other reasons which have either often been urged before, as those derived from the progress of religious ideas, and from political relations, or which are not very conclusive, as the influence of foreign culture,) these lie, we say, in the language of the book, both in general, and also in its particular features. I do not now refer to the so-called Aramæisms, of which we shall speak by-and-by, but rather to the whole figurative construction of the poem, and its by no means polished and artistic, yet, at the same time, pure and flowing diction. When we compare with this the well-attested relics of the earlier poetry, such as the fragments in the twenty-first of Numbers, and the song of Deborah, we must feel convinced that the earlier poetical diction was much more rough and unpolished, and that it

was first brought into form and pliancy by David and Solomon, or at least during their glorious age; as we find it, for example, in the Psalms and Proverbs. The prose, in like manner, appears to have received at that time a beneficial modification; at any rate, it is not easy to assert anything in opposition to Ewald's remarks on the re-elaboration of the earlier historical books, by some author of that period. (See Ewald's Geschichte des Volkes Israel, vol. i. p. 72.) But, to come to examples, the expression pix, (Ophir,) occurs twice in the book of Job, namely, xxii. 24, and xxviii. 16, an expression which it is vain to search for in the Pentateuch, though it often makes mention of gold; as also in the Psalms of David, which, in the same manner as the Pentateuch, only speaks of, and. It is true that the region itself is mentioned in the register of the peoples of the earth, (Gen. x. 29;) but Ewald has proved beyond a doubt, in his Israelitish History, that this register does not represent the ideas of the Israelites at the time of Moses, but the later geographical ideas of the age of Solomon. At any rate there was no trade to Ophir, and no gold from Ophir, in Israel before the time of Solomom; and on that account we find it first mentioned in the later Psalms, as xlv. 10. No one, at least, can very well deny that the two passages, 1 Kings ix. 28, and 1 Kings x. 11, express the first acquaintance of Israel with this distant land. If, then, the book of Job is an Israelitish production, as is now universally acknowledged, the very circumstance that the gold of Ophir is mentioned in it,-gold which first became known in the time of Solomon,-is a striking proof that the composition of the book of Job cannot fall before the time of Solomon, to say nothing of the many other objections, which stand in the way of an earlier authorship.

But however certain it may be that the book of Job was not written before the time of Solomon, it is equally evident that it was written before the time of the prophet Jeremiah and of king Josiah. If we carefully compare the passage in Jer. xx. 14-18, with Job iii. 3-10, and Jer. xvii. 1, with Job xix. 24, we cannot but observe a striking relationship. If this relationship indicates the acquaintance of the one author with the writings of the other, there can be no hesitation in asserting, both from the thorough originality of the author of Job, and from the circumstance that Jeremiah, in other places, quotes the earlier writings in his work, that the book of Job was known by Jeremiah, and consequently was written previous to his prophecies.

This becomes so much the clearer when we observe how closely the Lamentations of Jeremiah are related to Job in many points both of language and subject; so that, from these circumstances together, we may conclude with tolerable certainty upon Jeremiah's

acquaintance with the book of Job. The relationship in the subject-matter presents itself throughout the whole work; but as an instance of it in expression, any one may compare Lam. iii. 7, 9, with Job xix. 8; Lam. ii. 15 with Job xii. 4, xvii. 6, xxx. 1.

Contemporary with Jeremiah was the prophet Ezekiel. If this author (see Ezek. xiv. 14) knew Job as a very pious and devotional man, there must certainly have been before his imagination not a mere traditionary character, but the distinct person whose life is contained in the work before us; more especially with reference to the passage in Job xlii. 8. These reasons may be sufficient to lead any unprejudiced mind to regard it as morally certain, not only that Job lived before the age of both these prophets, but that his life had also been depicted in the book which we now possess. A similar reference to the book of Job appears also to be contained in Isa. xl. 2, as compared with Job vii. 1, also in Zech. xiv. 5, as compared with Job v. 1.

We are now in a position to advance somewhat farther, and to narrow our first supposition. In the book of Amos there are two passages which coincide in a very striking manner with the book of Job. In Amos iv. 13, this expression is used respecting Jehovah, yo by 77, the very same which we find in Job ix. 8, only in this case, instead of the expression, we find the term D employed. In the same manner, in Amos v. 8, we find the names of two constellations, and D, which we also meet with in Job ix. 9, and xxxviii. 21. These coincidences can hardly be fortuitous; they seem to indicate either that Amos had known the author of the book of Job, or that that author had known him. At the first view of the case, it may seem difficult to arrive at a decision on this point; but other points have yet to come before us, which will throw much light upon it. In consideration of the acknowledged originality of the book of Job, we should more safely conclude, at the first blush of the question, that the simple shepherd Amos had yielded his mind to the influence of so profound a writing as that on Job, rather than imagine the contrary. (Compare the expression in Micah i. 3, and a similar one, Isa. lviii. 14, and Deut. xxxii. 13.) For example, the heights of the sea, (that is, of the sea of clouds above us,) as used by Job, is manifestly a stronger and bolder expression than the heights of the earth, which are familiar to the eyes of every one. Since, however, it is clearly shown in other cases that the weaker term is also the later, it seems more natural to suppose that the weaker term was imitated by Amos, than the stronger by the author of Job.

If, on the one hand, the acknowledged critical canon, that the stronger expression is the original, goes to prove that the book of Job was used by the prophet Amos; the other critical rule,

« ZurückWeiter »