Page images
PDF
EPUB

at all events, the language belongs to a very late period."

[Augustine, Isidore, and Origen, refer the book to Ezra; Mr. Horne inclines to the same opinion; forgetting that he died before the date of the alleged events. Some of the Jewish rabbins, with the PseudoPhilo, refer it to Jehoiachim, a high priest of the Jews. Other Jewish writers, whom Huetius follows, ascribe it to the men of the Great Synagogue. R. Isaac Ben Aramah goes so far as to add, that Esther entreated these worthies of the Great Synagogue to write the book, taking the facts from the Persian records. Aben Ezra, and the greatest part of the Jewish and Christian scholars, refer it to Mordecai. Clement of Alexandria was of this opinion. Spinoza thinks it was written by some Jewish scribe, after the restoration of the temple by Judas the Maccabee. An author in Leclerc's Bibliotheca'-supposed to be Leclerc himself-says the book embraces figments collected by Hellenistic Jews; while the grave authorities, Nicolius Serrarius and Oliver Bonartius, consider it the joint work of Esther and Mordecai. More modern writers, with better judgment, affirm only their ignorance of the authorship.]

• The following examples are selected only from chap. i. Persian words : [77, verse 8, and often ;], 3; D, 20.-Later words, forms,

[ocr errors]

command, 10, 17; 7, 1, and often; 2,5; 1, 2, and often; "", honor, 20;, marble; 7, 8; by, 19.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

§ 200.

ADDITIONS TO THE BOOK OF ESTHER.

The Alexandrian version and the Itala, besides other less important variations from the Hebrew text, contain some additions to the book of Esther, which Jerome, in his Latin version, has placed at the end of the book, and Luther has placed in the Apocrypha. Josephus, also, is acquainted with these."

From the contradictions between these fragments and the rest of the book, it appears they are not genuine. [In the English version of these passages, (x. 2, xi. 1, sqq.,) it is said Mordecai discovered the conspiracy against the monarch in the second year of Artaxerxes. Now, from Esth. ii. 16, it appears Esther became queen in the seventh year, and at that time Mordecai sat at the king's gate, and "in these days, while he sat

[blocks in formation]

1. A dream of Mordecai, which, in the Alexandrian version, is prefixed to i. 1; in the Vulgate and English version, it appears after xi. 1–xii. 6. It is chap. vii. in Luther's Bible.

2. The decree of Haman, referred to in iii. 12, sqq. In the Alexandrian version, this is placed after iii. 13. It is xiii. 1-7 in the Vulgate and English Bible, and chap. i. in Luther.

3. A prayer of Mordecai and Esther, which, in the Seventy, is put after iv. 17; in the Vulgate and English, xiii. 8-xiv. 19; and ii. and iii. in Luther's version.

4. An embellished account of the scene between Esther and the king, v. 1,2, in the Seventy; xv. 4—19, in the Vulgate and English; and iv. in Luther.

5. The edict of Mordecai, alluded to in viii. 9. In the Septuagint, this occurs after viii. 12; in the Vulgate and English, xvi. 1—15; Luther, vi.

6. An explanation of Mordecai's dream, and an account of the manner in which the feast of Purim was celebrated in Egypt. In the Alexandrian, Vulgate, and English versions, this is placed after x. 3; and in chap viii. in Luther's version.

at the gate," discovered the conspiracy. The names of the two conspirators differ in the two accounts. In the first, they are Bigthan and Teresh, (ii. 21;) in the second, Gabatha and Tharra, (Apoc. xii. 1.) In one, Haman is angry because Mordecai will not do homage to him, (iii. 5;) in the other, on account of the eunuchs of the king, (xii. 6.) In ix. 20 and 32, Mordecai sends letters commanding the Jews to keep the feast of Purim, and Esther confirms these letters; but in xvi. 22, the king himself orders, not merely the Jews, but all his subjects, to keep it, "among their solemn feasts, a high day, with all feasting."]

a

From its religious tone, it is probable it is of Hellenistic and Alexandrian origin. This appears, also, from the party-colored and bombastic language, and the transformation of Haman into a Macedonian, (xvi. 10 and 14.) Bertholdt thinks the fragments were first added as supplementary notes, and has based this opinion on the incompleteness of these fragments in the Hebrew manuscripts, and in the Syriac and Arabic versions in the London Polyglot."

a

Eichhorn, Einl. in die Apocryphen, p. 488, sqq.

De Rossi (Specimen Varr. Lectt. sacri Textus et Chaldaica Estheris Additamenta; Tub. 1783) thinks the original book of Esther was a larger work, written in Chaldee by Mordecai, containing the present apocryphal additions, and the present book of Esther has been extracted from it. He founds this opinion upon a Hebrew MS. containing some of these chapters in the Chaldee language. But Bertholdt (p. 2457, sqq.) has satisfactorily answered the claims of this hypothesis. See, also, Usseri, Syntagmata de Græcæ LXX. Interprett. Vers. cum Libri Esth., Editione Origenica, et vet. Græca altera, in the appendix.

350

BOOK II.

THE THEOCRATICAL INSPIRED BOOKS.

§ 201.

THEIR RELATION TO THE FOREGOING.

WHILE the historical books show in what manner the theocracy originated, and point out its destiny, to warn and admonish later generations, here the present condition of the theocracy, and the future consequences of this condition, are treated of for the warning and admonition of the people. Here, as there, the same religious ideas are applied to the circumstances of the Jewish nation, and the same view of the world is taken. But the spirit and disposition" of the theocratic historian and that of the inspired prophet are different in this respect: The former, occupied with quiet contemplation of the past, gives rather the true picture of affairs than his own view of them; but the latter, impelled by his active participation in the present, and in the yet unformed future, living in the fire of inspiration and of holy zeal, expresses his own thoughts, demands, and wishes, cares and hopes, rather than paints the history of his time. This difference displays itself in their style.' Besides, the Hebrew historians pay little regard to

[blocks in formation]

the history of other nations; but the inspired guardians of the theocracy had so much to fear from them that they could not fail to bring them within the circle of their vision."

§ 202.

NAME AND IDEA OF A PROPHET.

The authors of these books, for the most part, bear the name of prophets, interpreters of God,' (Ex. vii. 1.)

......

See Knobel, Der Prophetismus der Hebräer; 1837, 2 vols. 8vo. Köster, Die Propheten des A. und N. T. nach ihren Wesen und Wirken; 1838. • Ελα, προφῆται, not μάντεις, the word by which the LXX. translate bop. Plato, Timmus, Opp. ix. p. 391, ed. Bipont, or p. 101, ed. Bekker : μαντικὴν ἀφροσύνῃ θεὸς ἀνθρωπίνῃ δέδωκεν· οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἔννους ἐφάπτεται μαντικῆς ἐνθέου καὶ ἀληθοῦς, ἀλλ ̓ ἢ καθ ̓ ὕπνον τὴν τῆς φρονήσεως πεδηθεὶς δύναμιν, ἢ διὰ νόσον ἢ τινα ἐνθουσιασμὸν παραλ λάξας. ̓Αλλὰ ξυννοῆσαι μὲν ἔμφρονος τά τε ῥηθέντα αναμνησθέντα ὄναρ ἢ ύπαρ ὑπὸ τῆς μαντικῆς τε καὶ ἐνθουσιαστικῆς φύσεως, καὶ ὅσα ἂν φάσματα ὀφθῇ, πάντα λογισμῷ διελέσθαι, ὅπῃ τι σημαίνει καὶ ὅτῳ μέλλοντος ἢ παρελθόντος ἢ παρόντος κακοῦ ἢ ἀγαθοῦ· τοῦ δὲ μανέντος, ἔτι τε ἐν τούτῳ μένοντος, οὐκ ἔργον τὰ φανέντα ἢ φωνηθέντα ὑφ ̓ ἑαυτοῦ κρίνειν, ἀλλ' εὖ καὶ πάλαι λέγεται τὸ πράττειν καὶ γνῶναι τά τε αὑτοῦ καὶ ἑαυτὸν σώφρονι μόνῳ προσήκειν. Οθεν δὴ καὶ τὸ τῶν προφητῶν γένος ἐπὶ ταῖς ἐνθέοις μαντείαις κριτὰς ἐπικαθιστάναι νόμος· οὓς μάντεις αὐτοὺς ἐπονομάζουσι τινὲς, τὸ πᾶν ἀγνοηκότες ὅτι τῆς δι' αἰνιγμῶν οὗτοι φήμης καὶ φαντάσεως ὑποκριταί· καὶ οὔ τι μάντεις, προφῆται δὲ μαντευομένων δικαιότατα ὀνομάζοιντ' ἄν. Comp. Bardili, De Significatu primitivo Vocis Προφήτης; Gott. 1786. Chrysost. Hom. xxix. in Ep. ad Corinth.: Τοῦτο γὰρ μάντεως ἴδιον τὸ ἐξεστηκέναι, τὸ ἀνάγκην ὑπομένειν, τὸ ὠθεῖσθαι, τὸ ἕλκεσθαι, τὸ σύρεσθαι, ὥσπερ μαινόμενον. ̔Ο δὲ προφήτης οὐχ οὕτως, ἀλλὰ μετὰ διανοίας νηφούσης καὶ σωφρονούσης καταστάσεως καὶ εἰδὼς ἃ φθέγγεται, φησὶν ἅπαντα. Neander, Gnost. Syst. p. 387. Jerome, Prom. in Jes. Neque vero, ut Montanus cum insanis feminis somniat, Prophetæ in extasi sunt loquuti, ut nescirent, quid loquerentur, et quum alios erudirent, ipsi ignorarent, quid dicerent. See Epiphanius, Hæres. xlviii. 3. Carpzov, Introd. vol. iii. p. 36, sq.

Yet, on the other hand, Hengstenberg (Christologie, vol. i. pt. i. p. 293) maintains the fanatical opinions of Montanus respecting the prophets of the O. T. [See Noyes, in Christian Examiner for 1833, vol. xvi. p. 321, sq., and

« PreviousContinue »