are Daniel ii. 4-vii. Ezra iv. 8-vi. 18. vii. 12-26, and Jeremiah x. 11.a

The apocryphal books are the product of the later Jewish literature, in part translated into Greek, and in part originally written in that language. They were recognized as sacred neither by the Jews nor by the ancient Christian church.

§ 9.

CONSTITUENT PORTIONS OF THE THIRD PART.

The New Testament contains the genuine writingswhich are accounted inspired and sacred- of the first Christian times, composed by the apostles of Christ, and their assistants and pupils, relating to the history and doctrine of the Christian religion."

says this cannot be maintained. Ubers, d. B. Daniel, i. 50, sqq. Einleit, p. 136.]

a

For the writings which are lost, see § 12, Hottinger, Thes. Phil. p. 532. Wolf, Bibliotheca Heb. pt. ii. sect. 4, p. 211, sqq. [See Appendix, article A.]

Touching the question why Christ wrote nothing, see J. G. Michaelis, Exercitatt. Theol. Philol.; Lug. Bat. 1757. Exercitat. i. de eo num Christus Dominus aliquid scripserit, &c. See Christ's epistolary correspondence with Abgarus, prince of Edessa, in Eusebius, H. E. i. 13. The authenticity of this work is defended by Richard Montacut, Origg. Eccless. vol. i. p. 61–63. Grabe, Spicilegium Patr. vol. i. p. 1-12. Cave, Hist. Litter. i. 2. On the other hand, see Nat. Alexander, H. E. sec. i. pt. i. diss. iii. p. 266. Lou. Ell. Dupin, Nouv. Bib. des Auteurs Eccles. i. 1, sq. Jac. Basnage, Hist. des Juifs, i. 7. Thom. Ittig, Heptas Dissertt. i. cap. 1, (§ 14,) p. 106. Fabricius, Codex Apocryphus, N. T. vol. i. p. 320; iii. p. 516. Semler, De Christi ad Abgar. Epistola; Hal. 1768, 4to. Compare Michaelis, ubi sup. p. 14, sqq. [Eusebius professes to have taken the letters from the archives of Edessa, and to have translated them literally from the Syriac language, opportunely," as he

hopes, and "not without profit." p. 44, sqq. ed. Boston, 1836.]

On the other apocryphal writings of Christ, see Augustin. De Consensu Evangelist. i. 9. Michaelis, l. c. p. 25, sqq. Fabricius, l. c. vol. i. p. 308. J. Andr. Schmid, Diss. de Epistolis Cœlo et Inferno delatis; Helmst. 1709.

§ 10.

ORDER AND DIVISION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

The division of the Old Testament into the Law, the Prophets, and the (other sacred) Writings, in, b, and a division which occurs in the New Testament, (§ 7,) is as old as the collection itself.

a

Josephus (cont. Apion. i. 8. See below, § 15) differs from this, and gives a division according to the contents, though it can scarcely be true that he follows the manuscripts, as some have maintained. [This division into three parts, says Eichhorn, was observed in the copy used by the Son of Sirach, by Philo, and the writers of the New Testament; only they had no general name for the third part, the Hagiographa. Therefore these writers must sometimes call the book which contained

6

Kimchi, Præf. in Psalm. Maimonides, More Neb. ii. 45, p. 317. Elias, in Tisbi, says the word means "written by the Holy Spirit." Compare Abarbanel, Præf. in Proph. prior. fol. 2, c. 1. Carpzov, Int. i. p. 25, and Crit. sac. p. 135. Augusti, Einleit, (§ 49,) [thinks that in the N. T. Genesis is taken for the first, and 2d Chronicles for the last book of the O. T.] Bertholdt, l. c. vol. i. p. 81, and Daniel, vol. i. p. 89, [thinks the term means "newly introduced into the canon," and supposes this part was added after the rest was completed.] See § 14. The Greeks call these books youɛia and Ayıó7oaga. Epiphanius, Hæres. xxix. 7, Opp. i. p. 122, ed. Petav. De Pond. et Mens. c. iv. Opp. ii. p. 162. Suiceri, Thesaurus eccles. sub voce.

Such is the opinion Storr maintains in his disputation on the most ancient division of the books of the O. T. in Paulus, neu. Rep. ii. p. 225. On the other side, see Eichhorn, § 8. Storr, likewise, too confidently, connects the following passage of Philo with that of Josephus, and considers it decisive of the question: "Taking nothing with them, neither drink, nor food, nor any of those things necessary to the wants of the body, but only laws, and oracles uttered (Sɛσлσ9¿vτα) by the prophets, and hymns, and the other [writings] by which knowledge and piety grow up together and become perfect." Philo, de Vita contempl. p. 893, ed. Frankfort; undèv eloxoμizovτες, μὴ ποτόν, μὴ σιτίον, μηδέτι τῶν ἄλλων ὅσα πρὸς τὰς τοῦ σώματος χρείας ἀναγκαῖα, ἀλλὰ νόμους καὶ λόγια δεσπισθέντα διὰ προφητῶν καὶ ὕμνους καὶ τὰ ἄλλα οἷς ἐπιστήμη καὶ εὐσέβεια συναύξονται καὶ τελειοῦνται.

the psalms, by the title "The Psalms," as it is done in the New Testament; sometimes they designated it as the "writings of a moral character," as the Son of Sirach, Philo, and Josephus, have done. The first trace of the name Hagiographa occurs in Epiphanius."

It may seem that, after the birth of Christ, the Jews comprised many books in the Hagiographa, which were formerly reckoned among the Prophets; for Josephus places but four books in the Hagiographa, and enumerates thirteen Prophets, while Jerome, the Talmud, and the modern Jews, count eight Prophets and nine books in the Hagiographa. But without doubt this division of Josephus is a classification entirely peculiar to himself. It was not based on the order of the books in the manuscripts, but on the custom of his time, which ascribed to the prophets all the books that were not written by poets, in the proper sense of that term. But, though this division was generally received among the Jews and Christians, it was yet inadequate, as the Jews themselves were aware; for, since not only writers who had published predictions came under the rubric of prophets, but also the authors of the books of Joshua, Judges, and the Kings, they were forced to distinguish between prophets of the first and second class."

The term (writings) was subsequently translated γραφεία and ἁγιόγραφα, (sacred writings.)

Abarbanel dwells long in explaining this subject, and thinks the foundation and reason of the distinction made between these writings and the other books of the Old Testament arise from the different mode and measure of divine influence by which they were composed. The Jewish teachers assign to Moses the highest degree,

for God spoke face to face with him, that is, without the intervention of visions and dreams. They ascribe the next degree to the prophets, who, either sleeping or waking, without the aid of the senses, heard a voice speaking to them, and in their ecstasy saw prophetic visions. The lowest degree of divine influence, which they call the Holy Spirit, (,) they concede to those God-inspired men, who, with their senses remaining in perfect action, spoke like other men. Though they did not rejoice in dreams or prophetic visions, they, nevertheless, felt the divine Spirit resting upon them, exciting and suggesting words of praise and penitence, or thoughts relating to divine or civil affairs, and they spoke or wrote them. All the prophets prophesied through an opaque, but Moses through a transparent glass, says a Jewish writer."]

The Prophets were divided into the early Prophets, (i) that is, the books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings; and the later Prophets, (

,) that is, the Prophets properly so called. These latter were subdivided into the major, (,) namely, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel; and the minor Prophets, (-) βίβλος τῶν δώδεκα προφητῶν, τὸ δωδεκαπρό

φήτον.

Under the Writings () were included the "five books," (,) Canticles, Ecclesiastes, Ruth, Lamentations, and Esther, and the poetic books, (,) namely, Job, Proverbs, and the Psalms, to which the Christians add Canticles and Ecclesiastes." Daniel belongs to the Hagiographa; only the Christians, who in this adhere to the division of the Septuagint, place this book among the Prophets.

See Carpzov, 1. c. pt. i. p. 25, and crit. s. pt. i. iv. 2.

Epiphanius, Pond. et Mens. 1. c. Gregor. Nazianz. Carm. xxxiii.

See Stange, in Keil and Tzschirners, Analekt. vol. i. p. 28, sqq.

The enumeration of the books is various; that of Josephus, (§ 15, note,) and of the Christians, (§ 25, note,) who make the number twenty-two, is based upon the Hebrew alphabet; but it was never current among the Palestine Jews, and scarcely among the Greek Jews. By the arrangement of the Septuagint, the book of Ruth is united with that of Judges, and the Lamentations of Jeremiah with his prophecies.

The number twenty-seven is still more artificial. (§ 26, note, and Epiphanius in § 27.) The Talmud is not exact in its enumeration of twenty-four books. If we are to count the five books of Moses separately, the books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles, the twelve minor Prophets, and Ezra and Nehemiah, we shall have thirty-nine books. After the five books of Moses, the others were thus enumerated in Baba-BathraProphets, Joshua and Judges, Samuel and Kings, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, Isaiah and the twelve, (Prophets;) in the Hagiographa, Ruth, Psalms and Job, and Proverbs and Ecclesiastes, Canticles and Lamentations, Daniel and the books of Esther, Ezra and Chronicles.

In regard to the order of succession among the single books, the Alexandrian translators, the Fathers, and Luther, differ from the Jews. Among the Jews themselves, the Talmudists and the Masorites, the German and the Spanish manuscripts, differ from one another. The Talmud places Isaiah after Ezekiel for this reason. Since the books of the Kings end in the Desolation, and Jeremiah is entirely occupied with the Desolation,- since Ezekiel begins in the Desolation, and Isaiah is totally occupied with consolation, for this reason they connected

• Fol. 14, c. 2.