« ÎnapoiContinuați »
The Council at this time, and on the following morning, recommended the following persons for election as members : Rev. S. J. Andrews,
Frank E. Woodruff,
John P. Taylor,
Union Theol. Sem., New York. “ Newman Smythe, D.D., New Haven, Conn. James R. Riggs,
Cranford, N.J. Prof. F. A. Gast,
Theol. Sem. of German Refd Ch.,
The Committee on the Nomination of Officers made their report, and it was laid on the table until the following morning.
The Treasurer's report was presented and also postponed, the President having, on motion, appointed an auditing committee, consisting of Profs. Prentice and Gould.
At 8.30 short notes were given as follows:
on aióvcos as a time-word.
These notes, and the discussion upon them, having occupied until 10 P.M., the Society adjourned to 9 A.M. on Wednesday.
Wednesday, the Society reassembled at 9 A.M.
The Treasurer's report was read, showing a balance of $344.93 in the treasury. The report was accepted and referred to the Auditing. Committee.
The Auditing Committee reported, after having examined the report and vouchers, and found everything correct.
The death of the Rev. Dr. Krauth, Provost of the University of Pennsylvania, since the last meeting, was announced. Tributes were paid to the memory of Dr. Krauth by Drs. Schaff
, Mombert, and Hall, Rev. W. H. Cobb, and others.
The report of the Committee on the Nomination of Officers was
The Committee nominated the former officers (with the exception of the Secretary, who was unable to serve longer, and Prof. Mead, who was absent from the country), and they were elected as follows:
Prof. E. P. Gould read the next paper, beginning at 10 A.M., on "The Argument of Romans ix.-xi.," and occupied until 11. This paper was dicussed until 11.40, when further discussion was postponed until after the reading of the next paper.
At 11.40 the last paper was read by Prof. Henry Ferguson, occupying until 12.25, on “The Prophet Zephaniah and his Times.” This was discussed until 12.40, when
After the reading of the rough minutes, at 12.53, the Society adjourned.
The Independent Legislation of Deuteronomy.
PROF. E. C. BISSELL, D.D.
"HE importance of the Book of Deuteronomy in all discussions
touching the age and origin of the Pentateuch cannot well be over-estimated. Leading critics, indeed, like De Wettel and Graf,? have regarded it as decisive battle-ground. Lying in the midst of the supposed development of Pentateuchal literature from Moses to Ezra, it ought to show, if it appear anywhere, positive evidence of the evolution then in progress. It ought to show this especially in its legislation, which, as the name “ Deuteronomy" imports, forms the body, and is undoubtedly the main object of the work. It ought to show it most of all in such laws as are original with this book, and intrinsically represent it.
It is said of the Pentateuchal codes in general that they but reflect, in their several parts, the changing social and ethical standard of the Hebrew people during many hundred years previous to the Exile. If this be true, and they are in no sense ideal or prophetical in character,
1 Lehrbuch der historisch-kritischen Einleitung. Neu bearbeitet von Schrader, Berlin, 1869, pp. 322 ff., 322 ff.; and Studien u. Kritiken, 1837, p. 953: “The view taken of Deuteronomy is for the criticism of the Pentateuch decisive.”
2 Die Geschichtlichen Bücher des Alten Testaments, p. 4 f.; of. also Kleinert, Das Deuteronomium, p. 3: “Denn zwar dieses erkennt De Wette an, und hat damit für seine Nachfolger einen Fingerzeig gegeben, dessen Nichtbeachtung fast immer der kritischen Untersuchung zur Schädigung gereicht hat: dass in dem Deuteronomium das dos pou toŮ Otw für die ganze kritische Frage über den Pentateuch gegeben ist.” Wellhausen, on the other hand, with a good deal of unneces. sary bravado, rules the whole matter out of the discussion as something already settled. He says (Geschichte, p. 9): “Ueber den Ursprung des Deuteronomiums herrscht noch weniger Zweifel; in allen Kreisen, wo überhaupt auf Anerkennung wissenschaftlicher Resultate zu rechnen ist, wird anerkannt, dass es in der Zeit verfasst ist, in der es entdeckt ... wurde.”
the peculiar product of a superhuman revelation, or inspiration at the genesis, and throughout the progress of a much more limited development, the fact should appear most plainly, not in the features that are common to all of them, but rather in such as are exceptional and individual. There are some laws, as for example that regarding public worship, or that of the feasts, which, in a form more or less modified, appear in each of the three great divisions of the Pentateuchal legislation. In such cases there is ample room for discussion, in fact, imperative need of it, on a host of questions quite apart from the main question. It must first of all be determined whether these diverse forms are, as alleged, the result of widely varying circumstances of place and time, or may fairly be regarded as evidence simply of another point of view within the same period, and on the part of the same legislator. Where, however, a law is found in but one of these divisions, and in but one form, the area of debatable ground is greatly lessened. We are then prepared at once to test our critical theory concerning the age of the document, and to do it under circumstances of the least embarrassment.
Now, it is well known that no inconsiderable portion of the Deuteronomic laws are of this character. And it is a highly significant fact in itself, since it is just what we might expect on the traditional hypothesis, that this code chronologically concludes the legislation of the Pentateuch. But it is also of value as furnishing a capital opportunity to prove the validity of a favorite tenet of many modern critics.
Out of the full score of these early laws original with Deuteronomy, and confined to it, there are some, it is true, of such a nature that a chronological test can only with difficulty be applied to them. But with the majority it is quite otherwise. Their response to such a test is both immediate and categorically direct. The only question remaining to be asked, i.l., for those who will press a question of this sort, is whether these laws are seriously meant, or, like the so-called “Blue Laws ” of Connecticut, are but quasi statutes, whose originator was satisfied if they were founded on fact, and were not easily distinguishable from fact.
The first example of a law peculiar to Deuteronomy is that concerning seduction to idolatry. It occupies the entire thirteenth chapter, and appears in three sections: (1) as applying to false prophets (vv. 2-6); (2) to individual members of the community whom it rigorously singles out from the most intimate relationships (vv. 7-12); and (3) to whole cities which might become infected with the crime