The volume herewith introduced to the reader
brings, according to the
original plan of the series, this Bible History to a
close. This circumstance
naturally suggests a retrospect, however brief. In the
Prefaces to preceding
volumes, the chief characteristics of each period were
successively
sketched, and the questions indicated to which they gave
rise, as well as
the special points in respect of which the treatment of one
part of this
History differed from another. The period over which the
present volume
extends — that from the decline to the fall of the Kingdoms
of Judah and
Israel — can scarcely be said to have any distinguishing
features of its
own. It is the natural outcome and the logical conclusion of
the history
which had preceded. It means that this History, as presented
in Holy
Scripture, is one and consistent in all its parts; or, to
put it otherwise, that
what God had from the first said and done with reference to
Israel was
true. Thus, as always, even the judgments of God point to
His larger
mercies.
In two respects, however, this period differs from the
others, and its
history required a somewhat different treatment. It was the
period during
which most of the great prophets, whose utterances are
preserved in the
books that bear their names, lived and wrought, and over
which they
exercised a commanding influence. And never more clearly
than in this
period does it appear how the prophet, as the messenger of
God,
combined the twofold function of preaching to his own and,
in a sense, to
every future generation, and of intimating the wider
purposes of God in
the future. There is not in the prophetic utterances
recorded any one series
of admonitions, warnings, or even denunciations which does
not lead up to
an announcement of the happy prophetic future promised. In
this respect
prophecy has the same fundamental characteristic as the Book
of Psalms,
in which, whatever the groundnote, every hymn passes into
the melody of
thanksgiving and praise. This similarity is due to the fact
that, in their
Scriptural aspect, the progress of outward teaching and the
experience of
the inner life are ever in accordance. On the other hand,
there is not in the
prophetic writings any utterance in regard to the future
which has not its
root, and, in a sense, its starting point in the history of
the time. The
prophet, so to speak, translates the vernacular of the
present into the
Divine language of the future, and he interprets the Divine
sayings
concerning the future by the well-known language of the
present. As
between his teaching and his prediction, so between the
history of the
present and that of the future there is not a gap: they are
one, because
through both runs one unswerving purpose which gradually
unfolds what
from the first had been enfolded. And so history and
prophecy also are
one, because God is one. And so also, if we would rightly
understand
them, must we study not so much prophecies as isolated
utterances, but as
prophecy in its grand harmonious historical unity.
But apart from the considerations now offered, it must be
evident to the
most superficial observer how much and varied light the
utterances of the
contemporary prophets cast on the condition, the
circumstances, and the
history of the time in which they lived. Indeed, from their
writings we
obtain the most vivid account, not only of the moral and
religious state of
the people, and even of their manners, but of the moving
springs and the
real history of events. On the other hand, it must be
equally evident how
the history of the time illustrates not only the occasion
but often the
meaning of the prophetic utterances. And so the one helps
the
understanding of the other. But this circumstance has also
naturally
imposed on us the duty of studying the history of this
period in
connection with the various prophecies referring to it, to
which,
accordingly, constant reference will be found in the present
Volume.
Another peculiarity of this period is that its history will
be found
inseparable from that of the great empires of the world —
especially
Assyria and Babylonia. Those who have followed the progress
of
Assyriological studies know how often and unexpectedly light
has been
cast on the history of the Old Testament by the information
derived from
the Assyrian monuments. But they equally know that this
science is as
yet almost in its infancy; that on some points connected
with the Old
Testament, the opinions of Assyriologists differ, or else
have undergone
change, while on others the information we possess may
receive further
confirmation, modification, or important addition. It will
be understood
that in these circumstances the preparation of the present
volume has
required special labor and care. I can only hope that it may
serve to make
clear the history of a period which without illustration
both from the
prophetic writings and the Assyrian records would be not a
little difficult
and complicated. Lastly, the twofold Index to the whole
series, contributed
by the industry of my daughter, will, it is believed, be
helpful to the
student.
Thus far as regards the present volume. And now it is with more than
the
common feelings of natural regret on bringing to a close a
work which has
engaged a writer more or less for a number of years, and on
parting from a
circle of readers, whom in the course of time he has come to
regard as
friends, that the concluding paragraphs of this Preface are
written. The
object in beginning this series was to make a fresh study of
Old Testament
history from the original text, with such help as was to be
derived from the
best criticism and from cognate sciences. And not only was
it to follow the
course of the outward history, describing it as accurately
and fully as
might be, but to reach beyond this to its spiritual and
universal meaning to
mark the unity, application, and unfolding of its underlying
idea; and to
point to its realization and completion in the kingdom of
God. Briefly, the
underlying idea of the Old Testament, in its subjective
aspect, is that of
"the Servant of the Lord." The history of the Old Testament
in its
progress to the New is that of the widening of the idea of
the servant of
the Lord into that of the kingdom of God. Lastly, its
realization and
completion is in the Christ and the Church of God. Unless,
indeed, the Old
Testament had this higher meaning and unity, it could not
possess any
permanent or universal interest, except from a historical
point of view. It
would not permanently concern mankind — no, nor even Israel,
at least, in
its present relation to the world. On the other hand,
without it the New
Testament would want its historical basis, and the
historical Christ offer
what would seem an absolutely unintelligible problem.
Such, then, has been the plan and conception of this
Bible History. The
readers in view were teachers, students, and generally the
wider, educated
and thoughtful public. Throughout, the desire has been not
to ignore nor
pass by difficulties or questions that might arise in the
course of this
History, but without always specially naming, rather to
anticipate and
remove or answer them by what seemed the correct
interpretation of the
narrative. How far this aim has been attained must be left
to the judgment
of others. This only may be truthfully said, that as
difficulties have not in
any case been consciously ignored, so their solution has not
been sought
by inventing an interpretation simply for the purpose of
removing an
objection. If it may seem that sometimes suggestions have
been offered
rather than positive statements made, it was because caution
was felt to be
not only in place but even part of necessary reverence.
But beyond all this there are wider questions connected with
the Old
Testament, which have, particularly of late, been
prominently brought
forward. In a work like the present it seemed specially
desirable to avoid
controversial matters, which, in any case, could not here be
satisfactorily
dealt with. And yet all reference to them could not be
omitted. But on the
most fundamental of them — that of the origin and date of
the Pentateuch
it may be well here to mark what appears an essential
distinction. There is
the widest difference between the question whether the
Pentateuch —
legislation is of Mosaic origin, and this other of the
precise time when it, or
any special part of it, may have been reduced to writing or
redacted. The
former is a question of principle, the latter one chiefly of
literary criticism,
and as such can have no absolute interest for general
readers of the Bible.
On the first of these questions the present writer has not
seen any reason
for departing from the old lines of the Church's faith, but
rather everything
to confirm our adherence to them. Thus literary criticism
may, and ought,
in this, as in other matters, to continue its independent
course of
investigation without causing any misgivings to those who,
on good and
valid grounds, hold fast to the old truth concerning' Moses
and the
prophets' and the assured fact of their testimony to Christ.
And the final
result of all investigations can only be the confirmation
and vindication of
the faith of the Church.
In conclusion I have to thank the readers of this Bible
History for their
kindness, and the indulgence extended to me in completing
this series. Any
delay in it has been caused by literary engagements. To me,
at least, it has
afforded the refreshment of periodically returning to a
loved work, while
the marked advance in cognate studies tending to the
illustration of this
History has been of the greatest advantage during the
progress of the
Series. It only remains, with all humility, to offer the
results of these
labors to those who love the Old Testament, in the earnest
hope that He in
Whose service they were undertaken may graciously accept,
and by His
blessing further them, not only to the fuller knowledge, but
to the spiritual
understanding of His own Word.
ALFRED EDERSHEIM
6, CRICK ROAD, OXFORD,
July 21, 1887.
|