« VorigeDoorgaan »
Is this form of writing intended for an elaborately designed or undesigned and hidden proof that the work of J, E, and P and SS is after all Mosaic? Whose style does it really point to? The longer I dwell upon it, the more perplexing it becomes. If it were found in Isaiah, or Jeremiah, or even in Amos,-that unimpressible writer (!) as regards the Book of Deuteronomy, though he well knew Moses' rule for the attestation of a prophet,—there would be some hope of arriving at a solution of it. But here is a peculiarity, preserved in the written text of the Pentateuch and nowhere else, so absolutely unbearable to Jewish ears, that they made a standing order that it must not be heard in the reading of the Pentateuch, and yet no mortal can be named as its author by the latest erudition of Oxford speaking in the name of all Germany. Rabbi Driver, speaking in the name of Rabbi Wellhausen, and Rabbi Kuenen, and Rabbi Riehm, and more others than I can name or spell, says in effect that no person who
can be named, or, more precisely, none who has been named to the exclusion of any other, is to be credited with writing He for She wherever it is to be found in all but ten places in the Pentateuch, and dropping it at Joshua, whose book forms part of the self-same Hexateuch. Every other peculiarity of style, however many can be specified, is plausibly assigned to J, or E, or JE, or JR, that is, J redacted, or P. Any one who has spent a little time over Driver's "Introduction" could make a pretty sure guess, on hearing a chapter in the Hexateuch, which letter is likely to be written at the side of the page, after the fashion of his "Westminster Commentary on Genesis." But as to the writing of He for She in the five books of notMoses, there is no assignable source for it. It cannot be classed with the Massoretic pointing; it is part of the written text of the Scriptures which we have received from Israel as God's written Word. The schoolmaster who taught me my Hebrew alphabet taught it as a peculiarity of the
Pentateuch. Until I came to look it up in Mandelkern's "Concordance" I had never noticed what a singular peculiarity it is. But if it proves anything, it goes far to prove that the entire Pentateuch is as old as Moses, and that the distinction between J, E, P, and SS is a fiction of the German brain.
Driver's note, which I have cited at p. 219, seems to miss the point at issue. It is not that there is no feminine in the Hebrew Pentateuch. It is that there, and there only, the third personal pronoun masculine is habituuy used in cases where the feminine pronoun is found in the subsequent books.
Driver's analysis of Genesis as a whole is at fault. His misplacement of the title the "Generations of the Heavens and the earth" is an enormous
THE next case I have to examine is a case of faulty analysis. Professor Driver, in his "Westminster Commentary on Genesis," has placed the title of the second portion, "the Generations of the Heavens, and earth on their creation, or completion," as the closing sentence of the first portion, or Beginning," of the entire book. This misplacement has been commented upon by Dr. Redpath in his "Modern Criticism and Genesis," p. 55. But Driver and the Germans have so entirely misapprehended the force of the title "generations," that Driver says (p. 6, note), "It is a plausible conjecture that it originally stood as the superscription to i. 1."
I cannot say whose conjecture that is, but a more conclusive proof that its author has not yet grasped the meaning of the phrase as used in Genesis could not have been given.
The "generations "-title throws such light upon the whole structure of the book, that when it is used as a key to the contents of Genesis, the plan of the narrative imperceptibly transfers itself to the mind of the user, and enables him at once to account for the position of every detail, and to remember it without referring to the pages of the book. The same thing cannot be said of a plan which assigns Genesis i. now to E and now to P, and passes from one author to another several times in the course of a single page, and which fails to assign chapter xiv. to any known or recognised section even of Driver's "Hexateuch."
The titles of the eleven "Generations" of Genesis afford a striking and obvious explanation of their contents in nine cases out of eleven. A little attention to detail