Book of Leviticus利未記書

General Information 一般信息

Leviticus is the third book of the Pentateuch, or Torah, the first five books of the Bible, which are traditionally ascribed to Moses. Its name is derived from the tribe Levi (the Levites), which had the responsibility for overseeing Israel's ritual worship. Leviticus consists primarily of laws regulating such activity, including sacrificial offerings, the installation of priests, cultic purity (which includes the dietary laws), and a more general legal collection known as the Holiness Code because of its emphasis on God's holiness.利未記是第三本書的五經,或律法,第一五本書的聖經,這是傳統上屬於摩西。它的名字是來自部落列維(的利) ,該負責監督以色列的禮拜儀式。 利未記主要的法律規範這類活動,包括祭祀的產品,安裝神父,邪教純度(其中包括飲食法) ,以及更廣泛的法律收集稱為聖潔碼,因為它強調上帝的聖潔。 These major collections together with several shorter supplements are part of the P source, normally dated to c. 450 BC.這些主要收藏連同若干較短的一部分補充的P來源,通常追溯到公元前450角。 Thus, as a book, Leviticus is postexilic, but the individual laws and various collections within the book differ in age, and some are quite ancient.因此,作為一本書,利未記是postexilic ,但個別的法律和各種收藏的圖書不同的年齡,和一些非常古老的。

BELIEVE Religious Information Source web-site相信宗教信息來源
Our List of 2,300 Religious Subjects我們所列出的2300名宗教科目
E-mail電子郵件
JJM Roberts JJM羅伯茨

Bibliography 參考書目
L Goldberg, Leviticus (1980); SS Kellogg, Studies in Leviticus (1988); BA Levine, In the Presence of the Lord (1974); J Milgrom, Cult and Conscience (1976). L戈德堡利未記( 1980年) ;黨衛軍凱洛格,研究利未記( 1988年) ;廣管局文,在存在的上帝( 1974年) ; J米爾格羅姆,邪教和良心( 1976年) 。


Book of Leviticus利未記書

Brief Outline簡要概述

  1. Sacrifices and offerings (1-7)犧牲和產品( 1-7 )
  2. Duties of Priests (8-10)牧師的職責( 8月10日)
  3. Cleanliness and Holiness (11-22)清潔度和聖潔( 11月22日)
  4. Feasts (23)節日( 23 )
  5. Promises and warnings (25-27)承諾和警報( 25-27 )


Levit'icus

Advanced Information 先進的信息

Leviticus is the third book of the Pentateuch; so called in the Vulgate, after the LXX., because it treats chiefly of the Levitical service.利未記是第三本書的摩西五;所謂的武加大後, LXX 。 ,因為它把主要的Levitical服務。 In the first section of the book (1-17), which exhibits the worship itself, there is, (1.) A series of laws (1-7) regarding sacrifices, burnt-offerings, meat-offerings, and thank-offerings (1-3), sin-offerings and trespass-offerings (4; 5), followed by the law of the priestly duties in connection with the offering of sacrifices (6; 7).在第一部分的書( 1月17日) ,該展品的崇拜本身,因此, ( 1 。 )了一系列法律( 1-7 )關於犧牲,被燒毀的產品,肉類產品,並感謝-產品( 1-3 ) ,單產品和非法侵入,產品( 4 , 5 ) ,其次是法司鐸職責方面提供的犧牲( 6 ; 7 ) 。 (2.) An historical section (8-10), giving an account of the consecration of Aaron and his sons (8); Aaron's first offering for himself and the people (9); Nadab and Abihu's presumption in offering "strange fire before Jehovah," and their punishment (10). ( 2 。 )歷史的一節( 8月10日) ,讓帳戶的神聖艾倫和他的兒子( 8 ) ;克阿倫的首款產品為自己和人民( 9 ) ; Nadab和亞比戶的推定為“奇怪的大火面前耶和華, “和他們的懲罰( 10 ) 。 (3.) Laws concerning purity, and the sacrifices and ordinances for putting away impurity (11-16). ( 3 。 )法律,純度,和犧牲和法令把遠離雜質( 11月16日) 。 An interesting fact may be noted here.一個有趣的事實可能會注意到在這裡。

Canon Tristram, speaking of the remarkable discoveries regarding the flora and fauna of the Holy Land by the Palestine Exploration officers, makes the following statement:, "Take these two catalogues of the clean and unclean animals in the books of Leviticus [11] and Deuteronomy [14]. There are eleven in Deuteronomy which do not occur in Leviticus, and these are nearly all animals and birds which are not found in Egypt or the Holy Land, but which are numerous in the Arabian desert. They are not named in Leviticus a few weeks after the departure from Egypt; but after the people were thirty-nine years in the desert they are named, a strong proof that the list in Deuteronomy was written at the end of the journey, and the list in Leviticus at the beginning.佳能狄,講了顯著的發現對動植物的聖地探索的巴勒斯坦官員,發表以下聲明: “以這兩個目錄的清潔和不清潔的動物在帳簿利未記[ 11 ]和申命記[ 14 ] 。有11申命記在不發生在利未記,這是幾乎所有的動物及禽鳥未發現在埃及或聖地,但其中有許多在阿拉伯沙漠。沒有被點名的利未記幾週後離開埃及,但在人三十九年在沙漠中,他們被命名,一個強有力的證據,這一名單是在申命記書面結束時的旅程,並在利未記的名單在開始。

It fixes the writing of that catalogue to one time and period only, viz., that when the children of Israel were familiar with the fauna and the flora of the desert" (Palest. Expl. Quart., Jan. 1887). (4.) Laws marking the separation between Israel and the heathen (17-20). (5.) Laws about the personal purity of the priests, and their eating of the holy things (20;21); about the offerings of Israel, that they were to be without blemish (22:17-33); and about the due celebration of the great festivals (23; 25). (6.) Then follow promises and warnings to the people regarding obedience to these commandments, closing with a section on vows. The various ordinances contained in this book were all delivered in the space of a month (comp. Ex. 40:17; Num. 1:1), the first month of the second year after the Exodus. It is the third book of Moses.它修正了書面的目錄之一的時間和期,即。 ,當以色列的兒童熟悉的動物和植物的沙漠“ ( Palest. Expl 。夸脫。 1月1887年) 。 ( 4 。 )法律標記分離以色列與異教徒( 17-20 ) 。 ( 5 。 )法律對個人純度神職人員,他們吃的聖事( 20 ; 21 ) ;所提供的關於以色列,這他們將被無污點( 22:17-33 ) ;和有關由於慶祝偉大的節日( 23 ; 25 ) 。 ( 6 。 )然後,按照承諾,並警告人們就服從這些命令,關閉了部分誓言。各種條例載在這本書都提供空間的一個月( comp.惠。 40:17 ;序號。 1:1 ) ,第一個月的第二個年頭後外逃。這是第三本書的摩西。

No book contains more of the very words of God. 沒有書包含了非常多的話上帝。 He is almost throughout the whole of it the direct speaker. This book is a prophecy of things to come, a shadow whereof the substance is Christ and his kingdom. 他幾乎是整個的IT的直接發言。這本書是一個預言的東西來,一個影子信守的實質是基督和他的王國。 The principles on which it is to be interpreted are laid down in the Epistle to the Hebrews.其所依據的原則是,解釋中規定了書信的猶太人。 It contains in its complicated ceremonial the gospel of the grace of God.它包含在其複雜的禮儀的福音神的恩。

(Easton Illustrated Dictionary) (伊斯頓圖解詞典)


Leviticus利未記

From: Home Bible Study Commentary by James M. Gray 來自:主頁聖經研究評論詹姆斯M灰色

The Meaning of the Book for Us的意義為我們的圖書

This book is of great value to Christians, containing five distinct revelations of the first importance, Kellogg defines them: (a) the character of God; (b) the fundamental conditions of true religion; (c) the principles that should guide human legislators; (d) the work of Christ; (c) the prophecies in types of things to come in the kingdom of Christ. It reveals the character of God by showing us His holiness, His intolerance of sin, and His mercy to the penitent. 這本書是很有價值的基督教徒,其中載有五個不同的啟示第一重要性,凱洛格將它們界定: (一)性質的上帝; (二)基本條件的真正的宗教; ( c )該原則,應指導人類立法者; ( d )在工作基督; ( c )該預言的工種的事情來王國基督。揭示神的性質,顯示我們的陛下,他的不容忍的罪惡,他的仁慈的懺悔。 It teaches us the fundamental truths of true religion by showing the need of a mediator with a propitiatory sacrifice for (Heb. 9:22).它告訴我們的基本真理的真正的宗教所顯示的需要,調停與和解的犧牲( Heb. 9時22分) 。

It reveals the right principles of human legislation concerning civil government and religion, capital and labor, landholding, the social evil and cognate matters.它揭示的權利的人權原則的立法中關於政府和民間宗教,資本和勞動力,土地,社會罪惡和同源事項。 It reveals the work of Christ by exhibiting the way of salvation through atonement, and showing the present and future position of the believer in His name.它揭示的工作,通過展示基督救贖的方式來贖罪,並顯示目前和將來的立場,相信他的名字。 In this book Christ is the offerer of sacrifice, He is the offering, and He the priest or mediator who presents the offering.在這本書中耶穌是發貨的犧牲,他的產品,和他的牧師或調停誰提出了提供。

Thus, as Jukes affirms, Leviticus reveals the work of Christ differently from any other Old Testament book. How wonderful as we thus think of Christ in this threefold way!因此,朱克斯申明,利未記揭示基督的工作不同於其他任何舊約全書書。多麼美妙,因為我們因此認為,基督在這三個途徑! As the offerer He is the one who became man to meet God's requirements.由於發貨他是誰成為一個人,以滿足神的要求。 As the offering He is the victim in His character and work, by which atonement was made for man.作為提供他是受害者在他的性格和工作,其中贖罪有人男子。 As the priest He is the officially appointed intercessor who brings man to God.作為牧師,他是正式任命intercessor誰把人的神。 Finally, this book reveals things to come in the kingdom of Christ by showing us in the Day of Atonement (c. 16) a type of the entering into the heavens of our great High Priest.最後,這本書揭示事物來在基督王國顯示我們在贖罪日(角16 )一類的進入天堂我們偉大的大祭司。 In the feast of trumpets we have His coming again and the ingathering of the full harvest of redemption.在節日的號角,我們再次和他來的ingathering全面豐收贖回。 In the sabbatic and jubilee years we have foreshadowed the millennial blessing which follows His second coming.在休假和大慶裡,我們已經預示千年祝福了他第二次來。


Leviticus利未記

Catholic Information 天主教新聞

Leviticus, called by Rabbinic writers "Law of the Priests" or "Law of the Sacrifices", contains nearly a complete collection of laws concerning the Levitical ministry.利未記,所謂的拉比作家法“祭司”或“法的犧牲” ,載有近一個完整的法律關於Levitical部。 They are not codified in any logical order, but still we may discern certain groups of regulations touching the same subject.他們沒有任何編纂的邏輯順序,但我們仍然可以看出某些群體的條例涉及同一議題。 The Book of Exodus shows what God had done and was doing for His people; the Book of Leviticus prescribes what the people must do for God, and how they must render themselves worthy of His constant presence.出書顯示上帝已經和正在進行為他的人民;書利未記規定什麼人必須做的神,以及他們是如何必須使自己值得他不斷存在。

(1) First Part, i, 1-x, 20.-Duties of Israel toward God living in their midst. ( 1 )第一部分,一, 1一X 20. -義務以色列對上帝生活在他們中間。

(a) i, 1-vi, 7.-The different kinds of sacrifices are enumerated, and their rites are described. (一)一, 1至六, 7. -不同種類的犧牲列舉,他們的禮儀介紹。

(b) vi, 8-vii, 36.-The duties and rights of the priests, the official offerers of the sacrifices, are stated. (二)六,八至七, 36. -的義務和權利的神職人員,官方offerers的犧牲,是的。

(c) viii, 1-x, 20.-The first priests are consecrated and introduced into their office. (三)第八章, 1 -第十20. -第一牧師神聖和引入到他們的辦公室。

(2) Second Part, xi, 1-xxvii, 34.-Legal cleanness demanded by the Divine presence. ( 2 )第二部分,十一, 1 -二十七, 34.法律所要求的潔淨神聖的存在。

(a) xi, 1-xx, 27.-The entire people must be legally clean; the various ways in which cleanness must be kept; interior cleanness must be added to external cleanness. (一)十一, 1 - XX條, 27. -全體人民必須在法律上清潔;的各種方式的必須保持潔淨;內部潔淨必須加上外部潔淨。

(b) xxi, 1-xxii, 33.-Priests must excel in both internal and external cleanness; hence they have to keep special regulations. (二) 21 , 1 - 22 , 33. -神父必須Excel在內部和外部的清潔;因此,他們必須保持特殊規定。

(c) xxiii, 1-xxvii, 34.-The other laws and the promises and threats made for the observance or the violation of the laws belong to both priests and people. (三) 23 , 1 -二十七, 34. -的其他法律和作出的承諾和威脅的遵守或違反法律屬於兩個神父和人民。

III.三。 AUTHENTICITY真實性

The contents of the Pentateuch furnish the basis for the history, the law, the worship, and the life of the Chosen People of God.的內容,摩西五提供的基礎,歷史,法律,宗教,以及所選擇的生活在天主的子民。 Hence the authorship of the work, the time and manner of its origin, and its historicity are of paramount importance.因此,作者的工作,時間和方式的起源,它的歷史性是至關重要的。 These are not merely literary problems, but questions belonging to the fields of history of religion and theology.這些不僅是文學問題,但問題屬於該領域的歷史宗教和神學。 The Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch is inseparably connected with the question, whether and in what sense Moses was the author or intermediary of the Old-Testament legislation, and the bearer of pre-Mosaic tradition.鑲嵌作品的摩西五是密不可分的問題,無論在何種意義摩西是作者或中介的老全書立法,並持證前花葉傳統。 According to the trend of both Old and New Testament, and according to Jewish and Christian theology, the work of the great lawgiver Moses is the origin of the history of Israel and the basis of its development down to the time of Jesus Christ; but modern criticism sees in all this only the result, or the precipitate, of a purely natural historical development.據趨勢新舊新約全書,根據猶太教和基督教神學的工作是偉大的立法者摩西的起源,歷史,以色列和根據其發展到耶穌基督的時間,但現代批評認為,只有在所有這一切的結果,或沉澱物,純自然的歷史發展。 The question of the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch leads us, therefore, to the alternative, revelation or historical evolution; it touches the historical and theological foundation of both the Jewish and the Christian dispensation.的問題,花葉作者的摩西五導致我們,因此,作為替代,啟示或歷史演變;它涉及的歷史和神學的基礎,雙方的猶太教和基督教分配。 We shall consider the subject first in the light of Scripture; secondly, in the light of Jewish and Christian tradition; thirdly, in the light of internal evidence, furnished by the Pentateuch; finally, in the light of ecclesiastical decisions.我們應考慮這個問題首先是根據聖經;其次,根據猶太教和基督教傳統;第三,根據內部的證據,所提供的摩西五;最後,在根據教會的決定。

A. TESTIMONY OF SACRED SCRIPTURE答:見證聖經

It will be found convenient to divide the Biblical evidence for the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch into three parts: (1) Testimony of the Pentateuch;這將是發現方便分裂聖經證據花葉著作權的摩西五分為三個部分: ( 1 )證言摩西五;

(2) Testimony of the other Old-Testament books; (3) Testimony of the New Testament. ( 2 )證明其他舊全書書籍; ( 3 )鑑定的新約。

(1) Witness of the Pentateuch ( 1 )證人的摩西五

The Pentateuch in its present form does not present itself as a complete literary production of Moses.在摩西五以其目前的形式並不本本身作為一個完整的文學生產摩西。 It contains an account of Moses' death, it tells the story of his life in the third person and in an indirect form, and the last four books do not exhibit the literary form of memoirs of the great lawgiver; besides, the expression "God said to Moses" shows only the Divine origin of the Mosaic laws but does not prove that Moses himself codified in the Pentateuch the various laws promulgated by him.它包含一個帳戶的摩西死亡,它講述了他的生命中的第三人,並以間接的形式,並在過去四年的書籍沒有展示的文學形式的回憶錄偉大立法者;此外,表達“上帝摩西說: “只顯示的神源是鑲嵌法,但並不能證明自己編纂摩西五經中的各種法律頒布的他。 On the other hand, the Pentateuch ascribes to Moses the literary authorship of at least four sections, partly historical, partly legal, partly poetical.另一方面,賦予了摩西五經的文學作品,至少四個部分,這部分是歷史,部分法律,部分詩意。 (a) After Israel's victory over the Amalecites near Raphidim, the Lord said to Moses (Exodus 17:14): "Write this for a memorial in a book, and deliver it to the ears of Josue." ( a )在以色列的勝利, Amalecites近Raphidim ,主說,摩西(出17:14 ) : “寫這本為紀念在一本書,並提供它的耳朵若蘇埃。 ” This order is naturally restricted to Amalec's defeat, a benefit which God wished to keep alive in the memory of the people (Deuteronomy 25:17-19).這自然是為了限制Amalec的失敗,受益上帝希望保持在記憶的人(申命記25:17-19 ) 。 The present pointing of the Hebrew text reads "in the book", but the Septuagint version omits the definite article. Even if we suppose that the Massoretic pointing gives the original text, we can hardly prove that the book referred to is the Pentateuch, though this is highly probable (cf. von Hummelauer "Exodus et Leviticus", Paris, 1897, p. 182; Idem, "Deuteronomium", Paris, 1901, p. 152; Kley, "Die Pentateuchfrage", Munster, 1903, p. 217).本指著希伯來文寫著“在這本書” ,但七十版本忽略了定冠詞。即使我們假設Massoretic指著使原來的案文,我們很難證明這本書提到的是摩西五,儘管這是極有可能(見馮Hummelauer “出埃及記和利未記” ,巴黎, 1897年,第182頁;同上, “ Deuteronomium ” ,巴黎, 1901年,第152頁; Kley , “模具Pentateuchfrage ” ,明斯特, 1903年,第217 ) 。 (b) Again, Ex., xxiv, 4: "And Moses wrote all the words of the Lord." (二)同樣,惠。 , 24 , 4 : “摩西寫的話,所有的主。 ” The context does not allow us to understand these words in an indefinite manner, but as referring to the words of the Lord immediately preceding or to the so-called "Book of the Covenant", Ex., xx-xxiii.的範圍內不允許我們理解這句話的是無限期的方式,但它是指用上帝緊接或所謂的“圖書的公約” ,當然。 ,二十,二十三。 (c) Ex., xxxiv, 27: "And the Lord said to Moses: Write thee these words by which I have made a covenant both with thee and with Israel." (三)前。 ,三十四, 27 : “耶和華對摩西說:你寫這些話的,我提出了兩個公約,並與你同以色列。 ” The next verse adds: "and he wrote upon the tables the ten words of the covenant."下次詩說: “和他寫的表的十個字的規定。 ” Ex., xxxiv, 1, 4, shows how Moses had prepared the tables, and Ex., xxxiv, 10-26, gives us the contents of the ten words.當然。 ,三十四, 1 , 4 ,顯示了如何編寫了摩西的桌子,和前。 ,三十四, 10月26日,使我們的內容十個字。 (d) Num., xxxiii, 1-2: "These are the mansions of the children of Israel, who went out of Egypt by their troops under the conduct of Moses and Aaron, which Moses wrote down according to the places of their encamping." (四)序號。 ,三十三, 1月2日: “這是紅樓夢的兒童以色列,誰走出埃及其部隊的行為摩西和亞倫,這摩西寫下根據地方的encamping 。 “ Here we are informed that Moses wrote the list of the people's encampments in the desert; but where it this list to be found?在這裡,我們被告知,摩西寫名單的人的營地在沙漠中,但如果此列表中可以找到? Most probably it is given in Num., xxxiii, 3-49, or the immediate context of the passage telling of Moses' literary activity; there are, however, scholars who understand this latter passage as referring to the history of Israel's departure from Egypt written in the order of the people's encampments, so that it would be our present Book of Exodus.這是最有可能提供數。 ,三十三, 3-49 ,或立即背景下,通過講述了摩西的文學活動;但是,也有學者誰明白這一點後,它是指通過以色列歷史上離開埃及寫在該命令的人的營地,因此,它將成為我們本書出走。 But this view is hardly probable; for its assumption that Num., xxxiii, 3-49, is a summary of Exodus cannot be upheld, as the chapter of Numbers mentions several encampments not occurring in Exodus.但這種觀點是很難有可能;其前提是序號。 ,三十三, 3-49 ,是一個總結出不能得到維護,因為該章中提到的幾個營地號碼不發生在出走。

Besides these four passages there are certain indications in Deuteronomy which point to the literary activity of Moses.除了這四個段落有一些跡象表明這一點在申命記的文學活動的摩西。 Deut., i, 5: "And Moses began to expound the law and to say"; even if the "law" in this text refer to the whole of the Pentateuchal legislation, which is not very probable, it shows only that Moses promulgated the whole law, but not that he necessarily wrote it. Practically the entire Book of Deuteronomy claims to be a special legislation promulgated by Moses in the land of Moab: iv, 1-40; 44-49; v, 1 sqq.; xii, 1 sqq. Deut 。 ,我, 5 : “摩西開始闡述法律,並表示” ;即使“法律”這個文本是指整個Pentateuchal立法,這是不太可能的,它表明只有摩西頒布整個法律,但不是說,他一定寫。實際上,整本書的申命記聲稱是一個特殊的立法頒布的摩西在土地莫阿布:四, 1-40 ; 44-49 ;五, 1 sqq 。 ;十二1 sqq 。 But there is a suggestion of writing too: xvii, 18-9, enjoins that the future kings are to receive a copy of this law from the priests in order to read and observe it; xxvii, 1-8, commands that on the west side of the Jordan "all the words of this law" be written on stones set up in Mount Hebal; xxviii, 58, speaks of "all the words of this law, that are written in this volume" after enumerating the blessings and curses which will come upon the observers and violators of the law respectively, and which are again referred to as written in a book in xxix, 20, 21, 27, and xxxii, 46, 47; now, the law repeatedly referred to as written in a book must be at least the Deuteronomic legislation.但是有一個建議,寫太多: 17 , 18-9 ,責成,未來的國王收到了一份來自該法的祭司,以便閱讀和遵守它;二十七, 1月8日,命令,在西約旦一側的“所有的話,該法”是寫在石頭山設立Hebal ;二十八, 58歲,說的是“所有的話,這一法律,這是寫在這卷”之後列舉的祝福和詛咒的會後,觀察員和違反法律的分別,並再次被稱為寫的一本書,第29 , 20 , 21 , 27 ,和三十二,第四十六條,第四十七條,現在,法律一再稱為寫圖書必須至少Deuteronomic立法。 Moreover, xxxi, 9-13 states, "and Moses wrote this law", and xxxi, 26, adds, "take this book, and put it in the side of the ark. . .that it may be there for a testimony against thee"; to explain these texts as fiction or as anachronisms is hardly compatible with the inerrancy of Sacred Scripture.此外,三十一, 9月13日國家“ ,並寫了這個摩西法” ,並三十一, 26歲,說: “考慮這本書,並把它放在一邊,方舟。 。 。 ,它可能是有一個證詞對你“ ;解釋這些文本小說或過時很難符合無誤的聖經。 Finally, xxxi, 19, commands Moses to write the canticle contained in Deut., xxxii, 1-43.最後,第31 ,第19 ,命令摩西寫頌歌載於Deut 。 ,三十二, 1-43 。

The Scriptural scholar will not complain that there are so few express indications in the Pentateuch of Moses' literary activity; he will rather be surprised at their number.在聖經學者不會抱怨說,有這麼幾個明確跡象表明在摩西五經的文學活動,他將感到吃驚,而他們的人數。 As far as explicit testimony for its own, at least partial, authorship is concerned, the Pentateuch compares rather favourably with many other books of the Old Testament.至於明確的證詞為自己的,至少是部分,作者而言,五經比較有利,而與其他許多書籍舊約。

(2) Witness of other Old-Testament Books ( 2 )證人的其他老聖經書籍

(a) Josue.-The narrative of the Book of Josue presupposes not merely the facts and essential ordinances contained in the Pentateuch, but also the law given by Moses and written in the book of the law of Moses: Jos., i, 7-8; viii, 31; xxii, 5; xxiii, 6. (一) Josue. ,說明部分圖書的前提不僅是若蘇埃的事實和基本條例載於五經,而且所提供的法律和書面摩西的書摩西律法:聖何塞,我7 -8 ;八, 31 ; 22 , 5 ;二十三, 6 。 Josue himself "wrote all these things in the volume of the law of the Lord" (xxiv, 26).若蘇埃他寫道: “所有這些事情中的體積法勳爵” ( 24 , 26 ) 。 Prof. Hobverg maintains that this "volume of the law of the Lord" is the Pentateuch ("Über den Ursprung des Pentateuchs" in "Biblische Zeitschrift", 1906, IV, 340); Mangenot believes that it refers at least to Deuteronomy (Dict. de la Bible, V, 66).教授Hobverg堅持認為,這種“體積法的上帝”是五經( “尤伯杯2007萬Pentateuchs起源”中的“ Biblische雜誌” , 1906年,四, 340 ) ; Mangenot認為,它是指至少在申命記(快譯通。德拉薩聖經,五, 66 ) 。 At any rate, Josue and his contemporaries were acquainted with a written Mosaic legislation, which was divinely revealed.無論如何,若蘇埃和他同時代的人熟悉的書面花葉立法,這是上天顯示。

(b) Judges; I, II Kings.-In the Book of Judges and the first two Books of Kings there is no explicit reference to Moses and the book of the law, but a number of incidents and statements presuppose the existence of the Pentateuchal legislation and institutions. (二)法官;一,二Kings. ,在書中法官和兩本書的第一個國王沒有明確提到摩西和圖書的法律,但一些事件和報表以存在的Pentateuchal立法和機構。 Thus Judges, xv, 8-10, recalls Israel's delivery from Egypt and its conquest of the Promised Land; Judges, xi, 12-28, states incidents recorded in Num., xx, 14; xxi, 13,24; xxii, 2; Judges, xiii, 4, states a practice founded on the law of the Nazarites in Num., vi, 1-21; Judges, xviii, 31, speaks of the tabernacle existing in the times when there was no king in Israel; Judges, xx, 26-8 mentions the ark of the covenant, the various kinds of sacrifices, and the Aaronic priesthood.因此,法官,十五, 8月10日,回顧以色列提供來自埃及和其征服樂土;法官,十一, 12月28日,國家中記錄的事件數量。 ,第XX號,第14 ; 21 , 13,24 , 22 , 2法官, 13日, 4日,國家做法的基礎上的法律Nazarites在序號。 ,六, 1月21日,法官, 18 , 31 ,談到幕中存在的時候,沒有國王在以色列;法官,二十, 26-8提到約櫃,各種犧牲,和Aaronic鐸。 The Pentateuchal history and laws are similarly presupposed in 1 Samuel 10:18; 15:1-10; 10:25; 21:1-6; 22:6 sqq.; 23:6-9; 2 Samuel 6.該Pentateuchal歷史和法律是同樣的先決條件在撒母耳記上10:18 ; 15:1-10 ; 10:25 ; 21:1-6 ; 22時零六sqq 。 ; 23:6-9 ;撒母耳記下6 。

(c) 1 and 2 Kings.-The last two Books of Kings repeatedly speak of the law of Moses. (三)第1和第2 Kings. ,最後兩本書的國王多次談到摩西律法。 To restrict the meaning of this term to Deuteronomy is an arbitrary exegesis (cf. 1 Kings 2:3; 10:31); Amasias showed mercy to the children of the murderers "according to that which is written in the book of the law of Moses" (2 Kings 14:6); the sacred writer records the Divine promise of protecting the Israelites "Only if they will observe to do all that I have commanded them according to the law which my servant Moses commanded them" (2 Kings 21:8).限制的含義,這個詞來申命記是一個任意的註釋(見列王紀上2時03分; 10時31分) ; Amasias表明憐憫的兒童的兇手“根據該寫這本書的法律摩西“ (列王紀下14點06分) ;神聖作家記錄神聖承諾保護以色列人”只有當他們將遵守盡一切,我已命令他們根據法律,我的僕人摩西指揮他們“ (列王紀下21 : 8 ) 。 In the eighteenth year of the reign of Josias was found the book of the law (2 Kings 22:8, 11), or the book of the covenant (2 Kings 23:2), according to which he conducted his religious reform (2 Kings 23:10-24), and which is identified with "the law of Moses" (2 Kings 23:25).早在十八歲的統治Josias發現這本書的法律(列王紀下22時08分, 11人) ,或本書的盟約(列王紀下23點零二分) ,根據了他的宗教改革( 2國王23:10-24 ) ,並確定這是與“摩西律法” (列王紀下23:25 ) 。 Catholic commentators are not at one whether this law-book was Deuteronomy (von Hummelauer, "Deuteronomium", Paris, 1901, p. 40-60, 83-7) or the entire Pentateuch (Clair, "Les livres des Rois", Paris, 1884, II, p. 557 seq.; Hoberg, "Moses und der Pentateuch", Frieburg, 1905, p. 17 seq.; "uber den Ursprung des Pentateuchs" in "Biblische Zeitschrift", 1906, IV, pp. 338-40).天主教評論家不是一個是否本法書是申命記(馮Hummelauer , “ Deuteronomium ” ,巴黎, 1901年,第40-60 , 83-7 )或整個摩西五(克萊爾, “沙漠之里弗羅伊斯” ,巴黎, 1884 ,二,第557頁起。 ;霍貝格, “摩西五經之和” , Frieburg , 1905年,第17頁以下。 “尤伯杯2007萬Pentateuchs起源”中的“ Biblische雜誌” , 1906年,四頁。 338 -40 ) 。

(d) Paralipomenon.-The inspired writer of Paralipomenon refers to the law and the book of Moses much more frequently and clearly. (四) Paralipomenon. ,作家的靈感Paralipomenon是指法律和這本書的摩西更頻繁和明確。 The objectionable names and numbers occurring in these books are mostly due to transcribers.不良的姓名和號碼出現在這些圖書主要是由於謄寫。 The omission of incidents which would detract from the glory of the Israelite kings or would not edify the reader is not detrimental to the credibility or veracity of the work. Otherwise one should have to place among works of fiction a number of biographical or patriotic publications intended for the young or for the common reader.遺漏的事件將影響到光榮的以色列人國王或不會陶冶讀者不會損害的信譽或真實性的工作。否則應該有一個地方的小說作品中的一些傳記或愛國出版物年輕或為了共同的讀者。 On their part, the modern critics are too eager to discredit the authority of Paralipomena.對他們而言,現代的批評太急於詆毀權威Paralipomena 。 "After removing the account of Paralipomena", writes de Wette (Beitrage, I, 135), "the whole Jewish history assumes another form, and the Pentateuchal investigations take another turn; a number of strong proofs, hard to explain away, for the early existence of the Mosaic books have disappeared, the other vestiges of their existence are placed in a different light." “在取消帳戶Paralipomena ” ,寫入日Wette ( Beitrage ,我, 135 ) , “整個猶太歷史承擔的另一種形式,和Pentateuchal調查,再反過來;了一些強有力的證據,很難解釋了,為早期存在的馬賽克書籍已經消失,其他殘餘的存在被安置在不同的光。 “ A glance at the contents of Parlipomenon suffices to explain the efforts of de Witte and Wellhausen to disprove the historicity of the books.一瞥的內容,足以解釋Parlipomenon的努力日維特和豪森駁斥了歷史性的書籍。 Not only are the genealogies (1 Chronicles 1-9) and the descriptions of worship traced after the data and laws of the Pentateuch, but the sacred writer expressly points out their conformity with what is written in the law of the Lord (1 Chronicles 16:40), in the law of Moses (2 Chronicles 23:18; 31:3), thus identifying the law of the Lord with that written by Moses (cf. 2 Chronicles 25:4).不僅是族譜(歷代誌上1月9日)和說明崇拜追查後,數據和法律的五經,但神聖的作家明確指出其符合什麼是書面的法律勳爵(歷代誌上16 : 40 ) ,在摩西律法(歷代誌下23:18 ; 31:3 ) ,從而確定的法律與主寫的摩西(參見歷代誌下25:4 ) 。 The reader will find similar indications of the existence and the Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch in I Par., xxii, 12 seq.; II Par., xvii, 9; xxxiii, 4; xxxiv, 14; xxv, 12.讀者會發現類似的跡象的存在和馬賽克起源於我的摩西五桿。 , 22 , 12起。 ;二桿。 ,十七, 9 ;三十三, 4 ;三十四, 14 ;二十五, 12 。 By an artificial interpretation, indeed, the Books of Paralipomenon may be construed to represent the Pentateuch as a book containing the law promulgated by Moses; but the natural sense of the foregoing passages regards the Pentateuch as a book edited by Moses.由人工解釋,事實上,圖書的Paralipomenon可能被解釋為代表了摩西五是出版了一本書的法律頒布的摩西;但自然意義上的上述段落關於摩西五為一本書主編的摩西。

(e) I, II Esdras.-The Books of Esdras and Nehemias, too, taken in their natural and commonly accepted sense, consider the Pentateuch as the book of Moses, not merely as a book containing the law of Moses. (五)第一,二Esdras. ,帳簿和Nehemias埃斯德拉斯,也採取了它們的自然和普遍接受的意義上說,考慮到五經的書摩西,而不僅僅是一本書,載摩西律法。 This contention is based on the study of the following texts: I Esd., iii, 2 sqq.; vi, 18; vii, 14; II Esd., i, 7 sqq.; viii, 1, 8, 14; ix, 3; x, 34, 36; xiii, 1-3.這一論點的依據是研究下列文本:我可持續發展教育。 ,三, 2 sqq 。 ;六, 18 ;第七章,第14條;二可持續發展教育。 ,我7 sqq 。 ;八, 1 , 8 , 14 ;九, 3 ;十, 34 , 36 ;第十三1-3 。 Graf and his followers expressed the view that the book of Moses referred to in these texts is not the Pentateuch, but only the Priestly Code; but when we keep in mind that the book in question contained the laws of Lev., xxiii, and Deut., vii, 2-4; xv, 2, we perceive at once that the book of Moses cannot be restricted to the Priestly Code.格拉夫和他的追隨者認為,這本書的摩西中提到的這些文本不是摩西五,但只有祭司碼;但是,當我們記住這本書載有問題的法律列夫。 ,二十三,並Deut 。 ,七, 2月4日;十五, 2 ,我們認為在這本書後,摩西不能僅限於在祭司碼。 To the witness of the historical books we may add II Mach., ii, 4; vii, 6; Judith, viii, 23; Ecclus., xxiv, 33; xlv, 1-6; xlv, 18, and especially the Preface of Ecclus.對證人的歷史書籍,我們可以添加二馬赫。 ,二, 4 ;七, 6 ;朱迪,八, 23 ; Ecclus 。 , 24 , 33 ;第四十五, 1月6日;第四十五, 18 ,特別是序Ecclus 。

(f) Prophetic Books.-Express reference to the written law of Moses is found only in the later Prophets: Bar., ii, 2, 28; Dan., ix, 11, 13; Mal., iv, 4. ( F )的先知Books. ,明確提到的書面摩西律法是發現,只有在後來先知:酒吧。 ,二, 2 , 28 ;丹。 ,第九章, 11 , 13 ;條。 ,四, 4 。 Among these, Baruch knows that Moses has been commanded to write the law, and though his expressions run parallel to those of Deut., xxviii, 15, 53, 62-64, his threats contain allusions to those contained in other parts of the Pentateuch. The other Prophets frequently refer to the law of the Lord guarded by the priests (cf. Deuteronomy 31:9), and they put it on the same level with Divine Revelation and the eternal covenant of the Lord.其中,巴魯克知道摩西已寫入命令的法律,儘管他的表現形式並行的那些Deut 。 ,二十八, 15 , 53 , 62-64 ,他的威脅含有暗示那些載於其他地區的摩西五。其他先知經常提到的法律,主守衛的祭司(參見申命記31:9 ) ,他們把它放在同樣的水平與天啟和永恆的盟約的上帝。 They appeal to God's covenant, the sacrificial laws the calendar of feasts, and other laws of the Pentateuch in such a way as to render it probable that a written legislation formed the basis of their prophetic admonitions (cf. Hosea 8:12), and that they were acquainted with verbal expressions of the book of the law.他們呼籲上帝的盟約,犧牲法律的日曆節日,和其他法律的摩西五以這樣一種方式,以使其有可能形成書面立法的基礎上他們的預言告誡(見何西阿8點12分) ,和他們熟悉的口頭表達的這本書的法律。 Thus in the northern kingdom Amos (iv, 4-5; v, 22 sqq.) and Isaias in the south (i, 11 sqq.) employ expressions which are practically technical words for sacrifice occurring in Lev., i-iii; vii, 12, 16; and Deut., xii, 6.因此,在英國北部阿摩司(四, 4月5日;五, 22 sqq 。 )和伊薩亞南部(一, 11 sqq 。 )僱用表現是技術的話幾乎犧牲發生在列夫。 ,一至三;七, 12 , 16 ;和Deut 。 ,第十二章, 6 。

(3) Witness of the New Testament ( 3 )證人的新約全書

We need not show that Jesus and the Apostles quoted the whole of the Pentateuch as written by Moses.我們沒有必要表明,耶穌和使徒引述整個五經書面的摩西。 If they attributed to Moses all the passages which they happen to cite, if they ascribe the Pentateuch to Moses whenever there is question of its authorship, even the most exacting critics must admit that they express their conviction that the work was indeed written by Moses.如果他們由於摩西的所有通道,他們舉出發生,如果他們賦予了摩西五摩西只要有問題,其著作權,即使是最苛刻的批評者也必須承認,他們表示相信,工作確實是寫的摩西。 When the Sadducees quote against Jesus the marriage law of Deut., xxv, 5, as written by Moses (Matthew 22:24; Mark 12:19; Luke 20:28), Jesus does not deny the Mosaic authorship, but appeals to Ex., iii, 6, as equally written by Moses (Mark 12:26; Matthew 22:31; Luke 20:37).當撒都該人對耶穌回复婚姻法Deut 。 , 25日, 5日,作為撰寫的摩西(馬太22:24 ;馬克12點19分;路加福音20:28 ) ,耶穌並不否認花葉著作權,但呼籲惠。 ,三,六,同樣寫的摩西(馬克12時26分;馬修22:31 ;路加福音20:37 ) 。 Again, in the parable of Dives and Lazarus (Luke 16:29), He speaks of "Moses and the prophets", while on other occasions He speaks of "the law and the prophets" (Luke 16:16), thus showing that in His mind the law, or the Pentateuch, and Moses are identical.再次,在寓言富豪和拉撒路(路加福音16時29分) ,他談到了“摩西和先知” ,而在其他場合,他說的是“ ,是律法和先知” (路加福音16:16 ) ,從而表明,在他的記憶法,或摩西五,和摩西是相同的。 The same expressions reappear in the last discourse addressed by Christ to His disciples (Luke 24:44-6; cf. 27): "which are written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms concerning me".同樣的表情出現在過去的話語處理基督門徒(路加福音24:44-6 ;比照。二十七日)說: “這是寫在摩西律法,並在先知,並在關於我的詩篇” 。 Finally, in John, v, 45-7, Jesus is more explicit in asserting the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch: "There is one that accuseth you, Moses. . .for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?"最後,在美國,五, 45-7 ,耶穌是更明確地主張著作權的馬賽克的摩西五: “我們是一個accuseth你,摩西。 。 。為他寫的我。但是,如果你不相信他的著作,您將如何相信我的話? “ Nor can it be maintained that Christ merely accommodated himself to the current beliefs of his contemporaries who considered Moses as the author of the Pentateuch not merely in a moral but also in the literary sense of authorship.也不能被認為基督只是住自己目前的信仰誰認為他同時代的作家摩西的摩西五不僅在道義上,而且在文學意義上的作者。 Jesus did not need to enter into the critical study of the nature of Mosaic authorship, but He could not expressly endorse the popular belief, if it was erroneous.耶穌並不需要進入關鍵研究的性質花葉作者,但他沒有明確贊同普遍認為,如果是錯誤的。

The Apostles too felt convinced of, and testified to, the Mosaic authorship. "Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith to him: We have found him of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets did write."使徒們也認為深信,並證明,著作權的馬賽克。 “菲利普findeth拿,和saith對他說:我們已經找到了他的人摩西的法律,和先知沒有寫。 ” St. Peter introduces a quotation from Deut., xviii, 15, with the words: "For Moses said" (Acts 3:22).聖彼得介紹引自Deut 。 , 18 , 15 ,改為: “對摩西說: ” (使徒3點22分) 。 St. James and St.聖雅各福群和街 Paul relate that Moses is read in the synagogues on the Sabbath day (Acts 15:21; 2 Corinthians 3:15).保羅說,摩西是涉及閱讀的猶太教堂的安息日(使徒15時21分;哥林多後書3:15 ) 。 The great Apostle speaks in other passages of the law of Moses (Acts 13:33; 1 Corinthians 9:9); he preaches Jesus according to the law of Moses and the Prophets (Acts 28:23), and cites passages from the Pentateuch as words written by Moses (Romans 10:5-8; 19).偉大的使徒談到其他段落中的摩西律法(使徒13:33 ;哥林多前書9時09分) ;他鼓吹耶穌根據摩西律法和先知(使徒28:23 ) ,並列舉了摩西五通道作為文字的摩西(羅馬書10:5-8 ; 19 ) 。 St. John mentions the canticle of Moses (Revelation 15:3).聖約翰提到頌歌摩西(啟示錄15:3 ) 。

B. WITNESS OF TRADITION灣昭傳統

The voice of tradition, both Jewish and Christian, is so unanimous and constant in proclaiming the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch that down to the seventeenth century it did not allow the rise of any serious doubt.傳統的聲音,無論猶太教和基督教,是如此一致,不斷在宣布馬賽克作者的摩西五是到17世紀它不允許任何崛起的嚴重懷疑。 The following paragraphs are only a meagre outline of this living tradition.以下各段僅是微薄的大綱此生活的傳統。

(1) Jewish Tradition ( 1 )猶太傳統

It has been seen that the books of the Old Testament, beginning with those of the Pentateuch, present Moses as the author of at least parts of the Pentateuch. The writer of the Books of Kings believes that Moses is the author of Deuteronomy at least.人們看到,圖書舊約,首先是摩西五,本摩西的作者至少部分摩西五。作家的書國王認為,摩西是作者申命記至少。 Esdras, Nehemias, Malachias, the author of Paralipomena, and the Greek authors of the Septuagint Version consider Moses as the author of the whole Pentateuch.埃斯德拉斯, Nehemias , Malachias的作者Paralipomena ,和希臘作者七十版本考慮摩西的作者整個摩西五。 At the time of Jesus Christ and the Apostles friend and foe take the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch for granted; neither our Lord nor His enemies take exception to this assumption.當時耶穌和使徒朋友和敵人採取馬賽克作者的摩西五是理所當然的;既不我們的上帝,也沒有他的敵人採取例外,這一假設。 In the first century of the Christian era, Josephus ascribes to Moses the authorship of the entire Pentateuch, not excepting the account of the lawgiver's death ("Antiq. Jud.", IV, viii, 3-48; cf. I Procem., 4; "Contra Apion.", I, 8).在二十一世紀的公元,約瑟夫賦予摩西作者整個摩西五,不除外到立法者的死亡( “ Antiq 。珠德。 ” ,四,八, 3-48 ;比照。我Procem 。 , 4 , “康特拉阿皮翁。 ”一, 8 ) 。 The Alexandrian philosopher Philo is convinced that the entire Pentateuch is the work of Moses, and that the latter wrote a prophetic account of his death under the influence of a special divine inspiration ("De vita Mosis", ll. II, III in "Opera", Geneva, 1613, pp. 511, 538).哲學家斐洛的亞歷山大相信,整個摩西五是工作的摩西,後者寫了預言到他去世的影響下,一個特別神聖的啟示( “者維Mosis ” ,當地僱員。二,三在“歌劇院“ ,日內瓦, 1613年,頁。 511 , 538 ) 。 The Babylonian Talmud ("Baba-Bathra", II, col. 140; "Makkoth", fol. IIa; "Menachoth", fol. 30a; cf. Vogue, "Hist. de la Bible et de l'exegese biblique jusqua'a nos jours", Paris, 1881, p. 21), the Talmud of Jerusalem (Sota, v, 5), the rabbis, and the doctors of Israel (cf. Furst, "Der Kanon des Alten Testaments nach den Überlieferungen im Talmud und Midrasch", Leipzig, 1868, pp. 7-9) bear testimony to the continuance of this tradition for the first thousand years.巴比倫他勒目( “巴巴- Bathra ” ,二,山口。 140 ; “ Makkoth ” ,下載。國際投資協定“ ; Menachoth ” ,下載。 30A的;比照。時尚, “組織胺。德拉薩聖經與法國exegese biblique jusqua ' 1我jours “ ,巴黎, 1881年,第21頁) ,在耶路撒冷的猶太法典(索塔,五, 5 ) ,猶太教,和醫生的以色列(參見弗斯特, ”明鏡加隆萬老聖經nach旦Überlieferungen即時塔爾穆德與Midrasch “ ,萊比錫, 1868年,頁。 7-9 )證明的延續了這一傳統的第一一千多年。 Though Isaac ben Jasus in the eleventh century and Abenesra in the twelfth admitted certain post-Mosaic additions in the Pentateuch, still they as well as Maimonides upheld its Mosaic authorship, and did not substantially differ in this point from the teaching of R. Becchai (thirteenth cent.), Joseph Karo, and Abarbanel (fifteenth cent.; cf. Richard Simon, "Critique de la Bibl. des aut. eccles. de E. Dupin", Paris, 1730, III, pp. 215-20).雖然伊薩克本Jasus於11世紀和Abenesra在某些第十二屆承認後花葉增加在五經,但他們以及邁蒙尼德堅持花葉著作權,並沒有實質性不同,這一點從教學中的河Becchai (第十三左右。 ) ,約瑟夫卡羅和Abarbanel (第十五左右。 ;比照。理查德西蒙, “批判Bibl 。沙漠引渡。埃克勒斯。日體育Dupin ” ,巴黎, 1730年,三,頁。 215-20 ) 。 Only in the seventeenth century, Baruch Spinoza rejected the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, pointing out the possibility that the work might have been written by Esdras ("Tract. Theol.-politicus", c. viii, ed. Tauchnitz, III, p. 125).只有在十七世紀,巴魯克斯賓諾莎拒絕馬賽克著作權的摩西五,指出的可能性,這項工作可能已經寫的埃斯德拉斯( “道。 Theol.政治論” ,角八,教育署。 Tauchnitz ,三,磷。 125 ) 。 Among the more recent Jewish writers several have adopted the results of the critics, thus abandoning the tradition of their forefathers.在最近的幾個猶太人作家已經通過的結果,評論家,從而放棄了他們祖先的傳統。

(2) Christian Tradition ( 2 )基督教傳統

The Jewish tradition concerning the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch was brought in to the Christian Church by Christ Himself and the Apostles.猶太傳統的馬賽克著作權的五經被帶到基督教的耶穌和使徒。 No one will seriously deny the existence and continuance of such a tradition from the patristic period onward; one might indeed be curious about the interval between the time of the Apostles and beginning of the third century.沒有人會認真地否認存在和繼續存在這樣一個傳統的教父期間起;人們可能確實是好奇之間的間隔時間的使徒和年初三世紀。 For this period we may appeal to the "Epistle of Barnabus" (x, 1-12; Funk, "Patres apostol.", 2nd ed., Tübingen, 1901, I, p. 66-70; xii, 2-9k; ibid., p. 74-6), to St. Clement of Rome (1 Corinthians 41:1; ibid., p. 152), St. Justin ("Apol. I", 59; PG, VI, 416; I, 32, 54; ibid., 377, 409; "Dial.", 29; ibid., 537), to the author of "Cohort. Ad Graec."在此期間我們可能會呼籲“使徒Barnabus ” (十, 1月12日;克, “ Patres apostol 。 ”第2版。 ,蒂賓根大學, 1901年,我,第66-70 ;十二, 2 - 9k ;同上。 ,第74-6 ) ,聖克萊門特的羅馬(哥林多前書41:1 ;同上。 ,第152頁) ,聖賈斯汀( “ Apol 。一” , 59 ;前列腺素,六, 416 ,我, 32 , 54 ;同上。 , 377 , 409 ; “撥號。 ” 29 ;同上。 , 537 ) ,作者的“隊列。廣告Graec 。 ” (9, 28, 30, 33, 34; ibid., 257, 293, 296-7, 361), to St. Theophilus ("Ad Autol.", III, 23; ibid., 1156; 11, 30; ibid., 1100), to St. Irenæus (Cont. haer., I, ii, 6; PG, VII, 715-6), to St. Hippolytus of Rome ("Comment. In Deut.", xxxi, 9, 31, 35; cf. Achelis, "Arabische Fragmente etc.", Leipzig, 1897, I, 118; "Philosophumena", VIII, 8; X, 33; PG, XVI, 3350, 3448), to Tertullian of Carthage (Adv. Hermog., XIX; PL, II, 214), to Origen of Alexandria (Contra. Cels., III, 5-6; PG, XI, 928; etc.), to St. Eusthatius of Antioch (De engastrimytha c. Orig., 21; PG, XVIII, 656); for all these writers, and others might be added, bear witness to the continuance of the Christian tradition that Moses wrote the Pentateuch. ( 9 , 28 , 30 , 33 , 34 ;同上。 , 257 , 293 , 296-7 , 361 ) ,聖奧菲勒斯( “廣告Autol 。 ” ,三, 23 ;同上。 , 1156年; 11 , 30 ;同上。 , 1100年) ,聖Irenæus (續haer 。 ,一,二, 6 ;指引,第七, 715-6 ) ,聖西波呂羅馬( “評論。在Deut 。 ”三十一, 9 , 31 , 35 ;比照。 Achelis , “ Arabische Fragmente等” ,萊比錫, 1897年,我, 118 ; “ Philosophumena ” ,八, 8 ;十, 33 ;指引,十六, 3350 , 3448 ) ,以良的迦太基( Adv. Hermog 。 ,十九;光致發光,二, 214 ) ,以奧利亞歷山大( Contra.細胞。 ,三, 5月6日;指引,十一, 928等) ,聖Eusthatius的安提阿(者engastrimytha角原始。 , 21 ;前列腺素,十八, 656 ) ;所有這些作家,和其他可添加,見證繼續基督教傳統,寫了摩西五經。 A list of the later Fathers who bear witness to the same truth may be found in Mangenot's article in the "Dict. de la Bible" (V, 74 seq.).的名單後父親誰見證相同的事實中可以找到Mangenot的文章在“快譯通。德拉薩聖經” (五, 74歲以下。 ) 。 Hoberg (Moses und der Pentateuch, 72 seq.) has collected the testimony for the existence of the tradition during the Middle Ages and in more recent times.霍貝格(摩西五經之和, 72起。 )已收集的證詞存在的傳統在中世紀,在更近的時候。

But Catholic tradition does not necessarily maintain that Moses wrote every letter of the Pentateuch as it is today, and that the work has come down to us in an absolutely unchanged form.但是,天主教的傳統,並不一定認為摩西寫每信摩西五象今天,該工作已下降到我們絕對不變的形式。 This rigid view of the Mosaic authorship began to develop in the eighteenth century, and practically gained the upper hand in the nineteenth.這種僵硬鑑於花葉作者開始發展在18世紀,切實佔上風19 。 The arbitrary treatment of Scripture on the part of Protestants, and the succession of the various destructive systems advanced by Biblical criticism, caused this change of front in the Catholic camp.任意對待聖經的一部分新教徒,並繼承了各種先進的破壞性系統聖經批評,造成這一變化的戰線天主教營地。 In the sixteenth century Card.在16世紀卡。 Bellarmine, who may be considered as a reliable exponent of Catholic tradition, expressed the opinion that Esdras had collected, readjusted, and corrected the scattered parts of the Pentateuch, and had even added the parts necessary for the completion of the Pentateuchal history (De verbo Dei, II, I; cf. III, iv).貝拉明,誰可被視為一個可靠的指數,天主教的傳統,認為埃斯德拉斯收集,調整,並糾正了分散部分五經,甚至增加了部分必要的完成Pentateuchal歷史(者動詞上帝,二,一;比照。三,四) 。 The views of Génebrard, Pereira, Bonfrere, a Lapide, Masius, Jansenius, and of other notable Biblicists of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries are equally elastic with regard to the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch.意見Génebrard ,佩雷拉,邦弗雷雷,一個Lapide ,麥西斯, Jansenius ,和其他顯著Biblicists的16和17世紀也同樣彈性關於花葉作者的摩西五。 Not that they agree with the contentions of our modern Biblical criticism; but they show that today's Pentateuchal problems were not wholly unknown to Catholic scholars, and that the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch as determined by the Biblical Commission is no concession forced on the Church by unbelieving Bible students.不是他們同意爭論我們現代聖經批評;但它們表明,今天的Pentateuchal問題沒有完全陌生的天主教學者和作者的馬賽克的摩西五所確定的聖經委員會沒有讓步強迫教會問題的不信聖經學生。

C. VOICE OF INTERNAL EVIDENCE角聲內部證據

The possibility of producing a written record at the time of Moses is no longer contested.可能生成書面記錄的時候,摩西已不再有爭議。 The art of writing was known long before the time of the great lawgiver, and was extensively practised both in Egypt and Babylon.寫作的藝術被稱為之前很久的時候,偉大的立法者,並廣泛實行在埃及和巴比倫。 As to the Israelites, Flinders Petrie infers from certain Semitic inscriptions found in 1905 on the Sinaitic peninsula, that they kept written accounts of their national history from the time of their captivity under Ramses II.至於以色列人,弗林德斯皮特里推斷某些猶太人題詞於1905年發現的Sinaitic半島,他們隨時書面帳戶本國的歷史,他們被關押的時間下拉美西斯二世。 The Tell-el-Amarna tablets show the language of Babylon was in a way the official language at the time of Moses, known in Western Asia, Palestine, and Egypt; the finds of Taanek have confirmed this fact.該告訴埃及阿瑪爾納片顯示的語言,巴比倫是一種官方語言的時候,摩西,已知在西亞,巴勒斯坦和埃及的認定的Taanek證實了這一事實。 But it cannot be inferred from this that the Egyptians and Israelites employed this sacred or official language among themselves and in their religious documents (cf. Benzinger, "Hebraische Archaologie", 2nd ed., Tübingen, 1907, p. 172 sqq.).但是,它不能作為推斷這是埃及人和以色列人僱用這個神聖或它們之間的官方語言,並在其宗教文件(參見Benzinger , “ Hebraische Archaologie ” ,第2版。 ,蒂賓根大學, 1907年,第172頁sqq 。 ) 。 It is not merely the possibility of writing at the time of Moses and the question of language that confronts us here; there is the further problem of the kind of written signs used in the Mosaic documents.它不僅是書面的可能性時,摩西和問題的語言,使我們在這裡有進一步的問題,什麼樣的書面標誌用於花葉文件。 The hieroglyphic and cuneiform signs were widely employed at that early date; the oldest inscriptions written in alphabetical characters date only from the ninth century BC But there can hardly be any doubt as to the higher antiquity of alphabetic writing, and there seems to be nothing to prevent our extending it back to the time of Moses.象形文字和楔形文字的標誌,廣泛採用該早日生效;最古老的碑文寫的字母字符到目前為止,只有從公元前9世紀,但就不可能有疑問,較高的文物的拼音文字,似乎是沒有防止我們的延長回到時間的摩西。 Finally, the Code of Hammurabi, discovered in Susa in 1901 by the French expedition funded by Mr. And Mrs. Dieulafoy, shows that even in pre-Mosaic times legal enactments were committed to, and preserved in, writing; for the Code antedates Moses some five centuries, and contains about 282 regulations concerning various contingencies in the civic life.最後,漢謨拉比法典,在蘇薩發現於1901年由法國資助的探險先生和夫人杜氏,結果表明,即使在預花葉次法令承諾,並保存在,寫作;守則antedates摩西大約5個世紀,並載有大約282名各種突發法規的公民生活。

Thus far it has been shown negatively that an historic and legal document claiming to be written at the time of Moses involves no antecedent improbability of its authenticity.迄今為止,它已被證明是一種消極的歷史和法律文件,聲稱是書面的時候,摩西不涉及先行不大可能的真實性。 But the internal characteristics of the Pentateuch show also positively that the work is at least probably Mosaic.但是,內部特徵的摩西五顯示了積極的,這項工作至少是可能馬賽克。 It is true that the Pentateuch contains no express declaration of its entire Mosaic authorship; but even the most exacting of critics will hardly require such testimony.的確,摩西五載沒有明確宣布其整個花葉著作權;但即使是最苛刻的批評者就很難要求這些證詞。 It is practically lacking in all other books, whether sacred or profane.這實際上是缺乏所有其他的書籍,不論是神聖的或褻瀆。 On the other hand, it has already been shown that four distinct passages of the Pentateuch are expressly ascribed to the authorship of Moses.另一方面,它已經表明,四個不同的段落的摩西五是明確歸因於作者的摩西。 Deut., xxxi, 24-9, is especially noted; for it knows that Moses wrote the "words of this law in a volume" and commanded it to be placed in the ark of the covenant as a testimony against the people who have been so rebellious during the lawgiver's life and will "do wickedly" after his death. Deut 。 ,三十一, 24-9 ,特別指出,因為它知道,摩西寫了“的話本法數額” ,並命令它放在約櫃的證詞對人民誰已這樣叛逆在立法者的生命,將“做壞透”在他死後。 Again, a number of legal sections, though not explicitly ascribed to the writing of Moses, are distinctly derived from Moses as the lawgiver.同樣,一些法律部門,雖然沒有明確賦予的書面摩西,明顯來自摩西作為立法者。 Besides, many of the Pentateuchal laws bear evidence of their origin in the desert; hence they too lay an indirect claim to Mosaic origin.此外,許多Pentateuchal法律承擔證明其原產地在沙漠中,因此他們也奠定了間接聲稱花葉來源。 What has been said of a number of Pentateuchal laws is equally true of several historical sections.所說的一些Pentateuchal同樣的法律的若干歷史章節。 These contain in the Book of Numbers, for instance, so many names and numbers that they must have been handed down in writing. Unless the critics can bring irrefutable evidence showing that in these sections we have only fiction, they must grant that these historical details were written down in contemporary documents, and not transmitted by mere oral tradition. Moreover, Hommel ("Die altisraelitische Überlieferung in inschriftlicher Beleuchtung", p. 302) has shown that the names in the lists of the Book of Numbers bear the character of the Arabian names of the second millennium before Christ, and can have originated only in the time of Moses, though it must be admitted that the text of certain portions, eg, Num., xiii, has suffered in its transmission.這些包含在這本書中的數字,例如,如此眾多的名字和號碼,他們必須一直流傳下來的書面。除非批評可以帶來不可辯駁的證據顯示,在這些路段,我們只有小說,他們必須承認,這些歷史的細節寫在當代的文件,而不是僅僅通過口頭傳播的傳統。此外,霍梅爾( “模具altisraelitische Überlieferung的inschriftlicher Beleuchtung ” ,第302頁)表明,名單中的名字的圖書數承擔的性質阿拉伯名字公元前第二個千年,可以只在起源時,摩西,但必須承認,案文的某些部分,例如數。 ,十三,受到在其傳播。 We need not remind the reader that numerous Pentateuchal laws and data imply the conditions of a nomadic life of Israel.我們需要提醒讀者,許多Pentateuchal法律和數據意味著條件游牧生活以色列。 Finally, both the author of the Pentateuch and its first readers must have been more familiar with the topography and the social conditions of Egypt and with the Sinaitic peninsula than with the land of Chanaan.最後,作者的五經和它的第一讀者必須是比較熟悉的地形和社會條件的埃及和比Sinaitic半島的土地Chanaan 。 Cf., eg, Deut., viii, 7-10; xi, 10 sqq.比照。 ,例如Deut 。 ,八, 7月10日;十一, 10 sqq 。 These internal characteristics of the Pentateuch have been developed at greater length by Smith, "The Book of Moses or the Pentateuch in its Authorship, Credibility, and Civilisation", London, 1868; Vigouroux, "La Bible et les decouvertes modernes", 6th ed., Paris, 1896, I, 453-80; II, 1-213, 529-47, 586-91; Idem, "Les Livres Saints et la critique rationaliste", Paris, 1902, III, 28-46, 79-99, 122-6; Heyes, "Bibel und Ægypten", Munster, 1904, p.這些內部特徵的摩西五已經制定更詳細的史密斯, “這本書或摩西五經的作者,信譽,文明之光” ,倫敦, 1868年; Vigouroux , “香格里拉聖經與法國decouvertes現代” ,第6版。 ,巴黎, 1896年,我, 453-80 ;二, 1-213 , 529-47 , 586-91 ;同上, “法國和法語圖書聖徒批判rationaliste ” ,巴黎, 1902年,三, 28-46 , 79 - 99 , 122-6 ; Heyes , “聖經和Ægypten ” ,穆斯特, 1904年,第 142; Cornely, "Introductio specialis in histor. Vet. Test. libros", I, Paris, 1887, pp. 142 ; Cornely , “引的特別histor 。獸醫。試驗。 libros ” ,我,巴黎, 1887年,頁。 57-60; Poole, "Ancient Egypt" in "Contemporary Review", March, 1879, pp. 57-60 ;普爾, “古埃及”在“當代評論” , 3月, 1879年,頁。 757-9. 757-9 。

D. ECCLESIASTICAL DECISIONS 4教會決定

In accordance with the voice of the triple argument thus far advanced for the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, the Biblical Commission on 27 June, 1906, answered a series of questions concerning this subject in the following way:根據聲音的三重論點迄今先進的馬賽克著作權的五經,聖經委員會關於1906年6月27日,回答了一系列問題,這一問題的方式如下:

(1) The arguments accumulated by the critics to impugn the Mosaic authenticity of the sacred books designated by the name Pentateuch are not of such weight as to give us the right, after setting aside numerous passages of both Testaments taken collectively, the continuous consensus of the Jewish people, the constant tradition of the Church, and internal indications derived from the text itself, to maintain that these books have not Moses as their author, but are compiled from sources for the greatest part later than the Mosaic age. ( 1 )論點所積累批評家非難花葉真實性神聖的書籍指定的名稱摩西五沒有這種重量給我們的權利,在撇開許多段落都聖經採取集體,連續共識猶太人民,不斷的傳統,教會,和內部的跡象來自文字本身,以保持這些書籍沒有摩西作為其作者,而且是從來源的最大部分不遲於花葉年齡。

(2) The Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch does not necessarily require such a redaction of the whole work as to render it absolutely imperative to maintain that Moses wrote all and everything with his own hand or dictated it to his secretaries; the hypothesis of those can be admitted who believe that he entrusted the composition of the work itself, conceived by him under the influence of Divine inspiration, to others, but in such a way that they were to express faithfully his own thoughts, were to write nothing against his will, were to omit nothing; and that finally the work thus produced should be approved by the same Moses, its principal and inspired author, and published under his name. ( 2 )花葉真實性摩西五並不一定需要這樣的編輯整個工作使其絕對必須保持這一摩西寫道,一切都與他自己的手或口述給他的秘書;的假設這些可必須承認誰相信他委託組成的工作本身,他所設想的影響下,神聖的靈感,給他人,但以這樣一種方式,他們忠實地表達自己的想法,寫了什麼對他的意志,省略了什麼;和最後的工作應該是這樣生產批准同摩西,其本金和激勵作者和出版他的名字。

(3) It may be granted without prejudice to the Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch, that Moses employed sources in the production of his work, ie, written documents or oral traditions, from which he may have drawn a number of things in accordance with the end he had in view and under the influence of Divine inspiration, and inserted them in his work either literally or according to their sense, in an abbreviated or amplified form. ( 3 )可給予不損害花葉真實性摩西五,即摩西受聘來源生產中所做的工作,即書面文件或口頭傳統,他從那裡可以得出一些事情根據為此,他已經考慮和的影響下,神聖的靈感,並插入他們在工作中也確實或根據自己的感覺,在一個縮寫或擴增形式。

(4) The substantial Mosaic authenticity and integrity of the Pentateuch remains intact if it be granted that in the long course of centuries the work has suffered several modifications, as; post-Mosaic additions either appended by an inspired author or inserted into the text as glosses and explanations; the translation of certain words and forms out of an antiquated language into the recent form of speech; finally, wrong readings due to the fault of transcribers, which one may investigate and pass sentence on according to the laws of criticism. ( 4 )大量馬賽克真實性和完整性的摩西五不變,如果給予,在長期的世紀工作就經受了好幾次修改,如;後花葉增加或者附加的啟發作者或插入文本掩蓋和解釋;翻譯某些詞和形式的陳舊的語言到最近形式的講話,最後,由於錯誤讀數的過錯謄寫,其中一個調查和判決的法律根據的批評。

The post-Mosaic additions and modifications allowed by the Biblical Commission in the Pentateuch without removing it from the range of substantial integrity and Mosaic authenticity are variously interpreted by Catholic scholars.後花葉補充和修訂所允許的聖經中的摩西五委員會而不刪除它的範圍從大量的完整性和真實性是不同的馬賽克解釋天主教學者。

(1) We should have to understand them in a rather wide sense, if we were to defend the views of von Hummelauer or Vetter. ( 1 )我們應該理解他們在一個相當廣泛的意義上說,如果我們要維護的意見,馮Hummelauer或Vetter 。 This latter writer admits legal and historical documents based on Mosaic tradition, but written only in the times of the Judges; he places the first redaction of the Pentateuch in the time of the erection of Solomon's temple, and its last redaction in the time of Esdras.後者作家承認的法律和歷史文獻的基礎上鑲嵌的傳統,但只寫在他的時代,法官,他的第一個地方的五經編輯的時候,勃起的所羅門聖殿,並在其最後編輯時間埃斯德拉斯。 Vetter died in 1906, the year in which the Biblical Commission issued the above Decree; it is an interesting question, whether and how the scholar would have modified his theory, if time had been granted him to do so. Vetter死於1906年,在這一年中的聖經委員會發表了上述法令,這是一個有趣的問題,是否和如何修改的學者將他的理論,如果時間已給予他這樣做。

(2) A less liberal interpretation of the Decree is implied in the Pentateuchal hypotheses advanced by Hobert ("Moses und der Pentateuch; Die Pentateuch Frage" in "Biblische Studien", X, 4, Freiburg, 1907; "Erklarung des Genesis", 1908, Freiburg, IL), Schopfer (Geschichte des Alten Testamentes, 4th ed., 226 sqq.), Hopfl ("Die hohere Bibelkritik", 2nd ed., Paderborn, 1906), Brucker ("L'eglise et la critique", Paris, 1907, 103 sqq.), and Selbst (Schuster and Holzammer's "Handbuch zur Biblischen Geschichte", 7th ed., Freiburg, 1910, II, 94, 96). ( 2 )少從寬解釋法令是隱含在Pentateuchal假設先進的Hobert ( “摩西五經之和; Frage模具五經”中的“ Biblische Studien ” ,第十,第4 ,弗賴堡, 1907年; “ Erklarung之起源” 1908年,弗萊堡,白細胞介素) , Schopfer (史老Testamentes ,第4版。 , 226 sqq 。 ) Hopfl ( “模具hohere Bibelkritik ” ,第2版。 ,帕德博恩, 1906 ) , Brucker ( “歐萊雅埃格利斯與香格里拉批判” ,巴黎, 1907年, 103 sqq 。 )和自身( Schuster和Holzammer的“手冊Biblischen史論” ,第七版。 ,弗賴堡, 1910年,二, 94 , 96 ) 。 The last-named writer believes that Moses left a written law-book to which Josue and Samuel added supplementary sections and regulations, while David and Solomon supplied new statutes concerning worship and priesthood, and other kings introduced certain religious reforms, until Esdras promulgated the whole law and made it the basis of Israel's restoration after the Exile.過去命名的作家認為,摩西留下了書面法律書籍的若蘇埃和Samuel補充和規章的補充部分,而大衛和所羅門提供新的章程和有關禮拜牧師和其他國王介紹了某些宗教的改革,直到整個埃斯德拉斯頒布法律並使其根據以色列的恢復後,流亡國外。 Our present Pentateuch is, therefore, an Esdrine edition of the work.我們目前的五經,因此,一個Esdrine版的工作。 Dr. Selbst feels convinced that his admission of both textual changes and material additions in the Pentateuch agrees with the law of historical development and with the results of literary criticism.博士自我感覺相信,他承認這兩個文本的修改和補充材料中的五經同意的法律和歷史發展的結果,文學批評。 Historical development adapts laws and regulations to the religious, civil, and social conditions of successive ages, while literary criticism discovers in our actual Pentateuch peculiarities of words and phrases which can hardly have been original, and also historical additions or notices, legal modifications, and signs of more recent administration of justice and of later forms of worship.適應歷史發展的法律和規章的宗教,民間,社會條件的歷屆年齡,而文學批評發現在我們的實際摩西五特點的單詞和詞組難以被原始,也是歷史上增加或通知,法律的修改,和最近的跡象,司法行政和後來形式的崇拜。 But Dr. Selbst believes that these peculiarities do not offer a sufficient basis for a distinction of different sources in the Pentateuch.但醫生認為,這些自身的特點沒有提供足夠的基礎,區分不同來源的摩西五。

(3) A strict interpretation of the words of the Decree is implied in the views of Kaulen (Einleitung, n. 193 sqq.), Key ("Die Pentateuchfrage, ihre Geschichte un ihre System", Munster, 1903), Flunk (Kirchenlexicon, IX, 1782 sqq.), and Mangenot ("L'authenticite mosaique du Pentateuque", Paris, 1907; Idem, "Dict. de la Bible", V, 50-119. With the exception of those portions that belong to the time after the death of Moses, and of certain accidental changes of the text due to transcribers, the whole of the Pentateuch is the work of Moses who composed the work in one of the ways suggested by the Biblical Commission. Finally, there is the question as the theological certainty of the thesis maintaining the Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch. ( 3 )嚴格解釋的話是暗示的法令的意見Kaulen (導論,北路193 sqq 。 ) ,關鍵詞( “模具Pentateuchfrage , ihre史聯合國ihre系統” ,明斯特, 1903年) ,失敗( Kirchenlexicon ,九, 1782年sqq 。 )和Mangenot ( “歐萊雅authenticite mosaique杜Pentateuque ” ,巴黎, 1907年;同上, “快譯通。德拉薩聖經” ,五, 50-119 。除部分屬於時間去世後摩西,以及某些意外更改的文字,由於謄寫,整個摩西五是工作的組成摩西誰的工作方法之一聖經所建議的委員會。最後,還有一個問題作為神學確定性論文保持花葉真實性摩西五。

(1) Certain Catholic scholars who wrote between 1887 and 1906 expressed their opinion that the thesis in question is not revealed in Scripture nor taught by the Church; that it expresses a truth not contained in Revelation, but a tenet which may be freely contested and discussed. ( 1 )某些天主教學者誰寫的1887年和1906年表示,他們認為,論文中的問題是,沒有發現在聖經也不教教堂,它表達了真理中不包含的啟示,而是一個宗旨可以自由爭論和討論。 At that time, ecclesiastical authority had issued no pronouncement on the question.在那個時候,教會當局沒有發出聲明問題上。

(2) Other writers grant that the Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch is not explicitly revealed, but they consider it as a truth revealed formally implicitly, being derived from the revealed formulae not by a syllogism in the strict sense of the word, but by a simple explanation of the terms. ( 2 )其他作者給予的馬賽克真實性摩西五是沒有明確透露,但他們認為這是一個事實表明正式含蓄,被來自顯示公式不是一個三段論在嚴格意義上的文字,但由簡單的解釋條款。 The denial of the Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch is an error, and the contradictory of the thesis maintaining the Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch is considered erronea in fide (cf. Mechineau, "L'origine mosaique du Pentateuque", p. 34).剝奪花葉真實性摩西五是一個錯誤,而且矛盾的命題保持花葉真實性摩西五是erronea在真誠(參見Mechineau , “歐萊雅起源mosaique杜Pentateuque ” ,第34頁) 。

(3) A third class of scholars considers the Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch neither as a freely debatable tenet, nor as a truth formally implicitly revealed; they believe it has been virtually revealed, or that it is inferred from revealed truth by truly syllogistic deduction. ( 3 )第三類學者認為,花葉真實性摩西五既不作為一個有爭議的自由的宗旨,也作為一個真理正式含蓄地表明,他們認為它實際上已被發現,或者說這是推斷揭示真理的真正三段論扣除。 It is, therefore, a theologically certain truth, and its contradictory is a rash (temeraria) or even erroneous proposition (cf. Brucker, "Authenticite des livres de Moise" in "Etudes", March, 1888, p. 327; ibid., January, 1897, p. 122-3; Mangenot, "L'authenticité mosaïque du Pentateuque", pp. 267-310.因此,一個神學某些事實,其矛盾的是皮疹( temeraria ) ,甚至錯誤的主張(見Brucker , “ Authenticite萬里弗日莫伊茲”中的“練習曲” , 3月, 1888年,第327頁;同上。 1月, 1897年,第122-3 ; Mangenot , “歐萊雅authenticité mosaïque杜Pentateuque ” ,頁。 267-310 。

Whatever effect the ecclesiastical decision concerning the Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch may have had, or will have, on the opinion of students of the Pentateuchal question, it cannot be said to have occasioned the conservative attitude of scholars who wrote before the promulgation of the Decree.無論教會決定作用的馬賽克真實性摩西五可能有或將有的意見,學生的Pentateuchal問題,不能說已經引起了保守態度的學者誰寫之前頒布的法令。 The following list contains the names of the principal recent defenders of Mosaic authenticity: Hengstenberg, "Die Bucher Moses und Aegypten", Berlin, 1841; Smith, "The Book of Moses or the Pentateuch in its Authorship, Credibility, and Civilisation", London, 1868; C. Schobel, "Demonstration de l'authenticite du Deuteronome", Paris, 1868; Idem, "Demonstration de l'authenticite mosaique de l'Exode", Paris, 1871; Idem, "Demonstration de l'authenticite mosaique du Levitique et des Nombres", Paris, 1869; Idem, "Demonstration de l'authenticite de la Genese", Paris, 1872; Idem, "Le Moise historique et la redaction mosaique du Pentateuque", Paris, 1875; Knabenbauer, "Der Pentateuch und die unglaubige Bibelkritik" in "Stimmen aus Maria-Laach", 1873, IV; Bredenkamp, "Gesetz und Propheten", Erlangen, 1881; Green, "Moses and the Prophets", New York, 1883; Idem, "The Hebrew Feasts", New York, 1885; Idem, "The Pentateuchal Question" in "Hebraica", 1889-92; Idem, "The Higher Criticism of the Pentateuch", New York, 1895; Idem, "The Unity of the Book of Genesis", New York, 1895; C. Elliot, "Vindication of the Mosaic Authorship of the Pentateuch", Cincinnati, 1884; Bissel, "The Pentateuch, its Origin and Structure", New York, 1885; Ubaldi, "Introductio in Sacram Scripturam", 2nd ed., Rome, 1882, I, 452- 509; Cornely, "Introductio specialis in historicos VT libros", Paris, 1887, pp.下面的列表包含的姓名,最近的主要捍衛者的馬賽克真實性:亨斯, “模具與Aegypten布赫爾摩西” ,柏林, 1841年;史密斯, “這本書或摩西五經的作者,信譽,文明之光” ,倫敦, 1868 ;角Schobel , “示範法國authenticite杜Deuteronome ” ,巴黎, 1868年;同上, “示範法國authenticite mosaique法國Exode ” ,巴黎, 1871年;同上, “示範法國authenticite mosaique杜Levitique等沙漠Nombres “ ,巴黎, 1869年;同上, ”示範法國authenticite德拉薩Genese “ ,巴黎, 1872年;同上, ”樂莫伊茲歷史等香格里拉編輯mosaique杜Pentateuque “ ,巴黎, 1875年; Knabenbauer , ”明鏡摩西五與死亡unglaubige Bibelkritik “中的” Stimmen澳大利亞瑪麗亞Laach “ , 1873年,第四;登坎普”法則與Propheten “埃爾蘭根, 1881年;綠色, ”摩西和先知“ ,紐約, 1883年;同上, ”希伯來節日“ ,紐約, 1885年;同上, ”該Pentateuchal提問“ , ” Hebraica “ , 1889年至1892年;同上, ”上批評五經“ ,紐約, 1895年;同上, ”團結的創世記“ ,紐約, 1895年;角艾略特, “報復的馬賽克著作權的五經” ,辛辛那提, 1884年; Bissel說: “摩西五,其來源和結構” ,紐約, 1885年; Ubaldi , “引Sacram Scripturam ” ,第2版。 ,羅馬, 1882年,我, 452 - 509 ; Cornely , “引historicos特別在佛蒙特州libros ” ,巴黎, 1887年,頁。 19-160; Vos, "Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuchal Codes", London, 1886; Bohl, "Zum Gesetz und zum Zeugniss", Vienna, 1883; Zah, "Erneste Blicke in den Wahn der modernen Kritik des AT", Gutersloh, 1893; Idem, "Das Deuteronomium", 1890; Idem, "Israelitische und judische Geschichte", 1895; Rupprecht, "Die Anschauung der kritischen Schule Wellhausens vom Pentateuch", Leipzig, 1893; Idem, "Das Rathsel des Funfbuches Mose und seine falsche Losung", Gutersloh, 1894; Idem, "Des Rathsels Losung order Beitrage zur richtigen Losung des Pentateuchrathsels", 1897; Idem, "Die Kritik nach ihrem Recht uknd Unrecht", 1897; "Lex Mosaica, or the Law of Moses and the Higher Criticism" (by Sayce, Rawlinson, Trench, Lias, Wace, etc.), London, 1894; Card. 19-160 ;沃斯, “馬賽克起源Pentateuchal守則” ,倫敦, 1886年;博爾, “ Zum法則與zum Zeugniss ” ,維也納, 1883年; Zah , “ Erneste Blicke在2007 Wahn現代批判之在” ,居特斯洛, 1893年;同上, “達斯Deuteronomium ” , 1890年;同上, “ Israelitische與judische史” , 1895年;魯普雷希特, “模具之kritischen直觀學派Wellhausens論五經” ,萊比錫, 1893年;同上, “達斯Rathsel萬Funfbuches摩西和他的falsche Losung “ ,居特斯洛, 1894年;同上, ”輔Rathsels Losung秩序Beitrage楚richtigen Losung萬Pentateuchrathsels “ , 1897年;同上, ”模具批判nach ihrem法uknd不法“ , 1897年; ”的Lex Mosaica ,或摩西律法和更高批判“ (由Sayce ,羅林森,麟趾,黑侏羅統, Wace ,等等) ,倫敦, 1894年;卡。 Meignan, "De L'Eden a Moise", Paris, 1895, 1-88; Baxter, "Sanctuary and Sacrifice", London, 1896; Abbé de Broglie, "Questions bibliques", Paris, 1897, pp. Meignan , “法國伊甸園1莫伊茲” ,巴黎, 1895年1-88 ;巴克斯特的“庇護和犧牲” ,倫敦, 1896年;布沙尼德布羅意, “問題bibliques ” ,巴黎, 1897年,頁。 89-169; Pelt, "Histoire de l'AT", 3rd ed., Paris, 1901, I, pp. 89-169 ;佩爾特, “法國史的” ,第3版。 ,巴黎, 1901年,我頁。 291-326; Vigouroux, "Les Livres Saints et la critique ratioinaliste", Paris, 1902, III, 1-226; IV, 239-53, 405-15; Idem, "Manuel biblique", 12th ed., Paris, 1906, I, 397-478; Kley, "Die Pentateuchfrage, ihre Geschichte und ihre Systeme", Munster, 1903; Hopfl, "Die hohere Bibelkritik", Paderborn, 1902; Thomas, "The Organic Unity of the Pentateuch", London, 1904; Wiener, "Studies in Biblical Law", London, 1904; Rouse, "The Old Testament in New Testament Light", London, 1905; Redpath, "Modern Criticism and the Book of Genesis", London, 1905; Hoberg, "Moses und der Pentateuch", Freiburg, 1905; Orr, "The Problem of the Old Testament considered with reference to Recent Criticism", London, 1906. 291-326 ; Vigouroux , “法國圖書聖徒等批判ratioinaliste香格里拉” ,巴黎, 1902年,三, 1-226 ;四, 239-53 , 405-15 ;同上, “曼努埃爾biblique ” ,第12版。 ,巴黎, 1906年,我, 397-478 ; Kley , “模具Pentateuchfrage , ihre歷史與ihre制” ,明斯特, 1903 ; Hopfl , “模具hohere Bibelkritik ” ,帕德博恩, 1902年;托馬斯“的有機統一的五經” ,倫敦, 1904年;維納, “聖經研究法” ,倫敦, 1904年;勞斯, “舊約中新約全書光” ,倫敦, 1905年;雷德帕思, “現代的批判和創世記” ,倫敦, 1905年;霍貝格, “摩西與德國五經“ ,弗賴堡, 1905年;奧爾,他說: ”問題舊約審議提到最近批評“ ,倫敦, 1906年。

E. OPPONENTS OF THE MOSAIC AUTHORSHIP OF THE PENTATEUCH體育反對者鑲嵌著作權的摩西五

A detailed account of the opposition to the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch is neither desirable nor necessary in this article.詳細介紹了反對花葉著作權的摩西五既不可取,也不需要在這一條。 In itself it would form only a noisome history of human errors; each little system has had its day, and its successors have tried their best to bury it in hushed oblivion.它本身只是一個形式有礙人類歷史錯誤;每個小系統也有一天,它的繼任者已經盡力埋葬在寂靜遺忘。 The actual difficulties we have to consider are those advanced by our actual opponents of today; only the fact that the systems of the past show us the fleeting and transitory character of the actual theories now in vogue can induce us to briefly enumerate the successive views upheld by the opponents of the Mosaic authorship.的實際困難,我們必須要考慮的是通過我們的實際先進反對者今天,只有這樣一個事實,即系統過去查看我們的短暫和過渡性質的實際現在流行的理論能誘導我們簡要列舉堅持連續意見由反對花葉作者。

(1) Abandoned Theories ( 1 )被遺棄的理論

The views advanced by the Valentinian Ptolemy, the Nazarites, Abenesra, Carlstadt, Isaac Peyrerius, Baruch Spinoza, Jean Leclerc are sporadic phenomena. Not all of them were wholly incompatible with the Mosaic authorship as now understood, and the others have found their answer in their own time.-With the work of John Astrue, published in 1753, began the so-called Hypothesis of Documents which was further developed by Eichhorn and Ilgen.該意見提出瓦倫蒂安托勒密的Nazarites , Abenesra , Carlstadt ,艾薩克Peyrerius ,巴魯克斯賓諾莎,讓勒克萊爾是零星的現象。不是所有的人完全不符合著作權的馬賽克像現在的理解,和其他人發現自己的答案自己time. ,隨著工作的約翰Astrue ,發表於1753年,開始了所謂的假說文件進一步發展了艾希霍恩和Ilgen 。 But the works of the suspended priest, Alexander Geddes, published in 1792 and 1800, introduced the Hypothesis of Fragments, which in its day was elaborated and championed by Vater, de Wette (temporarily at least), Berthold, Hartmann, and von Bohlen.但是,工程暫停神父,亞歷山大格迪斯,出版於1792年和1800年,介紹了假設的碎片,這一天是在其制定並倡導壺腹部,日Wette (至少暫時) ,貝特霍爾德,哈特曼和馮波倫。 This theory was soon confronted by, and had to yield to the Hypothesis of Complements or Interpolations which numbered among its patrons Kelle, Ewald, Stahelin, Bleek, Tuch, de Wette, von Lengerke, and for a brief period also Franz Delitzsch.這一理論很快就面臨著,並已取得的假說補或插值其中編號之間的顧客凱萊,埃瓦爾德,斯斯塔埃林, Bleek , Tuch ,日Wette ,馮Lengerke ,和一個短暫的時期內還弗蘭茲德里。 The theory of interpolations again had hardly found any adherents before Gramberg (1828), Stahelin (1830), and Bleek (1831) returned to the Hypothesis of Documents, proposing it in a somewhat modified form.插值理論的再次幾乎沒有發現任何信徒面前Gramberg ( 1828 ) ,斯斯塔埃林( 1830 ) ,和Bleek ( 1831年)返回假設的文件,提出它在一種經略加修改的形式。 Subsequently, Ewald, Knobel, Hupfeld, Noldeke, and Schrader advanced each a different explanation of the documentary hypothesis.隨後,埃瓦爾德,克諾貝爾,霍普菲, Noldeke和施拉德先進的每一個不同的解釋紀錄片假說。 But all of these are at present only of an historical interest.但是,所有這些都是目前唯一的一個歷史的興趣。

(2) Present Hypothesis of Documents ( 2 )現假設文件

A course of religious development in Israel had been proposed by Reuss in 1830 and 1834, by Vatke in 1835, and by George in the same year.課程在以色列的宗教發展提出了Reuss在1830年和1834年,由Vatke於1835年,和喬治在同一年。 In 1865-66 Graf took up this idea and applied it to the literary criticism of the Hexateuch; for the critics had begun to consider the Book of Josue as belonging to the preceding five books, so that the collection formed a Hexateuch instead of a Pentateuch. The same application was made by Merx in 1869.格拉夫在1865年至1866年了這一想法,並適用於它的文學批評的Hexateuch ;的批評已開始考慮書若蘇埃屬於前5本書,以便收集形成了Hexateuch不是摩西五。同一申請是由Merx於1869年。 Thus modified the documentary theory continued in its development until it reached the state described in the translation of the Bible by Kautzsch (3rd ed., with Introduction and Annotations, Tübingen, 1908 sqq.).因此,修改的文件在其理論繼續發展,直至達到國家中所描述的翻譯聖經的Kautzsch (第3版。 ,以介紹和說明,圖賓根, 1908年sqq 。 ) 。 In itself there is nothing against the assumption of documents written by Moses; but we cannot ascribe with certainty anything of our literary remains to the hands of the Hebrew lawgiver.這本身沒有什麼危害擔任撰寫的文件摩西;但我們不能歸咎於任何肯定我們的文學仍然掌握在希伯萊立法者。 The beginning of written accounts must be placed towards the end of the time of Judges; only then were fulfilled the conditions which must precede the origin of a literature properly so called, ie, a general acquaintance with the art of writing and reading, stationary settlement of the people, and national prosperity.年初書面帳目必須放置在接近年底時法官的時間才得到滿足的條件,必須先來源的文學所謂正確,即一般熟人與藝術的書寫和閱讀,平穩解決人民和國家的繁榮。 What then are the oldest literary remains of the Hebrews?那麼什麼是最古老的文學仍然希伯來書? They are the collections of the songs dating from the heroic time of the nation, eg, the Book of the Wars of the Lord (Numbers 21:14), the Book of the Just (Joshua 10:12 sqq.), the Book of Songs (1 Kings 8:53; cf. Budde, "Geschichte der althebr. Literature", Leipzig, 1906, 17).他們收藏的歌曲約會時間從英雄的民族,如圖書的戰爭勳爵(民數記21:14 ) ,這本書的正義(約書亞10:12 sqq 。 ) ,這本書的首歌曲(列王紀上8點53分;比照。布德, “史althebr 。文學” ,萊比錫, 1906年, 17歲) 。 The Book of the Covenant (Exodus 20:24-23:19) too must have existed before the other sources of the Pentateuch. The oldest historical work is probably the book of the Yahwist, designated by J, and ascribed to the priesthood of Juda, belonging most probably to the ninth century BC圖書盟約(出20:24-23:19 )也必須有之前就存在的其他來源的摩西五。最古老歷史的工作,可能是本書的Yahwist指定的J和歸因於鐸的猶大,屬於最有可能在公元前9世紀

Akin to this is the Elohim document, designated by E, and written probably in the northern kingdom (Ephraim) about a century after the production of the Yahweh document.類似於這是耶洛因文件,指定的E和書面可能是在英國北部(伊弗雷姆)約在一個多世紀後的生產耶和華文件。 These two sources were combined by a redactor into one work soon after the middle of the sixth century.這兩個來源所合併成一個工作redactor後不久,中東第六世紀。 Next follows the law-book, almost entirely embodied in our actual Book of Deuteronomy, discovered in the temple 621 BC, and containing the precipitate of the prophetic teaching which advocated the abolition of the sacrifices in the so- called high places and the centralization of worship in the temple of Jerusalem.下一步如下法律書籍,幾乎完全體現在我們的實際書申命記,發現了公元前621廟,並載有沉澱的預言教學主張廢除犧牲在所謂的高的地方和集中禮拜寺耶路撒冷。 During the Exile originated the Priestly Code, P, based on the so-called law of holiness, Lev., xvii-xxvi, and the programme of Ezechiel, xl-xlviii; the substance of P was read before the post-exilic community by Esdras about 444 BC (Nehemiah 8-10), and was accepted by the multitude.在流亡的祭司碼起源,磷的基礎上,所謂的法律的聖德,列夫。 ,十七,二十六,該方案的Ezechiel ,儀-四十八;的P物質前宣讀後放逐社會公元前約444埃斯德拉斯(尼希米記8月10日) ,並接受了眾多。 History does not tell us when and how these divers historical and legal sources were combined into our present Pentateuch; but it is generally assumed that there was an urgent call for a compilation of the tradition and pre-exilic history of the people.歷史上並沒有告訴我們何時和如何這些潛水員的歷史和法律的來源合併為我們目前的摩西五;但一般認為,迫切要求彙編傳統和前放逐人民歷史。 The only indication of time may be found in the fact that the Samaritans accepted the Pentateuch as a sacred book probably in the fourth century BC Considering their hatred for the Jews, one must conclude that they would not have taken this step, unless they had felt certain of the Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch.唯一顯示時間可能會發現這樣一個事實,即撒瑪利亞接受了摩西五書作為一項神聖的可能是在公元前四世紀的考慮他們的仇恨猶太人,我們必須得出結論,他們就不會採取這一步驟,除非他們認為某些馬賽克起源摩西五。 Hence a considerable time must have intervened between the compilation of the Pentateuch and its acceptance by the Samaritans, so that the work of combining must be placed in the fifth century.因此,在相當一段時期內必須進行干預之間的彙編摩西五和接受撒瑪利亞,這樣結合起來的工作必須放置在五世紀。 It is quite generally agreed that the last redactor of the Pentateuch completed his task with great adroitness.這是很普遍認為,在過去的五經redactor完成他的任務十分精明。 Without altering the text of the older sources, he did all within man's power to fuse the heterogeneous elements into one apparent (?) whole, with such success that not only the Jews after the fourth century BC, but also the Christians for many centuries could maintain their conviction that the entire Pentateuch was written by Moses.在不改變舊的案文的來源,但他所有的人的權力,融合成一個異質因素明顯( ? )整體而言,這種成功,不僅對猶太人在公元前四世紀,而且為許多世紀基督徒可能保持它們的信念,即整個五經的作者是摩西。

(3) Deficiencies of the Critical Hypothesis ( 3 )有缺陷的關鍵假設

As several Pentateuchal critics have endeavoured to assign the last redaction of the Pentateuch to more recent dates, its placement in the fifth century may be regarded as rather favourable to conservative views.正如一些批評者一直在努力Pentateuchal指派最後編輯的摩西五,以更近的日期,其位置在第五世紀可能會被視為相當有利的保守觀點。 But it is hard to understand why the patrons of this opinion should not agree in considering Esdras as the last editor.但很難理解為什麼顧客的意見不應該同意在考慮埃斯德拉斯作為最後的編輯器。 Again, it is quite certain that the last editor of the Pentateuch must have notably preceded its acceptance on the part of the Samaritans as a sacred book; bit is it probably that the Samaritans would have accepted the Pentateuch as such in the fourth century BC, when the national and religious opposition between them and Jews was well developed?再次,這是很肯定地說,最後的編輯特別是摩西五之前必須接受的一部分撒瑪利亞為一個神聖的書籍;位是它可能是撒瑪利亞會接受了摩西五等在公元前四世紀,在民族和宗教對立,他們和猶太人已經十分發達? Is it not more probable that the mixed nation of Samaria received the Pentateuch through the priest sent to them from Assyria?這難道不是更可能是混合的國家薩馬利亞收到摩西五通過神父向他們發送從亞述? Cf.比照。 2 Kings 17:27.列王紀下17時27分。 Or again, as this priest instructed the Samaritan population in the law of the god of the country, is it not reasonable to suppose that he taught them the Pentateuchal law which the ten tribes carried with them when they separated from Juda?或再次,因為這神父指示撒瑪利亞人口的法律,上帝的國,是不是合理的假設,他教他們Pentateuchal法律進行的10個部落與他們分開時,猶大? At any rate, the fact that the Samaritans accepted as sacred only the Pentateuch, but not the Prophets, leads us to infer that the Pentateuch existed among the Jews before a collection of the prophetic writings was made, and that Samaria chose its sacred book before even Juda placed the works of the Prophets on the same level with the work of Moses.無論如何,這樣一個事實,即撒瑪利亞接納為神聖只有五經,但不是先知,使我們推斷,摩西五猶太人之間存在之前收集的預言著作寫了,而且薩馬利亞選擇其聖書之前甚至猶大放在工作的先知在同一水平上的工作,摩西。 But this natural inference finds no favour among the critics; for it implies that the historical and legal traditions codified in the Pentateuch, described the beginning, and not the end, of Israel's religious development.但是,這自然推理認為,沒有贊成的批評,因為它意味著,歷史和法律傳統中的摩西五編,介紹了剛剛開始,不是結束,以色列的宗教發展。 The view of Israel's religious development prevalent among the critics implies that the Pentateuch is later than the Prophets, and that the Psalms are later than both.以色列認為的宗教發展中普遍存在的批評意味著摩西五晚於先知,而且詩篇是不遲於兩個。 After these general considerations, we shall briefly examine the main principles, the methods, the results, and the arguments of the critical theory.在這些一般性的考慮,我們將簡要地審查的主要原則,方法,結果和論點的批判理論。

(a) Principles of the Critics (一)原則批評

Without pretending to review all the principles involved in the theories of the critics, we draw attention to two: the historical development of religion, and the comparative value of internal evidence and tradition.沒有假裝審查所有參與的原則理論的批評,我們提請大家注意兩個:歷史發展的宗教,和相對值的內部證據和傳統。

(i) The theory of the historical evolution of Israelitic religions leads us from Mosaic Yahwehism to the ethical monotheism of the Prophets, from this to the universalist conception of God developed during the Exile, and from this again to the ossified Phariseeism of later days. (一)理論的歷史演變Israelitic宗教使我們從花葉Yahwehism的道德一神教的先知,從這一概念的普遍性上帝流亡期間制定,並從這個再次僵化Phariseeism後來天。 This religion of the Jews is codified in our actual Pentateuch, but has been fictitiously projected backwards in the historical books into the Mosaic and pre-prophetic times. The idea of development is not a purely modern discovery.這一宗教的猶太人是編纂在我們的實際摩西五,但一直fictitiously預計倒退的歷史書籍的花葉和前預言次。發展的想法是不是一個純粹的現代發現。 Meyer ("Der Entwicklungsgedanke bei Aristoteles", Bonn, 1909) shows that Aristotle was acquainted with it; Gunkel ("Weiterbildung der Religion", Munich, 1905, 64) maintains that its application to religion is as old as Christianity, and that St.邁耶( “明鏡Entwicklungsgedanke北亞里士多德” ,波恩, 1909 )表明,亞里士多德是熟悉它;貢克爾( “ Weiterbildung之宗教” ,慕尼黑, 1905年, 64歲)堅持認為,它適用於宗教一樣古老基督教,和意法半導體。 Paul has enunciated this principle; Diestel ("Geschichte des AT in der chrislichen Kirche", Jena, 1869, 56 sqq.), Willmann ("Geschichte des Idealismus", 2nd ed., II, 23 sqq.), and Schanz ("Apologie des Christentums", 3rd ed. II, 4 sqq., 376) find the same application in the writings of the Fathers, though Hoberg ("Die Forschritte der bibl. Wissenschaften", Freiburg, 1902, 10) grants that the patristic writers often neglect the external forms which influenced the ideas the Chosen People.保羅已經闡明了這一原則; Diestel ( “史中的chrislichen在教堂” ,耶拿, 1869年, 56 sqq 。 ) ,維爾曼( “史唯心主義” ,第2版。 ,二, 23 sqq 。 )和坎茲( “辯護萬基督教“ ,第3版。二, 4 sqq 。 , 376 )找到同一申請的著作中的父親,但霍貝格( ”模具Forschritte之bibl 。學問“ ,弗賴堡, 1902年, 10 )贈款教父作家往往忽視了外部形式的思想影響的選民。 The Fathers were not fully acquainted with profane history, and were more concerned about the contents of Revelation than about its historical development.父親沒有完全熟悉褻瀆歷史,並更關注啟示的內容比其歷史發展。 Pesch ("Glaube, Dogmen und geschichtliche Thatsachen" in "Theol. Zeitfragen", IV, Freiburg, 1908, 183) discovers that St. Thomas, too, admits the principle of development in his "Summa" (II-II, Q. i, a. 9, 10; Q. ii, a. 3; etc.).佩施( “信仰, Dogmen與geschichtliche Thatsachen ”中的“ Theol 。 Zeitfragen ” ,四,弗賴堡, 1908年, 183 )發現,聖托馬斯也承認,發展的原則,在他的“神學” (二,二,問:我答: 9日, 10日;問:二A 3 ;等等) 。 But the Catholic conception of this principle avoids two extremes:但是,天主教的概念這一原則避免兩個極端:

the theory of degeneracy, based on the teaching of the early Lutheran theologians (cf. Giesebrecht, "Die Degradationshypothese und die altl. Geschichte", Leipzig, 1905; Steude, "Entwicklung und Offenbarung", Stuttgart, 1905, 18 sqq.);簡的理論基礎上,教學中的早期路德神學(參見Giesebrecht , “模具Degradationshypothese與模具altl 。史” ,萊比錫, 1905年; Steude , “ Entwicklung與啟示” ,斯圖加特, 1905年, 18 sqq 。 ) ;

the theory of evolution which dissolves all truth and history into purely natural development to the exclusion of everything supernatural.理論的演變溶解一切的真理和歷史到純粹的自然的發展,排除一切超自然。

It is this latter extreme that is advocated by the Biblical critics.正是這種極端後者是聖經所主張的批評。 Their description of the early religion of Israel is contradicted by the testimony of the oldest Prophets whose authority is not questioned by them.他們描述了早期宗教的以色列是矛盾的證詞,最古老的預言,其權威是不能質疑他們。 These inspired seers know of the fall of Adam (Hosea 6:7), the call of Abraham (Isaiah 29:23; Micah 7:20), the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrha (Hosea 11:8; Isaiah 1:9; Amos 4:11), the history of Jacob and his struggle with the angel (Hosea 12:2 sqq.), Israel's exodus from Egypt and dwelling in the desert (Hosea 2:14; 7:16; 11:1; 12:9, 13; 13:4, 5; Amos 2:10; 3:1; 9:7), the activity of Moses (Hosea 12:13; Micah 6:4; Isaiah 63:11-12), a written legislation (Hosea 8:12), and a number of particular statutes (cf. Kley, "Die Pentateuchfrage", Munster, 1903, 223 sqq.). Again, the theory of development is more and more contradicted by the results of historical investigation.這些靈感的預言家知道秋天亞當(何西阿6點07 ) ,要求亞伯拉罕(以賽亞書29:23 ;米卡7時20分) ,銷毀所多瑪和Gomorrha (何西阿11時08 ;以賽亞1點09 ;阿莫斯納曼4時11分) ,歷史上的雅各布和他的鬥爭與天使(何西阿12:2 sqq 。 ) ,以色列的流亡埃及和居住在沙漠中(何西阿2時14 ; 7時16分; 11時零一分; 12時09分, 13人; 13時04分, 5個;阿莫斯納曼2時10 ; 3:1 ; 9時07分) ,活動的摩西(何西阿12:13 ;米卡六點04 ;以賽亞書63:11-12 ) ,書面立法(何西阿八時12分) ,以及一些特別的章程(見Kley , “模具Pentateuchfrage ” ,明斯特, 1903年, 223 sqq 。 ) 。同樣,理論的發展是越來越多的矛盾的結果,歷史調查。 Weber ("Theologie und Assyriologie im Streit um Babel und Bibel", Leipzig, 1904, 17) points out that the recent historical results imply decadence rather than development in ancient oriental art, science, and religion; Winckler ("Religionsgeschichtler und geschichtl. Orient", Leipzig, 1906, 33) considers the evolutionary view of the primitive state of man as false, and believes that the development theory has, at least, been badly shaken, if not actually destroyed by recent Oriental research (cf. Bantsch, "Altorientalischer und israelitischer Monothesismus", Tübingen, 1906).韋伯( “神學與Assyriologie即時通訊漫嗯巴貝爾和聖經” ,萊比錫, 1904年, 17歲)指出,最近的歷史結果意味著頹廢,而不是發展的古代東方藝術,科學和宗教; Winckler ( “ Religionsgeschichtler與geschichtl 。東方“ ,萊比錫, 1906年, 33歲)認為,進化觀點,原始狀態的男子為false ,並認為,發展理論,至少被嚴重動搖,如果不是實際上摧毀了最近東方研究(參見Bantsch ” Altorientalischer與israelitischer Monothesismus “ ,圖賓根, 1906年) 。 Köberle ("Die Theologie der Gegenwart", Leipzig, 1907, I, 2) says that the development theory has exhausted itself, reproducing only the thoughts of Wellhausen, and deciding particular questions not in the light of facts, but according to the postulates of the theory. Köberle ( “模具之當代神學” ,萊比錫, 1907年,一,二)說,發展理論已用盡本身,音響唯一的想法豪森,並決定具體問題沒有根據的事實,但根據假設的這一理論。 Finally, even the rationalistic writers have thought it necessary to replace the development theory by another more in agreement with historical facts.最後,即使是理性的作家都認為有必要,以取代發展理論的另一種更符合歷史事實。 Hence Winckler ("Ex Oriente lux", Leipzig, 1905- 6; Idem, "Der Alte Orient", III, 2-3; Idem, "Die babylonische Geisteskultur in ihren Beziehungen zur Kulturentwicklung der Menschheit" in "Wissenschaft und Bildung", Leipzig, 1907; cf. Landersdorfer in "Historisch-Politische Blatter", 1909, 144) has originated the theory of pan-Babelism according to which Biblical religion is conceived as a conscious and express reaction against the Babylonian polytheistic state religion.因此Winckler ( “惠東方勒克斯” ,萊比錫, 1905年- 6 ;同上, “明鏡老東方” ,三, 2月3日;同上, “模具babylonische Geisteskultur在ihren Beziehungen楚Kulturentwicklung之Menschheit ”中的“科學與修養” ,萊比錫, 1907年;比照。 Landersdorfer在“歷史,政治的布拉特” , 1909年, 144 )源於理論的泛Babelism其中聖經宗教被認為是有意識的反應,並表示對巴比倫多神教國教。 It was not the common property of Israel, but of a religious sect which was supported in Babylon by certain monotheistic circles irrespective of nationality.這不是共同財產,以色列,而是一個教派對此表示支持在巴比倫的某些一神教界無論其國籍如何。 This theory has found powerful opponents in Budde, Stade, Bezold, Köberle, Kugler, Wilke, and others; but it has also a number of adherents.這一理論已經發現強大對手的布德,體育場, Bezold , Köberle ,庫格勒,維爾克等;但也有不少信徒。 Though wholly untenable from a Christian point of view, it shows at least the weakness of the historical development theory.雖然完全站不住腳從基督教的觀點來看,這表明至少薄弱的歷史發展理論。

(ii) Another principle involved in the critical theory of the Pentateuch supposes that the internal evidence of literary criticism is of higher value than the evidence of tradition. (二)另一個原則參與批判理論的摩西五假設的內部證據的文學批評具有較高的價值比傳統的證據。 But thus far the results of excavations and historical research have been favourable to tradition rather than to internal evidence.但迄今發掘的成果和歷史的研究已經有利於傳統,而不是內部的證據。 Let the reader only remember the case of Troy, Tiryns, Mycenae, and Orchomenos (in Greece); the excavations of the English explorer Evans in Crete have shown the historical character of King Minos and his labyrinth; Assyrian inscriptions have re-established the historical credit of King Midas of Phrygia; similarly, Menes of Thebes and Sargon of Agade have been shown to belong to history; in general, the more accurate have been the scientific investigations, the more clearly have they shown the reliability of even the most slender traditions.讓讀者只記得特洛伊的情況下,梯林斯,邁錫尼和奧爾霍邁諾斯(希臘) ;挖掘英語總管埃文斯在克里特表明,歷史特點和他的國王米諾斯迷宮;亞述銘文重新建立的歷史信貸的國王邁達斯的Phrygia ;同樣,美尼斯底比斯和薩爾貢的Agade已被證明屬於歷史,總體而言,更準確的科學已調查,更清楚地表明,他們的可靠性,即使是最微弱的傳統。 In the field of New-Testament criticism the call "back to tradition" has begun to be heeded, and has been endorsed by such authorities as Harnack and Deissmann.領域中的新舊約批評呼籲“回到傳統”已開始得到重視,並已通過這種當局哈爾納克和Deissmann 。 In the study of the Old Testament too there are unmistakable signs of a coming change.在這項研究中舊約也有明確的跡象表明,未來的變化。 Hommel ("Die altisrealitische Überlieferung in inschriftlicher Beleuchtung", Munich, 1897) maintains that Old- Testament tradition, both as a whole and in its details, proves to be reliable, even in the light of critical research.霍梅爾( “模具altisrealitische Überlieferung在inschriftlicher Beleuchtung ” ,慕尼黑, 1897 )堅持認為,舊全書傳統,無論作為一個整體,在其詳細信息,被證明是可靠的,即使在光線的關鍵研究。 Meyer ("Die Entstehung des Judentums", Halle, 1896) comes to the conclusion that the foundations of the critical Pentateuchal theory are destroyed, if it can be proved that even part of the impugned Hebrew tradition is reliable; the same writer proves the credibility of the sources of the Books of Esdras (cf. "Grundriss der Geographie und Geschichte des alten Orientes", Munich, 1904, 167 sqq.).邁耶( “模具Entstehung萬Judentums ” ,哈雷, 1896年)得出結論的基礎的關鍵Pentateuchal理論被銷毀,如果能夠證明,即使部分指責希伯來傳統是可靠的;同一作家的信譽證明的來源的書埃斯德拉斯(參見“ Grundriss德國地理學與史老Orientes ” ,慕尼黑, 1904年, 167 sqq 。 ) 。 SA Fries has been led by his critical studies, and without being influenced by dogmatic bias, to accept the whole traditional view of the history of Israel.公司薯條一直由他的批判性研究,並沒有受到教條偏見,接受傳統觀點整個以色列歷史上。 Cornill and Oettli express the conviction that Israel's traditions concerning even its earliest history are reliable and will withstand the bitterest attacks of criticism; Dawson (cf. Fonck, "Kritik und Tradition im AT" in "Zeitschrift fur katholische Theologie", 1899, 262-81) and others apply to tradition the old principle which has been so frequently misapplied, "magna est veritas, et praevalebit"; Gunkel ("Religionsgeschichtliche Volksbucher", II, Tübingen, 1906, 8) grants that Old-Testament criticism has gone a little too far, and that many Biblical traditions now rejected will be re-established. Cornill和歐特列表示相信,以色列的傳統,其最早的關於歷史甚至是可靠的和能夠承受預定的激烈攻擊批評;道森(參見Fonck , “批判與傳統即時在”中“雜誌天主教神學” , 1899年, 262 - 81 )和其他適用於傳統的舊的原則,一直經常誤用, “大預測船級社等praevalebit ” ;貢克爾( “ Religionsgeschichtliche Volksbucher ” ,二,圖賓根, 1906年, 8 )贈款,舊全書批評了一有點遠,而且許多聖經傳統現在拒絕將重新建立。

(b) Critical Method (二)關鍵方法

The falsehood of the critical method does not consist in the use of criticism as such, but in its illegitimate use.謊言的重要方法並不使用的批評,而是在其非法使用。 Criticism became more common in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; at the end of the eighteenth it was applied to classical antiquity.批判變得更加常見於十六世紀和十七世紀;年底第十八這是適用於古代。 Bernheim ("Lehrbuch der historischen Methode", Leipzig, 1903, 296) believes that by this means alone history first became a science.伯恩海姆( “教科書之historischen方法” ,萊比錫, 1903年, 296頁)認為,以這種方式本身的歷史第一次成為科學。 In the application of criticism to the Bible was are limited, indeed, by the inspiration and the canonicity of its books; but there is an ample field left for our critical investigations (Pesch, "Theol. Zeitfragen", III, 48).在批評中的應用的聖經是有限的,事實上,靈感和正規的書籍,但有充足的外地留給我們的重要調查(佩施, “ Theol 。 Zeitfragen ” ,第三章, 48條) 。

Some of the principal sins of the critics in their treatment of Sacred Scripture are the following:一些主要的罪過的批評,他們的待遇聖經如下:

They deny everything supernatural, so that they reject not merely inspiration and canonicity, but also prophecy and miracle a priori (cf. Metzler, "Das Wunder vor dem Forum der modernen Geschichtswissenschaft" in "Katholik", 1908, II, 241 sqq.).他們否認一切超自然的,因此,他們拒絕不僅僅是靈感和正規,而且還預言與奇蹟先驗(參見梅茨勒, “達斯奇蹟的VOR DEM的論壇現代Geschichtswissenschaft ”中的“ Katholik ” , 1908年,二, 241 sqq 。 ) 。

They seem to be convinced a priori of the credibility of non-Biblical historical documents, while they are prejudiced against the truthfulness of Biblical accounts.他們似乎都相信先驗的信譽非聖經的歷史文件,同時對他們有偏見的真實性聖經帳戶。 (Cf. Stade, "Geschichte Israel's", I, 86 seq., 88, 101.) Depreciating external evidence almost entirely, they consider the questions of the origin, the integrity, and the authenticity of the sacred books in the light of internal evidence (Encycl. Prov. Deus, 52). (參見體育場, “歷史以色列的” ,我, 86起。 , 88 , 101 。 )貶值的外部證據幾乎完全,他們考慮問題的來源,完整性,真實性和神聖的書籍,根據內部證據( Encycl.省。殺出, 52 ) 。

They overestimate the critical analysis of the sources, without considering the chief point, ie, the credibility of the sources (Lorenz, "Die Geschichtswissenschaft in ihren Hauptrichtungen und Aufgaben", ii, 329 sqq.). Recent documents may contain reliable reports of ancient history.他們高估了批判性分析的來源,而不考慮行政點,即信譽的來源(洛倫茲, “模具Geschichtswissenschaft在ihren Hauptrichtungen與Aufgaben ” ,二, 329 sqq 。 ) 。最近的文件中可能包含的可靠報告古代歷史。 Some of the critics begin to acknowledge that the historical credibility of the sources is of greater importance than their division and dating (Stark, "Die Entstehung des AT", Leipzig, 1905, 29; cf. Vetter, "Tübinger theologische Quartalschrift", 1899, 552).一些批評者開始認識到,歷史信譽的來源是更重要比司和約會(斯塔克, “模具Entstehung之在” ,萊比錫, 1905年, 29 ;比照。 Vetter , “ Tübinger神學Quartalschrift ” , 1899年, 552 ) 。

The critical division of sources is based on the Hebrew text, though it is not certain how far the present Massoretic text differs from that, for instance, followed by the Septuagint translators, and how far the latter differed form the Hebrew text before its redaction in the fifth century BC Dahse ("Textkritische Bedenken gegen den Ausgangspunkt der heutigen Pentateuchkritik" in "Archiv fur Religionsgeschichte", VI, 1903, 305 sqq.) shows that the Divine names in the Greek translation of the Pentateuch differ in about 180 cases from those of the Hebrew text (cf. Hoberg, "Die Genesis", 2nd ed., p. xxii sqq.); in other words and phrases the changes may be fewer, but it would be unreasonable to deny the existence of any.關鍵司的來源是基於希伯來文字,但我們並不一定多遠本Massoretic不同於文本,例如,其次是譯本翻譯的程度,以及不同形式後者希伯來文字之前,編輯在公元前五世紀Dahse ( “ Textkritische Bedenken葛根旦Ausgangspunkt德國當代Pentateuchkritik ”中的“檔案館毛皮Religionsgeschichte ” ,六, 1903年, 305 sqq 。 )表明,神聖的名字,在希臘的翻譯五經不同約180例從這些希伯來文(見霍貝格, “模具起源” ,第2版。 ,第22 sqq 。 ) ;在其他單詞和短語的變化可能會減少,但它是不合理的否認存在任何。 Again, it is antecedently probable that the Septuagint text differs less from the Massoretic than from the ante-Esdrine text, which must have been closer to the original.再次,這是先行可能是不同的譯本文字較少從Massoretic不是從產前Esdrine文字,它必須已經接近原來的。 The starting point of literary criticism is therefore uncertain. It is not an inherent fault of literary criticism that it was applied to the Pentateuch after it had become practically antiquated in the study of Homer and the Nibelungenlied (cf. Katholik, 1896, I, 303, 306 sqq.), nor that Reuss considered it as more productive of difference of opinion than of results (cf. Katholik, 1896, I, 304 seq.), nor again that Wellhausen thought it had degenerated into childish play.起點文學批評因此,不確定的。這不是一個固有的過錯文學批評,這是適用於摩西五後,它已成為幾乎陳舊的研究荷馬和龍根之歌(參見Katholik , 1896年,我303 , 306 sqq 。 ) ,也不是Reuss認為,隨著越來越多的生產性的意見分歧,而不是結果(參見Katholik , 1896年,我, 304起。 ) ,也再次表明豪森認為它已墮落為幼稚的發揮。 Among Bible students, Klostermann ("Der Pentateuch", Leipzig, 1893), Konig ("Falsche Extreme im Gebiete der neueren Kritik des AT", Leipzig, 1885; "Neueste Prinzipien der alt. Kritik", Berlin, 1902; "Im Kampfe um das AT", Berlin, 1903), Bugge ("Die Hauptparabeln Jesu", Giessen, 1903) are sceptical as to the results of literary criticism, while Orelli ("Der Prophet Jesaja", 1904, V), Jeremias ("Das alte Testament im Lichte des Alten Orients", 1906, VIII), and Oettli ("Geschichte Israels", V) wish to insist more on the exegesis of the text than on the criss-cross roads of criticism.在聖經學生, Klostermann ( “明鏡五經” ,萊比錫, 1893年) ,柯尼格( “ Falsche至尊之neueren即時Gebiete批判之在” ,萊比錫, 1885年; “最新Prinzipien河畔轉氨酶。批判” ,柏林, 1902年“進出口Kampfe這個東西在“ ,柏林, 1903年) ,布格( ”模具Hauptparabeln耶穌“ ,吉森, 1903年)是懷疑的結果,文學批評,而Orelli ( ”明鏡Jesaja先知“ , 1904年,五) ,赫雷米亞斯( ”達斯老約萬老即時Lichte方向“ , 1906年,八) ,和歐特列( ”以色列的歷史“ ,五)要堅持更多關於註釋的文字比對縱橫交錯的道路的批評。 G. Jacob ("Der Pentateuch", Göttingen, 1905) thinks that the past Pentateuchal criticism needs a thorough revision; Eerdmans ("Die Komposition der Genesis", Giessen, 1908) feels convinced that criticism has been misled into wrong paths by Astrue.灣雅各布( “明鏡五經” ,哥廷根, 1905年)認為,過去Pentateuchal批評需要徹底修訂; Eerdmans ( “模具Komposition之成因” ,吉森, 1908年)認為相信,批評被誤導到錯誤的路徑的Astrue 。 Merx expresses the opinion that the next generation will have to revise backwards many of the present historico-literary views of the Old Testament ("Religionsgeschichtliche Volksbucher", II, 1907, 3, 132 sqq.). Merx表示認為,下一代將不得不修改倒退許多本歷史,文學觀舊約( “ Religionsgeschichtliche Volksbucher ” ,二, 1907年, 3 , 132 sqq 。 ) 。

(c) Critical Results (三)重大成果

Here we must distinguish between the principles of criticism and its results; the principles of the historical development of religion, for instance, and of the inferiority of tradition to internal evidence, are not the outcome of literary analysis, but are its partial basis.在這裡,我們必須區分的原則,批評,其結果;的原則,歷史發展的宗教,例如,和自卑感傳統內部的證據,沒有結果的文學分析,但其部分基礎。 Again, we must distinguish between those results of literary criticism which are compatible with the Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch and those that contradict it.再次,我們必須區分這些成果的文學批評是符合花葉真實性摩西五和那些違背它。 The patrons of the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, and even the ecclesiastical Decree relating to this subject, plainly admit that Moses or his secretaries may have utilized sources or documents in the composition of the Pentateuch; both admit also that the sacred text has suffered in its transmission and may have received additions, in the form of either inspired appendices or exegetical glosses.顧客的馬賽克著作權的五經,甚至宗教法令有關這一問題,顯然承認,他的秘書摩西或可能利用源或文件組成的摩西五;都承認還神聖案文中所受它的傳輸和可能已收到補充的形式,要么靈感附錄或訓詁粉飾。 If the critics, therefore, can succeed in determining the number and the limits of the documentary sources, and of the post-Mosaic additions, whether inspired or profane, they render an important service to the traditional tenet of Pentateuchal authenticity.如果批評,因此,可以成功地確定的數量和範圍的文件來源,並後的馬賽克增加,無論是啟發或褻瀆,他們提供服務的一個重要的傳統宗旨Pentateuchal的真實性。 The same must be said with regard to the successive laws established by Moses, and the gradual fidelity of the Jewish people to the Mosaic law.同樣必須指出的是關於連續法律設立的摩西,並逐步高保真猶太人民的摩西律法。 Here again the certain or even probable results of sane literary and historical criticism will aid greatly the conservative commentator of the Pentateuch.在這方面,某些甚至可能結果理智的文學和歷史的批評將有助於大大保守評論員的摩西五。 We do not quarrel with the legitimate conclusions of the critics, if the critics do not quarrel with each other.我們不吵架的合法結論的批評,如果批評不互相爭吵。 But they do quarrel with each other. According to Merx (loc. cit.) there is nothing certain in the field of criticism except its uncertainty; each critic proclaims his views with the greatest self-reliance, but without any regard to the consistency of the whole.但他們互相爭吵。根據Merx (如上。 )沒有任何某些領域中的批評,但它的不確定性;每個評論家宣稱他的意見最大的自力更生,但沒有任何方面的一致性整個。 Former views are simply killed by silence; even Reuss and Dillmann are junk-iron, and there is a noticeable lack of judgment as to what can or cannot be known. Hence the critical results, in as far as they consist merely in the distinction of documentary sources, in the determination of post-Mosaic materials, eg, textual changes, and profane or inspired additions, in the description of various legal codes, are not at variance with the Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch.前意見只是被沉默;甚至Reuss和Dillmann是垃圾鐵,並有明顯的缺乏判斷力什麼可以或不可以被稱為。因此,關鍵的結果,至於他們在於區別文件來源,在確定後鑲嵌材料,如文字的變化,褻瀆或啟發補充,在描述中的各種法律法規,沒有不符合花葉真實性摩西五。 Nor can an anti-Mosaic character be pointed out in the facts or phenomena from which criticism legitimately infers the foregoing conclusions; such facts or phenomena are, for instance, the change of the Divine names in the text, the use of certain words, the difference of style, the so-called double accounts of really, not merely apparently, identical events; the truth of falsehood of these and similar details does not directly affect the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch.也不能反馬賽克性質必須指出的事實或現象從批評合法推斷上述結論;這些事實或現象,例如,改變名稱的神聖案文中,使用某些也就是說,不同的風格,所謂的雙重帳目真的,而不僅僅是顯然,相同的活動;真相的謊言,這些和類似的細節並不直接影響到花葉著作權的摩西五。 In which results then does criticism clash with tradition?在這種結果那麼批評同傳統? Criticism and tradition are incompatible in their views as to the age and sequence of the documentary sources, as to the origin of the various legal codes, and as to the time and manner of the redaction of the Pentateuch.批評與傳統相抵觸的意見的年齡和序列的文件來源,為原產地的各種法律法規,並以的時間和方式編輯的摩西五。

(i) Pentateuchal Documents.-As to the age and sequence of the various documents, the critics do not agree. (一) Pentateuchal Documents. ,至於年齡和序列的各種文件,批評不同意。 Dillmann, Kittel, Konig, and Winckler place the Elohist, who is subdivided by several writers into the first, second, and third Elohist, before the Yahwist, who also is divided into the first and second Yahwist; but Wellhausen and most critics believe that the Elohist is about a century younger than the Yahwist. Dillmann ,基特爾,柯尼格和Winckler把Elohist ,誰細分成幾個作家的第一,第二和第三Elohist之前, Yahwist ,誰也分為第一和第二Yahwist ;但豪森和大多數評論家認為,在Elohist約一個世紀更年輕Yahwist 。 At any rate, both are assigned to about the ninth and eight centuries BC; both too incorporate earlier traditions or even documents.無論如何,都被分配到的第九和公元前8世紀;既過於納入較早的傳統,甚至文件。

All critics appear to agree as to the composite character of Deuteronomy; they admit rather a Deuteronomist school than single writers.所有批評似乎同意作為綜合性質的申命記;他們承認而是Deuteronomist學校比單一作家。 Still, the successive layers composing the whole book are briefly designated by D1, D2, D3, etc. As to the character of these layers, the critics do not agree: Montet and Driver, for instance, assigned to the first Deuteronomist cc.儘管如此,層層撰寫全書簡要指定的D1和D2中,維生素D3等作為的性質這些層,批評不同意: Montet和驅動程序,例如,分配給第一Deuteronomist毫升。 i-xxi; Kuenen, Konig, Reuss, Renan, Westphal ascribe to DN, iv, 45-9, and v-xxvi; a third class of critics reduce D1 to xii, 1-xxvi, 19, allowing it a double edition: according to Wellhausen, the first edition contained i, 1-iv, 44; xii-xxvi; xxvii, while the second comprised iv, 45-xi, 39; xii-xxvi; xxviii-xxx; both editions were combined by the redactor who inserted Deuteronomy into the Hexateuch.一至二十一; Kuenen ,柯尼格, Reuss ,雷南維,韋斯特法賦予的DN ,四, 45-9 ,和V - 26 ;第三類批評減少D1至十二, 1 - 26 , 19 ,允許其雙重版本:據威爾浩,第一版載一, 1至四, 44 ; 12 - 26 ;二十七,而第二個組成四, 45喜, 39歲; 12 - 26 ;二十八,三十;兩種版本合併的redactor誰申命記插入到Hexateuch 。 Cornill arranges the two editions somewhat differently. Cornill安排兩個版本略有不同。 Horst considers even cc. xii-xxvi as a compilation of pre-existing elements, gathered together without order and often by chance.克勒認為,即使抄送。第十二- 26作為彙編預先存在的要素聚集和無秩序往往是偶然的。 Wellhausen and his adherents do not wish to assign to D1 a higher age than 621 BC, Cornill and Bertholet consider the document as a summary of the prophetic teaching, Colenso and Renan ascribe it to Jeremias, others place its origin in the reign of Ezechias or Manasses, Klostermann identifies the document with the book read before the people in the time of Josaphat, while Kleinert refers it back to the end of the time of the Judges. The Deuteronomist depends on the two preceding documents, J and E, both for his history land his legislation; the historical details not found in these may have been derived from other sources not known to us, and the laws not contained in the Sinaitic legislation and the decalogue are either pure fiction or a crystallization of the prophetic teaching.威爾浩和他的追隨者不想指派為D1更高的年齡超過621年, Cornill和Bertholet審議該文件的摘要預言教學,科倫索和雷南維賦予它赫雷米亞斯,其他地方起源於在位埃澤希亞甚或Manasses , Klostermann確定該文件與圖書閱讀的人面前時,約薩法特,而萊內特指它的結尾的時候,法官。該Deuteronomist取決於前兩個文件, J和英文,對他的他的歷史的土地立法的歷史資料中找不到這些可能是來自其他來源的不知道,我們的法律中不包含的Sinaitic立法和十誡不是純粹的小說或結晶先知教學。

Finally, the Priestly Code, P, is also a compilation: the first stratum of the book, both historical and legal in its character, is designated by P1 or P2; the second stratum is the law of holiness, H or Lev., xvii-xxvi, and is the work of a contemporary of Ezechiel, or perhaps of the Prophet himself (H, P2, Ph); besides, there are additional elements springing rather from a school than from any single writer, and designated by Kunen as P3, P4, P5, but by other critics as Ps and Px.最後,祭司碼,磷,也是一個彙編:第一層的書籍,無論在歷史上和法律上的性質,是指定的P1或P2的;第二層是法律的神聖, H或列夫。 ,十七第二十六,是工作的一種當代的Ezechiel ,或者自己的先知(高,二,博士) ;此外,還有其他因素雨後春筍般從一所學校,而不是從任何單一的作家,並指定由丘嫩的小三, P - 4級,小五,而是由其他的批評作為PS和酶。 Bertholet and Bantsch speak of two other collections of laws: the law of sacrifices, Lev., i-vii, designated as Po; and the law of purity, Lev., xi-xv, designated as Pr. Bertholet和Bantsch發言的另外兩個收藏的法律:法律的犧牲,列夫。 ,一至七,指定為寶;和法律的純潔性,列夫。 ,西十五,被指定為镨。 The first documentary hypothesis considered PN as the oldest part of the Pentateuch; Duston and Dillmann place it before the Deuteronomic code, but most recent critics regard it as more recent than the other documents of the Pentateuch, and even later than Ezech., xliv, 10-xlvi, 15 (573-2 BC); the followers of Wellhausen date the Priestly Code after the return from the Babylonian Captivity, while Wildeboer places it either after or towards the end of the captivity.第一個假說認為偽紀錄片作為最古老的部分摩西五; Duston和Dillmann置於前Deuteronomic代碼,但最近的批評者認為這是更近的比其他文件摩西五,甚至晚於Ezech 。 ,四十四, 10四十六, 15 ( 573-2公元前) ;的追隨者豪森日期祭司碼返回後從巴比倫圈養,而Wildeboer的地方,要么在或接近尾聲的囚禁。 The historical parts of the Priestly Code depend on the Yahwistic and the Elohistic documents, but Wellhausen's adherents believe that the material of these documents has been manipulated so as to fit it for the special purpose of the Priestly Code; Dillmann and Drive maintain that facts have not been invented or falsified by P, but that the latter had at hand other historical documents besides J and E. As to the legal part of P, Wellhausen considers it as an a priori programme for the Jewish priesthood after the return from the captivity, projected backwards into the past, and attributed to Moses; but other critics believe that P has systematized the pre-exilic customs of worship, developing then, and adapting them to the new circumstances.歷史部分祭司碼取決於Yahwistic和Elohistic文件,但豪森的信徒認為,這些文件材料已被操縱,以適應它的特殊用途的祭司碼; Dillmann和驅動保持這一事實沒有發明或偽造的P ,但後者在手其他歷史文件除了J和大腸桿菌作為法律的一部分磷,豪森認為這是一個先驗方案猶太祭司返回後從被關押,預計倒退到過去,由於摩西;但其他批評者認為磷已系統化前放逐海關的禮拜,然後發展,並使之適應新的情況。

What has been said clearly shows that the critics are at variance in many respects, but they are at one in maintaining the post- Mosaic origin of the Pentateuchal documents.所說的話清楚地表明,批評者有差異在許多方面,但他們是在一個在維護後馬賽克起源Pentateuchal文件。 What is the weight of the reasons on which they base their opinion?什麼是體重的原因的基礎上,他們自己的看法?

The conditions laid down by the critics as prerequisites to literature do not prove that the sources of the Pentateuch must be post-Mosaic.所定的條件,該批評的先決條件,以文學沒有證明的來源必須是摩西五後花葉。 The Hebrew people had lived for, at least, two hundred years in Egypt; besides, most of the forty years spent in the desert were passed in the neighbourhood of Cades, so that the Israelites were not longer a nomadic people.希伯來人的生活了,至少二百年在埃及;此外,大多數四十年花費在沙漠中通過了在附近的Cades ,使以色列人不再是游牧人。 Whatever may be said of their material prosperity, or of their proficiency in writing and reading, the above-mentioned researches of Flinders Petrie show that they kept records of their national traditions at the time of Moses.可以說,不管他們的物質繁榮,或者他們的能力,寫作及閱讀,上述研究的弗林德斯皮特里表明他們保持記錄他們的民族傳統的時候,摩西。

If the Hebrew contemporaries of Moses kept written records, why should not the Pentateuchal sources be among these documents?如果希伯來語同時代摩西保持書面記錄,為什麼不應該的來源之一Pentateuchal這些文件? It is true that in our actual Pentateuch we find non-Mosaic and post- Mosaic indications; but, then, the non-Mosaic, impersonal style may be due to a literary device, or to the pen of secretaries; the post-Mosaic geographical and historical indications may have crept into the text by way of glosses, or errors of the transcribers, or even inspired additions.的確,在我們的實際摩西五我們發現非馬賽克和後花葉的跡象,但是,然後,非馬賽克,非個人的風格,可能是由於文學設備,或以筆的秘書;後花葉地理和歷史的跡象可能已經悄悄進入文字的方式掩飾,或錯誤的謄寫,甚至啟發補充。 The critics cannot reject these suggestions as mere subterfuges; for they should have to grant a continuous miracle in the preservation of the Pentateuchal text, if they were to deny the moral certainty of the presence of such textual changes.批評不能拒絕這些建議只是託辭;對他們應給予持續的奇蹟在維護Pentateuchal文字,如果他們否認道德確定性的存在,例如文字的變化。

But would not the Pentateuch have been known to the earlier Prophets, if it had been handed down from the time of Moses?但不會對摩西五已經知道先前的先知,如果它已經流傳下來的時間摩西? This critical exception is really an argument e silentio which is very apt to be fallacious, unless it be most carefully handled.這一重要的例外是真正的論點é silentio非常容易荒謬的,除非它是最認真的處理。 Besides, if we keep in mind the labour involved in multiplying copies of the Pentateuch, we cannot be wrong in assuming that they were very rare in the interval between Moses and the Prophets, so that few were able to read the actual text.此外,如果我們記住勞動力參與乘以副本摩西五,我們不能是錯誤的假設,它們是非常罕見的間隔摩西和先知,所以很少有人能讀的實際文本。 Again, it has been pointed out that at least one of the earlier Prophets appeals to a written mosaic law, and that all appeal to such a national conscience as presupposes the Pentateuchal history and law.同樣,已經指出,至少有一個早期先知呼籲書面鑲嵌法,所有呼籲這樣一個民族良知的前提是Pentateuchal歷史和法律依據。 Finally, some of the critics maintain the J views the history of man and of Israel according to the religious and the moral ideas of the Prophets; if there be such an agreement, why not say that the Prophets write according to the religious and moral ideas of the Pentateuch?最後,一些批評意見,保持了J人類歷史上和以色列根據宗教和道德觀念的預言,如果有這樣的協議,為什麼不說,根據先知寫的宗教和道德觀念在摩西五?

The critics urge the fact that the Pentateuchal laws concerning the sanctuary, the sacrifices, the feasts, and the priesthood agree with different stages of post-Mosaic historical development; that the second stage agrees with the reform of Josias, and the third with the enactments enforced after the time of the Babylonian Exile.批評者敦促這一事實,即Pentateuchal法律關於庇護,該犧牲的節日,並鐸同意不同階段後花葉歷史發展的第二階段同意改革Josias ,第三與法規強迫的時間之後的巴比倫流亡。 But it must be kept in mind that the Mosaic law was intended for Israel as the Christian law is intended for the whole world; if then 1900 years after Christ the greater part of the world is still un-Christian, it is not astonishing that the Mosaic law required centuries before it penetrated the whole nation.但必須記住,這是摩西律法的目的是為以色列的基督教法律的目的是對整個世界;如果然後一千九百年基督之後,更大的世界的一部分仍然是聯合國的基督徒,這是不令人驚訝的摩西律法規定百年前侵入整個國家。 Besides, there were, no doubt, many violations of the law, just as the Ten Commandments are violated today without detriment to their legal promulgation.此外,還有,毫無疑問,許多違反法律的,正如十誡受到侵犯今天不損害其法律施行。 Again there were times of religious reforms and disasters as there are periods of religious fervour and coldness in the history of the Christian Church; but such human frailties do not imply the non-existence of the law, either Mosaic or Christian.再有時間的宗教改革和有災害時期的宗教熱情和冷漠歷史上的基督教會,但這種人類弱點並不意味著不存在法律,無論是馬賽克或基督教。 As to the particular laws in question, it will be found more satisfactory to examine them more in detail.至於具體的法律問題,這將是找到更令人滿意的審查更詳細說明。

(ii) Pentateuchal Codes.-The critics endeavour to establish a triple Pentateuchal code: the Book of the Covenant, Deuteronomy, and the Priestly Code. Instead of regarding this legislation as applying to different phases in the forty years' wandering in the desert, they consider it as agreeing with three historical stages in the national history. (二) Pentateuchal Codes. -評論家努力建立一個三Pentateuchal代碼:該書的盟約,申命記,和祭司碼。相反的就這一立法為適用於不同階段的四十年'遊蕩在沙漠中,他們認為這是同意三個歷史階段中的國家的歷史。 As stated above, the main objects of this triple legislation are the sanctuary, the feast, and the priesthood.正如上文所述,主要對象是本三重立法聖殿,節日,和祭司。

(a) The Sanctuary (一)保護區

At first, so the critics say, sacrifices were allowed to be offered in any place where the Lord had manifested his name (Exodus 20:24-6); then the sanctuary was limited to the one place chosen by God (Deuteronomy 12:5); thirdly, the Priestly Code supposes the unity of sanctuary, and prescribes the proper religious rites to be observed.起初,因此批評者認為,犧牲被允許可在任何地方,體現了上帝的名字(出20:24-6 ) ;然後聖殿僅限於一個地方選擇的上帝(申命記12點05分) ;第三,祭司碼假設的團結,庇護所,並規定適當的宗教儀式得到遵守。 Moreover, the critics point out historical incidents showing that before the enforcement of the Deuteronomic law sacrifices were offered in various places quite distinct from the resting place of the ark.此外,批評者指出,歷史事件表明,在執行該法的犧牲Deuteronomic提供了在不同地方截然不同的安息之地的方舟。 What do the defenders of the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch answer?什麼捍衛花葉著作權的摩西五答案嗎? First, as to the triple law, it points to three different stages in Israel's desert life: before the erection of the tabernacle at the foot of Mt.首先,作為法律的三倍,它分三個不同階段,以色列的沙漠生活:前豎立在會幕山山腳。 Sinai, the people were allowed to erect altars and to offer sacrifices everywhere provided the name of the Lord had been manifested; next, after the people had adored the golden calf, and the tabernacle had been erected, sacrifice could be offered only before the tabernacle, and even the cattle killed for consumption had to be slaughtered in the same place, in order to prevent a relapse into idolatry; finally, when the people were about to enter the promised land, the last law was abolished, being then quite impossible, but the unity of sanctuary was kept in the place which God would choose.西奈半島,人們被允許建造祭壇和祭祀各地提供的名稱上帝已經表現;明年,在人民愛戴的金牛犢,以及幕已經豎立,犧牲可只提供前幕,甚至死亡的牛消費不得不宰殺在同一地點,以防止重新陷入偶像崇拜;最後,當人即將進入樂土,過去的法律被廢除,被當時很不可能,但團結的避難所被保存在的地方,上帝會選擇。 Secondly, as to the historical facts urged by the critics, some of them are caused by direct Divine intervention, miracle or prophetic inspiration, and as such are fully legitimate; others are evidently violations of the law, and are not sanctioned by the inspired writers; a third class of facts may be explained in one of three ways:其次,作為歷史事實敦促批評,其中一些人所造成的直接神的介入,奇蹟或先知的啟示,因此是完全合法的;其他顯然違反法律,不認可的啟發作家;第三類事實可以解釋的三種方式之一:

Poels ("Le sanctuaire de Kirjath Jeraim", Louvain, 1894; "Examen critique de l'histoire du sanctuaire de l'arche", Louvain, 1897) endeavours to prove that Gabaon, Masphath, and Kiriath-Jarim denote the same place, so that the multiplicity of sanctuaries is only apparent, not real. Poels ( “樂sanctuaire日Kirjath Jeraim ” ,盧萬, 1894年; “考試法國批判史杜sanctuaire法國凱旋門” ,盧萬, 1897年)的努力,以證明Gabaon , Masphath ,並Kiriath - Jarim指同一個地方,這樣的多重保護區是唯一明顯的,而不是真實的。

Van Hoonacker ("Le Lieu du culte dans la legislation rituelle des Hebreux" in "Musceeon", April-Oct., 1894, XIII, 195-204, 299- 320, 533-41; XIV, 17-38) distinguishes between private and public altars; the public and national worship is legally centralized in one sanctuary and around one altar, while private altars may be had for domestic worship.凡Hoonacker ( “樂寮杜culte立法中的香格里拉rituelle萬Hebreux ”中的“ Musceeon ” , 4至10月, 1894年,十三, 195-204 , 299 - 320 , 533-41 ;第十四17-38 )區分私營和公共祭壇;公眾和國家崇拜是集中在一個法律庇護和一個祭壇周圍,而私人神壇可能已為國內崇拜。

But more commonly it is admitted that before God had chosen the site of national sanctuary, it was not forbidden by law to sacrifice anywhere, even away from the place of the ark.但更常見的是承認,上帝面前選擇了網站的國家庇護,這不是法律所禁止的任何犧牲,甚至遠離地點方舟。 After the building of the temple the law was not considered so stringent as to bind under all circumstances.經過建設的寺法律不被視為非常嚴格的約束,在任何情況下。 Thus far then the argument of the critics is not conclusive.迄今為止然後論點的批評是沒有定論。

(b) The Sacrifices (二)的犧牲

According to the critics, the Book of the Covenant enjoined only the offering of the first-fruits and the first-born of animals, the redemption of the first-born of men, and a free-will offering on visiting the sanctuary (Ex., xxii, 28-9; xxiii, 15, [Heb., xxiii, 19]); Deuteronomy more clearly defines some of these laws (xv, 19-23; xxvi, 1-11), and imposes the law of tithes for the benefit of the poor, the widows, the orphans, and the Levites (xxvi, 12-5); the Priestly Code distinguishes different kinds of sacrifices, determines their rites, and introduces also incense offering.據批評,這本書的盟約責成只提供第一水果和第一出生的動物,贖回第一出生的男子,和自由將提供庇護的訪問(例如: , 22 , 28-9 , 23 , 15 , [河北。 , 23 , 19 ] ) ;申命記一些更清楚地界定這些法律(十五, 19日至23日; 26 , 1月11日) ,並強制法的什一稅的有利於窮人,寡婦,孤兒,和利( 26 , 12月5日) ;的祭司碼區分不同種類的犧牲,確定它們的儀式,並介紹了也香提供。 But history hardly bears out this view: as there existed a permanent priesthood in Silo, and later on in Jerusalem, we may safely infer that there existed a permanent sacrifice.但是,歷史很難證明了這一觀點:由於存在一個常設鐸在筒倉,以及後來在耶路撒冷,我們可以推斷,安全存在著一個永久的犧牲。 The earliest prophets are acquainted with an excess of care bestowed on the sacrificial rites (cf. Amos 4:4, 5; 5:21-22, 25; Hosea passim).最早的先知熟悉過多照顧賦予的祭祀(參見阿莫斯納曼4點04 , 5 ; 5:21-22 , 25 ;何西阿各處) 。 The expressions of Jeremias (vii, 21-3) may be explained in the same sense.表達的赫雷米亞斯(七, 21-3 )可以解釋在同樣的意義。 Sin offering was known long before the critics introduce their Priestly Code (Osee, iv, 8; Mich., vi, 7; Ps., xxxix [xl], 7; 1 Kings, iii, 14).黃大仙提供被稱為早在介紹他們的祭司批評典( Osee ,四, 8 ;密歇根州,六,七;聚苯乙烯。 ,三十九[儀] , 7 ;列王紀上,三, 14 ) 。 Trespass offering is formally distinguished from sin offering in 2 Kings 13:16 (cf. 1 Samuel 6:3-15; Isaiah 53:10).侵入提供正式區別於黃大仙提供的列王紀下13時16分(見撒母耳記上6:3-15 ;以賽亞書53:10 ) 。 Hence the distinction between the different kinds of sacrifice is due neither to Ezekiel 45:22-5, nor to the Priestly Code.因此,區分不同類型的犧牲是由於既不厄澤克爾45:22-5 ,也不向祭司碼。

(c) The Feasts (三)節日

The Book of the Covenant, so the critics tell us, knows only three feasts: the seven-days feast of the azymes in memory of the exodus form Egypt, the feast of the harvest, and that of the end of the harvest (Exodus 23:14-7); Deuteronomy ordains the keeping of the feasts at the central sanctuary adds to Pasch to the feast of the azymes, places the second feast seven weeks after the first, and calls the third, "feast of tabernacles", extending its duration to seven days (Deuteronomy 16:1-17); the Priestly Code prescribes the exact ritual for five feasts, adding the feast of trumpets and of atonement, all of which must be kept at the central sanctuary.圖書的盟約,所以批評告訴我們,只知道三個節日: 7天的節日,以紀念azymes外流形式埃及,節日的收成,而年底的收成(出埃及記23 :14 - 7 ) ;申命記ordains保存的節日在中央聖殿增加Pasch的盛宴的azymes ,地方第二次盛宴七週之後的第一,並呼籲第三, “住棚節” ,擴大其期限為7天(申命記16:1-17 ) ;守則規定的祭司的確切儀式五個節日,增加節日的喇叭和贖罪,所有這一切都必須保持在中央聖殿。 Moreover, history appears to endorse the contention of the critics: Judges, xxi, 19 knows of only one annual feast in Silo; 1 Samuel 1:3, 7, 21 testifies that the parents of Samuel went every year to Silo to the sanctuary; Jeroboam I established in his kingdom one annual feast similar to that celebrated in Jerusalem (1 Kings 12:32-3); the earliest Prophets do not mention the names of the religious feasts; the Pasch is celebrated for the first time after the discovery of Deuteronomy (2 Kings 23:21-3); Ezechiel knows only three feasts and a sin offering on the first day of the first and the seventh month.此外,歷史上似乎贊同論點的批評:法官, 21 , 19知道的只有一個年度盛宴在筒倉;撒母耳記上1:3 , 7,21證明,父母的塞繆爾了每年筒倉的庇護;耶羅波安我設立一個在他的英國年度盛宴類似慶祝活動在耶路撒冷(列王紀上12:32-3 ) ;最早預言沒有提及姓名的宗教節日;的Pasch慶祝後首次發現申命記(列王紀下23:21-3 ) ; Ezechiel知道只有3個傳統節日和一種罪過提供的第一天,第一屆和第7個月。 But here again, the critics use the argument e silentio which is not conclusive in this case.但是,在這裡再次批評使用的論點é silentio這是不是決定性的在這種情況下。 The feast of atonement, for instance, is not mentioned in the Old Testament outside the Pentateuch; only Josephus refers to its celebration in the time of John Hyrcanus or Herod.節日贖罪,例如,沒有提到舊約以外的摩西五;只有約瑟夫指慶祝時代的約翰Hyrcanus或希律王。 Will the critics infer from this, that the feast was not kept throughout the Old Testament?將批評這一推斷,該節日是沒有跟上整個舊約? History does not record facts generally known.歷史不會記錄事實,一般人都知道。 As to the one annual feast mentioned in the early records, weighty commentators are of opinion that after the settlement of the people in the promised land, the custom was gradually introduced of going to the central sanctuary only once a year.作為一個年度盛宴中所提到的早期記錄,重大評論員的意見,在解決人民的樂土,自定義是逐步推行的去中央避難所只有每年一次。 This custom prevailed before the critics allow the existence of the Deuteronomic law (1 Kings 12:26-31), so that the latter cannot have introduced it.這種風俗前的批評允許存在的Deuteronomic法(列王紀上12:26-31 ) ,使後者不能引進。 Isaias (xxix, 1; xxx, 29) speaks of a cycle of feasts, but Osee, xii, 9 alludes already to the feast of tabernacles, so that its establishment cannot be due to the Priestly Code as the critics describe it. Ezechiel (xlv, 18-25) speaks only of the three feasts which had to be kept at the central sanctuary.伊薩亞(第29屆, 1 ;三十, 29歲)講一個週期的節日,但Osee ,第十二章,第9的意思已經向住棚節,因此,它的設立不能由於祭司碼作為批評家描述。 Ezechiel (第四十五, 18-25 )僅三個節日必須加以中央避難所。

(d) The Priesthood (四)鐸

The critics contend that the Book of the Covenant knows nothing of an Aaronitic priesthood (Exodus 24:5); that Deuteronomy mentions priests and Levites without any hierarchical distinction and without any high priest, determines their rights, and distinguishes only between the Levite living in the country and the Levite attached to the central sanctuary; finally, that the Priestly Code represents the priesthood as a social and hierarchical institution, with legally determined duties, rights, and revenues.評論家認為,此書的盟約一無所知的Aaronitic鐸(出埃及記24:5 ) ;申命記提到的司鐸和利沒有任何等級的區分,沒有任何大祭司,確定他們的權利,以及之間的區別只生活在列國家和利未連接到中央聖殿;最後,祭司源代碼鐸作為一種社會和分級機構,依法確定的職責,權利和收入。 This theory is said to be borne out by the evidence of history.這一理論被認為是證實了歷史上的證據。 But the testimony of history points in the opposite direction.但是,歷史的證詞指出了相反的方向。 At the time of Josue and the early Judges, Eleazar and Phinees, the son and nephew of Aaron, were priests (Numbers 26:1; Deuteronomy 10:6; Joshua 14:1 sqq.; 22:13, 21; 24:33; Judges 20:28).當時若蘇埃和早期法官,埃萊亞薩和Phinees的兒子和侄子亞倫,是祭司(民數記26:1 ;申命記10時06分;約書亞14點零一sqq 。 ; 22點13分, 21 ; 24:33法官: 20:28 ) 。 From the end of the time of Judges to Solomon, the priesthood was in the hands of Heli and his descendants (1 Samuel 1:3 sqq.; 14:3; 21:1; 22:1) who sprang from Ithamar the younger son of Aaron (1 Chronicles 24:3; cf. 1 Samuel 22:29; 14:3; 2:7 sqq.).月底的時候法官所羅門鐸在手中的合力和他的後代(撒母耳記上1:3 sqq 。 ; 14點03分, 21時01 ; 22時01分)從Ithamar誰跳的小兒子艾倫(歷代誌上24:3 ;比照。撒母耳記上22:29 ; 14點03分; 2點07分sqq 。 ) 。 Solomon raised Sadoc, the son of Achitob, to the dignity of the high priesthood, and his descendants held the office down to the time of the Babylonian Captivity (2 Samuel 8:17; 15:24 sqq.; 20:25; 1 Kings 2:26, 27, 35; Ezekiel 44:15); that Sadoc too was of Aaronic descent is attested by I Par., vi, 8.所羅門提出Sadoc的兒子Achitob ,尊嚴高級牧師和他的後代廳舉行下跌的時間巴比倫圈養(撒母耳記下8時17 ; 15:24 sqq 。 ; 20:25 ;列王紀上2點26分, 27 , 35 ;厄澤克爾44:15 ) ;這Sadoc也是出身的Aaronic證明了我標準桿。 ,六, 8 。 Besides the Books of Josue and Paralipomenon acknowledge the distinction between priests and Levites; according to 1 Samuel 6:15, the Levites handled the ark, but the Bethsamites, the inhabitants of a priestly city (Joshua 21:13-6), offered sacrifice. A similar distinction is made in 2 Samuel 15:24; 1 Kings 8:3 sq.; Isaiah 66:21. Van Hoonacker ("Les pretres et les levites dans le livre d'Ezechiel" in "Revue biblique", 1899, VIII, 180-189, 192-194) shows that Ezechiel did not create the distinction between priests and Levites, but that supposing the traditional distinction in existence, he suggested a divisions in to these classes according to merit, and not according to birth (xliv, 15-xlv, 5).除了圖書承認若蘇埃和Paralipomenon之間的區別祭司和利;根據撒母耳記上6:15 ,該處理的方舟利,但Bethsamites ,居民的祭司市(約書亞21:13-6 ) ,提供了犧牲。類似的區別是在撒母耳記下15:24 ;列王紀上八時03平方米;以賽亞書66:21 。範Hoonacker ( “法國之利pretres等中的樂德Ezechiel書”中的“雜誌biblique ” , 1899年,八, 180-189 , 192-194 )表明, Ezechiel沒有創造的區別祭司和利,但假設的傳統區別的存在,他建議這些部門在班級根據成績,而不是根據出生(四十四, 15第四十五, 5 ) 。 Unless the critics simply set aside all this historical evidence, they must grant the existence of an Aaronitic priesthood in Israel, and its division into priests and Levites, long before the D and P codes were promulgated according to the critical theory. It is true that in a number of passages persons are said to offer sacrifice who are not of Aaronitic descent: Judges, vi, 25 sqq.; xiii, 9; 1 Samuel 7:9; 10:8; 13:9; 2 Samuel 6:17; 24:25; 1 Kings 8:5, 62; etc. But in the first place, the phrase "to offer sacrifice" means either to furnish the victim (Leviticus 1:2, 5) or to perform the sacrificial rite; the victim might be furnished by any devout layman; secondly, it would be hard to prove that God committed the priestly office in such a way to Aaron and his sons as not to reserve to himself the liberty of delegating in extraordinary cases a non-Aaronite to perform the priestly functions.除非批評只是撤銷所有這一切的歷史證據,他們必須給予存在Aaronitic鐸在以色列,其劃分為祭司和利,早在D和P碼頒布了根據批判理論。誠然,在一些段落的人說,向犧牲誰不是Aaronitic後裔:法官,六, 25 sqq 。 ;第十三9 ;撒母耳記上7時09分; 10時08分; 13點09分;撒母耳記下6點17分; 24:25 ;列王紀上八時05 , 62 ;等等,但擺在首位,把“提供的犧牲”是指提供受害者(利未記1:2 , 5 )或履行其祭天;受害者可能是所提供的任何虔誠的門外漢;其次,就難以證明上帝的祭司辦事處致力於以這樣一種方式來亞倫和他的兒子不準備金,以自己的自由,授權在特殊情況下,非Aaronite執行在牧師的職能。

(iii) Pentateuchal Redaction.-The four documentary sources of the Pentateuch thus far descried were combined not by any one individual; critics require rather three different stages of combination: first, a Yahwistic redactor RXX or RX combined J and E with a view of harmonizing them, and adapting them to Deuteronomic ideas; this happened either before or after the redaction of D. Secondly, after D had been completed in the sixth century BC, a redactor, or perhaps a school of redactors, imbued with the spirit of D combined the documents JE into JED, introducing however the modifications necessary to secure consistency. (三) Pentateuchal Redaction. ,這四個文件來源的摩西五迄今descried合併不是由任何一個個人;批評需要而三個不同階段的結合:第一, Yahwistic redactor RXX或RX結合J和E與檢視harmonizing them, and adapting them to Deuteronomic ideas; this happened either before or after the redaction of D. Secondly, after D had been completed in the sixth century BC, a redactor, or perhaps a school of redactors, imbued with the spirit of D combined the documents JE into JED, introducing however the modifications necessary to secure consistency. Thirdly, a last redactor RX imbued with the letter and the spirit of P, combined this document with JED, introducing again the necessary changes. The table of nations in Gen., xiv was according to Kunen added by this last redactor.

At first sight, one is struck by the complex character of this theory; as a rule, truth is of a more simple texture.乍一看,是深刻的複雜性理論;作為一項規則,事實是一個更為簡單的紋理。 Secondly, one is impressed by the unique nature of the hypothesis; antiquity has nothing to equal it.其次,留下了深刻的印象之一是性質獨特的假說;古代無關等於它。 Thirdly, if one reads or studies the Pentateuch in the light of this theory, one is impressed by the whimsical character of the redactor; he often retained what should have been omitted, and omitted what should have been retained.第三,如果一個內容或研究了摩西五根據這個理論,一個是下了深刻的印象異想天開性質redactor ;他常常保留應該被省略,省略哪些應該被保留下來。 The critics themselves have to take refuge, time and time again, in the work of the redactor, in order save their own views of the Pentateuch.批評者本身必須採取避難,一次又一次,工作中的redactor ,為了挽救自己的看法的摩西五。 A recent writer does not hesitate to call the complex redactor ein genialer Esel.最近筆者就毫不猶豫地要求複雜redactor艾因genialer Esel 。 Fourthly, a truth-loving, straightforward reader is naturally shocked by the literary fictions and forgeries, the editorial changes and subterfuges implied in the critical theory of the Pentateuchal documents and redaction.第四,真理愛好,直截了當讀者自然感到震驚的是文學小說和偽造,編輯修改和託辭隱含在批判理論的Pentateuchal文件和編輯。 The more moderate critics endeavour to escape this inconvenience: some appeal to the difference between the ancient and the modern standard of literary property and editorial accuracy; others practically sanctify the means by the end.較溫和的批評努力擺脫這種不便:一些呼籲之間的差異古代和現代的文學財產的標準和編輯準確性;其他幾乎神聖的方式結束。 Oettli considers the dilemma "either the work of Moses or the work of a deceiver" as the expression of sheer imprudence; Kautzsch unctuously points to the depth of the wisdom and knowledge of God whose ways we cannot fathom, but must admire.歐特列認為兩難“要么摩西的工作或工作的騙子”的言論純粹輕率; Kautzsch假惺惺點深度的智慧和知識的上帝的方式我們無法捉摸,但必須欽佩。 The left wing of criticism openly acknowledges that there is no use in hushing up matters; it actually is the result of scientific research that both form and contents of a great part of the Old Testament are based on conscious fiction and forgery.左翼的批評,公開承認,是沒有用的hushing的事項;它實際上是由於這兩個科研形式和內容的很大一部分舊約是基於意識小說和偽造。

IV.四。 STYLE OF THE PENTATEUCH風格摩西五

In some general introductions to the Pentateuch its messianic prophecies are specially considered, ie, the so-called proto-evangelium, Gen., iii, 15; the blessing of Sem, Gen., ix, 26-7; the patriarchal promises, Gen., xii, 2; xiii, 16; xv, 5; xvii, 4-6, 16; xviii, 10-15; xxii, 17; xxvi, 4; xxviii, 14; the blessing of the dying Jacob, Gen., xlix, 8-10; the Prophecy of Balaam, Num., xxiv, 15 sqq.; and the great Prophet announced by Moses, Deut., xviii, 15-19. But these prophecies belong rather to the province of exegesis than introduction.在一些普通的五經推出其彌賽亞的預言正在特別考慮,即所謂的原福音,將軍,三, 15 ;的祝福掃描電鏡,將軍,九,埃弗里;父權制的承諾,根。 ,十二, 2 ;第十三16 ;十五, 5 ;十七, 4月6日, 16日;十八, 10月15日; 22 , 17 ; 26 , 4 ;二十八, 14 ;的祝福臨終雅各布,將軍, xlix , 8月10日;預言的巴蘭,序號。 , 24 , 15 sqq 。 ,和偉大的先知摩西宣布, Deut 。 , 18 , 15-19 。但是,這些預言屬於而是省的註釋比言。 Again, the text of the Pentateuch has been considered in some general introductions to the work.同樣,文摩西五一直被認為在一些一般性的介紹工作。 We have seen already that besides the Massoretic Text we have to take into account the earlier text followed by the Septuagint translators, and the still earlier readings of the Samaritan Pentateuch; a detailed investigation of this subject belongs to the field of textual or lower criticism.我們已經看到了,除了Massoretic文字,我們必須考慮到先前的文本其次是七十譯員,並仍然較早讀數撒瑪利亞五經;詳細調查這個問題屬於文字領域的或較低的批評。 But the style of the Pentateuch can hardly be referred to any other department of Pentateuchal study.但是,風格的摩西五很難提到任何其他部Pentateuchal研究。

As Moses employed no doubt pre-existent documents in the composition of his work, and as he must have made use too of the aid of secretaries, we expect antecedently a variety of style in the Pentateuch.正如摩西僱用毫無疑問預先存在的文件的組成他的工作,因為他必須有使用過的秘書的協助下,我們預計先行各種風格的摩西五。 It is no doubt due to the presence of this literary phenomenon that the critics have found so many points of support in their minute analysis.這無疑是由於存在這種現象,文學評論家發現這麼多點支持他們分鐘分析。 But in general, the style of the work is in keeping with its contents.但一般而言,工作作風,是符合其內容。 There are three kinds of material in the Pentateuch: first, there are statistics, genealogies, and legal formularies; secondly, there are narrative portions; thirdly, there are parenthetic sections.有三種物質在摩西五:第一,有統計資料,族譜,法律處方;第二,說明部分;第三,有弧形的部分。

No reader will find fault with the writer's dry and simple style in his genealogical and ethnographic lists, in his table of encampments in the desert, or his legal enactments.沒有讀者會發現故障與作家的乾旱和樸實的作風在他的家譜和人種名單,在他桌上的營地在沙漠中,或其法律法規。 Any other literary expression would be out of place in records of this kind.任何其他文學作品的表達將是不合時宜的,在這種記錄。 The narrative style of the Pentateuch is simple and natural, but also lively and picturesque.的敘事風格的摩西五是簡單和自然,而且活潑,風景如畫。 It abounds in simple character sketches, dialogues, and anecdotes.它有許多簡單的字符素描,對話,和軼事。 The accounts of Abraham's purchase of a burying-ground, of the history of Joseph, and of the Egyptian plagues are also dramatic.帳目的亞伯拉罕的購買掩埋地面,歷史的約瑟夫,埃及瘟疫也戲劇性。 Deuteronomy has its peculiar style on account of the exhortations it contains.申命記有其獨特的風格考慮到它包含的規勸。 Moses explains the laws he promulgates, but urges also, and mainly, their practice.摩西說,他頒布的法律,但還敦促,主要的做法。 As an orator, he shows a great deal of unction and persuasiveness, but is not destitute of the earnestness of the Prophets.作為一個演說家,他發現了大量的油膏和說服力,但不是赤貧的真誠的先知。 His long sentences remain at times incomplete, thus giving rise to so-called anacolutha (cf. Deuteronomy 6:10-12; 8:11-17; 9:9-11; 11:2-7; 24:1-4).他的長句,有時仍然不完整,從而引起所謂anacolutha (參見申命記6:10-12 ; 8:11-17 ; 9:9-11 ; 11:2-7 ; 24:1-4 ) 。 Being necessarily a popular preacher, he is not lacking in repetitions.正在流行的不一定是傳道,他並不缺乏重複。 But his earnestness, persuasiveness, and unction do not interfere with the clearness of his statements.但他的真誠,說服力和油膏不干預清晰,他的發言。 He is not merely a rigid legislator, but he shows his love for the people, and in turn wins their love and confidence.他不僅是一個僵化的立委,但他表明他的愛的人,反過來贏得他們的愛和信心。

Decisions of the Biblical Commission決定聖經委員會

Some decisions of the Biblical Commission in regards to the chief subject of this article, viz., Genesis, are as follows: The various exegetical systems which exclude the literal and historical sense of the first three chapters of the Book of Genesis are not based on solid foundation.一些決定的聖經委員會在對行政主體的規定,即。 ,成因如下:各訓詁系統排除的字面和歷史意義上的前三章的創世記不是基於堅實的基礎。 It should not be taught that these three chapters do not contain true narrations of facts, but only fables derived from the mythologies and cosmogonies of earlier peoples, purged of the polytheistic errors and accommodated to monotheism; or allegories and symbols, with no objective reality, set forth in the guise of history to inculcate religious and philosophical truths; or, finally, legends partly historical and partly fictitious put together for instruction and edification. In particular, doubt should not be cast on the literal and historical sense of passages which touch on the foundations of the Christian religion, as, for instance, the creation of the universe by God at the beginning of time; the special creation of man; the formation of the first woman from the first man; the unity of the human race; the original happiness, integrity, and immortality of our first parents in the state of justice; the precept given by God to man to try his obedience; the transgression of the Divine precept, at the suggestion of the Devil, under the form of a serpent; the fall of our first parents from their original state of justice; the promise of a future Redeemer.它不應該告訴我們,這三個章節不包含真正述的事實,但只有寓言源自神話和cosmogonies早先人民,清除錯誤的多神教和安置到一神教;或寓言和象徵,沒有任何客觀現實,中所列的幌子歷史灌輸宗教和哲學的真理;或最後,傳說是虛構的歷史和部分提出的指導和啟發。尤其是,毫無疑問不應投下的文字和歷史意義上的通道談談的基礎基督教派,例如,創造宇宙的上帝在開始的時間;特別設立人;成立的第一位女性的第一人;的團結人類的原來幸福,完整,我們的第一個不朽的父母在該國的司法所給予的戒律上帝男子試圖服從他的侵神聖戒律,在建議的魔鬼,根據形式的蛇;秋天我們的第一個父母從原來的國家司法;承諾未來救世主。

In explaining such passages in these chapters as the Fathers and Doctors interpreted differently, one may follow and defend the opinion which meets his approval.在解釋這種通道在這些章節的父親和醫生不同的解釋,你可以遵循和捍衛認為符合他的批准。 Not every word or phrase in these chapters is always necessarily to be taken in its literal sense so that it may never have another, as when it is manifestly used metaphorically or anthropomorphically.並非每一個詞或短語在這些章節是一定要採取在其字面意義,以便它可能永遠不會有其他的,當它顯然是用來比喻或anthropomorphically 。 The literal and historical meaning of some passages in these chapters presupposed, an allegorical and prophetical meaning may wisely and usefully be employed.字面和歷史意義的一些段落在這些章節的先決條件,一個寓言和預言的含義可能會明智和有益的工作。 As in writing the first chapter of Genesis the purpose of the sacred author was not to expound in a scientific manner the constitution of the universe or the complete order of creation, but rather to give to the people popular information in the ordinary language of the day, adapted to the intelligence of all, the strict propriety of scientific language is not always to be looked for in their terminology.作為書面的第一章成因的目的不是神聖的作者闡述了科學的方式在憲法的或完整的宇宙秩序的創造,而是給人民大眾的信息在普通語言的一天,以適應所有的情報,嚴格科學的語言合適的並不總是要尋找的術語。 The expression six days and their division may be taken in the ordinary sense of a natural day, or for a certain period of time, and exegetes may dispute about this question.六天的表達及其司可採取在普通意義的自然天,或對某一段時間內,和exegetes可能爭論這個問題。

Publication information Written by AJ Moss.出版信息作者歐塞爾莫斯。 Transcribed by Thomas M. Barrett & Michael T. Barrett. Dedicated to the Poor Souls in Purgatory The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XI.轉錄由托馬斯M巴雷特&邁克爾巴雷特。專門向窮人靈魂煉獄天主教百科全書,第十一。 Published 1911.發布時間1911年。 New York: Robert Appleton Company.紐約:羅伯特阿普爾頓公司。 Nihil Obstat, February 1, 1911. Nihil Obstat , 1911年2月1日。 Remy Lafort, STD, Censor. Imprimatur.雷米Lafort ,性病,檢查員。認可。 +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York +約翰法利紅衣主教,大主教紐約

Bibliography參考書目

Many works referring to the Pentateuch have been cited throughout the course of this article.許多工程指的是摩西五已經列舉的整個過程中這一條。 We shall here add a list of mainly exegetical works, both ancient and modern, without attempting to give a complete catalogue.我們將在這裡購買的清單,主要訓詁作品,無論古代和現代,而試圖讓一個完整的目錄。

PATRISTIC WRITERS."Eastern Church:--ORIGEN, Selecta in Gen., PG, XII, 91- 145; IDEM, Homil. in Gen., ibid., 145-62; IDEM, Selecta et homil, in Ex., Lev., Num., Deut., ibid., 263-818; IDEM, Fragmenta in PG, XVII, 11-36; ST. BASIL, Homil. in Hexaemer. in PG, XXIX, 3-208; ST. GREGORY OF NYSSA, In Hexaemer. in PG, XLIV, 61-124; IDEM, De homin. Opific., ibid., 124-297; IDEM, De vita Moysis, ibid., 297-430; ST. JOHN CHRYS., Homil. in Gen. in PG, LIII, LIV, 23- 580; IDEM, Serm. In Gen. in PG, LIV, 581-630; ST. EPHR., Comment in Pentat. in Oper. Syr., I, 1-115; ST. CYRIL OF ALEX., De adoratione in spiritu in PG, LXVIII, 133-1125; Glaphyra in PG, LXIX, 13-677; THEODORETUS, Quaest. in Gen., Ex., Lev., Num., Deut. in PG, LXXX, 76-456; PROCOPIUS OF GAZA, Comment. in Octateuch. in PG, LXXXVII, 21-992; NICEPHORUS, Catena in Octateuch. et libros Reg. (Leipzig, 1772).教父作家。 “東方教會: -奧利, Selecta的將軍,前列腺素,第十二章, 91 - 145 ;同上, Homil 。將軍中,同上。 , 145-62 ;同上, Selecta等homil ,在惠。 ,列夫。 ,序號。 , Deut 。 ,同上。 , 263-818 ;同上, Fragmenta的指引, 17 , 11-36 ;秘。羅勒, Homil 。在Hexaemer 。在前列腺素,第29屆, 3-208 ;秘。貴格利的NYSSA ,在Hexaemer 。在指引,四十四, 61-124 ;同上,者homin 。 Opific 。 ,同上。 , 124-297 ;同上,者維Moysis ,同上。 , 297-430 ;秘。約翰CHRYS 。 , Homil 。在將軍的指引, LIII ,活動全省, 23 - 580 ;同上,血清。在將軍的指引,活動全省, 581-630 ;秘。 EPHR 。 ,評論中Pentat 。在歌劇院。錫爾河。 ,我1-115 ;意法半導體。利羅杜德偉。 ,者adoratione在spiritu的指引, LXVIII , 133-1125 ; Glaphyra的指引, LXIX , 13-677 ; THEODORETUS , Quaest 。將軍中,惠。 ,列夫。 ,序號。 , Deut 。在前列腺素, LXXX , 76-456 ;普羅科匹厄斯加沙,評論。在Octateuch 。在指引, LXXXVII , 21-992 ; NICEPHORUS ,卡泰納在Octateuch 。等libros註冊。 (萊比錫, 1772年) 。

Western Church: ST.西方教會:聖。 AMBROSE, In Hexaemer.劉漢銓,在Hexaemer 。 in PL, XIV, 123-274; IDEM, De Paradiso terrestri, ibid., 275-314; IDEM, De Cain et Abel, ibid., 315-60; IDEM, De Noe et arca, ibid., 361-416; IDEM, De Abraham, ibid., 419-500; IDEM, De Isaac et anima, ibid., 501-34; IDEM, De Joseph patriarcha, ibid., 641-72; IDEM, De benedictionibus patriarcharum, ibid., 673-94; ST.在光致發光,十四, 123-274 ;同上,者天堂terrestri ,同上。 , 275-314 ;同上,者該隱與亞伯,同上。 , 315-60 ;同上,者諾埃等方舟,同上。 , 361-416 ;同上,者亞伯拉罕,同上。 , 419-500 ;同上,者艾薩克等動物,同上。 , 501-34 ;同上,者約瑟夫patriarcha ,同上。 , 641-72 ;同上,者benedictionibus patriarcharum ,同上。 , 673 - 94 ;秘。 JEROME, Liber quaest. JEROME ,書quaest 。 hebraic. in Gen. in PL, XXIII, 935-1010; ST.希伯來語。在將軍的特等,二十三, 935-1010 ;秘。 AUGUSTINE, De Gen. c.奧古斯丁者將軍角 Manich. Manich 。 ll. 11 。 due in PL, XXXIV, 173-220; IDEM, De Ger.由於特等,三十四, 173-220 ;同上,德閣。 ad lit., ibid., 219-46; IDEM, De Ger.廣告點燃。 ,同上。 , 219-46 ;同上,德閣。 ad lit.廣告點燃。 ll. 11 。 duodecim, ibid., 245-486; IDEM, Quaest in Heptateuch., ibid., 547-776; RUFINUS, De benedictionibus patriarcharum in PL, XXI, 295-336; ST. duodecim ,同上。 , 245-486 ;同上, Quaest在Heptateuch 。 ,同上。 , 547-776 ; RUFINUS ,者benedictionibus patriarcharum的特等,二十一, 295-336 ;秘。 VEN.委內瑞拉。 BEDE, Hexaemeron in PL, XCI, 9-190; IDEM, In Pentateuch. BEDE , Hexaemeron在特等, XCI , 9-190 ;同上,在摩西五。 Commentarii, ibid., 189-394; IDEM, De tabernaculo et vasibus ejus, ibid., 393-498; RHABANUS MAURUS, Comm. Commentarii ,同上。 , 189-394 ;同上,者tabernaculo等vasibus ejus ,同上。 , 393-498 ; RHABANUS毛魯斯,商業。 in Gen. in PL, CVII, 443-670; IDEM, Comment.在將軍的特等, CVII , 443-670 ;同上,評論。 in Ez., Lev., Num., Deut. in PL, CVIII, 9-998; WALAFRID STRABO, Glossa ordinaria in PL, CXIII, 67-506.在雌二醇。 ,列夫。 ,序號。 , Deut 。在特等, CVIII , 9-998 ; WALAFRID斯特拉博, Glossa ordinaria在特等, CXIII , 67-506 。

MIDDLE AGES:-ST.中世紀時期: ST段。 BRUNO OF ASTI, Expositio in Pentateuch.布魯諾的ASTI , Expositio在摩西五。 in PL, RUPERT OF DEUTZ, De SS.在光致發光,魯珀特的道依茨公司,德黨衛軍。 Trinitate et operib. Trinitate等operib 。 Ejus in PL, CLXVII, 197-1000; HUGH OF ST. VICTOR, Adnotationes elucidatoriae in Pent. Ejus在特等, CLXVII , 197-1000 ;休聖。維克托, Adnotationes elucidatoriae的壓抑。 in PL, CLXXV, 29-86; HONORIUS OF AUTUN, Hexameron in PL, CLXXII, 253-66; IDEM, De decem plagis Aegypti, ibid., 265-70; ABELARD, Expositio in Hexaemeron in PL, CLXXVII, 731-84; HUGH OF ST. CHER, Postilla (Venice, 1588); NICOLAUS OF LYRA, Postilla (Rome, 1471); TOSTATUS, Opera, I-IV (Venice, 1728); DIONYSIUS THE CARTHUSIAN, Comment.在特等, CLXXV , 29-86 ;挪留的歐坦, Hexameron在特等, CLXXII , 253-66 ;同上, 12月plagis Aegypti者,同上。 , 265-70 ;亞伯拉德, Expositio在Hexaemeron在特等, CLXXVII , 731-84 ;休聖。雪兒, Postilla (威尼斯, 1588年) ; NICOLAUS的LYRA , Postilla (羅馬, 1471年) ; TOSTATUS ,歌劇,一至四(威尼斯, 1728年) ;狄奧尼修斯的卡爾特,評論。 in Pentateuch.在摩西五。 in Opera omnia, I, II (Montreuil, 1896-7).在Opera OMNIA公司,一,二(蒙特勒伊, 1896-7 ) 。

MORE RECENT WORKS.-Jewish Writers:-The Commentaries of RASHI (1040-1150), ABENASRA (1092-1167), and DAVID KIMCHI, (1160-1235) are contained in the Rabbinic Bibles; ABARBANEL, Comment.最近WORKS.猶太作家: -的評注的RASHI ( 1040至1150年) , ABENASRA ( 1092年至1167年) ,和大衛泡菜, ( 1160年至1235年)中載有拉比聖經; ABARBANEL ,評論。 (Venice, 5539 AM; 1579 BC); CAHEN, French tr. (威尼斯, 5539分; 1579年) ; CAHEN ,法國文。 of Pent.壓抑。 (Paris, 1831); KALISCH, Historical and Critical Comment on the Old Test. (巴黎, 1831年) ; KALISCH的,歷史的和批判性評論的舊試驗。 (London), Gen. (1885); Lev. (倫敦) ,將軍( 1885年) ;列夫。 (1867, 1872); Ez. ( 1867年, 1872年) ;雌二醇。 (1855); HIRSCH, Der Pent. ( 1855年) ; HIRSCH ,明鏡壓抑。 ubersetzt und erklart (2nd ed., Frankfurt, 1893, 1895); HOFFMANN, Das Buch Lev. ubersetzt與erklart (第二版。 ,法蘭克福, 1893年, 1895年) ;霍夫曼達斯圖書列夫。 ubersetz und erklart (Berlin, 1906). ubersetz與erklart (柏林, 1906年) 。

Protestant Writers:-The works of LUTHER, MELANCHTHON, CALVIN, GERHART, CALOVIUS, DRUSIUS, DE DIEU, CAPPEL, COCCEIUS, MICHAELIS, LE CLERC, ROSENMULLER, and even of TUCH and BAUMGARTEN, are of minor importance in our days; KNOBEL, Gen. (6th ed., by DILLMANN, 1892; tr., Edinburgh, 1897); RYSSEL, Ez.新教作家: -的作品路德梅蘭希頓,卡爾文格哈, CALOVIUS , DRUSIUS ,德迪厄, CAPPEL , COCCEIUS ,蔑克里斯,樂賈勒, ROSENMULLER ,甚至TUCH和鮑姆加滕,是未成年人的重要性在我們天;克諾貝爾,將軍(第6版。通過DILLMANN , 1892年;文。 ,愛丁堡, 1897年) ; RYSSEL赫拉。 and Lev.和列夫。 (3rd ed., 1897); DILLMANN, Numbers, deut., Jos. (2nd ed., 1886); LANGE, Theologisch-homiletisches Bibelwerk (Bielefeld and Leipzig); IDEM, Gen. (2nd ed., 1877); IDEM, Ez., Lev., and Numbers (1874); STOSCH, Deut. (第3版。 , 1897年) ; DILLMANN ,數字deut 。 ,聖何塞(第二版。 , 1886年) ;蘭格Theologisch - homiletisches Bibelwerk (比勒費爾德和萊比錫) ;同上,將軍(第2版。 , 1877年) ; IDEM赫拉。 ,列夫。和數字( 1874年) ; STOSCH , Deut 。 (2nd ed., 1902); KEIL and FRANZ DELITZSCH, Biblischer Comment. (第2版。 , 1902年) ;的Keil和弗蘭茲德里, Biblischer評論。 uber das AT; KEIL, Gen. and Ex. (3rd ed., Leipzig, 1878); IDEM, Lev., Numbers, Deut.尤伯杯存在的; Keil公司,將軍和前。 (第3版。 ,萊比錫, 1878年) ;同上,列夫。 ,數字Deut 。 (2nd ed., 1870; tr., Edinburgh, 1881, 1885); STRACK and ZOCKLER, Kurzgefasster Komment. (第2版。 , 1870年;文。 ,愛丁堡, 1881年, 1885年) ;施特拉克和ZOCKLER , Kurzgefasster Komment 。 zu den h. Schriften A. und NT (Munich); STRACK, Gen. (2nd ed., 1905); IDEM, Ez., Lev., Numbers (1894); OETTLI, Deut.楚蘭旦閣下著作答:與新台幣(慕尼黑) ;施特拉克,將軍(第2版。 , 1905年) ;同上,雌二醇。 ,列夫。 ,數字( 1894年) ;歐特列, Deut 。 (1893); NOWACK, Handkomment. ( 1893年) ; NOWACK , Handkomment 。 zum AT (Gottingen); GUNKEL, Gen. (1901); BANTSCH, Ez., Lev., Numbers (1903); Deut. zum在(哥廷根大學) ;貢克爾,將軍( 1901 ) ; BANTSCH赫拉。 ,列夫。 ,數字( 1903年) ; Deut 。 by STEUERNAGEL (1900); MARTI, Kurtzer Handommentar z.由STEUERNAGEL ( 1900 ) ;馬蒂庫爾策Handommentar卓 AT (Freiburg): HOLZINGER, Gen. (1898), Ez.在(弗賴堡) : HOLZINGER ,將軍( 1898 ) ,雌二醇。 (1900), Numbers (1903); BERTHOLET, Lev. ( 1900年) ,數字( 1903年) ; BERTHOLET ,列夫。 (1901), Deut. ( 1901 ) , Deut 。 (1899); BOHMER, Das erste Buch Mose (Stuttgart, 1905); COOK, The Holy Bible according to the Authorized Version, I-II (London, 1877); SPENCE and EXELL, The Pulpit Commentary (London): WHITELAW, Gen.; RAWLINSON, Ex.; MEYRICK, Lev.; WINTERBOTHAM, Numbers; ALEXANDER, Deut.; The Expositor's Bible (London): DODS, Gen. (1887); CHADWICK, Exod. ( 1899年) ;博默,達斯erste圖書莫塞(斯圖加特, 1905年) ;庫克聖經根據授權版本,第一和第二(倫敦, 1877年) ; SPENCE和EXELL ,講壇評(倫敦) :懷特勞,根。 ;羅林森,惠。 ;蛾,列夫。 ;溫,數字;亞歷山大, Deut 。 ;的Expositor的聖經(倫敦) : DODS ,將軍( 1887年) ; CHADWICK , Exod 。 (1890); KELLOGG, Lev. ( 1890年) ; KELLOGG ,列夫。 (1891); WATSON, Numbers (1889); HARPER, Deut. (1895); The International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh): GRAY, Numbers (1903); DRIVER, Deut. ( 1891年) ;華生,數字( 1889年) ;哈珀, Deut 。 ( 1895年) ,國際評論文章(愛丁堡) :灰色,數字( 1903年) ;司機, Deut 。 (1895); SPURRELL, Notes on the Hebrew Text of Gen. (2nd ed., Oxford, 1896); GINSBURG, The Third Book of Moses (London, 1904); MACLAREN, The Books of Ex., Lev., and Numbers (London, 1906); IDEM, Deut. ( 1895年) ; SPURRELL ,債券在希伯來文將軍(第2版。 ,牛津, 1896年) ;金斯伯格的第三本書的摩西(倫敦, 1904年) ;麥克拉倫的書惠。 ,列夫。和數字(倫敦, 1906年) ;同上, Deut 。 (London, 1906); REUSS, L'histoire sainte et la loi (Paris, 1879); KUENEN, HOSYKAAS, and OORT, Het Oude Testament (Leyden, 1900-1). (倫敦, 1906年) ; REUSS ,歐萊雅等香格里拉史聖萊(巴黎, 1879年) ; KUENEN , HOSYKAAS ,和奧爾特報舊全書(萊頓, 1900-1 ) 。

Catholic Works:-The works of CAJETAN, OLEASTER, STEUCHUS EUGUBINUS, SANTE PAGINO, LIPPOMANNUS, HAMMER, B. POREIRA, ASORIUS MARTINENGUS, LORINUS, TIRINUS, A LAPIDE, CORN, JANSENIUS, BONFRERE, FRASSEN, CALMET, BRENTANO, DERESER, and SCHOLZ are either too well known or too unimportant to need further notice.天主教工程: -的作品CAJETAN , OLEASTER , STEUCHUS EUGUBINUS , SANTE PAGINO , LIPPOMANNUS ,錘子,灣POREIRA , ASORIUS MARTINENGUS , LORINUS , TIRINUS ,阿LAPIDE ,玉米, JANSENIUS ,邦弗雷雷, FRASSEN , CALMET , BRENTANO , DERESER ,和SCHOLZ都是眾所周知或太不重要需要另行通知。 La Sainte Bible (Paris); CHELIER, La Genese (1889); IDEM, l'Exode et la Levitique (1886); TROCHON, Les Nombres et le Deuteronome (1887-8); Cursus Scripturae Sacrae (Paris); VON HUMMELAUER, Gen. (1895); Ex., Lev.聖聖經(巴黎) ; CHELIER ,香格里拉Genese ( 1889年) ;同上,歐萊雅Exode等香格里拉Levitique ( 1886年) ; TROCHON ,法國Nombres等樂Deuteronome ( 1887-8 ) ; Cursus Scripturae Sacrae (巴黎) ;馮HUMMELAUER ,將軍( 1895年) ;惠。 ,列夫。 (1897); Num. ( 1897年) ;序號。 (1899); Deut. ( 1899年) ; Deut 。 (1901); SCHRANK, Comment. ( 1901年) ;薊馬,評論。 literal.字面。 in Gen. (1835); LAMY, Comment in l. Gen.在將軍( 1835年) ;拉米評論中湖將軍 (Mechlin, 1883-4); TAPPEHORN, Erklarung der Gen. (Paderborn, 1888); HOBERG, Die Gen. nach dem Literalsinn erklart (Freiburg, 1899); FILLION, La Sainte Bible, I (Paris, 1888); NETELER, Das Buch Genesis der Vulgata und des hebraischen Textes ubersetzt und erklart (Munster, 1905); GIGOT, Special Introduction to the Study of the Old Testament, I (New York, 1901). Biblical Commission: Acta Apostolicoe Sedis (15 July, 1908); Rome (17 July, 1909). ( Mechlin , 1883-4 ) ; TAPPEHORN , Erklarung德國將軍(帕德博恩, 1888年) ;霍貝格,模具nach將軍馬克Literalsinn erklart (弗賴堡, 1899年) ;菲利安,聖聖經,我(巴黎, 1888年) ; NETELER ,達斯書起源之Vulgata和沙漠hebraischen文本ubersetzt與erklart (明斯特, 1905年) ; GIGOT ,特別介紹研究舊約,我(紐約, 1901年) 。聖經委員會:獸類Apostolicoe位置未定( 1908年7月15號) ;羅馬( 1909年7月17號) 。


Leviticus利未記

Jewish Perspective Information 猶太透視信息

ARTICLE HEADINGS:文章標題:

-Biblical Data:聖經資料:

Contents.目錄。

Holiness Code.聖潔碼。

Latest Stratum of Pentateuch.最新地層摩西五。

-Critical View:臨界查看:

Chapters viii.-x.: Narratives.章節viii.-x. :說明。

Ch.總。 i.-vii.: Laws of Offerings.一至七。 :法律服務。

Ch.總。 xi.: Clean and Unclean Animals.十一。 :清潔和不清潔的動物。

Ch.總。 xiii.十三。 and xiv.: Laws of Leprosy.和十四。 :法律麻風病。

Ch.總。 xvi.: The Day of Atonement.十六。 :贖罪日的。

Ch.總。 xvii.-xxvi.: The Holiness Code. xvii. - 26 。 :神聖碼。

Interpolations.插值。

Date and Place of Composition of P.日期和地點組成的體育

Date and Place of Composition of the Holiness Code.日期和地點的組成聖潔碼。

-Biblical Data:聖經資料:

The English name英文名稱

is derived from the Latin "Liber Leviticus," which is from the Greek (το) Λενιτικόν (ie, βιβλίον).源於拉丁文“書利未記” ,這是從希臘( το ) Λενιτικόν (即βιβλίον ) 。 In Jewish writings it is customary to cite the book by its first word," Wa-yiḳra."在猶太著作是習慣引用這本書的第一句話, “瓦yiḳra 。 ” The book is, composed of laws which treat of the functions of the priests, or the Levites in the larger sense.這本書是由法律處理的職能司鐸,或利在更大的意義。 It is in reality a body of sacerdotal law.這是在現實中的一套sacerdotal法。 The various laws comprising this collection are represented as spoken by Yhwh to Moses between the first day of the first month of the second year after the Exodus and the first day of the second month of the same year (comp. Ex. xl. 17 and Num. i. 1).各種法律,包括本收集派所講Yhwh摩西之間的第一天,第一個月的第二個年頭後,流亡和第一天的第2個月,同年( comp.惠。儀。 17序號。一1 ) 。 There is no note of a definite time in Leviticus itself, but from the references cited it is clear that in the continuous narrative of the Pentateuch this is the chronological position of the book.有沒有注意到一個明確的時間在利未記本身,而是來自引用引用很清楚,在連續的五經說明這是順序的立場書。

Contents.目錄。

Ch.總。 i.-vii.: A collection of laws relating to sacrifices.一至七。 :一個收集有關的法律犧牲。 It falls into two portions: (1) ch.它分為兩個部分: ( 1 )總。 i.-vi. 7 (Hebr. i.-v.) and vii. 7 ( Hebr. i.-v. )和第七章。 22-34 are laws addressed to the people; (2) ch. 22-34是法律給人民; ( 2 )總。 vi.六。 8-vii. 8七。 21 (Hebr. vi. 1-vii. 21) are addressed to the priests. 21 ( Hebr.六。 1至七。 21 )是給祭司。 Ch.總。 i.字母i. contains laws for burnt offerings; ch.含有法律,燔祭;總。 ii., for meal-offerings; ch.二。 ,膳食,產品;總。 iii., peace-offerings; ch.三。和平的產品;總。 iv., sin-offerings; ch.四。 ,新安產品;總。 v. 1-vi.五, 1至第六。 7 (Hebr. ch. v.), trespass-offerings; ch. 7 ( Hebr.總。五) ,非法侵入,產品;總。 vi.六。 8-13 (Hebr. vi. 1-6) defines the duties of the priest with reference to the fire on the altar; ch. vi. 8月13日( Hebr.六。 1-6 )確定的職責神父參照祭壇上的火;總。六。 14-18 (Hebr. vi. 7-11), the meal-offering of the priests; ch. vi. 14日至18日( Hebr.六。 7月11日) ,吃飯,提供的神職人員;總。六。 19-23 (Hebr. vi. 12-16), the priests' oblation; ch. 19-23 ( Hebr.六。 12月16日) ,祭司'祭品;總。 vi.六。 24-30 (Hebr. vi. 17-23), the trespass-offering; ch. 24-30 ( Hebr.六。 17-23日) ,在侵入募股;總。 vii.七。 1-7, trespass-offerings; ch. 1月7日,侵入-產品;總。 vii.七。 8-10, the portions of the sacrifices which go to the priests; ch. 8月10日,該部分的犧牲去神父;總。 vii.七。 11-18, peace-offerings; ch. 11月18日,和平的產品;總。 vii. 19-21, certain laws of uncleanness; ch.七。 19-21 ,某些法律uncleanness ;總。 vii.七。 22-27 prohibits eating fat or blood; ch. 22-27禁止進食脂肪或血液;總。 vii.七。 28-34 defines the priests' share of the peace-offering. 28-34定義祭司份額的和平提供。 Ch.總。 vii.七。 35-38 consists of a subscription to the preceding laws. 35-38包括訂購前的法律。

Ch.總。 viii.-ix.: The consecration of Aaron and his sons; though narrative in form, they contain the precedent to which subsequent ritual was expected to conform. viii.-ix. :在神聖的亞倫和他的兒子;但敘事的形式,它們包含的先例,而隨後的儀式,以符合預期。

Ch.總。 x. contains two narratives: one shows that it is unlawful to use strange fire at Yhwh's altar; the other requires the priests to eat the sin-offering.包含兩個說明:一是表明,它是非法使用奇怪的火災Yhwh的祭壇;其他需要祭司吃新安提供。 Between these narratives two laws are inserted, one prohibiting intoxicating drink to the priests, the other giving sundry directions about offerings (8-15).這說明兩個法律插入,一個令人飲料禁止的牧師,其他雜方向給予有關產品( 8月15日) 。

Ch.總。 xi.十一。 contains laws in regard to clean and unclean animals, and separates those which may from those which may not be used for food. Ch.載有法律方面的清潔和不潔的動物,並隔離那些可能來自那些可能不被用於食品。總。 xii.十二。 contains directions for the purification of women after childbirth.包含方向淨化分娩後的婦女。 A distinction is made between male and female children, the latter entailing upon the mother a longer period of uncleanness.作了區分男性和女性兒童,後者的母親帶來較長的uncleanness 。

Ch.總。 xiii.十三。 and xiv.和十四。 contain the laws of leprosy, giving the signs by which the priest may distinguish between clean and unclean eruptions.含有麻風的法律,使其中的跡象神父可能區分清潔和不清潔的爆發。

Ch.總。 xv.十五。 contains directions for the purifications necessary in connection with certain natural secretions of men (2-18) and women (19-30).包含方向purifications必要與某些自然分泌的男性( 2月18日)和婦女( 19-30 ) 。

Ch.總。 xvi.十六。 contains the law of the great Day of Atonement.包含的法律,偉大的一天贖罪。 The chief features of this ritual are the entrance of the high priest into the Holy of Holies and the sending of the goat into the wilderness (see Azazel).首席特點這一儀式的是入口的大祭司進入神聖的神聖和派遣山羊到曠野(見阿撒茲勒) 。

Holiness Code.聖潔碼。

Ch.總。 xvii.-xxvi. xvii. - 26 。 contain laws which differ in many respects from the preceding and which have many features in common.含有不同的法律在許多方面由前並有許多共同的特點。 They are less ritualistic than the laws of ch.他們不太儀式的法律以外的甲烷。 i.-xvi.一,本篤十六世。 and lay greater stress on individual holiness; hence the name "Holiness Code," proposed by Klostermann in 1877 for these chapters, has been generally adopted.奠定更加強調個人的成聖,因此命名為“聖潔守則” ,提出Klostermann在1877年對這些章節,已經被普遍採用。

Ch.總。 xvii.十七。 contains general regulations respecting sacrifice; ch. xviii.包含一般條例尊重犧牲;總。十八。 prohibits unlawful marriages and unchastity; ch.禁止非法婚姻和不貞潔;總。 xix.十九。 defines the religious and moral duties of Israelites; ch.確定了宗教和道德義務的以色列人;總。 xx.二十。 imposes penalties for the violation of the provisions of ch.實行處罰違反規定的CH 。 xviii.十八。 In ch. xxi.在CH 。二十一。 regulations concerning priests are found (these regulations touch the domestic life of the priest and require that he shall have no bodily defects); ch.法規司鐸被發現(這些條例觸摸家庭生活的神父和要求,他不應有任何身體上的缺陷) ;總。 xxii.二十二。 gives regulations concerning sacrificial food and sacrificial animals; ch.使條例的犧牲糧食和犧牲動物;總。 xxiii.二十三。 presents a calendar of feasts; ch.提出了一種日曆節日;總。 xxiv.二十四。 contains various regulations concerning the lamps of the Tabernacle (1-4) and the showbread (5-9), and a law of blasphemy and of personal injury (10-23); ch. xxv.包含各種規章關於燈的幕( 1-4 )和showbread ( 5-9 ) ,以及法律的褻瀆和對人身傷害( 10月23日) ;總。二十五。 is made up of laws for the Sabbatical year and the year of jubilee (these laws provide periodical rests for the land and secure its ultimate reversion, in case it be estranged for debt, to its original owners); ch.由法律,休假一年和一年的銀禧(這些法律規定定期在於土地和安全的最終逆轉的情況下,它被疏遠的債務,其原始所有者) ;總。 xxvi.二十六。 is a hortatory conclusion to the Holiness Code.是勸告結束聖潔碼。

Ch.總。 xxvii.二十七。 consists of a collection of laws concerning the commutation of vows.包括收集有關該減刑的誓言。 These laws cover the following cases: where the vowed object is a person (1-8); an animal (9-15); a house (14-15); an inherited field (16-21); a purchased field (22-25); a firstling (26-27).這些法律包括下列案件:如果誓言對象是一個人( 1-8 ) ;動物( 9月15日) ;一所房子( 14-15 ) ;繼承領域( 16-21 ) ;購買的外地( 22 -25 ) ;一初( 26-27日) 。 Then follow additional laws concerning persons and things "devoted" (28-29) and concerning tithes (30-33).然後依照有關法律的人更多的東西“專門” ( 28-29日)和關於什一稅( 30-33 ) 。 Verse 34 is the colophon to the Book of Leviticus, stating that these laws were given by Yhwh as commands to Moses at Mount Sinai.EGHGAB新詩34是colophon的書利未記,指出這些法律所給予Yhwh作為命令摩西山Sinai.EGHGAB

Latest Stratum of Pentateuch.最新地層摩西五。

-Critical View:臨界查看:

In the critical analysis of the Pentateuch it is held that Leviticus belongs to the priestly stratum, designated by the symbol P. To this stratum the laws of Leviticus are attached by their nature and also by linguistic affinities (comp. Pentateuch, and J. Estlin Carpenter and G. Harford Battersby, "Hexateuch" [cited hereafter as "Hex."], i. 208-221).在關鍵的分析摩西五是認為利未記屬於祭司階層,指定的象徵體育在這方面的法律地層利未記是重視其性質也由語言的相似性( comp.摩西五,和J. Estlin卡彭特和G.哈福德巴特斯, “ Hexateuch ” [引用以下簡稱“十六進制” 。 ]島208-221 ) 。 This priestly stratum was formerly regarded as the "Grundschrift," or oldest stratum of the Pentateuch, but by Graf and Wellhausen, whose views now receive the adherence of the great majority of scholars, it has been shown to be on the whole the latest.這祭司階層原被視為“ Grundschrift ”或最古老地層的五經,但格拉夫和豪森,現在收到的意見加入絕大多數學者,它已被證明是對整個最新的。 Leviticus as it stands is not, however, a consistent code of laws formulated at one time, but is the result of a considerable process of compilation.利未記因為這不,但是,一貫法典制定在同一時間,但由於相當進程彙編。 It has already been noted that chapters xvii.已經指出,章十七。 to xxvi.到二十六。 have a distinct character of their own and a distinct hortatory conclusion, which point to an independent codification of this group of laws.具有顯著的特點和自身的獨特性的結論,這一點對一個獨立的編纂這一組的法律。 Within this same group many indications that it is a compilation from earlier priestly sources may also be found. Ch.在這同一組的許多跡象表明,這是一個彙編先前祭司來源也可找到。總。 xviii.十八。 26, xix. 26 ,十九。 37, xxii. 37 ,二十二。 31-33, xxiv. 31-33二十四。 22, xxv. 22 ,二十五。 55, xxvi. 55 , 26 。 46, and xxvii. 46 ,和二十七。 34 are all passages which once stood at the end of independent laws or collections of laws. 34個是所有通道一旦站在年底獨立法律或收藏的法律。 Similar titles and colophons, which are best explained as survivals from previous collections, are found also in other parts of the book, as in vi.類似的標題和colophons ,這是最好的解釋生存率從以前集合,也發現其他地方的書,如在六。 7 (AV 14); vii. 7 (視頻14 ) ;七。 1, 2, 37, 38; xi. 1 , 2 , 37 , 38 ;十一。 46, 47; xiii. 46 , 47 ;十三。 59; xiv. 59 ;十四。 54, 55; xv. 54 , 55 ;十五。 32, 33. 32 , 33 。 It is necessary, therefore, to analyze these laws more closely.這是必要的,因此,分析這些法律更加密切。

Chapters viii.-x.: Narratives.章節viii.-x. :說明。

It will be convenient to begin this analysis with ch.這將是方便的開始這一分析與CH 。 viii.-x., which are, as previously noted, narratives rather than laws. viii.-x. ,這是,如前所述,敘述,而不是法律。 Ch. viii.總。八。 relates the consecration of Aaron and his sons to the priesthood.涉及的神聖艾倫和他的兒子向祭司。 That consecration is commanded in Ex.這神聖的指揮在惠。 xl.儀。 12-15, just as the erection of the Tabernacle is commanded in Ex. 12月15日,就在勃起的幕是在惠指揮。 xl.儀。 1-11. 1月11日。 As the erection of the Tabernacleis described in Ex.由於安裝中所描述的Tabernacleis前。 xl.儀。 17-38, it is probable that Lev. 17-38 ,很可能列夫。 viii., recounting the consecration of Aaron and his sons, immediately followed Ex.八。 ,敘述了神聖的亞倫和他的兒子,緊接著惠。 xl.儀。 Ch.總。 i.-vii.一至七。 have by editorial changes been made to separate this narrative from its context.已通過編輯改動作了單獨這說明其背景。 Lev. viii.列夫。八。 is based on Ex.是根據前。 xxix., relating its fulfilment, just as Ex. xxxv.-xl.二十九。有關履行,正如前。 xxxv.-xl. is based on Ex.是根據前。 xxv.-xxviii. xxv. -二十八。 and xxx., xxxi.和XXX 。 ,三十一。 It has been shown (comp. Exodus, Book of, Critical View I.) that Ex.它已被證明( comp.外流,書,批評的看法一) ,前。 xxxv.-xl. is a later expansion of a briefer account of the fulfilment of the commands of xxv.-xxxi.; it follows accordingly that Lev. xxxv.-xl.是後來擴大到了簡短的履行命令xxv. -三十一。 ;它如下因此認為列夫。 viii. probably belongs to a similar late expansion of a shorter account of the fulfilment of the commands of ch.八。可能屬於一個類似晚擴大縮短到履行命令的CH 。 xxix.二十九。 Lev.列夫。 viii.八。 is not so late as Ex.不是這麼晚當然。 xxxv.-xl., since it knows but one altar. xxxv.-xl. ,因為它知道,但一個祭壇。

Ch.總。 ix.九。 resumes the main thread of the original priestly law-book. It relates to the inaugural sacrifice of the Tabernacle-the real sequel to Ex.恢復主線原始祭司法律書籍。它涉及的首屆犧牲幕,真正的續集,當然。 xxv.-xxix. xxv. -二十九。 Probably it was originally separated from those chapters by some brief account of the construction and erection of the sanctuary and the consecration of the priesthood. The editor's hand may be detected in verses 1 and 23.可能最初是分開的這些章節的一些簡要說明建造和安裝的避難所和神聖的神職。編輯的手可能會發現詩句1和23 。

Ch.總。 x. 1-5 is the continuation of ch. 1月5日是繼續膽固醇。 ix.九。 and is from the same source.是來自同一來源。 The regulations in verses 6-20 are loosely thrown together, though verses 6, 12-15, and 16-20, are, as they stand, attached to the main incident in verses 1-5.該條例是在6月20日的詩句鬆散扔在一起,但詩句6 , 12月15日和16日至20日,是因為他們的立場,重視的主要事件中的詩句1-5 。 Verses 10, 11 are allied to ch. xvii.-xxvi., the Holiness Code (comp. Driver in "SBOT" ad loc.).詩篇10中, 11個總同盟。 xvii. - 26 。 ,神聖法( comp.驅動程序的“ SBOT ”廣告同上。 ) 。 Verses 16-20 are a late supplement, suggested by the conflict between the procedure of ix.詩篇16日至20日是已故的補充,所建議的程序之間的衝突的九。 15 and the rule of vi. 15和法治的六。 24-30. 24-30 。

Ch.總。 i.-vii.: Laws of Offerings.一至七。 :法律服務。

Ch.總。 i.-vii., as already noted, consist of two parts: i.-v.一至七。 ,正如已經指出的那樣,由兩部分組成: i.-v. (AV vi. 7), addressed to the people, and vi.-vii. (影音六。 7 ) ,給人民, vi.第七。 (AV vi. 8-vii. 36), addressed to the priests. (影音六。 8七。 36 ) ,給祭司。 It is not a unitary, harmonious code: the two parts have a different order, the peace-offering occurring in a different position in the two parts.這不是一個統一,和諧碼:兩部分有不同的秩序,和平的提供發生在不同的位置中的兩個部分。

Ch.總。 i.-iii.一至三。 were compiled from at least two sources, and have been touched by different hands.彙編從至少有兩個來源,並已接觸到不同的手中。 Ch.總。 iii.三。 should follow immediately after ch.應遵循後總。 i.字母i.

Ch.總。 iv., which graduates a scale of victims for the sin-offering according to the guilt of the sinner, is later than i.-iii.四。 ,它的畢業生的比例為受害者單提供按照有罪的罪人,是不遲於一,三。 It is regarded by all critics as a late addition to the ritual.這是被所有的批評作為後期除了例行公事。 The altar of incense, v. 7, is unknown to the older ritual (comp. Ex. xxix. 10-14); and the ritual of the high priest's sin-offering is much more elaborate than in Ex.在香壇,五,七,是未知的老年人儀式( comp.惠。二十九。 10月14日) ;和儀式的大祭司的罪孽,提供更為詳盡,在惠。 xxix.二十九。 10-14 or Lev. 10月14日或列夫。 ix.九。 8-11. 8月11日。 The sin-offering, which in other laws is a goat (Lev. ix. 15, xvi. 8, and Num. xv. 24), is here a bullock.該信提供,這在其他法律是一個山羊( Lev.九。 15 ,十六。 8 ,和序號。十五。 24 ) ,是這裡布洛克。 The ritual is throughout heightened, perhaps beyond all actual practise.整個儀式是加劇,也許以後一切實際執業。

Ch.總。 v.-vi. 7 (AV v.) afford no indications of so late a date as ch. 7 (影音五)負擔沒有跡象表明這麼晚的日期總。 iv., although it is clearly a combination of laws from various sources (comp. verse 14 and v. 20 (AV vi. 1). The oldest nucleus seems to be v. 1-6, in which there are no ritual directions. Verses 7-10 and 11-13 are later and perhaps successive additions. Though united later, they are probably genuine laws.四。 ,儘管它顯然是一個綜合的法律從不同來源( comp.詩14日和訴20 (影音六。 1 ) 。最早的核似乎是五, 1月6日,在沒有任何儀式的方向。詩篇7月10日和11月13日以後,也許連續增加。雖然美國後,他們可能是真正的法律。

The rules for the guidance of the priests (vi. [AV vi. 8-vii.]) are also compiled from previous collections, as is shown by the different headings (comp. vi. 1, 13, 18 [AV vi. 8, 19, 24]).規則的指導司鐸( vi. [影音六。 8七。 ] )也從以往的集合彙編一樣,所表現出不同的標題( comp.六。 1 , 13 , 18 [影音六。 8 , 19 , 24 ] ) 。 They also are genuine laws from an older time.他們還都是真正的法律從舊時間。

Ch.總。 xi.: Clean and Unclean Animals.十一。 :清潔和不清潔的動物。

Ch.總。 xi.十一。 defines the clean and unclean animals.界定了清潔和不潔的動物。 Because several of these laws are similar to the Holiness legislation (comp. verses 2-8, 9-11, 20, 21, and 41, 42), it has been inferred by many critics that ch.由於這些法律的一些類似的神聖立法( comp.詩句2月8日, 9月11日, 20 , 21 , 41 , 42 ) ,已推定的許多批評是總。 xi.十一。 is a part of that legislation, that it is in reality the law which xx.是其中的一部分的法律,這是在現實中的法律二十。 25 implies. 25暗示。 Others, as Carpenter and Harford Battersby, regard it as an excerpt from a body of priestly teaching which once had an existence independent of the Holiness Code.其他人,因為卡彭特和哈福德巴特斯,認為這是摘自一個機構神父教學曾經有一個獨立存在的聖潔碼。 The chapter is not a unit.這一章不是一個單位。 Verses 24-31 seem to be an expansion of v. 8, while verses 32-38 appear to be a still more recent addition. Ch.詩篇24-31似乎是擴大訴8 ,而詩句32-38似乎更加最近增加。總。 xii.十二。 contains directions for the purification of women after childbirth.包含方向淨化分娩後的婦女。 In v. 2 reference is made to ch.在五, 2提到了總。 xv.十五。 19. 19 。 As the rules in xii.由於規則十二。 are cast in the same general form as those of xv., the two chapters are of the same date.是演員在相同的一般形式是十五。兩個章節是同一日期。 It is probable that xii.很可能十二。 once followed xv.一旦其次十五。 30. 30 。 Why it was removed to its present position can not now be ascertained.為什麼刪除其現在的位置是現在不能確定。 For date see below on ch.日期見下文對CH 。 xv.十五。

Ch.膽固醇。 xiii.十三。 and xiv.: Laws of Leprosy.和十四。 :法律麻風病。

The extreme elaboration of the rules for Leprosy has led some scholars to regard the compilation of ch.極端制定的規則麻風病已導致一些學者把彙編的CH 。 xiii.十三。 and xiv.和十四。 as late, especially as it has been inferred from Deut.作為較晚,特別是因為它已經被推斷Deut 。 xxiv.二十四。 8 that when Deuteronomy was compiled the rules concerning leprosy were all still oral (comp. "Hex." ii. 158, note). 8 ,當申命記彙編規則麻風病都是仍然口頭( comp. “六角。 ”二。 158注) 。 Moore, on the other hand (in Cheyne and Black, "Encyc. Bibl."), points out that the ritual of xiv.摩爾,另一方面(在進益和黑色, “ Encyc 。 Bibl 。 ” ) ,指出儀式十四。 2-8 is very primitive (comp. Smith, "Rel. of Sem." pp. 422, 428 [note], 447), and that there is no reason to doubt the early formulation of such laws. 2月8日是非常原始的( comp.史密斯, “相對。掃描電鏡。 ”頁。 422 , 428 [注意] , 447 ) ,而且沒有任何理由懷疑早日制定這種法律。 These chapters are not, however, all of one date.這些章節都沒有,但是,所有的日期。 The original draft of the law included only xiii.原來的法律草案只包括十三。 2-46a, xiv. 2 - 46a ,十四。 2-8a, and the subscription in 57b; xiii. 2 - 8A型,和訂閱的57B章;十三。 47-59, which treats of leprosy in garments, was codified separately, for in verse 59 it has a colophon of its own. 47至59段,其中治療麻風病的服裝,被編入另外,在59詩句colophon它有它自己的。 Ch.總。 xiv.十四。 10-20 is clearly a later substitute for 2-8a. 10月20號顯然是一個後來取代2 - 8A型。 Ch.總。 xiv.十四。 33-53, which treats of fungous growths on the walls of houses, is often classed with the rules for leprosy in garments; but since it has a new introductory formula (33) it is probably independent of that section. 33-53 ,這對待真菌生長的牆壁上的房屋,往往是歸類的規則,麻風病的服裝,但因為它有一個新的介紹性公式( 33 ) ,這可能是獨立的一節。 Since it adopts (49) the mode of cleansing of xiv.由於它採用了( 49 )的模式清洗十四。 2-8a, it is also independent of xiv. 2 - 8A型,這也是獨立的十四。 9-32. 9-32 。 As it makes mention of atonement while xiv.因為它使提及贖罪而十四。 2-8a does not, it is also later than that. 2 - 8A型不,還不遲於這一點。 Thus three hands at least worked on these chapters. The rules for purification after the discharge of secretions of various kinds (ch. xv.) are often regarded as late.因此手中至少三個工作對這些章節。規則淨化後排放的各類分泌物(章十五。 )往往被視為已晚。 The language is tediously repetitious.語言是tediously重複。 The sacrificial ritual (verses 14, 29) is parallel to that of the sin-offering in ch.祭祀儀式(詩句14 , 29 )是平行的,在黃大仙,提供在CH 。 v. It is probable that a shorter earlier law on the subject has been expanded by a later hand; but it seems impossible now to separate the original from the later material.五,很可能較短早些時候關於這一問題的法律已經擴大了後來的手,但現在看來是不可能分開的原始從後來的材料。

Ch.總。 xvi.: The Day of Atonement.十六。 :贖罪日的。

Much discussion has been expended upon the account of the great Day of Atonement (ch. xvi.).許多討論四十四萬四千三百三十的帳戶偉大贖罪日(章十六。 ) 。 Its opening words connect it with the incident of Nadab and Abihu (x. 1-5).其開頭語將它連接的事件Nadab和亞比戶(十1-5 ) 。 These words are regarded as editorial by some, but the subsequent material,which denies the priests free approach to the sanctuary, makes such a connection fitting.這些話被視為編輯一些,但隨後的材料,它拒絕祭司自由的辦法來庇護所,使這種聯繫擬合。 Not all of the chapter, however, treats of this subject. With various prohibitions against entering the holy place, there is combined a curious ritual concerning the sending of a goat into the wilderness to Azazel.不是所有的一章,但是,對待這個問題。隨著各種禁止進入神聖的地方,有一個奇怪的合併儀式關於派遣山羊到曠野,以阿撒茲勒。 As this ritual is given before the directions for the observance of the day, Benzinger (in Stade's "Zeitschrift," ix. 65-89) has argued that in verses 4-28 two accounts have been combined, one of which dealt with entrance into the sanctuary, and the other with the Azazel ritual.由於這一儀式之前給出的指示,為紀念一天, Benzinger (在體育場的“雜誌, ”九。 65-89 )認為,在4月28日的詩句兩個帳戶合併,其中之一涉及進入聖殿,和其他與阿撒茲勒儀式。 The former of these consisted of verses 1-4, 6 (or 11), 12, 13, and 34b, which were perhaps followed by 29-34a.前這些包括詩句1-4 ,第6條(或11 ) , 12 , 13 ,和34B條,這也許其次是29 - 34A條。 This original law prescribed a comparatively simple ritual for an annual day of atonement.這原來法律規定的比較簡單的儀式,每年贖罪日。 With this verses 5, 7-10, 14-28 were afterward combined.與此詩句5日, 7月10日,合併後14-28人。 This view has not escaped challenge (comp. "Hex." ii. 164, note); but on the whole it seems probable. The Day of Atonement appears, however, not to have been provided for by the priestly law-book in the time of Nehemiah; for, whereas the celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles, beginning with the fifteenth of the seventh month (Neh. viii. 14 et seq.), which was followed on the twenty-fourth by a confession of sin (ib. ix. 1 et seq.), is described, no mention is made of a day of atonement on the tenth.這種看法沒有逃過挑戰( comp. “六角。 ”二。 164注) ,但總體上看來可能。贖罪日的出現,然而,沒有被規定的祭司法律書籍中時間記;的,而慶祝活動的住棚節,從第十五屆第七個月( Neh.八。 14起。 ) ,隨後又在第二十四由招供的罪孽( ib.九。 1起。 ) ,是描述,沒有提到的贖罪日的第十屆。 Probably, therefore, ch.可能,因此,總。 xvi.十六。 and other passages dependent upon it (eg, Lev. xxiii. 26-32 and Ex. xxx. 1-10) are of later date (comp. "Hex." i. 156 et seq.).和其他段落取決於它(例如,列夫。二十三。 26-32和EX 。三十。 1月10日)是日後( comp. “十六進制” 。島156起。 ) 。 Even if this ritual be a late addition to the Book of Leviticus, however, there is good reason to believe that it represents a primitive rite (comp. Smith, "Rel. of Sem." 2d ed., pp. 411 et seq., especially p. 414, and Barton, "Semitic Origins," pp. 114, 289).即使這一儀式是已故除了利未記書,然而,有充分理由認為,它代表了原始儀式( comp.史密斯, “相對。掃描電鏡。 ”二維版。頁。 411起。 ,特別是第414 ,和巴頓, “猶太人的起源” ,頁。 114 , 289 ) 。

Ch.總。 xvii.-xxvi.: The Holiness Code. xvii. - 26 。 :神聖碼。

Ch.總。 xvii.-xxvi., as already pointed out, form a group of laws by themselves. xvii. - 26 。 ,正如已經指出的那樣,形成了集團的法律本身。 Ch.總。 xxvi.二十六。 3-45 contains an address of Yhwh to the Israelites, setting forth the blessings which will follow if these laws are observed, and the disasters which will ensue if they are violated. 3-45包含一個地址Yhwh的以色列人,列明的祝福將後續如果這些法律得到遵守,以及災害將接踵而至,如果這些權利受到侵犯。 The character of the discourse and its resemblance to Deut.性質的話語和相似之處Deut 。 xxviii.二十八。 prove that Lev.證明列夫。 xxvi.二十六。 once formed the conclusion of a body of laws.一旦形成的結論,一個機構的法律。 The peculiar phraseology and point of view of this chapter recur a number of times in earlier chapters (comp. xviii. 1-5, 24-30; xix. 2, 36b, 37; xx. 7, 8, 22-26; xxii. 31-33).特殊的用語和觀點本章發生多次在前面幾章( comp.十八。 1-5 , 24-30 ;十九。 2 ,第36B條, 37條;二十。 7日, 8日, 22日至26日; 22 。 31-33 ) 。 Ch. xviii.-xxvi.總。 xviii. - 26 。 are therefore bound together as one code.因此,結合在一起作為一個代碼。 Recent criticism regards ch.最近的批評,認為總。 xvii.十七。 as originally a part of the same legislation.原先的一部分,同樣的法律。 As the "Book of the Covenant," Ex.作為“圖書盟約, ”當然。 xx.二十。 24-xxiii. 24二十三。 19, and the Deuteronomic Code, Deut. 19 ,和Deuteronomic碼, Deut 。 xx.-xxvi., each opened with a law regulating the altar ceremonies, it is probable that the Holiness Code (H) began in the same way, and that that beginning now underlies Lev. xx. - 26 。 ,每開一個法律規範的祭壇儀式,很可能聖潔碼(高)開始以同樣的方式,而且,從現在強調列夫。 xvii.十七。 The regulations of this code sometimes resemble those of Deuteronomy, sometimes those of P; and as it traverses at times the legislation of both, there can be no doubt that it once formed a separate body of laws.規定此代碼有時類似於申命記,有時這些磷;和因為它穿越有時雙方的立法,但毫無疑問,它一旦形成了一個單獨的法律。

This code was compiled from various sources by a writer whose vocabulary possessed such striking characteristics that it can be easily traced.此代碼彙編從各種來源的一個作家的詞彙具有鮮明的特點,例如,它可以很容易地追踪。 Some of his favorite phrases are, "I Yhwh am holy"; "I am Yhwh"; "my statutes and ordinances"; "who sanctifies you [them]"; "I will set my face against them"; etc. (comp. Driver, "Leviticus," in "SBOT" p. 83, and "Hex." i. 220 et seq.).他的一些最喜愛的短語, “我Yhwh很神聖” , “我Yhwh ” , “我的法規和條例” , “誰認可你[他們] ” , “我將我的臉對他們” ;等(壓縮機。球桿, “利未記” ,在“ SBOT ”第83頁,和“十六進制” 。島220起。 ) 。 As the work now stands the laws have been somewhat interpolated by P; but these interpolations can for the most part be easily separated.由於現在的工作的法律已經有些插值的P ;但這些插值可以在大多數情況下很容易分開。

Interpolations.插值。

In ch.在CH 。 xvii.十七。 P has added verses 1, 2, 15, and 16, and all references to "the tent of meeting" and "the camp" in verses 3, 4, 5, and 6; probably, also, the last clause of verse 7. P增添了詩句1 , 2 , 15和16 ,以及所有提到的“帳篷會議”和“集中營”中的詩句3 , 4 , 5 , 6 ;可能,另外,最後一句的詩句7 。 The original law required every one who slaughtered an animal to bring the blood to the sanctuary (comp. I Sam. xiv. 33-35), a thing perfectly possible before the Deuteronomic reform had banished all local sanctuaries. This law is, therefore, older than the centralization of the worship in 621 BC (comp. II Kings xxiii.).原來的法律要求每一個誰屠宰的動物,使血液的避難所( comp.我薩姆。十四。 33-35 ) ,完全有可能的事之前Deuteronomic改革放逐所有地方避難所。這項法律,因此,以上集中在621崇拜公元前( comp.二世國王二十三。 ) 。 As P by his additions has left the law in Lev.以P他補充已經離開了法律列夫。 xvii., it could have been observed by only a small community dwelling near Jerusalem.十七。 ,它可能已被觀察到只有一小社區居住在耶路撒冷附近。

In ch.在CH 。 xviii.十八。 P has transmitted H's law of prohibited marriages and unchastity, prefixing only his own title. P轉交了H公司的法律禁止結婚和不貞潔,只有他自己的前綴名稱。

Ch.總。 xix.十九。 contains laws which are, broadly speaking, parallel to the Decalogue, though the latter portion, like the Decalogue of J in Ex. xxxiv., treats of various ritualistic matters.含有法律,是從廣義上說,平行十誡,儘管後者的部分,如十誡的J在惠。三十四。 ,對待各種儀式事項。 P's hand is seen here only in verses 1, 2a, 8b, 21, and 22. P的手是在這裡看到的唯一的詩句1 , 2A型, 8B條,第21 ,和22 。

Ch.總。 xx.二十。 opens with a law against Moloch-worship.開放的一項法律對摩洛克崇拜。 Verse 3 is contradictory to verse 2.新詩3是矛盾的詩句2 。 Probably the latter is the old law and the former is from the pen of the compiler of H (comp. Baentsch in Nowack's "Hand-Kommentar," 1903).後者可能是舊的法律和前是從筆的編譯器的H ( comp. Baentsch在Nowack的“手Kommentar , ” 1903年) 。 In verses 11-21 laws against incest, sodomy, approach to a menstruous woman, etc., are found. They are parallel to ch. 11月21日在經文的法律亂倫,雞姦,方式,以menstruous婦女等,被發現。他們是平行的路。 xviii.十八。 and from a different source.並從不同的來源。 H embodied both chapters in his work. H章節都體現在他的工作。 P prefixed verse 1 to the chapter. P開頭的詩句1章。

Ch.總。 xxi.二十一。 contains regulations for priests.包含法規司鐸。 Originally it referred to all priests; but P has interpolated it in verses 1, 10, 12b, 16a, 21, 22, and 24, so as to make it refer to Aaron and his sons. The laws of sacrificial food and sacrificial animals have been modified by many glosses.原先它指的是所有神職人員;但P已插在詩句1 , 10 , 12B條,第16A , 21 , 22 , 24 ,以便使其成為提及亞倫和他的兒子。法律祭祀食品和犧牲動物被修改的許多粉飾。 Some of these are anterior to H. P has added the references to Aaron and his sons in verses 1, 2, 3, 4, and 18.其中有些是前至H P增加了提及亞倫和他的兒子的詩句1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ,和18 。 In this chapter two originally independent calendars of feasts have been united.在這一章中兩個原本獨立的日曆已被聯合國節日。 From P came verses 1-9, 21, 23-38, 39a, 39c, and 44; from H, verses 10-20, 39b, and 40-43.從P來到詩句1月9日,第21 , 23-38 , 39a ,不在此限,和44 ;從H ,詩10月20號, 39b ,和40-43 。 A later hand added verse 22, and perhaps other glosses (for details comp. "Hex." and Baentsch ad loc.).後來手說詩句22日,也許其他粉飾(詳情補償。 “六角。 ”和Baentsch廣告同上。 ) 。

Ch.總。 xxiv.二十四。 1-9, which treats of the lamps and the showbread, belongs to the P stratum, but is out of place here. 1月9日,該處理的燈和showbread ,屬於為P層,而是出在這裡。 Verses 10-13, 23 deal with blasphemy.詩篇10月13日, 23日處理褻瀆。 They are quite unrelated to verses 15-22 except as a partial doublet, and belong, perhaps, to a secondary stratum of P. Verses 15-22 are a part of the Holiness Code.他們是有相當的無關的詩句15-22除部分雙線,屬於或許,次要地層體育詩篇15-22是一個神聖的一部分代碼。

The law of the Sabbatical year and of jubilee in ch.該法的休假一年的銀禧在CH 。 xxv.二十五。 is now composite.現在複合。 The earlier portion was a part of the Holiness Code. Driver sees this portion in verses 2b-9a, 10a, 13-15, 17-22, 24, 25, 35-39, 43,47, 53, 55.早先的部分是一個神聖的一部分代碼。駕駛員看到這部分的詩句2b干擾素- 9A條, 10A條, 13-15 , 17-22 , 24 , 25 , 35-39 , 43,47 , 53 , 55 。 P has added the portions which introduce a complicated reckoning, viz.: verses 1, 9b, 10b-12, 16, 23, 26-34, 40, 42, 44-46, 48-52, 54 (for other analyses comp. Baentsch and "Hex." ad loc.). P的部分增加了一個複雜而引進推算,即。 :詩句1 , 9B條, 10B條, 12 , 16 , 23 , 26-34 , 40 , 42 , 44-46 , 48-52 , 54 (其他分析比較。 Baentsch和“六角。 ”廣告同上。 ) 。

Ch.總。 xxvi., as already noted, is the hortatory conclusion of the Holiness Code. 26 。 ,正如已經指出的,是勸告結束聖潔碼。 It has escaped serious interpolation from later hands, except perhaps in verses 34 et seq., where references to the Exile may have been inserted.它逃脫嚴重插值後來手,或許除在詩句34起。 ,其中提到的流亡可能已插入。

Leviticus now concludes with a chapter on vows, which belongs to a late stratum of P. It is later than the institution of the year of jubilee, and introduces a law, not mentioned elsewhere, concerning the tithe of cattle.利未記現在最後一章是關於誓言,屬於後期地層體育這是遲於該機構在今年的銀禧,並介紹了法,而不是其他地方也曾經提到,關於十分之一牛。

Date and Place of Composition of P.日期和地點組成的體育

From what has been said concerning the absence of ch.從所說的缺乏膽固醇。 xvi.十六。 from the Pentateuch of Nehemiah it is clear that some of the material of Leviticus was added to it later than Nehemiah's time.從摩西五記很清楚的是,有些材料利未記添加到它不遲於尼希米記的時間。 It is probable that P in its main features was in the hands of Ezra and Nehemiah. Leviticus is, however, not the work of the P who wrote the account of the sacred institutions, but of an editor who dislocated that work at many points, and who combined with it the Holiness Code and other elements.很可能P的其主要特點是手中的以斯拉和尼希米記。利未記然而,沒有工作的P誰寫的帳戶的神聖機構,而是誰的編輯脫臼,工作多點,和誰結合它的神聖守則和其他要素。

It is commonly supposed that the priestly laws were collected in Babylonia and were brought back to Palestine by Ezra.人們普遍假定的祭司法收集的東風,並帶回巴勒斯坦以斯拉。 Haupt goes so far as to claim that the Levitical ritual is influenced by Babylonian institutions (comp. Haupt, "Babylonian Elements in the Levitical Ritual," in "Jour. Bib. Lit." xix. 55-81), and that a number of the words are Babylonian loan-words.豪普特甚至聲稱, Levitical儀式是受巴比倫機構( comp.豪普特, “巴比倫元素Levitical儀式, ”在“季刊。書目。里拉。 ”十九。 55-81 ) ,以及一些這幾個字是巴比倫貸話。 Any deep Babylonian influence may well be doubted, however.深巴比倫任何影響很可能會懷疑,但是。 It has been seen that the laws of Leviticus were collected little by little in small codes, and that they were united into their present form after the time of Nehemiah.人們看到,法律利未記收集了一點點小代碼,他們到美國後,其目前的形式時,尼希米記。 If any of these collections were made during the Exile, it must have been the desire of the priests who collected them to preserve the sacred ritual of the Temple at Jerusalem.如果任何這些收藏了流亡期間,它必須一直渴望祭司誰收集它們保存神聖儀式的聖殿在耶路撒冷。 Like Ezekiel, they may have proposed reforms, but it is hardly likely that they would deliberately copy heathen practises.像厄澤克爾,他們可能提出的改革,但它是不大可能,他們將實行蓄意複製異教徒。 The Levitical terms which are identical with Babylonian no more prove borrowing from Babylonia than the similarities between the code of Hammurabi and the Hebrew codes prove a similar borrowing there.該Levitical條件是相同的巴比倫沒有證明借款巴比倫比相似之處漢謨拉比法典和希伯來語守則證明有一個類似的借貸。 All that is proved in either case, when radical differences are given proper weight, is that in both countries the laws and the ritual were developed from a common basis of Semitic custom.所有這一切都證明,在這兩種情況下,當激進的差異給予適當體重,是在這兩個國家的法律和制定的儀式由一個共同的基礎的猶太人的習俗。

Date and Place of Composition of the Holiness Code.日期和地點的組成聖潔碼。

It is generally held that the Holiness Code is younger than Ezekiel, though this is opposed by Dillmann ("Exodus und Leviticus") and Moore (in "Encyc. Bibl." sv).人們普遍認為,聖潔守則是小於厄澤克爾,雖然這是反對Dillmann ( “出埃及記和利未記” )和穆爾(在“ Encyc 。 Bibl 。 ”希沃特) 。 That there are many resemblances between H and Ezekiel all agree.有許多相似之處H和厄澤克爾都同意。 Ezekiel dwells again and again upon offenses which are prohibited in the code of H. Compare, eg, the laws of incest, adultery, and of commerce with a woman in her uncleanness (Lev. xviii. 8, xx. 10-17, and Ezek. xxii. 10, 11).厄澤克爾居住後,一次又一次地犯了禁止在代碼中的H.比較,例如法律,亂倫,通姦,以及商業與一個女人在她的uncleanness ( Lev.十八。 8日,第XX號。 10月17日,和結。二十二。 10日, 11日) 。 A list of such parallels will be found in "Hex."的名單相似之處將在“十六進制” 。 i.字母i. 147 et seq. 147起。 The same writers point out (ib. pp. 149 et seq.) that there is a similarity between Ezekiel and the hortatory portions of H so striking as to lead Colenso to regard the former as the author of those exhortations.同一作者指出( ib.頁。 149起。 )有相似之處厄澤克爾和勸告部分的H如此驚人作為領導科倫索把前者作為作者的規勸。 Equally striking differences make Colenso's theory untenable; and it remains an open question whether Ezekiel influenced H, or H influenced Ezekiel.同樣引人注目的分歧使科倫索的理論站不住腳,它仍然是一個懸而未決的問題是否影響厄澤克爾小時,或H影響厄澤克爾。 Those who regard H as the later (Wellhausen, Kuenen, Baentsch, and Addis) lay stress on the references to exile in xxvi.這些方面的H是誰後(豪森, Kuenen , Baentsch ,和亞的斯亞貝巴)突出提到流亡在二十六。 34-44, while Dillmann and Moore regard such phenomena as the work of later hands. 34-44 ,而Dillmann和摩爾等現象方面的工作後的手中。 When one remembers how many hands have worked on Leviticus it must be admitted that the references to exile may well be additions; and if the antiquity of the law of the altar in ch.當人們還記得有多少雙手工作過利未記必須承認,提到很可能是流亡增加;如果古代的法律祭壇在CH 。 xvii.十七。 be recalled-a law which is clearly pre-Deuteronomic-the probability that H is really earlier than Ezekiel becomes great.應當記得,一項法律,這顯然是預先Deuteronomic ,概率H是真的早於厄澤克爾變得偉大。

Comparisons of the laws of H with those of Deuteronomy have often been instituted, but without definite results.比較法的H與申命記常常被提起,但沒有明確的結果。 Lev.列夫。 xix.十九。 35, 36 is, it may be urged, more developed than Deut. 35 , 36 ,它可能會要求,比較發達的比Deut 。 xxv.二十五。 13-15, since the measures and weights are more definitely specified; but the point is not of sufficient significance to be decisive. 13日至15日,因為這些措施和重量更明確規定,但問題是沒有足夠的意義是決定性的。 On the other hand, the implication of many sanctuaries in ch.另一方面,所涉及的許多避難所,在CH 。 xvii.十七。 points to H's priority to Deuteronomy.點至H的優先申命記。 At any rate it seems probable that H and Deuteronomy were collected quite independently of each other.無論如何,似乎可能是H和申命記收集了相當獨立,互不干預。 The hortatory form of each is similar.的勸告形式的每一個是相似的。 This, together with resemblances to the language and thought of Jeremiah, points to the same general period as the date of their composition.這一點,加上相似的語言和思想的耶利米,點,相同的一般期限之日起其組成。 Whether H is not the older of the two must be left an open question, with a slight balance of argument in favor of its greater antiquity.無論H是不老的兩個必須由一個開放的問題,略有結餘的論據支持它的更大的古物。 This view makes it probable that the Holiness Code was compiled in Palestine.這種觀點使可能的神聖法典彙編巴勒斯坦。

Emil G. Hirsch, George A. Barton埃米爾赫斯基灣,喬治巴頓

Jewish Encyclopedia, published between 1901-1906.猶太百科全書出版01年至1906年之間。

Bibliography:參考書目:

Dillmann, Exodus und Leviticus, 3d ed., 1897; Graf, Die Geschichtlichen Bücher des Alten Testaments, 1866; Nöldeke, Untersuchungen zur Kritik des Alten Testaments, 1869; Colenso, The Pentateuch and the Book of Joshua, 1872, vi.; Kuenen, Hexateuch, 1886; Wellhausen, Die Composition des Hexateuchs, 3d ed., 1899; Driver, Introduction, 6th ed., 1897; idem, Leviticus, in Haupt, SBOT 1898; Bacon, Triple Tradition of the Exodus, 1894; Addis, Documents of the Hexateuch, 1898; Carpenter and Harford Battersby, Hexateuch, 1900; Baentsch, Exodus-Leviticus-Numeri, in Nowack's Hand-Kommentar, 1903; Paton, The Original Form of Lev. Dillmann ,出埃及記和利未記,三維版。 , 1897年,格拉夫,模具Geschichtlichen Bücher萬老聖經, 1866年; Nöldeke , Untersuchungen楚老聖經批判萬, 1869年;科倫索的摩西五和約書亞記, 1872年,六。 ; Kuenen , Hexateuch , 1886年;豪森,模具組成沙漠Hexateuchs ,三維版。 , 1899 ;驅動器,導言,第6版。 , 1897 ;同上,利未記,在豪普特, SBOT 1898年;培根,三重傳統外流, 1894年;亞的斯亞貝巴,文件Hexateuch , 1898 ;卡朋特和哈福德巴特斯, Hexateuch , 1900 ; Baentsch ,出埃及記,利未記- Numeri ,在Nowack的手Kommentar , 1903 ;佩頓,原來的形式列夫。 xvii.-xix. xvii. - 19 。 in Jour.在季刊。 Bib.圍兜。 Lit.里拉。 xvi. 31 et seq.; idem, The Original Form of Lev.十六。 31起。 ;同上,原來的形式列夫。 xxi.-xxii. xxi. - 22 。 ib.國際文憑。 xvii.十七。 149 et seq.; Haupt, Babylonian Elements in the Levitical Ritual, ib. 149起。 ;豪普特,巴比倫元素Levitical儀式,國際文憑。 xix.十九。 55 et seq.EGHGAB 55等seq.EGHGAB


This subject presentation in the original English language本主題介紹在原來的英文


Send an e-mail question or comment to us: E-mail發送電子郵件的問題或意見給我們:電子郵箱

The main BELIEVE web-page (and the index to subjects) is at主要相信網頁(和索引科目),是在