The Expositor's Bible: The Book of LeviticusKellogg, Samuel H. (Samuel Henry)
Religion
The Expositor's Bible: The Book of Leviticus
Kellogg, Samuel H. (Samuel Henry)
Bible. Leviticus -- Commentaries; Bible. Leviticus -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.
[1] "Genesis may be made up of various documents, and yet have
been compiled by Moses; and the same thing is possible, even in
the later books of the Pentateuch. If these could be
successfully partitioned among different writers, on the score
of variety in literary execution, why may not these have been
engaged jointly with Moses himself in preparing each his
appointed portion, and the whole have been finally reduced by
Moses to its present form?... Why might not these continue their
work, and record what occurred after Moses was taken
away?"--Professor W. H. Green, _Schaff-Herzog Encyclopædia_;
article, "The Pentateuch."
We are willing to go further, and add that in the testimony of our
Lord we find nothing which declares against the possibility of one or
more redactions or revisions of the laws of Leviticus in post-Mosaic
times, by one or more _inspired_ men; as, _e.g._, by Ezra, described
(Ezra vii. 6) as "a ready scribe in the law of Moses, which the Lord,
the God of Israel, had given;" to whom also ancient Jewish tradition
attributes the final settlement of the Old Testament canon down to his
time. Hence no words of Christ touch the question as to when the book
of Leviticus received its present form, in respect of the order of its
chapters, sections, and verses. This is a matter of quite secondary
importance, and may be settled any way without prejudice to the Mosaic
origin and authority of the laws it contains.
Neither, in the last place, do the words of our Lord, carefully
weighed, of necessity exclude even the possibility that such persons,
acting under Divine direction and inspiration, may have first reduced
some parts of the law given by Moses to writing;[2] or even, as an
extreme supposition, may have entered here and there, under the
unerring guidance of the Holy Ghost, prescriptions which, although new
as to the letter, were none the less truly Mosaic, in that by
necessary implication they were logically involved in the original
code.[3]
[2] "If it be proven that a record was committed to writing at a
comparatively late date, it does not necessarily follow that the
essential part has not been accurately handed down."--Professor
Strack, _ibid._
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account