sober, &c. (1 Pet. v. 8). It is fearful, when one can say nothing more of a man than, "He has despised God and his word, served his belly, and ended his life with a revel. Better to famish and be miserable with Lazarus, and then to be borne by angels into Abraham's bosom, than with the rich man to live in splendor and revelry, and afterwards to suffer the pains of hell.-Ver. 9. Drunken revels are an abomination unto the Lord, and only occur where the fear of the Lord is abThe drunkards rank with those (1 Cor. vi. 9, 10) who will not inherit the kingdom of God, and the Lord Christ warns: Take heed to yourselves, &c. (Lu. xxi. 34). gent. He Vers. 11-20. Zimri, King. (a) His way to the throne: Treachery, cunning, murder. He shunned no means to gain his end. That is the way of the ungodly; but without their knowledge or will they are compelled to be scourges and whips in the hand of the Lord (Is. x. 5). (b) His end: a speedy and fearful one. Only seven days did the dominion which he so coveted, and attained through such villany, last. Lightly come, lightly go. The ungodly are like the chaff, &c. (Ps. i. 4, 6). gave himself up to death, in flames of fire. The ungodly are utterly consumed, &c. (Ps. lxxiii. 19). As he had lived, so he died.-Ver. 18. The doom of despair is the end of a life given over to sin, which has lost sight of the living God, and can never again find Him. Frequently, what the world regards as heroism and contempt of death is simply cowardice and crime in the sight of God. The Lord has no pleasure, &c. (Ezek. xviii. 23). It requires more courage and bravery to bear the merited punishment of one's sins than to escape from it by suicide. Vers. 21-28. The King Omri. (a) How he, became king. When the king is chosen by the people instead of receiving the crown from the hand of God by right of inheritance, which is by the grace of God, factions are sure to arise, which wage bloody conflicts, and waste the best strength of the people, until, at length, the stronger party conquers the weaker by violence.* The curse of party spirit. (b) How he reigned. He built Samaria, making it the strong centre of the kingdom, but he walked in all the sins of Jeroboam, and "did worse" than all who went before him. A man may be skilful and useful to himself and others, in all material and worldly things, whilst in spiritual and divine things he works only mischief and destruction. What, without religion, is so-called civilization? Vers. 29-34. The King Ahab. (a) His union with Jezebel-a marriage contracted not in obedience to God's holy will, but merely upon worldly grounds and political considerations, and was therefore the source of great mischief to himself and to his people. (b) The uplifting of idolatry over the religion of the country. The calf-worship was merged in the Baal worship. The greatest tyranny is the tyranny over conscience, which pretends to rule also over belief. The worst rule is that which, instead of demanding recognition of the truth, substitutes lies and errors, and exercises its power in aid of unbelief and of superstition. (c) The rebuilding of Jericho. By means of "faith" the walls of Jericho fell (Heb. xi. 30). Idolatry will build them up again, but the curse rests upon them. He who builds up what the Lord has destroyed, falls under his judgment. 2 Chron. xiii. 12: Fight ye not, &c. Julian, who rebuilt the heathen temple, and the Jews, who rebuilt the temple of Jerusalem, were confounded and brought to shame. [Of course our readers will estimate at their value these stiff monarchial sentiments. The present Editor, here as elsewhere, prefers to translate in this work rather than omit them, because it is due to the author to give his work fairly in a translation. But here he enters a mild caveat, and avails himself of the opportunity to say that his task is not that of a reviewer, and consequently he has allowed many things to pass without comment, from which he differs widely and thoroughly.—E. H.] SECOND EPOCH. FROM AHAB TO JEHU. (1 KINGS XVII.—2 KINGS VIII.) FIRST SECTION. THE PROPHET ELIJAH DURING AHAB'S REIGN. 1 KINGS XVII., XVIII., XIX. 1 A.-Elijah before Ahab, at the brook Cherith, and in Zarephath. CHAP. XVII. 1-24. AND Elijah' the Tishbite, who was of the inhabitants of Gilead, said unto Ahab, As the Lord [Jehovah] God of Israel liveth, before whom I stand, there shall not be dew nor rain these years, but according to my word.' And the word of the Lord [Jehovah] came unto him, saying, Get thee hence, and turn thee eastward, and hide thyself by the brook Cherith, that is before 4 Jordan. And it shall be, that thou shalt drink of the brook; and I have com5 manded the ravens to feed thee there. So he went and did according unto the word of the Lord [Jehovah]: for he went and dwelt by the brook Cherith, that 6 is before Jordan. And the ravens brought him bread and flesh in the morning, and bread and flesh in the evening; and he drank of the brook. 7 And it came to pass after a while, that the brook dried up, because there had 8 been no rain' in the land. And the word of the Lord [Jehovah] came unto him 9 saying, Arise, get thee to Zarephath, which belongeth to Zidon, and dwell there: 10 behold, I have commanded a widow woman there to sustain thee. So he arose and went to Zarephath. And when he came to the gate of the city, behold, the widow woman was there gathering of sticks: and he called to her, and said, 11 Fetch me, I pray thee, a little water in a vessel, that I may drink. And as she was going to fetch it, he called to her, and said, Bring me, I pray thee, a morsel 12 of bread in thine hand. And she said, As the Lord [Jehovah] thy God liveth, I have not a cake, but a handful of meal in a barrel, and a little oil in a cruse: and, 13 behold, I am gathering two sticks, that I may go in and dress it for me and my son, that we may eat it, and die. And Elijah said unto her, Fear not; go and do as thou hast said: but make me thereof a little cake first, and bring it unto 14 me, and after make for thee and for thy son. For thus saith the Lord [Jehovah] God of Israel, The barrel of meal shall not waste, neither shall the cruse of oil 15 fail, until the day that the Lord [Jehovah] sendeth' rain upon the earth. And she went and did according to the saying of Elijah: and she, and he," and her 16 house, did eat many days. And the barrel of meal wasted not, neither did the cruse of oil fail, according to the word of the Lord [Jehovah], which he spake by Elijah. 17 8 And it came to pass after these things, that the son of the woman, the mistress of the house, fell sick; and his sickness was so sore, that there was no breath left 18 in him. And she said unto Elijah, What have I to do with thee, O thou man of God? art thou come unto me to call my sin to remembrance, and to slay my 19 son? And he said unto her, Give me thy son. And he took him out of her bosom, and carried him up into a loft", where he abode, and laid him upon his 20 own bed. And he cried unto the Lord [Jehovah], and said, O Lord [Jehovah] my God, hast thou also brought evil upon the widow with whom I sojourn, by slay21 ing her son? And he stretched himself" upon the child three times, and cried unto the Lord [Jehovah], and said, O Lord [Jehovah] my God, I pray thee, let 22 this child's soul come into him again. And the Lord [Jehovah] heard the voice of Elijah; and the soul of the child came into him again, and he revived. 23 And Elijah took the child," and brought him down out of the chamber into the house, and delivered him unto his mother: and Elijah said, See, thy son liveth. 24 And the woman said to Elijah, Now by this I know that thou art a man of God, and that the word of the Lord [Jehovah] in thy mouth is truth. TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL 1 Ver. 1.-[The Sept. adds his office, "Elijah the prophet, the Tishbite." 2 Ver. 1.—The Sept. has mistaken the Heb. participle, and by a slight change of the pointing has read ò ex eoßov, “who was of Thesbe." The Alex. Sept. also omits the word eaßires. It has been much questioned whether Elijah was of the Thesbe in Galilee mentioned Tobit i. 2 (see Exeg. Com.). Against this supposition is the fact that the Jews of our Lord's time believed that "out of Galilee ariseth no prophet" (Jno. vii. 52). is strongly emphatic: nisi ego et non alius vir, etiamsi propheta sit vel prophetam 3 Ver. 1. mentiatur, dixero, Seb. Schm. 4 Ver. 8.- [The phrase "y, the ambiguity of which is exactly rendered in the English "before," allows either the opinion that the brook was on the east of the Jordan (Euseb., Jerome, v. Raumer, &c., with whom our author), or that it was on the west (Reland, Robinson, &c.) • Ver. 4.—[Day is translated ravens in all the VV. except the Arab. ; yet so important a commentator as §. Jerome says: Orbim accola villæ in finibus Arabum, Eliæ dederunt alimenta. But see Exeg. Com. Ver. 6.-[The Vat. Sept. says the ravens brought bread in the morning and flesh in the evening. 7 Ver. 7.—[The Heb. word here used for rain,, is the same as in ver. 14 and in xviii. 41, but different from coupled with dew, in ver. 1. It denotes heavy rain. 8 Ver. 12.-[The Sept. curiously has here and in ver. 18 réxvois in the plural. 9 Ver. 14. [The forin in the text is pointed by the Masorets and marked in the k'ri as to be understood. It may, however, be considered as the infin. 238 c.-F. G.] with reduplicated syllable and read . See Ewald Krit. Gramm. 10 Ver. 15.-The k'ri - in place of the k'tib - is unnecessary. Maurer: Accentus major voci adponendus, post vero cogitatione repetendum est edebat 8. edebant. According to Keil, the feminine form SN is to be taken as an indefinite neuter: and it, he and she, ate. [The reading of the k'ri, however, is sustained by many MSS. 11 Ver. 19.-[-nepov, the upper chamber which is often built upon the roof of Oriental houses, and to which there was access without passing through the house. 12 Ver. 21.- lit. "he measured himself," i. e. stretched himself. 13 Ver. 23.-[The Vat. Sept. omits the greater part of ver. 22 and the first clause of ver. 23.-F. G.] PRELIMINARY. The history of the prophet Elijah, which begins with the chapter now before us, is continued in chapters xviii., xix., xxi., 2 Kings i., and is brought to a conclusion in 2 Kings ii., belongs, as is known, not only to the weightiest portions of our own, but of the Old Testament historical books generally. Hence it has been the object frequently, both of special theological inquiry and also of devotional consideration. In this respect we name here: Eichhorn: Ueber die Prophetensagen aus dem Reiche Israel (in der allgem. Bibliothek der bibl. Literatur IV. 2 s. 193 sq.). Niemeyer: Charakteristik der Bibel V. s. 257 sq. Knobel: Der Prophetismus der Hebräer II. s. 73 sq. Rödiger: In der Hall. Encyclopädie Bd. 33 s. 320. Köster: Die Pro |pheten des Alten und Neuen Testaments, s. 70 sq. Winer: R.-W.-B. I. s. 317 sq. Ewald: Geschichte Israels III. s. 485 sq. und 533 sq. Kurtz, in Herzog's R.-E. III. s. 754 sq. Sartorius: Elias und Elisa, 3. Heft der Vorträge über die Propheten, Basel, 1862. Menken Christliche Homilien über die Geschichte des Propheten Elias, 2 Bd. der gesammelten Schriften, Bremen, 1858. (These 1798 homilies are, as the preface rightly remarks, "a complete ascetic commentary.' They are to this day unsurpassed, and belong to what is best that has ever been said and written upon Elijah.) Fr. W. Krummacher: Elias der Thisbiter, 4. Ausg.. Elberf., 1851. K. M. Wirth: Das Leben des Propheten Elias, Predigten, Bern, 1853. F. Bender: Alttestamentlichė Lebensbilder in Predigten, 3. Bändchen: Die Propheten Elias und Elisa, Stuttgart, 1858. [See also Dean Stanley: Jewish Church, Lecture xxx. F. D. books, pronounces it more or less unhistorical At first the attempt was made to explain this miraculous element away by giving to the events concerned a merely natural coloring (cf. Exeget Handbuch des Alt. Testaments, 8 and 9; St. Bauer, Hebr. Mythologie II. s. 156 sq. and Gesch. der hebr Nation II. s. 406 sq.; Ausführliche Erklärung der Wunder II. s. 148), but, as Winer mildly expresses it, "not with a very felicitous result," examples of which shall be cited below. Subsequently this was entirely abandoned. The view now current takes this form: we have before us here, not history strictly speaking, but a tradition-sketch;" the entire delineation wears often "a wholly fabulous character " (Thenius), and is hence full of "the marvellous" (Winer), and yet "the fabulous is so closely connected with the historical that it is scarcely possible to separate the one from the other in all particulars" (Rödiger, Knobel). The latest way of looking at the matter goes still farther, claiming that the documentary source employed by our in which the image of such an extraordinary phe nomenon as Elijah had gradually become stronger and more colossal," that in this work, still further, "older narratives and treatises were manifestly made use of," only "the author, conceiving of everything with poetic loftiness, lifted up the reader even to a height often dizzy, has formed anew the whole history of Elijah and of his time." It is "a wonderful, creative representation of the sublimest prophetic truths," and "is freed besides of every fetter of prosaic historical material" (Ewald, l. c., s. 534 sq., whose words Eisenlohr, as usual, repeats). Bunsen has expressed this view in the sharpest way (Bibelwerk für die Gemeinde V. 2. s. 540. sq.): "The whole narration of the life of Elijah is a firmly welded popular epic in its execution, from the beginning to end. . . for the wonderful power of this spirit and for his astonishing manifestations our poem serves better than a dry narration of the actual occurrences. It is the fruit of an inspiration which he, like some superhuman being as it were, awakened in his disciples. Nothing but boundless ignorance, or, where historical criticism has not died out, only an hierarchical-dilettanti reaction, foolhardy hypocrisy or weak-headed fanaticism, would wish to demand the faith of the Christian community in the historic truth of these miracles as if they had actually taken place." Reserving details for the particular statements, we remark as follows, in a general way, upon these various modes of view of the new criticism. Besides the sections in our books just referred to, we have no further accounts of the history of Elijah. As his activity was limited to the kingdom of Israel, the Chronicles, which are occupied specially with the kingdom of Judah, furnish no parallel accounts. They make no mention of Elijah, except that he wrote a letter to king Joram (2 Chiron. xxi. 12 sq.), of which, however, we find nothing in our books. Elsewhere in the Old Testament, Elijah is mentioned but once (Mal. iv. 5). How high he stood in the estimation of the later Jews may be learned from the praise of him in the Wisdom of Solomon (xlviii. 1-12). In the New Testament no prophet is mentioned and extolled so frequently as Elijah: whence certainly it follows that in the time of Christ and of the Apostles generally, a high sig-author "is a poetico-prophetic work of a later age, nificance was attached to him in the sphere of the history of redemption. Rabbinical tradition supplements indeed the history of the prophets, but its statements are so marvellous, and in part so absurd (Cf. Schöttgen, Hor. heb. II., p. 533; Eisenmenger, Entdecktes Judenthum II. s. 401 sq.), that not the slightest historical value can be conceded to them. They certainly show, however, the extraordinary estimation in which then and always Elijah stood amongst the Jews. Origen, Jerome, and Eusebius mention apocryphal accounts of Elijah, and even the Mohammedans have their fables about him (See Winer s. 320 and Ewald s. 548). In respect now of the narrations in our books, as to form and contents, they are so unmistakably distinguishable from the chapters which precede, and which are inserted amongst them (xv., xvi., xx., and xxii.), as to place it beyond doubt that they belong to another documentary source, the work assuredly of some prophet, and probably incorporated into the great historical collection in the hands of our author (see Introd. § 2). Lately, distinctions between the different accounts have been made; and it has been maintained that they are the product of different periods. According to Ewald, chap. xxi. is the most ancient, and 2 Kings chap. i. 2-17 the latest section (so Thenius also in respect of the latter); but that the main portion, (chaps. xvii., xviii., xix., 2 Kings ii. 1-18) was written by one person, who lived at the close of the eighth or the beginning of the seventh century, i. e., some two hundred years after Elijah. (a) In respect of "the accumulation of the miraThis view rests, however, upon a completely un- culous," from which the new criticism generally, justifiable perversion of the history, by virtue of in disputing the historical character of the acwhich the punishment of Naboth (chap. xxi.) de- count about Elijah, proceeds, Kurtz says "It must cided the whole turn of affairs in Israel. When be confessed that these miracles, partly at least, the author of the main portion of the narrative are surprising through their outwardness, and lived cannot be determined. That "he cannot have that, were we justified in supposing that mythical lived before the end of the eighth or the first half embellishments entered into the biblical history of the seventh century," is an assumption which at all, here (and in Elisha's story) more than anyrests only upon the undemonstrated opinion of the where else would they be found." If indeed it be unhistorical character of the story of Elijah in presupposed that a miracle is an impossibility, and general, but which does not necessarily follow from is to be relegated, consequently, to the sphere of lethis. Who in that period, far from being an in-gend or of fiction, the history of Elijah must appear significant one, could have been the author? certainly as legendary and unhistorical. But if this be not presupposed, the frequent manifestation of the miraculous in this history cannot surprise us. The entire history (Heilsgeschichte) of the Old and New Testament, as the actual revelation of the living, holy God, who is infinitely above all natural, finite being, is a great continuous miracle, and is likewise the soil in which all miracles, in particular, are rooted. But as it has, like every other history, its main epochs, which form the gathering-points of its development, so it is agreeable to its nature, that just at these very points the miraculous should appear stronger, more distinctly and more frequently, and the appearance of any person who stands at the apex of a new epoch should be accompanied by miracles. The concentration of revelation leads, in the nature of the case, to a concentration of the miraculous, and moreover, in a way which corresponds with the steps in the development of the people, and the position of the person who leads them. Such was the case with Moses, the founder of the Covenant, and with Christ its finisher, and it would be surprising if in the case of Elijah, the restorer of the Covenant (see below, Historical and Ethical), miracle should not be present. Ewald confesses this when (s. 510) he says: The sphere of religion is always that of wonder, while that of strong faith in the being and agency of heavenly powers is in action as well as experience; where also there is the strongest intensity of true religion, there will such wonders in part actually take place through the activity of the believing spirit, and in part will be experienced, at least, by believing hearts 66 In so far were the days of Elijah and of Elisha, then, when the true religion was compelled to maintain itself most stringently against its internal foes, as rich in wonders as of old the days of Moses and of Joshua had been." Sartorius also justly remarks: "The activity of these prophets of an older time did not consist in testimonies simply by word of mouth, in long speeches and extended discourses, like those of the later prophets, but in deeds laid upon them by God, wrought by them in the strength of God, which they taught people rightly to understand only, in brief statement, as a sign from the Lord. Especially was the falling away at that time at such a pass that the conversion of souls could not be accomplished by words simply, but by demonstrations of the power of the living God, and these we see now in the miracles of Elijah." What Christ says in John v. 36 of His works is true, mutatis mutandis, of Elijah. They were signs and witnesses, and there can be no discussion here of a surprising "outwardness" in any particular. They have all a spiritual kernel, and often speak deeper and louder than words. The proof of this devolves upon the exegesis. If the legendary be so cemented with the historical, as the new criticism confesses, that it is "impossible" to separate them, the accounts generally can have no historic worth, and it would be more consistent, critically, to explain them as fiction. For the rest, supposing that tradition has added this or that, it by no means follows, as has been assumed, that all the miraculous belongs to the legendary only, and is unhistorical. The miraculous which the Jewish tradition has grafted upon the biblical accounts is of the sort which can be readily distinguished from that which in the Bible itself is explained away as legendary. But never would a tradition, running out into what is irregular and extraordinary, have been formed, had Elijah's appearing been without any miracle. (b) The notion that the accounts of Elijah are portions of a larger poetical work, in fact a national epic, does away readily with many difficulties, but at the same time is involved in irreconcilable contradictions. No one can deny that the author of our books wished to write an historical work. Had he regarded the history of Elijah, as contained in his documentary sources, not as history but as "fiction," he would not have incorporated it into his work, and have placed it side by side with the other documents to which he appealed. Least of all would he have done this in a main portion. in the history of the prophet who makes an epoch in the history of the monarchy, yea, of the theocracy of the Old Covenant. Of course, if he held that to be history which he incorporated into his own work he would have claimed in its behalf acceptance upon the part of his readers. If, finally, it were "fiction," that objection of "unlimited ignorance," absence of "historic sense," "foolhardy hypocrisy," or "weak-headed fanati cism" would before all strike him, and he would, at the same time, disclaim for his whole history all trustworthiness and credibility. If the documentary source belonged to the end of the eighth or the beginning of the seventh century, then for the space of two hundred years, down to the days of our author, no one remarked that it did not contain history, but was only a fiction. The history of Israel was likewise the history of the divine revelation, and consequently a matter not for the poets but for the prophets (see Introd. § 2), and nothing can be more certain than that the prophet who composed the documentary source, did not mean to write a popular epic, but history. But apart from every other consideration, the narratives about Elijah, notwithstanding their peculiar coloring, are not related to the remaining portions of our books as poetry to prose. The extreme simplicity and directness of the narratives (cf. Thenius, Comment. s. 218), the pregnancy of expression, the frequent designation of places, the many individual characteristico-psychological traits impart to the whole an historical impress so unmistakable, that the events narrated cannot possibly be regarded as a poetic costume and "representation of the sublimest prophetic truths" and general religious ideas. Ewald's view, that the author of the documentary source had gathered together everything with poetic elevation, and has lifted his readers up to a height which is often giddy, contradicts flatly his own previous assertion: "How grand everything said of him (Elijah) may be, still all accounts can be but a feeble image of the original grandeur, and the allconquering might of this great prophetic hero of the ten tribes." If the appearing of Elijah were originally so grand-and "there can be no doubt actually of the marvellousness of his prophetic activity "-if he achieved the "incredible miracle of a complete alteration in the condition of the ten tribes at that time," we see no reason why the author of the documentary source could or would have been moved "to form anew the whole history of Elijah and of his time," "to make an entire new thing," and to "get rid of every fetter in the way of a lower historical material." When Bunsen says, "we have legends, not myths," but adds, "the historical character of the life and of the personality is not at all imperilled thereby," this is simply a contradiction. For legends are no |