梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ○ 賜 ★ 辛酔堀貧和鍬匈��梓囚徒貧議 Enter 囚辛指欺云慕朕村匈��梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ● 辛指欺云匈競何��
!!!!隆堋響頼��紗秘慕禰厮宴和肝写偬堋響��
put together these three considerations�察�namely�察�the unity of the subject of
all the books�察 �the connection between them�察 �and the fact that they are
compilations made many generations after the events they relate had taken
place�察�we come to the conclusion�察�as I have just stated�察�that they are all the
work of a single historian。 ��100�� Who this historian was�察�it is not so easy
to show�察 �but I suspect that he was Ezra�察 �and there are several strong
reasons for adopting this hypothesis。
��101�� The historian whom we already know to be but one individual
brings his history down to the liberation of Jehoiakim�察 �and adds that he
himself sat at the king's table all his life ´ that is�察 �at the table either of
Jehoiakim�察�or of the son of Nebuchadnezzar�察�for the sense of the passage is
ambiguous�此�hence it follows that he did not live before the time of Ezra。
��102�� But Scripture does not testify of any except of Ezra ��Ezra vii��10���察�
that he ;prepared his heart to seek the law of the Lord�察�and to set it forth�察�
and further that he was a ready scribe in the law of Moses。; ��103��
Therefore�察 �I can not find anyone�察 �save Ezra�察 �to whom to attribute the
sacred books。
��104�� Further�察 �from this testimony concerning Ezra�察 �we see that he
prepared his heart�察�not only to seek the law of the Lord�察�but also to set it
forth�察�and�察�in Nehemiah viii��8�察�we read that ;they read in the book of the
law of God distinctly�察�and gave the sense�察�and caused them to understand
50
´ Page 51´
A Theologico´Political Treatise Part 2
the reading。;
��105�� As�察�then�察�in Deuteronomy�察�we find not only the book of the law
of Moses�察 �or the greater part of it�察 �but also many things inserted for its
better explanation�察�I conjecture that this Deuteronomy is the book of the
law of God�察�written�察�set forth�察�and explained by Ezra�察�which is referred to
in the text above quoted。 ��106�� Two examples of the way matters were
inserted parenthetically in the text of Deuteronomy�察 �with a view to its
fuller explanation�察 �we have already given�察 �in speaking of Aben Ezra's
opinion。 ��107�� Many others are found in the course of the work�此 �for
instance�察�in chap。 ii��12�此 �The Horims dwelt also in Seir beforetime�察�but the
children of Esau succeeded them�察 �when they had destroyed them from
before them�察 �and dwelt in their stead�察 �as Israel did unto the land of his
possession�察�which the Lord gave unto them。; ��108�� This explains verses 3
and 4 of the same chapter�察�where it is stated that Mount Seir�察�which had
come to the children of Esau for a possession�察�did not fall into their hands
uninhabited�察 �but that they invaded it�察 �and turned out and destroyed the
Horims�察 �who formerly dwelt therein�察 �even as the children of Israel had
done unto the Canaanites after the death of Moses。
��109�� So�察 �also�察 �verses 6�察 �7�察 �8�察 �9�察 �of the tenth chapter are inserted
parenthetically among the words of Moses。 Everyone must see that verse 8�察�
which begins�察 �At that time the Lord separated the tribe of Levi�察─�
necessarily refers to verse 5�察�and not to the death of Aaron�察�which is only
mentioned here by Ezra because Moses�察 �in telling of the golden calf
worshipped by the people�察�stated that he had prayed for Aaron。
��110�� He then explains that at the time at which Moses spoke�察�God had
chosen for Himself the tribe of Levi in order that He may point out the
reason for their election�察 �and for the fact of their not sharing in the
inheritance�察�after this digression�察�he resumes the thread of Moses' speech。
��111�� To these parentheses we must add the preface to the book�察�and all the
passages in which Moses is spoken of in the third person�察�besides many
which we cannot now distinguish�察 �though�察 �doubtless�察 �they would have
been plainly recognized by the writer's contemporaries。
��112�� If�察�I say�察�we were in possession of the book of the law as Moses
wrote it�察�I do not doubt that we should find a great difference in the words
51
´ Page 52´
A Theologico´Political Treatise Part 2
of the precepts�察 �the order in which they are given�察 �and the reasons by
which they are supported。
��113�� A comparison of the decalogue in Deuteronomy with the
decalogue in Exodus�察 �where its history is explicitly set forth�察 �will be
sufficient to show us a wide discrepancy in all these three particulars�察�for
the fourth commandment is given not only in a different form�察�but at much
greater length�察�while the reason for its observance differs wholly from that
stated in Exodus。 ��114�� Again�察�the order in which the tenth commandment
is explained differs in the two versions。 ��115�� I think that the differences
here as elsewhere are the work of Ezra�察�who explained the law of God to
his contemporaries�察 �and who wrote this book of the law of God�察 �before
anything else�察�this I gather from the fact that it contains the laws of the
country�察�of which the people stood in most need�察�and also because it is not
joined to the book which precedes it by any connecting phrase�察�but begins
with the independent statement�察 �these are the words of Moses。; ��116��
After this task was completed�察�I think Ezra set himself to give a complete
account of the history of the Hebrew nation from the creation of the world
to the entire destruction of the city�察 �and in this account he inserted the
book of Deuteronomy�察�and�察�possibly�察�he called the first five books by the
name of Moses�察 �because his life is chiefly contained therein�察 �and forms
their principal subject�察�for the same reason he called the sixth Joshua�察�the
seventh Judges�察�the eighth Ruth�察�the ninth�察�and perhaps the tenth�察�Samuel�察�
and�察 �lastly�察 �the eleventh and twelfth Kings。 ��117�� Whether Ezra put the
finishing touches to this work and finished it as he intended�察 �we will
discuss in the next chapter。
52
´ Page 53´
A Theologico´Political Treatise Part 2
CHAPTER IX
OTHER QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE SAME BOOKS�此�
NAMELY�察 �WHETHER THEY WERE COMPLETELY FINISHED BY
EZRA�察 �AND�察 �FURTHER�察 �WHETHER THE MARGINAL NOTES
WHICH ARE FOUND IN THE HEBREW TEXTS WERE VARIOUS
READINGS。
��1�� How greatly the inquiry we have just made concerning the real
writer of the twelve books aids us in attaining a complete understanding of
them�察 �may be easily gathered solely from the passages which we have
adduced in confirmation of our opinion�察�and which would be most obscure
without it。 ��2�� But besides the question of the writer�察�there are other points
to notice which common superstition forbids the multitude to apprehend。
��3�� Of these the chief is�察�that Ezra ��whom I will take to be the author of the
aforesaid books until some more likely person be suggested�� did not put
the finishing touches to the narrative contained therein�察 �but merely
collected the histories from various writers�察 �and sometimes simply set
them down�察�leaving their examination and arrangement to posterity。
��4�� The cause ��if it were not untimely death�� which prevented him
from completing his work in all its portions�察�I cannot conjecture�察�but the
fact remains most clear�察�although we have lost the writings of the ancient
Hebrew historians�察�and can only judge from the few fragments which are
still extant。 ��5�� For the history of Hezekiah ��2 Kings xviii��17���察�as written in
the vision of Isaiah�察�is related as it is found in the chronicles of the kings
of Judah。 ��6�� We read the same story�察�told with few exceptions�察。�Endnote
11�В察�in the same words�察�in the book of Isaiah which was contained in the
chronicles of the kings of Judah ��2 Chron。 xxxii��32��。 ��7�� From this we
must conclude that there were various versions of this narrative of Isaiah's�察�
unless�察�indeed�察�anyone would dream that