imprecations; till finally, the latest portions of the Pen-tateuch could venture to charge him with the blackest crimes, finding a just retribution in the wicked seducer's ignominious death." 9. CONCLUSIONS. It is, therefore, most natural to suppose, that the portion before us originated at a comparatively early date; that, complete in itself, it was preserved as a small book or scroll from generation to generation, till it was ultimately embodied in the great national work, the Pentateuch, as one of its most precious ornaments. How the last redactor of that complex Book could, side by side, incorporate two entirely contradictory versions, and how he considered they might be reconciled, these are no easy questions, the solution of which has exercised, and is still exercising, the zeal and sagacity of hundreds of interpreters, which, however, like the efforts of harmonising the double accounts of the Creation and the Flood, of Korah's rebellion and other events, and of many laws, must, perhaps, always remain open problems. It is enough to know that the compiler deemed an agreement possible, and it will not be without interest, in the exposition of the text itself, to search for his probable view. Nor shall we, in this place, do more than mention a few devices, by which the rest may be estimated. 'It is indeed certain,' observes a great critic, 'that an intrinsic identity of history or form is out of the question; but in a higher sense, such wavering and contradiction are quite possible in a heathen, that is a lower, prophet, who momentarily may be filled with a purer spirit, and may, at such a time, speak and prophesy beyond the capacity of his a Josh. xiii. 22; xxiv. 9, 10. b Num. xxxi. 8-16; comp. xxv. 1-18. nature, but who, being in his own mind very far behind the Divine spirit, may easily, when those transitory moments have passed, yield to very different impulses.”a That a man like Ewald should have rested satisfied with so equivocal an explanation, is hardly less astonishing than the difficulty which the explanation is meant to remove. Acumen and truthfulness led Lessing to recognise in Balaam 'acts of the strictest honesty, and even of an heroic submission to God,' and yet Balaam's character was to him a riddle-a curious mixture,' in which 'many excellent qualities' were allied with the utmost baseness and iniquity.' Balaam must indeed appear an inexplicable mystery to all who fail to separate the two antagonistic traditions. Had this been carefully done, earlier and recent writers would not, in troubled embarrassment, 'have wondered at the strange inconsistency and complexity' supposed to mark the seer's character; at the subtle phases of his greatness and of his fall;' at 'the self-deception which persuaded him that the sin which he committed might be brought within the rules of conscience and revelation;' at 'a noble course' degraded by a worldly ambition never satisfied;' or at 'the combination of the purest form of religious belief with a standard of action immeasurably below it.' Had the sources been examined, we should not find Balaam described 'as a prophet of the true God, and a most detestable type of unredeemed wickedness;' as 'an extraordinary nondescript between the Divine messenger and a soothsayer operating with the arts of heathen sorcery; nor a Ewald, Jahrbuecher, viii. 39. b Butler, Sermons, vii.; Newman, Sermons, iv.; Arnold, Sermons, vi.; summarised by Stanley, Jewish Church, i. 188. c 'd Michaelis, Anmerk., pp. 51, 52. d Riehm, Handwoert., i. 190, 'als merkwürdige Zwittergestalt zwischen dem echten Jehovapropheten ' etc.; Lergerke, Kenaan, i. 585, 594. as any other of those impossible beings, which the fancy of able and learned men has so abundantly conceived." We have shown that the Book of Balaam' is in complete accordance with the earlier phases of Hebrew prophecy. But we believe it is possible to establish the date of the composition with much greater accuracy. With this view it will be necessary, first to consider whether the three chapters, as we read them in the traditional text, really represent the form in which they were originally written. 10. THE ORIGINAL BOOK OF BALAAM. AN attentive and impartial analysis incontestably proves that this portion includes several important interpolations, of which it is for our present purpose sufficient to point out the following two: a 1. When Balaam, after the arrival of the second em Comp. Deyling, Observatt., iii. 102-117; Clarke, Comm., p. 714 (although, on the whole, judging of Balaam with remarkable moderation and justice, and even defending the evil counsel he is said to have given by supposing that he desired to form alliances with the Moabites or Midianites through the medium of matrimonial connections'); Beard, Dict. of the Bible, i. 123; Smith, Dict., i. 162; Davidson, Introd. to the Old Test., i. 331, 332; Herzog, Real-Encycl., ii. 237; H. Schultz, Alttestam. Theol., ii. 35; Reinke, Beitraege, iv. 215, 232; Lange, Bibelwerk, ii. 307-309 ('the dogmatic Balaam' must be taken in connection with 'the worldly politician and tempter Balaam;' we have before us not a settled character, but one still changing and struggling'); etc. Correctly, however, two different and irreconcilable traditions are admitted by De Wette, Kritik der Israelit. Geschichte, i. 362; Vater, Pentat., iii. 118-120, 457; A. G. Hoffmann, in Ersch and Gruber's Encycl., x. 184; Gramberg, Religions-Ideen, ii. 349; Lergerke, Ken. i. 582; Oort, Disputatio de Pericope Num. xx. 2-xxiv., p. 124; Bunsen, Bibelwerk, v. 599, 600; Noeldeke, Untersuchungen, pp. 87, 90; Colenso, Pentat. and Book of Joshua, Parts v., vi.; Fuerst, Gesch. der Bibl. Liter., ii. 228, 230; Krenkel, in Schenkel's Bibel Lex., i. 456; Riehm, 1. c.; etc. But many of these writers either do not attempt at all to fix the mutual relation of the two versions, or fix it hazardously. 'b bassy, consulted God again, he received the answer: 'Rise, and go with the men.' Yet when, following this distinct direction, he had entered upon the journey, we read that 'God's anger was kindled because he went, and the angel of the Lord placed himself in the way to oppose him,' for 'the journey was pernicious in his eyes.' No ingenuity, no dialectic skill, will ever succeed in harmonising these two statements. They are simply antagonistic. Therefore, the whole passage in which this contradiction occurs must be considered as interpolated; the more so, as that passage interrupts the thread of the narrative, destroys the unity and symmetry of the conception, and is, in spirit and in form, as a whole and in its details, strikingly different from the main portion.d 2. Balaam was called by Balak, that he might by imprecatory utterances assist him in the anticipated struggle between Israel and Moab. Therefore, both the glorification of Israel, and the prediction of Moab's future subdual,e fall fitly within the author's plan. But everything elsef must be regarded as inappropriate, and would, from this consideration alone, be marked as unwarranted addition. But other arguments lead to the same conclusion. After having finished his oracles on Israel, Balaam says to Balak, Come, I will tell thee what this people is destined to do to thy people in later days.' After this clear introduction, we have merely to expect a prophecy a xxii. 20, see supra, p. 2. b Vers. 22, 32. c xxii. 22-35. d See notes on xxii. 22-35. Some modern writers have justly perceived the incongruous character of these verses; as Gramberg, 1. c., ii. 348; Oort, 1. c., p. 120; Beard, Dict. of the Bible, i. 123; Krenkel, in Schenkel's Bibel-Lexic., i. 457; f xxiv. 18-24. העם הזה לעמך,14 .xxiv : b on Moab. But besides this, we find vaticinations, peculiar in language and rhythm, in tone and tendency, on Edom and Amalek, on the Kenites, the Cyprians, and Assyrians." Again, throughout the portions we have before discussed, the principle is maintained that the prophet must see those on whom he pronounces prophecies; for the Moabites also he beholds in their chief representatives, the king and the princes. But that characteristic principle is disregarded, at least with respect to some of the nations just mentioned, if not to all. Thus the firm framework of the narrative is loosened, and the admirable completeness of the picture destroyed. d Now if we consider the section before us with the exclusion of these two passages, we may arrive at a safe result as to 11. THE DATE OF THE COMPOSITION. THE following points seem evident :— 1. All the tribes of Israel are described as inhabiting the land in security and prosperity. The date of the Book is, therefore, neither before Joshua, nor after the reign of the kings of Israel, Menahem and Pekah (B.C. 770-740), when the first Assyrian deportations took place under Pul or Tiglath-pileser.f 2. The people are constituted as a monarchy. The a Vers. 18-24. b See supra, p. 18. c See notes on xxiv. 18-24. Some other passages, apparent, in our opinion, as interpolations or corruptions, but without importance for establishing the date of the Book, will be pointed out in their due places; as xxii. 3, 4 (see notes in loc.); the word, 'n, xxiv. 1, see) יהוה or אלהים probably for supra, pp. 19-21). d Viz., xxii. 22-35, and xxiv. 18-24; see Appendix. e xxiii. 9, 24; xxiv. 2, 5. f 2 Ki. xv. 19, 20, 29; 1 Chr. v. 26. 8 xxiv. 7, 17, ID DAW DPI. |