terpretations were rather paraphrases than translations. The necessity for them arose from the substitution of Aramaic for Heb. as the ordinary language of the Jews after their return from the Exile. The most important is the Targ. of Onkelos on the Pent., which keeps more closely to the original than the others, and is remarkable for

careful as well as skilful work.

Of VSS which embrace both OT and NT, one of the earliest and most valuable is the Syriac Peshitta, the name meaning 'simple' or 'faithful.' Its relation to one or two VSS of equal or greater antiquity is still sub judice. It dates from the 2nd cent. A.D. Its place in the history of the Canon has already been mentioned. The Philoxenian or Monophysite Version is not an independent rendering, but a peculiar modification of the Peshitta. The Old Lat. Version (the Itala) prob. arose in N. Africa, was made (as already mentioned) from the Greek of the LXX, and is only known from citations in patristic writers. It was in the course of revising the Old Latin that Jerome conceived the design of making a new translation of OT direct from the Hebrew. This work, begun in A.D. 390, occupied him fourteen years, and was for long most unfavourably received. It was accused of being heretical, and even Augustine underrated it. It received ecclesiastical sanction first in Gaul; later it was recognised by Gregory the Great, but 200 years more elapsed before it became in the West the generally received and authoritative version, thenceforward known as the Vulgate or 'popular' version. The text of the Vulgate is in a very unsatisfactory condition, having been almost from the first corrupted owing to the existence and use along with it of the Old Latin, and the not unnatural transference of readings from the one into the other. Of the multitude of modern VSS of the B. it is impossible here to speak. Our own English B. has a long and interesting history (see under art. VERSIONS). Most modern VSS differ from the ancient in the extent of the critical apparatus on which they are based. They do not depend upon a single MS or a single version in another tongue. This is esp. the case with the most recent revisions, which, as for instance our own RV, attempt to present, both in regard to text and interpretation, the nearest possible approach to the language of the original writers of the Scriptures.

B. THE EXTERNAL RELATIONS OF THE

BIBLE.

Having now, so far as space permits, analysed the B., shown the parts of which it is made up, the forms in which it has appeared, their relations to each other, and their history up to the point at which this collection practically assumed its present form, we turn to its consideration as a whole, its character as a literature, and its relation to Christianity and the Christian Church. The B. is the sacred book of Christianity. Round it-its origin, history, and contents-circle many of the most important problems which affect the nature and claims of the Christian faith. As Christianity is admittedly the highest and purest form of religion known to man, it may be said that the religious destinies of the race depend upon the B. He, certainly, who would understand what Christianity is, must have a clear conception of what the B. is and teaches.

I. THE LITERATURE OF OTHER Religions.—As, however, there are other religions besides Christianity, there are other literatures which are regarded as sacred and authoritative by the adherents of these religions. Some of them, indeed, claim to be the vehicles of Divine Revelation. It may be well, therefore, to consider what a sacred book is, and how it acquires this character,

and to give a brief account of the chief sacred books of the world. It is one great characteristic of them that they have in every case grown; they are collections, literatures, rather than books; not composed at once, or proceeding from one hand, but combining many diverse elements, and gener. ally reflecting the history and developments of a religion through a considerable period of time. This is to a great extent true even of the Koran, which is more of the nature of a book than any of the others. With the exception again of the Koran, it is probable that large portions of their contents were handed down by tradition before being committed to writing. Religion began in custom rather than in thought, and was embodied in ceremonies before these were explained by means of doctrines. However simple the primitive worship might be, it naturally tended to assume fixed forms; the same words would be used in incantation and prayer, and these would be accompanied by the same acts and observances. When religious custom became more complicated and more highly organised, the tradition was preserved first by means of a sacred caste or priesthood, and then by writing down the tradition itself. Hence the most ancient portion of such literatures usually consists of liturgical formulas and ritual texts, where the former give the words to be used and the latter give the directions for the accompanying acts. The priestly class becoming naturally the learned class, and their writings remaining for a long time the only national literature, it was to be expected that many matters of interest would receive notice in that literature which could not be strictly and absolutely described as religious. Thus mythological and historical particulars which were already ancient, and because of their antiquity were held in reverence, would be carefully set down. Laws first of ceremonial purification and later of moral worthiness, the priestly wisdom in its exercise even about civil matters, histories, especially of the heroes of the nation and of the faith, genealogical and other registers,-all, in fact, which was regarded by those who were identified with the religion as having permanent value became a part of the sacred book. These features can be traced in OT itself, and are generally characteristic of what are known as the Bibles of mankind. The canonical position acquired by such writings is due to their acceptance by nations or religious communities as of decisive authority especially in matters affecting faith and worship, and is usually supported by ascribing to them a supernatural origin, or at least the authority due to them as the work of the founders of the respective religions, or as belonging to the period of development when the influence of the founder was still fresh and his initiative unimpaired.

For our present purpose it is only necessary to take account of the literary monuments of the chief ethnic religions. Fuller details may be found in such works as Chantepie de la Saussaye, Lehrbuch der Religionsgeschichte (of which the first volume has been translated); Tiele, Outlines of the History of Religion; Menzies, History of Religion; and in the literature as cited in these works. For a brief sketch of the religions themselves, see RELIGION.

The sacred books of China bring us face to face with the practical paradox, that, while none have ever been more influential in moulding the life of a people, no inspiration or supernatural authority is claimed for them. They are received with the reverence due to the sages from whom they proceeded, and their guardians are not so much priests as scholars. The five chief books of Confucianism are termed King,-i.e. classical, canonical,-and are partly the original war of the master, partly

compilations and selections by him from pre-existing literature, with possibly, to some small extent, later additions. In character they range from extremely dry chronicles to the interpretation of magical formulas, rules of conduct, and sacred songs. The Li-Ki contains laws for domestic and social life at once comprehensive and minute, and by them the life of the whole Chinese Empire has been moulded to the present day. Its fundamental lesson is the inculcation of reverence, and it is full of finely conceived and inspiring thoughts. The four Shoo, or records of the philosophers, contain much that is of interest, particularly the Memorabilia of Confucius himself and the writings of Mencius, one of the most powerful and practical of Chinese thinkers. The teaching of the latter as to human nature has been compared with that of Bishop Butler, since it regards human nature in its ideal as a system or constitution in which the rightful ruler of the entire nature is the moral will. The Tao-ti-King is the sacred book of Taoism, which divides with Confucianism and a form of Buddhism the religious homage of the Chinese people. The author of this 'Book of Doctrine and Virtue' was the philosophic mystic Lao-tsze, who was born about half a century before Confucius (B.C. 600). Lao-tsze traces the origin of things to an impersonal reason, and directs men to seek the supreme good by way of contemplation and asceticism; at the same time many of his utterances are marked by great beauty and genuine moral insight.

In India we meet with a twofold stream of literature, that of Brahmanism and that of Buddhism, the former being the main factor in the development of modern Hinduism. The Brahmanic literature includes the Vedas proper, consisting of four books or collections of hymns, the Brahmanas, or ritualistic commentary upon these, and the Upanishads or speculative treatises containing the philosophy of the universe which the Vedic hymns seemed to imply. All these form part of the Veda, or knowledge par excellence, and belong to revelation or 'S'ruti' (hearing), as having been communicated to inspired men from a higher source. A second order of books is similarly termed 'Smriti' (recollection or tradition), and includes the law books, the great Epic poems, and the Puranas or ancient legends. Of these various works the most important and interesting from our present point of view are the Rigveda, the Laws of Menu, and the Epics. The Rigveda is of the greatest antiquity, and reveals much of the life and manner of thinking and feeling of the earliest invaders of India from the north of whom anything is known. The hymns are spirited and intensely national in tone. They were designed for use at the sacrifices, of the ritual of which they formed an essential part. The gods addressed in them are pre-eminently Nature deities, whose power is extolled and whose aid and favour are invoked. The Laws of Menu form one of those codes for the regulation of conduct which have gradually grown into shape. Much of it is believed to belong to prehistoric times, and the main body of the code is undoubtedly very ancient, though in its present form it is probably not older than the 2nd cent. A.D. It has been described as 'a kind of Indian Pentateuch, resting on the fundamental assumption that every part of life is essentially religious.' It originated either in a particular locality or with a particular school, but gradually extended its authority over the entire Hindu people. It consecrates the system of Caste, but, while it exalts asceticism, its regulation of ordinary life is touched with a fine spirit and marked by a practical morality. The great Epic poems, the Ramayana and the Mahabharata,

chiefly influenced the transition from the ancient Brahmanism to modern Hinduism. With their countless legends and deep personal interest, they appealed to those whom neither speculation nor ritual could move. They are the Bibles of the people, and celebrate the achievements of the ancient heroes, Rama and Krishna. The latter is regarded in the Mahabharata as an incarnation of Vishnu, one of the supreme Hindu deities. The idea of incarnation of deity is indeed the chief addition made by these poems to the religious thought of India, and was probably developed under the necessity of competing with Buddhism for popular favour. Turning to the sacred literature of Buddhism, it is best represented in what is known as the Southern Canon, the form in which the books are used by the Buddhists of Ceylon. They are written in Pâli, while those of the Northern Canon are in Sanskrit. They are otherwise termed the Tripitaka, or three baskets, from the manner of preserving the leaves in each volume, and were accepted as canonical about B.C. 250. The three 'baskets' are the Vinaya Pitaka, which gives the rules of Buddhism as a religious community, and especially of its monastic order; the Abidharma Pitaka containing the philosophic or speculative doctrine of the faith; and the Sutta Pitaka consisting of reminiscences of the parables and sermons of Buddha, in which the religion is adapted to common life. To the last belong the Dhammapada, sentences of religion,' the most popular of all the Buddhist books. The Dhammapada and the Sutta-nipata are said to rank among the most impressive of the religious books of the world.'

The religion specially identified with Persia is Zoroastrianism, and the B. of Zoroastrianism is commonly known as Zend-Avesta. Properly, how. ever, 'Avesta' is the text,-like the Indian Veda' it means 'knowledge,' and 'Zend' is the commentary or annotation upon it. The commentary is in a different language from the text. The latter consisted originally of 21 books, but practically only one of these has survived. It consists of three parts-the Yasna, a collection of liturgies along with some hymns; the Visperad, consisting of sacrificial litanies; and the Vendidad, an ancient law book, with which are incorporated a number of legendary narratives. While the prevailing character of the Zend-Avesta is that rather of a book of devotion than of the records of a religion, a Bible in our sense, there is discernible within it a variety of religious conceptions which illustrate its essentially composite character. At the same time it contains many passages of an extremely noble and spiritual character, and the religion of which it is the monument has had no inconsiderable influence upon both Judaism and Christianity. The only other sacred book of the first rank which it is necessary for us to notice is the Koran of the Mohammedans. The name signifies 'reading.' It has already been remarked that the Koran differs from other sacred literatures in being the production of one man. Mohammed is its author, the revelations being written down by the followers of the prophet, after whose death the fragments were gathered together and formed, unfortunately with a total lack of arrangement, into the unity of a single book. The attempts of modern scholars to set the suras or chapters in chronological order has largely increased the interest of the book, and thrown light upon the spiritual development of the prophet himself. In such an arrangement the earliest utterances are seen to be full of emotional fire, brief, poetic, pointed. The later are longer and more prosaic, dealing with all varieties of subjects, personal and domestic, civil as well as religious. They contain

also elements drawn from Jewish and Christian sources. Yet the Koran throughout claims to be inspired in the strictest sense, its words are the words of God Himself.

II. THE BIBLE IN RELATION TO THE LITERATURE OF OTHER RELIGIONS.-What, then, is the relation of the literature thus briefly described to the Christian Scriptures? It is not necessary to depreciate the former in order to exalt the latter. We have already noted that there is wisdom, truth, and spirituality in these books of nonChristian faiths. They and the religions with which they are connected have been the light of generations of human beings. They are associated with the civilisations of the world and its great historical epochs. What we have now to ask is, whether, apart from the question of Divine Revelation, to which we shall presently advert, any of them possess the qualities fitting them to become the sacred books of the world, or whether the B., from this point of view, has any manifest superiority over them? If we turn to Confucianism and its authoritative literature, we find every where a consecration of the past, even where it is not understood, which is the deadly enemy of progress; the life of the people is bound in fetters of habit and ceremony which political changes and revolutions have not sufficed to break. The characteristics of the Chinese mind, with its want of comprehensiveness, and excessive attention to minute detail, are reflected in its 'classics.' Moral and spiritual life is crushed out under the burden of external precepts and directions, and there is a determined adherence to the level of the purely human, an avoidance of all reference to the divine, which ignores and tends to mutilate the higher side of man's being, and to deprive him of an ideal. It is no wonder that the mysticism of the Tao-ti-King had an attraction for those out of whom the spiritual life was not wholly crushed. But Taoism, notwithstanding its philosophical and ethical excellences, 'as a religion is a dismal failure, and shows how little philosophy and morals can do without a historical religious framework to support them' (Menzies). The sacred literature of India is characterised not only by its immense extent, but by the great variety of standpoints represented in it. What failed to meet the wants of a single people can scarcely be expected to satisfy the entire human race. The Vedic hymns exhibit the instability of polytheism. The Brahmanic system endeavoured to meet this defect by means of its philosophical developments; but in so doing unfitted itself to be a popular religion. Hence India, during the supremacy of Brahmanism, had in reality two religions, the speculative and the idolatrous and mythical. The separation between the two tended to intensify their several peculiarities, as well as to degrade the popular faith-a difficulty which was only partially met by the incarnation ideas which emerge in the great Epics. Even Buddhism, which presents a personal object of affection and imitation to the worshipper, is condemned by its one-sidedness. If in Confucianism we have a religious positivism which will not look at the Divine, in Buddhism we have an agnosticism which cannot find it. It is a religion of despair; it cannot become the spring of human effort, promote civilisation, or contribute to social progress. The sacred books which have sprung up on soil like this, reflecting the peculiarities of their origin, must be held as falling short of the required conditions on which alone they could supersede all others. Zoroastrianism as a religion may be said to be already dead, modern Parsism being a compa atively uninfluential modification of it. The Zend-Avesta is of interest, as we have seen, for the noble elements contained in it, and

for the traces of its thought which are to be found in the teachings of other faiths; but even in the portions which have come down to us, it shows itself, like the literature of Brahmanism, a mixture of diverse views and standpoints. Its mainly liturgical character, and the view presented in it of the supreme Deity, so far as a dualistic system can be said to have a supreme Deity, prevented it from spreading much beyond the region of its origin. The Mohammedan Koran is equally unfitted to become the book of a universal religion. Like Confucianism, though in a different way, Islam is a foe to progress. Its ideas are bald and poor; it grew too fast; its doctrines and forms were stereotyped at the very outset of its career, and do not admit of change. Its morality is that of the stage at which men emerge from idolatry its doctrine is after all no more than negative. Allah is but a negation of other gods. ... He does not enter into humanity, and therefore he cannot render to humanity the highest services.'

...

bridge Companion to the B., distinguishes the sacred books of Westcott, in an interesting article contributed to the Cam the pre-Christian ethnic religions from the OT Scriptures under three heads. 1. They are unhistorical. In no case is the revelation or authoritative rule given in them represented as embodied and wrought out step by step in the life of a people. The doctrine is announced and explained, and fenced in by comment and ritual; but it finds no prophets who unfold and apply the divine words to the varying circumstances of national growth, which at once fix their application and illuminate their meaning. 2. They are retrogressive. The oldest portions of the several collections of the Chinese, Indian, and Persian Scriptures are confessedly the noblest in thought and aspiration; and, secondly, ritual in each case has finally overpowered the strivings after a personal and spiritual fellowship with God.' 3. They are partial. In their most complete form they may be said to be a Psalter completed by a law of ritual.' 'On the other hand, the B. contains every element which the representatives of different races have found to be the vehicle of religicus teaching, and every element in its fullest and most fruitful form." If these features, we may add, are conspicuous on a com. parison with the OT, the argument is strengthened when the NT is brought into view. There the highest reaches of doctrine and devotion are embedded in history; there the culmination of all the divine progress is attained; there in amplest measure are to be found the sources of man's purest and highest life. And the B. thus completed suggests a point of distinction which perhaps does not belong to the OT alone. The ethnic Scriptures are essentially national, or at least racial; they are bound by limits of place and time, the natural products of the circum stances in which they arose; the B. may be admirably adapted to the needs of place and time, it alone appeals to man as man, and most marvellously combines a truly historical character with an adaptability to be the religious guide and instructor of mankind. It has proved its power to travel and to speak to the hearts of men of varying countries and climes.

The

i. Revelation.-A usual feature of the sacred books we have been considering is the claim made by them, or on behalf of them, that they are vehicles of a divine Revelation. The Chinese alone do not claim that their books are inspired, though they regard them with a reverence as deep as anything connected with their religion calls forth. three parts of the Veda, as we have seen, are distinguished as S'ruti, 'revelation,' from the Smriti, or tradition.' The Vedic hymns themselves were held to possess supernatural powers, and were raised to the rank of a divinity. The Avesta had been, according to the Persians, communicated to Zarathustra (Zoroaster) by Ahura, the good god, himself. The Koran, according to the Mohammedans, is an earthly copy of a heavenly original, which the angel of revelation made known to the prophet during his ecstasies; it was the subject of one of their greatest controversies whether the Koran as it stands, down to the very word and letter, was not uncreated and eternal, and free therefore from every possible imperfection. The motive of such conceptions lies upon the surface. If, on the one hand, it is man's way of expressing his boundless reverence for that which is ancient or of proved value, it is, on the other hand, due to the desire of feeling himself on solid ground in regard to the highest and most mysterious concerns of life, those

is necessary to salvation. 3. Perspicuitas. The B. is self-explanatory. Passages may be more or less obscure, but these must be explained by means of the simpler and clearer declarations. Rightly used, it requires no other interpreter. 4. Efficacia. The B. is a means of grace, having the power of converting the sinful and consoling the sad. The secondary attributes are necessitas, integritas et perennitas, puritas et sinceritas fontium, authentica dignitas. These indicate generally that a revelation must be written, and that, in all respects, the B., as we have it, is the B. as it was intended to be.

It is unnecessary to pursue further the history of the idea of inspiration as applied to the B. Enough has been said to show the position which it held, and how it was liable to be modified according to the circumstances in which the Church of successive ages found itself placed. Before touching, however, upon the position accorded to the B. at the present day, attention must be directed for a moment to the relation in which the question of canonicity stands to that of inspiration, since these together have determined the manner in

which the B. has been received in the Christian Church. The formation of a Canon at all implies that authority is attributed to the writings included in it. The history of the Canon has shown us that it was formed gradually, as the result of local usage, which fixed and extended itself, and not as the outcome of criticism or even formal determination on the part of the whole Church or its more important divisions. By the end of the 4th cent., as we have seen, the B. stood practically as we have it now. Yet its limits were not settled in such a way that the Reformers of the 16th cent. felt themselves precluded from rediscussing them. Their tendency was, in the first instance, to examine this and other accepted usages of the Church in the light of historical inquiry. But the opportunities and the material for a competent historical investigation were wanting. The questions at issue were largely decided upon the basis of feeling, either individual or general. The exigencies of controversy necessitated a rapid arrival at a decision which should be practical and readily intelligible. While, therefore, it was not upon the authority of the Church, but through an intuitive perception supposed to reside in the believing Christian, that the contents of the B. were received, the B. thus acknowledged was nevertheless the same B. as that of the 4th cent. And this once determined, the doctrine of Inspiration was frequently employed to lift it out of the region of historical criticism, and to make its limits and contents a matter of dogmatic definition. Thus we have the rather remarkable result that inspiration in the sense of a supernatural guarantee for their truth and authority is claimed for a series of writings, while no claim is, or can be, made for a supernatural determination of the precise writings which are to be included in the series. If the latter question is still open to historical criticism, and must be determined, as every book on Biblical Introduction proves to us anew, on grounds of historical investigation, it is impossible for a dogmatic definition of inspiration to be applied in more than a general way to such a series of books; and in that case the question, what inspiration is, and what So are its limits or degrees, is again opened up. long as inspiration cannot be claimed for the process by which canonicity is determined, canonicity cannot be held to fix the bounds of inspiration. It is true that, as Westcott remarks (Bible in the Church, pp. 293, 294), the usage which fixed the Canon is only another name for a divine instinct, a providential inspiration, a function of the Christian body'; that history teaches by the plainest

examples that no one part of the B. could be set aside without great and permanent injury to the Church which refused a portion of the apostolic heritage. We are now in a position to estimate what would have been lost if the Epistle to the Hebrews or the Epistle of St. James or the Apocalypse had been excluded from the Canon. And, on the other hand, we can measure the evils which flow equally from canonising the Apocrypha of the OT, and denying to them all ecclesiastical

use.'

In more recent times, and at the present day, cases may be pointed out of almost all the varieties of view on the subject which our brief historical sketch brought to light. Some carry inspiration to the extreme of literalism, some appear to deny it in any sense in which it is not applicable to poetry and other forms of art. Unreserved condemnation should not be poured upon either of these extremes. The first is held not only by the unthinking multitude,-'the indolence of human nature,' Mr. Gladstone remarks (Butler, iii. p. 17), would be greatly flattered by a scheme such as that of the verbal inspiration of Holy Scripture,'but by thoughtful men who have seen in it the logical conclusion of their religious theories; the second, not only by those who are indifferent to re ligion, but by fine spirits who have not seen the possibility or perhaps the need of anything further. The large majority of inquirers, however, recog. nise frankly the true inspiration of the B., and also that the determination of its nature, degrees, and limits must be the result of an induction from all the available facts.

On the one hand, full weight must be given to that remarkable testimony of history which Westcott, in the passage quoted above, signalises. But a still more remarkable phenomenon of the same kind is apparent in the pages of the B. itself. From one point of view, nothing can be more unsystematic and fragmentary than its contents. It is full of contrasts and surface-discrepancies. It is made up of extracts from the lives of individuals and the experiences of a people. All forms of literature are represented in it (see The Literary Study of the Bible, by R. G. Moulton). It presents no systematised theology or ethics. Yet a closer observation reveals the unity underlying all this variety. A progress is discernible from the first page to the last. Revelation corresponds to revelation, like the outcropping of the same rock-stratum in different places. One thought, one plan, is seen to pervade the whole, and to make the B., if the product of many minds, the outcome of one Spirit,-not a 'library' only, as has been said, but a 'book.' Again, in so far as the B. is admitted to be inspired, its testimony to itself, the testimony of part to part, cannot be ignored. This is an argument which may easily be pushed too far and made to prove too much; its application in any absolute way would require, for example, the question of canonicity to be already settled. But the great argument for the real inspiration of the B. in a special sense is that it commends itself to the minds of those who devoutly receive it,what the Reformers designated the testimonium Spiritus Sancti. The relation of this to other evidences for the unique authority of Scripture is expressed by the Westminster Confession (ch. i. 5) thus: We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the Church to an high and reverend esteem of the Holy Scripture, and the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole (which is to give all glory to God), the full discovery it makes of the only way of man's salvation, the many other incompar able excellences, and the entire perfection thereof

·