THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
events, it is quite evident from the prophetic parallels that the prophets were acquainted with one another's writings. The loss of so b. The Hist- much sacred literature in the destrucorico-pro- tion of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans phetic and made the collection of the remaining Distinct- historic as well as prophetic books ively Pro- the more imperative. The success of phetic a collection of historical books was Books — the furthered by the fact that Joshua " Second continued the narrative of the Pen- Canon." tateuch. Since Kings continues the history in I and II Sam., and may be plaCed in the latter half of the exilic period, the close connection with the earlier prophets gave the name to them of " the Former Prophets " and secured a high estimate for them on the return from Babylon.
David and Solomon began the arrangement of the temple praise-service and a collection of Psalms, and later collections and individual c. The Ha- Psalms were "added. The time of giographa Nehemiah was very productive. The - — the " Third division into five books is older than Canon." the Chronicler. The first collection of the Proverbs of Solomon (cf. Prov. x. 1-xxii. 16) was so highly valued that Hezekiah ordered a second to be prepared (Prov. xxv. 1). The name of the wise man sufficed to recommend Canticles; its age and contents, the Book of Job. Lamentations appealed directly to every patriotic Jew during the exile, and was accepted as sacred, although Jeremiah was not its author. Ruth, by age, and especially by its genealogy of David, was put in the third canon, and formed an introduction to the Psalter. These early writings were followed gradually by the others, Ezra-Neh., I and II Chron., Eccles., Esther (an explanation of Purim, the festival the Persian Jews brought back with them), and finally Daniel, in the time of the Maccabees. After this time, and down to the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, 70 a.d., the nation was so .affected by Greek customs, and divided by the .growing rival parties, the Pharisees and Sadducees. that its religious development was too much hindered for any work to receive universal recognition, and hence canonicity. The reception of Dan. into tHe canon appears explicable under the circumstances only if a Daniel narrative, the basis of Dan. ii.-vi., already existed (cf. Ezek. xiv. 14, 20; xxviii. 3). Xot long after the Maccabees, the second coflection or caT^ received its name, the Prophets, d^riptive not only of a portion of its contents, but of their authorship; and thus the three divisions of the Old Testament canon — the Law, Prophets, and Hagiographa — dated from the second century B.C. (cf. the Prologue to Ecclesiasticus). Valentin Loescher (De causis lingua- Hebnvir, p. 71, Leipsic, 1706) said rightly: " The canon came not, as they say, by one act of man, but gradually from God."
2. Witnesses for the Second and Third Parts of the Canon: Jesus Sirach (Ecclus. xlvi.-xlix., especially xlix. 10) shows acquaintance only with the Prophets in the wider sense, the "second canon." His grandson testifies to the third divi-
sion also. The Second Book of Maccabees, dated by Niese (Kritik der bciden Makkabtierbiicher, Berlin, 1900) 125-124 B.C., in the section i. 10— ii. 18 contains an account of the recovery of the sacred fire, a quotation from the " records " of Jeremiah (a lost apocryphal writing); and then follows ii. 13: " And the same things also were reported in the records, namely, the memoirs of Nehemiah [another apocryphal writing], and how he, founding a library, gathered together the books concerning the kings and prophets, and those of David, and epistles of kings concerning holy gifts." This reference to the " epistles of kings concerning holy gifts " can not denote the Book of Ezra, but only a collection of documents regarding international matters, such as would be of value to a statesman like Nehemiah, and which had connection with the temple and its offerings. It, therefore, bears witness to Nehemiah's collection of the second canon substantially as we have it to-day, in addition to the Psalms and the documents so weighty for the rebuilt city. The next verse, " And in like manner also Judas gathered together all those books that had been scattered by reason of the war we had, and they are with us," applies only to the third canon. Therefore, the last enlargement of the Hebrew canon took place under Judas Maccabseus; although probably most of the books of the third canon had previously been preserved in the temple archives.
Philo had the same canon as ours (cf. C. Siegfried, Philo, p. 161, Jena, 1875), and quotes from almost all the books; while from the Apocrypha he makes no excerpts or citation, not giving it the honor he accords to Plato, Hippocrates, and several other Greek writers.* The New Testament contains quotations principally from the Pentateuch, Prophets, and Psalms, as might be conjectured from its scope, but recognizes the threefold division of the canon (Luke xxiv. 44). In this verse " The Psalms " does not stand for the entire Hagiographa; for our Lord meant to emphasize the fact that the Psalms spoke of him. The use of the phrase "the Law and the Prophets" (Matt. v. 17; Acts xxviii. 23) does not imply a division into two parts. The Syrians used the same expression for the whole Old Testament. The absence of quotation in the New Testament of any Old Testament book argues nothing against its canonicity. The use by the New Testament of Apocrypha or Pseudepigrapha has no bearing on the canonical status of the books used or cited. Josephus (Apion, i. 8)
* P. C. Lucius, Die Therapeuten und ihre Stellung in der Askese, Ktrasburg, 1880, has proved that the De vita contemplatira was not written by Philo, and consequently the classic passage — " In every house there is a sacred shrine, which is called the holy place, and the monastery in which 1 1 icy [the Therapeutics] retire by themselves, and perform all the mysteries of a holy life . studying in that place the laws and the inspired words through the prophets and hymns and the other [writings], by which knowledge and piety are increased and perfected '' (De vita contempt., iii.\ which is the only direct reference to the threefold division of the canon found in Philo's works (genuine and pretended) —must be given up. [The passage is translated by C. D. Yonge, Philo, in Bonn's Library, iv. 6. F. C. Conybeare, in his edition of Philo About the Contemplative Life (Oxford, 1N95) defends the Philonian authorship.]