NOTE ", p. 347.

In studying the conception of sin distinctive of the Psalter we naturally turn first of all to the technical words for sin. In Ps. xxxii. 1, 2, for instance, we have three such words, p, p, jy, the first of which describes sin as a breaking loose, the second as a missing of the right aim, and the third as perversion or distortion. It will be seen that all these terms (cf. 77, p. 466) imply the idea of law; but what sort of law is meant, depends upon the stage of religious development reached by the writer who uses the terms. The rule from which, according to the original usage, the sinner deviated, was mainly the unwritten one of divinely sanctioned custom (see Gen. xx. 9, xxxiv. 7, with Dillmann's notes). The gradual growth of written collections of laws, and finally the promulgation first of Deuteronomy and subsequently of the priestly code as the basis. of the national life, profoundly modified the conception of sin. The transition is visible in Jeremiah (comp. Jeremiah, his Life and Times, p. 39); it is already past in the time of the psalmists. To them a word like nisp suggested, not a mere national even though consecrated custom, but the 'delicate outline' of that virtue which is required by an 'exceeding broad' commandment (Ps. cxix. 96), the manifoldness of whose precepts sharpened the moral perceptions.

Had the psalmists what may be called a definite theory of sin? The reader of these Lectures will not easily believe that they had. They had indeed made various moral observations, but they had no complete theory to account for them. Sometimes they take the gloomiest possible view both of Israel and of the world (see Pss. xii., xiv.), in which, as in Sodom, it would almost appear that there were not ten righteous men ; sometimes Israel at least is acquitted of any serious transgression (see e.g. Ps. xliv.). But the general tone of the circles in which the psalmists moved is that of watchfulness (see e.g. Pss. xxxiv. 14, xxxix. 2, cxli. 3). There is even in the pious the possibility that doubting thoughts may arise which may even lead to open apostasy (see Ps. lxxiii. 2). These must be striven against, best of all in the sanctuary (ib. v. 17). Weak as human nature is, it is not impossible to reject evil and choose good (cf. Ps. lxxxi. 9-11, 14 with Deut. xxx. 15-20), at least as long as Jehovah's tōrāh (the precepts enshrined in the Scriptures) is within the heart, moulding the character, and giving the man moral insight and an impulse towards goodness (cf. Pss. xix. 12, xl. 9, li. 8, 14, Deut. vi. 6, Jer. xxxi. 33). But no watchfulness can prevent those sins of infirmity, which in many cases no human eye can discern, and which are therefore called 'errors (=lapses) and 'secret things' (see p. 354). Even these Jehovah in

,

His severity may sometimes punish; earnestly therefore does the Church supplicate Him, in the name of His goodness, not to take notice of them by a judicial sentence (Ps. xix. 13). One who is formed of dust cannot always maintain the highest standard (Ps. ciii. 10, 14), especially in the passionate season of youth (cf. Ps. xxv. 7), or when placed, as Israel has so often been, by divine appointment, in difficult circumstances (Ps. li. 6; cf. Isa. lxiii. 17). The origin of sin, equally with that of death, the psalmists leave unexplained; neither Ps. li. 7 nor Ps. xc. 8 refers to human nature in general. And now, what are the peculiar merits of the psalmists' treatment of sin, as compared with that of the Vedic and Gâthic hymnwriters? First they lay much less stress than the former (see Rig Veda, vii. 86, 3) on the excuses of sin. They do not even once refer to Satan or to 'the Satan,' and only once do we find such a plea as that in Ps. li. 6. In general the post-Exile writers love to magnify human responsibility, nor is this denied by the agonized writer of Ps. li. Another point in which the psalmists' treatment of sin differs widely from that of the Vedic poets is that they do not put the non-offering of libations on a level with moral offences.

Christian students must not however underrate the morality of Vedic religion. In other sections it may be ritualistic, but with Varuna it goes down into the depths of the conscience, and realizes the idea of holiness' (Barth, Religions of India, p. 17). And still more respect is due to Mazdeism. The priestly writers of the Avesta have not indeed completely disengaged the idea of moral from that of ceremonial purity. But we remember on the one hand the ceremonialism of Leviticus and on the other passages in the Gâthâs which are in perfect accord with Pss. xv. and xxiv. Ahura Mazda is the God of purity and truth; how then can it be correct to say that Mazdeism only knows physical defilement? No psalmist can detest evil more than Zarathustra and his successors, and the threefold division of sins into those of thought, word, and deed in Ps. xvii. 3-5 is thoroughly Zarathustrian (see e.g. Vendidâd viii. 100). For essays on the Vedic and on the Babylonian conceptions of sin respectively, see M. Holzman in Steinthal's Zeitschrift, 1884, Heft 1; G. Evans, Christian Reformer, 1887, pp. 122-128.

NOTE, p. 348.

It is disputable whether in Isa. xxx. 20 is singular or plural. At any rate, since the tōrāh of priests and prophets comes from Jehovah, He might justly be called 'Teacher' (strictly, 'director'). Teaching' is indeed ascribed to Jehovah in Isa. ii. 3 (Mic. iv. 2), xxviii. 26. Cf. p. 352, note o.

NOTE, p. 348.

Comp. also the Jerus. Targ. on Gen. i. 1, 'By wisdom the Lord created,' where 'wisdom' means the Tōrāh or Law, which was in the period of this Targum considered one of the seven antemundane things. Precisely so the Zoroastrian Dîn or Daêna, the impersonation of the Zoroastrian Law, is said to have come from the heavenly dwelling, and to be created by Mazda (see the Din-Yast, Oxford Z. A. ii. 264-269). But there is no historical connexion between the beliefs. They are natural inferences of the idealistic philosophy which lies at the root of the ancient Oriental religions.

NOTE, p. 349.

That other books besides the Law and the Prophets (e.g. especially Job) early acquired the position of religious classics, could be easily shown.

NOTE ,P. 350.

Much has been said (see e.g. Siegfried, Theol. Literaturzeitung, Oct. 5, 1889; W. R. Smith, The Religion of the Semites, p. 418) of the reactionary character of the Jewish ceremonial system. If there be a danger that the reformed churches may fall back into a system in which rites have an inherent value, it is not amiss to speak severely of Ezra's work. But from a historical point of view, it appears to me that a milder judgment upon Jewish ceremonialism is called for. Could the principles of Jeremiah and the Second Isaiah have been carried out? Was it not all-important to organize the restored people on a strongly religious basis? and how could Ezra, under his circumstances, have acted otherwise than he did, building upon the sacerdotal traditions with which as a priest he was familiar? Happily he was not the only educator granted by Providence to his people. If Ezra was a sōfer of the Law (see Ezra vii. 11 Sept.), other men were equally devoted soferim of the writings of Jeremiah. And even the Law, side by side with its traditional survivals,' contains passages enough which are full of inspiring and inspired moral earnestness. In short, Jewish legalism was not without a truly spiritual and even an evangelical element. The misfortune was that after Christianity in one way, as Buddhism in another, had taken up what M. Réville, in his Prolegomena of the History of Religions, calls the 'principle of redemption,' a fatal logical necessity drove Judaism to identify itself more and more with a strict and unspiritual legalism. Jewish readers will understand, however, that I am not so blind as to assert that this identification has ever been complete. Cf. my article on 'The Jews and the Gospel,' Expositor, 1885 (1), pp. 401-418.

LECTURE VIII.

God hath spoken once, twice have I heard this; that power belongeth unto God. Also unto thee, O Lord, belongeth mercy [American revision, lovingkindness]; for thou renderest to every man according to his work.--Ps. lxii. 12, 13 (R. V.).

LECTURE VIII.

PART I.-But if the Law is Jehovah's best gift to Israel, how is it that the ritual system is so seldom referred to by the psalmists? Two explanations can be given, one partial, the other more complete; (1) the framers of the Psalter took thought for the needs of distant brethren, and (2) the phrase 'the Law' meant more to the later Church than it seems to have done to Ezra.-The growth of schools or sects, a consequence of accepting a Law' of such varied contents. The two extremes, represented by the promoters and editors of the priestly legislation (cf. Ps. li. 20, 21) and by Isa. xliii. 23, lxvi. 3, Pss. xl. 2-12, l., li. 3-19; the middle school by Pss. i. and cxix., and by the Books of Joel and Jonah, but scarcely by Prov. i.-ix. (pre-Exilic), nor by Ps. xix. 8-15 (too legalistic in spirit). We might, however, perhaps include the Hallelujah psalms in the third group. Was, then, the great idea of spiritual sacrifices the monopoly of a single school? No; but some Churchmen welcomed it more heartily than others. They found a Bible within the Bible, from which the spiritual meaning of sacrifice dawned upon them. Not to ritual sacrifices but to the self-oblation of Jehovah's Servant do they (like 2 Isaiah) ascribe the full regeneration of Israel. Thus they anticipate Christian truth (Heb. x. 1-10). Reply to objections.-How is it, then, that the benefits derived by Israel at large from Jehovah's Servant (the phrase is explained elsewhere) are not more clearly referred to by the psalmists? Perhaps they were afraid of too much efficacy being ascribed to the merits of the righteous. The Servant might indeed prepare the way for Israel's return to its God. But obedience was still the only acceptable sacrifice. -But how could turning from evil ways make up for past sins? An important question, for even those who were symbolized by the 'Servant of Jehovah' were sadly imperfect. Of this the psalmists are for the most part well aware. A keen self-distrust has come upon the Church-nation. It is felt that obedience can in the first instance only take the form of repentance. Application of Ps. li. 13, 17, 19. Explanation of the professions of innocence in Ps. xliv. 18, 19, &c.—And what is it that makes repentance possible? The thought of the divine lovingkindness. Explanation of khésed. It is the characteristic attribute of the two parties to a covenant, such as that which bound each Israelite to his people, and the people of Israel to its God. Jehovah's khésed is the one safeguard of erring Israel. Distinction between 'lovingkindness' and 'mercy,' between historic faith and devotional philosophy. -But will the lovingkindness of the divine Shepherd never attain its end? Must Israel perpetually alternate between sinning and repenting, suffering oppression, and receiving deliverance? No; the Judgment Day is coming. But we cannot frame a consistent picture either of the judgment or of the succeeding age. On this as on other subjects, a study of the Psalter reveals somewhat different schools of thought. Manifold contrasts (of which specimens are given) and underlying unity. The psalmists, like the prophets, suppose the Day of Jehovah to be nearer than it really is. Occupation of the waiting Church.