not to admire the indomitable energy which CALVIN displayed in proceeding with his task, and in meeting the remonstrances of those who would have withdrawn him from it, with the heroic exclamation, "Would you that the Lord, when He comes, should find me idle!" A Work written at such a time, and in such a spirit, might justly claim exemption from criticism; but it has no need of indulgence, and can well afford to be judged by its own intrinsic merits. Viewed merely as an intellectual effort, it displays all the excellencies which characterize the other Commentaries of its distinguished Author: viewed in a higher and better light, it is his dying bequest to the Church-a solemn ratification of the whole System of Doctrine which he had so long, so earnestly, and so successfully promulgated. As an appropriate conclusion both to the present Volume and the others which have preceded it, a valuable Tract, first published in this country in 1845, has been appended. It contains a Preface by the Rev. WILLIAM PRINGLE, its original editor, an Essay from the German of Professor THOLUCK, and a series of Extracts from Writers often differing widely from each other, but all concurring in a united testimony to the greatness of CALVIN'S talents, or the excellence of his character. In the present reprint, the chief change consists in the insertion of Additional Testimonies. The list of CALVIN'S Writings, which completes the present Volume, is in accordance with that furnished by his greatest Biographer, HENRI of Berlin, and will enable the reader to comprehend at a single glance the amazing extent of his literary labours. December 30, 1854. H. B.. CALVIN'S ARGUMENT OF THE BOOK OF JOSHUA. As to the AUTHOR of this Book, it is better to suspend our judgment than to make random assertions. Those who think that it was JOSHUA, because his name stands on the title page, rest on weak and insufficient grounds. The name of SAMUEL is inscribed on a part of the Sacred History containing a narrative of events which happened after his death; and there cannot be a doubt that the book which immediately follows the present is called JUDGES, not because it was written by them, but because it recounts their exploits. JOSHUA died before the taking of Hebron and Debir, and yet an account of it is given in the 15th chapter of the present Book. The probability is, that a summary of events was framed by the high priest ELEAZAR, and furnished the materials out of which the Book of JOSHUA was composed. It was a proper part of the high priest's duty not only to give oral instruction to the people of his own time, but to furnish posterity with a record of the goodness of God in preserving the Church, and thus provide for the advancement of true religion. And before the Levites became degenerate, their order included a class of scribes or notaries who embodied in a perpetual register everything in the history of the Church which was worthy of being recorded. Let us not hesitate, therefore, to pass over a matter which we are B unable to determine, or the knowledge of which is not very necessary, while we are in no doubt as to the essential point -that the doctrine herein contained was dictated by the Holy Spirit for our use, and confers benefits of no ordinary kind on those who attentively peruse it.' Although the people had already gained signal victories, and become the occupants of a commodious and tolerably fertile tract of country, the Divine promise as to the land of Canaan still remained suspended. Nay, the leading article in the Covenant was unaccomplished, as if God, after cooping up his people in a corner, had left his work in a shapeless This practical conclusion, which is indeed the only one of real importance, is founded partly on the general consent of the Church, evinced by the place which the Book of Joshua has always held in the Sacred Canon, and partly on the strong sanction given to it by the direct or indirect references and quotations of the other inspired writers both of the Old and the New Testament, e.g., 1 Kings xvi. 34; Psalms xliv.; lxviii. 12-14; lxxviii. 54, 55; cxiv. 4, 5; Hab. iii. 11; Acts vii. 45; Heb. iv. 8; xi. 30, 31; xiii. 5; and James ii. 25. The authorship, however, is so uncertain, that there is scarcely a writer of eminence from the period of the history itself down to the time of Ezra, for whom the honour has not been claimed. Among others may be mentioned Phinehas, Samuel, and Isaiah. The obvious inference is, that the question of authorship is one of those destined only to be agitated but never satisfactorily determined. The opinion above stated by Calvin is perhaps as plausible as any other, though he scarcely appreciates the claims which may be urged in favour of Joshua himself. It is, of course, impossible to attribute to him either the narrative of his own death, or the references to one or two events which happened subsequent to it. Such anachronisms, if they may be so called, only prove what has never been denied, that some insertions or interpolations have been made in the original work. But as the account of the death of Moses in the last book of the Pentateuch is not allowed to cast any doubt on the claim of Moses to have been the true author, it is not easy to see why similar insertions should be supposed to have any stronger effect in regard to the claim of Joshua. In addition to the evidence furnished by those passages in which the writer speaks as an eye-witness, and an actor in the events recorded, those who attribute the Book to Joshua find a strong argument in the position which Joshua occupied. He was not only the divinely appointed successor, but the ardent admirer and diligent imitator of Moses. Is it reasonable to suppose, that while imitating him in the general principles of his government, he forgot to imitate him in the use of his pen, or that he was not as careful as Moses had been to draw up a written narrative of the wonderful events which the Lord performed by his hand? The important fact that Joshua did write is distinctly stated in chapter xxiv. 26; and though the writing there referred to seems to have been confined to the narrative of a special event, analogy goes far to justify the inference, that what he did on this occasion was in accordance with his usual practice, and that the record which we now possess of his eventful life, is, in substance at least, the production of his pen.-Ed. |