In regard to the dates of the prophetical books of the Old Testament, the differences between the mass of Biblical scholars and the rationalistic critics are not so serious as to demand especial attention, except as to the last twenty-seven chapters of Isaiah, and the Books of Jonah and Daniel. By these critics these chapters of [11] Isaiah, and a few of the earlier chapters, are assigned to the period of the Babylonian captivity, and said to have been written by an unknown prophet far superior in style and in genius to Isaiah. After his death his writings were attached to those of Isaiah, because, when the prophetic books were collected in their present form, his name had been lost (Driver's Introduction, 231).

      JONAH.--Of this book Driver says: "A date in the fifth century B. C. will probably not be far wide of the truth" (301). This is about three centuries after the date assigned in the Scriptures to the career of Jonah, who is said to have lived in the reign of Jeroboam II.

      DANIEL.--Of this book the same writer says: "Internal evidence shows, with a cogency that can not be resisted, that it must have been written not earlier than about 300 B. C., and in Palestine; and it is at least probable that it was composed under the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes, B. C. 168 or 167." This puts the date from three hundred to four hundred years after the time of Daniel, and after the occurrence of the events of which the earlier chapters claim to be predictions. It robs this part of the book of all prophetical character.

      JOB.--Driver does not credit this book as containing "literal history." This inappropriate use of the term literal, we take to be a mild form of declaring that it contains no history at all. He admits "the antique, patriarchal coloring" of the first two chapters and the last, but he ascribes this to "the skill of the author." Of its date he says: "It is impossible to fix the date of the book precisely; but it will scarcely be earlier than the age of Jeremiah, and belongs most probably to the period of the Babylonian captivity" (405).

      THE PSALMS.--Our author asserts that a majority [12] of the seventy-three Psalms ascribed to David by the inscriptions above them, can not be his (352); he quotes Ewald's opinion that thirteen of them, and a few scraps of others, are David's (357); and he finally decides thus: "It is possible that Ewald's list of Davidic Psalms is too large, but it is not clear that none of the Psalms contained in it are of David's composition" (358). All the other Psalms are of course from the pens of writers later than those to whom they are ascribed in the inscriptions.

      PROVERBS.--The contents of this book came from the pens of many different authors, and the many different compilations of which it is made up bear date from the eighth century B. C. down to the period after the exile. The earliest part was compiled, in other words, about two centuries after the death of Solomon, and whether he wrote any of the proverbs which the book contains is left in doubt (381-83).

      SOLOMON'S SONG.--It is "out of the question," says our author, to think of Solomon as the author of this composition. It was written either after the exile, about five hundred years after the time of Solomon, or just before the exile; and if at the latter date, its author lived in the northern kingdom, not even in the kingdom over which Solomon's successors reigned.

      ECCLESIASTES.--Our author speaks hesitatingly about the date of this book. He quotes Ewald as assigning it to the later years of the Persian rule, which ended B. C. 332, and closes his discussion on it with the remark that a date somewhat later than Ewald's appears to be more probable" (446, 447).

      This brings our statements of the dates of the Old Testament books, according to the "conservative critics," to a close. We have made it brief, and have left out [13] collateral matter, in order that it may serve as a kind of reference table for those readers who have not taken the pains to go through the subject for themselves, or whose memory needs occasional refreshing on the subject. The effect which the acceptance of these dates must have on our faith in the credibility of most of these books, and in the honesty of their writers or compilers, must be apparent in its main features, and it will appear in a more glaring light as we enter into details, which we hope to do at least in part as we proceed with the work of this department.

[SEBC 11-14]