JOURNAL

OF

BIBLICAL    LITERATURE

Volume  XXIV                     Part I                                1905

Torah:   .A Word-study in the Old Testament 1

WILLIS J. BEECHER

AUBURN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

HEN a person gets far enough along to understand that the word torah, law, is sometimes used to desig

nate the  Pentateuch  as  distinguished  from  those  parts  of the Old  Testament  that are commonly called  the  Prophets and the Hagiographa, he is in danger of assuming that Pentateuch  and  torah  are  convertible  terms.  As  a  matter of fact this assumption is very common, and leads to many blunders. A study of the usage of the word torah is not superfluous.

In five places in the New Testament, including nearly a

dozen instances in all, non-pentateuchal passages are cited as written in the law (John 1034 1526 1234 Rom. 310-191 Cor. 1421).

Proverbs, Isaiah in two places, and several psalms are thus cited.    In  these citations  the  term  "law"  is  clearly used to denote a wider body of literature than the Pentateuch, evidently  the  Old  Testament.    Inasmuch as whatever  is in the Pentateuch is also in the Old Testament, it is impos sible to tell, in many instances, which conception of the law the New Testament writer had in mind. It is therefore impossible to tell which is the prevailing usage in the New Testament.  A similar double use of the word appears in

1 President's Address at the Annual Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis, December 27, 1904.

1

2                JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE

other literature from the time of the New Testament to the present day.  The  current  explanation  0£  these  phenomena is that  the  term  torah  originally  denoted  the  Pentateuch, and came to be applied to other writings by a process of extension.  A good many important positions held by schol ars 0£ different schools depend on this assumption. Whether the assumption will stand, is a question of some importance, and one which can be settled only by a study of the term as used in the Old Testament.

We need not delay over the derivation of  the  word. It comes from yarah, which denotes the  act of  shooting arrows or hurling a  javelin. All  that  we  need  attend  to  at  this point is  that  torah  is from  the  hiphil of  the  stem, and that the verb in the hiphil is strictly cognate  in  use  to  the  noun, so that the two ought  to be studied  together.    In  this paper we will study them together. Ordinarily we will transfer the noun into English, instead of translating it, and will translate the verb by the corresponding phrase " to give torah."

The  usage  is  abundant  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining the meaning, the noun occurring more  than  two  hundred times  and  the  verb  in  the  hiphil  more  than sixty times in the different parts  of  the Old  Testament. This  paper  is based on the study of all the instances, though  its  limits restrict it to comparatively few actual citations.

1. In studying the usage, note first that the law or the teaching denoted by torah or horah is divine law or teaching. To  this there  are only  a  very  few  exceptions  in  the  case 0£ the verb, and probably none in the case of the noun.

In  a few instances  the  hiphil  horah  retains  the  meaning 'to   shoot.'    Once it  is  used  0£  Judah going in advance of his father to Goshen "to give torah," that is, to give orders (Gen.  4628).       In  Prov.  613   it  is  said  concerning  the  "man of iniquity " :

" He winketh with his eyes, he talketh with his feet, He giveth torah with his :fingers."

But in most of the instances where the verb is used, the directions or teachings in question are either given directly

BEECHER :   TOR.AH:  A WORD-STUDY                      3

by Deity, or are given by one who speaks in the name of Deity.

A few times the subject of the verb is a false Deity, or simply some Deity or other. In Habakkuk the men  are scored who appeal to a molten image to give, lying torah, or who look to a dumb stone to give torah (218•19). In Isa. 2826 the husbandman's Deity is said to give him torah. But commonly the subject of the verb is either the one true God or some representative of the true God.

In perhaps one third of the instances the subject is directly either Elohim or Yahaweh. Yahaweh gives Moses and Aaron torah as to what  they should say and do before  Pharaoh (Ex. 412•15). He gave Moses torah concerning a tree for healing  the bitter fountain  (Ex. 15?.5),   At  the dedication of  the temple he is asked to give Israel torah concerning "the good way" (1 Ki. 8811).     He gives various persons torah "in  the way," "in   that way thou shalt  go," "in  a way that he shall choose" (Ps. 258• 12 328). He gives the nations torah "out of  his ways" (Mic. 42 Isa. 23).     The name Elo him is less used in this way, but the verb appears twice in Job with Elohim for subject (3432 3622).

The most prominent use is that in which a prophet or priest gives torah  as the  representative of  God. Instances of this are needless, though many are given in the course of this paper. In other instances the subject of the verb is indefinite, or is some person or object, but the teaching given is of the nature of revelation from God. Bezalel is to give torah concerning  the tabernacle  work (Ex. 3534).     One of the toroth in Leviticus (1457) is for the purpose of giving torah concerning the clean and the unclean. In the forty fifth Psalm the king's right hand gives him torah in "terrible things." In various places in the Wisdom books, the fathers or the beasts  or  the earth  or"  my father" or Job's friends are said to give torah. In some of  these places it  is clear that the speaker had a divine revelation  in mind, and  in none of them is it clear that he had not.

So much for the verb. So generally does it denote re quirement or teaching that is thought of as coming from

Deity, that this is presumptively its meaning in all cases except where the context clearly shows the contrary.            And if this is true of the verb, it is more decidedly true of the noun.         There are probably no exceptions to  the  rule  that the Old Testament men  think  of  torah as coming from Deity. If there are any exceptions, they are seven or eight of the thirteen instances in which the word occurs in the book of Proverbs, and these, although the revised English version annotates them with the alternative "or, teaching," are not real exceptions.                     There is nothing to prevent the phrase "the law of thy mother" (18 620) from meaning' Yahaweh's law as taught thee by thy mother.'      Similar statements might be made concerning the phrases "my law" (31 42 72), "their law" (623, if one accepts the emendation), "a wise man's law" (1314), "a law of loving kindness" (3126).                                                 It is easy to understand these to mean simply 'thy mother's teachings,' ' my teachings,' 'the teachings of thy parents,' ' the teachings of a wise man,' ' teachings concerning loving kindness ' ; but it is just as easy to understand them to mean 'God's revealed will as made known to thee by thy mother, by me, by thy parents, by a wise man, by the " virtuous woman."'            Either we must thus interpret these phrases, fol lowing the use of the word elsewhere, or we must regard them as a group of exceptions.     Elsewhere, at least, the usage is uniform and torah is represented as of divine origin.

2. A second point follows from this, or it might be inde pendently made out by reexamining the instances: torah always denotes authoritative command or information. The idea of authority is inseparable  alike  from  the  noun  and from the verb.

In the English versions the verb is commonly translated

" teach." In the revised versions the noun is sometimes annotated with the alternative, "or, teaching." Authors frequently tell us that the noun denotes  instruction,  and they draw important inferences from  this weakened meaning of it.    This is commendable so far forth as it is an attempt to disentangle the Old Testament term from misleading asso ciations with the English word "law" or its equivalents in

other  languages; but we must  limit  the attempt carefully, or in rescuing the word from uncongenial  company  we  shall lead it into  company  that  is  less  congenial. Torah  and horah are never used of teaching or instruction merely in the sense of giving information. They always denote authori tative  teaching. With  the few  exceptions   already  noted, they denote teaching  that is regarded as divinely authorita tive. Not that they always express commands; the thing expressed by them may be information  and  not  command ; but it is information that is thought of as authoritative, and ordinarily as of divine authority.

3. A third point in the usage concerns the relation of

torah respectively to the prophets and the priests.

Since these were thought of as in a special sense the rep resentatives of Deity, we should expect that they would be particularly concerned with torah, and this expectation is met in the  record. According to the  record the  prophets are the medium through whom torah is given from Deity; the priests are the official custodians and administrators of torah; the prophets and the priests are, in their respective spheres, the interpreters of torah.

a. The prophet is the person through whom Yahaweh

reveals his torah to Israel.

There are certain general statements to this effect. In

Daniel we find the phrase :

"His toroth, which he gave before us by the hand of his servants the prophets" (910).

The record of the downfall of northern Israel says:

" .And Yahaweh testified with Israel and with Judah by the hand of every prophet of his, every seer, saying, Turn from your evil ways and keep my commandments, my statutes, according to all the torah which I commanded your fathers, and which I sent unto you by the hand of my servants the prophets" (2 Ki. 1718).

And Jeremiah uses this language :

"Thus saith Yahaweh, If ye will not hearken unto me, to walk in my torah which I have given before you, to hearken unto the words of my servants the prophets whom I send unto you" (264--a).

Such general statements are frequent and they are sup ported by particular instances in abundance. It was through Nathan the prophet that " the torah of mankind " was an nounced to David (2 Sam. 719).       Sealed written torah was given  through  Isaiah the  prophet  (816• 20).                   The various toroth of the Pentateuch are represented to have been given through Moses the man of God, the greatest of the prophets. Passages of  still  a  different  class  give  us  the  same  result by suggestion.          The confession in Nehemiah's time is that Israel has "cast thy torah behind their back, and murdered

thy prophets" (Neh. 926).    In Lamentations we read:

"Her king and her captains are among the nations ; there is no torah, also her prophets have not found vision from Yaha weh" (29).

And in Isaiah we read of

" lying sons, sons that are not willing to hear the tomh of Yahaweh; who say to the seers, Ye shall not see," etc. (309-11).

Instances like these, in which it is either expressed or implied that the prophet is the man through  whom  Deity  reveals torah, might be multiplied, but that is needless.  I  add only two or three in which the  verb  is  used,  not  the  noun. Manoah desired that the Angel, whom he supposed to be a "man of  God," might be sent again to give torah concerning the son that was to be born (Judg. 138). That is to say, he regarded the giving of torah as the function of  the  man of God.    Isaiah says that the prophet who gives false  torah  is the  tail  in  Judah  (915).    Samuel  the  prophet,  after  Israel had made a king, promised nevertheless not to cease giving them torah (1 Sam. 1228).

b. So much for the prophets.  The priests are the guar

dians of torah, but are not its revealing agents.

They are as prominently mentioned in connection with torah as are the prophets, but  their functions are different. In conjunction with the elders and with the judges or kings, they are the custodians and administrators of  the  torah. Like the prophets they are the interpreters of the torah, but they are not law-bringers like the prophets. The conception

is that certain aggregates of  torah, brought  from  Deity by men who had prophetic gifts, were placed in the hands of the priests for use.

What the priests had to do with torah in general is fairly represented  by what they had to do with the so-called  "book of the torah." The record is that this was written by the prophet Moses and put into the keeping of the priests and elders. They were to keep it safe, and once in seven years were to teach it by public readings (Deut. 319-13).   They were to have charge of the torah in the place which Yahaweh should choose, and were to administer it in cases of appeal. The king was to have a copy of the torah made from the one that was before "the Levite priests" (Deut. 178-12• 18).  We are  told that  Jehoshaphat  had  priests who went through the land on a mission of reform, carrying with them "the book of the torah of Yahaweh " (2 Chron. 179). The prophet Haggai sends men to the priests to ask questions as to a point in the ceremonial torah (211-13).

The verb horah is much used in connection with the priests. They are to teach the people, give the people torah, concern ing leprosy (Deut. 248).     That is, they are  to  make  known and enforce the law on this subject, as it  has  been  com mitted to them.    Aaron and  his sons  are  to· teach  the  sons of Israel, to give the sons of Israel  torah, all  the  statutes which God gave by Moses (Lev. 1011).  Here  their  torah  is the statutes which have already been given  through  the prophet Moses. Ezekiel says of the priests ( 442ll) :

" And they shall give torah to my people between holy and profane, And between clean and unclean they shall give knowledge to them."

We are told that the king of  Assyria  sent  the Israelite  priest to the foreign populations which he had placed in Samaria,

"that he might give them torah, the usages of the God of the land, ... how they might fear Yahaweh" (2 Ki. 1727-28).

In these and a large number of  like passages  the  relation of the   priest  to law is very explicitly defined.    He does  not, like the prophet, receive torah by direct  revelation  from Deity; but he has charge of torah which has already been

revealed, to administer and interpret it. The only sense in which he gives new torah is by interpreting the old, answer ing questions concerning it, making decisions upon it, estab lishing  precedents  and  usages from  it. In  these  ways he had, of course, a lawgiving function that was of considerable importance.

Some scholars are accustomed to speak of a priestly torah and a prophetic torah, as if the two differed in their contents. There  is  no  ground for  this.  There  may be passages  that are capable of being understood in this way, but  there  are none that  necessarily give this meaning, and none that with any strong probability  imply it.     The   representation  rather is that the prophets and the priests had a common body of torah, to which they stood in differing relations. They were both  expounders  of  the  torah, but  the  prophet was, except as already noted, the sole agent through whom torah was revealed.

4. The consideration of these three points prepares us for a fourth, the different forms which torah assumed, as indi cated by the variant uses of the word.

a. Torah was sometimes oral and sometimes written.

We need not take the trouble to prove that  the  prophets gave torah orally, or that they and the priests gave oral interpretations  and  oral  decisions  on   questions  that  arose. It is equally needless to prove the existence of written torah. But we have to note that at this point the element of time becomes more important  than it has been in the matters thus far discussed. Written  torah  began  at  an  early  date. In Isaiah we have an account of torah written and sealed (816• 20). Hosea, in a passage that has  been much discussed  (812),  says of Ephraim:

" I write for him the ten thousand, my torah,

As a stranger they are accounted."

That there was written torah from the time of Moses is the testimony of all the numerous passages that speak of Moses writing the law, or of the book of Moses, or of the   book of the law; and I suppose that even the scholars who reject

this testimony nevertheless  hold  that  the writing  of  torah was a part of the  earliest literary  writing  in  Israel,  no mat ter how many centuries after Moses they may date this.

b. Again, the noun torah is subject to the variety of uses which we should expect in the case of a term that was so fre quently employed. It is used in the singular, in the plural, collectively, abstractly; it is used  definitely or indefinitely, with a subject genitive, with an object genitive. Certain particulars in its use are significant :

First, the term torah is applied to any particular divine requirement or other message. It is thus employed indefi nitely in the singular, for example (Isa. 816):

"Bind thou up a testimony, seal a law, among my disciples."

The context shows that the torah in this case is a particular message given in writing.   The term  is also used indefinitely in the plural, for example, "They have transgressed laws" (Isa. 245). Oftener, however, this sense is expressed by the plural used definitely. In connection with the visit of Jethro, Moses is spoken of  as making the people  to  know the toroth of Deity (Ex. 1816• 20). Abraham is commended for keeping Yahaweh's toroth (Gen. 265). At the giving of the manna, Yahaweh rebukes Israel for not keeping his toroth (Ex. 1628). Later instances are abundant.   For this purpose of denoting a particular message the word is also used definitely in the singular, with the article or with  an  objective  genitive. This is especially  frequent in literary titles or subscriptions. " Moses began to declare this torah." " This is the torah of the burnt-offering." " The torah of the plague of leprosy " (Deut. 15 Lev. 737 1369). Possibly also the term is used to denote a particular message in some instances where it is defined by a subjective genitive. Take, for example, Isa iah's exclamation (11°):

" Hear ye the word of Yahaweh, ye officials of Sodom !

Give ear to the torah of our God, ye people of Gomorrah l "

Here it is possible, though not necessary, to  hold  that  the torah to which  the  prophet refers is the message which  he is in the act of uttering.

10               JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERA'fURE

This usage, we should note, is found in the records con cerning the exodus and concerning Abraham, in the writings which the older tradition attributes  to  Moses,  and  in sec tions which the analytical critics assign  to E  and to  J.    That is to say, you find it, no matter to what critical school you belong, in the  earliest  extant  Israelitish  literature  as well as in all subsequent periods.

Second, the word torah in  the  singular  is used  to  denote an aggregate of divine messages or requirements. A more specific use with the article, or with a defining subject geni tive, will be considered later.  Jfor the  present we note that this use occurs when the noun has no article, or when the article only indicates that the torah spoken  of has  been defined by the context. An  instance  without  the  article occurs in the prayer of  Nehemiah:

"And commandedst them commandments and statutes and a

torah, by the hand of Moses thy servant " (Neh. 914).

Here, clearly, torah denotes the aggregate of the Mosaic re quirements or revelation. There are many similar instances, some referring to Moses and some not (e.g. Dent. 334 Ps. 786 Mal. 26). Instances  with  the  article, some  of them  rela tively early, will be hereafter mentioned, especially in con nection with the book of the  law.

Third, this indefinite general use easily passes over into an abstract use. This is generally concealed in the English versions, which render  in  such  cases  with  the  article, but the  usage is  abundant. It  occurs  sometimes in  plain prose. In Asa's time, says the Chronicler, Judah was "without law-expounding priest and without law," and he says that Jehoshaphat's judges were to be faithful" between law and commandment" (2 Chron. 153 1910). But the usage is more frequent in poetry, and is to some extent a matter of poetic diction.

" For out of Zion torah shall go forth,

and the word of Yahaweh from Jerusalem" (Isa. 28 Mic. 42). " Torah will go forth ...              for a light of  peoples" (Isa. 514). "Her priests have done violence to torah" (Zeph. 34).

" Forsakers of torah praise a wicked person, While observers of torah contend with them."

" He that guardeth torah is a discerning son." " He turneth away his ear from hearing torah,

Also his prayer is an abomination" (Prov. 284• 7. 9).

Fourth, among the uses of the word torah one in particu lar is significant - that in  which  the definite phrase  "the torah " designates a certain definite and recognized aggre gate.    The phrase may of course appear in variant forms : "the torah of Yahaweh," "the torah of our God,"  "my torah," "thy torah," "his torah," "the torah," "this torah." Before discussing this use of the term, let us complete our list of uses.

Fifth, there remains one more case to be noted. It is a matter of  natural variation  in the use of  a word that any part of the torah-aggregate may sometimes be called by the name that properly  belongs to the  whole.   For  example, the deuteronomic book of the torah might by itself be called the torah. The relatively brief section inscribed on the altar at Ebal is called " all the words of this torah."

Such are the five uses of the term. It is used of a single divine requirement or other message, of an undefined aggre gate, in an abstract sense, of the recognized definite aggregate, and, by synecdoche, of the parts of this aggregate. The validity of the  general  classification is not  changed by the fact that the assignment of certain instances would be affected by the critical theories held. Take, for example, " the torah " introduced in Deuteronomy 444• Did the writer intend to intimate  that  what  follows  is  a  single  prophetic  message, or a relatively brief  aggregate of  such messages, or a section of the well-known torah-aggregate ? Your answer to this question will affect your classifying of the  passage, but  not the categories of the classification itself.

5. With these five uses of the term in mind we take  up

the question of the nature of "the torah" regarded as  a single aggregate.

a. The word torah might supposably denote the formally recognized aggregate of the toroth that have been received

12              JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LI'l'ERATURE

from Deity, whenever it has the definite article or is made definite by some designation of Deity used as a subject geni tive. In fact, however, there are several limitations. For, first, the definite phrase may be used of  some particular torah somehow indicated by the context.  Or, second, it may be used of some section or some other lesser aggregate of toroth, instead of  denoting  the great  aggregate.    Or, third, it may be used vaguely. Or, fourth, it is wide enough to include oral as well as written torah; though we must here note that it has especial affiliations with written torah, and unquestionably connects itself with the traditions of writings laid up before Yahaweh.

But after eliminating all the instances possible, the use of

the phrase to denote one especial aggregate still remains. Necessarily it was a growing aggregate. On this point there should be no difference of opinion between men of differing critical schools, however they might differ in regard to the details of the growth. The torah was a body of literature when the term first began to be used in this way, and it enlarged its boundaries afterward.

b. Let us look at a few instances.

First, take a group from the records of the early part of the public career of Moses, from writings which the older tradition ascribes to Moses, and which the analysis now cur rent ascribes to J or E.     We have already found these writ ings mentioning toroth in the plural, but they also use the definite phrase in the singular. Israel is to teach the children concerning the passover,

"that thetorah of Yahaweh may be in thy mouth" (Ex.139 J).

Giving the manna, Yahaweh chides Israel for not keeping his toroth (Ex. 1628), but tests them

"whether they will walk in my torah" (Ex. 16• J).

At Sinai Yahaweh says,

"And I will give thee the tables of stone and the torah and the commandment which I have written " (Ex. 2412 E or E8).

In the first two of these instances and probably in the  third also, " the  torah "  is  an aggregate.  In  the  third  instance, and  possibly in the other two, the torah is in writing.  The men of that generation  thought of  Yahaweh's  requirements not merely as so many toroth, but also as a unit, torah. Of course, the unit is not here the Pentateuch or the Old Testa ment; but the mental habit of thinking of Yahaweh's com munications to men as aggregated then already existed in Israel; and, since this  habit  existed,  it certainly  fastened itself to any written torah which they might possess. What ever be one's critical point of  view, this  habit  was  prevalent in Israel in the times of the earliest records.

Second, the conception of " the torah " as an aggregate is frequent in Deuteronomy and in the scriptures which pre suppose  Deuteronomy. Conspicuous  here are the passages that speak  of  the  "book of  the  law," but the conception is also abundantly presented in other passages.

" What great nation is there that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this torah which I set before you this day?" (Deut. 48).

It is evident that " this torah" here   denotes an aggregate of " statutes and judgments," a recognizable, well-known aggre gate. And this is the beginning of a line of presentations, extending through the prophets and psalmists and other writings. We read of " the torah . • • which Yahaweh commanded the sons of Jacob" (2 Ki. 17M); "the torah .•. which he wrote for you" (17:17); "the torah of Yahaweh" in which Jehu failed to walk (1031), in which the sons of David were to walk (2 Chron. 616), which Rehoboam forsook (121), in which the perfect man meditates day and night (Ps. l2), which is perfect (Ps. 197), which is better than thousands of gold and silver (Ps. 11972), which Yahaweh will write within his servants (Jer. 3133), which Judah has despised, but for which the coastlands wait (Isa. 4224• 4), which is in the heart of those who know righteousness (Isa. 517); "the  torah of Moses my servant" (Mal. 44).

The basal conception in these deuteronomic and post-

deuteronomic utterances is that of " the torah " as the aggre gate of the  toroth that have been revealed from  Deity. In many of the  instances the term has literary implications, and the aggregate it denotes either is or includes an aggregate in writing. It is less  easy to prove that  this aggregate was a canon, or even physically a collection ;  but  it  is  recognized, in  thought at  least, as a known  unit.     The  term  "the  book of the torah " may supposably denote this aggregate, or may denote some section of  it, or may denote sometimes the one and sometimes  the  other, but  in any case this idea of  the torah  as  a  literary aggregate  is  in  familiar  use. This was the case from the time when deuteronomic  writing began  to the close of the Old Testament.

In the present state of criticism it seems convenient to recognize as a third group of instances those found in Hosea and Amos and the first  half  of  Isaiah. In  these  writings torah is mentioned many times, and the definite phrase occurs not less than seven times.

"And thou hast forgotten the law of thy God." "They have transgressed my covenant and trespassed against my law." "I write for him the ten thousands of my law " (Hos. 46 s1.12)

"Because they have rejected the law of Yahaweh, and have not kept his statutes,

And their lies have led them astray,

after which their fathers walked " ( Am. 24).

"The law of our God," "the law of Yahaweh of hosts,"" the law of Yahaweh" (Isa. l1° 524 309).

In one or two of these seven instances " the torah" may pos sibly be something less than the recognized torah-aggregate; but in most  of  them  it  is clearly  that  aggregate,  more  or less definitely conceived. In one of them the aggregate is described as an existing  body  of literature,  and  this  one must needs have weight  in  interpreting  the others. One's view of the relation of these instances to those of the two groups already cited will depend on his critical position, but whatever that may be, instances of this sort emerge in the

BEECHER :  TORA.H:  A WORD-STUDY                    15

earliest  extant  Israelitish  literature.    At  the  beginnings of the authentic history of Israel, no matter  when  one  dates these, we have glimpses of the torah as an aggregate of some sort, and we have glimpses of literary torah.   The conception of " the torah" as a known  literary aggregate  cannot  have been long delayed.

It  is evident  that the torah-aggregate is not exclusively the  Pentateuch. We have found  that the term  is said to have been in use before most of the pentateuchal events occurred. The passages generally speak of torah as com mensurate with the authoritative teaching of the prophets, and therefore as something much wider than the Pentateuch. The torah which is made so prominent in Ezra and Nehe miah and Daniel certainly includes the Pentateuch, but just as certainly includes much more than the Pentateuch. Even when the author of Ezra calls it "the book of  Moses" (618), he speaks of it as including the ceremonial arrangements of the  time of  David. Whether the  Pentateuch by itself  is ever in the Old Testament called "the torah" is a matter of interpretation, and is at least doubtful.

It would be more nearly correct to identify the torah aggregate with  the  Old  Testament, though  this  should  not be done without careful definition. Whenever men began to think of the written torah as an aggregate, they would natu rally apply to it the three names that now denote the three divisions of the Old Testament. They would think of the aggregate as "the Law," the body of torah which Deity had given; they  would  think  of  it  as "the  Prophets," because they regarded it as given through  the  prophets;  and they would think  of  it   as "the Writings,"  distinguishing it from the  toroth  that  were  given  orally.    They would  think thus of the aggregate, even if no physical collection of it had been made; much more would they think thus of it if they pos sessed it in collected form. It  was doubtless" the Law" and "the   Prophets"  and  "the  Writings"  during   the  time  when it was receiving additions, and, when at length it ceased to grow and  thereby became the fixed body of  writings  which we now call the Old Testament, it was still "the Law,'' and

also was still "the Law" and "the Prophets" and "the Writings."

The author of the book of Ecclesiasticus had a body of writings that was nearly or exactly the same as our Old Tes tament. His list of worthies is virtually a table of contents, presenting an arrangement of  the  books which is mainly that of the events they treat, with no hint of a division into the Pentateuch and the Prophets and the Hagiographa. He has something to say concerning the law of Moses, but his law of Moses apparently included other writings as well as the Pen tateuch, and in particular it included the Wisdom books. Two generations later, the translator of Ecclesiasticus emphasizes some sort of  a division  into "the  Law" and "the  Prophets" and "the other  books,"  but  leaves  the  matter  indefinite. Some generations  after  him, Philo  at last sharply marks off the   Pentateuch  as "the Law," and  perhaps  hints uncertainly at a threefold division. Some generations later still, we find contemporaneously the two conflicting theories of a triple division presented respectively by the Masoretes and by Jose phus  the  Palestinian  Pharisee.    Not  till long after this can the division properly be regarded as settled.

These post-biblical facts are in continuity with the biblical phenomena. The order of succession was clearly this : first, concrete toroth, regarded as messages from Deity; at a very early date some of these in writing; also from an early date the habit of thinking of Yahaweh's torah as an aggregated unit; this habit fixing itself especially upon the  written toroth and leading to the use of means for collecting and authenticating these; the written aggregate coming to be known as par excellence the Torah, and also as the Torah and the Prophets and the Writings ; finally these terms acquiring the secondary sense in which they denote respectively the three divisions of the aggregate.