Page Content (OCR)
KOSTLIN? divides thus: (1) The groundwork, embracing 1-16; 21-36; 72-105, and written about 110B.C. (2) The Parables, 37-71 (with the exception of the Noachic fragments), written between 100 and 64 B.C. The same author wrote 17-19. (3) The Noachic fragments 54:7-55:2; 60; 65-69:25, possibly 20 and 82:9-20, and probably 106-107, and also some things in 6-8. (4) Chap. 108, an Essenic addition about the time of Herod the Great or his successors. HILGENFELD? considers 1-16; 20-36; 72-105 the groundwork, written in the first years of Alexander Jannai. Later additions are found in 17-19; 37-71; 106-108, and these later portions are all the work of a Christian adherent of Gnosticism about the time 22 between Saturninus and Marcion. Hilgenfeld lays special stress on a pretended Christian character of the Messiah in 37-71. He declines to separate Noachic fragments. Later he modified his idea concerning the first part by claiming that it was written about 98 B.C. This result is reached by interpreting the periods of the seventy shepherds as each of seven years, so that 7x70 or 490 years from 588 B.C., as the acknowledged commencement of the reign of these shepherds, would establish the period of writing. VOLKMAR' claims that the periods of the shepherds each embrace terms of ten years, so that the whole period of this rule would be 70, or rather 72, according to his idea, times 10, i.e. 720 years, and counting from 588 B.C. this would indicate 132 A.D. as the year in which the book was written. It is claimed to be the first connected account of the commencement of the insurrection of Bar-cochebas, and was written by a disciple of Akiba. He rejoices in this conclusion exceedingly, and later? characterizes the book of Enoch as “a warlike zelotic announcement of the final victory of Bar-cochebas after the defeat of Hadrian 132 A.D.”! LANGEN? admits that in its present shape the book is the work of different authors, but claims that the internal harmony is such that a great difference of time cannot exist. As he interprets the “great horn” as Judas Maccabi, he places the composition of the groundwork at about 160 B.C. ' Zeitschrift d. Deutschen Morgenlédnd. Gesellschaft, xiv. pp. 87-134, 296; Zeitschrift f. wissensch. Theol. iv. pp. 111-136, 422 sqq.; v. p. 46 sqq., and Eine neutest. Entdeckung, etc. Ziirich, 1862. 2 Das vierte Buch Esra... als dltester Commentar zum N.T. Titbingen, 1863, p. 408. 23 SIEFFERT! considers 1-16; 20-36; 72-81; 91-105 as the oldest portion, written about the time of Jonathan, 165-160 B.C., and interprets the seventy shepherds in 82-90, which he regards as a separate addition, in Hilgenfeld’s style, but begins the rule of these shepherds already 598 B.C., and thus makes the book ten years older than Hilgenfeld, i.e. it was written about 108 A.D. Chap. 17-19; 37-71; 106-108 were written by an Essene, and before the invasions of the Parthians in 64 B.C. PHILIPPI? defends the absolute integrity of the book. With Hofmann he regards the small lambs as Christians, and interprets the period of the shepherds like Volkmar, but assumes only seventy shepherds and, counting either from 606 or 588 B.C., considers the book as one of a Christian origin, and written about 100 A.D. 3 Das Judenthum in Paldstina, 1866, pp. 35-64.