[11] Mark Rutherford, The Revolution in Tanner’s Lane, p. 238.
[12] In the final form of the Book thus gradually evolved it is sometimes very easy, sometimes difficult or impossible, to distinguish with exactitude the earlier from the later ‘sources’ out of which it has been composed; but the main stages of the compilation can generally be determined with a high degree of accuracy, just as in an old cathedral through the varying modes of architecture employed the general history of the building is clearly visible to the trained perception.
[13] Evidence for the statements here given is omitted, partly because they are matters of general agreement among modern students of the Bible, but still more because the full evidence has been repeatedly set forth in works accessible to any who may have inclination to consider the subject in detail. Reference may conveniently be made to C. H. Toy, Proverbs, or to the same writer’s article Book of Proverbs, in the Encyclopædia Britannica (11th edition); or to G. F. Moore, Literature of the Old Testament, ch. xxii. (Home University Library).
[14] Cp. also 101 The proverbs of Solomon; 2217 Words of the Wise; 2423, These are also words of the Wise; 251 These are also proverbs of Solomon which the men of Hezekiah, king of Judah, copied out; 301, Sayings of Agur, son of Jakeh; 311, Sayings of Lemuel, king of Massa. The last two of these titles rest on an uncertain Hebrew text. For the allusion to Solomon see pp. 71, 72.
[15] Perhaps almost all, in their present polished form. Thus Toy (Proverbs, p. xi.) declares that “none of the aphorisms are popular proverbs or folk-sayings. They are all reflective and academic in tone, and must be regarded as the productions of schools of moralists in a period of high moral culture.” This observation is generally true, and of great importance; but it is not to be understood as meaning that the Book, or even the several sections, sprang out of nothing. In and behind the finished product there may well be a great deal of earlier material.
[16] i.e., any subsequent changes were of a minor character, introduced occasionally by some scribe or copyist. The year 200 B.C. may reasonably be taken as the lower limit of date, partly because Proverbs has features (notably its attitude to the Mosaic Law) which suggest that it was finished earlier than Ecclesiasticus, a work composed about 190 B.C. This argument, though strong, is not conclusive; but in any case the peaceful, comfortable, tone which pervades Proverbs indicates that it is not later than the years of persecution preceding the Maccabean revolt in 167 B.C.
[17] See for Ecclesiastes the volume Pessimism and Love by D. Russell Scott; and for Job, The Problem of Pain, by J. E. McFadyen.
[18] N.B. Hereafter the abbreviation “E,” will constantly be used for Ecclesiasticus, and “Pr.” for Proverbs.
[19] The dots indicate words missing from the Hebrew text or of unknown meaning.
[20] Cp. also E. 251, 2; 265.