De Moor II:3: The Word of God Unwritten

The Word of God here supplies the place of a Genus.  When the Word of God is called the Genus of Scripture, one might thence easily conclude that part of the Word of God is Written, concerning which we here treat, another part is Not Written, which the Papists also maintain.  Bellarmine,[1] in his Controversiis, tome 1, book IV, de Verbo Dei, chapter XII, column 255:  “In the next place, I say that Scripture, even if it was not composed so that it might be a rule of faith, nevertheless is a rule of faith, not total, but partial.  For the total rule of faith is the Word of God, or the Revelation of God made to the Church, which is divided into two partial rules, the Scripture and Tradition.”  But for that reason Theologians observe that, when we speak of the Word of God ἀγράφῳ/ unwritten and ἐγγράφῳ/written, it is not thus a division of the Genus into Species, or of the Whole into Parts; but it is a description of the Subject according to its various Accidents; for to the same Word, formerly ἀγράφῳ/unwritten, it happens afterward to be written down, and thus to become ἔγγραφον/written:  in a similar manner as it is permissible to affirm of a man that he is naked or clothed, which cannot be true of the same subject at the same time, but is able to happen unto the same man at different times.  At the time that the Prophets were yet living among the people of God, the ἔγγραφον/written, Mosaic, etc., Word was flourishing in the Church together with the ἄγραφον/unwritten Word, which the Prophets were daily speaking forth:  but with the ἀγράφῳ/ unwritten ceasing now of a long time after the completion of the Canon of Sacred Scripture, the ἔγγραφον/written Word of God alone obtains.  SPANHEIM,[2] in Collegio Theologico Heidelbergæ de Principio Theologiæ, part 2, § 1, 2, opera, tome 3, column 1190:  “We have, therefore, established the Word of God as the true, sole, and adequate principium of Sacred Theology, which Word was at first ἀγράφως, without writing, from Adam unto Moses, —and was afterwards exhibited ἐγγράφως, in writing, in the Canonical Scriptures of both Testaments.  Hence arose the distinction of the Word into ἄγραφον/unwritten and ἔγγραφον/written, not in a composite sense and with respect to the present time, as if today some might be written and some not written, but in a divided sense and with respect to past time, so that what was formerly ἄγραφον/unwritten might now be ἔγγραφον/written, both being the same materially and with respect to substance, but distinct formally and in the mode of communication.”

The ἄγραφον/unwritten Word alone obtained in the Church until Moses.  Although we would not at all wish to say that Moses was the first inventor of letters.  As far as we are concerned, letters would naturally have an origin far earlier, and would have been already in common use in the age of the Patriarchs:  for why in that age, in which Music, Astronomy, and other arts were thriving, shall we be unwilling to allow that letters were also invented at that time, so that through the help of writing they might instruct posterity, since the signs of mortality were evident in daily experience?  Indeed, I allow the invention of letters to be attributed to Adam himself as author.  Concerning which matter HUGO’S[3] de prima Scribendi Origine, notis Clarissimi Trotz[4] illustratus, chapter III, is able to be consulted; and also GERHARD JOHANN VOSSIUS’[5] de Arte Grammatica, book I, chapter IX, opera, tome 2, pages 13-15; SPANHEIM’S Historiam Ecclesiasticam Veteris Testamenti, epoch I, chapter III, § 7, column 275, epoch II, chapter VII, § 2, column 297; GULIELMUS SALDENUS’[6] Otia Theologica, book I, exercitation I, pages 1-18; VITRINGA’S[7] Sacrarum Observationum, book I, chapter IV, pages 35-37, in notis; BUDDEUS’ Historiam ecclesiasticam Veteris Testamenti, period I, section I, § 27, tome I, page 109; likewise Conjectures sur la Genese, à Bruxelles[8] 1753, Remark I, pages 281-297.  Yet we do not find the divine Word ἔγγραφον/written before Moses:  but, if it had existed, written at the Command of God, and destined by God to be assigned to the Canon; certainly it would have been preserved by God, and by Moses inserted into, or set before, his Pentateuch.  And so they would have committed sacred things also to letters before Moses; this they did by a more private decision for private uses, whence writings of this sort by the passage of time were able to be lost again:  After Moses, by the leading of the divine Spirit, had perhaps transferred thence into the Book of Genesis those things that were profitable for us to know of the origins of the World and of the Church and its history:  consult TRIGLAND’S[9] Antapologiam, chapter II, page 38.

For in vain on behalf of an ante-Mosaic, ἐγγράφῳ/written, Word is objected,

α.  The Prophecy of Enoch mentioned by Jude in verses 14 and 15, προεφήτευσε δὲ καὶ τούτοις ἕβδομος ἀπὸ Ἀδὰμ Ἐνώχ, λέγων, Ἰδού, ἦλθε Κύριος, etc., and Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh, etc.  For it is not necessary that these things be sought, 1.  either from The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs,[10] cited by Origen and Procopius,[11] and published by JOHN ERNEST GRABE[12] in his Spicilegio Patrum, Century I, in which many prophecies of Enoch are inserted, and also things somewhat similar to what is mentioned by Jude, yet not altogether the same.  But, that the author of this book was in fact a Jew, tinged with elements of the Christian faith, CAVE[13] and DODWELL[14] suppose, referring the writing of the book to the second Century of Christianity.  2.  Neither with much right is recourse to be had to the book that is called Ἀποκάλυψις Ἐνὼχ, The Apocalypse of Enoch, which, according to GROTIUS[15] on this passage, is cited by Irenæus,[16] Clement of Alexandria,[17] Origen,[18] and Tertullian,[19] to which book the Jews in the Zohar[20] bestowed almost the same confidence; and a great part of it SCALIGER[21] gave in Greek out of George Syncellus[22] in his ad Eusebium notis,[23] which Greek KIRCHER rendered into Latin in his Oedipo Ægyptiaco:[24]  see SCALIGER’S Notas in Græca Eusebii, pages 404, 405.  But concerning its argument SCALIGER, in his Notis in Græca Eusebii, page 405b, says that he does not know whether the Jews have more leisure, that they would fabricate these things, or more patience, that they would write them.  For there are so many things in them, says he, that disgust, weary, and shame, that, unless I had known that it belongs to the Jews to lie, and that now they are not able to leave off those trifles, I would have thought them to be not even worthy of reading.  But nevertheless, which is strange, the same SCALIGER, in his Notis in Græca Eusebii, pages 404a, 405b, twice asserts that the passage, which in the Epistle of Jude is produced out of the work of Enoch concerning the angelic prevaricators, was taken out of this fragment.  3.  With difficulty indeed would I believe with COCCEIUS[25] that Jude gathered this from Moses’ history alone, that Enoch as Prophet had the argument of the prophecies, and by conjecture attributed such words to Enoch as might well agree with him and with the time in which he lived:  for when Enoch is said to have prophesied λέγων/saying, it indubitably follows that the words next mentioned are the very words of that Prophet.  4.  Therefore, I would rather say that certainly from Jude it is evident that Enoch προεφήτευσε—λέγων, prophesied…saying; but not that Enoch wrote down this prophecy.  Therefore, this prophecy, delivered orally by Enoch, the Apostle would have had from the tradition of his ancestors, which nevertheless at a later time was able to be written down by others, and concerning the truth of which by the Spirit of God he would have been rendered quite certain; compare 2 Timothy 3:8:  see HOTTINGER’S Thesaurum Philologicum, book I, chapter II, section II, pages 82-88; our AUTHOR’S Expectationem Gloriæ futuræ Jesu Christi, book I, chapter XXIII, § 6; WESSELIUS’ Fasciculum Dissertationum, etc., Dissertation XIII, which is on Hebrews 12:18-21, § 12, pages 426, 427.

β.  Neither do those things make more for the matter, which JOSEPHUS[26] has in Antiquities of the Jews, book I, chapter III, concerning the two Pillars of the Sethites, one of brick and the other of stone, on which their discoveries, τὰ εὑρημένα, σοφίαντε τὴν περὶ τὰ οὐράνια καὶ τὴν τούτων Διακόσμησιν, and wisdom concerning the heavenlies and their order, they inscribed, one of which even in his own time survived in Syria, μένει δ᾽ ἄχρι τοῦ δεῦρο κατὰ τὴν Συριάδα.[27]  But, 1.  there are learned men that think that Josephus, from the στηλαῖς/stone Columns of the Egyptian Hermes ἐν τῇ σηριαδικῇ γῇ, in the Seriadic country,[28] mentioned by Manetho,[29] fabricated those Columns of Seth καὶ τῶν ἀπογόνων, and of his offspring, κατὰ τὴν  Συριάδα, in Syria/Siriad.  2.  They desire more definite proofs of the ἀξιοπιστίας/trustworthiness of this narration in Josephus, and more circumstances; that is, there had been an obligation to relate what was written on those Columns, in what language, in what characters, with what witness of Antiquity was it established that those Columns or this Column surviving the Flood was of Seth.  3.  But, with the verity of the entire history narrated by Josephus conceded, this contributes nothing at all to our controversy; since on these Columns were inscribed only certain Astronomical discoveries, not the Revealed Word of God, concerning which inquiry is here made:  see VOSSIUS’ de Arte Grammatica, book I, chapter IX, opera, tome 2, pages 14b, 15a, where with the help of transposed punctuation he tries to emend the passage of Josephus cited:  add SPANHEIM the Younger’s Chronologiam Sacram, part 2, chapter I, column 145, and Historiam Veteris Testamenti, epoch I, chapter III, § 7, column 275, opera, tome I; SALDENUS’ Otia Theologica, book I, exercitation I, which is de Primo Scriptore, and the whole worthy of reading, especially § 4, 10; and also ÆGIDIUS STRAUCH’S[30] Disputationem Historicam de Columnis Sethianis, in CRENIUS’[31] Fasce V. Exercitationum 297-320; BUDDEUS’ Historiam ecclesiasticam Veteris Testamenti, period I, section I, § 27, tome I, page 127.

γ.  Hardly worthy of mention is the Book יְצִירָה/Yetzirah, or concerning Creation, written by Abraham, at least according to the vulgar opinion of the Jews, according to the book of Cosri.[32]  But by others this book is attributed to Rabbi Aquiba, son of Joseph, who flourished under Titus Vespasian and Hadrian.[33]  While others, on the other hand, maintain that a book was written under the same title both by Abraham and by Aquiba.  To what author the work is to be assigned is hardly evident with any certainty.  It is certain that it was already written down before the Talmud was completed:  for it is mentioned in Gemara Sanhedrin, chapter VII, § 9, published by Cocceius, opera Cocceji, tome 9, page 222.  The argument of the book sufficiently indicates that Abrahamic authorship is safely rejected; since it is Kabbalistic and most obscure, and, according to the opinion of learned men, to a great extent embraces a Pythagorean method of philosophizing from letters and numbers:[34]  see the Most Illustrious JOHANN CHRISTOPH WOLF’S[35] Bibliothecam Hebraicam, tome I, pages 23-29; HEIDEGGER’S[36] Historiam Patriarcharum, tome 2, page 143; BAYLE’S[37] Dictionaire in Abraham et Akiba; BUDDEUS’ Historiam ecclesiasticam Veteris Testamenti, period I, section III, § 21, tome I, page 325b, 326a.  Concerning other writings, attributed to the Patriarch Abraham by the Sethians[38] and others, consult likewise WOLF’S Bibliothecam Hebraicam, tome I, pages 29, 30, and others whom in that place he recommends.

And so, before Moses, God preserved His Word ἄγραφον/ unwritten through Oral Tradition, according to Genesis 18:19, which at that time was more easily able to be done; 1.  On account of the eminent Longevity of the Fathers; since Moses, the son of Amram and Jochebed, hardly attained to the age of his grandfather, Kohath son of Levi,[39] of which Levi Jochebed herself, the mother of Moses, is also said to be a daughter, Numbers 26:59.  Now, Kohath was able to learn the way of the Lord from his grandfather Jacob; Jacob lived for some time with his grandfather Abraham; Abraham reached to the age of Shem, who survived more than a century after the birth of Abraham; Shem lived nearly a century with Methuselah, but Methuselah was able to have known for a very long time Adam, the parent of the human race.  2.  The smaller Number of the faithful, before the human race at first multiplied, is added; then by a distinction, which very quickly arose, between the sons of God and of men before the Flood;[40] and after the Flood by a way laid out step-by-step to the rejection of the Gentiles, when already the tents of Shem were blessed above the rest by the inhabitation of the Lord,[41] and Abraham was commanded to go out from his land and family, to be adopted by the Lord with the more blessed part of the posterity, with the rest esteemed less.[42]  3.  On account of the multiplied Apparitions of God, repeated examples of which are found in the history of the Patriarchs, and the frequency of which is to be gathered out of the history of Job, Job 4:12, etc.; 33:14, 15, etc.; 38 and following; 42:5, 7.  4.  On account of the yet lesser astuteness of Satan, that is, in feigning Oracles, by which he was imitating the revelations of God:  for, besides Knowledge natural and revealed, experimental knowledge also agrees with Angels, which doubtlessly is made greater by degrees; see Chapter IX, § 8.

[1] Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621) entered the Order of the Jesuits in his late teens.  He became one of the great theologians of his era, a Cardinal, and, after his death, a Doctor of the Church.

[2] That is, the Younger.

[3] Hermann Hugo (1588-1629) was a Jesuit priest.  His Pia desideria was one of the most popular devotional texts of the period.

[4] Christianus Henricus Trotz (1703-1773) was a Dutch jurist.

[5] Gerhard Johann Vossius (1577-1649) was a Dutch classical scholar and theologian.  In 1619, his Historia Pelagiana brought him into suspicion of Arminianism.

[6] Guilielmus Saldenus (1627-1694) was a Dutch Reformed pastor and theologian, and supporter of the Nadere Reformatie.

[7] Campegius Vitringa Sr. (1659-1722) was a Dutch Reformed theologian and Hebraist.  He was a critical Cocceian, and heavily influenced by his pastor, Herman Witsius.  He served the university at Franeker, first as professor of Oriental languages (1681), then of Theology (1682) and Church History (1697).  He is remembered for his work in Jewish antiquities, and for his commentaries on Isaiah and Revelation.

[8] Jean Astruc (1684-1766) was a professor of medicine at Montpellier.  His Conjectures sur les Genese was important in the early development of the Documentary Hypothesis of the Pentateuch.

[9] Jacobus Trigland the Elder (1583-1654) was a Dutch Reformed pastor and theologian.  He was deputed by the Synod of North Holland to the Synod of Dort; he was a member of the committee appointed to draw up the Canons of Dort.  In 1633, he became Professor of Theology at Leiden.

[10] The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs purports to relate the dying commands of the twelve patriarchs of Israel.  It was composed in Greek, and appears to have reached its final form in the second century AD.  In the Testament certain writings of Enoch are cited.

[11] Procopius (c. 500-c. 560) was a Byzantine historian.

[12] John Ernest Grabe (1666-1711) was an Anglican theologian and chaplain of Christ Church, Oxford.  He was involved in producing the Spicilegium Patrum et hæreticorum, and new editions of Justin Martyr’s Apologiæ primæ, Irenæus’ Adversus omnes hæreses, and the Septuagint (based upon Codex Alexandrinus).

[13] William Cave (1637-1713) was an Anglican churchman and theologian, and patristic scholar.  His Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Historia Literaria is held in high esteem.

[14] Henry Dodwell (1641-1711) was an Irish theologian and controversialist.  He produced several learned works on ecclesiastical chronology.

[15] Hugo Grotius (1583-1645) distinguished himself in the field of international law, but he was interested in many fields of learning, including Christian apologetics, theology, and Biblical criticism and exegesis.  His dual interest in international law and theology caused him to run afoul of civil authorities:  Embracing Arminian doctrine, he was imprisoned from 1618-1621 after the Synod of Dort declared against the position.

[16] Against Heresies 4:30.

[17] Excerpts out of Theodotus.

[18] Against Celsus 5.

[19] Against Idolatry; Concerning Female Fashion 1.

[20] The Kabbalah is a set of secret, esoteric Rabbinic doctrines, handed down orally and based on a mystical interpretation of the Hebrew Scripture.  Zohar is one of the principal texts for Kabbalists.  It was probably written by Moses de León in the thirteenth century, but it has traditionally been attributed to Simeon ben Jochai, a second century Rabbi and mystic.

[21] Joseph Scaliger (1540-1609) was a skilled linguist and developed into one of the most learned men of his age.  During the course of his studies and travels, he became a Protestant and suffered exile with the Huguenots.  He was offered a professorship at Leiden (1593), a position which he eventually accepted and in which he remained until his death.

[22] George Syncellus (died 810) was a monk, syncellus or secretary to the Patriarch of Constantinople, and a chronographer, chronicling the time from the creation to Diocletian.

[23] Scaliger, ever interested in matters of chronology, reconstructed Eusebius’ lost Chronicon.

[24] Athanasius Kircher (c. 1601-1680) was a German Jesuit scholar, skilled in geology, medicine, and Oriental studies.  His Oedipus Ægypticus is a large study of Egyptology and comparative religion.

[25] Johannes Cocceius (1603-1689) was born in Bremen, Germany, and went on to become Professor of Philology at the Gymnasium in Bremen (1630), held the chair of Hebrew (1630) and Theology (1643) at Franker, and was made Professor of Theology at Leiden (1650).  He was the founder of the Cocceian school of covenant theology, bitter rival to the Voetian school.

[26] Flavius Josephus (37-93) was a priest in the Temple of Jerusalem, a Jewish general, and an eyewitness to the final siege of Jerusalem.  Josephus’ works are invaluable to the student of Jewish antiquities and of the history of the fall of Jerusalem.

[27] The Greek reads Siriad, a region in Egypt.

[28] Hermes, or Mercury, is another name for the Egyptian god, Thoth.  Thoth is linguistically and mythologically related to Seth.  The pillars were said to have been erected to preserve information concerning the ante-diluvian world.

[29] Manetho (third century BC) was an Egyptian historian.  His Ægyptiaca has been of enduring value in the study of Pharaonic dynasties.

[30] Ægidius Strauch II (1632-1682) was a Lutheran theologian.  He served as Professor of Philosophy (1653-1666), then as Professor of Theology (beginning in 1666) at Wittenberg.

[31] Thomas Crenius (1648-1728) was a German Lutheran philosopher, theologian, and schoolmaster.  He was one of his age’s great gatherers and collectors of antiquities.

[32] The Book of Cosri (Kitab al Khazari) was written by the Spanish Jewish philosopher, Rabbi Yehuda Halevi, and published around 1140.  It is an apology for the Jewish religion, composed in a dialogue form.

[33] Rabbi Aquiba ben Joseph, or Rabbi Akiva (c. 17 AD-c. 137 AD), was a Jewish Tanna of great influence, considered to be one of the earliest founders of rabbinical Judaism.  Vespasian reigned from 69 to 79; Hadrian, from 117 to 138.

[34] Pythagoras (582-507 BC) was a Greek philosopher and mathematician.

[35] Johann Christoph Wolf (1683-1739) was a German Lutheran Hebraist and scholar.  His Bibliotheca Hebræa (published in four volumes, 1715-1733) was a standard reference work on Jewish literature for more than a century.

[36] Johann Heinrich Heidegger (1633-1698) was a Swiss Reformed theologian, serving as Professor of Theology at Steinfurt (1659-1665), and then at Zurich (1667-1698).

[37] Pierre Bayle (1647-1706) was a French philosopher.  He was the son of a Reformed minister; for a short time he defected to Roman Catholicism, only to return again to his Reformed roots.  He was influenced by Rationalism; and consequently he advocated for a separation between the domains of faith and reason, and for toleration of differing beliefs.

[38] The Sethians were a Gnostic sect, the existence of which may pre-date the Apostolic era.  They were heavily influenced by Judaism and Platonism.  Their name comes from their veneration of the Biblical Seth.

[39] See Exodus 6:16-20.

[40] Genesis 6:1, 2.

[41] Genesis 9:27.

[42] Genesis 12:1-4.