What is the Samaritan Pentateuch?

An ancient recension of the five books of Moses. Though it had been mentioned by some of the early fathers, it was not till about A.D. 1616 that a MS copy of it was discovered. At first it was considered by some as far superior to the Hebrew Pentateuch, but when other copies came to light (there are now about twenty) and they were examined more carefully, the thought of its superiority was not maintained; it is now regarded only as a copy of the Hebrew, though it agrees with the LXX in many places where that differs from the present Hebrew text. The Pentateuch which the Samaritans called 'The Law' is all they have of the O.T. The characters in which it is written, by being compared with ancient coins, etc., are judged to be more ancient than the square Hebrew letters now in common use. The origin of it may have been a copy of the Pentateuch secured by the Israelites on the division of the kingdom. The Paris and the London Polyglots give the text in full.

Of the Samaritan Pentateuch age and author are alike unknown. It is written in a Semitic dialect, and continues to be the sacred book of the remnant of this ancient people, settled at Nablus, the ancient Shechem or Sychar, described by Stanley as 'the most beautiful spot in Central Palestine.' The reader may here recall the interesting verses in chap. 5 of Ecclesiasticus (25, 26 of Authorised Version; in Vulgate and Douay 27, 28), where mention is made of this people, 'no nation,' which the writer hated, the 'foolish people that dwell in Sichem.' The author of 'Sinai and Palestine' says: 'In the humble synagogue at the foot of the mountain (Gerizim) the Samaritans still worship — the oldest and smallest sect in the world' (p.240), and refers to the 'sacred spots where they alone of all the Jewish race yearly celebrate the Paschal sacrifice' (p.241). Dr. T. Robinson says of their ancient copy of the Pentateuch, that 'it is kept with great care, being only brought out on the day of Atonement. In some parts it appeared scarcely legible, and was mended at the bottom with a new piece of parchment. The priest, or as he is called, the high priest, declared it to have been written by Abishua, the son of Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron.' Gesenius, who is our principal authority upon the subject, considers it to belong to the first Christian century.

Of the Text that underlies this ancient copy of the Torah, it is enough to suppose that the copyists, like the 'LXX,' made use of MSS. with additional glosses and notes which they embodied as seemed convenient in the text formed by them. Where the Samaritan and Hebrew agree, it is strong testimony that the reading is authentic. The same remark would apply to the LXX. It is in the agreement of either with the Hebrew that the Samaritan and LXX have such critical value as they may possess, and then (as Thrupp says of the LXX) their evidence is of real worth as compared with later authority.

The Samaritan is included in Walton's Polyglott, transcribed from the Paris Polyglott of 1645 in which it had first appeared, but its variant readings may be seen in Davidson, or in Bagster. In Gen. 2:2, it goes with the LXX, Syriac, &c., in reading 'sixth'; in which we have an illustration of the tendency to adopt easier and apparently less offensive readings, and so in Gen. 2:18, again with the LXX and even Aquila, it has, 'Let us make,' apparently to agree with 1:26. But Jehovah Elohim is the speaker in chap. 2.

It is an interesting circumstance that the Samaritans — the religious rivals of the Jews (John 4) — possessed a copy of the Pentateuch written in the ancient Phoenician or Hebrew characters, hence not a translation, which they regarded with peculiar veneration, and from which the woman of Samarian race gathered that Messias was to come (John 4:25). There are said to be several complete copies of the Samaritan Pentateuch now in Europe, and one is believed to date from the 8th century — the era of Mohammed. The Pentateuch, as a whole, was from earliest times familiarly spoken of by the Jews as "the law," or "the law of Moses." The Lord, and writers of the New Testament, frequently refer to and cite from the Pentateuch as a whole, as also its several books. The writings of Moses are held to be of equal authority with the words of the Lord Himself (Luke 16:31).

As for the Hebrew, so for the Greek, there are three sources to which we can turn to help us to an understanding of what the text originally was, viz., MSS., versions, and quotations from early Christian writers. A more formidable difficulty, however, presents itself at the outset, when we come to inquire about the Hebrew text, than when we examine into the accuracy of the common Greek text. The Hebrew MSS., though by no means few in number, are nearly all of one recension, exhibiting for the most part the readings approved of by the Masoretic Scribes. Their age, too, when compared with the antiquity of some MSS. of the New Testament, is comparatively modern. The Hebraeo-Samaritan Pentateuch, i.e., the Pentateuch in Samaritan characters, preserved by the small and decreasing sect of the Samaritans, which we might have expected would have been of the greatest use as a concurrent witness of what Moses wrote, often differs from the Hebrew so much, that its readings would require support ere being accepted in preference to that text handed down by the Jews. In one place it has substituted Gerizim for Ebal (Deut. 27:4), to favour the Samaritan worship. In others, its accuracy is open to grave suspicion.

Nor is this by any means all. The Providence of God has preserved a still more ancient testimony, in the Samaritan Pentateuch. Its existence was known to the Christian Fathers; but for a thousand years it lay concealed, and at last came forth as from the grave, to assure us of the identity of the Pentateuch. Suppose that in that long interval some doubter had said, The Samaritans were a distinct and rival sect, hated by the Jews, and hating in return. Josephus, and the Fathers of the Church, and the Rabbis, all bear witness that they had a copy of the Pentateuch: bring it forth and let us compare it with the Hebrew and Christian copies, and see whether they agree. How would he have triumphed had the Samaritan copy been produced, and found to differ altogether from those of Jews and Christians! But what is the fact? The Samaritan copy has been produced, written in a character equally unknown to Jews and Christians.

A little remnant of the people still exist to present it to the world. And lo! with the exception of a very few passages, it is the same in narrative and legislative enactment as that known to the Synagogue and the Church. This testimony carries us back to the erection of the Temple on Mount Gerizim, to the days of Sanballat, that is, to the time of Nehemiah (Neh. 13:28), and the close of the canon of the Old Testament; and assures us not only that it existed, but that it was not and could not be a compilation of those times. Manasseh, of the family of the high priest, being excluded from the priesthood because he refused to dismiss his heathen wife as the Law required, does not protest against this Law as ungenuine, and therefore unworthy of obedience but, when he leaves the Jewish people, imposes its yoke upon his Samaritan friends. Such conduct can only be explained by Manasseh's firm conviction that its origin was divine. Its acceptance by the Samaritans testifies a similar conviction on their part, produced by what they had already learned. At all events, the Pentateuch then existed, was ever afterwards preserved by the Samaritans. and their copy now shows the identity of their Pentateuch with our own.*

As to the discrepancy between the Hebrew and the Septuagint, as to the years in chapter 5, I say nothing, save that there is a curious fact in this, that to each of these lives the Septuagint adds a hundred years. Thus "Adam lived 230 years, and begat," instead Of 130. This adds fourteen hundred years to the time of the world, the Samaritan Pentateuch more still. It is not a casual mistake, but done on purpose, for it is to each, and it is only carried down to the point where, if they had gone one more, they would have pushed it over the flood; but there it stops. In Matthew the genealogy is a copy of Jewish records. I do not doubt myself, though it has been disputed since the second century, that Luke's is Mary's genealogy. Luke takes it back up to man, but Matthew from David and Abraham, because his reference is to promises. In the Talmud they have got Mary the daughter of Eli.

There are more links of time mentioned in scripture than is generally supposed, forming together an approximate chronology. There is however one great difficulty in the variations of the Hebrew text from the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint. It is found that there must have been a systematic alteration somewhere, and if the Hebrew text is correct, a period of 100 years has been added to the lives of several, both before the Flood and after it.

The above figures form the basis of what is called the 'long chronology' from the LXX, and the 'short chronology' from the Hebrew. It will be seen that there are about 1400 years difference from the birth of Seth to the Call of Abraham. It is difficult to see why the Hebrew text should be abandoned; and if it were, what superior claim would the LXX have over the Samaritan Pentateuch?

But they would not give up their own idols but retained the character of a mixed people ('mixed multitude', Ex. 12:38). Later the Samaritans built an own sanctuary on Mount Gerizim and took over the Pentateuch as binding Holy Scripture.

§ 1. The Samaritans.*

In the last chapter we considered the Hebrew Canon. To speak now of the Samaritan: it was and is confined to the Pentateuch. As the last editor of De Wette's 'Introduction' says (Schrader's De Wette, § 19.), the Samaritans, who took as their sacred book the 'Law,' the authority of which had in that day been firmly established, would be afterwards disinclined, from the hostility that existed between them and their neighbours, to accept any other Scriptures that acquired equal authority among the Jews. And the same writer — who seems here to follow Geiger — is right in thinking there is no sufficient ground for the assertion that the Jewish sect of the Sadducees was responsible for an attempt to confine the Canon to the Pentateuch. Josephus, in speaking of their tenets, does not hint at anything of the kind. The Talmud says passages in the Prophets were discussed by both parties.

It is remarkable that while the Jews have lost all means of keeping their feasts at Jerusalem, a few, still calling themselves Samaritans, at Nablus, in a humble synagogue at the foot of the mountain, continue their worship, and annually ascend the mountain and keep the feast of the Passover with a roasted lamb: a marked instance of imitation, now so common in Christendom. They have an ancient MS called the SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH (q.v.), for which they claim great antiquity.