The scribes are mentioned very early in the sacred history, and
many authors suppose that they were of two descriptions, the one
ecclesiastical, the other civil. It is said, “Out of Zebulon come they
that handle the pen of the writer,” Judges v, 14; and the rabbins state,
that the scribes were chiefly of the tribe of Simeon; but it is thought
that only those of the tribe of Levi were allowed to transcribe the Holy
Scriptures. These scribes are very frequently called wise men, and
counsellors; and those of them who were remarkable for writing well were
held in great esteem. In the reign of David, Seraiah, 2 Sam. viii, 17,
in the reign of Hezekiah, Shebna, 2 Kings xviii, 18, and in the reign of
Josiah, Shaphan, 2 Kings xxii, 3, are called scribes, and are ranked
with the chief officers of the kingdom; and Elishama the scribe, Jer.
xxxvi, 12, in the reign of Jehoiakim, is mentioned among the princes. We
read also of the “principal scribe of the host,” or army, Jer. lii, 25;
and it is probable that there were scribes in other departments of the
state. Previous to the Babylonian captivity, the word scribe seems to
have been applied to any person who was concerned in writing, in the
same manner as the word secretary is with us. The civil scribes are not
mentioned in the New Testament.
It appears that the office of the ecclesiastical scribes, if this
distinction be allowed, was originally confined to writing copies of the
law, as their name imports; but the knowledge, thus necessarily
acquired, soon led them to become instructers of the people in the
written law, which, it is believed, they publicly read. Baruch was an
amanuensis or scribe to Jeremiah; and Ezra is called “a ready scribe in
the law of Moses, having prepared his heart to seek the law of the Lord,
and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and judgments,” Ezra vii,
6, 10; but there is no mention of the scribes being formed into a
distinct body of men till after the cessation of prophecy. When,
however, there were no inspired teachers in Israel, no divine oracle in
the temple, the scribes presumed to interpret, expound, and comment upon
the law and the prophets in the schools and in the synagogues. Hence
arose those numberless glosses, and interpretations, and opinions, which
so much perplexed and perverted the text instead of explaining it; and
hence arose that unauthorized maxim, which was the principal source of
all the Jewish sects, that the oral or traditionary law was of Divine
origin, as well as the written law of Moses. Ezra had examined the
various traditions concerning the ancient and approved usages of the
Jewish church, which had been in practice before the captivity, and were
remembered by the chief and most aged of the elders of the people; and
he had given to some of these traditionary customs and opinions the
sanction of his authority. The scribes, therefore, who lived after the
time of Simon the Just, in order to give weight to their various
interpretations of the law, at first pretended that they also were
founded upon tradition, and added them to the opinions which Ezra had
established as authentic; and in process of time it came to be asserted,
that when Moses was forty days on Mount Sinai, he received from God two
laws, the one in writing, the other oral; that this oral law was
communicated by Moses to Aaron and Joshua, and that it passed unimpaired
and uncorrupted from generation to generation, by the tradition of the
elders, or great national council, established in the time of Moses; and
that this oral law was to be considered as supplemental and explanatory
of the written law, which was represented as being in many places
obscure, scanty, and defective. In some cases they were led to expound
the law by the traditions, in direct opposition to its true intent and
meaning; and it may be supposed that the intercourse of the Jews with
the Greeks, after the death of Alexander, contributed much to increase
those vain subtleties with which they had perplexed and burdened the
doctrines of religion. During our Saviour’s ministry, the scribes were
those who made the law of Moses their particular study, and who were
employed in instructing the people. Their reputed skill in the
Scriptures induced Herod, Matt. ii, 4, to consult them concerning the
time at which the Messiah was to be born. And our Saviour speaks of them
as sitting in Moses’s seat, Matt. xxiii, 2, which implies that they
taught the law; and he foretold that he should be betrayed unto the
chief priests and unto the scribes, Matt. xvi, 21, and that they should
put him to death, which shows that they were men of great power and
authority among the Jews. Scribes, doctors of law, and lawyers, were
only different names for the same class of persons. Those who in Luke v,
are called Pharisees and doctors of the law, are soon afterward called
Pharisees and scribes; and he who, in Matt. xxii, 35, is called a
lawyer, is, in Mark xii, 28, called one of the scribes. They had
scholars under their care, whom they taught the knowledge of the law,
and who, in their schools, sat on low stools just beneath their seats;
which explains St. Paul’s expression that he was “brought up at the feet
of Gamaliel,” Acts xxii, 3. We find that our Saviour’s manner of
teaching was contrasted with that of those vain disputers; for it is
said, when he had ended his sermon upon the mount, “the people were
astonished at his doctrine; for he taught them as one having authority,
and not as the scribes,” Matt. vii, 29. By the time of our Saviour, the
scribes had, indeed, in a manner, laid aside the written law, having no
farther regard to that than as it agreed with their traditionary
expositions of it; and thus, by their additions, corruptions, and
misinterpretations, they had made “the word of God of none effect
through their traditions,” Matt. xv, 6. It may be observed, that this in
a great measure accounts for the extreme blindness of the Jews with
respect to their Messiah, whom they had been taught by these
commentators upon the prophecies to expect as a temporal prince. Thus,
when our Saviour asserts his divine nature, and appeals to “Moses and
the prophets who spake of him, the people sought to slay him,” John v;
and he expresses no surprise at their intention. But when he converses
with Nicodemus, John iii, who appears to have been convinced by his
miracles that he was “a teacher sent from God,” when he “came to Jesus
by night,” anxious to obtain farther information concerning his nature
and his doctrine, our Lord, after intimating the necessity of laying
aside all prejudices against the spiritual nature of his kingdom, asks,
“Art thou a master in Israel, and knowest not these things?” that is,
knowest not that Moses and the prophets describe the Messiah as the Son
of God? and he then proceeds to explain in very clear language the
dignity of his person and office, and the purpose for which he came into
the world, referring to the predictions of the ancient Scriptures. And
Stephen, Acts vii, just before his death, addresses the multitude by an
appeal to the law and the prophets, and reprobates in the most severe
terms the teachers who misled the people. Our Lord, when speaking of
“them of old time,” classed the “prophets, and wise men, and scribes,”
together, Matt. xxiii, 34; but of the later scribes he uniformly speaks
with censure and indignation, and usually joins them with the Pharisees,
to which sect they in general belonged. St. Paul asks, 1 Cor. i, 20,
“Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this
world?” with evident contempt for such as, “professing themselves wise
above what was written, became fools.”
many authors suppose that they were of two descriptions, the one
ecclesiastical, the other civil. It is said, “Out of Zebulon come they
that handle the pen of the writer,” Judges v, 14; and the rabbins state,
that the scribes were chiefly of the tribe of Simeon; but it is thought
that only those of the tribe of Levi were allowed to transcribe the Holy
Scriptures. These scribes are very frequently called wise men, and
counsellors; and those of them who were remarkable for writing well were
held in great esteem. In the reign of David, Seraiah, 2 Sam. viii, 17,
in the reign of Hezekiah, Shebna, 2 Kings xviii, 18, and in the reign of
Josiah, Shaphan, 2 Kings xxii, 3, are called scribes, and are ranked
with the chief officers of the kingdom; and Elishama the scribe, Jer.
xxxvi, 12, in the reign of Jehoiakim, is mentioned among the princes. We
read also of the “principal scribe of the host,” or army, Jer. lii, 25;
and it is probable that there were scribes in other departments of the
state. Previous to the Babylonian captivity, the word scribe seems to
have been applied to any person who was concerned in writing, in the
same manner as the word secretary is with us. The civil scribes are not
mentioned in the New Testament.
It appears that the office of the ecclesiastical scribes, if this
distinction be allowed, was originally confined to writing copies of the
law, as their name imports; but the knowledge, thus necessarily
acquired, soon led them to become instructers of the people in the
written law, which, it is believed, they publicly read. Baruch was an
amanuensis or scribe to Jeremiah; and Ezra is called “a ready scribe in
the law of Moses, having prepared his heart to seek the law of the Lord,
and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and judgments,” Ezra vii,
6, 10; but there is no mention of the scribes being formed into a
distinct body of men till after the cessation of prophecy. When,
however, there were no inspired teachers in Israel, no divine oracle in
the temple, the scribes presumed to interpret, expound, and comment upon
the law and the prophets in the schools and in the synagogues. Hence
arose those numberless glosses, and interpretations, and opinions, which
so much perplexed and perverted the text instead of explaining it; and
hence arose that unauthorized maxim, which was the principal source of
all the Jewish sects, that the oral or traditionary law was of Divine
origin, as well as the written law of Moses. Ezra had examined the
various traditions concerning the ancient and approved usages of the
Jewish church, which had been in practice before the captivity, and were
remembered by the chief and most aged of the elders of the people; and
he had given to some of these traditionary customs and opinions the
sanction of his authority. The scribes, therefore, who lived after the
time of Simon the Just, in order to give weight to their various
interpretations of the law, at first pretended that they also were
founded upon tradition, and added them to the opinions which Ezra had
established as authentic; and in process of time it came to be asserted,
that when Moses was forty days on Mount Sinai, he received from God two
laws, the one in writing, the other oral; that this oral law was
communicated by Moses to Aaron and Joshua, and that it passed unimpaired
and uncorrupted from generation to generation, by the tradition of the
elders, or great national council, established in the time of Moses; and
that this oral law was to be considered as supplemental and explanatory
of the written law, which was represented as being in many places
obscure, scanty, and defective. In some cases they were led to expound
the law by the traditions, in direct opposition to its true intent and
meaning; and it may be supposed that the intercourse of the Jews with
the Greeks, after the death of Alexander, contributed much to increase
those vain subtleties with which they had perplexed and burdened the
doctrines of religion. During our Saviour’s ministry, the scribes were
those who made the law of Moses their particular study, and who were
employed in instructing the people. Their reputed skill in the
Scriptures induced Herod, Matt. ii, 4, to consult them concerning the
time at which the Messiah was to be born. And our Saviour speaks of them
as sitting in Moses’s seat, Matt. xxiii, 2, which implies that they
taught the law; and he foretold that he should be betrayed unto the
chief priests and unto the scribes, Matt. xvi, 21, and that they should
put him to death, which shows that they were men of great power and
authority among the Jews. Scribes, doctors of law, and lawyers, were
only different names for the same class of persons. Those who in Luke v,
are called Pharisees and doctors of the law, are soon afterward called
Pharisees and scribes; and he who, in Matt. xxii, 35, is called a
lawyer, is, in Mark xii, 28, called one of the scribes. They had
scholars under their care, whom they taught the knowledge of the law,
and who, in their schools, sat on low stools just beneath their seats;
which explains St. Paul’s expression that he was “brought up at the feet
of Gamaliel,” Acts xxii, 3. We find that our Saviour’s manner of
teaching was contrasted with that of those vain disputers; for it is
said, when he had ended his sermon upon the mount, “the people were
astonished at his doctrine; for he taught them as one having authority,
and not as the scribes,” Matt. vii, 29. By the time of our Saviour, the
scribes had, indeed, in a manner, laid aside the written law, having no
farther regard to that than as it agreed with their traditionary
expositions of it; and thus, by their additions, corruptions, and
misinterpretations, they had made “the word of God of none effect
through their traditions,” Matt. xv, 6. It may be observed, that this in
a great measure accounts for the extreme blindness of the Jews with
respect to their Messiah, whom they had been taught by these
commentators upon the prophecies to expect as a temporal prince. Thus,
when our Saviour asserts his divine nature, and appeals to “Moses and
the prophets who spake of him, the people sought to slay him,” John v;
and he expresses no surprise at their intention. But when he converses
with Nicodemus, John iii, who appears to have been convinced by his
miracles that he was “a teacher sent from God,” when he “came to Jesus
by night,” anxious to obtain farther information concerning his nature
and his doctrine, our Lord, after intimating the necessity of laying
aside all prejudices against the spiritual nature of his kingdom, asks,
“Art thou a master in Israel, and knowest not these things?” that is,
knowest not that Moses and the prophets describe the Messiah as the Son
of God? and he then proceeds to explain in very clear language the
dignity of his person and office, and the purpose for which he came into
the world, referring to the predictions of the ancient Scriptures. And
Stephen, Acts vii, just before his death, addresses the multitude by an
appeal to the law and the prophets, and reprobates in the most severe
terms the teachers who misled the people. Our Lord, when speaking of
“them of old time,” classed the “prophets, and wise men, and scribes,”
together, Matt. xxiii, 34; but of the later scribes he uniformly speaks
with censure and indignation, and usually joins them with the Pharisees,
to which sect they in general belonged. St. Paul asks, 1 Cor. i, 20,
“Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this
world?” with evident contempt for such as, “professing themselves wise
above what was written, became fools.”