Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

the song itself implies that the transactions at the brooks of Arnon,' as well as at the Red Sea, were long past. And, consequently, the 'Book of the Wars of Jehovah,' which contained this song, must have been written long after the days of Moses.

251. (ix) See, he hath brought in an Hebrew unto us to mock us. G.xxxix. 14.

The Hebrew servant, which thou hast brought unto us. G.xxxix.17.

For indeed I was stolen away out of the land of the Hebrews. G.xl.15.

There was with us a young man, an Hebrew. G.xli.12.

In the above passages, the word 'Hebrew' is used in a familiar way, as if it were a well-known appellation of a whole people,-well-known even in Egypt-nay, as if the land of Canaan could already be spoken of by Joseph, as the 'land of the Hebrews,' so as to be readily understood by the Egyptians with whom he was speaking. It seems plain that here also expressions, which were current in a later age, have, been allowed inadvertently to slip into the narrative.

252. (x) So also, in Deuteronomy, transactions, in which Moses himself was concerned, are detailed at full length, as by one referring to events long past, when, according to the story, only a very short time could by any possibility have elapsed since they took place, and, therefore, all the circumstances must have been quite fresh in the memory of those, to whom Moses is supposed to be speaking. See D.i,ii,iii, and especially such a passage as the following.

And we took all his cities at that time; there was not a city, which we took not from them, threescore cities, all the region of Argob, the kingdom of Og in Bashan. All these cities were fenced with high walls, gates, and bars, beside unwalled towns, a great many. And we utterly destroyed them, as we did unto Sihon, king of Heshbon, utterly destroying the men, women, and children, of every city.

But all the cattle, and the spoil of the cities, we took to ourselves. And we took at that time, out of the hand of the two kings of the Amorites, the land that was on this side [on the other side] Jordan, from the river of Arnon unto Mount Hermon,—which Hermon the Sidonians call Sirion, and the Amorites call it Shenir,- all the cities of the plain, and all Gilead, and all Bashan, unto Salchah and Edrei, cities of the kingdom of Og in Bashan. For only Og, king of Bashan, remained of the remnant of the giants; behold, his bedstead was a bedstead of iron; is it not in Rabbath of the children of Ammon? nine cubits was the length thereof, and four cubits the breadth of it, after the cubit of a man. D.iii.4-11.

Now we have already seen (173) that only a week or two at the outside could possibly have elapsed since the time when these transactions, according to the story, took place. Even if they had happened within the last few years, Moses could hardly have spoken of them as events of a bygone time in this way. But, with an interval only of a few days, when they had hardly yet breathed from the conflict, it is absolutely impossible that he should have thus addressed them.

253. Thus it is obvious that large portions of the Pentateuch, including the account of the Exodus itself, (see E.x.19, where the word 'sea' is used for 'west'), must have been composed long after the times of Moses and Joshua.

Further, it cannot be supposed that any later writers would have presumed to mix up, without distinction, large and important sections of history of their own composition, with writings so venerable and sacred, as any must have been, which had been handed down from the time of Moses, and were really believed to have been written by his hand, and, chiefly, from the very mouth of Jehovah Himself. It is inconceivable that any pious Israelite, much less a Prophet or Priest, would have dared to commit an act of such profanity, under any circumstances. But, certainly, he could not have done so, without distinguishing in some way the Divine words, as written down by Moses, from his own.

254. There is not, however, a single instance of any such

distinction being drawn throughout the books of Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers; though in one or two places of Deuteronomy, xxxi.30, xxxiii.1, xxxiv, the expressions imply that a later writer is professedly setting forth the words or acts of Moses. And many of the signs of a later date, which we have just been considering, occur in passages, which must, if any, have been written by Moses himself, recording the words which Jehovah had spoken to him. We are compelled, therefore, it would seem, to the conclusion, that the later writer or writers did not believe in the unspeakably sacred character of any older documents, which may have come down to them,-that they did not receive them, as really written by the hand of Moses, and conveying, on his own authority, the astonishing facts of his awful communion with God.

255. While, therefore, it is possible, as far as we know at present, that laws, songs, &c., may be included in the Pentateuch, which are of very ancient date, and may have even been handed down from the times of Moses, we can scarcely suppose that they were written by his hand, any more than we can believe that the whole story of the Exodus, containing, as we have seen, such flagrant contradictions, could have had Moses for its author. In short, without anticipating here the result of closer enquiry, observing only that the instances above adduced occur in so many different places as to cover, so to speak, the whole ground of the Mosaic story, we are warranted already in asserting that the Pentateuch and book of Joshua, generally, must have been composed in a later age than that of Moses and Joshua, and some parts of them, at all events, not earlier than the time of Samuel (245) or of David (249).

209

CHAPTER VI.

ADDITIONAL SIGNS OF LATER DATE IN THE PENTATEUCH.

256. BESIDES those already produced, however, there are a number of minor indications, all pointing to the same result; though, perhaps, if they stood alone, an ingenious criticism might dispose of some of them, by suggesting that glosses of later writers may have crept in by accident, or may, possibly, have been designedly interpolated in the original text.

257. We may notice, for instance, the frequent occurrence of the expression 'unto this day,' in places where it could have had no meaning, unless the day' referred to was considerably later than the time of Moses or Joshua.

[ocr errors]

'Jair, the son of Manasseh, took all the country of Argob unto the coasts of Geshuri and Maachathi, and called them after his own name Bashan-Havoth-Jair, unto this day.' D.iii.14.

But this took place after the conquest of Bashan, v.13, and, therefore, could only have happened (173) a few days before the death of Moses.

'No man knoweth of his (Moses's) sepulchre unto this day. D.xxxiv.6.

‘And Joshua set up twelve stones in the midst of Jordan, in the place where the feet of the Priests, which bare the Ark of the Covenant, stood; and they are there unto this day.' Jo.iv.9.

'Wherefore the name of the place is called Gilgal unto this day.' Jo.v.9.

'And they raised over him a great heap of stones unto this day... Wherefore the name of that place was called the valley of Achor, unto this day.' Jo.vii.26. 'And Joshua burnt Ai, and made it a heap for ever, even a desolation unto this day!' Jo.viii.28. So viii. 29,x.27.

'And Joshua made them that day hewers of wood and drawers of water for the Congregation, and for the Altar of Jehovah, even unto this day, in the place which He should choose.' Jo.ix.27.

P

'Nevertheless, the children of Israel expelled not the Geshurites nor the Maachathites; but the Geshurites and the Maachathites dwell among the Israelites unto this day.' Jo.xiii. 13. So xv.63, xvi.10.

'Hebron, therefore, became the inheritance of Caleb, the son of Jephunneh, the Kenezite, unto this day.' Jo.xiv.14.

6

There are other passages in the Pentateuch, in which the phrase unto this day' occurs, as G.xix.37,38, xxii.14, xxvi.33, xxxii.32, xxxv.20, xlvii.26, D.ii.22, x.8, where, however, the phrase might have been used even by a writer of the age of Moses, as the events referred to were either ancient in his days, or, in the case of D.x.8, (which refers to the separation of the Levites for religious offices,) had taken place, according to the story, nearly forty years before.

258. Again, such expressions as the following indicate a later date than that of Moses.

"And the Canaanite was then in the land.' G.xii.6.

'And the Canaanite and Perizzite dwelt then in the land.' G.xiii.7.

These words obviously imply that, at the time when they were written, the Canaanite was no longer dwelling in the land, as its owner and lord. The Hebrew word t, here translated 'then,' cannot possibly be rendered already,' as some have supposed.

6

Upon the above passages, BLEEK, who maintains that a great many of the laws in the Pentateuch are not only of Mosaic origin, but were actually written down in the wilderness, remarks as follows (Einl. in das A. T. p.202):—

Some have supposed that a contrast is here meant to an earlier time, when the Canaanites were not yet in the land, either because men generally had not yet spread themselves over the earth, or, at all events, because the Canaanites had not yet taken up their position, it being assumed that formerly they had their dwelling in another land. HENGSTENBERG explains it otherwise; he believes that it refers simply to the promise, which God gave to Abraham, v.7, that He would give this land to his seed, so that here we have merely the contrast between the actual present, and the promised future, state of things. But both these explanations are unnatural, and the last worse than the first. A writer in the Mosaic age, even

« ZurückWeiter »