'^l LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY PRINCETON, N. J. Bivision.Ju)..0 \2,'^2.0 Section. d-,3^7 i . .. .117 c. The Incense, . . .. .. . .117 Typical Character of Sacrifices, .. .. . ,118 Complex Idea of Sacrifice, .. . . . ,120 NUMBERS. Derivation of Title, . Contents of the Book. 121 122 CONTENTS. The First and Second Census, History of the Wanderings of Israel, Mosaic Authorship, .... Typical Character of the Wanderings of Israel, The Prophecies of Balaam, The Fragments of Ancient Poetry found in it, Objections against the Book, 1. As to the Food miraculously provided, 2. As to the Number of Israelites, 3. As to the Number of Children, 4. As to the Number of Lambs, Analysis of the Contents, PAGE 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 128 130 131 131 132 DEUTERONOMY. A Recapitulation of the Law and History of the pre ceding Books, . . , , Relation to the other Books, Additional Historical Details found in it, . Additions to the Law, Resemblances to the Prophecies of Jeremiah, Comparison with St. John's Gospel, ' Not a History, but a Homily,' Style, Prophetic Tone and Character, The Documentary Hypothesis applied to it, The alleged Contradictions and Errors in Chronology Analysis of the Contents, .... 135 136 137 137 138 138 139 139 140 141 142 143 CONTENTS. XI APPENDIX I. EVIDENCE FOR THE MOSAIC AUTHORSHIP OF THE PENTATEUCH, External Evidence;^ Internal Evidence, PAGE 145 149 APPENDIX 11. ON THE ALLEGED INCONGRUITY OF THE PENTATEUCH WITH THE AGE OF MOSES. Historical Difficulties, Geographical Difficulties, Archeological Difficulties, Legislative Difficulties, Linguistic Difficulties, 153 157 160 163 170 APPENDIX III. ON THE ALLEGED INCONGRUITY OF THE PENTATEUCH WITH THE PERSON AND CHARACTER OF MOSES, 74 Index, Index to Scripture References, 177 183 THE PENTATEUCH. INTRODUCTION ' Christianity is an historic religion. It claims to be a reasonable belief ; but it does not base itself upon Reason, its foundation is laid on the rock of Fact.' Aids to Faith, Essay vl. p. 237. ' The past, the present, and the future have a connected reference to one great plan, which infinite Wisdom, Prescience, and Power could alone form, reueal, and execute. Every succeeding age throws an increasing light upon these sacred writings, and contributes additional evidence to their divine origin. ' Bishop Tomi.ine. I. The fivefold book which is styled the Pentateuch^ — ' the foundation-stone on which the rest of the Bible is built' — is called by the rabbinical writers, 'The five- fifths of the law.' It comprises a period, according to the commonly received computation, of 2515 years, and according to the system of chronology advocated by Dr. Hales, of 3765 years. It is referred to in Holy Scripture under different names. It is spoken of in Ezra and Nehemiah under the titles of 'The Book of Moses' (Ezra vi. 18 ; Neh. xiii. i ; cf. 2 Chron. xxv. 4, XXXV. 12), or 'The Law of Moses' (Ezra vii. 6), or ' The Book of the Law of Moses ' (Neh. viii. i). ^ Derived from the words -rivTs and t'cv;^o;, which last, having originally the meaning of ' vessel ' (and familiar in Homer in the plural as ' arms '), passed in the Alexandrian Greek to the signification of ' volume ' or 'book.' A 2 THE PENTATEUCH. It was in all probability the same book which, havincf been discovered by Hilkiah the priest, in the reign of Josiah, in the temple, was named 'The Book of the Law of the Lord by the hand of Moses' (2 Chron. xxxiv. 14, marginal reading), and which is also desig- nated ' The Book of the Covenant ' (2 Chron. xxxiv. 30 ; 2 Kings xxiii. 2, 21), 'The Book of the Law' (2 Kings xxii. 8), and ' The Book of the Law of the Lord ' (2 Chron. xvii. 9). Modern critics, however, assert that * The Book of the Covenant,' which was the basis of the reformation of Josiah, did not include the whole Penta- teuch, but is to be confined to the Book of Deuteronomy, in which latter book can be found all that Josiah acted upon. In the New Testament it is commonly called ' The Law' (Matt. xii. 5, xxii. 36, 40 ; Luke x. 26 ; John viii. 5, 17), and sometimes the name of 'Moses' is employed to represent the Pentateuch, as containing the law pro- mulgated by him (Luke xxiv. 27). It is not an unlikely supposition that we owe to the Greek translators the division of the whole into five parts, inasmuch as the names of the different books are not of Hebrew, but Greek origin. The MS. of the Pentateuch forms in the Hebrew one single roll or volume, which is broken up into sections, not into books. It is therefore to be regarded as ' one book in five parts.' ' We are accustomed to see the Pentateuch divided into five books, and to regard it as consisting of five separate writings. But this seems to be an erroneous view of the case, and it has served to give readier currency to inaccurate theories concerning its authorship.' ' ^ Wordsworth, Introduction, vol. i. p. xxviii. INTRODUCTION. 3 II. But some notice, however brief, respcctlnc^ tlie art of writing- in the time of Moses should here, at tlie outset, be introduced, both to obviate misconception and to answer objections that have been raised. It has been satisfactorily proved by recent researches that writing was common in Egypt, not only in hieroglyphics, but in what has been called the cursive hieratic charac- ter, on parchments and papyri, at a period long anterior to Moses. And it is remarked by Ewald, that ' we need not scruple to assume that Israel knew and used writing in Egypt before Moses.' It is evident, therefore, that Moses could have written such a work as the Pentateuch ; and, if he could, it is a priori highly probable that he zvojild have done so. But the Pentateuch itself contains further evidence in confirmation of this view. It informs us that Moses, learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, carried the art of writing with him into the wilderness, and himself * kept a contemporaneous record of events ; ' ^ and it has been regarded as a legitimate deduction, 'that Aaron and others of the higher nobles, equally with Moses, possessed a knowledge of this art.' ^ III. The two main classes of objections which have been directed against the Pentateuch refer to its author- sJiip and its autJienticity. I. With regard to its aiitJiorsJiip;' the onus prcbandi ^ Compare, in proof of this, Ex. xvii. 14, xxiv. 4, xxxiv. 27 ; Num. xxxiii. 2. The word rendered 'officers' in Ex. v. 6-19, signifies literally * scribes,' so that there was a learned class even then. 2 See Dean R. P. Smith in the Bible Educator^ p. 2. An exhaustive treatment of this subject will be found in the work of the Rev. W. Smith, Ph.D., On the Pentateuch, vol. i. pp. 13-21. Cf ileng.slcnl)erj^ On Penta- teuch, vol. i. pp. 394-462. * On the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, sec Appendix I. 4 THE rENTATEUCir. lies with the person who denies the genuineness; for it has been shown by internal evidence that the work is exactly, in style ^ and other characteristics, such a work as Moses might a priori have been expected to produce. * The Pentateuch,' says Delitzsch {Biblical Coimnentary on the Old Testament), 'answers all the expectations which a study of the personal character of Moses could lead us justly to form of any work composed by him. He was one of those master-spirits in whose life the rich maturity of one historical period is associated with the creative commencement of another, in whom a long past culminates, and a far-reaching future strikes its roots. In him the patriarchal age terminated, and the period of the law began ; consequently we expect to find him, as a sacred historian, linking the existing revelation with its patriarchal and primitive antecedents. As the mediator of the law he was a prophet, and, indeed, the greatest of all prophets ; we expect from him, therefore, an incomparable prophetic insight into the ways of God in both past and future. He was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians ; a work from his hand, therefore, would show, in various intelli- gent allusions to Egyptian customs, laws, and incidents, the well-educated native of that land.' Again : * In its general form, too, the Thorah answers the expectations which we are warranted in entertaining of a work of Moses. In such a work we should expect to find the unity of a magnificent plan ; comparative indifi"crencc to the mere details, but a comprehensive and spirited 1 The style of the Pentateuch exhibits greater marks of antiquity than that of any other portion of the Hebrew Scriptures. See a hst of archaisms in the Pentateuch, given in Wordsworth's Introduction, p, xxxiii. note ; and compare Macdonald 07t (he PcniattUich, vol. i. pp. 303-307 ; and Keil nnd Delitzsch's Biblical Comiiuntary oil the Old Tcstaiiicjit, p. 23 (Clark's edition). INTRODUCTION. 5 grasp of the whole and of salient points ; depth and elevation combined with the greatest simplicity. In the magnificent unity of plan we shall detect the mighty leader and ruler of a people numbering tens of thousands; in the childlike simplicity, the shepherd of Midian, who fed the sheep of Jethro far away from the varied scenes of Egypt, in the fertile clefts of the mountains of Sinai.' The book exhibits throughout an acquaintance with Egypt, and with Egyptian memories and recollections ; with the Arabian desert, and other geographical features of the neighbourhood ; with the minutiae of the exodus; with the details of legislation, which scarcely any one except Moses could have possessed, — an acquaintance which is displayed in the most natural, spontaneous, and unstudied manner. ' It is when the Biblical narrative refers to Egypt that the most ample confirmation of its historical accuracy can be produced. Something, indeed, may be gathered from the researches of Layard, Rawlinson, and Loftus amid the ruins of Assyria and Babylonia, but it was not till after the Mosaic age that the great empires on the Tigris and Euphrates rose into importance. Not so, however, with Egypt, the birthplace of the accredited author of the Pentateuch, and whose intimate acquaint- ance with all that related to that country, — its history, manners, and laws, its productions and physical pecu- liarities, — while one of the strongest testimonies in favour of the Mosaic origin of the work, is no less conclusive with respect to its credibility.' ^ It also claims to be the work of Moses, the Pentateuch bearing its own witness to its authorship, and speaking not only constantly, but consistently, of Moses as its ^ Fairbairn's Diclioiiary of the Bible, art. 'Genesis.' 6 THE PENTATEUCH. author.^ There are, moreover, constant indications that the 'author was writing for those very Hebrews who knew Egypt and the desert, but had yet to know personally the topography of Canaan.' IMoreover, there is external evidence for the Mosaic authorship which is not less strong and convincing ; for a long line of historical writers, from the time of Moses to Ezra, attests the fact,^ which is confirmed by the concordant voice of Jew and Greek through century after century, prophets, poets, apostles, confessors, and our Lord Himself being among the witnesses to it. ' From Joshua to Josephus there is, during the whole course of Israel's national history, one continuous and unbroken chain of testimony in its favour. The wit- nesses are of every class, profession, and character ; checking and controlling one another in the different relations of life ; at one time speaking with all the freshness of contemporaries, at another showing their absolute trust in the unquestionableness of their tradi- tion. There are the people themselves, both good and bad, kings, both faithful and apostate, judges and priests, poets, historians, and philosophers, all with one voice acknowledging that the law, of which the nation was so heedless, was nevertheless delivered and written by Moses in the name and authority of Jehovah. * Nor was this striking unanimity due to the blind acceptance of a vague tradition, whose beginnings were lost in prehistoric ages, and might, for aught any one knew, have originated in poetic sagas, in priestly legends, or mythic hero-worship. For, unlike any other people ^ Compare Ex. xvii. 14, xxiv. 3, 4, xxxiv. 27 ; Lev. xxvii. 34 ; Num. xxxiii. 2, xxxvi. 13 ; Deut. xvii. 18, 19, xxvii. 1-13 (cf. fulfilment, Josh. viii. 30-35), xxxi. 9, 24-27, and i. 1-5. 2 On tliis subject see Appendix I., evidence for the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. INTRODUCTION. 7 of the old world, Israel entered on her national career in the full consciousness of historic reality, and in all the developed maturity of ancient civilisation.' Another point of material importance to the argu- ment has been lucidly stated by Bishop Wordsworth. * The Pentateuch,' he says, ' is not like a book which is published by private authority for private use. It was a public national document. It was more than a royal proclamation or a collection of legislative enactments. It was set apart by God Himself from all other writ- ings in the world by being deposited in the tabernacle. It was received by the whole Hebrew nation as the work of Moses, writing under the direct inspiration of God for the benefit of the nation and of the world. This national reception of it as such by the whole Hebrew people is a testimony which ought to outweigh all conjectures of modern times.' The Mosaic authorship, then, may safely be regarded as a fact, which cannot be set aside by any fancied pre- sumptions (such as those adduced by De Wette) founded on the idea of the work being the production of an age more refined and cultivated than that of Moses, — • presumptions refuted by the plainness, simplicity, and inartificial style, which are its marked characteristics. So many and so striking are the references and allu- sions to the Pentateuch which occur in the later books of the Bible, that Hengstenberg is led to trace out in detail the influence of the law upon the whole life, civil and religious, of the nation after their settlement in the land of Canaan. He sees its spirit transfused into all the national literature, historical, poetic, and prophetical ; he argues that, except on the basis of the Pentateuch as already existing before the entrance of the Israelites into Canaan, the whole of their history after the occupa- 8 THE PENTATEUCH. tion of the land becomes an inexplicable enigma. Such a line of proof as this is indirect, and on that very account the more convincing. * Nor would the Hebrew nation have been biassed by any national prepossession to receive the Pentateuch as the work of Moses, writing under the guidance of God. For the Pentateuch exhibits the Hebrew nation as murmuring against God, as rebelling against Him, as condemned by God to banishment from Canaan. It is a history of the sins of the Hebrew nation, and yet it w^as received by the Hebrew nation as the work of Moses himself under the guidance of God. Nations do not readily adopt libels against themselves, and recite them as true histories.' ^ And this universal belief of the Hebrew nation is further reflected in the ' Greek and Roman authors, who, both before and after Christ, received and repeated the tradition of the Jews. Such were Hecat^us of Abdera, the friend of Alexander the Great ; Alex. Polyhistor, contemporary with Sulla ; Apollonius Molon and Ly- simachus ; Nicolaus of Damascus, the friend of Herod ; Numenius, contemporary with the Antonines ; Longinus with Aurelian ; and Juvenal, to whom belongs the line — " Tradidit arcano quodcunque volumine Moses." {Sat, xiv. 102).' ^ All that has been advanced — and we have intention- ally quoted the opinions of well-known scholars and divines in proof of our assertions — is in the strongest antagonism to the theories of those who, like Ewald, think that we ought to assign a far later date than the time of Moses to the composition of the Pentateuch. 1 Bishop Wordsworth's Com/ncnfajy, Introduction, p. xxxii. 2 Rev. VV. Smith, Ph.D., The Penlateuch, vol. i. p. 39. INTRODUCTION. 9 Indeed, Its early composition may be indirectly traced in the possession by the Samaritans ^ of a copy of the Pentateuch, which agrees to a great extent with that of the Jews. 2. Objections against the Pentateuch affecting its aiLtJienticity^ and based upon particular incidents and genealogies, and the remarkable increase of the Hebrew race, and the length of the life of the patriarchs, all fall under the head of ' negative criticism.' - They have been accumulating for more than half a century, and are based upon the assumed incongruity ^ of the Penta- teuch with the character as well as the age of Moses. They may more fitly be relegated to the introduction to the different books in which they are mentioned. From geimine criticism (it has been pertinently observed) the Church has nothing to fear. The two are not naturally foes. When it can be trusted to follow the sound and healthy instincts of its nature, it jars with nothing either around it or above it. It cannot help, like every other science, being in unison with revelation. It is the same voice, though speaking in a different language ; the same agency, though working in a different sphere ; an emanation from the same God, speaking and acting ever in harmony with Himself, though using the medium of different instrumentalities. True faith, therefore, and true criticism can just as little be opposed to each other as eyesight to astronomy, or hearing to the science of acoustics. ^ Many learned writers believe that the Samaritan Pentateueh came into the hands of the Samaritans as an inheritance from the ten tribes whom they succeeded. This is the popular notion. But see article in Dr. Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, ' Samaritan Pentateuch. '_, ^ On 'negative criticism,' sec Appendix II, 3 On the alleged incongruity of the Pentateuch with the person and character of Moses, see Appendix III. 10 THE TENTATEUCII. IV. There is an obviously perceptible unity \\\ the Pentateuch, and there are in it evident marks of design, which cannot be set aside. It has been said by an eloquent writer, that though the Pentateuch ranges over a vast period of time, and over a large extent of space, yet there is a harmonious unity in it from beginning to end. There is a systematic plan in the whole. The design of the work is ever present to the eye. The Pentateuch is preparatory to the gospel. ' The law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ.' The history of the creation, as described in the Pentateuch, is so written as to be a reflection of the new creation in Christ. The history of Adam is so treated as to be a prophecy of Christ. The history of the flood and the ark is written in such a manner as to be a typical adumbration of a Christian sacrament, and of the Christian Church. The materials of the history of Genesis are so selected, methodized, and marshalled, as to be like rays converging steadily from various points to one central focus. Accordingly, the Pentateuch is no 'mere collection of loose fragments carelessly put together at different times,' as some have ventured to affirm, but with no solid basis for their statement. We can trace throughout it the predominant idea of oneness, purpose, and connection. P^or century after century in the history of the Church the Pentateuch was regarded as the work of Moses. It was reserved for critical, or we may perhaps say for sceptical, writers in after ages, such as Hobbes in the 17th century, and at a little later date, in still stronger language, for Spinoza, to dispute the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. About a century after the time of Hobbes, it was reserved for Astruc, the court i^hysician of Louis XIV., about 1753, to evolve from the different INTRODUCTION. II use of the names of God, Elohim and Jehovah/ what is ]) ydiovistic sections, or sections in which the name Jehovah either predominates or is exclusively used ; for (r) mixed sections, in which there is the use of Jehovah and Elohim as equally divided ; and for {d) latent sections, in which no name of God appears, — see Lange's Introduction to Genesis, p. 105 et seq., who also gives a minute account of the meaning and derivation of the different names of God in the Old Testament, pp; 109-I13. 2 Aids to Faith, Essay v. p. 190 et seq. 12 THE PENTATEUCH. His people. If such a distinction is correct, — and it would appear to be so, — then the use of the one name or the other is no necessary evidence of a difference of authorship. We may observe that, from the Eastern habit of repeating- the noun instead of employing a pronoun, the name is constantly repeated. Hence the recurrence of the word ' Elohim ' in the account of creation about thirty-five times. It has been shown by Quarry, that in the first eleven chapters of Genesis the name of Elohim only really occurs fifteen times, and that oi Jehovah twelve times. Elohim, the Mighty One, would seem to be derived from ni^i^ = b^K, *to be strong.' It is a title rather than a name, while Jehovah is 2ipivper name, like * Jupiter' as compared with ' Deus.' The passage in Ex. vi. 2, 3, which has given rise to so much controversy, may be interpreted (according to Bishop Harold Browne) thus : ' I manifested myself to the patriarchs in the character of El-Shaddai, the omnipotent God, able to fulfil that which I had promised ; but as to my name {i.e. my character and attributes) Jehovah, I was not made manifest to them.' The theory, then, of the late invention of the name Jehovah has really no foundation. In Dr. Fair- bairn's Dictionary oj the Bible the following explanation is given : ' The children of Israel were now to think of their God 2iS Jehovah, almighty, and also unchangeable, as He was manifesting Himself to be, whereas it was His almightiness alone of which their fathers had had experience.' There is nothing inconsistent with either the wisdom or the divine inspiration of Moses, that he should make use of historical documents which existed at the time, or incorporate traditions, whether written or oral, which bore upon them the impress of truth. ' Inspiration,' it INTRODUCTION. 1 3 has been truly remarked, ' does not supersede human reason and human labour, but presupposes the use of both.' Inspiration enables human reason to use per- fectly whatever human labour has provided for its use. If such documents existed, and if they v/ere trustworthy, and were ministerial to the end which Moses had in view, then he would be guided by divine inspiration as well as by his own reason to use them. St. Matthew and St Luke incorporate genealogies of Christ in their Gospels. St. Paul quotes Aratus (Acts xvii. 28), Menander (i Cor. xv. 33), and Epimenides (Tit. i. 12) ; two of the evangelists quote speeches of Satan himself (Matt. iv. 3-6 ; Luke iv. 6-9). Again, another class of critics contended boldly for the hypothesis, which has been named the fragmen- tary Jiypothesis, since they could only trace in the Pentateuch a mass of fragments loosely strung together, without order, or cohesion, or relation one to the other, like the world of Epicurus, formed by an accidental combination of atoms. A serried phalanx of distinguished writers, of whom Hengstenberg takes the lead, have shown by incontro- vertible arguments that there is a unity of design throughout the Pentateuch which can only be accounted for on the supposition of a single author having com- posed the whole, and that that author must have been Moses, with whom God ' spake face to face ; ' or, if this be denied, that there is nothing left to preserve us from the 'absurdity of universal literary scepticism.' There is also another hypothesis, which has been called the hypothesis of supplements, or the completion hypothesis {Ergdnzungs-hypothese) , initiated by Stahclin, and advocated by Ewald and others, which, though it recognises in the Pentateuch a systematic unity of design, 14 THE PENTATEUCH. yet imagines that the form in which the Pentateuch now appears was gradually developed and brought to its present condition at a time long subsequent to that of Moses.^ Respecting that time, its advocates have held the most diversified opinions. Stahelin, for example, thought that the Pentateuch was composed in the time of the Judges ; Killisch, in that of David ; Ewald, in the days of Solom.on ; De Wette, in the time of the Kings. It need hardly be said that such divergent theories on the part of those who have ad- vocated this hypothesis, tend greatly to its refutation and rejection by all in whom judgment takes the lead of imagination. Lastly, it is not necessary to insist that Moses with his own hand wrote down every word that occurs in the Pentateuch. It is possible that he may have dictated parts of it to Joshua, who may have acted as his amanuensis, just as St. Paul would seem not unfre- quently to have employed his companions to transcribe his thoughts and words for him. No one would contend that the account of the death of Moses, in the last chapter of Deuteronomy, was not added by another hand, perhaps by that of Joshua, perhaps in a revision by Ezra, or, as some think, by the men of the great synagogue. Such a concession does not in the slightest degree weaken or invalidate the inspiration of the Pentateuch, — a point for which we would most earnestly and resolutely contend. V. Such is the usually received account of the author- ship of the Pentateuch, — an account which has been ^ On Ewald's 'developed hypothesis,' designated by Delitzsch as tlie * crystallization hypothesis,' and on the 'modified complementary liypo- thesis,' see J. P. Lange's bitroduction to Genesis, pp. 114, 115. INTRODUCTION. 1 5 sanctioned by the orthodox school of theologians during many ages, and which has been stamped with the ap- proval of the vast majority of our most trusted and esteemed Biblical scholars. But it would be folly to shut our eyes to the fact, that of late years a new school has sprung up, which has endeavoured either to over- throw or to discountenance a large number of the positions on this subject which have been commonly held and believed. This school claims for itself the monopoly of the title of critical. But as in most theories, so with criticism, there is a false as well as a true, a conservative as well as a destructive, type and development. It may safely be granted that criticism is a real, living, active force ; nor can it be denied that Biblical criticism is a legitimate outgrowth from the science of history. It is, moreover, no less evident that, superadded to the devout, practical, experimental study of the word of God with a view to the soul's progress in spiritual religion, there may exist, side by side, an intel- lectual, scholarly investigation of Scripture, which employs itself in examining into the different books of the Bible, and in attempting to discover their authors, their internal structure, the time when they were written, as well as their relation to other portions of God's word. Between these two processes there need be no rivalry, nor do they necessarily proceed on any but parallel lines. The acute and discriminating critic may be at the same time the devout and spiritual student of the inspired volume. By this new critical school, of which Professor Robertson Smith is one of the chief advocates, it has been maintained that the Pentateuch is complex rather than simple in its structure ; that it is post-Mosaic for l6 THE PENTATEUCH. the most part as regards the time of its composition ; that the idea of Moses being the author of the entire Pentateuch is simply derived from an old Jewish view given in Josephus ; that it was not written in the wilder- ness, but in the land of Canaan, as may be seen (say the critics) from the employment of certain terms (e.g. ' seaward ' for westward, ' toward the Negeb ' for southward), and from the assumption that the geo- graphical knowledge which is shown of Palestine is far greater than that which is shown of the wilderness ; that from internal evidence it could not have been written before the time of the Kings ; that so far from its being a single continuous whole, it is rather a com- bination, as may be traced in the use of different names of God, which indicates a different class of authorities and records from which the statements are derived, inasmuch as in Oriental literature it is usual to reproduce the history in the exact words of original sources, such different sources being easily separated from each other, as, e.g., in the account of the flood ; that to insist upon the whole of the law being the work of Moses, is to introduce no slight difficulty in the way of its recogni- tion as a divine dispensation ; that, in fact, history represents certain things, but not the whole law, as having been written by Moses, who is often spoken of in the third person in a way which proves that he could not have been the author of that part, for that would be to suppose that the formalities of a later literature were traceable in the simple and inartificial style of the Pentateuch ; that the Pentateuch, if written by Moses, was, strange to say, lost, and not known in all its fulness either by prophets or priests of Shiloh, or even by Josiah, a long period of one thousand years ; that by the term Law of Moses wc arc not to under- INTRODUCTION. 1/ stand the law as actually written by him, but rather precepts drawn from Mosaic principles ; that the law continues and carries out, rather than precedes, the work of the prophets, to whom (it is said) a great part of it was unknown ; that if shut up to make our choice between the Mosaic authorship of all the Pentateuch and the sceptical opinions held on the subject, the sceptics must gain the day ; that the complete ritual system of the Pentateuch, which is, in fact, a fusion of prophetic and priestly Torah, was not known in the time of the Judges, or the Kings, or under the first temple, or in the time of Josiah, whose reformation was based only on Deuteronomy ; that there are in fact three distinct groups of laws — the First Legislation, which was of a simple, primitive character, addressed to an agricultural people, living in the land of Canaan, consisting of laws not ideally perfect, where ritual had but little prominence, and where Jehovah was behind the law, and where also a plurality of sanctuaries was admitted ; the Deuteronomic Code, in which in the place of many sanctuaries one was substituted, in which Macceba and Ashera were declared unlawful, under which the prophets taught, who were not politicians, but men whose influence lay in their converse with God, a scheme based on prophetic lines ; and a third and fmal development, viz. the Ritual Law or the Levitical system, which afforded a complete contrast to the popular worship which was before prevalent, its prin- ciple being the separation of Israel as a people from the neighbouring nations ; in which system prophecy did not, as in the former case, move in the same plane ; but in which new forms arose that prepared the way for Christianity, forms adapted to the second temple ; a scheme of ritual, under which B l8 THE PENTATEUCH. Israel is no longer reg-arded as a nation, but as a Church. These, then, are some of the principal positions advocated by the new school, though they cannot refuse to allow that, in many points, these positions have been held by the rationalistic schools of a former age. Many of this school would, no doubt, deny that their sym- pathies were in the least degree rationalistic, or that they desired to eliminate from Holy Scripture the supernatural, miraculous, or prophetical elements, or that they intentionally cast any doubts upon the in- spiration of God's word. But, nevertheless, though we would give them full credit for these assertions, the conclusion cannot be avoided, that the tone of mind which they exhibit, the mental attitude which they assume, has a tendency to lead, if not themselves, at least others who follow them, into a questioning, self- satisfied method of criticism, — a criticism that would appear to find a certain satisfaction in the discovery of suggested contradictions, that seems to delight to pry into questions which lie outside and beyond the grasp of man's intellect, and that would fain view Scripture too exclusively on its human side, to the neglect of its divine aspect and character. To some of the statements which have been advanced we would offer a brief reply in passing. It would be unwise to meet with a decisive negative the asserted combination of different documents trace- able in the books of the Pentateuch. Such documents may, no doubt, have been introduced into the sacred text, and it is quite possible that in some cases (as, e.g., in the narrative of the flood) such a documentary theory may tend to simplify and elucidate the sacred text. In certain cases, also, the theory derived from INTRODUCTION. 1 9 the use of the different names of God may hold good, although in many other cases the argument would seem to have been strained to a tension which it cannot safely or wisely stand. But — even though such a concession be made — we cannot allow that the Mosaic record is consequently to be regarded as destitute of the oneness, the unity, or the simplicity which we have claimed for it. The parts may be drawn from different sources, but yet they may be worked up, amalgamated, and woven together by one master-mind into one consistent and uniform whole. Again, we may concede that the Levitical Code, in its full completeness and perfection, may have been more adapted to the age of Ezra and that which succeeded him, and that many portions of it may appear to have been but slightly or imperfectly carried out during that which has been named the period of the P'irst Legislation, and even during the time of the Deuteronomic Code. But, though we grant this, it would not at all neces- sarily follow that, in consequence of its greater suitability and adaptation to the later period of the Jewish history, and because many of its ritual details were scarcely ever carried out in the earlier times of the state, Moses, therefore, was not the author of the whole system. There is nothing inconsistent in the idea that Moses, through the inspiration of God, should have been commissioned to reveal a system of laws, many of which would be less adapted to the earlier than to the later period over which its influence was designed to extend. If, as we believe, it was the divine purpose to declare the law by Moses, there would be nothing derogatory to our conceptions of God in the supposition that He commissioned Moses to publish a scheme 20 THE rEXTATEUCII. which would have its full and complete development in a remoter age, or that many of its sanctions and precepts and institutions would have but little field for their manifestation in the period that immediately suc- ceeded the age of the great legislator. How else could it have been arranged on the supposition — which the voice of so many ages has attested — that the law was given by ]\Ioses? Again, it would scarcely appear either logical or rea- sonable to brand Avith the name of * nonsense ' the explanation which has been offered for the use of the terms ' seaward ' for westward, and ' toward the Negeb ' for southward, in the Pentateuch, — the explanation, namely, that such a phraseology may have dated from patriarchal times, and still have been employed in the desert, where such terms would not have been so strictly accurate, in a geographical point of view, as they would have been when Canaan was the settled abode of the people. But when we consider the immense influence which the age of the patriarchs could not have failed to exert upon the exiles in Egypt, — how the ideas con- nected with that brighter period must have tinged the thoughts and expressions of the race suffering and sorrowing under Egyptian bondage ; how we may fairly infer a priori that, while their life of slavery was a historic blank, with nothing in it to cheer and affect their hearts and minds, the glorious past of the patri- archal days of the nation — the age of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob — must have lived and flourished in their thoughts and memories through a cherished tradition ; and when we take also into consideration the fixity of ideas and institutions among Eastern nations, so unlike the rapid changes and alternations of modern civilisation and of Western peoples, — when we think of INTRODUCTION. 21 all this, there will appear nothing strange, certainly nothing absurd, in the supposition that such geographical terms were handed down from father to son, and were sanctioned by ordinary use and wont, even though they did not technically and accurately, according to their original meaning and derivation, express the exact geo- graphical truth. But we must here rest content with this general answer, and leave the answers to many of the statements which have been adduced as prevalent among the critical school to those parts of this work which examine in detail the separate books of the Pentateuch. GENESIS. In the first page of this sacred boob a child may learn more in one hour than (ill the philosophers in the world learned without it in thousands of years.' Fuller. The separatist theory, not satisfied, as it should have been, with pointing out in Genesis pre-Mosaic documents, breaks up the whole Pentateuch into un-Mosaic fragments, contributed chiefiy by post-Mosaic writers.' Rev. W. Smith, Ph.D., TAe Pentateuch, Preface, vol. i. I. The Book of Genesis cannot fail to possess an un- dying interest alike for the Christian, the philosopher, and the historian.^ Not only is it the oldest book, or at least one of the oldest books in the world, — for Herodotus, the Greek historian, who is called the ' Father of History,' was but coeval with Malachi, the last of the Old Testament writers ; and Homer himself could scarcely have been anterior to the prophet Isaiah, — but it claims to be a truthful history, and also a ^ The term 'Genesis,' like 'Pentateuch,' is, of course, derived from the Greek language, Tevso-/,', LXX., i.e. 'original,' or 'origination,' ' beginning,' or 'production.' The Hebrew title is n''*^•^?'^^, i.e. 'in the beginning.' Compare the first verse of the New Testament, (ilfiXos ytvUiwi (Matt. i. i), and also compare the use of Iv apxv (' i" the beginning '), the initial words of the LXX. version of the Bible, with the iv a.f>x,V ^^ ^^''^ commencement of St. John, which Gospel treats especially of the eternal generation of the Son of God. The Book of Gener;is comprises the history of 2369 years according to the common computation, and of 3619 years according to that of Dr. Hales. The Jews divide it into twelve Paraschioth, or larger sections, and forty-three Siderim, or smaller ones. 22 GENESIS. 23 religious history. It is not, like the sacred books of the Chinese, a confused mass, partly speculative, partly cosmogonical ; it is not, like the old Vedas, a simple collection of sacred hymns ; it is not, like the Zenda- vesta, a mere philosophic view of the origin of the world ; nor does it resemble the fanciful and extrava- gant mythologies of Greece and Rome. Its claims are far higher, and wider, and deeper than these. It professes, indeed, to be a truthful history of facts, to be regarded and examined like other facts. ' Holiness, sublimity, truthfulness — these are the im- pressions left upon the mind of the thoughtful reader of Genesis. There is meant by this its subjective truth- fulness. It is no invention. The one who first wrote it down, or first spoke it to human ears, had a perfect conscious conviction of the presence to his mind of the scenes so vividly described, and a firm belief in a great objective reality represented by them. It is equally evident, too, that it is the ofi"spring of one conceiving mind. It never grew, like a myth or legend. It is one total conception, perfect and consistent in all its parts. There is nothing ideal about it. Myths and legends are the products of time ; they have a growth. Thus other ancient cosmogonies, though bearing evidence of derivation from the one in Genesis, have had their suc- cessive accretions and deposits of physical, legendary, and mythological strata. This stands alone in the world. It has nothing national about it. It is no more Jewish than it is Assyrian, Chaldaean, Indian, Persian, or Egyptian. It is no imitation. Copies may have been made from it, more or less deformed, but this is an original painting. The evidence is found in its simplicity, unity, and perfect consistency. Its great antiquity is beyond dispute. It was before the dawning 24 THE PENTATEUCH. of anything called science. We are shut up to the conclusion of Its subjective truthfulness and its subjec- tive authenticity. At a very early day, to which no profane history or chronology reaches, some man, who w^as not a philosopher, not a poet, not a fable-maker, but one who "walked with God," and was possessed of a most devout and reverent spirit, — some such man, having a power of conception surpassing the ordinary human, or else Inspired from above, had present to his soul in some way, and first wrote down or uttered In words, this most wonderful and sublime account of the origin of the world and man. He believed, too, what he wrote or uttered. He was conscious of some source, whether by words or vision, whence he had received it, and he had no doubt of its relation to an outward objective truth which it purported to set forth.' ^ The narrative contained In the Book of Genesis Is of world - wide Interest and extent. As the gospel message was addressed to all nations, peoples, and lan- guages, — in fact, to every creature under heaven, — so also the Book of Genesis Is connected with the fortunes of the whole race of mankind from the very beginning of all things. It has a wider scope than the simple promulgation of the Mosaic institutions and polity. It gives a general Interest to those more local and national institutions, by pointing out their relation and bearing upon the entire human family. It lifts the veil from the early obscurity of all things, and clearly shows the connection of the Jewish race with the Gentile world, and with man's universal history. It is, above all things, a religions history of facts, which go back to the very first commencement of all things. It Is this religious element which especially ^ Lange On Genesis. GENESIS. 25 characterizes it, and which marks it off by so clear a line of demarcation from all other histories and writings which lay claim to a venerable antiquity. It is abso- lutely necessary to have this aspect of our subject kept continually in view, when we endeavour to form an accurate conception of the work as a whole. It is the main clue to its right understanding. For if we regarded it simply as a philosophical work, we might fairly search for scientific theories and terms, and perhaps for specu- lations on geology, and astronomy, and physics, and search in vain ; or if we viewed it as a pure history, we might be surprised and dissatisfied at finding so little said of mighty empires, and powerful monarchs, and famous wars, which we should have thought would have naturally formed a prominent feature in a record of ancient times. But when we look upon Genesis as a religious history, written with the definite object and purpose of tracing out the great dealings of God with His people, alike in creation and redemption, in their fall and in their restoration, in giving them a law, in establishing them in a land which they could call their own, and in their theocratic form of government, the true nature of the book becomes apparent. We no longer marvel, either at the little space given to the history of powerful kings and dynasties uncon- nected with the chosen race, or at the absence of all theories on physical science, or at the account and explanation of natural phenomena in the simplest lan- guage of ordinary life, and from what may be thought an unscientific standpoint. Nor, on the contrary, are we astonished at the minuteness and fulness of the descriptions which we meet with in the Book of Genesis, of the primeval happiness of our first parents, of their 26 THE PENTATEUCH. temptation, sin, punishment, and restoration. We see a reason for the copious details given respecting those great patriarchs, Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, through whom were to come down all those inestimable blessings which were in store for the pro- mised seed, — the law to guide, the land to contain, the Messiah to redeem and restore the people whom Jehovah had chosen to Himself out of all the families of the earth for a royal nation and a peculiar people. Nor, again, are we surprised to meet with such various and striking predictions of that future Messiah, of the seed of the woman that was to bruise the serpent's head (iii. 15), of the blessing on all the nations of the earth through the line of faithful Abraham (xii. 3, xviii. 18, xxii. 18, xxvi. 4, xxviii. 14), of the sceptre not departing from Judah until Shiloh come (xlix. 10), nor of the typical relation in which Adam is represented as standing to the Second Adam (i Cor. xv. 45), and Melchizedek and Isaac to the future Christ (Heb. vi. 20, xi. 18, 19). Regarded from this standpoint, the Book of Genesis acquires a unity of design and structure, a cohesion of all its different parts as together forming one complete whole, a oneness of aim and object. We can trace the presence, as it were, of one golden thread systematically running through its whole woof and texture. The great facts of the religious history of man then stand out in their appointed places, and with the importance which attaches to each severally in the scheme of redemption. The creation of all things as the basis of all, ushered in by a brief preface, the 'conceptions in which are as grand as they are philosophically true ; ' 1 God all in all, the 1 Dean R. Payne Smith, The Bible Educator, vol. i. p. 50. ' There are three words employed in the Old Testament in reference to the production GENESIS. 27 sole Author of being, the One who alone both is and works by His own power, and matter created by Him and subordinate to His will ; man's primitive happiness in Paradise, the temptation, the fall, the entrance of sin into the world and death by sin, the ruin of the deluge, God's covenants with the patriarchs, the promise of a Redeemer in the fulness of time, the genealogy of the chosen seed, the Egyptian bondage, the deliverance from it by the hands of Moses, the journey through the wilderness, the giving of the law on Sinai, and the entrance into the land of promise, — all these grand and important events stand forth in the history of the Pentateuch with a light and a clearness which, when once appreciated, can never be forgotten. Thus we can trace in this history not only a local and a special aspect, but also a world - wide and a universal character. The special and peculiar people are preparing the way for a redemption and a restora- tion which shall equally affect and benefit the whole of the peoples, nations, and languages of the universal family of man. But perhaps there is nothing which stamps the Book of Genesis, and indeed all Scripture, with so definite a mark of divine origin, as the element of prophecy which pervades the whole. Its gradual development and ex- pansion throughout the various dispensations — from the moment when, in the midst of man's hopelessness and despair, the promise was given that the seed of the of the world, — Bard, He created ; Yatzdr, He formed ; Asdh, He made, — the first term being appropriated exclusively to God alone, who is alone called t^"]'!^' Creator. Creation, therefore, according to the Hebrew, is a divine act ; though, according to its etymology, it does not necessarily imply a creation out of nothing, it does signify the divine producticm of something new, something that did not exist before.' — Dr. M'Caul, Aids to Faith, p. 203. 28 THE PENTATEUCH. woman should bruise the serpent's head till the fulness of time came, and God was made man — give to Holy Scripture not only a living force and unity, but prove besides this, that He who could thus take in at a glance the present, past, and future, must be God Himself And, once more, the tmity of Genesis is shown by a ' characteristic formula ' i which runs through the whole, constituting and forming ten successive links in the chain which binds the whole together in one. This formula is : ' These are the generations/ the ' Toledoth,' the origins, — and then, generally, the histories of any- thing. (Cf Gen. ii. 4, v. i, vi. 9, x. i, xi. 10, 27, xxv. 12, 19, xxxvii. 2.) We cannot wonder, then, at the expression of the great German Reformer, Luther : ' Nihil pttlchrhis Genesis niJiil titiliiLs^ ' There is nothing more beautiful than the Book of Genesis, nothing more useful.' There is, indeed, a beaitty in it, which cannot be discovered in any other ancient work : there is a utility in it which we cannot fail, on inquiry and investigation, to appreciate. It is the record of the creation of the material world and of the founding of the spiritual world ; and as such it stands at the head of all Scripture as the authentic basis of the whole Bible, while, in the most special sense, it is the basis of the Pentateuch. It is, says Lange, the root whose trunk extends through all Scrip- ture, and whose crown appears in the Apocalypse ; or, as Delitzsch has expressed the same idea : ' Genesis and Apocalypse, the Alpha and Omega of the canonical writings, correspond to each other. To the creation of the present heaven and the present earth corresponds the creation of the new heaven and the new earth on the last ' See Speaker's Co77iinentary, vol. i. pp. 22, 23, and Wordsworth's Holy Bible, Introduction, p. xxix. GENESIS. 29 pages of the Apocalypse. To the first creation, which has as its object the first man Adam, corresponds the new creation, which has its outgoing from the Second Adam. Thus the Holy Scriptures form a rounded, completed whole, — a proof that not merely this or that book, but also the canon, is a work of the Holy Spirit.' II. The Book of Genesis has, no doubt, its difficulties ; and what ancient writing is free from them ? It is not exempt from all mystery and ambiguity ; if it were so, would it not be an argument against its authenticity ? For * incomprehensibility is inseparable from God and from all His works.' It may not satisfy the cravings of the speculative man of science in its descriptions of the phenomena of nature, of the creation of the world in six days, of the existence of light prior to the existence of the sun, of the descent of all the families of the world from a single pair, of the real historical character of the fall, of the extent of the deluge, of the confusion of tongues, of the one origin of language, of the genea- logies of the patriarchs and the length of their lives. Nevertheless, it has been shown by accumulated evidence, and by the testimony of some of the wisest philosophers whom the world has seen, that statements which have been controverted and called in question on supposed principles of science, have after all been found to be correct, or, at least, not contradictory to the laws of natural philosophy. ' A comparison of the actual state- ments of Moses with the discoveries and conclusions of modern science is so far from shaking, that it confirms our faith in the accuracy of the sacred narrative. We are astonished to see how the Hebrew prophet, in his brief and rapid outline sketched three thousand years ago, has anticipated some of the most wonderful of 30 THE TENTATEUCII. recent discoveries, and can ascribe the accuracy of his statements and language to nothing but inspiration. . . . Faith, therefore, feels no more fear of criticism than of science, being assured that neither can do anything against the truth, but for the truth.' ^ Objections grounded on theories of language have, after deeper study and a more extended basis of investigation, proved not to be real or valid. It is unreasonable in a work designed for all mankind, in all ages and at all times, to look for a scientific method of description and a technical mode of expression, which scientific men themselves would discard in their ordinary conversation, if they wished to avoid the stigma of pedantry and affectation. Dr. Harold Browne has justly remarked, that 'in the present state of our knowledge, both critical and scientific, a patient suspension of judgment on many points seems our wisest attitude. . . . Modern discovery is yet in a most imperfect condition, the testimony of the rocks and of the stars but imperfectly read, whilst there is room for no small diversity of sentiment on the meaning of many of the expressions in Genesis. . . . Certainly as yet nothing has been proved which can disprove the records of Genesis, if both the proof and the records be interpreted largely and fairly.' III. There are, in fact, two great books in which God has inscribed the record of His perfections, — the book of Nature and the book of Revelation. Inasmuch as both proceed from one and the same Divine Author, they must necessarily be in harmony the one with the other. If intelligently read, and rightly interpreted, they will naturally tell the same tale, and bear witness alike to the infinite power, wisdom, justice, truth, and ^ M'Caul, Aids to Faiih, pp. 232-234. GENESIS. 31 mercy of their heavenly Author. But these two books are laid open for vuvi to decipher and interpret ; and man, from the very constitution of his nature, is liable to various errors, both of heart and head. Hence there arises in some minds a tendency to view these two records as rival systems ; to study them independently the one of the other ; to imagine that their response may possibly, nay probably, be contradictory ; not seldom, indeed, to ' hold to the one and despise the other.' Thus it is, that the student of the book of Nature is commonly too much disposed to magnify reason and to depreciate faith. Standing on what he deems the impregnable basis of his own intelligence ; inclined to form a too flattering estimate of the claims of science, of the infallibility of his logical deductions, and of the mathematical certainty of the matter on which his reasoning processes are employed, — he is tempted to exaggerate the relative importance of that book of Nature which he professes to interpret, and at once too hastily imagines that, if any apparent diver- gence is traceable between the two records, some error exists in the book of Revelation, and pronounces with a ready assurance that the statements of Scripture are incorrect and untrustworthy. He has, to speak gene- rally, neither the patience nor the humility to wait and consider whether he has really read that record of Revelation aright, whether his interpretation of its language may not possibly be incorrect, whether, after all, there may not be a real and substantial agreement under an apparent divergence of thought or language.^ ^Compare Aids to Failh, pp. 320, 321. 'Why, then, must we be puzzled because some recently -discovered geological phenomena seem hard to reconcile with a few verses in one chapter of Genesis? Are we to forget the marvellous harmony between God's word and His works. 32 THE PENTATEUCH. On the other hand, the student of the book of Revelation is often tempted by this rash presumption on the part of the advocate of Nature, to rush into an opposite extreme, and decry all physical science as in itself antagonistic to scriptural truth, and as exerting an injurious influence over the minds of its professors. Now, as we have already suggested, both these estimates are alike false and mistaken. The two volumes cannot — if they emanate from the same Divine Author — be really opposed to each other. Their teaching must be substantially identical in mean- ing, though possibly conveyed in a language which may seem at variance to a finite mind. They may not, indeed, discuss matters with an equal fulness of treat- ment ; brevity in the one may be matched by copious- ness in the other. Sometimes Nature speaks, and Revelation holds her peace ; while, at another time. Revelation may utter her voice, and Nature may main- tain a reverent silence. There can be no essential or 2Lltiinate discord between science and religion, philosophy and theology. The God of reason and the God of revelation is one and the same, and cannot contradict Avhich a general view of both convinces us of, because there are some small fragments of both which we have not yet learned to fit into each olher? God's works rightly read are not likely to contradict God's word rightly interpreted. There will be for a time, perhaps for all time, a}iparent difficulties. When new questions arise, at first many will feel that it is hopeless to attempt to solve them. Some will despair, some will try to smother inquiry, some will rush into Atheism, and others will fall back into superstition. Patience is the proper temper for an age like our own, which is in many ways an age of transition. Sober views, patience, prayer, a life of godliness, and a good conscience, will no doubt keep us from making shipwreck of faith. What now seems like a shadow may only be the proof that there is light behind it. And even if, at times, there should come shadows seeming like deep night, we may hope that the dawn of the morning is but the nearer.' GENESIS. 33 Himself. The difficulty lies only in our innpcrfcct knowledge and comprehension of the book of Nature, or of the Bible, or of both. ' The abnegation of reason,' says Bishop Lightfoot, ' is not the evidence of faith, but the confession of despair. Reason and reverence are natural allies, though untoward circumstances may sometimes interpose and divorce them.' Such, then, being the absolute identity of the teaching of the books of Nature and Revelation, as being the product of the mind and purpose of one and the same Almighty Author, — but, nevertheless, such being the apparent relative divergence between the two, as it is presented to the eye of fallible man, whose reading and interpreta- tion alike of Nature and Revelation may possibly be equally incorrect, — it is easy to understand how the discoveries and deductions of modern science in the volume of Nature may be supposed by their advocates to be inconsistent with, if not directly opposed to, the declarations made in the volume of Inspiration. Such a tendency of the human intellect may have existed from the very earliest times ; but, with the marvellous upgrowth of natural science in modern days, and with all the pretensions naturally fostered by such a remark- able progress, this tendency has of late been far more obtrusively manifested. The subject-matter of the controversy has indeed varied with the varying times. Formerly the questions which called forth a conflict of opinion were chiefly questions in connection with astronomy. Of late years, however, the discussion has turned more on the scriptural record of the creation,^ on the discoveries and claims of ^ Infidelity, it has been remarked by Dr. Kurtz {Bible and Astronomy), has always made the doctrine and history of creation a principal point of attack. Deism and Pantheism, whether separately or unitedly, have here C 34 THE PENTATEUCH. geology, on the extent of the flood, on the unity and the antiquity of the human race, and other kindred topics. Such have been some of the different battlefields on which the conflicts between Science and Revelation have been fought. And very often the contest has been carried on with such rancour, that the advocates, for example, of geology have not confined themselves to the simple assertion of their own views and theories, but have stoutly and defiantly maintained that the conclusions at which their favourite science has arrived were at variance with and destructive of the declarations and utterances of the inspired word on the page of Revelation. Such being the case, it becomes imperatively neces- sary to examine and compare the statements which are respectively advanced by Science and Revelation, to in- quire into the differences and even contradictions which have been supposed to exist between them, and to seek to discover any light or illustration that they may mutually shed on each other. Since, however, the chief end and object of a divine revelation is to teach men those great moral and religious truths that tend to the renovation of the heart and the guidance of the life and conduct, it would be alike un- reasonable and unphilosophical to expect to find either the laws, or discoveries, or principles of natural science, entered the lists against the Bible. More particularly has Pantheism con- troverted the Biblical doctrine of creation, while Deism has objected to the Biblical narrative of its process. Deists profess to believe in a creation out of nothing, and hence controvert only the claim of our narrative to be regarded as of divine rcvelatioii. On the other hand, Pantheists, who deny the independent and personal existence of God, and the origin of the world by the mere will of a personal God, object chiefly to the Biblical doctrine of creation. GENESIS. 35 as, e.^., of astronomy, or geology, or chemistry, laid down or taught, either explicitly or implicitly, in the book of Revelation. Nor should we expect to light upon anticipations there of the discoveries which have been made of late years in the domain of physical science. The page of Scripture was obviously written, as we have seen, with a different design. Nor, again, ought we, as a natural consequence from what has just been stated, to lay too much stress upon what have been regarded as confirmations of science in Holy Scripture. The great point on which we ought to be specially earnest is this : to be able to show that the principles and the statements of Scripture are not at variance with those of science, and that there is no antagonism between the two. It is a negative argument which we should be contented to establish ; nor should we venture upon the more difficult task of attempting to reconcile all the teaching of Scripture and Science together. That Scripture, however, has fairly estab- lished its claim to be a revelation from God, from the very truthfulness of its statements in regard to the creation and history of this world, may be indirectly seen by a consideration of the scientific errors into which different false religious systems (as, e.g., Hinduism) have deeply sunk, and so have entirely destroyed, in the minds of the more educated of their votaries, their claim to be true revelations of the mind and will of God. Into similar errors, mistakes, and false scientific state- ments we may safely assert that Holy Scripture has never fallen. The objections brought forward against the teaching of Revelation on such points have generally proved, when carefully and accurately considered, to refer rather to the mode of expression and the language which Scripture has employed in treating of these 36 THE PENTATEUCH. subjects, than to any question as to facts or objective realities. I. Thus the difficulties which have been felt to exist in regard to the statements of the revealed word on the subject of astronoviy may be regarded as apparent rather than real, as referring more to the mode of ex- pression than to the truth itself. If we premise one or two cautions on this point, much difficulty and diver- gence of views may be obviated. It is to be observed that the Bible, as being a revela- tion intended for all men, educated and uneducated, at all times, and in all countries, is naturally written in such a language as would appeal most effectually to the minds of its varied readers. Hence it is obvious that a strictly scientific form of language, adapted to the scientific knowledge of some particular period or other of the world's history, would be manifestly out of place. It could find no standpoint on which to rest, no era in the history of the world on which to fix as the definite period in relation to which it might formulate, with scientific precision, its statements ; since what might be clear and precise in one age would be utterly obscure and meaningless in another. Hence we feel no hesita- tion in asserting that the Bible could not do otherwise than it has done, namely, employ the language, not of philosophical and scientific treatises, but of appearances ; such a language as the generality of men employ in the expression of their ideas. This language may not always be absolutely correct according to abstract prin- ciples of science, but it is the language in which the mass of mankind are in the habit of speaking, and in which a Newton or a Herschel would have spoken, and did speak, when they addressed themselves to ordinary hearers, and wished to be understood. Such a language GENESIS. 37 of appearances, though it may not always be scientifi- cally and absolutely perfect, is relatively correct, and conveys a true impression of what is felt and believed by the mass of mankind. There is no contradiction, indeed, between appearances and facts. Such appear- ances are facts to the majority of men, and are employed by scientific writers themselves when recording the re- sults or subject-matter of their discoveries. {a) When, e.g., Scripture asserts, 'The sun was risen upon the earth ' (Gen. xix. 23) ; ' His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it ' (Ps. xix. 6) ; ' The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose ' (Eccles. i. 5), — it speaks in a language capable of being used, whether under the prevalence of the Ptolemaic or Co- pernican system of astronomy, — a language relatively true to the senses of men, though not absolutely correct according to scientific exactness, an exactness, however, that even a philosopher would think it pedantic to employ in the ordinary intercourse of life. {b) So, in the same way, objections have been raised against the use of the word * firmament,' as conveying a wrong idea. But here it becomes a question of the interpretation of language, rather than of any incorrect- ness as attaching to the subject-matter itself. The word in the original translated j^r;;/^;;/^:;//', — the transla- tion probably resulting from a mistaken notion derived from ancient philosophical theories, — which has been perpetuated also in the LXX. ore^sw/za, and the Vulgate ' Firmamentum,' ought properly to have been rendered (as shown by Dr. M'Caul, Aids to Faith, p. 220 et seq., and as appears in the marginal reading 'expansion/ before astronomical and geological questions were thought of) by the word expanse, i.e. something spread 38 THE PENTATEUCH. out, 'expansio,' for suck is the exact equivalent of the Hebrew word (-^"P")). {c) So, too, in regard to the objection respecting the fancy that Scripture exhibits the iiJiinobility of the earth, — a controversy in which GaHleo played so famous a part, — taken for the most part from such passages as Ps. xciii. i, 'The world also is established that it cannot be moved' (cf. Ps. civ. 5, cxix. 90, 91), the diffi- culty will be seen to fall under the explanation above advanced, and to be accounted for from the employment in Scripture of a language appealing to the senses of men, and only liable to perversion from the intentional misconceptions of would-be philosophers. {d) And so also as to the question that ligJit must must have existed before the sun, — since geology has discovered pre-Adamite animals with eyes, and plants requiring light, — there is no real difficulty. The sceptical question of Voltaire, ' How did God create the light before the sun t ' has been satisfactorily answered by Dr. M'Caul,^ who has proved that the discoveries with regard to heat, combustion, electricity, and galvanism, show that there may be light independent of the sun, and that the progress of science has neutralized the objection that light could not exist before the sun. He has also shown that our translation of the Hebrew admits of improvement, and that Moses does not call the Sun Or, light, but Maor, a place or instrument of light, a luminary — ^just what modern science has dis- covered it to be. ' Moses,' he adds, * did not say that the body of the sun or moon or stars were created on the fourth day, but, according to the Hebrew, God said. Let there be light-holders in the firmament of the heavens . . . and let them be for light-holders in the 1 'Mosaic Record of the Creation,' Aids to Faith, pp. 209-212. GENESIS. 39 firmament of the heaven, to give h'ght upon the eartli ; and God made two great hght-holders . . . and God gave (i^!y them in the firmament of the heaven to give Hght upon the earth, and the stars.' The Hebrew word for make is ' Asah,' which means, viakc^ make ready ^ prepare. It is, moreover, to be noticed that the Scripture WTiters take their stand at no imaginary centre of the universe or solar system, but view the varied phenomena of the earth and heavens from the more natural stand- point of this world, and speak and write as observers from it. Such a description is sufficiently accurate for all practical purposes ; it leads to no real confusion of thought ; and it is the very form of stating things which we might expect in a work whose design was not to teach science or scientific principles, but to appeal to the heart of man, and to convey a message to a sinful race which should lift them out of their fallen state, and produce, if possible, a moral regeneration in their hearts and lives, and so prepare them for a future life of happiness in heaven. 2. But the difficulties which it was supposed that astronomy, as treated of in Scripture, presented, have of late years somewhat faded away before those difficulties which the Jiistory of tJie creation^ as recorded in the first chapter of Genesis, has presented, when brought into sharp contrast with the scientific teaching of modern geology on the same subject. The contrast has been brought forward with all the prominence and all the sharpness of outline that scientific ingenuity — unaffected and uninfluenced by any reverence for the word of Scripture — could devise. The various and perhaps divergent opinions of the advocates of scriptural teaching have been paraded with 40 THE PENTATEUCH. an eager satisfaction ; mistakes Into which some may have fallen have been Incisively criticized ; and some misbelievers have not even hesitated to assert that ' ex- tinguished theologians lie about the cradle of every science, as the strangled snakes beside that of Hercules,* and that the 'cosmogony of the semi-barbarous Hebrew is the incubus of the philosopher and the opprobrium of the orthodox.' The first and foremost difficulty which is usually brought forward relates to the age of the zuorld. It has been thus stated : ^ ' According to the teachings of geology and astronomy, the existence of the heavens and the earth is to be reckoned by myriads of thousands of years. According to Moses, it Is alleged, they are of yesterday.' Or, again, the case has been put thus : '-^ ' The statement of Genesis Is to this effect, that man was created, and placed on the earth, in Asia, in the garden of Eden, six or seven thousand years ago ; that his creation took place on the last of six successive days, during which the earth was changed from a dark, waste, and unformed condition, to a well-furnished habitation, by signal acts of creative energy ; and that a seventh day followed, or a Sabbath of rest, which God appointed for a lasting ordinance, because on this seventh day He rested from all His work which He created and made.' ' Now, geological science,' he adds, ' discloses a long series of changes, through which our earth had passed before any traces are found of man's presence, and a distinct fauna and flora in each of those eras, amount- ing to many thousand extinct species. The question is, how these two statements are to be reconciled, or whether they are wholly incompatible.' ^ Aids to Faith, p. 190. 2 The Bible and Modern Thought, p. 299. GENESIS. 41 Such is the maui difficulty ; and the point at issue is, Can this apparent divergence of statement be rationally and satisfactorily explained ? A solution of the diffi- culty would seem to be possible, without doing violence to Scripture, or refusing to credit the deductions and inferences of geological science. In order to effect a reconciliation between statements which, on the surface, may seem to be discordant with each other, tivo different explanations have been proposed, neither of which is inconsistent with the language or the silence of Holy Scripture, and which adequately meet the requirements of the case on the side of geology. But though neither of them is inconsistent with the language of the Bible, yet the claims of the latter on our belief would seem to preponderate over those of the former. (i.) Some writers^ have regarded the six days of creation, not as six natural days, but as six periods of tinu\ of vast duration, and, it may be, of unequal length ; but not necessarily to be connected with the six periods commonly received in geology. It is not to be denied that the word 'day' is used some- times in the Bible of an indefinite period of time, and not necessarily of a space of twenty-four hours. We meet with such phrases as, 'The day of the Lord,' ' The day of vengeance,' ' The day is at hand,' and in Gen. ii. 4 the word day comprehends the whole space of creation. It has also been advanced (whatever the force of the inference may be) in confirmation of the period-theory, that the day of God's rest should be 1 Such, e.g., as Hugli jNIiller, in his later years, in his Testimony of the Rocks, Dr. M'Causland in his Sermons on Stones, Dr. M'Caul in Aids to Faith, Trofessor ChalHs (apparently) in his Creation in Plan and Progress, Dr. Dawson in his Arehaia, and others. 42 THE PENTATEUCH. regarded as a period of undefined length, since it still continues. If, then, the six days may be regarded as six indefi- nite periods of time, the changes in animal and vege- table life, as well as in the crust of the earth of which geology tells us, may have had sufficient time and scope for their development. (2.) There is, however, another admissible interpreta- tion of the initial words of Genesis which will equally, and probably with greater exegetical accuracy, account for the phenomena on which geology is wont to dwell. According to this interpretation, the days in Genesis are simple literal days, as we use the term at the present time.^ We may, in accordance with this interpretation, as will be presently seen, take full account of the long ages necessary for the production of the pheno- mena which geology brings before our notice ; and yet we shall have no necessity to appeal to the deluge for explanations which the deluge cannot furnish ; for, as has been remarked, ' rushing waters w^ere not the scene for deposits, in which all the bones and spines of the m.ost delicate structures, and the forms of leaves and plants in endless variety, could be laid and kept unhurt. A deluge, and that, too, of only one hundred and fifty days' duration, was not the workshop in which strata ten m.iles thick could be formed and packed with their teeming population ; it had neither time to do the work, nor room to hold the materials. Physiology, too, lent its aid. It was discovered that ^ This view oiliteral days has been held by Dr. Buckland in his Bj-idge- water Treatise, chap, ii., by Dr. Chalmers (vol. xii. p. 369, and vol. i. p. 228), by Professor Sedgwick in his Discourse on the Studies of the University of Cambridge, by Dr. Kurtz in his Bible and Astronomy, by Archdeacon Pratt in his Scripture and Science not at Variance, by Canon Birks in his Bible and Modern Thought, and by other writers. GENESIS. 43 the buried species, at any rate below the higher (the tertiary) beds, differed essentially in their organization from the existing races. An order of things had then prevailed to which the present families could claim no relationship.' ^ If, then, we cannot find the long period which geology would require in the successive days of creation, when those days are taken in their literal sense, it remains to be seen whether anything may be found in the simple, unforced interpretation of the narrative of creation in the beginning of Genesis, which will account both for the pre-Adamite animals and plants, and the different phenomena which geology has brought before our view. Now this indefinite period of time may be fairly dis- covered in an interpretation of the first and second verses of the first chapter of Genesis, in which no violence is done to the just principles of exegesis. We may legitimately infer that between the announce- ment, in the first verse, of the creation, and the state of chaos into which the world is represented (ver. 2) to have sunk, an interval of time of unknown duration and extent may have occurred. Nor is such an interpreta- tion merely devised in order to meet the geological difficulty; for it is stated to be met with in some of the early Christian Fathers, as Theodoret and Augustine.^ 1 Pratt, Scripture and Science not at Variance, pp. 36, 37. 2 Thus Dr. Chalmers (in his Evidence and Authority of the Christian Revelation, p. 205) asks the question, ' Does our Saviour ever say that there was not an interval of many ages betwixt the first act of creation, described in the first verse of the Book of Genesis, and said to have been performed at the beginning, and those more detailed operations, the account of which commences at the second verse, and which are described to us as having been performed in so many days ? ' Again : ' Between the 44 THE rENTATEUCII. In Gen. i. i we read in the English version, ' In tlie beginning God created the heaven and the earth.' A distinguished Hebraist ^ has affirmed that this passage is more hterally and accurately translated thus, * Of old, in former duration, God created the heavens and the earth.' How long ago is not stated. The Hebrew word, he says, is indefinite, and can include millions or miUiards of years just as easily as thousands. The statement of Moses is therefore not contrary to the discoveries of geology, which alleges the earth to have existed for myriads of years before the creation of man. The words of Moses leave ' the when ' of creation undefined. The phrase in Hebrew, n''*i^'^5"i3, is without the definite article. ' In Reshith (not in the Reshith) Elohim created the heavens and the earth.' In LXX. it is h ccpyj,, with which we should compare the same expression in St. John i. I, where Alford says h apyjri is =':Tph roD rh xocimv ihai (John xvii. 5), * Before the world was,' expressing duration or time previous to creation, but not referring to oi'dcr. (Compare LXX. Ezek. xxxvi. 1 1 ; Prov. viii. 23.) So in Chaldee, P?onp3, Bekadniin, in plural and without article, signifies ' in former times,' or ' duration of old.' The word n^t^^^?^ (from j>»j<-i, rosJi, ' caput ') means 'priority,' 'anteriority,' ix. 'in former times.' It would be a mistake to regard this first verse as a title or summary of the words of the chapter that follow, as some have done. Such a view is forbidden by the conjunction 'and,' with which the second verse com- first and the second, and between the second and third verses of the first chapter of Genesis, Revelation leaves two blank pages on which Science may write to fill up the gaps which Revelation has left in regard to subjects which lay beyond its province' (Kurtz). 1 Dr. M'CauI, Aids to Faith, p. 202. GENESIS. 45 mcnccs. It is, as Dr. IM'CauI, Aids to FaitJi, pp. 204, 205, has shown, a part and portion of the history of creation. Nor has it anything to do with the 'creation of the materials out of which the heavens and earth were afterwards formed. This is simply to put into the verse what is not there.' It has been well said by William Kelly,^ ' The incontrovertible fact is, that the 21SUS loqueiidi proves that the first verse is not a summary of what follows in the six days' work, but an initiatory act sid generis^ the groundwork of all that follows, no doubt, and as distinct from ver. 2 as both clearly are from ver. 3, where the first day's work begins. The copulative vau connects each verse, but of itself in no way forbids an immense space, which depends on the nature of the case, where no specifica- tion of time enters.' The first verse, then, of Genesis states, with a grand and noble simplicity of language, the creation of the universe without any note of time. It would be con- trary to the spirit of the Hebrew language, contrary, indeed, to the spirit of all language, to suppose that the first verse is simply an abridgment of the six days' work. We have in this first verse no connection of day and night, nor any mention of the state of ruin and disruption which is so vividly painted in the second verse. Thus, as has been already said, the account in Genesis leaves room for the different changes, whether they were of a gradual and quiet, or of a more violent character, which, according to geological science, pre- ceded the creation of man. Though we are informed of the great fact of the creation of the universe, yet we arc not informed what changes took place previous to the state of chaos described in the second verse. We ^ Rationalism and the Pentatcnch^ p. 22. 46 THE PENTATEUCH. can, however, discover an ample space for any changes to have taken place. We learn simply from the record of inspiration, that in times of old (we know not when) God created the heavens and the earth. He created them, — the word employed in Hebrew being a word which is never predicated of any human being, but of God alone, who is called the Creator, x;i!n, boTc, from the verb i^nzi, signify- ing to create something nezv, something which did not before exist, though not necessarily to create out of iiotJiiug. He created the universe ; and hence neither is the world itself, nor the matter of which it is com- posed (as Aristotle and others thought), eternal or self- existent ; hence the universe is not a pantheistic emana- tion, but a work of the divine will and power. God is thus seen to be the Creator of all things, whether visible or invisible. It has been eloquently said, 'According to the Bible, this earth is not the centre of the universe. Long before it was fashioned for man, there were heavens, and morning stars, and angels (Job xxxviii. 7), regions more glorious than the earth, heavens more ancient than the firmament, heavenly inhabitants who excel in strength, and who looked on in wonder and adoration when they beheld the earth fashioned by the Creator. The ken of Moses and the Hebrews was not limited to this earth, nor their idea of duration to the time that man has existed. They knew that the earth in its present condition was later than the heavens and their host, and the human race young when compared with the angels of God.'^ Such, then, being the period at which any changes, such as geology teaches us to have taken place, may 1 Dr. M'CauI, 'The Mosaic Rccofd of Creation,' in Aids to Faith, p. 207. GENESIS. 47 have been carried out, we pass on to the period at which our earth, after an interval of many ages, at the close of what is named the Tertiary Period, was finally prepared for the habitation of man. ' According to this hypothesis,' remarks Archdeacon Pratt,^ ' it is supposed that the generations of animals and plants which are stored up in the earth's strata lived and perished in that interval of time of unknown duration which preceded the six days' creation, and that Scripture is altogether silent regarding them. The difficulties, therefore, which the first and second of the discoveries of geology, regarding the age of the earth, and the pre-existence of animals and plants long before Adam, gave rise to, are altogether removed.' But before we say more, it may be well to consider in passing what is the mode of rcpresejitation employed in Holy Scripture in treating of the six days' work of creation. It is evident that the events are described accordinsf as they would appear to a person on the surface of this earth. This is not — as Mr. W. Goodwin, in his article on * Mosaic Cosmogony,' in Essays and Reviews, insists — to ' assume that appearances only, not facts, are de- scribed.' P'or, in such a case as we have spoken of, appearances themselves are facts. There is no real antithesis between them. They are the facts upon which all science must rest ; and so the scriptural statement, if a truthful record of appearances, is on a par with the records and registers of all the daily dis- coveries and facts on which modern science rests. Such an objection would equally sweep away all the ground and foundation on which all science must depend. And is not such a record of appearances not ^ Scripture and Science not at Variance^ p. 39. 48 THE PENTATEUCH. only the usual mode In which the facts of Science are described in ordinary life, but in which they would even be described in a scientific account of any observations made, — a form of language adopted by the historian, and traceable also throughout the Bible? There is no 'riddle' in thus speaking of the phenomena of Science. It is the natural way in which scientific truth would be described. As the creation of the second and third heavens — the starry region and the heaven of faith — is represented in the first verse, so the heaven which is said to have been created on the second day is the lower firmament, — the 'visible arch of the sky,' — and falls into its place most naturally when the earth is being prepared for the habitation of man. It has been supposed that the darkness and confusion observable in the second verse, when ' the earth was ' [or, as others translate, Jiad become (so Dathius, ' terra facta erat vasta et deserta')] 'desolation and emptiness' [^nh, toJiu ; ^'^*^}, vabohii, cf Jer. iv. 23-26 and Isa. xlv. 18], ' and darkness upon the face of the raging deep, and the Spirit of God brooding upon the face of the waters,' refer to a condition of things existing between the tertiary and human period, and that this chaos and darkness was the starting-place of the scriptural account. That the six days of creation were natural days, is most in accordance with the historic truthfulness and simplicity of the Mosaic account. The first chapter of Genesis is neither poetry, nor vision, nor parable, nor myth. It is the simple language of historic prose. The whole book and the Pentateuch itself are alike historical ; and hence it would be unnatural to regard the account of the creation in the first chapter as a prophetic vision. ' When the Lord,' it has been said, GENESIS. 49 * recapitulates its contents in the Fourth Commandment, and makes it the basis of the ordinance of the Sabbath, He stamps it as real history. To suppose a moral, or even a ceremonial command, based upon a poetic picture, or a vision, or an ideal narrative, would be absurd. The Lord also treats the first chapters of Genesis as real and authoritative history, when He makes Gen. i. 27 and ii. 23, 24 (cf. Matt. xix. 4 ; Mark x. 7, and I Cor. xi. 7 ; and Matt. xix. 5 ; Mark x. 7 ; i Cor. xi. 8) the foundation of His doctrine concerning marriage and divorce. As history, therefore, they must be re- ceived, whatever difficulties that reception may involve. Some, indeed, hold that " the purpose of revelation is to teach man what he cannot find out by his unassisted reason, but not physical truths, for the discovery of which he has faculties." But what are we to do when a truth is both religious and physical, such as ' God created the heavens and the earth ' t ^ Again, the fact of the alternations of light and darkness being distinctly defined as day and night in Gen. i. 5, is (thinks Canon Birks) a strong argument in favour of natural days, and against periods. Again, the visible appearance of the sun on the fourth day, furnishes a strong argument for natural days, if the term, ' and evening was, and morning was,' which occur six times, is to be interpreted consistently throughout. * For it may be fairly assumed,' says Archdeacon Pratt, 'that the heavenly bodies began at once to fulfil the functions assigned to them, viz. "the greater light to ride the day, and the lesser light to rule the night" (i. 16), and therefore the fifth and sixth days, at least, must have been ordinary days of twenty-four hours each ; and as they were of sufficient length for ' Aids to Faith, p. 199 ; cf. Bible a7id Mock^-n TJwught, chap. xv. D 50 THE PENTATEUCH. the work belonging to them, the first, second, third, and fourth may well have been sufficient for tJieir respective works. The description, "evening was, and morning was," being the same, the day must be homogeneous.' Once again, the language of the Fourth Command- ment would seem to be in favour of natural days and opposed to period days (Ex. xx. 8-11). For is it not harsh to suppose that the ' six days ' in ver. 9 do not mean the same as the 'six days' in ver. 11, but that in the last place they mean periods } ' Thus the work of the six days ' — it has been well and forcibly remarked — ' describes a brief work of God's almighty power, by which our planet was fitted to be the abode of man. All the objects which man sees around him are referred in it to their Divine Author. His power is shown in the swift completion of so great a work. His wisdom in its orderly progress ; and a moral character is infused into the whole, when six days of creative energy are seen to be followed by the divine Sabbath of rest, a precedent for the use of mankind in every later age. Nothing is wanting, nothing superfluous.'! IV. In the Book of Genesis we see deeply em- bedded in its structure, in its language, in its estimate of persons and things, a purity, a simplicity, a morality, and a religious tone, which we look for in vain in any other book of the same antiquity. We there read of a God standing apart in His distinct individuality from all creation and men ; no pantheistic blending and fusing of nature and Godhead ; * no Manichaean theory of the existence of two opposite and independent prin- ciples of good and evil ; ' but an individuality, a dis- ^ lUrks, Bible and Modern Thought, p. 310. GENESIS. 51 tinctncss, and a separation in the one God from every- thing else in the created universe. We there learn that the world did not come into existence either by a ' fortuitous concourse of atoms,' or by an ' eternal succession of material causes,' but that ' in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,' — God, the personal and the self - subsistent. Neither the world nor the matter of which it is com- posed is eternal or self-existent ; and the ' universe is not a pantheistic emanation, but a work of the divine will and power ; ' and ' this Mosaic doctrine, in accordance with all sound reason, has not been shaken by any discoveries of science.' 1 V. Such a work, so comprehensive in Its simplicity, so simple in its comprehensiveness, with one object and purpose running through the whole, affecting such a variety of circumstances, men, and ages ; one light, with different degrees of intensity, shining throughout the entire history ; one code of morality, one religious character, one divine principle pervading the whole, — such a work could scarcely, under any conceivable cir- cumstances, have owed its authorship to different minds, different writers, different historians. It must, we believe, be assigned, in accordance with the claims which it makes for itself, to one single author, the great law- giver, and the mighty leader of God's people out of their Egyptian bondage, the one of all others most versed in the learning, science, and literature of the 1 It has been remarked by Lange (p. 126), that whether the account in Genesis has in view a universal or a partial creation, whether \\vq principium there mentioned be the particular beginning of the special work there described, or t\\e. princ2piu7n principiorum, the beginning of all beginnings, the Bible is, in either case, a protest against the dogma of the eternity of the world, or of the eternity of matter. 52 THE PENTx\TEUCH. Egyptians, — even Moses, who as prophet, legislator, peacemaker, and mediator, presented so typical a re- semblance to the future Messiah. ' Moses,' says Bishop Harold Browne, ' could have written Genesis, for he had every conceivable qualification for writing it. The writer of after times who could have produced that book must have been himself a wonder, unsurpassed by any of those wonders which he is supposed to have devised and recorded.' ' This most ancient of records,' it has been said, 'carries with it its own evidence. Its contents, particularly its propJietic intimations, whether conveyed in types or in express terms, show it to be a part of one harmonious whole, whose vast and varied arrange- ments, dating from " the beginning," and germinally comprehending all theology and history, could have been the production only of God.' ' The creative document is a grand and glorious in- troduction to the rest of Holy Scripture ; but it was not intended to teach theology or astronomy. Rightly understood, it does not contradict these sciences ; but its real object was to set forth two main truths, — the first, that all the laws and workings of nature are the workings of God ; the second, that of all this working man is the final cause. In every stage of creation, God is the active principle pervading all ; of all. that is done, man is the end, and the earth was made such as it is that it might be a fit stage for human activity ' (Dean R. Payne Smith). VI. Analysis of the Book of Genesis, Tivo principal divisions — though not without an inti- mate connection between them — may be traced in this book. GENESIS. 53 1. The first division (chaps, i.-xi.) may be regarded chiefly as an introduction to the whole Bible ; and, subordinately, as introductory to the particular history which closely follows it. Its subdivisions are — (i.) A ^^;/^m/ history of the creation or origin of the world (chaps, i.-ii. 3) ; and 2^ particular account of the creation of man, and of the law which was given him to observe (chap. ii. 4-25). (2.) Man's violation of that law; his fall; his expul- sion from Paradise, with (however) an intima- tion of restoration and recovery (chap. iii.). (3.) The history of Adam and his descendants, in the line of Seth, down to Noah (chaps, iv., v.). (4.) The universal corruption of the world, and its con- sequent destruction by the deluge (chaps, vi., vii.). (5.) The preservation of a righteous seed, and the peopling of the earth through Noah's descend- ants (chaps, viii.-x.). (6.) The confusion of tongues, and the dispersion of mankind (chap. xi.). 2. The second division (chaps, xii.-l.) contains the particular history of tJic patriarchs. (i.) The history of Abraham, consisting chiefly of his call ; his consequent migration, with Lot, into Canaan ; his journey into Egypt ; his return, and separation from Lot, who removed towards Sodom ; his deliverance of Lot from his captors ; God's promise to him renewed ; Ishmael's birth by Hagar; further divine communications made to him ; the destruction of Sodom, but Lot's deliverance; Isaac's birth by Sarah; the temp- 54 THE PENTATEUCH. tation of Abraham by the order to sacrifice his son ; the death of Sarah ; the marriage of Isaac; and the death of Abraham (chaps, xii.-xxv.). (2.) The history of Isaac, which is uneventful and quiet, containing an account of Ishmael and his • sons ; of the birth of Isaac's two sons, Esau and Jacob ; of his dwelHng in Gerar ; of his return to Beersheba ; and of Jacob's deceit in obtain- ing the blessing (chaps, xxv.-xxvii.). (3.) The history oi Jacob : viz. His journey to Meso- potamia; the promises of God made to him; his visit to his uncle Laban at Haran ; his marriage with Rachel and Leah, and offspring ; his return home ; and the domestic troubles that befell him ; together with the genealogy of Esau (chaps, xxviii.-xxxvii.). (4.) The history oi Joseph : His being sold into Egypt ; Jacob's sorrow on his account ; the incest of Judah ; the imprisonment of Joseph by Poti- phar ; his subsequent promotion in the Court ot Pharaoh ; the journeys of his brothers to buy corn ; the removal and settlement of Jacob with his family in Egypt ; Jacob's prophetic blessing of his sons ; the death and burial of Jacob ; and the death of Joseph (chaps, xxxvii.-l.). EXODUS. Studied with tiiis light thrown upon it, the eat-ly history of the /sraelites becomes an inexhaustible source of instruction, warning, and consola- tion ; and the conviction arises in the mind of the believer, that so apt a reflection of the Christian life, in its various aspects, cannot be a casual coincidence; in other words, that the Divine Wisdom shaped the history of the chosen people, as well as the appointments of the law, with a special reference to the future dispensation of Christ. ' Litton's Ba}npto7t Lectures, p. 66. 'Israel in ancient days. Not only had a view Of Sinai in a blaze, But learned the Gospel too : The types and figures were a glass. In which they saw a Saviour's face.' COWPER. I. The sacred penman has given us in the Book of Genesis a graphic sketch of the records of God's Church, as they could be traced in the family history and biographies of the early patriarchs. In Exodus he has no less forcibly described the history of Israel as a nation, the upgrowth of the national life and its political development. The object and scope of the Book of Exodus Is to exhibit Israel as a nation, first oppressed and enslaved, and then rescued and delivered, together with the signal judgments that befell her enemies. And this book has also a prospective character, reaching far beyond the mere historical period, and pointing out in the distant 55 56 THE PENTATEUCH. future through all time the Church of God in her afflic- tions, her dehverances, her victories over her adversaries, even to the great final consummation of all things, when the Church militant will become the Church triumphant, when * the great Church victorious shall be the Church at rest' The revelation, then, In the Book of Exodus is carried on a stage beyond that which is recorded in the Book of Genesis. We have in Exodus a strictly historical portion, treating first of the condition of the Israelites in Egypt, and of the different preparations for their deliverance ; and, secondly, of the final accomplishment of that deliverance, as described in the first eighteen chapters of the book. We have also (what we had not, strictly speaking, in the preceding book) a legislative portion, extending from the beginning of the nineteenth chapter to the close of the book. ' These two portions,' observes Canon Cook, 'are unlike in style and structure, as might be expected from the difference of their subject-matter ; but their mutual bearings and interdependence are evident, and leave no doubt as to the substantial unity of the book.' This may be regarded as a new element in the composition of the Pentateuch up to this time. With the close of the patriarchal dispensation, and the com- mencement of the national life of the Israelites, it is only natural that a system and code of laws should be revealed, by which that national life should be regulated. There is therefore no diversity or discrepancy be- tween the Books of Genesis and Exodus, though there is a further revelation of God's will contained in the latter. Both books are in strict harmony and unity, but in the latter there is a greater expansion and develop- ment. Although a certain interval of time separates EXODUS. 57 them from each other, yet the Book of Exodus com- mences with the Hebrew conjunctive particle 'and,' intimating the close connection between the two books. But that interval probably contained few facts bearing upon the manifestation of the divine will and purposes in relation to the chosen people and the future Church, and accordingly — as we have noticed before in the case of empires and rulers unconnected with the history of the elect race or promised seed — they were passed over in silence, with only a reference to the increase of the people, which tended to confirm the promise made to Abraham in the past, and so link the two books together in mutual harmony. The chronology of the Book of Exodus is involved in some difficulty, and two opposite views have been maintained on the subject. The question chiefly relates to the length of the sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt, which would also, of course, affect the date of their departure. If we look merely to the statements of the Hebrew text, we should not have much difficulty in forming a decision on the subject. In Ex. xii. 40, the length of the sojourn is said to have been four hundred and thirty years; in Gen. xv. 13, we find a prediction to Abraham that his seed would be a stranger and a servant in a land that was not theirs four hundred years ; and this is again quoted by Stephen in Acts vii. 6 ; while with the statement in Ex. xii. 40 the language of St. Paul in Gal. iii. 17 seems to agree accurately. Hence it would appear that four hundred and thirty years intervened between the time of Jacob's journey into Egypt and the exodus. But, in spite of these definite statements in Genesis and Exodus, a different length of time for the sojourn has been fixed by others, grounded upon the Septuagint reading of Ex. xii. 40, and the 58 TPIE PENTATEUCH, requirements of the genealogies. The LXX. reading of the passage is, ' The sojourning of the sons of Israel, which they sojourned in the land of Egypt and in the land of Canaan, they and their fathers, was four hundred and thirty years.' The period of the sojourn in Egypt, according to Usher, was two hundred and fifteen years. Those who advocate the shorter period think that it is impossible that ' three or four generations could possibly span a period of four hundred and thirty years,' as would seem to be required by the genealogical state- ment. But it would scarcely seem possible to reconcile the shorter period of two hundred and fifteen years — adopted by Usher, and deduced from the genealogical calculations of some learned Jews — with the vast increase of the Hebrews from seventy souls to six hundred thousand males at the time of the exodus.^ This increase might have been possible during a lapse of more than four centuries in the case of a family which numbered seventy males, together with their households, in a fertile district in Egypt, and under favourable cir- cumstances for rapid increase ; but would appear to be impossible, except through miraculous agency, in the shorter period of two hundred and fifteen years.^ ^ The date of the exodus is variously stated. Dr. Perovvne places it in the year 1652 B.C.; Hales, in 1648 ; Usher (and the system of chronology in the margin of our Bibles), in 1491 ; and Bunsen, in 1320. 2 See, on this disputed question, the arguments of Canon Cook (Speaker's Commentary, ' Introduction to Exodus '), Dean R. P. Smith {Bible Educator, vol. i. p. 76), and Canon Norris {ibid. vol. i. p. 124). Cf. also Birks, The Exodtis of Israel, chap. ii. p. 18 et seq., ^\\o inclines to the shorter period ; also on the increase of Israel in Egypt, see ibid. chap, iii. p. 25 et seq., who asks in what light the historian himself represents this great increase ? Does he teach us to view it as an ordinary event ? or does he represent it, though not directly miraculous, as a signal exception to the usual rate of increase, and a result of the special blessing of the God of Israel? (Cf. Gen. xvii. 1-6, xxi 16, 17, xxvi. 2-4, xxviii. 1-3, 12-14, EXODUS. 59 II. The Book of Exodus^ has been ahuost univer- sally regarded as the genuine work of ' Moses, the servant of the Lord.' * No critic of any weight, either in France or Germany, who admits the supernatural character of the transactions, rejects the authorship of Moses.' The various circumstances and miracles men- tioned in this book are very frequently referred to, not only in the Old, but also in the New Testament, as events and works well known, notorious, and undoubted, and the narrative of these facts is assigned to Moses. This is equally the case in the historical portions of the Old Testament, in the prophetical, and in the Psalms, as also in the language of our Lord and His apostles. In fact, not only are the words of Exodus quoted as the words of Moses by David, and Daniel, and other writers, but there are, it is said, no less than twenty- five passages from this book quoted by Christ and His apostles in express words, and nineteen more as to the sense. Moreover, the divine inspiration of this book is manifested by the various predictions^ contained in it, the accomplishment of some of them being also re- xxxii. 12, XXXV. II, xlvi. 3, 4, xlvii. 27, xlviii. 16; Ex. i. 6, 7, 12, 20; Deut. i. 9-1 1, x. 21, 22, xxvi. 5.) Thus (he adds) it is plain that, if the increase in Egypt were of a usual and ordinary kind, the Pentateuch would contradict its own repeated statements, and a series of often-repeated promises of God to the patriarchs would have failed. ^ Its initial words in Hebrew are T\\D^ n?5^"l> or simply T\St^'^ i^-^- ' names '). In the LXX. "E^o^os ; exodus, Vulg., ue. ' the departure.' The book is divided by the Jews into eleven Paraschioth and twenty-nine Siderim. ^ Compare promises and prophecies made to Abraham, etc., respecting the increase of their descendants (Gen. xv. 5, xvii. 4-6, xxxv. 1 1, with Num. i. 46) ; also prophecies that they should be ' afflicted in a land not their own,' whence they should depart with great substance in the fourth generation (Gen. xv. 13-16 with Ex. xii. 35, 40, 41). 6o THE TEN TATE U CI I. corded in the book itself, whilst the fulfilment of others is stated in the later writings of the Bible. Thus Moses is said not only to have predicted, but also to have effected, the deliverance of the Jews from Egypt (cf. Ex. vii. 4, 5, and xiv. 4, 18). 'It likewise describes some' (to use the words of Dr. Gray) ' which were not fulfilled till after the death of Moses, as that concerning the con- quest of Canaan, and the future division and allotment of the land ; also those relating to the revolutions that were to take place in the government of the Jews, their future subjections, captivities, deliverances, and returns.' We trace the fulfilment, e.£:, of the promise of the restoration of the Jewish nation from their captivity in Egypt as declared to Abraham (Gen. xv. 14), — a promise which was still more explicitly and definitely made to Jacob when at Beersheba on his way to Egypt (Gen. xlvi. I, 3, 4), — a promise in the fulfilment of which Joseph must have felt the most undoubted confidence, since he solemnly requested at his death that his bones should be removed and taken with them at the time of their deliverance from the house of bondage (Gen. 1. 24, 25). In the dread manifested by the rulers of Egypt at the rapid increase of the Hebrew race, and in the stern and cruel means taken by them to repress it, we can also indirectly trace the accomplishment of the predictions made to the patriarchs of the vast upgrowth of their seed in the future. But not simply in the prophecies, but also in the h'/^cs, which abound in the Book of Exodus in greater profusion than in any other book of the Bible, do we see conclusive evidence of its having been written under the inspiration of the Spirit of God. Types, indeed, are simply abbreviated and unwritten prophecies. They contain within them in germ all the prophetic clement. EXODUS. 6l How, then, can we regard the narrative before us as anything less than the inspired word and oracle of God, when we see in it manifest types of the Saviour, which received their accomplishment, so to speak, nearly one thousand five hundred years afterwards, when their great Antitype came in the fulness of time ? ' The subject of types has been much dwelt upon by modern writers, and in most cases with singular unfair- ness. The popular mode of arguing on this subject is to select some instances which are obviously fanciful and untenable, and then to ask if a system of which these are examples either can or ought to be regarded with any degree of favour or confidence. We ought, ■ however, to bear in mind the following facts : — {a) That our Lord Himself referred to the brazen serpent as typical of His being raised aloft, and that He illustrated the mystery of His own abode in the chambers of the earth by an event of the past which He Himself was pleased to denominate as a sign, the only sign that was to be vouchsafed to the generation that was then seek- ing for one. {li) That the evangelists recognise the existence and significance of types in reference to our Lord (Matt. ii. 15 ; John xix. 36). {c) That the teach- ing of St. Paul is pervaded by references to this form of what has been termed "acted prophecies" (Rom. v. 14 seq. ; i Cor. v. 7, x. 2 seq. ; Gal. iv. 24 seq. ; Col. ii. 1 1). {d) That the greater part of the Epistle to the Hebrews is one continued elucidation of the spiritual significance of the principal features of the Levitical law ; its sacri- fices, rites, and priests were all the shadows and typical resemblances of good things to come (Heb. x. 1). {c) That St. Peter plainly and distinctly declares that the water of the flood is typical of baptism (i Pet. iii. 21). (/) That in the last and most mysterious revela- 62 THE PENTATEUCH. tion of God to man the very realms of blessedness and glory are designated by a name and specified by allu- sions (Rev. xxi. 2) which warrant our recognising in the holy city on earth, the "Jerusalem that now is," a type of that heavenly city which God hath prepared for the faithful (Heb. xi. 16), a similitude of the Jerusalem that is above, a shadow of the incorruptible inheritance of the servants and children of God ' (Bishop EUicott, Aids to Faith, Essay ix.). We can trace in Aaron, with the light shed upon him in the inspired commentary on the Mosaic law, the Epistle to the Hebrews, a type of the high-priesthood of Christ (Heb. iv. 14-16, V. 4, 5) ; in the rock in Horeb, under the guidance of St. Paul, we can see in figure Christ, the 'spiritual Rock' and the 'spiritual drink' (i Cor. x. 4) ; in the manna, Christ as the 'spiritual meat' of His people (i Cor. X. 3, and John vi. 32) ; in the mercy-seat we behold the 'throne of grace,' to which we can 'come boldly' and 'obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need' (Heb. iv. 16) ; and in the paschal lamb, ' Christ our Passover, sacrificed for us' (i Cor. v. 7), a 'bone' of w^hom was not to be ' broken ' (John xix. 36). And, moreover, in the deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt, in the passage through the Red Sea, in their wanderings in the wilderness, in their crossing the Jordan, and in their entrance into the land of promise, we can see shadowed forth and prefigured, in a portraiture not to be misunderstood, the condition of Christ's Church in this wilderness-world until the stream of Jordan be crossed, and the heavenly Canaan reached ; and in the fact that the fathers of the Jewish nation ' were under the cloud,' and that ' all passed through the sea,' as well as in their murmurings, and backslidings, and idolatries in the wilderness, we ought to read a EXODUS. 63 lesson ' written for our admonition upon whom the ends of the world arc come' (i Cor. x. I et seq.). Nor, once more, is the mediation of Moses without its use and advantage in illustrating and throwing light upon the mediation of our great Surety, Christ Jesus. It is thus that the historian of the exodus * looks far beyond the horizon of his own age. Minute incidents are noted by him which would never have arrested the attention of a common historian. The author of Exodus wrote not only as a historian, but as a prophet (Hos. xii. 13), and these minute incidents, even by their minute- ness, are proofs of his prophetic intuition. They became great and glorious when transfigured by the light of the gospel. The history of Exodus is propJietically pre- adjusted to the history of Christ and His Church, even to the end of time. A similar remark may be made with regard to the other parts of the Pentateuch. They form consistent portions of one harmonious system.' ' The exodus of the Israelites was a unique event. It stands alone in the annals of antiquity. It was not only the first public assertion of the universal supremacy of Jehovah in opposition to the false deities of heathen- ism, but it was something more. It was the type and figure of the greatest event which the world has ever seen ; an event which concerns all mankind in every nation of the earth, until the end of time, and through the countless ages of eternity. It was the type and figure of the world's exodus ; it was the type and figure of mankind's deliverance by the death and passion of Him who is no other than the Lord Jehovah Himself. . . . The Holy Spirit, in the New Testament, teaches us to regard the exodus in this light. He teaches us that all things in the exodus of Israel were 7-6-0/ ^^/xwi/, "figures of us." . . . No wonder, then, that the exodus was 64 THE TENTATEUCIL introduced and accompanied by miracles. It would have been strange indeed if it had not been so inaugur- ated. When we consider what it was in itself, and much more what it prefigured and pre-announced ; when we reflect not only on what it was as an historical event, but when we regard it in all its bearings, moral, social, national, and religious, and also contemplate it as a prophecy, promise and pledge of the world's exodus in Christ, — then we cannot deny that if ever there was an adequate occasion for the sounding forth of the voice of God from the majestic stillness of eternity, calling on the world by the trumpet-tongue and thunder-peal of miracles, it was the exodus of Israel from Egypt.' ^ III. It need scarcely be said that, as in the case of the Book of Genesis, so in regard to that of Exodus, the critical and the sceptical spirit have been actively at work. The different facts in the history have at various times been summoned before the bar of criticism, but the result of an impartial judgment has only estab- lished their veracity and credibility. Again, as before, attempts have been made by the rationalistic school to disintegrate the narrative by assigning some portions of the text to an EloJiistic, others to a Jehovistic source. The methods, however, by which such distinctions have been drawn, have been pronounced precarious, uncertain, and arbitrary by writers of the orthodox school, who were equally com- petent to form a sound critical judgment.- 1 Bishop Wordsworth, Inlrodiiction to Bible. 2 Ranke and Havernick (on the orthodox side) as opposed to Stahelin and De Wette (see Dr. Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, ' Exodus '). The ' documentary hypothesis ' cannot be so largely applied to the IJook of Exodus, since the interchange of the divine names ceases to be such after Ex. iii. (see Eairbairn's Bible Dictionary, 'Exodus'). EXODUS. 65 ]\Iorcover, the historical crcdibih'ty of Exodus is con- firmed by Manetho's 1 statements respecting the Hyksos, and the rule of an alien dynasty in Egypt, and respect- ing strangers from the East having taken up their abode in an eastern portion of Lower Egypt. Again, the birth of Moses has been placed upon the same mythical level with the stories of Romulus and Cyrus, and the groundwork of the story has been sought for in the desire to explain the derivation of the word * Moses,' — a mythical explanation in entire opposition to the whole style and simplicity of the account in Exodus. A similar charge of its being a mere ' mythic fiction ' has been brought against the institution of the Passover, on grounds equally futile, and by which all history, whether sacred or profane, might be attempted to be overthrown. Moreover, as it has been remarked by Birks,- the first Passover, the opening of this eventful history, has pledges of its truth so various and decisive, that it is not easy to see how they could be increased. It gave birth to a yearly festival of the whole nation, which lasted 1500 years ; and two main eras of reforma- tion were marked by its revival from comparative neglect into the freshness of its early youth again. On the other hand, the minute knowledge of Egypt and Egyptian habits and modes of life manifested in the Book of Exodus, — the truth and soundness of which knowledge is confirmed by external sources of informa- tion and by monuments, — as well as the acquaintance displayed with the Arabian Desert, are both sufficiently natural, if Moses is regarded as the author of the book, but alike unnatural, if the authorship is attributed to ^ Manetho was an Egyptian priest of Scbennytiis, who lived in the reign of Ptolemy, son of Lagus. - Exodus of Israel, chap. vii. p, 7S. 66 THE PENTATEUCH. some one unconnected with Egypt or the Sinaitic desert. * The Book of Exodus,' remarks Canon Cook, * could not have been written by any man who had not passed many years in Egypt, and who had not also a thorough knowledge, such as could only be acquired by personal observation of the Sinaitic peninsula. But it is improbable that any IsraeHte between the time of Moses and Jeremiah could have possessed either of these qualifications ; it is not credible, or even possible, that any should have combined both.' IV. The way having been thus cleared, the historical bearing of the Book of Exodus will claim our first con- sideration ; its legislative aspect will naturally follow afterwards. I. With the Book of Exodus the patriarchal life is merged in the national, the domestic in the political. In the land of Goshen the Hebrew race had marvellously developed in numbers. Though useful to their tyranni- cal taskmasters, — and the more useful in proportion to the increase in their numbers, — they nevertheless began to be a source of alarm to the king and the rulers of the land. Their daily tasks were consequently increased ; they were subjected to more rigorous toil and labour, and many privileges which they before possessed were withdrawn. It was at such a time that Moses — himself providentially rescued, and brought up in the Egyptian Court — made his first appeal to his enslaved brethren. It failed, however; and Moses subsequently withdrew to the desert of Arabia. It would seem as though a further discipline was necessary, both for the people and for Moses himself After a while, at God's bidding, though not without reluctance, he left his seclusion in the desert (like John Baptist in the after time), and, joined EXODUS. 6j by his brother Aaron, made his appeal once more to the people, exhibited the signs which testified to the truth of his mission, and won them over to belief. This was followed by an appeal, in which Aaron shared as spokesman, to the king of Egypt. His request for permission to go and offer sacrifice in the wilderness was at first refused with almost indignant surprise. There was need of divine agency in order to influence and bend the hard and stern heart of the Egyptian king. Without such supernatural assistance, it is impossible to conceive that an unfriended exile from the deserts of Midian could have induced a Pharaoh, in the pleni- tude of his power, to have listened to his request. But now divine judgments fall thick and fast upon the devoted Egyptians : plague follows plague in rapid succession. Soon the magicians and sorcerers of the king are unable to imitate the miracles of Moses. Such a manifestation of power was necessary both for the Egyptians and the Israelites ; necessary for the former, that the utter weakness of their diviners should be shown, and the opposition of the proud monarch should be overborne ; necessary for the latter, that the power and majesty of their God should be clearly revealed. Then, when one plague after another, in quick suc- cession, had crushed the spirit of the king, and exhibited the impotence of the deities in whom the Egyptians trusted, and when God was revealed to His own people as the Almighty Jehovah, — when the divine and super- natural in these miracles could be clearly traced, and when they could no longer be ascribed to natural agencies, or happy accidents, or second causes ; when thus the miraculous display of almighty power had struck terror into the heart of the king, had confounded his magicians, paralysed the Egyptians, and had brought 6S THE rENTATEUCII. conviction home to the Hebrews that the Omnipotent God was on their side, — then, and not till then, had the object sought for been fully attained. These plagues are not to be regarded as mere wonder- works, destitute of all moral significance. They were intended to subserve a certain definite purpose, both as regards the king, the Egyptians, and the Israelites. They may, indeed, have been in conformity with certain phenomena which were not uncommon in the land. Like most of the miracles of Scripture, they may have had their own peculiar * local colouring.' * One charac- teristic, common to all scriptural miracles^ but in none more conspicuous than in those recorded in the Book of Exodus, is their strongly marked, and indeed unmis- takeable, local coloiLving. They are such as no later writer living in Palestine could have invented for Egypt. Erom beginning to end no miracle is recorded which does not strike the mind by its peculiar suitableness to the place, time, and circumstances under which it was wrought. The plagues are each and all Egyptian ; and the modes by which the people's wants are supplied in the Sinaitic peninsula recall to our minds the natural con- ditions of such a journey in such a country. We find nature everywhere, but nature in its Master s hand! ^ Locusts, and hail, and murrain may before have ravaged the country and destroyed the inhabitants ; or, again, it may be said that there was a sort of physical sequence in the contamination of the Nile having generated the frogs, while from these dead frogs may have followed in natural order the flies and gnats, from whence might have arisen the boils and murrain in man and beast. But, though such a physical sequence might be possible, and though phenomena, such as then appeared, may ' Speaker's Commentary^ ' Introduction to Exodus. ' EXODUS. 69 have manifested themselves at different times in the country, yet there was a terrible rapidity, an awful intensity about these ten successive plagues, which could only be accounted for by supernatural causes, and a divine agency, working in harmony with the will of Moses. Nothing less than a divine interposition could legitimately account for the facts of the case, and prove a sufficient cause for the effects produced. Thus, and apparently thus only, could it become clear to the Israelites that it was the Lord God who had brought them out from beneath the burdens under which they groaned (Ex. vl. 7) ; and thus only could the Egyp- tians know that Jehovah was the Lord, when He stretched out His hand upon Egypt (vii. 4, 5), and brought out His people by 'great judgments,' and executed also judgment against all the gods of Egypt (xil. 12). They had seen their sacred river contaminated ; the central deity of their system, the sun-god, obscured and darkened ; their property and their persons, over which particular divinities watched and presided, griev- ously afflicted. ' The miracles in Egypt were,' observes a modern writer, ' supernatural in their greatness, in their concentration upon one period, In their coming and going according to the phases of conflict between the tyrant and the captive race, in their measured grada- tion from weak to strong. No one plague could be omitted without dislocating the whole narrative, and breaking the order distinctly intimated, though nowhere formally stated, by the writer. The results were brought about by the combined operation of all the plagues ; they could never have been produced by a merely for- tuitous concurrence of natural events ; and the narrative which records them, remarkable as it is for artlcssness and simplicity, is certainly not one which could have 70 THE PENTATEUCH. been concocted from documents of different ages, con- structed on different principles, and full of internal discrepancies and contradictions. It is the produc- tion of one mind, written by one man, and by one who had alone witnessed all the events which it re- cords.' ^ With a mighty hand and with a stretched-out arm were the chosen people thus delivered from their bondage in Egypt. With an increase in numbers that was perhaps possible by the ordinary law of causes, and able to come to pass within the limits of the time ^ given for the sojourn of the Hebrews in the land, — a land of the greatest fertility and productiveness, but which increase looked, nevertheless, almost like the result of a miraculous power exerted in their midst, — the Hebrews went forth out of the land 600,000 strong, besides women and children — a total number which has been roughly estimated at two millions and a half for the entire nation. Thus having spoiled ^ the Egyptians, having kept the Passover, having gone forth by a route which it is most difficult exactly to determine at the present time, since we have no definite information as regards the geo- graphical position of Goshen and Rameses,and no express note of time to direct us, and, guided by the pillar of fire, having reached the passage of the Red Sea, where Pharaoh and his armies perished, and the children of 1 See Bryant's Treatise on these Plagues, an analysis of which is given in Home's Introduction to Scriptures, vol. iv. p. il et seq. (ed. 1834). Cf. also Canon Cook's ' Introduction to Exodus ' (Speaker's Comvientary), also Dr. Edersheim's Exodus, pp. 69-78. ^ See above, p. 58 ; 430, not 215 years. 2 The word ^^ti^j with its Hiphil form, would probably be better translated to ' request,' and to 'comply with the request,' than 'borrow' and ' lend.' EXODUS. 71 Israel crossed In safety, — they entered upon their toll- some wanderings In the wilderness. Some sceptical writers have attempted, in the teeth of the express language of Scripture (Ex. xlv. 18, 23, 28), and the teaching of the Psalms (cxxxvl. 15), to maintain the untenable position that Pharaoh, never perished In the waters of the sea ; whilst others have indulged in what have been called ' naturalistic explana- tions,' and have suggested a passage through 2, ford, or hinted at particular effects of winds and tides and currents, and other physical causes, in order to invalidate the miraculous element In the story.^ They have, however, only Involved themselves in impossibilities, or at least improbabilities, far greater than those which they endeavoured to account for. The passage was commemorated In a paean or song of victory, in which it Is declared that ' the Lord shall reign for ever and ever.' - 2. We now see the Israelites on their march through the wilderness, by devious wanderings, to the land of promise, — a people under the protection of Jehovah, and designed for His service. Still were they to be kept apart from other nations, as they had been in Egypt ; and, moreover, they were to be trained and disciplined in the wilderness, as they had been trained in the fur- nace of affliction during their captivity. They were ^ Modern writers, such as Robinson and Wilson, advocate different localities for the passage of the Red Sea,- those who have recourse to ' second causes ' generally advocating the neighbourhood of Suez, where the water is shallower (Fairbairn's Dictionary). ^ ' The length and structure of the song of Moses have been represented as proofs of a later origin. A comparison between it and Egyptian poems of the age of Moses leaves no doubt as to the possibility of such a hymn being written by Moses, who was trained in the schools of Eg}'pt ' (Canon Cook, Speaker's Commentary). 72 THE rENTATEUCII. now, even more expressly than before, to be made a ' holy nation,' a ' peculiar treasure,' a ' kingdom of priests' (xix. 5, 6). Holiness — *Ye shall be holy; for I the Lord your God am holy ' (Lev. xix. 2), — holiness was to be the special characteristic of God's covenant people, and to secure it was the ultimate aim of all their legislative enactments, — the object sought after by their rigid separation from all other peoples. It was (as it has been well observed) a remarkable peculiarity in Mosaic legislation, that the religious enactments had a civil or judicial sanction, while the civil bore also a religious character. Transgression of a religious com- mand was an offence against the State, and contempt of a civil ordinance came under the character of sin. This arose from the circumstance that the proper head of the community was God and King in one person, — a principle which, however alien to, and indeed incom- patible with, ordinary legislation, was indispensable to the purposes of the theocracy, and in building up a community which had been long deteriorated by a crushing slavery, but which was to be both blessed in itself and a source of blessing to mankind. But while the laws and ordinances were intended to meet the immediate wants of the people, they had also a typical and spiritual bearing in relation to time future. Hence the civil and the moral enactments blend together in one complex whole, having one basis, God's covenant with His people, and one object, the realizing the provisions of the covenant ; and hence the differing and apparently opposing senses in which the term law is employed in the New Testament. These considera- tions will serve to explain the large space given to matters of a civil character, and to what might appear unimportant details {e.g, the structure and furnishing of EXODUS. 73 the tabernacle) in a professed revelation from God. For * ordinances even the most seemingly trivial are in that case found to be, like the history in which they arc enclosed, fraught with great principles of eternal truth.' The opinion that this book was written in the wilder- ness after the departure from Egypt, and written by an eye-witness of the scenes and events described, seems most fairly deducible from internal evidence. The truth of the record is confirmed in the strongest manner by the institution of two ordinances, — a monument more durable even than stone or brass : M ommieyiUmi (Ere perenniiis, — the one, the institution of the Passover, as a commemorative memorial of what occurred in Egypt (Ex. xii. 26, 27, and Deut. vi. 20 ad fin.) ; the other, the feast of Tabernacles, as a commemoration of their living in tents in the wilderness (Lev. xxiii. 42 ad fin.). 'Could any monuments,' it has been asked, 'better subserve the purpose contemplated than these annual celebrations and reunions of tribes and families at the national sanctuary, the centre of all authority, civil and sacred } Nothing, indeed, could have been better adapted for the conservation of the national unity and traditions, and for perpetuating the remembrance of the great incidents in the nation's history.' V. Analysis of the Book of Exodus. There are three broadly marked divisions in this book ; the first two being historical, and the third legislative. I. An account of the state of the Israelites in Egypt, and the preparations for their deliverance from their bondage there (chaps, i.-xii. 36). (I.) The rapid increase of the Israelites in Egypt, and their grievous oppression under a new dynasty after the death of Joseph (chap. i.). 74 THE PENTATEUCH. (2.) The birth, preservation, education, and flight of Moses to Arabia ; his divine call to be the deliverer of his brethren ; his consequent re- turn into Egypt ; his first unsuccessful attempt to induce Pharaoh to let the people go ; the infliction of the ten plagues upon the Egyp- tians ; and the institution of the Passover (chaps, ii.-xii. 36). 2. An account of the march of the Israelites from Rameses to Mount Sinai (chaps, xii. 37-xix. 2). (i.) The exodus, together with specific instructions respecting the Passover and the consecration of the first-born (chaps, xii. 37-xiii. 16). (2.) The line of march to the Red Sea ; the passage of the Israelites through it, and the destruction of Pharaoh and his host; together with the song of triumph by Moses on the deliverance of his people and the overthrow of their enemies (chaps, xiii. 17-xv. 21). (3.) Various events and miracles recounted that occurred on their journey between the Red Sea and Sinai, e.g. the bitter waters at Marah ; the giving of quails and of manna; the sanctity of the Sabbath ; the water that flowed miracu- lously from the rock at Rephidim ; the battle there fought with the Amalekites (chaps, xv. 22-xvii. 16). (4.) The arrival at the camp of Moses' wife and children with Jethro, and the advice given by the latter as to the government of the people (chap, xviii.). 3. The promulgation of the law on Mount Sinai, and the solemn inauguration of the theocracy (chaps, xix. 3- xl.). EXODUS. 75 (i.) The setting apart and preparing the people as a ' holy nation ' for the receiving of the law (chap. xix.). (2.) The promulgation of the Ten Commandments — the vioral law (chap. xx.). (3.) Different ordinances delivered, chiefly of ^judicial character (chaps, xxi.-xxiii. 19). (4.) An angel promised as their guide ; and the cove- nant between God and His people solemnly ratified (chaps, xxiii. 20-xxiv. 18). (5.) The ceremonial law promulgated, chiefly bearing on the construction of the tabernacle, the ark, the mercy-seat, and the altar of burnt-offering ; the setting apart of Aaron and his sons for the priestly functions, their vestments, and the ceremonial to be observed at their consecra- tion ; the altar of incense, the laver, the holy oil ; the appointment of Bezaleel and Aholiab for the construction of the tabernacle ; the ob- servance of the Sabbath ; and the delivery into the hands of Moses of the two tables of the law (chaps, xxv.-xxxi. 18). (6.) The apostasy and idolatry of the Israelites in the matter of the golden calf; their consequent rejection, and their restoration to divine favour through the intercession of Moses (chaps, xxxii.-xxxiv. 35). (7.) The offerings of the people, and the construction of the tabernacle, as well as the arrangement of everything in relation to its services ,in accordance with the instructions which had been before given ; together with the renewal of the covenant (chaps, xxxv.-xl.). LEVITICUS. 'So Law appears imperfect, and but given With purpose to resign tfiem, in full time, Up to a Better Covenant; disciplined From sfiadoivy types to truth; from flesh to spirit; From imposition of strict laws to free Acceptance of large grace; from servile fear To filial ; works of law to works of faith. ' Milton's Paradise Lost^ xii. 300 seq. I. Leviticus, the central book of the Pentateuch, owes its name, as the two former ones have done, to the LXX. translators.^ Unlike the Books of Genesis and Exodus, it contains very little history, which is princi- pally found in the 8th, 9th, loth, and part of the 24th chapters, in which are respectively described the conse- cration of Aaron and his sons ; the offerings for himself and people ; the destruction of Nadab and Abihu for offering strange fire, and the stoning of the blasphemer. * As regards its subject-matter, Leviticus is closely connected with Exodus at its commencement, and with Numbers at its conclusion ; the first link of connection being clearly shown by the fact that while the directions ^ The Hebrew title — the first word in the book — is 5<"|ps") {''and He called,' showing it to be a continuation of the preceding history) ; AiviriKcv, LXX. ; Leviticus, Vulg. The word ' Leviticus ' is an adjective form derived from Levi or Levite, and so is descriptive of the book, which is mainly occupied with the laws for sacrifices and other services, which were com- mitted to the charge of Aaron the Levite (Ex. iv. 14). Compare the expression in Heb. vii. II, Xiv'iTiKh kpMirCvri. 7(> LEVITICUS. 'JJ for the consecration of the priests are given in Exodus, the consecration itself is narrated in Leviticus in nearly the same words, changing the tense of the verbs.' It is chiefly occupied with the promulgation of the laws referring to sacrifices,^ to purity and impurity, to the separation of the Jewish nation, to the priests and priesthood, to the holy days and festivals, and to vows. It has been supposed that the laws given in Leviticus were given between the period in which the tabernacle was fully set up and the period when the tabernacle removed from Mount Sinai, i.e. between the first day of the first month and the twentieth day of the second month of the second year of the exodus (Ex. xl. 2, 17, and Num. x. 11). It probably comprises the history of one month ; though some, with less probability, have limited it to the eight days occupied with the consecra- tion of the priests.^ It may be safely inferred that the laws above indicated were given, not at detached times, but continuously, from the mercy-seat of the tabernacle, on which (as we find from the last chapter of Exodus, xl. 34) the glory of the divine presence rested. As the Ten Command- ments and the instructions for the erection of the sanctuary were given at the theophany on the summit of Mount Sinai in the midst of thunder and lightning by the hands of Moses as mediator, so now the laws relating to the church-services of the Israelites, which are contained in the Book of Leviticus, issue forth, through the agency of the same mediator, from the divine glory ^ Sacrifices were not first introduced under the Mosaic law ; they had existed before. So, too, the priesthood may be traced before, especially in the case of Melchizedek and of Jethro. (Cf. for the ante-Mosaic existence of sacrifice, Dr. Smiih.'^ Dictioiiaiy of the Bible, 'Sacrifice.') - See Rev. D. Macdonald's Introduction to the Pentateuch, vol. i. p. 98, and article ' Leviticus ' in Fairbairn's Bible Dictionary. yS THE PENTATEUCH. of the tabernacle, the 'theocratic centre of the nation,' in the midst of the people, and no lon^i^er from the lonely height of the Sinaitic mount. II. In regard to the classification of the subject-matter contained in this book, and especially in relation to sacrifices, some little difference of arrangement may be observed in different authors. I. It has been remarked by some ^ that the laws relating to sacrifices, which were the recognised media of approach to Jehovah, and therefore graciously treated of in the first instance, such, e.g., as the burnt-offering, the meat-offering, the peace-offering, and the trespass- offering (chaps, i.-v.), and the laws relating to the duties of the priests in reference to these offerings (chaps, vi., vii.), are classified, after the pattern of the Ten Com- mandments, in decalogues of instructions under their respective heads ; and that as the first seven decalogues referred to the putting away of guilt, so the next seven (in chaps, xi.-xvi.) referred to the putting away of /";//- purity, containing commands relating to clean and unclean flesh, to leprosy, and to the great Day of Atonement ; the first section teaching that * God can only be approached by means of appointed sacrifices,' and the next, that * man in nature and life is full of pollution from which he must be cleansed.' Again, it ^ has been supposed by the same critics, that when Israel is taught that it is a holy nation, separate, sanctified for God's service (chaps, xvii.-xx.), another group of seven decalogues may be traced ; while in chaps, xxi.-xxvi. they discover another group of the same number of decalogues, treating chiefly of the personal ' By Bertheau and Baumgartcn (see Dr. Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, vol. ii. p. 109). LEVITICUS. 79 purity of the priests, as before the laws had borne on external purity (chaps, xi.-xvi.), and on moral purity (chaps, xvii.-xx.), the whole being brought to a close by a promise, rich and full, to those who are obedient, and by a threatening, equally comprehensive, in the case of those who are disobedient ; the threat having been omitted in the first book of the covenant (Ex. xxiii. 20-33), because as yet the nation had not entered into a definite covenant with Jehovah ; but, now that it was bound in the bonds of a covenant relation with Him, the punishment to follow transgression is held out prominently before them. It may be thought (not unfairly) that such a principle of division into decalogues is somewhat arbitrary, and perhaps fanciful and imaginative ; but it has been referred to, because it has commended itself to some, who have bestowed much time and critical labour on the subject. 2. With a greater simplicity of arrangement, Keil has traced a twofold division of subjects ; one, the ordinances for the covenant relation of Israel with God (chaps, i.-xvi.) ; the other, the laws for hallowing Israel in this covenant fellowship (chaps, xvii.-xxvii.). In the first place, their privileges are taught, as a ' king- dom of priests,' and as a covenant people ; in the second, their duties, as a ' holy nation ' (Ex. xix. 6), who were to manifest this covenant relation in a holy Hfe. We may observe that we should look for a popular rather than a / the questions connected with special seasons and particular meats and drinks also referred to (Gal. iv. 9, 10; Col. ii. 16, 17; Acts xv.); the year of jubilee, i.e. of the 'glad sound' (Lev. xxv. ), referred to Ps. Ixxxix. 15 and Isa. Ixi. 1-3, is also referred to by our Lord in the synagogue at Nazareth (Luke iv. 16-21). 2 See Ilavernick's Introdiiclion to the Pentateuch, p. 303 et seq. 86 THE PENTATEUCH. history of the Jewish people, to their exile in a strang-e land/ to their sorrows and trials, and their future deliverance. It may be added that there is much less objection made to this book by critics and sceptics than to any other book of the Pentateuch ; though, naturally, the opponents of inspiration have, however rashly and in- considerately, objected to the propJiecies contained in the chapter just alluded to, and regarded it in conse- quence as the work of a later age, on principles no less arbitrary than unphilosophical.^ VIII. There can indeed be no doubt that the ritual and sacrificial system of this book must have appeared trivial, cumbrous, and burdensome to those who viewed it only in its simple and literal sense, and without any reference to that which it was intended to prefigure in the future. Here, no doubt, was one of the great trials of the ancient worshipper. To the thoughtful and 1 'Modern criticism here will have it, because mention is made of the exile, that there is an oracuhim post ei'enhmi, and on that account denies that it belongs to the age of Moses ' (Havernick, ibid. p. 304). ' It may be with them {i.e. the critical school) a first principle that supernatural revelation is impossible, and prophecy nothing but retro- spective history. But, after all, it is only a theoretical opinion, one, too, negatived by the voice of human nature, rejected by the majority of the learned (who are by no means found exclusively in the ranks of Pantheism), and repugnant to the essential relations subsisting between the Creator and the creature' (Rev. W. Smith, Ph.D., O71 the Pentateuch, vol. i. preface, p. viii.). 2 We may observe that even those critics who favour the 'documentary hypothesis ' allow that Leviticus is almost entirely the work of one author, viz. the Elohist. 'As regards the question of atithorship,^ says the Rev. Samuel Clarke, 'most, even of those who hold a different opinion on the other books of the Pentateuch, ascribe it in the main to Moses. The theories which are counter to its Mosaic origin are so much at variance with each other, — no two of them being in substantial agreement, — that it does not seem worth while to notice them in this place.' LEVITICUS. 87 enlightened in the Jewish Church of old the sacrifice may have seemed, like the Christian sacraments to those of after time, to possess not only an outward and visible sign, but also an inward and spiritual reality.^ To some this view was no doubt vague and indistinct, and they could trace in it but a faint expression of their own spiritual wants and desires ; while to others, whose reli- gious perceptions were brighter, a divine light may have been shed upon the sacrificial system as it appeared to reflect the glory of the great offering to be made in the future in the person of Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God. It is probable that to every thoughtful Israelite a certain contradiction must have presented itself in the idea of the spotlessness and freedom from guilt in the perfect and unblemished victim which he was called upon to offer up, and in his own sad consciousness of sin and imperfection ; and he must have felt that such a sacrifice could not in any sense represent himself. Such a mystery and such an apparent contradiction could only be solved by realizing that spotless, sinless Lamb of God, to whom the victim pointed in type and figure, to be offered up as a sweet savour to God in the fulness of time. IX. What was the exact keynote ?ind fundamental idea of the sacrificial system has been variously explained. To some it has appeared to be found in the notion of expiation, in the significance of the blood in making an atonement (Lev. xvii. 11, 12). But in the patriarchal sacri- fices, it has been objected, blood has no place, nor again in the meat-offerings of the Mosaic ritual. Archbishop Thomson- has observed, 'The keynote of all the sacri- * See Speaker's Coi/iiiicntary, ' Introduction to Leviticus.' ^ BaDiptoii Lectures^ p. 40. 88 THE PENTATEUCH. ficial systems Is the same ; self-abdication and a sense of dependence on God are the feelings which gifts and victims strive to express.' Whatever may be the exact truth in the midst of conflicting opinions on this point, it would seem that there was a definite and obvious arrangement and sequence to be traced in the sacrifices which were to be offered up. The ^///-offering would clearly appear to take the first and foremost place. It would thus be in accord with the spiritual progress and condition of him who offered the sacrifice. The sin- offering spoke of transgression of the law, of a conscience ill at ease through a sense of sin and its need of atone- ment. It was therefore the ' creation of the law ; ' * for by the law is the knowledge of sin ' (Rom. iii, 20). Then would follow, in a natural order, the diir/i t-offering, indicating that the worshipper, having acknowledged his transgressions, could now present himself as accepted in the burnt-offering, which indicated the complete dedication and surrender of the offerer to God's service, his mounting upwards above the world and the things of sense to God. Then would succeed, in the order of succession, the /^eace-ofiering, symbolizing communion and acceptance with God, a conscience at peace through reconciliation. X. But before we close this section it will be necessary to state and examine, with some degree of order and precision, certain facts and theories in regard to ^/le tinportant institution of sacrifice, — a subject which is so prominently brought under our notice in the Book of Leviticus, but which, in accordance with scriptural usage, is not arranged there in a methodical or system- atic manner. I. The question as to the origin of sacrifice will LEVITICUS. 89 naturally claim our first consideration. It Is a somewhat difficult inquiry, and several theories have been ad- vanced to account for the facts of the case. There are, however, two main views which have been held on this point. By one school of interpreters it has been sup- posed that the rite of sacrifice had its origin in the natural religious instinct of man, either unconsciously influenced by the Spirit of God, or without and apart from any such divine guidance. By another school its origin has been traced to a divine primeval revelation, which has been regarded as the source and groundwork of the institution. That the rite of sacrifice existed and prevailed very extensively — we may perhaps say, almost universally — amongst mankind at larg^, is an indisputable fact. But whether it arose from a direct positive command of God, or whether it originated in the natural instincts of the human heart, — in which there lurked a latent sense of sin, a desire to regain a lost communion with God, an experienced necessity such as that which is indicated by the very act of prayer, — cannot be demonstrably or incontrovertibly proved. It has been argued, on the one hand, that if the institution of sacrifice owed its origin to a positive divine command, we might a prioj-i have reasonably supposed that in the case of so important an institution, and one that afterwards occupied so large a place in the Jewish economy, we should have met with some definite intima- tion, at the very commencement of Holy Scripture, of the existence of such a command, more especially when we observe that the origin of the Sabbath is distinctly referred to in the second chapter of Genesis ; but, it is objected, there is apparently no intimation of this kind to be discovered, and that Scripture maintains an entire 90 THE PENTATEUCH. silence on the subject ; and yet, when our attention is first called to the sacrifices of Cain and Abel, such sacrifices are regarded as things of course, customary, and, it would appear, authorized. Again, the objection is raised, that although the eucharistic and deprecatory aspects of the rite of sacri- fice are generally allowed to be in accordance with the natural instincts of man, yet that the additional and higher idea — namely, its expiatory character — would seem to have been slowly and gradually evolved, dimly and obscurely, even under the strict Mosaic ritual, and to have waited for its full manifestation and develop- ment until the times of the new dispensation, and under the teaching of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Accord- ingly, it is said that we may trace a simpler and more unfettered service during primitive and patriarchal times, which was gradually narrowed, limited, and confined under the guiding hand of God at the establishment of the complete Mosaic institution of sacrifice, — an existing and prevalent custom amongst mankind having thus, it has been supposed, received the impress and sanction of God's approval, and obtained an authoritative recep- tion into the positive code of divine law. If, moreover, we regard the ori which is said to be derived from the obsolete root n3!0> 'to give,' is used in Gen. xxxii. 13, 20, 21, of a gift (LXX. lupov) from Jacob to Esau; in i Kings iv. 21 {}oupa.), in 2 Sam. viii, 2, 6 (iswa), and in 2 Kings xvii. 4 (^«vaa), as the tribute from a subject king. Eoth its 100 THE PENTATEUCH. be observed in the various sacrifices were minutely detailed and carefully formulated. But even in the time before the giving of the law, Jethro, when meeting Moses, is said to have offered both burnt-offerings and slain-offerings (Ex. xviii. 12), showing that the 'dis- tinction between these two kinds of sacrifices was common to the Terahite family generally' (Kurtz) ; and in pre-Mosaic times also the distinction between clean and unclean animals prevailed (Gen. viii. 20). After the criving of the law, the different institutions that existed, the necessity of separating the people by a line of demarcation from their neighbours, and the relations in which they stood in their theocracy to God, all called for a more minute and enlarged system of sacrifice. The more spiritual significance of the sacrifices was also brought out with greater vividness under the Mosaic code. The Idea of transgression was more clearly enunciated, and as a corollary the idea of atonement, — ' And therefore was Law given them, to evince Their natural pravity, by stirring up derivation, therefore, as well as its usage, would refer it to that idea of sacrifice which may be termed eucharistic. (2) Another term employed for that which is dedicated to God, corresponding to our word 'oblation,' was \2'^p {Korban\ which is used together with Minchah in Lev. ii. i, 4, 5, 6 (LXX. 1)0)^01 ^vffia.), generally translated luipov (cf. Mark vii. 11, Kopfhay, liTTi ^upav), which is Said to be derived from the root 2*]p> ' to approach,' or in Hiphil to ' make to approach.' It was employed of what was paid to the sanctuary and towards the maintenance of the priests. In this term the idea of a covenant between God and man seems to be indicated. (3) Another term used in connection with sacrifice is n^T {Zcbach), derived from nilT. *« 'slaughter animals,' especially to 'slay' in sacrifice, and refers to the bloody sacrifice, in which the shedding of blood is especially indicated. (Cf. its use by Moses, Ex. x. 25.) It is sometimes rendered 'offering,' but more generally 'sacrifice,' in our version. Of course, with this word the expiatory notion of sacrifice is specially connected. LEVITICUS. 10 1 Sin against Law to fight : that when they see Law can discover sin, but not remove, Save by those shadowy expiations weak, The blood of bulls and goats, they may conclude Some blood more precious must be paid for man.' Milton, Paradise Lost, xii. 2S7 seq. No doubt before the law of Moses not only a moral law and a spiritual covenant existed, but also, in some degree and to some extent, a sense of sin and the idea of atonement (cf. Job i. 5) ; but still these principles awaited their fuller and clearer manifestation in the Mosaic code. The animals which were permitted to be used in sacrifice on the altar were doves, pigeons, sheep,i and oxen, which were all used by Abraham in his covenant sacrifice (Gen. xv. 9), and were regarded as clean even before the institution of the law (Gen. vii. 2). The only produce of the land that was offered was oil, and wine, and corn, either in the ear, or in the form of meal, dough, and cakes ; figs, pomegranates, and grapes being excluded. Hence the sacrifices were of two kinds — (i) the animal or bleeding sacrifice, and (2) the bloodless or vegetable sacrifice. The animals, with one exception (Lev. xxii. 23), must be perfect, male or female, of at least eight days old (Ex. xxii. 30 and Lev. xxii. 27), and generally not more than three years old (Gen. XV. 9, an exception in Judg. vi. 25). The turtle-doves ^ The English version uses the term 'lamb' (Lev. iii. 7, iv. 32, etc.) sometimes where 'sheep ' would be more accurate. The word plb^ kSeh), which means ' one of the flock,' is somewhat loosely rendered in the English version 'ewe,' and 'lamb,' and 'sheep' (Lev. v. 7, xii. 8, etc.). The roebuck and the hart, though clean animals, and used for food, were not domesticated, and, as being ferce naturce, were not employed in sacrifice. The camel and the ass, though domesticated, were regarded as unclean. 103 THE TENTATEUCH. and pigeons were, to speak generally, only offered in the place of other animals by the poor. The bloodless and vegetable offering consisted of a vicat- and drink-o^^nw^. The meat-offering {Minchah) consisted only of food prepared from corn in different ways (Lev. ii.), as groats, or meal, or unleavened bread, for leaven was excluded, as amongst the Greeks and Romans, from sacrifices, because it was viewed as some- thing corrupting and defiling. It was also ' salted with salt' (Lev. ii. 13), to render it enduring (John vi. 27), salt being viewed as a means of keeping off corruption and consequent destruction. Oil and frankincense were regarded as accompaniments of the offering, for * this saturation of the minehah of the Fore-court with oil, expressed the thought that the only spiritual food pre- pared by man that could be well-pleasing to God was that \\\ which the Spirit of God had co-operated, and the only food that could be offered to Him was that which had been anointed with the oil of His Spirit ' (Kurtz, p. 289). The offerings on the altar — to which the name of sacri- fice is, in its strictest sense, confined, and which formed the chief element in the sacred services of the Mosaic ritual — were composed of what was the ordinary food of the people, and thus were frequently designated the * food ' or ' bread ' of God (Lev. xxi. 6, 8), that which served as the daily food of Israel being, as Kurtz has remarked, adopted as the symbol of those spiritual gifts which were offered to Jehovah as food. But only those clean animals that formed the general stock of their homesteads, and only those vegetables which had been cultivated with the care and labour of their hands, could be offered ; for thus the Israelites confessed that all the fruits of their labours were blessings from God, and LEVITICUS. 103 consecrated their life-calling, and along with it their life with all its powers to God.i The animal sacrifices — which represented more com- pletely the person and characteristics of men than vegetable products could — were of three kinds, the sin- and trespass-offerings, the burnt-offering, and the peace- offering. These three kinds, which seem to embody different phases of man's relation to God, resembled each other in the manner in which the sacrifice was presented ; in the laying on of the sacrificer's hands, which imposition of hands had no form of prayer or confession mentioned in the law, tJiat in the case of the scapegoat (Lev. xvi. 21) being peculiar, though such confession is referred to by the Jewish Rabbis ; and in the mode in which the victim was killed, whether by the sacrificer, or the priest, or his deputy ; but they had each some distinctive and peculiar observances of their own. In the case of the ^///-offering, blood was to be 'sprinkled' either on the horns of the altar or in the tabernacle ; in the case of the ^/^r;//-offering, there was the particularizing act of burning ; and in the peace-offer- ing, the peculiarity consisted in the sacrificial meal that followed that offering. But in all the three the blood of the victim was offered on the altar, and so they were all expiatory sacrifices, ' for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul' (Lev. xvii. 11). But in the sin-offering this sprinkling of the blood, and, as a con- sequence, the idea of atonement, was most clearly marked. For the sin-offering bore its witness to the existence of sin in man ; and, as the wages of sin is death, it further indicated the fact that God had pro- vided an atonement by the propitiatory sacrifice of a substituted victim. In the two other sacrifices, this ^ See Y'3\x\>7mxv^ Biblical Dicliona)-}'^ art. 'Offerings.' 104 THE PENTxVTEUCH. idea of atonement, though present (Lev. i. 4), was not so decidedly in the foreground. Hence these three sacrifices, if offered together, naturally followed in the order in which they have been placed, thus indicating the spiritual process to be traced in the offerer, — the sense of sin, of acceptance, and of communion with God (cf Lev. viii. 14-22, ix. 8 seq., xiv. 19 seq.), the sin- offering always occupying the foremost place. The second could only be presented after the acceptance of the first, and the third might be viewed as a subsidiary part of the second. In the patriarchal sacrifices we can trace more of the element of the peace-offering and the burnt-offering ; but under the law, by which was * the knowledge of sin ' (Rom. iii. 20), the sin-offering was more explicitly set forth. This, it has been re- marked, is but natural, since the deepest ideas are last in the order of development. i. a. The sin-offeriyig^ — the creation of the law — was offered either {a) on feast-days, the day of the new moon, at the Passover, Pentecost, and feast of Trumpets and Tabernacles (Num. xxviii. and xxix.), and on these days a kid was offered, while on the great Day of Atonement we find that two goats — the goat sacrificed and the scapegoat — were offered for the people, and a bullock for the priest himself (Lev. xvi.); or {b) in addi- tion to these high and solemn feast-days, the sin-offering was offered on special occasions of sin, which required expiation. We find the ritual of the sin-offering given in Lev. iv., where we observe that the offering depended upon the ^ The sin-offering (JlXtSn {Chaffdth), cciMOL^rlot., -rsp) Kfixprtx;, or ro ?^^Jxj/a, or to tyj; 7rXy!f/./MXiia.;, pro delicto. 2 Gemiineness of the Pentateuch, vol. ii. p. 176. I08 THE PENTATEUCH. a compensation of the spiritual debt {h(pu\y\ij.a) was taxed as high as the sum which w^as given for the compensa- tion of the outward material Icpii'kruj.a. By this symbolic act the idea of debt was most vividly impressed, and the necessity of making a settlement with God was clearly exhibited.' In what the exact difference — which De Wette has characterized as ' obscure ' — between the sin-offering and the trespass-offering consisted has been variously stated at different periods and by different writers.^ Some of the older writers, as Philo and Josephus,^ thought that the trespass- offering was presented by those who were constrained by their own consciences to self- accusation. 'Whoever,' says Winer, 'brought a trespass-offering was convicted by his own conscience ; but he who brought a sin-offering was convicted of a definite, yet unconscious sin.' On the other hand, Gesenius has affirmed that * nothing more can be deter- mined than that the sin-offerings were presented in the case of graver offences, and trespass-offerings in the case of lighter offences,' Kurtz, however, has main- tained that 'in case of every sin for which restitution or legal satisfaction could be made, such satisfaction was required. And, in such cases, a trespass-offer- ing was presented. When the rites of God, or of men which were protected by the covenant law of God, were violated, not only had the injury to be 1 It has been well remarked that it is, of course, impossible that the forms of sacrifices should be rigidly separated, because the ideas which they enshrine, though capable of distinction, are yet inseparable from one another. ^ Antiq. iii. 9, sec. 3, who thinks that the sin-offering is presented by those 'who fall into sin in ignorance'' {kbct uyvoixv), and the trespass- offering by ' one who has sinned, and is conscious of his sin, but has no one to convict him thereof.' LEVITICUS. 109 repaired, but the broken law honoured and the sin expiated.' ^ The distinguishing features of the law of the trespass- offering are to be seen in Lev. v. 14 seq., and vi. 1-7, the law being divided into two parts, corresponding with what is stated respecting the sin-offering. The first part refers to trespasses committed ' through ignor- ance,' or unintentionally, in all which cases restitution is to be made and a ram offered. The second part refers to cases of perjury or fraud, which, though committed knowingly, have been repented of and voluntarily confessed. Here also restitution is required. The same principle may be also traced in certain other cases. We can see, therefore, that the characterizing feature in the trespass-offering, which separated it off from the sin-offering, was this, that it was offered for offences where restitution could be legally made. Accordingly it has been supposed that the sin-offering, which was the most solemn and comprehensive of the two, looked chiefly to the guilt of the sin which was committed, irrespective of the consequences that flowed from it ; but that the trespass-offering looked rather to those consequences, and to the duty of making an atonement for them. We may add, that the blood in the trespass-offering was poured out over the surface of the altar, not, as in the case of the sin-offering, sprinkled over the highest parts of the altar, designated the horns of the altar. 1 As to the disputed difference, we find that HNt^rij being derived from NDn> which is properly to 'miss' a mark, or to 'err' {ufixprdvuv), and secondly to 'sin,' or incur 'penalty;' while Qti'S is properly to 'fail, having for its primary idea ncgligejice, especially in gait (Gesen.),^ — the former, therefore, would seem to refer to sin general and actual, the latter to special cases of negligence. no THE PENTATEUCH. ii. The burnt - offering'^ follows after the sui- and trespass-offerings. The very derivation of the word indicates this sacrifice as inoiintiiig ttpwards towards heaven, like incense, in fire and smoke, inasmuch as it was wlLolly consumed on the altar ; whereas, in the other sacrifices, only the fat portions were thus consumed. Hence the expression 'whole burnt-offering.' Being a bloody sacrifice, it contained the idea of propitiation ; but this idea was not brought out so clearly as in the other two sacrifices, which have just been considered. The leading idea of this sacrifice was not so much vicarious as representative ; and so St. Paul argues in Rom. xli. i.^ In this sacrifice was specially contained the notion of self-sacrifice, self-surrender, and self-dedication on the part of the sacrificer to God. Here we may trace a link between the sin-offering and the peace-offering ; and to restore this link was the great object of the ^ Its Hebrew equivalent is npy [Olah] or TOSV^ ^^^"^ ^bv^ to 'ascend.' In the LXX. the word is usually translated o\ox.u.uTuunt., and sometimes ()Xox.a.vTaj(Ti; and 'oXoKapTratn; and oXox.a.pTufji.x, and in the Vulgate Holocatistuni. It is sometimes expressed in Hebrew by p''P3 {Kdkel), 'whole burnt sacri- fice' (Deut. xxxiii. lo; Ps. li. 19), and by n^'X {Ishsheh), i.e. ' burnt with fire.' We find the burnt-offering; first mentioned in Gen. viii. 20, as offered after the flood, and it is referred to almost exclusively throughout the whole Book of Genesis (cf xv. 9 and xxii. 2, 7, 8, 13). - 'All sacrifices are divided (see Heb. v. i)into "gifts" and "sacrifices for sin " {i.e. eucharisiic and propitiatory sacrifices), and of the former of these the burnt-offering was the choicest specimen. Accordingly (in Ps. xl. 8, 9, quoted in Heb. x. 5), we have first (in ver. 8) the general opposition, as above, of sacrifices, ivclan (propitiatory), and offerings, 7rpocr;p,ofio(.t, and then (in ver. 9) "burnt-offering," as representing the one, is opposed to "sin- offering," as representing the other. Similarly, in Ex. x. 25 (less precisely) " burnt-offering " is contrasted with "sacrifice." (So in I Sam. xv. 22; Ps. 1. 8; Mark xii. ■^2>.) On the other hand, it is distinguished from " meat-offerings " (which were unbloody) and from "peace-offerings " (both of the eucharistic kind), because only a portion of them was consumed (see I Kings iii. 15, viii. 64, etc.) (Dr. Barry). LEVITICUS. Ill teaching of the prophets,^ a teaching which was directed to the inculcation of spiritualized views in regard to the sacrifices of the law, a teaching which was subjec- tively brought forward by David in the Psalms ^ no less strongly or frequently. And we may remark that this sacrifice typified (Heb. v.) our Lord's sacrifice, more especially in His agony and temptation, — His offering the ^perfect sacrifice of His own human will to the will of His Father.' For the most part, only males were allowed to be offered in this sacrifice, pointing out, as has been remarked by Oehler, the superior rank of this kind of sacrifice, just as male animals were selected for the higher description of sin-offerings. Together with the burnt-offering, it is observable that a meat-offering,'^ consisting of oil and flour, and a drink- offering of wine, were presented, as ' showing that with themselves the worshippers dedicated the labours of their hands, and the gifts of Providence with which they were endowed;' as representing 'the co-opera- tion of human will and labour with divine grace ; ' and, it may be, as ' foreshadowing the perpetual ex- hibition of that one sacrifice in the elements of bread and wine.' The victim, whether bullock, ram, or goat, when its blood had been poured out, as in the case of the trespass-offering, about the altar, was flayed, and cut up into different parts for the sake of burning (Lev. i. 6-9), and piled ' in order' (Lev. i. 7, 8) on the altar. All, ^ Cf. I Sam, XV. 22; Isa. i. 10-20; Jer. vii. 22, 23; Ezel<. xx, 39 44 ; Hos. vi. 6 ; Amos v. 21-27, and Micah vi. 6-8. * Cf. Ps. xl. 6 seq., 1. 13, 14, cxli. 2, li. 16, 17. ^ Cf. Ex. xxix, 41; Lev. viii 18, 22, 26, ix. 16, 17, xiv. 20; Num. xxviii. 4, 5. 112 THE PENTATEUCH. except the skin, which was given to the priest, was consumed by fire (Lev. vii. 8). The burnt-offering, which would appear to have been the most ancient form of sacrifice, and in which the 'radical idea' of sacrifice is to be sought, was the normal, customary, and regularly appointed sacrifice for the devout worshipper. The altar in the court was called the altar of burnt-offering. Every morning and every evening a lamb was offered. It was the * continual,' the standing sacrifice (Ex. xxix. 42 ; Lev. vi. 8-13), daily offered up in behalf of the whole congregation. On the Sabbath, two lambs were offered at each sacri- fice (Num. xxviii. 9). On certain of the great feasts, as, e.g.y at the new moon, the three great festivals, the feast of Trumpets, and the great Day of Atonement (cf. Num. xxviii. 11, and xxix.), a still larger number of victims were offered up, as well as at the consecration of the tabernacle and the temple. iii. Pcace-ojfei'ings^ were of the nature of voliuitary sacrifices, offered up in accordance with the spontaneous feelings of the worshipper. ' Ye shall offer it at your own will,' is the expression given in Lev. xix. 5. Hence they were not appointed to be offered at fixed and definite times, except at the feast of Pentecost. The very name given to them indicated that their offerer was at peace with God. They therefore, as has been already remarked, followed last, when they accompanied the expiatory sin-offering and the dedicatory burnt- offering. The ritual of this sacrifice is given in Lev. iii., where we find that it corresponded with that of the sin-offering, ^ In Heb. '^uy^ {Shdamim), SvffUi ffumpiov. The tha7ik-oKex\ng (Lev. vii. ii, 12, and xxii. 29) is named T\1St\ {Todah), equal to 'thanks,' T 'thanksgiving' (Gesen,). LEVITICUS. 113 except that the blood was wholly poured upon the altar, as in the case of the trespass- and the burnt-offerings. The fat was also burned. The priests claimed the * heave-leg ' and the ' wave-breast.' The remainder was given back to the offerer of the sacrifice to be eaten in the sanctuary. This sacrifice was always accompanied by a meat- and a drink-offering. ' The memorial of it,' as it is named in Lev. ii. 2, that is, the portion of it which ' brought the worshipper to the gracious remem- brance of God,' was burned on the altar, and the remain- ing portion was consumed by the sacrificer and his friends at the feast which succeeded. This meal was the characteristic element in the sacrifice. It indicated the communion existing between the offerer of the sacrifice and God Himself. All had to be offered to Jehovah, who therefore provided the feast in His own house and at His own table, and hence the feast became a symbol of peace and friendship between God and the worshipper. It symbolized the enjoyment of communion with God at the ' table of the Lord,' in the different gifts, which, through His mercy, were bestowed upon the offerer (cf. Phil. iv. 18 ; Heb. xiii. 15, 16). The flesh was, in most cases, eaten on the same day on which it was offered (Lev. vii. 15). It has been remarked that the method employed in the peace-offering resembled the rites observed in the oldest heathen sacrifices recorded (cf. Hom. //. i. 315, 458, ii. 421, xi. 770; ^sch. Prom. 496; Soph. Antig. loio). The custom of ivaving, in which the term * wave- breast' in this sacrifice originated, prevailed also at other times and other occasions (cf. Num. v. 25 ; Lev. viii. 29, xiv. 12, xxiii. 11). The waving the breast of the victim by the priest ' before the Lord ' and towards H 114 THE PENTATEUCH. himself, indicated the solemn offering- of the gift to God and its restoration again to the offerer. The 'wave- breast' and the * heave-leg' or ' shoulder' i (cf. Ex. xxix. 26, 27 ; Lev. vii. 32-34) were permitted to be eaten by the priest and his family in a clean place outside the sanctuary (Lev. x. 14). The devout and thoughtful worshipper must have felt that a contradiction existed in his offering a pure and spotless victim in the place of his own sinful self, though he must have felt at the same time that the victim, as offered to a God of purity, must be pure ; and the fact of the priest acting as the atoning agent, must also have led him to thoughts, it may be, of a Sinless Victim and another Mediator to be revealed in the fulness of time. The peace-offerings were of three kinds — ist, thanks- giving-offerings ; 2nd, votive-offerings ; and 3rd, freewill- offerings (Lev. vii.), which last were probably supplica- tory offerings. The animals to be offered might be either sheep, goats, or oxen — male or female — as a rule, perfect and without blemish — with no limit as to the number offered, showing that these sacrifices were spontaneous, depending entirely upon the feelings and inclinations of the offerer. On important occasions of public rejoicing a large number of offerings were presented, which would furnish a sacrificial meal for the multitudes collected together. Only on two occasions do we find peace-offerings offered with burnt-offerings at a time of national sorrow and fasting, when they practically became supplicatory ^ Doubts have existed as to the meaning of the word pi^ {Slwh), which .seems to mean /^^ rather than shoulder (as in English Version, LXX., and Vulg.), or hip. Josephus, in speaking of the portions of the priests, uses the word xvj"'^>j {Antiq. iii. 9. 2). The Hebrew for ' wave-offering ' was nS^in {Tcnuplidh)^ that for 'heave-offering' HDlin {Tenlmdh). LEVITICUS. 115 offerings (Judg. XX. 26 ; 2 Sam. xxiv. 25). The offering which was offered by Jacob at Mizpah and at Beersheba (Gen. xxxi. 54, xlvi. i) would seem to have been a peace-offering. Once more, the bloodless offermgs^ which were offered on the altar of the Fore-court, were meat-offerings and drink-offerings. ia) Meat-o^^xmg?> ^ consisted of meal, bread or cake, and groats (Lev. ii.), all mixed with salt and oil, and frankincense with those only of meal and groats. Of these sacrifices a ' memorial ' was consumed on the altar ; the rest was to be eaten by Aaron and his sons, in a holy place, and the frankincense was to be wholly consumed on the altar. {b) Z^r/V/Z^-offerings^ are first described and enforced in Num. xv. 1-12 ; and from the introductory words, * When ye be come into the land of your habitation,' it has been fairly inferred that drink-offerings were not to be offered before their occupation of the promised land. The wine was to be poured out entirely upon the altar, and not drunk cither by the priest or the offerer. It is a somewhat perplexed question, whether the meat-offering by itself or accompanied by the drink- offering could be presented independently and by itself, or whether it was always preceded by the burnt-offering and the peace-offering. The meat-offering recognised the sovereignty of God, and in acknowledgment of His bounty it dedicated to Him what were regarded as the choicest of His gifts to man — bread, as the staff of life ; wine, as representative of that which gladdens and invigorates ; and oil, as the symbol of what is rich and nutritive (cf i Chron. xxix ^ See note, p. 99, for Hebrew, etc. ^ The Hebrew was "nD3> the Greek 7, libamen. Il6 THE PENTATEUCH. 10-14). We can scarcely trace in this sacrifice the ideas either of self-dedication to God or of atonement. These ideas would seem to be presupposed, this particular sacrifice being of a subsidiary nature. The bloodless offerings of the Holy Place were {a) the meat-offering on the table of show-bread ; {b) the oil for the seven-branched candlestick for the light- offering ; and {c) the incense for the altar of incense. {a) The sJwiv-bread} or skew-bread, consisted of twelve loaves, corresponding to the number of the twelve tribes, renewed every Sabbath. They were so called, inasmuch as they were set before the face of the Lord, apro/ IvJj'moi (Ex. XXV. 30), in the place where His glory dwelt, so as to be visible to Him. They were placed in 'two rows, six on a row, on the pure table^ before the Lord' (Lev. xxiv. 6, and i Sam. xxi. 6), with 'pure frankincense upon each row' (Lev. xxiv. 7). After their removal they were eaten by the priests 'in the Holy Place,' 'for it is most holy unto him of the offerings of the Lord made by fire' (Lev. xxiv. 9). It is possible that a drink-offering of wine may have accompanied the offering of the cakes of white meal. It has been remarked by Bahr {Syinb. I. vi. § 2) that * bread is here a symbol, and stands, as it so generally does in all languages, both for life and life's nourishment ; but by being entitled the Bread of the face, it becomes a symbol of a life higher than the physical ; it is, since it lies on the table placed in the symbolic heaven, heavenly 1 In Hebrew C^^'iQ Dn^ 5 LXX. ecprot rng 'rfoSiffiM-, (Matt. xii. 4 ; Luke vi. 4), &ftoi ryls ^paff^popa; (l Kings vii. 48) ; h Tpofitn; tuv (ipruv in Heb, ix. 2; in Vulg. ^ Fanes propositionis,' 'loaves of proposition ' (Wiclif). 2 See, for description of table, Ex. xxv. 23-30. (Cf. 2 Chron. iv. 19, xiii. IT.) It has been said that no rite in Scripture is more unexplained thin that of the shew-bread. LEVITICUS. 117 bread ; they who eat of it, and satisfy themselves with it, see the face of God.' {b) The seven lamps, placed on the seven-branched candlestick, filled with purest oil, and cleaned every day, were lighted in the evening, so that they might burn all night. The candlestick, described in Ex. xxv. 31-37 and xxxvii. 17-24, is named 'pure' (Lev. xxiv. 4), and had seven branches, as some have thought in re- ference to the planets (Josephus), or as others, as indicative of the Sabbath (Calmet). (c) The incense,'^ which was burnt on the altar of incense, composed of fragrant spices (onycha, stacte, galbanum, etc.), w^as rekindled every morning and evening, so that it might be a ' perpetual incense before the Lord throughout your generations' (Ex. xxx. 8). The service, as in the case of lighting the lamps, was first performed by the high priest, and subsequently by the other priests. Besides the- incense in the morning and evening (Ex. xxx. 7, 8), there was also the offering of the incense on the great Day of Atonement (Lev. xvi. 12), symbolical of the intercession of the priest (as a type of the great High Priest) rendering efficacious the prayer offered by the people (cf. Heb. ix. 24-28 with iv. 14 seq., vi. 19, 20, vii. 25). That intercession is said to be the strength of our prayers, and with the smoke of its incense they are said to rise up to heaven (Rev. viii. 4). And so Grotius thinks the mystical signification of incense to be ' Stirsiim habcnda cor da' 4. Though it is true that the ' gifts and sacrifices ' " of the first tabernacle could never make those who ^ 1 he name given to the incense in Hebrew was D'^QDH Dlbp {I'^cloreth Hassaminini), Ex. xxv. 6. '^ dcLpa. TS x,u.) 6u(Tta.i. Il8 THE PENTATEUCH. offered them perfect in conscience ' (Heb. ix. 9), and were only regarded as ' carnal ordinances ' (or ' rites ' or ' cere- monies/ marg.) imposed upon them until the time of refor- mation (Heb. ix. 10), — their constant repetition proving their intrinsic imperfection, inasmuch as it is 'not possible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins' (Heb. x. 4), — yet they are invested with a character at once solemn, important, and spiritual, from their being regarded as typical of the ' Lamb slain from the foundation of the world ' (Rev. xiii. 8), the ' Lamb without blemish and without spot, foreordained before the foundation of the world, but manifested in these last times' (i Pet. i. 19, 20). It was thus the different sacrifices of the Mosaic Law symbolized the Great Atonement, which was fore- ordained in the Divine mind, and which sacrifices were designed to presignify till the Divine Antitype Himself appeared. The whole system of sacrifice, in particular, must have been intended to foreshadow some deep spiritual blessings latent in the offerings themselves, and to lead on the devout worshipper to look forward to that divine and sinless sacrifice — very God and very man — in whom alone the legal sacrifices could find their true accomplishment, — all the varied offerings of the law being representations and types of the different aspects of Christ's atoning sacrifice, and in their mutual combination, and in the symmetry of all their various parts, bringing out in clearest relief that great and important doctrine of the Christian covenant. Not viewed in this light, the Levitical Law might indeed have appeared * like an enigmatic scroll of mysterious hieroglyphics ; ' but when ' deciphered by the Holy Spirit in the gospel, its characters, before dim, were gilded with heavenly light, and were seen LEVITICUS. 119 to be instinct with moral and spiritual meaning.' Not only was the Levitical Law, in itself, a ' shadow of the good things which were to come' (Heb. x. i), but also 'our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ' (Gal. iii. 24), * who is the High Priest of the good things to come' (Heb. ix. 11), of whom Moses wrote (John V. 46). That sacrifice of Christ is called a[ ' propitiation ' (Rom. iii. 24 ; i John ii. 2) and a ' ransom ' (Rom. iii. 25 ; i Cor. i. 30), and is typified by the sin- offering with which the high priest, on the great Day of Atonement, entered into the Most Holy Place. To Him is given the title of ' our Passover, sacrificed for us' (i Cor. v. 7), and though He 'knew no sin,' He is said to have been 'made sin for us' (2 Cor. v. 21). As the sin-offerings were, in certain cases, burned ' without the camp,' so Christ is said to have * suffered without the gate ' of the city (Heb. xiii. i r, 12). The principle of vicarious sacrifice is illustrated throughout the entire law. The sacrifice of Isaac typifies the same thing, though some indeed have viewed it as an ' analogue ' rather than a type. More- over, the language of the Bible, both in the Old and New Testament alike, is full of this typical imagery (cf Rom. xii. i ; Phil. ii. 17 ; 2 Tim. iv. 6, etc.). His intercession in heavenly places is typified by the offer- ing of the incense in the Most Holy Place by the high priest (Heb. ix. 24 seq., iv. 14, vii. 25). All the ideas connected with sacrifice, its self-dedicatory, its euchar- istic, its deprecatory, its expiatory aspects, — all come forth into clearer relief and fuller meaning when viewed in connection with the light shed upon sacrifices by their prefiguring the Divine Antitype, who was to come in the fulness of time. It is clear from all this, as it has been well expressed, 120 THE PENTATEUCH. that the idea of sacrifice is a complex idea, involving the propitiatory, the dedicatory, and the eucharistic elements. Any one of these, taken by itself, would lead to error and superstition. The propitiatory alone would tend to the idea of atonement by sacrifice for sin, as being effectual without any condition of re- pentance and faith ; the self-dedicatory, taken alone, ignores the barrier of sin between man and God, and undermines the whole idea of atonement ; the eucharistic alone leads to the notion that mere gifts can satisfy God's service, and is easily perverted into the heathenish attempt to ' bribe ' God by vows and offerings. All three probably were more or less implied in each sacrifice, each element predominating in its turn : all must be kept in mind in considering the historical influence, the spiritual meaning, and the typical value of sacrifice. Thus Milton, in his Paradise Lost (xii. 227 seq.), has dwelt on this great truth : — ■ * God from the mount of Sinai will Himself Ordain them laws, part such as appertain To civil justice ; part religious rites 0{ sacrifice, informing them by types And shadows of that destined Seed to bruise The serpent, by what means He shall achieve Mankind's deliverance.' NUMBERS. 'Over all the other great scenes of human history,— Palestine itself, Egypt, Greece, and Italy,— successiue tides of great recollections have rolled, each to a certain extent obliterating the traces of the former. But in the Peninsula of Sinai there is nothing to interfere with the effect of that single euent. The Exodus is the only stream of history that has passed through this wonderful region,— a history which has for its background the whole magnificence of Egypt, and for its distant horizon the forms, as yet unborn, of Judaism, of Mahometanism, of Christianity.' Dean Stanley's Sinai and Paiestine, p. 4. I. The fourth book of the Pentateuch i — a book which is chronologically essential to the organic completeness of the whole five — derives its name from the double numbering or census of the people of Israel ; one recorded at the commencement of the book (chaps, i.-iv.), the other towards its close (chap, xxvi.), — a census which affords a remarkable fulfilment of the promise to Abraham, that his seed should be as the stars of heaven for multitude. ^ The Book of Numbers (the only book of the Pentateuch whose name is clothed in an English dress) is called by the LXX. 'Apjf^oi; in the Vulgate NuDieri, and so by the Latin Fathers, except Tertullian. In the Hebrew it is named either "i^Ttl ('and He spake'), the initial word, or "13nfD3 ('in the wilderness'), a part of the first verse which is descriptive of the book. The later Jews named it D''1SD?2>n "IQD {Liber Niimeroi'itm) and Dn^pSn "IQD {Liber Rccensiowim). It contains, according to the Jews, ten Paraschioth. 122 THE rENTATEUCH. It contains the account of the long journeying of the Israehtes in the ' crreat and terrible,' the * waste howlino; wilderness' (Deut. viii. 15, xxxii. 10), — a circumstance which is sadly alluded to in the second name by which the Jews designated the book, ' in the wilderness,' — from the time of their leaving Mount Sinai, in the second month of the second year after the exodus, until they arrived at the borders of Canaan, the promised land, in the tenth month of the fortieth year. This entrance into the land of promise was the grand object which was kept before their view. The covenant had been ratified, the laws had been given, the taber- nacle had been erected, the priestly functions had been marked out, the divine presence had been manifested in their midst, and now, before they had to win their toilsome way by force into the promised land (for a peaceful entrance into that land is forbidden them), and before the doomed nations of the Canaanites perished, — doomed, because their ' iniquity ' was now ' full,' — it was deemed right that the host of the Lord should be mustered, organized, and numbered. All the males that were ' able to go forth to war ' are counted, and the total number (the Levites^ being excluded, who were claimed for God's service instead of the first-born) amounted to 603,550, which agreed with the calculation of the census instituted before with a view to supply the tribute for the support of the taber- nacle^ (Ex. xxxviii. 26). At the second census recorded in Numbers, which took place thirty-eight years after in the plains of Moab, * The Levites at the first census in the Book of Numbers amounted to 22,000 (chap. iii. 39), and at the second census to 23,000 (chap. xxvi. 62). -' On the difficulties of the first and second numbering of the people, and their solutions, see The Exodus of Israel, by Birks, chap. xi. p. 116 et seq. NUMBERS. 123 the numbers are set down at 601,730 (chap, xxvl.), and * among these there was not a man of them whom Moses and Aaron the priest numbered, when they numbered the children of Israel in the wilderness of Sinai, save * Caleb the son of Jephunneh, and Joshua the son of Nun. . . . For the Lord had said of them, They shall surely die in the wilderness' (xxvi. 64,65). So, too, in the 95th Psalm we read : ' Forty years long was I grieved with this generation ; . . . unto whom I sware in My wrath, that they should not enter into My rest,' — a statement applied personally to ourselves in the Epistle to the Hebrews (iv. i), ' Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into His rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.'-^ n. The history of the wanderings of Israel in the wilderness is not perfect or complete. Long periods of time are passed over in silence, no doubt in accordance with that divine plan of procedure to which reference has before been made. Between the transactions recorded in the 14th and 20th chapters of Numbers there is a gap 1 Cf. Heb. iii. 19 : 'They could not enter in because of unbelief;' and, 'All these things are written for our admonition' (i Cor. x. 11). ' Miriam, the prophetess ' (says Bishop Wordsworth, Introduction, p. xxxii.), ' died in the first month of the fortieth or last year of the wanderings ; Aaron, the priest, died in the fifth month of the same year ; and lastly, Moses, the deliverer of the law, died in the last month of the same year. All these events were significant. They showed that prophecy, the Levitical priesthood, and the Levitical Law, could and did bring Israel to the borders of Canaan, the type of heaven ; but they could not cross the frontier ; they could not bring them into Canaan. That was reserved for Joshua, the type of Jesus, the Saviour of all the Israel of God. For, as the Holy Ghost says by St. John, "The law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." Most of the transactions described in this book happened in the first and last years of the thirty- eight. The date of those events which are recorded in the middle of the book cannot be precisely ascertained.' 124 THE PENTATEUCH. of thirty-eight years. During this chasm we know (it has been forcibly said) the people existed. There is a list of all the stations at which they halted, in the 33rd chapter of Numbers; they themselves have no history. Their names are written in water, they have no place in the annals of heaven ; and at the end of those wanderings they are again at Kadesh-barnea, no nearer to Canaan, but at the same place at where they had been thirty-eight years before. Here is a solemn lesson to Churches and nations. They lose their place in God's history by unbelief, and by rebellion against Him ; and, however they may boast of their owm intellectual advancement, they make no progress^ but rather are marching in a retrograde direction ; and after a long and weary pilgrimage they are only again at Kadesh-barnea. III. The Book of Numbers is supposed by some critics to embody the writings of two or three documen- tary writers. But the principles on which these different writers are distinguished from each other is most unsatisfactory. The name of God has now ceased to be their guide ; and in its place, certain phrases and particular modes of expression are supposed to decide whether the Elohistic or Jehovistic writer may be the respective author of certain passages.-^ In common, however, with the books that have gone before, Numbers has been generally, from the earliest times, regarded as the work of Moses. The ancient ^ ' It may be quite consistently allowed that Moses availed himself in some cases of pre-existing materials, whether documentary or traditional, and combined in his narrative the results of information obtained from others ; and this fact is a sufficient explanation of the use in certain passages of words or groups of words, and grammatical forms, which are not found, or found but rarely, in other parts of the book' (Rev. T. E. Espin). NUxMBERS. 125 catalogue of the different stations of the Israelites in their journey from Egypt to the land of Moab is ex- pressly stated to have been written by him (xxxiii. 2) ; we meet with communications addressed by God to Moses which could scarcely have been written or described except by the person to whom they were originally made ; the same intimate acquaintance with Egypt and the Egyptians which was manifested in the previous books is still equally conspicuous in this ; the blending together of historical and legal matter without any systematic separation, the one flowing simply and naturally from the other, may still be traced ; and, once more, evidences abound in the book that its writer was not only intimate with the life that was led in the desert, but was afi"ected and influenced by that life when he was engaged in his work. It may be safely asserted that no one save Moses could have possessed all the diff"erent qualifications for the duty which are exhibited in the Book of Numbers. IV. The long wanderings in the desert of the Israel- ites not only illustrate God's providential care of His people and His hatred of sin, but they have also a typical character, prefiguring the passage of the Church of God to the heavenly Canaan.^ In addition to the water from the rock (chap, xx., and i Cor. x. 4), we find in the bi'azen serpent another signal type of Christ, the application of which is fixed by our Lord Himself (John iii. 14). We can see also in Aaron's intercession ^or the rebellious Israelites a type of Christ, who made inter- cession for the sins of the people (Heb. ii. 17, and com- pare vii. 25). And, moreover, there are numerous types in this book of the pilgrimage of the Ouistian as he ^ Cf. Litton's Guide to the Study of Scripture, \). 248. 126 THE PENTATEUCH. passes through the wilderness of this world. There ' remaineth, indeed, a rest for the people of God ;' but they have to undergo a period of probation ere that rest is reached. Here they are strangers and pilgrims — sometimes joyous, more commonly afflicted and dis- tressed — pressing on in the midst of uncertainty, doubt, and discouragement, with enemies and obstacles on every side of them, towards the land of promise, the heavenly Canaan. The pillar of cloud — the token of God's love and promise — may, indeed, precede them on their way, but how often do they shrink from taking up the cross, express regret at the loss of past pleasures and enjoyments, grow weary of the journey on which they have entered, feel discouraged by the length of the way, and permit fears to dishearten them and unbelief to cloud their better judgment ! In such a case the Book of Numbers may read a useful lesson, and raise a warning note, to which such faint-hearted wanderers through this world's desert may do well to attend. V. The most signal prophecy contained in the book is obviously that of Balaam, relating to Christ under the figure of the 'Star' and the 'Sceptre' (chap. xxiv. 17), which was a * vivid prophecy, and adapted to keep men's minds and hopes intent, and prepare them for something beyond the law ; and that of no small importance, since it was to be ushered in by a person of a remote advent, whose symbols, a star and a sceptre, imported most naturally the display of some new revelation, and a dominion combined with it' ^ It is added : * The historic facts related of the man who was made to ^ Davison on Prophecy^ p. 148. For an account of Balaam's prophecies and their fulfilment, see Newton's Dissertations, v. pp. 50-68. Also, for character of Balaam, see Bishop Butler's Sermons, vii. NUMBERS. 127 deliver this prophecy, his solemn summons from the east, his compact with the king of Moab, his duplicity, his reluctant submission to the word put into his mouth, his strange rebuke, — all were of use to draw attention to his prediction, and signalize the memory of it' The denunciation also against Moses and Aaron for their unbelief, and, moreover, the different threatenings against the people for their murmuring spirit, and the declaration that none, save Caleb and Joshua, should enter the Promised Land, were all predictive statements that were strikingly fulfilled. The very rites of the Passover were also of a predictive character. * It is not, perhaps, to be wondered at' (says Dean Perowne),^ ' that the episode of Balaam (chaps, xxii. 2- xxiv. 25) should have been regarded as a late addition. The prophecies are vivid, and the diction of them highly finished. The language is peculiar, as well as the general caste of the narrative. On these grounds, as well as on the score of the distinctly Messianic character of Balaam's prophecies, Ewald gives the episode to his fifth narrator, or the latest editor (according to his theory) of the Pentateuch. This writer he supposes to have lived in the former half of the eighth century B.C. The prophecies of Balaam, therefore, on this hypothesis, are vaticinia ex eventu. But this sort of criticism is so purely arbitrary, that it scarcely merits a serious refu- tation, not to mention that it rests entirely on the assumption that in prophecy there is no such thing as prediction.' VI. The Book of Numbers is 'rich in fragments of ancient poetry, some of them of great beauty, and all throwing an interesting light on the character of the ^ See Dr. Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, vol. ii. p. 582. 128 THE rENTATEUCII.' times in which they were composed,' ^ \Vc have (chap. vi. 24-26) the blessing of the high priest, and also the chants that were sung when the signal was given for the ark and the camp to move ; we have also a dark and obscure fragment from * The Book of the Wars of Jehovah,' 2 quoted in chap. xxi. 14, 15; we have, too, in chap. xxi. 17, 18, 'The Song of the Well,' a 'little carol fresh and lusty with young life ; ' and we have, once more, closely following it (vers. 27-30), a song of victory, composed after the defeat of the Moabites, a ' taunting, mocking strain.' VII. Objections have been raised against particular facts and circumstances recorded in the Book of Numbers. I. Objections have been started against the possibility of supplying so large a number of persons as two millions and upwards with food in the wilderness.^ We may safely content ourselves with the answer that we are expressly told that the supply was viiracidonsly provided. To those, however, who are slow to credit anything miraculous or supernatural, it may be said that we have many reasons for inferring that the desert was much more fertile in former days than it is now. It has, in fact, long been deteriorating. In bygone times it is evident that far more trees grew there than can now be found. Arabia, indeed, has been described ^ See article on 'Numbers,' in Dr. Smith's Dictionary of the Bible. Compare also Dr. Fairbairn's Bible Dictionary, art. ' Numbers.' - The ' Book of the Wars of Jehovah ' is said to have been probably ' a collection of ballads and songs composed on different occasions by the watchfires of the camp, in commemoration of the victories of the Israelites over their enemies.' See Home's Inti'oductio7i, iv. p. 22, for different theories on this somewhat difficult subject. ^ See Fairbairn's Bible Dictionary, p. 414. NUMBERS. 129 by Ritter as 'a living- fountain of men ;' and we have now 'proofs from inscriptions coeval with the pyramids, both in Egypt and in the Peninsula, that under the Pharaohs of the 3rd to the 1 8th dynasty, ages before Moses, and up to his time, the whole district was occupied by a population whose resources and numbers must have been considerable, since they were able to resist the forces of the Egyptians, who sent large armies in repeated but unsuccessful attempts to subjugate the Peninsula.' 1 Moreover, we are informed by travellers that extensive remains of dwellings of stone, with gardens and enclosures, may even now be seen, 'testi- fying to the existence, in past ages, of a settled popu- lation.' '^ But undoubtedly the great deterioration of the district in fertility has been occasioned by the reckless conduct of the Arabs in cutting down the trees, partly to supply their immediate necessities, and partly to provide the annual tribute in charcoal demanded by the Turkish authorities. Such a destruction of timber must neces- sarily have affected the rainfall, especially as no pains are taken either in making plantations, or protecting the fountains, or in digging wells. In no long time — if such a state of things is allowed to exist — the whole district will degenerate into one vast arid waste, and become like the region of Paran in the time of Moses, and known even in our day by the name of El-Tib, 'the desolate,' as the ' great and terrible ' and ' howling wilderness,' — a ' land of drought and of the shadow of death' (Deut. i. 19, viii. 15 ; Num. x. 12 ; and Jer. ii. 6). We are told that when Niebuhr visited the country, at the commencement of the last century, very consider- ^ See Spcakcr\': Commentary, Introduction to ' Exodus.' ^ The Bible Educator, vol. i. p. 228. I 130 THE PENTATEUCH. able supplies of vegetables were regularly exported from this district to Egypt, supplies which have now entirely ceased. And Dean Stanley has remarked, that there are 'indications of the mountains of Sinai having been able to supply greater resources formerly than at present.' 1 Moreover, we may fairly assume that the Israelites did not remain long together in any one spot ; and, in addition, we may gather from the Scripture account (cf Deut. ii. 6, 7) that the Israelites were not unprovided with money to purchase provisions, and that they took with them both corn and flocks and herds. 2. Again, it has been objected that if the Israelites were as numerous as has been stated, they would have been able to defeat the Amalekites and Canaanites more easily than they are represented to have done, and certainly not have been subjected to signal defeat at their hands. It should, however, be observed that the Canaanites are said to have had thirty-one kings, and to have lived in numerous fenced cities. Hence they could scarcely be considered a despicable people, so far as their strength and resources were concerned. But we cannot fail to remark that the candid and open manner in which Moses describes the defeats and disasters of his countrymen, furnishes a strong internal evidence to the truth of his historic record. It has been well said by the present Dean of Canterbury,'-^ that 'had the Pentateuch been written in long subsequent times, when the sojourn in the wilderness was surrounded by a halo of romance, while its physical difficulties were pro- bably magnified (Jer. ii. 2, 6), the conduct of the Israelites would have been put in a better light, and certainly they would not have been represented as poor soldiers, not ^ See Sinai attd Palestine, pp. 24, 25, for proofs of this. 2 In the Biile Educator, vol. i. p. 229. NUMBERS. 131 to say cowards and unmanly (Num. xiv. 13). Yet this is what is recorded of them.' 3. Again, it has been objected that there is a diffi- culty, if not a contradiction, in the extreme disproportion between the number of the first-born and the number of the males, viz. only 22,273 (chap. iii. 43), as compared with 603,550 from twenty years old and upwards. It has, however, been supposed, with a very fair semblance of probability, that only the newly-born children are referred to, — an explanation which the Rev. J. M. Arnold has carefully worked out in detail.^ 4. Once more : objections have been raised against the vast number of lambs which would have been re- quired at the Passover at Sinai. It has been affirmed that 200,000 lambs would have been needed. This calculation, however, does not take into account the fact attested by Josephus,^ that, at the time of Christ, it was not unusual for twenty persons to partake of the same lamb. Another reply to this objection has been fur- nished by Bishop Wordsworth,^ who remarks that in consequence of their disobedience and sin they did not enter into the Promised Land for thirty-eight years, whereas the instructions for the celebration of the Passover were given on the presumption that they would enter it very shortly, in the course of not many days ; and that, in consequence of their sin, they did not observe the Passover nor even the initiatory rite of 1 In Dr. Fairbaim's Bible Dictionary, pp. 415, 416. Cf. \he Exodus of Israel, by Birks, chap. vi. pp. 64-77, and p. 233 et seq., where the difficulties and objections of Bishop Colenso and Van Bohlen are carefully examined and answered. - De Bell. yzid. vi. 9. 3 : 'zoXXa) Ti nou a-vv E'/xofftv a.^p/}i^avTcii (quoted in Fairbaim's Bidle Dictionary, p. 417). 3 hitroduction to Bible, p. xxxi. See also Birks' Exodus of Israel, chap, vii. p. So. 132 THE PENTATEUCH. circumcision during those long years, but were under a ban of excommunication during that time, and dis- franchised, and deprived of the privilege of communion with God, though still hopes of future restoration were mercifully held out to them. VIII. Analysis of the Book of Nieinbers. The Book of Numbers contains, in about equal pro- portion, history and legislation. 1. The Census. (i.) The enumeration and marshalling of the twelve tribes, each under their own captain, and each distinguished by its own peculiar standard ^ (chaps, i., ii.). (2.) The ecclesiastical census of the Levites ; their officers ; and their ministrations (chaps, iii., iv.). 2. An account of different ceremonial rites and insti- tutions. (i.) The purification of the camp from all unclean persons (chap. v.). (2.) The appointment of the Nazareate (chap. vi.). (3.) The oblations made by princes to the sanctuary (chap. vii.). (4.) The setting apart of the Levites (chap. viii.). (5.) The celebration of the Passover (chap. ix.). (6.) Regulations touching the moving and resting of the camp (chap. x.). ' The standards of each tribe are not mentioned by Moses, but seem to be indicated in Rev. iv. 7, with which the tradition of the Jews agrees. So also with the vision of the cherubic figures in Ezek. i. 10. We may observe that, by this strict arrangement of tribes, the Israelites were pre- served from intermixture with idolatrous neighbours ; the genealogy of the Messiah was also preserved, as well as the confirmation to Abraham and other patriarchs, of the number of their posterity. (Cf. Home's IntrO' dtution^ iv. p. 17.) NUMBERS. 133 3. Their jon7Viey from Mount Sinai to Moab, through the wilderness, in which are recounted their various viurmurings and their rebellious spirit. Mtinnuriiigs : — (i.) On account of the length of the way (chap. xi.). (2.) From their loathing of manna and desire for flesh (chap. xi.). (3.) The murmuring of Miriam and Aaron against Moses (chap. xii.). (4.) Their complainings at the report of the twelve spies (chap. xiii.). (5.) The murmuring and rebellion of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram (chap. xvi.). (6.) The murmuring of the people against Moses and Aaron (chap. xvi.). (7.) Their murmuring for water (chap. xx.). (8.) Their murmurs in compassing the land of Edom (chap, xxi.) : — Murmiiriiigs which -wevQ punished by fire at Taberah, by pestilence, by Miriam's leprosy, by the death of ten of the spies, and by the exclusion of all who were twenty years old and upward from entrance into the Promised Land, by the death of Korah and his com- pany, by plague, by exclusion of Moses and Aaron from the Promised Land, and by fiery serpents. 4. A record of what took place in the plains of Moab. (i.) The designs of enemies against the Israelites; the prophecies of Balaam ; and the seduction of the people to commit idolatry by the Moab- ites (chaps, xxii.-xxv.). (2.) The second census (chap. xxvi.). (3.) Joshua's appointment as successor to Moses ; laws respecting sacrifices and the division of the Promised Land (chaps, xxvii.-xxxvi.). 134 THE PENTATEUCH. On the different stations of the Israeh'tes in the wilderness, according to Robinson in his Biblical Researches, SQQ schenie given in Macdonald's/;^/;W//r//(;;^ to the Pentatcjich, vol. i. pp. 103-105. For the state- ment of the comparative increase of some of the tribes, and the decrease of others, at the first and second census in Numbers, see Home's Introduction, iv. p. 19, note, where is also given (in pp. 20-22) a table of the stations of the Israelites in the wilderness, from Dr. Hales' Analysis of Chronology. DEUTERONOMY. ' When Deuteronomy is brought under our notice as a series of discourses, and indeed of farewell discourses, from the lawgiver to his nation, the first expectation which such a designation justifies us in forming is, that we should find in it a particular prominence given to the personal views and feelings (the sub- jectivity) of the speaker, so that by this it will be distinguished from the strictly objective form of the law, which he has hitherto been engaged in promulgating. Now, that the present book is marked by this subjective mode of presentation as its prominent characteristic, has in general been recognised and expressed by critics, though in different ways.' Havernick, Introduction to Pentateuch, p. 338. I. The Book of Deuteronomy ^ is a recapitulation of the law and the history of some of the preceding books, in a hortatory form, addressed to a new generation, in which Moses, speaking as a preacher rather than a law- giver, urges earnestly upon his hearers — * precept upon precept, line upon line ' — a ready obedience to the com- mands of God. There would seem to be an additional solemnity given to his admonitions from the fact of his realizing so vividly that his own departure was now close at hand (chaps, xxxi. 2, iii. 27, iv. 22), and that he ^ Named in Hebrew, from initial words, Q'^H'in n?X ('These are the words'); in LXX. Ast/Tt/javo^/av ; Vulg. ' Deuteronomium,' ' the second,' or rather, * the repeated law;' and by later Jews n"linn HJC'D ('Repeti- tion of the law;' cf. Deut, xvii. 18, in Heb., where it is translated * copy '). It consists of ten Paraschioth. The king was to write a copy of this book with his own hand, and read therein all the days of his life, chap. xvii. i8 ; and it was also to be written on great stones, plastered, at their crossing over Jordan, chap, xxvii. 2, 3. 136 THE PENTATEUCH. should never enter into that land of which he urged them to take possession, but would very soon have to bid them farewell for ever. Admirably acquainted as he was with their disposi- tions and failings, he pathetically warned them, as his dying testimony, against self-righteousness and against idolatry (chaps, ix. 4-24, iv. 14-40, xvii. 2-7). He thus addressed them, when they had already reached the borders of the Land of Promise, after the defeat of Sihon and Og, in the plains of Moab, on the eastern side of the Jordan, with the goodly land lying before their eyes. The period of time comprised in this book, as in the case of the preceding one, is very short, being less than two months ; from the first day of the eleventh month of the fortieth year after the exodus, to the seventh or eleventh day of the twelfth month of the same year, B.C. 145 I. II. The relation subsisting between this book and the rest of the Pentateuch is of a very intimate kind. The facts before recorded are the groundwork of the ad- dresses which this book contains.^ There are, no doubt, certain alterations apparent, and certain additional state- ments made in Deuteronomy ; but they are of the very kind which might have been expected, when the altered character and circumstances under which the different books were composed is taken into consideration. It would be obviously natural in an address of a hortatory character, to persons cognizant for the most part of the 1 The representation here is a fruit produced on the soil of the law ; it is the result of that law which had been exhibited to the people, apprehended in its subjective importance (Havernick's Inb-oduction to Pentateiichy P- 339). DEUTERONOMY. 1 37 facts of the case, to group incidents of a similar cha- racter together, to touch upon historical facts more lightly, mentioning some and passing by others, to pay less regard to chronological sequence and arrangement, to allude to circumstances and details which might have been passed over in preceding books from being re- garded as self-evident, to modify, to restrict, to amplify existing laws, and even to introduce new ones, in accordance with the altered condition of affairs. Nor does it seem unnatural to meet with fresh and additional historical circumstances, with facts before unmentioned, especially under the new state in which the Israelites were then placed. These are — {a) Addi- tions hi histoiy, e.g. the command to leave Horeb (chap, i. 6, 7) ; the repentance of the Israelites (chap. i. 45) ; the intercession of Moses for Aaron (chap. ix. 20) ; the command not to fight with Moabites and Am- monites (chap. ii. 9, 19), or Edomites (chap. ii. 4-8) ; notices of earlier inhabitants of Moab, Ammon, and Mount Seir (chap. ii. 10-12, 20-23), of the sixty fortified cities of Basan (chap. iii. 4), of the king, as ' of the remnant of the giants' (chap. iii. 11); the different names of Hermon (chap. iii. 9), etc. {b) Additions in the law, e.g. appointment of cities of refuge (Deut. xix. 7-9, as compared with iv. 41 and Num. xxxv. 14), of one place where all the offerings and tithes were to be brought (chap. xii. 5, 6) ; notices of a king (chap. xvii. 14), prophets (chap, xviii. 15), wars and military service (chap. XX.), and various minor laws and enactments.^ We can trace also in the legislative portions of the book (the legal institutions given at Sinai being regarded as the acknowledged basis of all the commandments) a ^ See Dr. Smith's and Dr. Fairbairn's Bil>lt; Dictionaries^ under * Deuteronomy.' I3S THE PENTATEUCH. reference continually to the spirit rather than to the mere letter of the law, and to the love of God as the fulfilment of the law, a tone of thought and feeling which places the book more in connection with the prophetic writers of the Old Testament, and which gives it in part a strong resemblance to the writings of Jere- miah. Nor is this at all unnatural, if we suppose Moses to have been the author of the book. From his earliest days the prophet would have been conversant with the Mosaic Law ; and when the wave of calamity rolled over the nation, the priest of Anathoth would most natur- ally have expressed himself in the familiar language of Deuteronomy, and his words would have sounded like an echo of that book. Still, if linguistic considerations are to decide, ' the author of Deuteronomy and of the prophecies of Jere- miah were neither identical nor contemporary. The resemblances between the two books are on the surface, easy to notice, and at first sight very striking. A more minute scrutiny of the language of each will show that, whilst there is in various passages of the later document a distinct imitation of the earlier, yet that the two are in date, associations, idioms, and vocabulary as distinct as any two other writers of the Old Testament.' Thus the Book of Deuteronomy stands in a very similar relation towards the other books of the Penta- teuch to that which the Gospel of St. John holds in connection with the writings of the three preceding evangelists. In each case we see more of the spirit than the letter, a deeper devotional and experimental tone, a clearer appreciation of the hidden meaning that lurked beneath the surface-covering of the mere lan- guage, a greater unfolding of the inner consciousness and the secret motives of the heart of the Divine Saviour DEUTERONOMY. 1 39 and of the prophet-lawgiver, the sands of whose life were now so quickly running away. Thus viewed, the farewell utterances of the great lawgiver may fairly be considered * not a history, but a homily.' Hengstenberg has strikingly said: 'The ad- dress of Moses is in perfect harmony with his situation. He speaks like a dying father to his children. The words are earnest, inspired, and impressive. He looks back over the forty years of their wandering in the desert, reminds the people of all the blessings they have received, of the ingratitude with which they have repaid them, of the judgments of God, and the love that con- tinually broke forth behind them ; he explains the laws again and again, and adds what is necessary to com- plete them ; he surveys all the storms and conflicts which they have passed through, and, beholding the future in the past, takes a survey also of the future history of the nation, and sees, with mingled sorrow and joy, how the great features of the past — namely, apostasy, punishment, and pardon — continue to repeat themselves in the future also.' No doubt the style of Deuteronomy is different from that of the rest of the Pentateuch. It is more rhetorical, more flowing, with more rhythm and grandeur of dic- tion, and bears a greater likeness to the style of the prophets; but this is not surprising, since the former portions of the Pentateuch consist chiefly of simple history, whilst this book contains animated and horta- tory addresses ; just such a difference of style as may be traced in the historical portions, as compared with the speeches of Thucydides. Moreover, Deuteronomy contains expressions with which we are familiar in the former books of the Penta- teuch ; it is expressly quoted in many parts of the Old UO THE PENTATEUCH. Testament,^ and constantly in the New Testament,^ as the writing of Moses ; and it is honoured too by our Lord's having selected texts from it with which to baffle the temptations of Satan.^ III. We cannot fail to perceive a strongly marked prophetic tone and character in the Book of Deutero- nomy. Moses was not only conscious himself of the prophetic afflatus, but does not hesitate to speak of himself as a prophet;* and the book contains more references to what was about to take place in the times to come, than any other portion of the Pentateuch. At the close of Leviticus (chap, xxvi.) we meet with a prophetic notice of the future destiny of the Israelites, a notice which is more fully stated in Deuteronomy (chap, xxviii.), the curse which should follow dis- obedience being more prominently dwelt upon after- i E.g. I Kings ii. 3 ; 2 Chron. xxv. 4 ; Dan. ix. 13. ^ E.g. Matt. xix. 7, 8 ; Mark x, 3 ; John i, 45 ; Acts iii. 22, vii. 37 ; Rom. X. 5-8; I Cor. ix. 9; Gal. iii. 10-12. 3 Matt. iv. 4, 7, 10. The passages quoted in the New Testament from this book, as well by our Lord as His apostles, are not only characteristic but numerous : e.g. Deut. iv. 24, vi. 4, 5, 13, 16, viii. 3, xvii. 6, xviii. 15, 18, 19, xix. 15, 21, xxi. 23, xxv. 4, 5, xxvii. 26, xxix. 18, XXX. 12-14, xxxi. 6, 8, xxxii. 17, 21, 35, 36, 43. (Quoted in the S.P.C.K. Commentary.) ^ See chap, xviii. 15, 18 : ' The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me ; unto Him ye shall hearken,' — a prophecy of the Messiah, fulfilled 1500 years after its utterance, and applied to Christ in Acts iii. 22, 23, and vii. 37. See Bishop Newton's Dissertation VI. pp. 68-76. As to prophecies respecting the Jews, see ibid. Dissertation VIL pp. 77-87; and Davison On Prophecy^ Discourse IX. pp. 405-426, and also ibid. Discourse IV. p. 149 et seq. * There is found,' says Havernick, p. 340, 'in the case of Moses, such an interpenetration of the legal and the prophetical elements, as we find nowhere else. This mutual interpenetration is so intimate that the prophetic element itself has received, at least partially, a legal colouring, and the legal element a prophetical colouring.' DEUTERONOMY. 141 wards (chap, xxviii. 15 ad fin.) than on the former occasion. The prophet foresees their disobedience, and its consequent punishment in their dispersion, and exile, and restoration ; and, after their return, he predicts their siege at the hands of a 'nation of fierce counte- nance,' until their 'high and fenced walls come down,' and foretells their being ' plucked from off' their land, though still with something like hope shining upon them in the latter days : predictions relating to the Jews which have been fulfilling for more than three thousand years, and which are not even yet accom- plished. IV. We have seen that there was but little scope in the last book for the application of the ' dociLinentary hypothesis^ and in this still less opportunity is afforded. The great body of critico-sceptical writers are con- strained to allow that Deuteronomy presents undoubted evidence of having been written by one and the same author; and many, who refuse to allow the Mosaic authorship to the other books of the Pentateuch, are willing to acknowledge that Moses was the author of Deuteronomy ; an authorship which is claimed through- out by the book itself (chaps, i. 5, xvii. 18, xxviii. 58, xxix. 19, 20, 27), and supported by internal evidence of various kinds. It would, of course, be impossible to ascribe to Moses that portion which treats of his own death (chap, xxxiv.). The portion of which he is the author terminates with the 33rd chapter. It is probable that the first eight verses of the next chapter were added by Joshua, his successor, and the last four by some later writer, it may be Ezra or Samuel ; though some have thought that the last chapter of Deuteronomy was originally the 142 THE PKNTxVTEUCH. first of Joshua, but was added as a supplementary notice to Deuteronomy.^ It is worthy of notice that no inconsiderable number of what have been set down by writers of a certain school as contradictions and errors in chronology, and by some accepted as such, have been proved, after greater thought and study, to be no contradictions at all, but really to be statements tending to illustrate what has been said in previous books, or to be supplementary notices, or sometimes to be explanations of difficulties. No real contradiction exists between chap. i. 22 and Num. xiii. 2, one really elucidating the other ; e.g. ' The people make the request ; Moses refers it to God, who then gives it His sanction ; ' or between chap. ii. 24 and Num. xxi. 21. Again, Horeb is employed for Sinai, the name found in earlier books; but Horeb was the name of the whole mountain-range, of which Sinai was a par- ticular peak. Again, differences with regard to encamp- ment are attributable to our imperfect knowledge of the desert. Again, the variation on the surface between chap. i. 6-18 and Ex. xviii. (with regard to the appoint- ment of judges) is an anachronism, not unlikely to occur in an animated discourse. Again, in chap. i. 44 compared with Num. xiv. 43-45, the Amorites stand not for Amalekites, but Canaanites, as beingr the most powerful of all the Canaanitish tribes. Again, chap. ii. 2-^, said to be at variance with Num. xx. 14-21 and xxi. 4, is satisfactorily explained by Hengstenberg.^ It is evident, as we have already hinted, that in Deuteronomy a greater liberty is naturally allowed in the treatment of the facts of history. Moreover, its ^ See Home's Introduction, vol. iv. p. 23. - See Dr. Smith's and Fairbairn's Bible Dictionaries on * Deuteronomy ; ' and Macdonald's Introduction to Pentateuch^ vol. i. p. 114 etseq. DEUTERONOMY. 1 43 author, as having been an eye-witness of the facts recorded, and intimately associated with the different events themselves, would naturally feel that in such addresses as he then delivered, he need not be bound * carefully to follow a tradition that has already been moulded into a definite form,'^ nor to acquiesce in the precise statements that have been previously made, nor to abstain from treating in a more independent manner events and circumstances with which he was so thoroughly familiar, and which he was thus enabled to view from many and various standpoints. It is also worthy of remark, that those who deny the Mosaic authorship of this book all disagree as to the person to whom it should be attributed ; some (as Gesenius) ascribing it to Jeremiah, from the fact of corresponding phrases being found in both ; others (as Ewald), to a Jew living in Egypt at the end of the reign of Manasseh ; others, to a writer living in the days of Josiah. The same contradictory statements have been made with regard to the authorship of different portions of the book. But all such suggestions and hypotheses, in advocacy of a different authorship, are repugnant to the internal evidences afforded by the work itself, and to its own claims as to its author. V. A nalysis of the Book of Deuteronomy. The subject - matter of the book may be fairly arranged under the three main discourses delivered by Moses. i. T\\^ first discourse (chaps, i.-iv. 40), in which Moses recapitulates the chief events that had occurred during the forty years of their wanderings in the wilderness, ^ liavernick, Introduction to the Pentateuch^ p. 344. 144 THE PENTATEUCH. as an incentive to obedience and a warning against idolatry. There is an appendix, containing a short account of the three cities of refuge on the east bank of the Jordan (chap. iv. 41-43)- ii. Th.Q second discourse (chaps, v.-xxvi. 19), in which Moses recapitulates the Moral Law (dwelling on the ten commandments), and also the ceremonial, the judicial, the political, and the social laws ; warns Israel against idolatry and self-righteousness ; and, as a father, employs many impressive and urgent exhortations to obedience ; modifying several existing enactments, and introducing some new commandments. iii. The third discourse, to speak briefly, contains the blessing and the curse, given respectively on Gerizim and Ebal (chaps, xxvii.-xxx. 20), with a promise to obedience, and a terrible denunciation of vengeance against disobedience. We find, as an appendix — (i) An account of the law being handed over to the safe custody of the Levites, to be read every seven years (chap, xxxi.) ; (2) The song of Moses,! addressed to the people (chaps, xxxi. 30-xxxii. 44) ; (3) His prophetic blessing of the twelve tribes (chap, xxxiii.) ; and (4) The account of the death and burial of Moses (chap, xxxiv.). ^ The Song of Moses is described by Bishop Lowth in his lectures on Hebrew poetry, as a noble ode, singularly magnificent. * As Moses ' (says Bishop Wordsworth) ' had begun his career in the wilderness with a song of praise to God, so he ends it. He begins and ends with a hymn of thankfulness ; and that hymn is also a prophecy, reaching to the last days.' APPENDIX I. EVIDENCE FOR THE MOSAIC AUTHORSHIP OF THE PENTATEUCH.1 I. External QwidtncQ. ' Beginning with the earHest books of the Old Testa- ment, we can trace a constant stream of reference and quotation to the laws, the history, and the words of Moses, which show them all to have been well known and universally accepted.' 1. In Joshua the Law of Moses and the Book of the Law are constantly spoken of; the very words of Deuteronomy quoted ; the same ecclesiastical and civil constitution described ; the Aaronic priest- hood, the tribe of Levi, the tabernacle with its different features — sacrifices, altar, ark — all referred to ; the same general assembly, princes, elders, and officers described ; the different ordinances of the Mosaic Law observed. 2. In Judges there are naturally Jewer references to Moses. Still, however, the same ordinances and worship are adhered to : The office of judge 1 Derived chiefly from Speaker's Commentary ; Introduction to Penta- teicch, by Bishop Harold Browne, vol. i. p. 4 et seq. Compare Havernick's Introduction to Pentateuch, pp. 367-440 ; Macdonald's Intro- duction to Pentateuch, vol i. pp. 335-367 ; Hengstenberg, Genuineness of the Petitateuch, vol. i. pp. 107-212, and vol. ii. Dissertation iv. K 46 THE PENTATEUCH. corresponds with what Moses had said in Deut. xvii. 9 ; the theocratic character of the people still preserved ; the tabernacle still set up in Shiloh ; the people still ask counsel of God through the high priest ; the ephod is still worn ; the Levites remain as ministers of religion ; circumcision still prevails ; facts in the Pentateuch are referred to ; language is borrowed from it : all proving most clearly that the Pentateuch was known to the actors in the Book of Judges. 3. In Saitiuel we also find the ordinances of the law recognised : The high-priesthood in the house of Ithamar; the tabernacle (probably more solidly built) still at Shiloh, the lamp burning within it, the ark in the sanctuary amid the cherubim ; the altar, incense, ephod, different kinds of sacrifices, the animals, the ministering Levites all referred to, and also various historical events of the Pentateuch alluded to, — the very words of the Pentateuch being quoted \ in fact, the Mosaic system silently underlies the whole history of Samuel. 4. The times of David and Sulo?no7i. Here the facts are the same as before; the Levitical priesthood, the tabernacle, the ark, the sacrifices, all the same ; but there are two points to be observed, which give additional proof of the respect paid to the Pentateuch, and of the national recognition of the ordinances of the tabernacle. {a) In David we have an author as well as a king. The passing allusions in his Psalms, as well as their phraseology, — both grounded on the Pentateuch, — are most marked, especially in the Hebrew. {b) SoloDion also was an author. Though allusions (from the nature of his writings) not so fre- APPENDIX I. 147 quent; yet phrases in Proverbs are borrowed from the Pentateuch. He was especially con nected with ecclesiastic ritual as builder of temple^ which was simply a fixed and enlarged tabernacle. Notwithstanding all its splendour, it was only (says Ewald) 'a tent on a large scale, though no longer portable.' 5. The divided kingdom. Though the worship of the true God was con- fined to Judah, there is evidence that in both kingdoms the Pentateuch was acknowledged, both as a history and as a law. Compare case of Hezekiah (2 Kings xviii. 6), and of Jeroboam (i Kings xii. 38), as well as the place (Bethel) selected by him for worship. 6. So prophets^ when warning the people of Judah and Israel. From quotations in Isaiah, Amos, Micah, and Hosea, it is evident that these prophets must have had the books of Moses before them. 7. In the reign of Josiah we have strong evidence that, in the purification of the temple, the ordi- nances observed were those of the Mosaic Law. The Passover, the sacrifices offered, were all Mosaic. We have the finding of the Book of the Law in the temple by Hilkiah, the high priest. Deuteronomy was at least a portion of the book found. The curses in Deut. (chaps, xxvii. and xxviii.) probably referred to. Why, it may be asked, was the king so excited and alarmed at the reading of a book, which was, in fact, the acknow- ledged statute-book of the Jews ? It was probable that it was the very autograph of Moses which was stored up, first in the tabernacle, and then in the temple. Nothing strange to us in the preservation of a MS. for a period of 700 years. Moreover, 148 THE PENTATEUCH. there was a long prevalence of idolatry in the reigns preceding that of Josiah. To this long period of corruption Josiah succeeded at eight years old. It is very probable that the copy of the law- made by Hezekiah seventy or eighty years before had been destroyed, and that this temple-copy — the very autograph of Moses — had been concealed to secure its safety; and hence that the young king had never heard before the solemn language which so deeply affected him. 8. The captivity and the return. The prophets of the captivity both acknowledge and refer to this law ; e.g. (a) /ere/nia/i, whose writings are impregnated with the language of Deuteronomy ; and {/?) Ezekiel^ ' who in one short passage' (chap. xxii. 7-12), says Dr. M'Caul, 'has at least twenty-nine references to, or quotations from. Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy ; ' and (c) Ezra, who read the Book of the Law to the people at the feast of Tabernacles — who accepted it in opposition to their interest and inclinations — and interpreted it, since the younger men had lost their knowledge of Hebrew, and had brought with them from the captivity the Chaldaic or Syriac tongue. JV.B. — The Pentateuch, as preserved by the Jews, has come down to us in the modern Hebrew or Chaldaic character, said to have been translated by Ezra from the ancient Hebrew cha- racter, now known as the Samaritan. The Samaritan Pentateuch was lost to the Christian Church for a long period ; but a MS. of it was dis- covered in 1616, by Pietro della Valle, among the Samaritans in Damascus. Several other copies have since been discovered. In almost every particular (with the exception of dates) this agrees APPENDIX I. 149 with the Jewish Pentateuch. There can have been no collusion between Jews and Samaritans, from their intense disHke the one to the other. 9. The Septuagint version was composed in 280 b.c, bearing a great resemblance to the Samaritan Pentateuch, proving the acceptance of the Penta- teuch by the Jews in Egypt. N.B. — In the First Book of Maccabees, we read of the desire of Antiochus Epiphanes to destroy the books of the law. The books of the Apocrypha quote the Pentateuch, especially Ecclesiasticus. 10. The Chaldee Paraphrases were made soon after the return from the captivity. The earliest extant, the Targum of Onkelos, probably contemporaneous with the early life of Christ, is a paraphrase of the Pentateuch. 11. In the New Testament^ wherever the Pentateuch is referred to, either by apostles or by our Lord, its Mosaic origin, as well as its divine authority, is expressed or implied. The chain of evidence, then, is unbroken from Joshua to Jesus Christ. Has any book, ancient or modern, such a stream of concurrent and credible testimony in support of its claims to genuineness and authenticity ? II. Internal evidence points to Moses, and to him only, as the writer of the Pentateuch. I. The author of the Pentateuch and the deliverer of the Levitical law had an intimate acquaintance with Egypt ^ — its literature, customs, laws, and religion. ia) The making of bricks by captives is portrayed on monuments of the age of Moses. ip) The ark of papyrus, smeared with bitumen, suited to Egypt, and Egypt only. ISO THE PENTATEUCH. (c) The plagues were the natural troubles of the country magnified. (d) Mosaic laws and institutions were permeated with knowledge of Egyptian customs. (e) Distinction of clean and unclean animals, eminently Levitical and eminently Egyptian. Similarity, also, to be seen between Levitical and Egyptian priests, in shaving, bathing, using linen garments, and anointing. (/) The ceremony of the scapegoat, where the priest confesses the sins of the people on the head of the victim, parallel to custom recorded by Herodotus (ii. 39) of Egyptians. (So Hengstenberg.) {g) The Urim and Thummim on the breast of the high priest resembled the image of sapphire, called ' truth ' (AXrjOeLo), which the chief priest of the Egyptians, when acting as judge, wore round his neck (see Dr. Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, vol. iii. p. 1603). (Ji) The writing of the Commandments on door-posts agrees with what is seen in drawings of Egyptian architecture. (/) Covering pillars with plaster for inscriptions is parallel to Egyptian custom, (y) So, too, the infliction 01 bastinado (Deut. xxv. 2) observed on sculptures in Egypt. These are a few of the parallels, which prove an intimate acquaintance with the customs of Egypt in him who wrote the Pentateuch, and delivered the Mosaic Laws. 2. The history and laws of the Israelites bear tokens of their passage through the wilderness^ and their long residence in it. This is specially observable in regard to the tabernacle — the feast of Tabernacles ; the phrases camps and tents (' To your tents, O Israel j ' APPENDIX I. 151 cf. Heb. xiii. 13); the 7^^^^?^ employed (the acacia, or shittim tree), which was the wood of the desert; the food permitted in law, which was the game of the wilderness. The inevitable conclusion is, that the law had its origin in, and the legislator was intimately acquainted with, the wilder- ness of Sinai. 3. The language and legislation has Canaan only in prospect. The lawgiver is looking forward to a future in Canaan. (Cf. Deut. xii. 10; Ex. xii. 25-27, xiii. 1-5; Lev. xiv. 34; Num. xv. 2-18; Deut. iv. I, etc.) It has been objected that Moses appears to know too much of the geography of Palestine, and this has been made an argument against Mosaic origin of Pentateuch. But Moses (it may be replied) was well acquainted with the history of the patriarchs who dwelt in Palestine, and the Egyptians were well acquainted with it : Moses had lived near Palestine for forty years in wilder- ness of Sinai, feeding the flocks of Jethro, and he had, nioreover, made minute inquiries into the character of the country by means of spies. 4. The language of Pentateuch suitable to Moses. It is archaic, it contains many atrai Aeyo/xeva; it is simple and forcible, and was the groundwork of all the future language. Eastern languages are slow of change. The inhabitants of Mecca are said to speak the language of the Koran, written 1200 years ago. Egyptian papyri, with interval between them of 1000 years, are said to exhibit no change of language or grammar. As to the question of the post-Mosaic authorship of the Pentateucli, it may be fairly asked, Do any of the notes^ both 152 THE PENTATEUCH. external and internal, which point out Moses as the author of the Pentateuch, belong to any later prince or prophet ? 1. Joshua^ a man of war in early and middle life, was fully occupied throughout his life in keeping his people obedient to the laws. 2. Samuel^ a prophet and a reformer, not a legislator, could not (except by a miracle) have written books so full of Egyptian and Sinaitic details. The Israelites, in his time, were shut off from all contact with other nations, except the Canaanites and Philistines. 3. David, like Samuel and Joshua, had no time for composing so elaborate a treatise on law, and was himself a man of war. 4. Solo7non, with some intercourse with Egypt, and with a more peaceful reign, seems more qualified to have composed Pentateuch than any of his predecessors or successors. But still Solomon followed pattern of tabernacle in building the temple. Could one (it may be asked) who had framed laws so opposed to idolatry, have been likely to plunge into it at last ? 5. After the time of Solomon, when the kingdom was divided, it is impossible to conceive that any single man, or any succession of men, could have composed the Pentateuch (with all its Egyptian and Sinaitic references), or so dovetailed together their work, as to be the marvel of all subsequent APPENDIX 11. NEGATIVE CRITICISM. ON THE ALLEGED INCONGRUITY OF THE PENTATEUCH WITH THE AGE OF MOSES.^ I. Historical Difficulties. Objected, generally, by critics that many historical fads are posterior to Moses. 1. Gen. xii. 6, 'The Canaanite was tJwi (r^<) in the land' (cf. xiii. 7). Answer, — 'The Canaanite was then actually in the land ; ' — an unqualified statement of actual fact. The word then does not mean, ' then already^ or ' then still ox yet: — (Smith, pp. 381-388.) [Cf. Hengstenberg, Genuineness of Pe^itateuch^ ii. pp. 150-152; Macdonald, Introduction to Pentateuch, i. pp. 323, 324; Speakers Commentary t7i loc. ; Bishop Words- worth in loc; Dr. Lange on Gen. p. 391; Keil and Delitzsch's Commentary, vol. i. p. 196.] 2. Gen. xxxvi. said to be irreconcilable with Mosaic author- ship — ist, Because between Esau and Moses there is no 1 An analysis and condensation of Dr. Smith's work on Pentateuch, vol. i. pp. 380-524, in which the different objections of critics are minutely given and answered. Occasional references to statements of other more or less well-known writers on the same subject have been added in brackets. 153 154 THE PENTATEUCH. room for all the tribe — chiefs and kings — who are there stated to have held sway in Edom (vv. 15-43) ; an objection which has been stated in Latin by Michaelis. 2nd, Because one at least of these kings belongs to the time of Solomon ; and 3rd, Because none but an author who had seen the kingly office already introduced among the Hebrews could write, 'These are the kings, etc., before there reigned any king over the children of Israel' (ver. 31). Answer to first objection. In Edom, along with an elective monarchy, there was an hereditary nobility (the Alluphim), the representatives of Esau's sons and grandsons, who were contemporaneous with the monarchy. It would appear that there were at least 200 years for the eight kings between Esau and Moses, — an ample space. Answer to second objection. The Hadad mentioned not the same as the Hadad mentioned in i Kings xi. 14-22. The list of kings given is, indeed, a list of those who reigned befo7'e any king reigned over Israel. Answer to third objection. Answered by saying, first, that the expression (Gen. xxxvi, 31) is of the most mdefinite nature, viz. 'before the reigning of a king,' or perhaps better still, 'before king-ruling.' No definite article; no historical tense of verb ; the indefinite infinitive alone used. The expression would seem to refer to future kmg. Without the necessity of attributing any prophetic intuition to Moses, it is clear that he had a full expectation that the constitution he had given Israel would one day develop itself into a monarch)', and that the example of Edom was a proof of its near accomplishment. — {Jbid, i. pp. 388-397.) [Cf Macdonald, i. pp. 324-327 ; Hengstenberg, ii. pp. 165-167 ; Speakers Comjne?itary on ver. 31, and Bishop Wordsworth's Coimnentary on same verse.] 3. Gen. xl. 15. Joseph says, ' I was stolen away out of the APPENDIX II. 155 land of the Hebrews,' i.e., says Davidson, it 'presupposes its occupation by the Israelites.' So Colenso, who remarks, that it seems plain that an expression, current in a later age, has been allowed inadvertently to slip into the narrative. But (it may be replied) Hebrew was a very old term, applied to Abraham, as ' the Hebrew ' (Gen. xiv. 13), and commonly used by Egyptians (Ex. i. 16, ii. 6, V. 3, etc.). Hence the expression was appropriate in the mouth of Joseph — more appropriate than Canaan. —{Ibid. i. pp. 397-402.) Ex. XV. The Song of Moses not written (says Davidson) by Moses. It is said by objector to contain an allusion to temple on Mount Zion ; and also, in second verse, to contain an abbreniation not used in early writings, viz. iT for T\\r\\ But first, Moses never senselessly referred to Mount Zion, but to Canaan, where God was said (Ps. Ixxx. 8, 9) to have planted Israel, which Moses himself names (Deut. iii. 25) the 'goodly mountain' (cf. Ps. Ixxviii. 54). Canaafi was the promised land. The constructio7i would be better, if we connect the clauses with the preceding ones, continuing the government of ly ' until,' — ' //// Thou plant them in the mountain,' etc. In regard to the second objection. When can we affirm the practice of abbreviating words began ? Proof must be brought by opponents that it did not take place in the time of Moses. (Compare the use of the word t^W (Ex. XV. 4) in hymn, which is wrongly objected to by Knobel as a later word.) — {Ibid. i. pp. 402-407.) [Cf Bishop Wordsworth's Commentary in loc, and Speaker's Commentary in toe] Ex. xvi. 35. 'Moses was dead before the manna ceased (says Davidson), therefore natural to infer that he did not write these words.' But (as Hengstenberg states) Moses is not speaking of the cessation, but of the continuance of the manna, as far as his experience went, viz. to the 156 THE PENTATEUCH. border {'n)ip) of the land of Canaan, It was left for his successor to state the other fact (Josh. v. 11, 12). — {/h'd. i. pp. 407-410.) [Cf. Macdonald, i. p. 327 ; Speaker's Commentary ifi /oc] 6. Lev. xviii. 28, 'As it spued out the nations that were before you.' This language (says Davidson) presupposes the expulsion of the Canaanites from their country as past. But the verd would have been better expressed by a future perfect or futiirum exactum ; such a tense, how- ever, is unknown to Semitic languages. The passage (Smith thinks) may be thus paraphrased: 'When ye shall have come to the land of Canaan, defile not your- selves in any of those things for which I am casting out these nations before you . . . lest the land spue you out also, as it shall then have spued out the nations which were before you.' And probably this passage was written when Gilead and Bashan had already spued out their nations. — {Ibid. i. pp. 410-414.) 7. Num. XV. 32, ' While the childre7i of Israel were in the zvilderness, they found,' etc. Colenso says this must naturally have been written when the people w^ere no longer in the wilderness, i.e. it could not have been written by Moses. But there is a stress laid — from the fact of the context dwelling on commandments to be observed when they were in Canaan — on the word wilderness. This fact (their being there^ occasioned the perplexity as to their course of conduct. — {Ibid. i. pp. 414, 415-) [Cf. Speaker's Commentary in loc, and Bishop Words- worth's Comfnentary^ Num. xv. 35.] 8. The formula, ' Ufito this day,' said to indicate a long interval (Davidson) ; but it is sometimes used of a short time {e.g. Gen. xiviii. 15 ; i Sam. viii. 8; Deut. iii. 14). The phrase, ' Unto this day,' is often used of a very short interval of time, even that of a few months (i Sam. APPENDIX II. 157 xxxix. 8; Lev. xxiii. 14). Length of time is relative^ not absolute. The fact is, that it was strange that such a term Bashan tent - huts of Jair {Basha7i-Havoth-Jair) should have lasted up to the time of Moses as applied to cities so strongly built and so fenced up. — {Ibid. i. pp. 415-423.) [Cf. Macdonald, i. pp. 329, 330 ; Hengstenberg, ii. pp. 264-270, and pp. 185-193.] IL Geographical Difficulties. 1. Objection is made to the use of the term ''seaward' (HD^) for ^ westivard.'' But if it was so used in Canaan before the immigration into Egypt, surely the Hebrews in Egypt might fairly still continue to use the term, though it was no longer actually appropriate in their case. He compares analogies from other languages of a similar use of terms in regard to the cardinal points. — {Ibid. i. pp. 423-429.) 2. The expression 'beyond ("i^yil) Jordan' is said by ob- jectors to imply a ^^Titer living in Canaan, and therefore would not have been used by Moses. But why (as in the last instance) should not the phrase have come into existence, and forward an integral part of the language, during the 200 years the Hebrews were in Canaan before going down into Egypt ? The word itself does not necessarily imply the other side more than this side., and so its meaning must be determined by the contest. — {Ibid. i. pp. 429-433-) [Cf. Hengstenberg, i. pp. 256-264.] 3. The use of the name Bethel (Gen. xii. 8, xiii. 3), supposed by Colenso to betray a hand later than Moses (cf Gen. xxviii. 19, and xxxv. 1-7). No doubt the Canaanitish name was Luz ; but Jacob had called it, in memory of the divine vision, by the sacred name Bethel ; and so, very 158 THE PENTATEUCH. naturally, the Israelites in Egypt had kept up the name Bethel, with all its hallowed associations. Moses em- ploys the name well known in his time to mark its geographical position. The native name of Luz no doubt continued till Israel became the sole possessor of the place (cf Judg. i. 22-26, and Josh. xvi. 2). — {Ibid. i. PP- 433-435) [Cf. Macdonald, i. p. 318; Hengstenberg, ii. pp. 163, 164.] 4. The name Hebron (Gen. xxiii. 2, xxxv. 27) is said by Davidson to be post-Mosaic. ' In Kirjath-arba ; the same is Hebron.' A modern name, says Davidson, is here added in explanation of the ancient one. The name Hebron, it is said, was given to the place by Caleb, after one of his sons, its name before being Kirjath-arba (Josh. xiv. 15). In reply it may be said: things less known are explained by things more known. Their relative date is a mere accident. The later name is not always, therefore, used to explain the older. As in the case of an emigrant returning, the old names would be best known. So to the Hebrews, going back to Canaan, the name Hebron, familiar to them in the stories of Abraham and others, would be naturally appended as explanatory of the modern name. There is considerable difficulty with regard to the statement that the place was called Hebron after Caleb's son. Perfectly true that before Caleb conquered it the town was commonly called Kirjath-arba (Josh. xiv. 15). It is not, however, hinted that such was its 07'igi?ial appellation, or the one familiar to the patriarchs. Hebron is said (Num. xiii. 22) to have been built seven years before Zoan in Egypt. Zoan is identical with Avaris, which was founded centuries before Abraham. Hebron was intimately associated with the family history of the patriarchs. — {Ibid. i. pp. 435-445.) [Cf. Macdonald, i. p. 317; Hengstenberg, ii. pp. APPENDIX II. 159 152-157; also, Aids to Faith, pp. 246, 247; Lange's Commentary on Genesis, p. 476.] 5. In Gen. xiv. 14, Dan is spoken of; but in Josh. xix. 47, and Judg. xxiii. 29, the name of the place is stated to be Laish till the Danites took possession of it and called it Dan, after the name of their father. Jahn, Havernick, and Hengstenberg (the latter hesitatingly) have supposed that there were two cities of the name of Dan, but scarcely probable. The occurrence of the name Dan in Gen. xiv. is, indeed, at first sight an anomaly. He seeks for an explanation in the derivation of the two names, Dan and Laish. — {Ibid. i. pp. 445-454.) [Cf. Macdonald, i. p. 318; Hengstenberg, ii. pp. 157, 158; Speakers Co77wientary in loc. ; Bishop Wordsworth's Co7mnentary in loc.'] 6. Hormah. From comparison of Num. xxi. 1-3 with Num. xiv. 45, and from comparing Judg. i. 17 with Josh. xii. 14, Davidson traces a contradiction. There may have been (no uncommon circumstance in Palestine) ?nore than one Hormah. Apparently the Hormah (Num. xiv. 45) was Canaanitish ; that of Num. xxi. 3, a Hebrew name imposed upon Arad. — {Ibid. i. pp. 454-458.) [Cf. Macdonald, i. p. 319; Hengstenberg, ii. pp. 179- 182 ; Speaker's Cormnentary in loc.\ 7. So, too, in regard to Gilgal, Colenso is unable to distin- guish places of same name, but of a different situation. The words in Deut. xi. 29, 30, are attributed, says Colenso, to Moses ; but it is strange, he adds, that Moses could so clearly understand the topography of Canaan, which he had never seen, and stranger still, that he should have known the name of Gilgal, which was not given to the place till the people had been circumcised before entering the land (Josh. v. 9). The texts of Deuteronomy therefore, he argues, must have been written at a later age. In reply, it is not considered that Moses l6o THE PENTATEUCH. had employed twelve men for forty days in studying and mapping out the country, who gave him a full report of their labours (Num. xiii. 1-29), and therefore he was not likely to be ignorant of the geography. But, in fact, the places mentioned in the above two passages were different places ; the one situated between the Jordan and Jericho, and the other at a distance, in the neighbourhood of Shechem. — {Ibid. i. pp. 458-464.) [Cf. Speaker's Commentary in he, and Bishop Words- worth's Cof?i7nentary.'] 8. A group of explanatory names in Genesis {e.g. Gen. xxiii. 2, XXXV. 19, 27, xiv. 2, 3, 7, 17) commented upon, which are made grounds of objection by Colenso. In the long interval between the Hebrews of the Exodus and the events recorded in Genesis, changes of name took place. Old names disappeared, and new ones sprung up. Sometimes the old name, and sometimes the neiv one, were the most familiar. Moses, therefore, by introducing explanatory notices into documents, made them more intelligible to the reader. It is only when names intro- duced are /^j/-Mosaic that the argument brought forward by Colenso can have any weight. No shadow of a reason for believing that the names {e.g. Gen. xxxv. 19) are /<7j-/-Mosaic. The passages in Gen. xiv. 2,^3, 7, 17, considered by Ewald and others to be parts of the oldest documents in the Pentateuch, and also pre-Mosaic. — {Ibid. i. pp. 464-468.) III. Archeological Difficulties. Ex. xvi. 36, ' Now an o??ier is the tenth part of an ephah.* Davidson thinks that omer means a measure. It is the name of a statutory 7neasure of capacity ., or merely of a vessel corresponding roughly in its cubic contents to the APPENDIX 11. l6l tenth part of an ephah? Now, (i) the word does not occur in the Mosaic laws regulating weights and measures; nor (2) in other metrical systems ; and (3) its decimal relation militates against its antiquity, since it would appear that the dtcodecimal system was the most ancient ; and (4) each family had to possess one for the morning- gathering of the manna, — probably an earthenware vessel. Unlikely that each family would, under their circum- stances, possess a statutory measure of weight. The name and the vessel would seem to have come from Arabia. We can see how naturally the omer became the vessel to contain the manna in the sanctuary; and also why it was necessary to state its cubic contents, and inform posterity that it was equal to the tenth part of an ephah.' — {^Ibid. i. pp. 468-472.) [Cf. Macdonald, i. p. 331 ; Hengstenberg, ii. pp. 172- 174, and Bishop Wordsworth's Commentary in loc] In Ex. XXX. 13, xxxviii. 24-26, we read, 'After the shekel of the sanctuary' ^ Before^ says Colenso, ' any sanctuary was in existence ; an oversight,' he adds, ' indicating a much later date than the age of Moses and Exodus.' It may be answered : First, it should be translated more properly ' shekel of holiness^ or '-sacred shekel ; ' not neces- sary to suppose that its sacredness depended on the erection of the sanctuary. But, secondly, before the phrase is used, the sanctuary had been planned and described (Ex. xxv.-xxviii.). Laws regard the future ; and so standard weights might be named, even before they were in actual existence. — {Ibid. i. pp. 472, 473.) [Cf. Birks' Exodus of Israel^ p. 251; Bishop Words- worth's Conmientary in loc] Objection urged from i Sam. ix. 9, ' He that is now called a prophet (^s''3J, Nabi) was beforetime called a seer (nx'l, Roeh).' Colenso says that throughout Pentateuch, Joshua, and Judges, the latter word is never used, but L 1 62 THE PENTATEUCH. always Nahi. Hence (he infers) that those parts of these books which contain the latter word, can hardly have been written before the days of Samuel. Answer, — (i) That the Hebrew reading of the passage is not certain, a different translation in LXX., and consequently an uncer- tain reading cannot furnish a certain argument. But (2) supposing the Masoretic text were the genuine original, it would merely imply that at some indefinite period, before the author wrote, Roeh was used in much the same way as Nabi in his own time. He does not say that Roeh was the vford first used in Hebrew, nor that it was the word used in time of Moses ; much less that Nabi was not used in time of Moses. So that, were it clear that in Samuel's time Roeh was used, and that Nabi came afterwards into vogue, it is not logical to infer that Nabi was not used by Moses. Nabi is more comprehensive than the term Roeh, — the former being used of those who, from particular revelation, could tell of things past, present, or future. Samuel alone was a Roeh, while the colleges of prophets would have the other name given to them. — {Ibid. i. pp. 473-477.) [Cf. Macdonald, i. p. 332 ; Hengstenberg, ii. pp. 274-276.] 4. Objection made from the antiquarian style of Deut. iii. 9, ' Which Hermon the Sidonians call Sirion, and the Amorites call it Shenir.' 'Surely,' says Davidson, 'the different appellations of Hermon must have been familiar in Moses' time.' But why should not Moses have used these words ? Though there may have been no necessity, the very notice of Hermon afforded sufficient occasion for his doing so. The sun may have shone, as Porter saw it, on the crest of Hermon, and made it look like a breastplate or shield, the meaning of Shenir (the Amorite word) and the meaning of the Sidonian Sirion. — {Ibid. i. pp. 477, 478.) APPENDIX II. 163 [Cf. Hengstenberg, ii. pp. 193-198; Speaker's Commen- tary in /(?c.] Objection founded on Dent. iii. 11, by Davidson, who thinks that the details respecting the size of Og's bed may have come when David conquered the metropoHs of the Ammonites. But history simply tells us that Moses did know the facts of the case. Why, then, imagine how knowledge ?nay have come, when we have the mode of its transmission definitely given ? The people, for whom Moses wrote, might be benefited by the account of God's protection over Israel, as exhibited by His deliverance of them from the gigantic king of Bashan. — i^Ibid. i. pp. 478-480.) [Cf. Hengstenberg, ii. pp. 198-201 ; Macdonald, i. pp. 331, 332 j Bishop Wordsworth's Cofnmentary in locj] These observations applicable to a string of similar passages from Deut. ii. 10-12, 20-23, iii. 9-1 1, respecting the gigantic Emims^ Anakims, Zamzammims, etc. Davidson objects to these statements (i) as a reference to events long passed; and (2) as being parenthetically introduced. But surely both in Homer and Herodotus some of the most attractive matter is in parentheses. So, too, in Mosaic writings, the parentheses are both appropriate in themselves, and subservient also to his purpose of en- couraging the Israelites, by a reference to what God had done in the past. — {^Ibid. i. pp. 480-484.) IV. Legislative Difficulties. It has been remarked generally, that, if we look at all the objections that have been made to the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch laws, scarce one of the 613 precepts, into which the Rabbins have divided them, would be found to pass unchallenged. Obscurity scarcely inconsistent with the l64 THE PENTATEUCH. antiquity of a document ; and yet De Wette finds the different institutions so confused, unintelligible, and hard to understand, that he cannot allow them to go as far back as Moses, reversing all the ordinary laws of criticism. He regards the whole spirit of Deuteronomy as allegorizing and mystical, like the Rabbinical philosophy of later time. Thus objection has been made to some laws as pedantic, to others as too minute, to others as indicating too high a degree of civilisation ; while some have thought that the Decalogue (in principle) is the only renmant of the Mosaic age. Thus, instead of shaping their opinions by history, they study to mould history in accordance with their opinions, giving full scope to imagination and conjecture. In regard to such laws as those on agriculture, which imply a knowledge of the country, they say that Moses was never in the country, and so infer that some one else must have drawn them up. But personal k?iowledge not the only way of gaining local knowledge. For, {a) He had first all the traditional and documentary evidence of the nation, a knowledge which went down into Egypt, and was (in consequence of the promises made to nation in the future) no doubt carefully cherished. {b) This indigenous knowledge was enlarged from Egyptian sources, and commercial intercourse between Goshen and Palestine. . {c) This statistical knowledge was completed by the reports of the twelve spies, sent to investigate everything re- garding the land (Num. xiii. 18-20), communicated to Moses thirty-nine years before he promulgated the law as a whole. We have, moreover, no warrant for con- cluding that a low state of civilisation existed among the Hebrews ; while in Egypt a very high degree of civilisa- tion had certainly been attained.— (Z^/-;/. i. pp. 484-489-) I. The Deuteronomic laws on war, Vater believes to have been dictated in Canaan (cf Deut. xx. 15). He might AITENDIX IT. 165 (we should have supposed) have thought there would not be much use in legislating how they were to wage wars, after they had already expelled the population. The Canaaniies are spoken of as these nations, because they were only a short way off on the other side of the Jordan. — {Ibid. i. pp. 489, 490.) 2. The law regarding prophecy and prophets (Deut. xviii. 20-22) is said by Hitzig to have originated when the prophetic office had become an institution of the country, about the time of Samuel. But this assertion rests on supposition, neither justified by fact nor probable. It assumes that the law refers to a regular and ordinary office, and does not refer to the case of an individual. Still, it would surely be admissible for Moses to have made a law to meet Zifidure contingency, as he laid down instructions for the guidance of a future king. — {Ibid. i. pp. 490, 491.) 3. Davidson, after Vater, quotes against us Deut. xix. 14, 'Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour's landmark, which they of old time have set,' etc. This language implies the time (he observes) of peaceful settlement in Canaan, and presupposes a long abode in a land promised to their fathers. But there are three strange oversights in this : — (i) The law refers to the posses- sion of the land as future {^ shall inherit'); (2) The law is made for the descendants of those about to ac- quire possession of the land ; and (3) ' They of old time' (D''Jtr&^"i) is more accurately translated in LXX. oX Trarepes (tov., ' thy fathers,' Vulg. ' priores,' ' have set up ' ^futurum exactum ; see above. — {Ibid. i. pp. 491, 492.) [Cf Speakef^s Commentary in loc] 4. Ex. xxii. 29, 'Thou shalt not delay to offer the first of thy ripe fruits,' etc. Hence, says Davidson, the precept, in its present form^ was not written by Moses, but at a much later time (cf also Ex. xxiii. 10). Answer, — r66 THE PENTATEUCH. There are two precepts implied in the law ; the one requiring the offering to be made, the other forbidding all dilatoriness on the part of the offerer. It is a compound proposition, logically equivalent to two. No doubt in Ex, xxiii. 19 the existence of the tabernacle in Palestine is presupposed. — {^Ibid. i. pp. 492-494.) 5. Lev. xxvi. 34, 35, 43. This implies a time, says David- son, when the people should have been carried into exile by their enemies. It bears the stamp, he adds, of a period much later than the Mosaic. It may be replied, The real fact is that the passage contains a prophetic foresight of circumstances about to occur in the future. Hence, really, Davidson's objection to it. It is prophetic, and why may not Moses have been the prophet? — {Ibid. i. pp. 494-496.) 6. Lev. xiv. 22. Colenso says that it is an oversight, — the command to sacrifice 'turtle doves or young pigeons,' with express reference to their life ifi the wilder- ness, — arising from a later writer in a later age employing inadvertently an expression common in his own days, and forgetting the circumstances of the times which he is describing. But the law was intended for Canaan. The Hebrew sojourn in the wilderness was so short, as compared with their expected long possession of Palestine, that the legislator overleaped the former transitory condition, and made it of no account. If there were no such birds in desert, the law would be in abeyance till the land of Canaan was reached. The law originated in desert, and took some of its colouring from it, but was not drawn up expressly for those living a desert life, as the normal state of the people who were to keep it. — {Ibid. i. pp. 496, 497.) [Cf. Birks' Exodus of Israel, p. 254.] 7. In last chapters of Exodus (xxxix. 5, 7, xl. 19, 27, 29, 32), the frequent plwase, 'As God commanded Moses,' APPENDIX II. 167 shows a time posterior to Moses, says Davidson, for at least the form of the laws. But why shall not Moses speak of himself in the third person? Compare the case of God thus speaking in Gen. xix. 24 and Ex. xvi. 7. —{Ibid. i. pp. 497, 498.) In Ex. XX. 10 and Deut. v. 14, occurs the expression ' Within thy gates,' which, says Davidson, is inapplicable to the desert. Answer, — 'Within thy gates' would refer to a political community living within certain boundaries, and such a community was established in the desert. But, in fact, it w^as applicable chiefly to the community afterwards to be established in Palestine. The Syrians used the phrase proverbially in Gen. xxiv. 60, and perhaps from that country Abraham brought it originally (Gen. xxii. \^).—{Ibid. i. pp. 498-500.) Kalisch avows his sympathy with those who see nothing but deliberate forgeries in the laws of Leviticus, and in Moses no more than a 'great mythical hero.' He thinks that the sacrificial laws of Leviticus were not compiled before the Babylonian period, and came into operation in the second temple only, after the return of the Jews from captivity. He thinks that Jeremiah could not have written such language as chap. vii. 21, 22, if he had known the Books of Leviticus and Numbers, and considered them Mosaic. But he forgets the next verse, which antithetically modifies it ; like maxim of Samuel, *To obey is better than sacrifice,' etc. (i Sam. XV. 22 and Hos. vi. 6). Strange that he should have overlooked the peculiarity of the Hebrew style, as seen in Joel ii. 13 and Mai. i. i, 2. Compare also Jer. vii. 12 and xxxiii. 19. — {Ibid. i. pp. 500-502.) On Deut. xii. 8, Kalisch asks, to what period of the history of the Israelites does this refer? Impossible, he says, to refer to the time of the Hebrew wanderings in the desert. He aims a blow at the Mosaic author- 1 68 THE PENTATEUCH. ship of Deuteronomy as well as Leviticus. Answer, — The law regards, first, the one fixed sanctuary, to be afterwards established in Canaan ; and next, the duties devolving upon the people in consequence. Its observance was impracticable in desert. There they did whatever was good in their own eyes, but in Canaan they would not any longer do what was good in their own eyes, but would have to devote the appointed portions commanded by law. — {Ibid. i. pp. 502-504.) [Cf. Speaker's Commentary in /oc] 11. Kalisch affirms that the Levitical ordinances were neither known nor carried out before the exile, — unknown in time of Judges, David, Solomon, Josiah (the latter astonished at hearing ' the words of the law,' which he could not have been, if the law had been publicly read every seventh year). It is shown, from an induction of instances, that eJ>hod does not mean ' statue ' or 'image,' but 'garment' — {/bid. i. pp. 504-509.) 12. Kalisch affirms (as a reason for rejecting the Mosaic origin of the Levitical law) that the execution of these ordinances argues a degree of religious education utterly at variance with the multifarious forms of perverse idolatry to which the Hebrews were addicted up to the sixth century. In answer, it may be said that this objection confounds the execution of an ordinance with its enactment. Development from within is not the only source of a nation's code of laws ; much less, when the original lawgiver is known to have enjoyed a transcendently higher civilisation than the people whom he wished to bring up, as far as possible, to his own level. It was, indeed, a bound from the superstition and idolatry of Egypt to the pure unadulterated monotheism of the Pentateuch. The laws were so cast in the mould of the desert and of Egypt, that no Hebrew at the Babylonian period, or APPENDIX IT. 169 at any time after the exodus, could possibly have made them what they are. — {Ibid. i. pp. 509-513.) 13. It is objected by Kalisch, that the priests^ whom history proves to have long been powerless and needy, appear in the Levitical Law as men of influence and wealth. We may reply : Here again the appomiment of the law is confounded with its actual carrying out. The object of the legislator was to fix the social and civil status of the priests ; and that was one, undoubtedly, of influence and wealth. The Levites had little property of their own ; and they were made dependent for their sub- sistence on the sacrifices, tithes, etc., of their fellow- citizens. But they are not to be confounded with the priests who, down to Solomon, appear in positions of influence and wealth. — {Ibid. i. pp. 513-515-) [Cf. Hengstenberg, ii. pp. 329-340.] 14. Kalisch affirms that the DeiUeronomist is more lenient and less authoritative in some of the Levitical injunctions. But the same lawgiver may change his tone according to times and place. Laws in the desert were repealed on the entrance into Canaan. Difficulty can only exist for those who make two legislators instead of one, and consider the Levitical lawgiver posterior to the Deuteronomist. — {Ibid. i. p. 515.) 15. It is stated by Kalisch that the Book of Levitiais manifests a decided progress in spirituality and purity as compared with Deuteronomy., and exhibits a very matured stage in the internal history of the nation. The laws of Israel, it may be said, neither did nor could take their rise from the course of national development. The tendency of the nation was to develop into idolatry, instead of greater purity. The identity of lawgiver, both in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, the only hypothesis that explains all the difficulties of the ques- tion.— (/^/^. i. pp. 515, 516.) I/O THE PENTATEUCH. 1 6. Kalisch affirms that the minuteness of the sacrificial ritual laid down in Leviticus accords perfectly with the spirit of post-Babylonian times, and finds a faithful reflex in the thoroughly Levitical Book of Chronicles. We, however, maintain that it finds a still better explanation in the historical account of the Pentateuch itself, that the ritual proceeded directly from Moses ; again Kalisch says, ' The Book of Leviticus, as a whole, cannot be placed before the sixth century, for various intrinsic reasons, among which are, the exact descrip- tion of the Babylonian exile, and the allusion to the return of the captives. Here he confounds prophecy with history^ and mistakes a general resemblance for exact description.' — {Ibid. i. pp. 516, 517.) V. Linguistic Difficulties. The language of the Pentateuch said to be cast in too modern a mould for the Mosaic age. No important difference, it is stated, exists between the language of the Pentateuch and that of the other books written shortly after the return of the Israelites from the captivity in Babylon. But if there was an interval of nearly a thousand years between these writings, it is most extraordinary that no alteration in style should take place during that long period. Nay, more, adds Davidson, if Moses wrote the whole Pentateuch, he must have created the historical-epic^ the prophetic, and the rhetorical styles, which are all perceptible. — {Ibid. i. p. 517.) In reply, it may be said that the later books of the prophets, as Malachi, Haggai, Ezra, Nehemiah, and even Zechariah, have a Chaldaic style. We may fix 600 B.C. as the period when the language fell with the nation. Probably, therefore, not more than 750 years between Moses and the captivity. But Hebrew must not be measured by the standard of other APPENDIX II. 171 languages. There is a rigid and inflexible character about the language of the Semitic nations, like there is about their institu- tions and customs. On the supposition that Moses wrote the Pentateuch^ it would have at once become the source and standard of the law, the history and the literature of the nation. Three times a year every man had to go to the sanctuary, and drink anew at the fountainhead ; and every seven years it was read aloud ; hence it must have entered into the very Hfe-blood of their literature. It was the classical model, not to be departed from, or as little as possible. There was also a singular absence among the Hebrews of those external elements that bring about linguistic change; as, e.g.^ close intimacy with other nations of different religion, habits, speech, and civilisation ; a radical alteration in the forms of government, or administration of justice; the introduction of a new religion ; the progress of art and science ; the enlarge- ment of ideas, consequent on foreign conquest or commercial relations with distant countries ; the frequent naturalization of foreigners of different races ; and familiarity with the literature of other nations. Now the habits of Israel were diametrically opposed to all this. We know of no literature but their own with which they were acquainted. By the law of Moses, the pure blood of Jacob was to be preserved uncontaminated by foreign admixtures ; the conquests were confined to their immediate neighbour- hood, and to Semitic- speaking tribes ; the commercial estab- lishments of Solomon passed away with his glory. Semitic art was never inventive ; and the Hebrew turn of mind — devoted to husbandry and pastoral life — more imaginative than scientific. No new religion, nor modification of the old one, was permitted to corrupt their sacred names and formulas, or give new objects for religious meditation. The change of government introduced by Samuel was already provided for in the Pentateuch, and made but small alteration in the administration of justice, and close intimacy with surrounding 1/2 THE PENTATEUCH. nations was strongly discouraged, and even put down by law. But is it, after all, an unheard-of phenomenon that a living language, when once stereotyped in a classic mould, should remain substantially the same for a period of 750 years? There are 800 years of living Latin between Plautus and Gregory the Great, the homilies of the latter having been delivered to mixed congregations, and being, of course, meant to be understood. In the interval had taken place the mightiest revolutions of the world, leaving on language, as on everything else, an indelible impress. Everything — social, political, and religious — had undergone an entire change. New ideas, affecting every relation of life, had been intro- duced by Christianity. And yet, apart from the ecclesiastical and scriptural element, the poet and the homilist speak sub- stantially one and the same language. There are archaisms in the one, and new words in the other. But the great stock of words is the same, in meaning as in mould ; the grammatical forms are identical ; the spelling, inflexions, government, the same. So that a reader of Plautus, it is said, needs no more than an enlarged vocabulary to master the language of Gregory. If we extend our observation to the Greek language, the result is still more striking. Between Thucydides and Pro- copius {circ. 1520 a.d.) there is a space of nearly 1000 years. And yet when we make the allowances that are necessary, their language is just as like as that of Amos to the Pentateuch. During the reign of Justinian, when Procopius lived, Greek was still the current language of the people, and seems to have been spoken with as much purity as Hebrew at the time of the captivity. [Cf. Gibbon's Decline and Fall, chap, xlvi.] The Hebrews, especially their sacred writers, had every in- ducement to make them cling to the language of Moses, and but few external agencies to modify either their thought or APPENDIX II. 173 tlieir speech. They were consequently far less likely than Greek or Roman to lose the peculiarities of their language. If we turn to the literature of Egypt^ we have the judgment of one of the greatest Egyptian scholars, that ' on comparing, even superficially, the demotic papyrus of the Balak Museum {The Rommice of Sctfimi) with the romance of The TwoBrotJiers^ we perceive, not only that the language and the formulas of the two papyri — separated though they be chronologically by an interval of about 1000 years — are of the same stamp, but also the peculiarly interesting fact, that the grammar has not undergone the slightest change.' — {Bragsch.) It need excite, therefore, no astonishment, if the Semitic tongues, true to their unyielding instinct, exhibit a tenacity peculiarly their own. — {Ibid. i. pp. 517-524.) APPENDIX III. ON THE ALLEGED INCONGRUITY OF THE PENTATEUCH WITH THE PERSON AND CHARACTER OF MOSES. ^ 1. Hartmann finds in the use of the third persoii an argument against the Mosaic authorship. But so spoke Thucydides of his command in the Peloponnesian War ; Xenophon in his Anabasis ; Caesar and Procopius ; and so, too, Isaiah (vii. 3-20), so Hosea (i.), Amos (vii. 12-17), ^tc, and so also the writers of the New Testament. 2. Ex. vi. 26. Objected to by Davidson; but, says Dr. Smith, this is nothing more than the ' genealogy's usual epilogue, with the addition of such words as serve to bring the narrative back to the point where it was broken in upon by the insertion of the register.' 3. Ex. xi. 3. This, too, implies, says Davidson, like last, a considerable lapse of time : and the recording of the fact unsuitable and inappropriate, if Moses was the author. But Moses merely says that in the opinion, in the eyes, of the Egyptians he was great ; nothing inconsistent with true modesty in this, when, wishing to explain the great power over the Egyptians, he was enabled to exercise nothing irreverent, or derogatory to the Almighty, in this statement. 4. Num. xii. 3, ' The man Moses was very meek,' etc. The apparent self-commendation objected to by Davidson. ^ Abridged from Dr. Smith On the Peniateiuh, vol. i. pp. 552-577, 174 APPENDIX III. 175 Dr. Smith would translate the word IDV by the word afflicted^ which he regards as critically correct, and more suitable to the context. But ' although,' says Smith, * the sense we have given to Num. xii. 3 seems to us the most natural, yet we cannot admit that, had God wished to make known to posterity the extraordinary meekness and humility of Moses, He could not have chosen Moses him- self as the organ to proclaim it to the world, as a figure of Him who, possessing the virtue infinitely beyond all men on the face of the earth, said, " Learn of me, for I am meek and lowly of heart.'" 5. In different passages, says Davidson, allusions are made to Moses having written legal prescriptions (Ex. xxxiv. 27 and xxiv. 4) ; so also to have written historical accounts (Num. xxi. 14; Ex. xvii. 14). Such particulars, relating to Moses as a writer, he thinks agree only with a later person, who used documents. On the supposition, he adds, that the lawgiver wrote the whole Pentateuch, they are incongruous. But why so? The character of the lawgiver is not the only one in which the history pictures Moses. He appears as historian in two of the passages cited. Compare also the mode of speaking adopted by Thucydides, Caesar, and Josephus. 6. Improbable, says Davidson, that Moses himself should quote, ' The Book of the Wars of the Lord ' (Num. xxi. 14), i.e. his own work. Such a quotation, he thinks, shows a time of learning and a person posterior to Moses. But it is no strange thing for authors to quote themselves ; cf. case of Mohammed. Moreover, there is no authority for asserting that Moses did write the book mentioned. [Cf. Hengstenberg, ii. pp. 182-185 ; Macdonald, i. pp. 332, 333.] 7. Objection made to Ex. xxiv. 13, '■ His minister Joshua, on the supposition that such was the writing of a person long after Moses. But there would seem to be no reason 76 THE PENTATEUCH. why Moses should not have made such a statement, especially in the case of Joshua, his successor. L Davidson notices omissiofis^ which militate, he thinks, against the Mosaic authorship, indicating that documents or reminiscences w^ere wanting to the writer. But an author's silence respecting events which do not fall within the special range of his subject is no conclusive evidence of his ignorance of them. We may wish to have had interesting information, — as, e.g.^ respecting the events of the thirty-eight years in the wilderness, and also with regard to Hur and Jethro, — but we should look to the definite objects and purpose of the sacred historian. INDEX. Abel's offering, 91, 99, note. Animals fit or unfit for sacrifice, loi. Appearances, language of, respecting sun, firmament, immobility of earth, and light, 2>7 \ respecting six days of creation, 39. Archaic style of Pentateuch, 4, note. Astronomy and Genesis, differences apparent rather than real, 36. Authenticity of Scripture, evidence as to, 3. Balaam, prophecy of, 126. Banners of the tribes, 132, note. Battle-fields of science and revelation, 32. Blood in sacrifices, its meaning, 99, note. Bloodless offerings, 102. Book of the Law confined by critics to Deuteronomy, 2. Book of the Wars of Jehovah, 128, note. Burnt-offering, no. Cain's offering, 91, 99, note. Caul, the, 106, note. Chronology, Usher on, 58, note. Creation, Hebrew terms for, 26, note ; objection to history of, in Genesis, 39; question as to age of the world, 40 ; two different e.xplanations, 41. Critical school, its monopoly of the title, 15 ; Critical school— continued. its claims, 18 ; its objection to prophecy as an ' oraculum post eventum,' 86, note. Criticism, negative, 9 ; true, id. Days, natural or periodic, in creation, 41. Decalogues of instructions in Leviticus, 78. Deism, r^ Genesis, 33, note."! Deluge, the, 42. Desert of Sinai, changes in, 128. Deuteronomy, book of, a recapitulation in hortatory form of preceding books, by Moses, 135 ; its names, king ordered to write a copy of it, 135, note ; covers very short space of time, 136 ; its intimate relationship to rest of Pentateuch, id. ; its additions and omissions, 137 ; refers to spirit rather than letter of the law, 138 ; its resemblance to style of Jeremiah, id.; it resembles, in relation to other books of Pentateuch, St. John's Gospel, as compared with other Gospels, id. ; harmony between address of Moses and his situation, 139 ; style different from rest of Pentateuch I id. ; M 178 INDEX. Deuteronomy, book of — conti?ined. quoted in Old and New Testaments, 140 ; prophetic character, id. ; Moses speaks as prophet, 140, note ; affords Uttle opportunity for apphca- tion of the ' documentary hypo- thesis, ' 141 ; critical school acknowledge oneness of its authorship, id. ; portion of chap, xxxiv. not written by Moses, id. ; supposed contradictions and errors in chronology explained, 142 ; analysis of, 143. Documentary hypothesis, 11, 64, note, 86, note, 124, 141. Documents in Pentateuch acknow- ledged, 12. Documents, reference not opposed to inspiration, 208. Drink-offerings, in. Egyptian references in Pentateuch, 5. Elohistic theory, 11, 64, 124. Exodus, book of, its scope, 55 ; its historical and legislative portions, 56; a further expansion of Genesis, but strict union of the two, id. ; its chronology difficult, 57 ; dependent on length of sojourn in Egypt, id. ; its date, 58, note. its Mosaic authorship almost univer- sally acknowledged, 59, 63 ; its language quoted in Old and New Testaments, 59 ; its title in Hebrew and LXX., 59, note ; its inspiration, from predictions, 59, note ; from types — Aaron, rock in Horeb, manna, mercy-seat, paschal lamb, 60; written by Moses as prophet and historian, 63 ; Exodus, book of — continued. the exodus a unique event, typical of deliverance of mankind by Christ, id. ; strange, if not accompanied by miracles, 64 ; how assailed by rationalistic school, id.; documentary hypothesis not equally applicable in this case, 64, note ; charged with being mythical, 65 ; knowledge of Egypt and Arabian Desert shown in it, id. ; its historical bearing, 66 ; plagues in Egypt, 67 ; their local colouring, 68 ; number of the Hebrews, 70 ; false theories respecting Pharaoh's death, 71 ; difficulties as to exact route, 71, note ; march through the wilderness, their isolation, 71 ; legal enactments, 72 ; memorials of what had occurred in the history of the Passover and Feast of Tabernacles, 73 ; why written by an eye-witness in the wilderness, id. ; analysis of, 73. Fat in sacrifice, Hebrew names for, 106, note. Firmament, explanation of term, 37. Fragmentary hypothesis, 13. Genesis, book of, its names, 22 ; time comprised in, id. ; its claims to be true, historical, and religious history, id. ; its title derived from LXX., 22, note ; not ideal, 23 ; of world-wide interest, 24 ; its object and scope, id. ; does not aim at philosophical accu- racy of expression, 25, 29 ; INDEX. 179 Genesis, book of — continued. predictions and types in, 26 ; its principle of selection of events, id. ; the prophetic element, 27 ; its unity exhibited in the formula, ' these are the generations,' 28 ; correspondence between Genesis and Revelation, Lange and Delitzsch's viev^'S, id. ; naturally has its difficulties, 29 ; its statements not opposed to science, 30: patience needed, 31 ; . harmony of teaching of nature and grace, 32 ; apparent difficulties of science and Scripture, 34 ; geological question, id. ; its simplicity, purity, and sublimity, 50; its unity, vi^ork of one author, 51 ; that author Moses, well qualified for his task, 52 ; analysis of, 52. Geology and Genesis not necessarily opposed, 34 ; Genesis i. i explained, 43 ; not a title or summary, 44. Heave-leg, explanation of, 1 14. ImmobUity of the earth, 38. Incense, its composition symbolical, 117. Inspiration does not supersede human reason and labour, 13. Isaac's sacrifice an 'analogue,' iig. Jehovistic theory of documents, 11, 64 ; objection to the terminology, 11, 124. Korban, explanation of, 97. Lamb, term used vaguely in A. V., loi, note. Lamps, the seven, 117. Language of Scripture not scientific, and why, 41. Legislation, first, 17. Levitical code fully exhibited in age ot Ezra, and subsequently, 19 ; but this not inconsistent with Mosaic authorship, id^ Leviticus, book of, n3,me due to LXX contains very little history, id. ; closely connected with Exodus and Numbers, id. ; its Hebrew title, 76, note; time when laws were given, t^ ; subject-matter differently classified by Baumgarten, Keil, and Mac- donald, 78 ; its laws relative to a people sensuous, though under a theocracy, 80 ; and exposed to heathen influences, 81 ; ethical value of its teaching, id. ; teaches doctrine of atonement and sanctification, and the many- sidedness of Christ's sacrifice, 82; insufficiency of its ordinances to purify sin, id. ; their prospective and prophetic character, 83 ; care needed in the interpretation of its types, 84 ; exaggerated views respecting them, id. ; holiness taught, id. ; indirect allusions to Leviticus in the New Testament, 85 ; fewer sceptical objections to this than to any other book of the Penta- teuch, 86 ; ritual trivial and burdensome in the estimate of some, id. ; objection made to exile, as an 'oraculum post eventum,' 86, note; apparent contradiction in spotless- So INDEX. Leviticus, book oi— continued. ness of victim as compared with offerer's sinfulness, 87 ; an inquiry' as to keynote of sacrificial system, id. ; natural order and sequence of sacri- fices, 88. Light before sun, 38. Luther's remarks on Genesis, 28. Manetho, account of, 65, note. Matter, eternity of, Bible protest against, 51. Meat-offering, 99, note, 102. Minchah, meat-offering, 99, note, 102. Miracles in Egypt, 69. Moses used pre-existing m.aterials, 12. Names, Divine, Jehovah and Elohim, wise and careful employment of, II ; El-Shaddai, 12. Nature and grace, books of, in harmony, 32. Negative argument in science, 35. Negative criticism, 9. Numbers, book of, names of, 121 ; essential to completeness of Penta- teuch, id. ; its contents, 122 ; number of the Israelites, id. ; difficulties connected with the first and second numbering, 122, note ; imperfect history of the wandering in the wilderness, 123 ; a gap of thirty-eight years, id. ; documentary theory, 124; commonly regarded as Mosaic, id. ; no one else could have written por- tions of it, 125 ; reasons for Mosaic authorship, id. ; what the long wanderings were illus- trative of, id. ; its types (water from the rock, brazen serpent, Aaron's intercession), id.\ Balaam's prophecy, 126 ; Numbers, book oi—coiitiiiued. it contains fragments of ancient poetry, 127 ; objections against the large number fed in the wilderness, 128 ; wilderness once comparatively fertile, id. ; the objection, if so numerous, they would have easily defeated the Amalekites, answered, 130 ; objection from the disproportion of first-born and males, 131 ; objection to the vast number of lambs said to have been necessary at the Passover, id. ; analysis of, 132. ' Oraculum post eventum,' 86, note. Pantheism, 33, note. Paraschioth, or Parshioth, 22, note, 59, note, 121, note, 135, note. Passover charged with being a fiction refuted, 65 ; exceptional as sacrifice, 95, note. Patriarchal influences on Moses and Israehtes, 20. Peace-offering, 112 ; rites like some used in old heathen sacrifices, 113. Pentateuch, the, period contained in, I ; how designated in Scripture, id. ; derivation of word, i, note ; names of books of LXX. origin, 2 ; MS. formed one roll, id. ; objections to, as regards authorship and authenticity, 3 ; as regards style, 4 ; corresponds with our a priori expec- tations as to Mosaic authorship, 4 ; from internal evidence, style, Egyp- tian knowledge, 4, note ; bears witness to Moses as its author, s; INDEX. I8l Pentateuch, the — continned. from external testimony of sacred and profane writers, Greek and Roman, of every age, 6 ; a public and national document, 7 ; received by Hebrew nation, 7 ; innumerable references to it in Old Testament, 7 ; nation not biassed in favour of it, 8 ; late date assigned by Ewald, 8 ; objections to authenticity as to genealogies and style, 9 ; objections by Hobbes, Spinoza, Astruc, 10 ; unity of, id. ; evidences of design, id. ; no collection of loose fragments, id. ; advocates of ' documentary hypo- thesis,' II ; Elohistic and Jehovistic sections, 11, note ; advocates of ' fragmentary ' and ' supplementary ' hypotheses, 13 ; the work of a single author, 13 ; wide difference in their views as to time of composition, 14 ; Robertson Smith's objection to entire Mosaic authorship, 15. Period-theory of days in creation, 41, Propitiation in sacrifice, 103. Red heifer, an unusual sacrifice, 96, note. Revelation and reason not opposed to each other, 32. Sacrifice, its meaning, 84 ; has an outward sign and an inward significance, 87 ; origin of, 88 ; whether due to primeval revelation or instinctive feeling, id. ; amongst heathen nations, 94 ; similarity and dissimilarity between Mosaic and heathen sacrifices, 95 ; characteristic principles of Mosaic ritual, 97 ; Sacrifice — con tin ued. classification of, by Kurtz, 97, note ; representative principle in, 98 ; probably instituted at the Fall, 99 ; simple during the patriarchal age, id. ; eucharistic element in, 99, note ; animals permitted to be used in, 100 ; animal and vegetable offerings, loi ; forbidden animals, loi, note ; sequence of sacrifices, 103 ; sin - offering, its names, meaning, object, victims, characteristics, sprinkling of blood, expiatory, 104 ; trespass - offering, Hebrew, Greek, and Latin terms, victim, charac- teristics, distinction from sin- offering, 107 ; burnt-offering, its names, connection, characteristics, principle of self- dedication, victims, no; united with meat-offerings and drink- offerings, III ; peace-offering, voluntary, its names, victims, sacrificial meal, eucha- ristic, custom of ' waving,' man's sinfulness and victim's purity, 112 ; bloodless offerings, 115 ; meat-offerings and drink-offerings, characteristics, names, meanings, id. ; shevv-bread, meanings, constituents, symbolical character, 116 ; the seven lamps, 117 ; incense, constituents, symbolical meaning, 117 ; sacrifices typical of Christ's atone- ment, 118 ; elements of sacrifice complex, 120. Samaritan Pentateuch, the, 9, note. Satisfaction, what it impHes, 83. Science and Scripture not really op- posed, 32 ; confirmations and anticipations of, not to be sought for in Revelation, 36; no errors in Scripture concerning it, 37- I 82 INDEX. Seaward, the term explained, i6. Shew-bread, the, ii6. Siderim, 22, note. Sin-offering, the, 104. Skins of animals sacrificed, 93, note. Song of Moses, the, 71, note. 'Spoiled the Egyptians,' meaning of, 70, note. Supplementary liypothesis, 13. Theocratic principle, the, 72. To rah, 17. Trespass-offering, the, 107. Types, facts to be borne in mind re, specting, 61 ; Types — C071 tin tied. different bearings in different books, 84; exaggerated views of, id. Usher on chronology, 58, note. Wave-breast, the, 113. Waving in sacrifice, 113. Writing pre-Mosaic, 3 ; probably known to Moses, id, Zebach (sacrifice), meaning of word, 100, note. INDEX TO SCRIPTURE REFERENCES. Genesis. Genesis— continued. Exodus , P.A.GE PAGE PAGE i.-ii., . • .3. 53 XV. 9, 91, loi, no, note i.-xii., • 36. 73 i. I. . 43 note, 44, 45 XV. 13, 57 i. 6, 7, 12, 20, 59, note i. 2, . • 43. 45 XV. 13-16, . 59, note ii.-xii.. • 36. 74 i.5. . 49 XV. 14, 60 iii., 64, note i. i6, . 49 xvii. 1-6, 58, note, iii. 18, . 95, note i. 27, . 49 59, note iv. 14, . 76, note 11. 4, . . 28, 41 xviii. 18, 26 v. I, . 95, note ii. 4-25. 53 xix. 23, 37 V. 6-19, 3, note ii. 23, 24, 49 xxii. 2, 7, 8, 13, no, note vi. 2, 3, 12 iii., 53 xxii. 16, 17, 58, note VI. 7. . ^9 iii. 15, . 26 xxii. 18, 26 vii. 4, 5, . 60, 69 iv., 90 xxv.-xxvii. , . 54 X. 25, 100, note, no, note iv.-v., . 53 XXV. 12, 19, 28 xii.. 105, note iv. 3, 4, 99, note xxvi. 2-4, 58, note xii. 3, . 96, note V. I, . 28 xxvi. 4, 26 xii. 8, . 85 vi.-vii., 53 xxvi. 25, 91 xii. 12, . 69 vi. 9, . 28 xxviii.-xxxvii •. . 54 xii. 26, 27, . 73 vii. 2, . lOI xxviii. 1-3, I 2-14, xii. 35, 40, 41, 59, note viii., . 90 58, note xii. 37-xiii. 16, 74 viii.-ix.. 53 xxviii. 14, . 26 xii. 37-xix. 2, 74 viii. 20, 91, 1 00, no, note xxxi. 54, . 115 xii. 40, 57 viii. 21, 97 xxxii. 12, 59, note xiii. 17-xv. 21, 74 ix. I, . 91 xxxii. 13, 20 21, 99, note xiv. 4, 18, . 60 ix. 3, . 93, note xxxiii. 20, 91 xiv. 18, 23, 28, 71 X. I, 28 XXXV. II, 59, note XV. 22-xvii. 16, 74 xi. , 53 XXXV. 14, 91 xvii. 14, 3, note, 6, note xi. 10, . 28 xxxvii.-l., 54 xviii., . 74, 142 xi. 27, . 28 xxxvii. 2, 28 xviii. 12, 100 xii.-xxv., 54 xlvi. I, 60, 115 xix.. 75 xii.-l., 53 xlvi. 3, 4, 59, note, 60 xix. 3-xl., . 74 xii. 3, . 26 xlvii. 27, 59 xix. 5, 6, • 72, 79 xii. 7, 8, 91 xlviii. 16, 59, note XX., . 75 xiii. 4, 91 xlix. 10, 26 XX. 8-IT, 50 XV. 5, . 59, note 1. 24, 25. 6c xxi.-xxiii. 19, 75 84 INDEX TO SCRIPTURE REFERENCES. Exodus— conti nued. Leviticus- -co7iti?iued. NUMBEKS- -continued. PAGE PAGE pags xxii. 30, lOI viii.-x., 80 viii., . 132 xxiii. 20-33, . 79 viii. 14-22. 104 ix., 132 xxiii. 20-xxiv. I B, 75 viii. 18, 22, 2 6, III, note X., 132 xxiv. 3, 4, 3, note, 6, note viii. 21, 97 X. II, 77 xxiv. 8, 105, note viii. 29, 113 X. 12, 129 xxv.-xxxi. 18, 75 ix. 8, . 104 xi., 133 XXV. 6, "7. note ix. 10, . 106, note xii.. 133 XXV. 23-30, . 116, note ix. 16, 17, III, note xiii., 133 XXV. 30, 116 X. 14, . 114 xiii. 2, 142 XXV. 31-37, . 117 xi.-x-v., 80 xiv. 1-3, 131 xxviii. 38, , 98 xi.-xvi., . 78, 79 xiv. 43-45, 142 xxix. 26, 27, 114 xi. 44, . 85 XV. I-I2, . 115 xxix. 41, 97 , III xii. 8, . loi, note xvi.. 133 xxix. 42, 112 xiv. 12, 107, 113, 117 xix. 2, . 96, note XXX. 7, 8, . 117 xiv. 19, 104 XX. , 125. 133 xxxii.-xxxiv. 35 75 xiv. 20, III, note XX. 14-2T, 142 xxxiv. 27, 3, note 6 note xvi., 80, 104, 106 xxi.. ^^32, XXXV. -xl., 75 xvi. 20, 96, note xxi. 4, . 142 xxxvii. 17-24, 117 xvi. 21, 103 xxi, 14, 15, I 7. 18, 27-30. xxxviii. 26, . 122 xvi. 33, 82 128 xl. 2, 17, 43, n xvii.-xx.. 7S. 79. 80 xxi, 21, 142 xvii.-x.xvii., 79 xxii. -XXV., . 133 xvii. 2, . 87 xxii. 2-xxiv. 25 127 xvii. II, 92, 103 xxiv. 17, 126 Leviticus. xix. 2, 72 xxvi., . 121 . 123, 133 xix. 5, 112 .xxvi. 62, 122 i.-v., . . 78 xxi.-xxii. , 80 xxvi. 64, 65, 123 i.-vii., . 80 xxi.-xxvi., 78 xxvii. -xxxvi. 133 i.-xvi., 79 xxi. 6, 8, 102 xxviii.. 104 i. 4. • 104 xxii. 23, 27, lOI xx\'iii. 4, 5, III, note i. 6-9, . III xxii. 29, 112, note xxviii. 9, II, 112 ii., 102 . 115 xxiii. -xxvii., 80 x.xix., . 104, 112 ii. I, 4~6, 100, note xxiii. II, • "3 xxxi. 50, 96 ii. 2, . 113 xxiii. 42, IZ xxxiii. 2, 3, note, ii. 13, . 102 X.X3V. 4, 117 6, note, 125 iii. 7. . lor, note xxiv. 6, 7, 9, 116 XXXV. 14, 137 iii. 17, . 106, note XXV. , . 85, note xxxvi. 13, 6, note iv., 104 xxvi., . 140 iv. 3, 22, 23, 27 . 28, 30, 105 xxvii. 34, 6, note iv. 32, loi, note , 105 Deuteronomy. V. I, 4, . 107 V. 7, . lOI, note , 105 NUM BKRS. i.-iv, 40, 143 v. II, . 105 i. 1-5. • 6, note V. 14. . 109 i.-ii. , . 132 1. 5. . 141 V. 15-19. 107 i.-iv., . 121 i. 6, T, 137 vi.-vii., . 78 i. 46. . 59, note i. 6-18, 142 vi. 1-7, 107 iii.-iv.. . 132 i. 9-11, 59, note vi. 8-13, 112 iii. 43. . 131 i. 19, . 129 vi. 12, 26, 107 v.. 132 i. 22, , 142 vii., . 114 V. 25, . • 113 i. 44. • 142 vii. 8, . 1X2 vi.. 132! i. 45. . 137 vii. II, 12, 112, note vi. 24-26, 127, I28| ii. 2-8, 142 vii. 15, . 113 vii. , • 132 ii, 4-8, 137 vii. 32-34, 114 vii. 3, . . . 96! ii. 6, 7, 130 INDEX TO SCRIPTURE REFERENCES. 85 Deuteronomy— (Tf/z/^f. j Joshua. 2 Chronicles— fo«/rt'. PAGE PAGE ii. 9, io~i2, 19, 20-23, PAGE xiii. II, 116. note 137 viii. 30-35, . 6, note i xvii. 9, 2 ii. 24, . 142 XXV. 4, .1, 140, note iii. 4. 9, II. . 137 xxxiv. 14, 30, . 2 iii. 27, 135 XXXV. 12, I iv. 14-40, • 136 Judges. j iv. 22, . 135 iv. 24, . 140, note vi. 25, . . . loi iv. 41, . 137 XX. 26, . . 115 Ezra. iv. 41-43, 144 v.-xxvi. 19, 144 vi. 18, . I vi. 4, 5, 13, 16, 140, note I Samuel. vii. 6, . I vi. 20, . 73 viii. 3, 140, note XV. 22, . I TO, note. viii. 15, 122, 129 III, note Nehemiah. ix. 4-24, . 136 xxi. 6, . . . 116 ix, 20, . 137 viii. T, . . I X. 21, 22, 59, note xiii. I, . . I xii. 5, 6, 137 xvii. 2-7, . 136 2 Samuel. xvii. 6, 140, note xvii. 14, 137 viii. 2, 6, . 99, note Job. xvii. 18, 6, note. xxiv. 24, . . 98 135. note, 141 xxiv. 25, . . 115 i. 5. . . lOI xvii. 19, 6, note xxxviii. 7, . 46 xviii. 15, 137, 140, note xviii. 18, 19, 140, note xix. 7-9, . 137 I Kings. xix, 15, 21, . 140, note Psalms. XX., 137 ii. 3, . . 140, note xxi. 23, 140, note iii. 15, . . no, note xix. 4-6, 37 xxv. 4, 5, . 140, note iv. 21, . . 99, note xl. 6, . Ill note xxvi. 5, 59. note vii. 48, . 116, note xl. 8, 9, no, note xxvii.-xxx. 20, 144 viii. 64, . no, note 1. 8, . no, note xxvii. 1-13, . 6, note 1. 13. 14. . III note xxvii. 2, 3, . 135, note Ii. 16, 17, . III, note xxvii. 26, 140, note Ii. 19, . no note xxviii., 140 2 Kings, Ixxxix. 15, . 85 note xxviii. 15, 141 xciii. I, 38 xxviii. 58, . 141 xvii. 4, . 99, note xcv., . 123 xxix. 18, 140, note xxii. 8, . . 2 civ. 5, . 38 xxix. 19, 20, 27 , . 141 xxiii. 2, 21, . . 2 cxix. 90, 91, . 38 XXX. 12-14, . 140, note cxxxvi. 4, . 71 xxxi., . 144 cxli. 2, II note xxxi. 2, 135 xxxi. 6, 8, . 140, note I Chronicles. xxxi. 9, 6, note Proverbs. xxxi. 24-27 6, note xxix. 10-14, . 115 XXXI. 30-xxxn. 44, 144 xxxii. 10, no, note, 122 xxxii. 17, 21, 35, 36, 43, 140, note xxxiii., . 141, 144 xxxiv., . 141, 144 2 Chronicles. vni. 23, Ecclesiastes. IV. 19, 116, note i. 5, 44 37 1 86 INDEX TO SCRIPTURE REFERENCES. Isaiah. Mark. I Corinthians — contd. PAGE PAGE PAGE \. I0-20, . Ill, note vii. II, 100, note ix. 9, . . 140, note xlv. i8, 48 X. 3. • 140, note X, I, . 63 Ixi. 1-3, , 85, note X. 7. • 49 X. 2, . 61 xii. 33. no, note X. 3. . X. 4. • X. II, . "62 123, 62 . 125 note Jeremiah. Luke. xi. 7, 8, 49 XV. 33, . 13 ii. 2, . . 130 ii. 24, . . • 85 XV. 45, . 26 ii. 6, . . I2C . 130 iv. 6-9, 13 iv. 23-26, 48 iv. 16-2T, 85, note vii. 22, 23, . Ill, note vi. 4, . 116, note X. 26, . 2 2 CORINTHIANS xxiv, 27, 2 ii. 16, . 97 EZEKIEL. v. 21, . 119 John. i. 10, . 132, note XX. 39-44, . TTI, note i. I, 22, note, 44 xxxvi. II, . 44 i- 45. • iii. 14, . 140, note • 125 Galatians. iv. 20-24, 85, note iii. 10-12, . 140, note Daniel. V. 46, . 119 iii. 17, . . 57 vi. 32, . 62 iii. 24, . . 119 ix. 13, . . 140, note vi. 37. . 102 iv. 9, 10, 85. note viii. 5, 17, 2 iv. 24, . . 61 xvii. 5, 44 HOSEA. xix. 36, . 61, 62 vi. 6, . . Ill, note Ephesians. xii. 13, 63 iii. 19-21, TS. . 85 V. 2, . . 97 Amos. iii, 22, 23, 140, note vii. 6, . 57 Philippians. V. 21-27, . Ill, note vii. 37. 140, note XV., 85, note ii. 17. . 119 xvii. 25, 94 iv. 18, . 113 Micah. xvii. 28, 13 vi. 6-8, . Ill, note ROA ANS. COLOSSIANS. ii. II, . 61 Matthew. iii. 20, . 8, 104 ii. 16, 17, . 86, note iii. 24, 25, 119 ii. 23, . 95 i. I, . . 22, note V. 14, . 61 ii. IS, . . 61 viii. 19-23, . 85 iv. 3-6, . 13 X. 5-8. 140, note Titus. iv. 4, 7, 10, 140, note xii. I, . no, 119 xii. 4, . 116, note i. 12, . 13 xii. 5, . 2 xix. 4, 5, 49 I CORI> ithians. xix. 7, 8, 140, note 2 Timothy. xix. 28, 29, 85 i. 30. . 119 xxii. 36, 40, 2 V. 7. • 61, 62, 119 iv. 6, . 119 INDEX TO SCRIPTURE REFERENCES. 187 H EBREWS. Hebrews- -confi)iued. I Peter — continued. PAGE PAGE PA OR ii. 17. . 125 X. I, . 61 . 119 i. 19, 20, 1x8 iv. I, . 123 X. 2, . 82 iii. 21, 61 iv. 14, . 117, 119 X. 4, . 118 iv. 14-16, 62 X. 5. • no, note v., III xi. 4, . 91 I Joiix. V. I, no, note xi, 16, , 62 V. 4. 5. 62 xi. 18, 19, 26 ii. 2, . 1X9 vi. 19, . 117 xiii. II, 12, 119 vi. 20, . 26, 117 xiii. 15, 16, "3 vii. II, 76, note Revelation, vii. 25, 117 119, 125 ix. 2, . 1x6, note iv. 7, . . 132, note ix. 9, 10, 118 I Peter. viii. 4, . 117 ix. II, . 119 xiii. 8, . 1x8 ix, 24-28, 117. 119 i. 16, . . 85 xxi, 22, 62 MORRISON AND GIBB, EDINBURGH, PRINTERS TO HER MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE, BOOKS FOR SUNDAY-SCHOOL TEACHERS. OUTLINES OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST. A Guide to the Study of the Chronology, Harmony, and Purpose of the Gospels. By Eustace K. OoNDER, D.D. With Map. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. cloth boards. THE HANDY BOOK FOR BIBLE READERS. Witli Twelve carefully Coloured Maps. Is. paper cover; Is. 6d. cloth. New and Enlarged Edition, comprising ; A Concordance — Technical Terms connected with Hebrew Poetry and Music —Index to Scripture Persons, Places, and Subjects — An Alphabetical List of the Scripture Proper Names — Names, Titles, and Characters of Christ — Prophecies relating to Jesus Christ- Table to find each Psalm by its first line — Chronological arrangement of Psalms — Chronological Tables — Glossary of Bible Words. THE NEW BIBLICAL ATLAS AND SCRIPTURE GAZETTEER. With Coloured Maps. 6s. cloth boards. THE BIBLE HANDBOOK. An Introduction to the Study of Sacred Scriptures. By Joseph Angus, D.D. Map. 12mo, 5s. cloth boards. SKETCHES OF JEWISH SOCIAL LIFE IN THE DAYS OF CHRIST. By Dr. Edersheim. os. cloth boards, gilt edges. THE TEMPLE : Its Ministry and Services at the Time of Jesus Christ. By Dr. Edersheim. Imperial l6mo, 5s. cloth boards, gilt edges. BIBLE HISTORY. By the Rev. Dr. Edersheim. Each Volume in crown 8vo. 2s. 6"d. cloth boards. Vol. I. The World before the Flood, and the History of the Patriarchs. With Map.— Vol. II. The Exodus and the Wanderings in the Wilderness.— Vol. III. Israel in Canaan under Joshua and the Judges.— Vol. IV. Israel under Samuel, Saul, and David, to the Birth of Solomon— Vol. V. History of Judah and Israel, from the Birth of Solomon to the Reign of Ahab, WHAT DO I BELIEVE? By Rev. S. G. Green, D.D., Author of 'Bible Sketches and their Teachings,' etc. Pcap. 8vo, Is. cloth boards. WHY DO I BELIEVE ? or, The Bible HiBtorically Tnie and Divinely Inspired. By Mrs. J. B. Patterson. Is. cloth boards. 1 BOOKS FOR BIBLE STUDENTS. PROPHECY : Its Nature and Evidence. By the Rev. R, A, Redford M.A. CroAvn 8vo, 5s. cloth boards. ROMANISM : A Doctrinal and Historical Examination of the Creed of Pope Pius IV. By the Rev. Robert C. Jenkins, M.A., Rector of Lyminge, and Honorary Canon of Canterbury. Crown 8vo, 5s. cloth boards. THE ORIGIN OF NATIONS. In Two Parts. I. On Early Civilisa- tion. II. On Ethnic Affinities. By Canon Rawlinson, M.A., Camden Professor of Ancient History, Oxford. With Maps. Crown 8vo, 4s. 6d. cloth boards. THE RELIGIONS OF THE ANCIENT WORLD. By Geop.ge Rawlin- son, M.A. Crown 8vo. Illustrations. 4s. 6d. cloth boards. THE PROGRESS OF DIVINE REVELATION; or, The Unfolding Purpose of Scripture. By John Stoughton, D.D. Crown 8vo, 6s. 6d. cloth boards. HISTORICAL THEOLOGY. Christian Doctrine from the Apostolic Period of the Reformation. By Rev. Dr. Stoughton. 6s. cloth boards. OUR ENGLISH BIBLE : Its Translations and Translators. By the Rev. John Stoughton, D.D. Engravings. Imperial 16mo, 6s. in imita- tion half bindiug. THE GREAT PROBLEM ; or, Christianity as it is. By a Student of Science. Crown 8vo, 5s. 6d. cloth boards. HANDBOOK TO THE GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. Together with complete Vocabulary, and an Explanation of the chief New Testament Synonyms. By the Rev. S. G. Green, D.D. 8vo, 7s. 6d. THE CRITICAL HANDBOOK. A Guide to the Study of the Authen- ticity, Canon, and Text of the Greek New Testament. By Edward C. ]Mitchei.l, D.D. With Map, Diagrams, and Tables. Crown 8vo, 3s. 6d. cloth boards. A HARMONY OF THE FOUR GOSPELS. By E. Robinson, D.D. With Explanatory Notes, Maps, etc. 12mo, 3s. cloth boards. Pocket Edition, Is. 6d, THE RESURRECTION OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST : A Historical Fact. With an Examination of Naturalistic Hypotheses. By the Rev. J. Kennedy, D.D. 2s. 6d. cloth. 2 MISSIONARY BOOKS. AMONG THE MONGOLS. By the Rev. James Gilmour, M.A., of Pekin. With Map and numerous Engravings from Photographs and Native Sketches. 8vo, 6s. cloth boards. LIFE IN THE SOUTHERN ISLES ; or, Scenes and Incidents in the South Pacific and New Guinea. By the Eev. W. Wyatt Gill, B.A. With Illustrations. Gilt edges, 5s. 6d. cloth boards. MADAGASCAR AND ITS PEOPLE : Notes of a Four Years' Residence, •with a Sketch of the History, Position, and Prospects of Mission Work amongst the Malagasy. By James Sibree, Jun. With Engravings. Imperial 16mo, 6s. 6d. cloth boards. THE VANGUARD OF THE CHRISTIAN ARMY; or, Sketches of Missionary Life. By the Author of ' Great Voyagers.' Illustrated. Impei-ial 16mo, 5s. cloth boards, gilt edges. OUR EASTERN SISTERS AND THEIR MISSIONARY HELPERS : A Sketch of the Rise and Progress of Missionary and Zenana Work among Eastern Women. By Harriet Warner Ellis. Crown 8vo, 2s. 6d. cloth boards. PAST AND PRESENT IN THE EAST. By the Rev. Harry Jones, M.A. Fine Engravings. 5s. cloth boards. THE TWO VOYAGES ; or. Midnight and Daylight. By the hite Rev. W. H. G. Kingston. 5s. cloth boards. WHITE FOREIGNERS FROM OVER THE WATER: A Story of the Burmese Mission. Illustrated. Crown 8vo, 3s. cloth boards. SEVENTEEN YEARS IN THE YORUBA COUNTRY : Memorials of Anna Hinderer. Illustrated. Crown Svo, 3s. cloth boards. RIVERS OF WATER IN A DRY PLACE : An Accou: t of Dr. Moffat's Missionary Labours. Illustrated. Crown Svo, 3s. cloth boards. THE WALDENSIAN CHURCH IN THE VALLEYS OF PIEDMONT. By the late Jane L. Willyams. A New Edition. Edited by Mrs. Matheson. With Engravings by Whymper. 5s. cloth boards gilt. MEMOIR OF H. W. FOX, MISSIONARY TO THE TELUGUS. With Illustrations. 3s. 6d. cloth boards. TRUE TALES ABOUT INDIA : Its Natives, Princes, and British Rulers. Illustrated. Crown Svo, 3s. cloth boards. 3 PRESENT DAY TRACTS. Crown 8vo, price 4d. each, CHRISTIANITY AND MIRACLES AT THE PRESENT DAY. By the Rev. Principal Caikns, D.D. THE HISTORICAL EVIDENCE OF THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST FROM THE DEAD. By Rev. Prebendary Row, M.A. CHRIST THE CENTRAL EVIDENCE OF CHRISTIANITY. By the Rev. Principal Cairns, D.D. CHRISTIANITY AND THE LIFE THAT NOW IS. By Rev. W. G. Blaikie, D.D., LL.D. THE EXISTENCE AND CHARACTER OF GOD. By the Rev. Preben- dary Row, M.A. THE SUCCESS OF CHRISTIANITY, AND MODERN EXPLANATIONS OF IT. By the Rev. Principal Cairns, D.D. CHRISTIANITY AND SECULARISM COMPARED IN THEIR IN- FLUENCE AND EFFECTS. By Rev. W. G. Blaikie, D.D., LL.D. AGNOSTICISM : A Doctrine of Despair. By Rev. Noah Porter, D.D., LL.D. THE ANTIQUITY OF MAN HISTORICALLY CONSIDERED. By Rev. Canon Rawlinson, M.A. THE WITNESS OF PALESTINE TO THE BIBLE. By Rev. W. G. Blaikie, D.D., LL.D. THE EARLY PREVALENCE OF MONOTHEISTIC BELIEFS. By Rev. Canon Rawlinson, M.A. THE WITNESS OF MAN'S MORAL NATURE TO CHRISTIANITY. By the Rev. J. Radfokd Thomson, M.A. AGE AND ORIGIN OF MAN GEOLOGICALLY CONSIDERED. By S. R. Pattison, Esq., F.G.S., and Dr. Friedrioh Pfafp. THE RISE AND DECLINE OF ISLAM. By Sir William Muir, K.CS.L, Author of ' The Coran: Its Composition and Teaching.' PRESENT DAY TRACTS. On Subjects of Christian Evidence, Doctrine, and Morals. By various Writers. Voh I., containing tlie first Six Numbers of the Series. By the Rev. Principal Cairns, D.D., the Rev. Prebendary Row, M.A., and the Rev. Profe&sor Blaikie, D.D. y LL.D. Crown 8vo, 2s. 6d. cloth boards. 4 BIBLE MONOGRAPHS. THE BOOK OF RUTH. A Popular Exposition. By the Rev. Samuel Cox, D.D. Crown 8vo, 2s. cloth boards, red edges. ' An admirable treatise, full of tliought and the results of research.' — British Quarterly Eeview. DANIEL, STATESMAN AND PEOPHET. A Study for Young Men. By the Rev. H. T. Eobjohns, B.A. 3s. 6d. cloth boards, crown 8vo. 'Done carefully and in good spirit; while admitting difficulties, it novtv deviates from sound exposition.' — Literary Churchman. VOX CLAMANTIS : The Life and Ministry of John the Baptist. By Alexander Macleod Symington, D.D. Crown 8vo, 2s. 6d. cloth boards. ' In a simple and practical way. Dr. Symicgton has furnished a popular handbook to the Baptist's cAreer.''— British Quarterly Review. THE STORY OF ESTHER THE QUEEN. By the Rev. A. M. Symington, D.D. 2s. 6d. cloth boards. ' The book of Esther has had few expounders and illustrators hitherto, and we are glad to call attention to this popular exposition.' — Irish Ecclesiastical Gazette. NEHEMIAH : His Character and Work. A Practical Exposition. By T. Campbell, Finlayson. 2s. cloth boards. Well fitted to arouse or to deepen interest in an important but little studied period of Jewish history.' THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO PHILEMON. An Exposition for English Readers. By the Rev. A. H. Drysdale, M.A. 2s. 6d. cloth boards. ' This little book contains an introduction so good that we imagined it might prove the best part of the book — a trauslation, and then the exposition itself, which is exhaustive. We trust many may be the better for Mr. Drysdale's labour, and grateful for it.' — Spectator. ELISHA THE PROPHET: The Lessons of His History and Times. By the Rev. Alfred Edersiieim, D.D., Author of ' The Temple and its Services,' etc. Crown 8vo, 2s. Gd. cloth boards. ' A deeply interesting and instructive life of one of the most remarkable men of Scripture. Much spiritual instruction is given in these pictures of our Father's gracious dealings with His children.' — Footsteps of Truth. 5 ILLUSTRATED BOOKS. HISTORIC LANDMARKS IN THE CHRISTIAN CENTURIES : Con- temporary Events Pictorially Illustrated. With numerous Illustrations. 4to, 10s. cloth boards, gilt ' THOSE HOLY FIELDS.' Palestine Illustrated by Pen and Pencil. By the late Kev. S. Manning, LL.D. Elegantly bound, 8s. PICTURES FROM BIBLE LANDS. Drawn with Pen and Pencil. Edited by the Eev. S. G. Green, D.D. Illustrations by Edward Whymper and others. Handsomely bound, 8s. THE LAND OF THE PHARAOHS : Egypt and Sinai. Illustrated by Pen and Pencil. Cy the late S. Manning, LL.D. Elegantly bound, 8s. THE LANDS OF SCRIPTURE. The three preceding Books bound together in one handsome volume, 21s. SPANISH PICTURES. Drawn with Pen and Pencil. By the late Rev. S. Manning, LL.D. Illustrated by Dore. Elegantly bound, 8s. SWISS PICTURES. Drawn with Pen and Pencil. By the late Rev. S. Manning, LL.D. Profusely Illustrated. Elegantly bound, 8s. imp. 8vo. ITALIAN PICTURES. Drawn with Pen and Pencil. By the Author of *■ Swiss Pictures,' etc. Elegantly bound, 8s. PICTURES FROM THE GERMAN FATHERLAND. Drawn with Pen and Pencil. By the liev. Samuel G. Green, D.D. Profusely Illustrated. 8s. handsome cloth. INDIAN PICTURES. Drawn with Pen and Pencil. By the Rev. William Urwick, M.A. Profusely Illustrated by English and Foreign Artists. Imperial 8vo, 8s. handsomely bound, gilt edges. SEA PICTURES. Drawn with Pen and Pencil . By James Macaulay, M.A., M.D., Editor of 'The Leisure Hour,' etc. Profusely Illustrated by Eminent Artists. Imperial 8vo, 8s. handsomely bound, gilt edges ; morocco, 25s. HOMES AND HAUNTS OF LUTHER. By the Rev. Dr. Stoughton. With Engravings. Small 4to, 8s. FOOTSTEPS OF THE ITALIAN REFORMERS. By the Rev. John Stoughton, D.D. With Engravings. 4to, Os. boards, gilt edges. 6 INTERESTING AND INSTRUCTIVE BOOKS. THE LIFE OF HANNAH MORE. By A^^na J. Buckland, Author of ' Homely Heroes and Heroines,' etc. With Portraits. Imperial 16mo, 3s. cloth boards. THE LIFE OF JEAN FREDERIC OBERLIN, Pastor of the Ban de la Eoche. By Mrs. Josephine E. Butler. With Illustrations. Crown 8vo, 3s. 6d. cloth boards. HID IN THE CEVENNES; or, The Mountain Refuge. With Illus- trations. 3s. bevelled cloth boards, gilt KARL KRAPP S LITTLE MAIDENS AND THEIR GOOD GIFT. By the Author of ' Harry's Perplexity, and What came of It,' etc. With Illustrations. Crown 8vo, 3s. cloth boards, gilt edges. MARIQUITA : A Story of Spanish Life. With Illustrations. Small crown 8vo, Is. 6d. cloth boards. OLIVE'S STORY ; or, Life at Ravenscliffe. By Mrs. 0. F. Walton, Author of ' Christie's Old Organ,' ' Peep Behind the Scenes,' etc. With Engravings. 2s. 6d, cloth boards, gilt edges. LOST IN EGYPT : A Story from Life. By Miss M. L. Whately, Author of ' The Story of a Diamond,' etc. With Engravings. 4s. cloth boards, gilt edges. FREE TO SERVE. By Evelyn R. Garratt. With Engravings. Crown 8vo, 2s. 6d. cloth boards. GREAT VOYAGERS : Their Adventures and Discoveries. With En- gravings. Crown 8vo, 2s. cloth boards. THE FRANKLINS; or, The Story of a Convict. By George E. Sargent, Author of ' The Story of a City Arab,' etc. With Illustra- tions. Imperial 16mo, 5s. cloth boards, gilt edges. STANLEY'S SUMMER VISIT. By Constance Cross. With Illus- trations. Imperial 16mo, 2s. 6d. cloth boards. THE FIRST GIFT; or, Ruth Noble's Friends. With Illustrations. Imperial 16mo, 2s. Gd. cloth boards. 7 INTERESTING AND INSTRUCTIVE BOOKS. THE QUEEN 0' THE MAY. By Anne Beale, Author of 'The Young Eefugee,' etc. Forming Volume III. of ' The Girl's Own Book- shelf.' Illustrations. Imperial 16mo, 3s. cloth boards, bevelled edges. ELSIE'S FOOTPRINTS ; or, Jesus your Life, and your Life for Jesus. By Mrs. Lucas Siiadwell, Author of 'Golden (Sheaves,' etc. With Illustrations. Imperial 16mo, 2s, 6d. cloth boards. THE INTERPEETER'S HOUSE, AND WHAT I LEARNT THERE; or, New Lessons from an Old School. By the Eev. James E. Arnold. Crown 8vo, 2s. cloth boards, red edges. THE YOUNG REFUGEE. By Anne Beale, Author of ' The Queen o' the May,' etc. With Illustrations. Small 4to, Is. 6d. cloth boards, gilt edges. TWILIGHT TALKS; or, Easy Lessons on Things around us. By Agnes Giberne, Author of ' Eeadings with the Little Ones,' etc. With Illustrations. Crown 8vo, Is. 6d. cloth boards. CHILDREN'S FLOWERS : The Friends of their Rambles and Play. With fine Floral Illustrations by Giacomelli and Whymper. Crown 8vo, 2s. 6d. cloth boards. COBWEBS AND CABLES. By Hesba Stretton, Author of ' Jessica's First Prayer,' ' A Thorny Path,' etc. With Engravings by Gordox Brown. Imperial 16mo, 6s. cloth boards, gilt edges. TWO OF ENGLAND'S WARS; or, Theodore and Coffee. A Narrative for the Young. By the Author of ' A London Square and its Inhabitants, " etc. With Engravings. Small crown Svo, Is. 6d. cloth boards. PENFOLD : A Story of the Flower Mission. By RUTH Lynn. With Engravings by Whymper. 2s. cloth boards. ERMYN, THE CHILD OF ST. ELVIS. By Ruth Lynn, Author of ' City Sparrows,' etc. With Illustrations. Crown Svo, 3s, 6d. cloth boards, gilt edges. MY SCHOOLFELLOW " VAL BOWNSER." By the Author of ' Which wins the Prize?' etc. With Engravings. 3s. 6d. cloth boards, gilt edges. JOHN DENTON'S FRIENDS. By Crona Temple. Crown 8vo, Illus- trated, 2s. 6d. cloth boards. LONDON: THE EELIGIOUS TEACT SOCIETY, 56 Paternoster Eow, 65 St. Paul's Churchvard, And 164 Piccadilly. 8 h: RS1225.4 .B97 A popular introduction to the Pnnceton Theological Semmary-Speer Ubrary_ 1012 00039 5949