at this second census, when compared with that at the first (chap. iii. 39), involves a great inconsistency. "We are told," says bishop Colenso,* "that at the second census those that were numbered of them were 23,000. And at the first census all that were numbered were 22,000. Hence, during the thirty-eight years in the wilderness, they had only increased in number by 1,000 upon 22,000 They should have increased by more than 26,000. On the other hand, the tribe of Manasseh increased in the thirty-eight years from 32,000 to 52,000, they being all men in the prime of life, whereas the Levites numbered were all from a month old and upwards."" Several answers have been given to what the Bishop thinks should have been in the case of the Levites, the substance of which Mr. Fowler presents, in saying that the number of the Levites appears to have been limited by some dispensation of Providence not recorded. They were at the first census less by ten thousand than the least of all the tribes (Manasseh). Some, we may presume, fell among the 14,700 who died of the plague for murmuring (Numb. xvi. 49); and some more, also, among the 24,000 who fell for idolatry at Shittim (Numb. xxv. 9). If we attribute it to the hand of the Almighty, there is nothing surprising in it. If we disallow this, there is still nothing impossible nor incredible in believing in some limitation in marrying, or that some casualty befell them-nothing that affects in any way the historic truth of the Pentateuch. "Pentateuch Examined," Pt. i., pp. 109-111. THE BOOK OF DEUTERONOMY, CHAPTER I. "These be the words which Moses spake unto all Israel on this side Jordan, in the wilderness, in the plain over against the Red sea."-Ver. 1. It is not probable that our English Bible is correct in translating the Hebrew word Suph, in this passage, "the Red Sea." The Red sea is invariably called jamsuph the "sea of Suph." Besides which, Moses and the people were at this time on the east side of the Jordan, and far enough from that sea (ver. 5). We believe that this Suph, or Suphah, was a district on the frontiers of Moab, not far from the Jordan and the Arnon. Moses is here said to have spoken to "all Israel,” which is a thing quite impossible, says bishop Colenso; and inasmuch as Moses is often represented as thus speaking to "all Israel," to "all the congregation," to "all the people," the books in which such representations are made cannot be historically true, with how much reason may be seen by referring to the note on Lev. viii. 1-4. And "On this side Jordan, in the land of Moab, began Moses to declare this law, saying, The Lord our God spake unto us in Horeb, saying And I spake unto you at that time, saying Take you wise men, and understanding, and known among your tribes, and I will make them rulers over you. ye answered me, and said, The thing which thou hast spoken is good for us to do. So I took the chief of your tribes, wise men, and known, and made them heads over thousands, and captains over hundreds, and captains over fifties, you, captains over 428 And I and captains over tens, and officers among your tribes. charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren," &c.-Ver. 5-18. This passage furnishes one of the "numerous contradictions to the older narrative," which bishop Colenso detects in the book of Deuteronomy. It involves, he says, more than one. 66 (1.) First, the Deuteronomist loses sight of the fact, that, according to the story (Numb. xxvi. 64), the whole generation which received the law at Horeb was dead."* The answer is, that Moses is speaking to "the people," as a people, or a nation; and they were certainly the same "people, or nation, or commonwealth, although they were not the same individuals. The objection is so "puerile that the Primate of all England's "intelligent youth," whom he would send to correct the Bishop,† might here easily do so. The mode of expression, as he would know, is common to all history. (2.) But "a more remarkable discrepancy exists," says the Bishop, "in ver. 15, where the statement is wholly at variance with Exod. xviii. 25, 26, where the appointment of the officers takes place before the giving of the law at Sinai; while here it takes place nearly twelve months afterwards, when they are just about to leave Horeb."+ The answer given to De Wette, who first urged this as a discrepancy, appears to be quite satisfactory "There is no chronological inaccuracy at all; for it is only after the appointment of the judges that the departure from Sinai really takes place. The order and its fulfilment are clearly and definitely distinguished; while the time at which the appointment of the judges "Pentateuch Examined," Pt. iii. p. 433. took place is also defined in Exod. xviii., only generally, as that of the abode at Sinai."* "And ye came near unto me every one of you, and said, We will send men before us, and they shall search us out the land, and bring us word again by what way we must go up, and into what cities we shall come. And the saying pleased me well; and I took twelve men of you, one of a tribe,"-Ver. 22, 23. In Numb. xiii. 1, 2, the sending the spies is ascribed not to a suggestion of the people, but to an express command of Almighty God; but that is consistent enough with what is here said. The people proposed it to Moses; and the Lord said to him, Do as they require, and pointed out how the spies should be chosen, "And the Amorites, which dwelt in that mountain, came out against you, and chased you, as bees do, and destroyed you in Seir, even unto Hormah."-Ver. 44. In the primary relation of this circumstance (Numb. xiv. 43) the Amalekites, and not the Amorites, are mentioned. But, as Kitto observes, in the sequel of that very passage, “the Canaanites which dwelt in that hill," whom we know from their geographical position to have been Amorites, are described as acting with the Amalekites, and taking, as it would seem, the principal part which is here ascribed to them. In the present text those are more precisely indicated as Amorites who, in the earlier notice, are more generally mentioned as Canaanites. CHAPTER II. "The Horims also dwelt in Seir beforetime, but the children of Esau succeeded them, when they had destroyed them from before them, and dwelt in their stead; as Israel did unto the land of his possession, which the Lord gave unto them." Ver. 12. "IN the time of Moses, Israel had not done this * Havernich "Hist. Crit. Introd." p. 342. 6 Nor unto the land of Canaan, which, and not the country on the other side of Jordan, is meant by the land of his possession, Nor, plainly, is the country of Sihon and Og what is meant by the expression, the land of his possession, which the Lord gave unto them; for this is indicated distinctly as the land of Canaan, in Deut. iv. 1."* But, as Mr. Fowler observes, the land of Sihon and Og was, when Moses wrote this, the possession of Israel (Numb. xxi. 31, 35; xxxiii. 33). The expression was, therefore, perfectly true and appropriate. does it make in the least against the truth of this, that Canaan was also called the "land of possession;" for "land of possession" was equally true of both. It was true of the land of Sihon and Og de facto; it was true of Canaan de jure. Thus it is understood in the Arabic version, which translates " as Israel did in some (of the) possessions which God gave them." The cavil arises from the Bishop's inveterate habit of understanding words as if they were numbers. A number can mean only a certain quantity and no other; but a word may mean, with equal correctness, more than one thing. Thus, "land of possession" may be used sometimes for one place, and sometimes for another. "Behold I have given unto thy hand Sihon the Amorite, king of Heshbon, and his land; begin to possess it, and contend with him in battle."-Ver. 24. This is said to be contradicted by ver. 26, and also by Numb. xxi. 21, where Moses is represented as sending messengers to Sihon, to ask to be permitted to pass through his country. If the contradiction be real, the writer or compiler of the narrative must * Colenso's "Pentateuch," etc., Pt. ii. pp. 213, 214. |