Nor is the existence of those supposed archaisms difficult to be accounted for. The Pentateuch, if not the work of Moses, was undoubtedly, in great part, a compilation; and from the preëxisting documents or traditions which formed. its basis those few antiquated or peculiar forms of speech might be copied or imitated.

III. In the next place, it may be observed, that the Pentateuch contains passages, which, it is agreed, could not have been written by Moses. Some of them are obvious to every reader; as, for instance, the account of his own death, and the passage in Genesis,* in which it is said, "These are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel.” But such passages, it is said, do not prove that the Pentateuch was not his work; they are to be regarded only as additions made to it by some later hand. To this, it may

learned defenders which that supposition has found in our own age, it can scarcely approve itself to the judgment of an unprejudiced critic. ..... It is a fact, that the language of the Pentateuch fully corresponds with that of the other ancient historical books, and, in the poetical portions, with that of the other poetry of the first age." [Gesenius considers the first age of the Hebrew language as extending to the time when it was corrupted by the influence of the Chaldee in consequence of the Captivity.] "If there was an interval of nearly a thousand years between these writings, as there must have been on the supposition that Moses was the author of the Pentateuch, a phenomenon would be presented to which there is nothing parallel in the whole history of language, namely, that the living language of a people, and the circle of their ideas, should remain so unaltered for such a length of time." Geschichte der Hebräischen Sprache und Schrift: i. e. History of the Hebrew Language and Modes of Writing, § 8.

* Ch. xxxvi. 31.

be answered, that there is a presumption, that a work is no to be ascribed to a particular individual, when it contains a considerable number of passages which he obviously could not have written, though this presumption, undoubt edly, may be overborne by opposite evidence. It may b remarked, likewise, that upon the supposition that Mose was the writer of the Pentateuch, there would have been a natural reluctance among the Hebrews to making o permitting such useless interpolations; to thus tampering with a work so venerable, the composition of their inspire lawgiver, recording the very words of God himself; thei infallible directory in religion and morals, and the unalter able code of their civil law. A book thus unique migh be expected to escape corruption. During the perio concerning which we have satisfactory evidence, that th Pentateuch has been so regarded by the Jews, we kno that such interpolations have not been made in it. Bu it is unnecessary to insist on these considerations; ther is another to be attended to. At the time when thos supposed interpolations were made, no importance coul have been attached to the belief, that the Pentateuch wa written by Moses. The necessary effect of such interp lations was to incorporate into the book itself evidence, false evidence, it may be said, but still evidence, and sud as appears at first view decisive, that the book was n written by him. Those, therefore, by whom the interpol tions were introduced could not have attached any impo tance to a belief, which they took such means to destro But to say that no importance was attached to the belief th the Pentateuch was written by Moses, is but saying in oth words, that it did not exist; for it is impossible, if the bel existed, that it should not have been considered as esse tially affecting the character and authority of the Pen teuch.

The books of the

IV. THERE is another consideration. Pentateuch do not claim to be the work of Moses. They profess to contain his history, but they are not professedly written by him.

The fact has been regarded as of little weight; because in other historical works, as in those of Cæsar and Clarendon, the author has spoken of himself in the third person. But this is a deviation from common usage and the natural mode of expression, occasioned by some particular motive. It may be adopted by a writer in order to avoid an air of arrogance or vanity; or to give the appearance of impartiality to his history, as if it were unaffected by his personal feelings; or to place himself under the same point of view with other individuals whom he introduces into his narrative. It is a mode of writing which belongs not to a rude, but to a refined age; and no probable reason can be assigned, why it should have been adopted by Moses. Such a semblance of modesty would have been wholly unsuitable to his office. As the minister of God to his countrymen, it was his business to speak with authority, to assert his claims to deference, and to place himself without reserve before them, as one whom they were bound to listen to and obey.

But the fact is of much importance under another aspect. Did the Pentateuch assume to be the work of Moses, then, in denying it to be his work, we should be driven to the supposition of intentional fraud. But this would be the supposition not merely of a very gross imposture, but of an imposture which, as regards such books, ascribed to such an author, was very unlikely to be attempted, and very unlikely to be successful. On the other hand, there is no difficulty in supposing that a series of books might at any time be readily received by the Jews, which, without

N

claiming to be the work of Moses, embodied the traditions respecting their ancient history, and those that had long been gathering round his name, and which referred to him as their author those laws, that had been gradually built up on the basis of his institutions.

SECTION V.

On the Internal Character of the Pentateuch.

THE arguments hitherto adduced do not involve the credibility of the narratives contained in the Pentateuch or any moral or religious considerations. It is differen with those about to be stated.

IN judging whether the Pentateuch be the work o Moses, that is, of a writer deserving the highest credit, we must consider whether the narratives it contains are in themselves credible. These narratives may be divided into two classes, those which relate to natural and those which relate to supernatural events. As regards either class, i may be sufficient to direct attention to the subject, and then leave it to every one's private investigation and thought. Of many examples a few may be adduced, which seem to show that the history cannot be regarded as au thentic, nor as the work of a contemporary of the supposed events which it narrates. We will first attend to thos narratives which concern events not miraculous.

I. The number of fighting men among the Israelite ("every male from twenty years old and upward"), imme diately after their leaving Egypt, is said to have been mor

than six hundred thousand; the numbers of each tribe being particularly given.* This statement of the whole sum of the fighting men is repeatedly made. It included none from the tribe of Levi, who did not go forth to war. The whole number of the Israelites, therefore, at the time of their leaving Egypt, cannot be estimated at less than two millions and a half. More than eighty years before the time of their departure, a king of Egypt is represented as saying, "Lo! the people of the children of Israel are more numerous and stronger than we." The land of Egypt is said to have been filled with them. account of their numbers.

Let us consider this

The Israelites who established themselves in Egypt, that is, Jacob and his descendants, are stated, in the books of Genesis and Exodus, to have been seventy in number. § To these, in reckoning the progenitors of the nation, must be added the wives of his sons and grandsons. Their number is uncertain; but, as only two of his grandsons are mentioned as having children at this time, if we assume that the progenitors of the Israelites amounted to two hundred, the whole error in our estimate must be through excess. No one who receives the accounts in Genesis and Exodus, as authentic, can suppose that the number was greater.

How long, then, did the Israelites remain in Egypt? There are two different opinions on the subject; according to one of which, the period of their residence was two

* Numbers i. 19-46.

+ Numbers ii. 32; xi. 21; xxvi. 51. Exod. xii. 37; xxxviii. 26. Exod. i. 7, 9.

§ Genesis xlvi. 5-27. Exodus i. 5. Stephen, in his speech (Acts vii. 14.), says "seventy-five," following the Septuagint. It has been supposed, that to make this number the five grandsons of Joseph, who were born after the establishment of Jacob's family in Egypt, are added.