619

CHAPTER XXII.

CONCLUDING REMARKS.

869. As the result of the preceding investigations, it must, as we think, be admitted that the traditional belief, that the whole Pentateuch, with a few unimportant exceptions, was written by Moses himself, can no longer be maintained in face of the plain facts of the case, as they lie before us in this volume. These facts, it would seem, compel us to this conclusion, that, whatever portion of the other four books may have been actually composed by the hand of Moses, whatever of the laws and ceremonies contained in them may have been handed down from the Mosaic age, yet certainly the book of Deuteronomy was not written by him, but is the product of a much later time, and bears the distinct impress of that time and its circumstances.

870. And, if this be so, we cannot serve God by wilfully shutting our eyes to the truth, and walking still in darkness, when He is pleased to give us light. It would be no acceptable worship of Him, who is the very Truth, to do so: it would be sinful and displeasing in His Sight. We are bound to obey the Truth, which we see and know, and to follow it whithersoever it may lead us, calm in the assurance that, in so following, we are best doing the blessed Will of our Heavenly Father, that His Voice will cheer and strengthen us, His Hand lead on and uphold us, and we shall know sufficiently all that we need to know for this life and for the life to come. Only we must be strong and of good courage'; we must fear no evil, since He is with us, but go straightforward at His Word in the path of duty.

871. Unless, therefore, the evidence, which has here been produced, can be set aside by reasonable argument, we must accept it henceforth, as a matter of fact,—which is now, perhaps, to many made plain for the first time, though long wellknown to a few scholars here in England, and to very many on the Continent,-that, whatever may be true of the rest of the Pentateuch, the book of Deuteronomy, at all events, was not the work of Moses. We must accept this, I repeat, with all its important consequences.

872. And yet this book it is, and this alone, of which the authorship is actually claimed for Moses. We find mention made in the other books of his writing' on several occasions: e.g.

6

'And Jehovah said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua,' E.xvii.14;

'And Moses wrote all the words of Jehovah

and he took the book of

the covenant, and read in the audience of the people,' E.xxiv.4-7; 'And Jehovah said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel,' E.xxxiv.27;

'And Moses wrote their goings out according to their journeys by the commandment of Jehovah,' N.xxxiii.2.

From such passages it might be fairly argued, (though it certainly is not distinctly stated,) that other portions also of these books, besides those to which direct reference is made in the above quotations,-perhaps, the main portions of them,―are, of course, to be regarded as also the work of Moses.

873. But that, which can only be inferred in the case of these books, is expressly asserted with respect to Deuteronomy. Not only are we told, D.xxxi.22, that Moses wrote the Song, which we find recorded in D.xxxii, but the writing of the whole book or, at least, of the principal portion of it, is plainly ascribed to him in D.xxxi. 9–11 :

:

'And Moses wrote this Law, and delivered it unto the Priests the sons of Levi. And Moses commanded them saying, At the end of every seven years, in the solemnity of the year of release, in the Feast of Tabernacles, when all Israel is come to appear before Jehovah thy God in the place which He shall choose, thou shalt read this Law before all Israel in their hearing.'

874. We have already said in (575-580) what we have deemed it right to say—not to justify, indeed, but—to explain this proceeding, consistently with the conviction that the writer was a devout Prophet, a true servant of the living God. We shall here add further the remarks of RIEHM on this point, Gesetzg. Mosis im Lande Moab, p.113-126.

But with what right could the author allow himself such a literary fiction? Must we not charge him with the purpose to deceive? With that we should certainly do him wrong. Essentially he has here allowed himself no greater freedom than the author of Ecclesiastes, when he introduces Solomon speaking, and ascribes to this master of wisdom his own thoughts, [or the author of the book of Job, who puts into the mouth of Job and his friends, and the Divine Being himself, his own language]. Why should we concede this freedom to the Philosopher, and not also to the Lawgiver (and Prophet? In and by itself this literary fiction is nowise blamable. There is, however, between that case and ours this difference-that the writer of Ecclesiastes, when he introduced Solomon as speaking, had not in his eye any distinct practical object with his fiction,—that his fiction, consequently, is merely poetical; whereas the Deuteronomist, when he ascribed the new Law-Book to Moses, had--if not certainly, yet probably—this object in view, to secure thereby to the new Law-Book respect and recognition. This object, certainly, alters the state of the case; from our moral point of view we cannot justify the proceeding of the Deuteronomist; it appears in the light of the Law of perfect freedom' as somewhat insincere. But it would also be an injustice towards the writer, if we desired to measure him by the New Testament rule.

What now was the object of the writer in the publication of this new legislation, appearing under the form of an address delivered by Moses in the land of Moab ? Usually it is assigned as his chief object to make Jerusalem the only place for the public worship of God. But, certainly, this is not the first and chief direct object, but it is only something which, according to the relations of the time, was necessarily required by the writer's chief object. We must rather take this view of the case. In the time of the Deuteronomist, the whole theocratic state, which was founded on the exclusive worship of Jehovah, was in such great danger, from idolatrous practices getting ever more and more the upper hand, that, unless soon a fundamental and thorough reformation took place, its complete destruction was certain. The King himself, the Princes, even many Priests and Prophets, devoted as they were to idolatry, and promoting it as much as possible, had taken all pains to undermine the very foundations of the state. In addition to this the Judges were arbitrary and unjust, family life was corrupted, the poor were in the greatest want, the rich were hard-hearted and unmerciful; the condition of the slave was disconsolate, and lawless was the cruelty of their masters; in one word, the whole life of the people was in full process of dissolution. The old legislation could not check this impending dissolution, and, without being changed in some respects,

was no longer applicable. There existed now new circumstances and relations, which it could not have taken account of from the first; and many institutions of the present time, such as the kingdom, &c., had in it neither legal sanction nor wholesome restraining definition. Even the prophetical activity had shown itself, notwithstanding the powerful reproofs of the Prophets, insufficient to check the ever-spreading corruption. So the Deuteronomist decided, summoning to his aid together the might of both the Prophet and the Lawgiver, to make the attempt, through a new set of laws laid down in the name and spirit of Moses, to give a new and firmer foundation to the theocratic state.

But the people was already sunk too low. The destructive tendency to idolatry and to other heathen practices had already struck its roots too deep; dissoluteness of morals had already insinuated itself too much everywhere, and cankered and poisoned everything. The people broke again the newly-made covenant; and so the destruction, threatened by the author as Divine punishment for the repeated breach of the covenant, must no longer be withheld; the state was overthrown and brought to an end by the Chaldæans. On its reconstitution after the return from captivity, it was at first grounded firmly and strongly upon the Law-not that of Deuteronomy only, but the whole Law-Book, already considered as Mosaic. The strong distinction between Priests and Levites was again made of force according to the old legislation. . On the other hand, the restriction of

the public worship to the temple-service at Jerusalem was strictly carried out, and attained now its end, to keep the people from idolatry. But there arose now other dangers for the religious life of the people, springing out of this very strict and careful observance of the Law. It sank more and more into dead formalism, and stiffened into this by degrees, till through new chastisements, and at last through the complete cessation of an independent Israelitish state, the whole O. T. 'kingdom of God' drew near its end, in order that the far higher and eternal divine kingdom of the N. T. covenant might step into its place.

875. But this book also it is, in point of fact, which forms, so to speak, the most living portion, the very sum and substance, of the whole Pentateuch. When we speak of the Law of Moses,' we mean chiefly the book of Deuteronomy. And we cannot but remember that it is this book also, which is quoted again and again, with special emphasis, in the New Testament: e.g.

'He answered and said, It is written, Thou shalt not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God,' Matt.iv.4;

'Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God,' v.7;

'Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan! for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve,' v.10.

Here we have quotations from D.viii.3,vi.16,vi.13,x.20. And it is well known that there are many other passages in the Gospels and Epistles, in which this book is referred to, and in some of which Moses is expressly mentioned as the writer of the words in question, e.g. Acts iii.22, Rom.x.19. And, though it is true that, in the texts above quoted, the words are not, indeed, ascribed to Moses, but are merely introduced with the phrase, 'It is written,' yet in Matt.xix.7 the Pharisees refer to a passage in Deut.xxiv.1 as a law of Moses, and our Lord in His reply, v.8, repeats their language, and practically adopts it as correct, and makes it His own.

876. Here, then, we come again upon one of the grave questions, which inevitably must be stirred in the course of this enquiry. We dare not, I repeat, shut our eyes to the plain facts which lie before us, and prove, as it seems, beyond a reasonable doubt, the later origin of the book of Deuteronomy. And I can only repeat that there appears to me no other possible solution of this difficulty than that which I have suggested in each of my former volumes, which has been severely censured by many devout persons, but which will now, I trust, after consideration of the authorities produced in the Preface to the present volume, be admitted to be consistent with the most perfect orthodoxy, and certainly not deserving to be spoken of as 'heretical' and blasphemous.'

877. I say, then, again, once more, whatever other questions may be raised by the progress of scientific criticism, this difficulty vanishes for all who believe that our Lord Jesus Christ was born into the world to be a true Son of Man,'-that He was made like unto His brethren,'- that He was tried in all points like as we are,' was weak, and faint, and weary, as we are, was hungry and thirsty, as we are,--that He was subject also to all the other limitations of our nature, mental and spiritual, as well as bodily, needing food for the mind as well as for the body, and growing, like any other of the sons of men, in wisdom and knowledge as He