Page images
PDF
EPUB

I. THE EXPULSION OF THE CANAANITES.

And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Sichem. uuto the plain of Moreb. And the Canaanite was then in the land. Gen. iix, 6.

The observation, which concludes this passage, is unmeaning, if the Canaanites were still in the land when the book of Genesis was written. As the Canaanites were one of the nations against whom Joshua fought after Moses was dead, it is evident that Moses could not have written these words, but that they must be referred to an author who lived when the Canaanites had been exterminated. In the 13th chapter of Genesis, verse 7, is a passage of similar import :

And there was a sucife between the herdmen of Abram's caitle and the herdmen of Lot's cattle and the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled then in the land.

:

The inferential force of those passages, proving that they were written after the expulsion of those tribes from the Holy Land, has not escaped the notice of those who maintain the Pentateuch to be the work of Moses. The explanation, which Dr Graves gives of them, cannot be listened to for an instant.

It does not follow that the Canaanites have been expelled when this clause was written: it may mean no more than that the Canaanites were even at that time in the land, which God had promised to give the seed of Abram. This observation, in the foner place, may have been intended to illustrate the faith of Abram, who did not hesitate to obey the command of God, by sojourning in this strange land, though even then inhabited by a powerful nation, totally unconnected with, if not averse to, him; a circumstance intimated by Abram's remonstrance to Lot, to avoid an enmity between them, "because they were brethren :" as if he had said, It would be extreme imprudence in us, who are brethren, who have no connexion or friendship but with each other, to allow any dissension to arise between us, surrounded as we are by strangers, indifferent or even averse to us, who might rejoice at our quarrel, and take advantage of it to our common mischief: " for the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled" even " then in the laud." Another reason

may be given why Moses noticed the circumstance of the Canaanite and the Perizzite having been then in the land, which he, immediately after the first notice of it, declares that God promised to the seed of Abram. The Israelites might thus be most clearly satisfied, that no change had taken place in the purpose of God to give them this land; when they were reminded, that at the very time this purpose was declared, the very same nation possessed the country, who now occupied it.

This is puerile, and has nothing to do with the question: the introduction of the little word even into the text, without any authority, derived from the original Hebrew, is unwarrantable. The expressions "And the Canaanite was then in the land," "And the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled then in the land," seem to have been introduced by the writer for no other purpose than to shew that the land was at that time occupied by strangers, that Abraham and Lot were not its masters, and therefore were obliged to conduct themselves with more restraint than their descendants who drove out these people and had the land all to themselves. If the translators of our Bible understood the passages in the same sense as Dr Graves, why did they not adopt a less ambiguous mode of rendering it unto English, by inserting the word even, or by placing the word then in such a manner that it might have the force of even then? To give it this meaning, they ought to have placed it the last word in the sentence; thus--“The Canaanite was in the land then." But they have not given it this signification, neither have the translators of the Septuagint and the Vulgate understood the word then in that sense. The former translates the passages thus:

Οἱ δὲ Χαναναίοι τότε κατώκουν τὴν γῆν. Gen. xii, 6.

But the Canaanites then inhabited the land.

Οἱ δὲ Χαναναῖοι καὶ οἱ Φερεζαῖοι τότε κατῴκουν τὴν γῆν. Gen. xiii, 7. But the Canaanites and the Perizzites then inhabited the land.

The Latin Vulgate, also, conveys the same signification :

Chananæus autem tunc erat in terra, Gen. xii. 6.
But the Canaanite was then in the land.

Eo autem tempore Chananæus et Pherezæus habitabant in terra illa. Gen. xiii, 7.

But at that time the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelt in that land.

2. ALLUSION ΤΟ ΤΗΣ KINGS OF ISRAEL.

The next passage which I shall adduce is still more decisive of the age in which the Pentateuch was written. GEN. XXXVI, 30. 31. Duke Dishon, duke Ezer, duke Dishan; there are the dukes that came of Hori, among their dukes in the land of Seir. And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel.

These words prove as plainly as words can express, that since that time there had been kings who reigned over Israel. Now the first king of Israel was Saul, who reigned 500 years after the death of Moses. Yet those who maintain that the Pentateuch is the work of Moses, have endeavoured to explain the passage by supposing that Moses himself was a sort of king over Israel. Thus in the Family Bible is given the following note upon the text now under consideration:

Before there reigned any king over the children of Israel.] Moses, having recently mentioned the promise of God to Jacob, that "kings should come out of his loins," observes it as remarkable, that Esau's posterity should have so many kings, and yet there was no king in Israel when he wrote this book. Moses might have written this by inspiration or he might well write it without a spirit of prophesy; and we might affirm, if necessary, that his meaning is, "All these were kings in Edom, before his own time;" who was, in a certain sense, the first king in Israel, DEUT. xxxiii, 5; for he truly exercised royal authority over them, as Selden observes. Bp Patrick. See the note on Deut. xxxiii, 5. To save the reader the trouble of referring to this note, it is here subjoined.

-he was king in Jeshurun,] Many persons are called kings in Scripture, whom we should rather denominate chiefs or leaders. Such is the sense of the word in this passage. Moses was the chief, the leader, the guide of his people, fulfilling the duties of a "king," but he was not king in the same sense as David or Solomon, was afterwards. This remark reconciles Gen. xxxvi, 31, "These kings reigned in Edom, before

there reigned any king over the children of Israel," for Moses, though be was king in an inferior sense, yet did not reign, in the stronger sense, over the children of Israel, their constitution not being monarchical under him. Calmet's Dictionary. Moses was king; that is, under God the supreme ruler and governor of Israel. Bp Patrick, Dr Wells. Moses was a prince or governor, he gave laws and ruled the people. BpKidder. Was appointed of God the leader and governor of the Israelites. Pyle. Bp Hall.

These notes, so far from reconciling the two texts, actually contradict one another. Moses "was king," yet it was "in an inferior sense," he "was not king in the same sense as David or Solomon." This quibbling style of interpretation is highly censurable in historical criticism, and never has been allowed, where there was not a preconceived notion, or a particular theory to support. The truth, however, of the texts, that have been quoted, lies upon the surface, and common sense will be found to be the best interpreter. The Pentateuch, which informs us that there had been up to that time no king in Israel, was not written until there actually was a king in Israel, and the words, he was king in Jeshurun, applied to Moses, have nothing to do with the matter: they form part of a chapter describing the blessing of Moses, and are in a highly poetical or declamatory style, shewing that king' must be interpreted not literally, but metaphorically, a prince, leader or governor, as it is rendered in that portion of the note which was written by Bishop Kidder, Pyle and Bishop Hall.

6

3. THE CEASING OF THE ΜΑΝΝΑ.

And the children of Israel did eat manna forty years, until they came to a land inhabited; they did eat manna, until they came unto the borders of the land of Canaan.

This passage might perhaps have passed unnoticed, even though Moses died at least one month before the 40 years were expired, as we read in Deuteronomy xxxiv, 8:

And the children of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days &c.

The expression, 40 years, might be understood in round numbers, were it not for the fact that the manna had not ceased when Moses died. This we learn from Joshua, v. 12; that

The manna ceased on the morrow after they had eaten of the old corn of the land; neither had the children of Israel manna any more; but they did eat of the fruit of the land of Canaan that year.

It appears, then, that an allusion is here made to an event, the ceasing of the manna, which is known not to have happened, until after the death of Moses. The relation of its ceasing could not, therefore, have been written by Moses.

4. The sinew that was not eaten.

The thigh of Jacob is said to have shrunk after his interview and wrestling with the angel. The account is found in the XXXIInd chapter of Genesis, verses 31. 32.

And as he passed over Penuel, the sun rose upon him, and he halted upon his thigh. Therefore the children of Israel eat not of the sinew which shrank, which is upon the hollows of the thigh, unto this day: because he touched the hollow of Jacob's thigh in the sinew that shrank.

This reference to a custom still existing among the Israelites seems decidedly to indicate a later date than that of Moses. No one has ventured to assert that the Mosaic law was observed by the Jews before it was instituted by Moses. Now the words of the passage before us seem to shew that the Israelites had, for a very long time, abstained from eating the sinew which shrank. Moses, being conscious that this custom was ordained by himself, could hardly have used such language, or have claimed such great antiquity as the words seem to indicate.

8. The Pentateuch betrays a more advanced state of knowledge than prevailed in the time of Moses.

Many expressions, used in the Pentateuch, indicate a more advanced state of knowledge than was likely to exist

« PreviousContinue »