The Bible: what it is Part 12

Verses 13 and 14. I should not notice these verses, were it not for the gross absurdity of the 14th. The 13th contains a very useful sanitary regulation, although hardly worthy of a place in a revelation from the infinite and eternal ruler of the universe; but to suppose that G.o.d would perceive the 'unclean thing, and turn away,' is really too ridiculous to need further remark.

Verse 18. Why is a dog an abomination to the Lord? Dogs are of all animals the least likely to be an abomination to any one. They are more faithful to man than any animal except, perhaps, the horse. They possess better organisations than the majority of the brute family, and one is at a loss to understand the reason for this dislike {86} to a dog on the part of the Deity, especially when we remember that the same Deity is alleged to be the creator of the dog, and of all other animals.

Verses 19 and 20. All men ought to be considered as brethren. These verses are further evidence, if any were needed, that this is not a revelation from 'one G.o.d and Father of us all;' if it were, he surely would teach that all are brethren, and that none should be treated as strangers. Until we can call each man brother, and can set aside cla.s.s distinctions, we shall never be able to realise a good state of society.

*Chapter xxiv., v. 2. In Leviticus, chap, xxi., v. 7, it is said, 'Neither shall they take a woman put away from her husband.' These contradictory precepts can scarcely be from the same man; still less can they be from the same G.o.d.

Verse 16 has been referred to on page 56.

*Chapter xvvii, vv. 2 to 8. Here is a command for the elders to write 'all the words of this law,' and it is very clear that whether Moses, or any one else wrote, that it would be utterly impossible for a few men to carry the ark about, if it were filled with as many stones as would be required to contain the whole of the Pentateuch. The plastered stones would only suffice for a stationary people. Dr. Giles observes:--

'That the Hebrew legislator should deliver to his countrymen two tables of stone on which the princ.i.p.al heads of the law were engraved, is consistent with all the information which history supplies concerning those early times and the practice of other nations. But if we suppose, a book of such length and bulk as the Pentateuch to have been given at the same time to the Israelites, what becomes of the two tables of stone? Where was the necessity that these, also, should be given? It was not that they might be set up as monuments visible to the whole people, and as exponents of the heads of a law, which the written books would develop more fully, for the two tables of stone were never set up at all; they were kept in the ark of the covenant, and there is no mention made of their ever being taken out, not even when the temple of Solomon was built, when they might, with propriety, have been set up in some public place if this had been the use for which they were originally designed. But no such use is hinted at by the writer, nor were they originally given by G.o.d for such a purpose, as is manifest from their size, for when Moses came down from the Mount, he held the two tables in his hand, which he could not have done if they were of the usual size of monuments made to be set up in public.

'But the supposition that the two tables of stone were intended to be set up as monuments is refuted by the fact that other stones were actually set by Joshua, according to a command given by Moses, and that on them was inscribed a copy of the law of Moses. The original injunction of Moses is found in the 27th chapter of Deuteronomy, vv.

1-8.

'"And Moses, with the elders of Israel, commanded the people, saying, 'Keep all the commandments which I command you this day. And it shall be on the day when ye shall pa.s.s over Jordan unto the {87} land which the Lord thy G.o.d giveth thee that thou shalt set thee up great stones, and plaster them with plaster: and thou shalt write upon them all the words of this law when thou art pa.s.sed over, that thou mayst go in unto the land which the Lord thy G.o.d giveth thee--a land that floweth with milk and honey, as the Lord G.o.d of thy fathers hath promised thee. Therefore, it shall be when ye he gone over Jordan that ye shall set up these stones which I command you this day in Mount Ehal, and thou shalt plaster them with plaster. And there shalt thou build an altar unto the Lord thy G.o.d, an altar of stones: thou shalt not lift up an iron tool upon them. Thou shalt build the altar of the Lord thy G.o.d on whole stones: and thou shalt offer burnt offerings thereon unto the Lord thy G.o.d: and thou shalt offer peace offerings, and shalt eat there and rejoice before the Lord thy G.o.d. And thou shalt write upon the stones all the words of this law very plainly."

'The fulfilment of the command is related in the 8th chapter of Joshua, vv. 30-32:--

'"Then Joshua built an altar unto the Lord G.o.d of Israel in Mount Ebal, as Moses, the servant of the Lord, commanded the children of Israel, as it is written in the book of the law of Moses, an altar of whole stones, over which no man hath lift up any iron: and they offered thereon burnt offerings unto the Lord and sacrificed peace offerings. And he wrote there upon the stones a copy of the law of Moses, which he wrote in the presence of the children of Israel. And all Israel, and their elders, and officers, and their judges stood on this side the ark and on that side before the priests the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the Lord, as well as the stranger, as he that was born among them; half of them over against Mount Gerizim, and half of them over against Mount Ebal; as Moses, the servant of the Lord, had commanded before, that they should bless the people of Israel. And afterwards he read all the words of the law, the blessings and cursings, according to all that is written in the book of the law. There was not a word of all that Moses commanded, which Joshua read not before all the congregation of Israel, with the women, and the little ones, and the strangers that were conversant among them."

'This narrative is remarkable, for it commemorates a public solemnity held for no other purpose than that the laws of Moses might be impressed on the minds of the Jewish people. The writer also tells us that it was held in accordance with the book of Moses, and yet he does not tell us that the book of Moses was produced on that occasion, though we are to suppose that it was in existence. Yet something is then done which seems to prove by implication that there was no such book at all at that time.

Joshua is said to have engraved on certain stones a copy of the law of Moses, and afterwards to have read all the words of the law, and the concluding paragraph relates that "there was not a word of all that Moses commanded, which Joshua read not before all the congregation of Israel." Must we, then, suppose that the whole of the Pentateuch was inscribed on those {88} stones by Joshua? What could be the use of inscribing the historical parts of the Pentateuch on those stones, or reading them afterwards to the people if the object was simply to admonish them that they should observe the law of Moses? It is more probable that an inscription, much shorter than the whole of the Pentateuch, was carved upon those stones, and as no mention is made of any book at all on the same occasion, we have a negative proof that no such book was in existence at that time.

'The delivery of the two tables renders it unlikely that any other writing was bequeathed by Moses to the Israelitish people, particularly as the age in wnich Moses lived precedes by many centuries the times in which books, as far as we know of them, can be proved to have been written.'

*Chapter xxviii. The remarks on page 61 apply more forcibly here. In this chapter Moses exerts himself to the utmost to depict the blessings attendant upon obedience to the laws; he uses the most expressive words he can command to define the rewards which G.o.d will give his chosen people, but he never dreams of a crown in heaven, or of an eternal life of happiness after death. If man possessed an immortal soul in the days of Moses, it is certain that Moses was ignorant of its existence. When threatening the people with terrible punishments if they disobeyed the laws, when using terms which would degrade the Deity into a cruel and horrible monster, when speaking of events which, if they had occurred, would have made life a burthen, when using the most vindictive and diabolical curses, Moses never hinted at a h.e.l.l fire in which men were burned 'for ever and ever,' by the fire which is never quenched, and, at the same time, further tormented by the worm that never dieth. The doctrines of the existence of a soul, and of its punishment or reward in a future state, were entirely unknown to the Jewish lawgiver.

Verse 23. Here the heaven is to be 'bra.s.s,' and the earth 'iron.' In Leviticus, chap, xxvi., v. 19, the heaven is to be 'iron,' and the earth 'bra.s.s.'

Verse 58. Is evidently written long after the time of Moses, because at the commencement of his oration, Moses tells the elders to write 'the words' after they have crossed the Jordan, and this verse, therefore, could have formed no part of the original speech of Moses.

Verse 61. The same applies here.

*Chapter xxix., v. 23. 'Admah and Zeboim, which the Lord overthrew in his anger.' We have no account of this anywhere in the Pentateuch. It has been a.s.sumed (but I am unable to learn on what ground) that these cities were destroyed at the same time with Sodom and Gomorrah.

Verses 25 and 28. Dr. Giles observes that in these verses 'are described the evils that should happen to the Israelites in case of their not observing the law which had been given by Moses:--

'"Then men shall say, Because they have forsaken the covenant of the Lord G.o.d of their fathers which he made with them when he brought them forth out of the land of Egypt For they went and {89} served other G.o.ds, whom they knew not, and whom he had not given unto them. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against this land, to bring upon it all the curses that are written in this Book. And the Lord rooted them out of their land in anger and in wrath, and in great indignation, and cast them into another land, as it is this day."'

'Here is an allusion to the great downfall of the first Israelitish monarchy, too plain to be interpreted as a supposed case, merely of a misfortune which only _might_ befall them if they should be disobedient to G.o.d's commandments. The impression which the words irresistibly leave on the mind is, that the calamity of defeat and transportation into a strange country, had actually befallen them when those words were written.'

*Chapter x.x.xi., w. 9, 19, 22, 24, and 26. These verses are, I believe, sometimes quoted as evidence of the authorship of the Pentateuch; but it has been urged in opposition, that it is idle to quote a work, while its authenticity is denied (_vide_ Watson's 'Apology for the Bible,' p.

183); and that the terms 'book' and 'volume' are not applicable to the age in which Moses lived (when the mode of writing was on thin slabs of plastered stone). Papyrus is not once spoken of, or alluded to, in the Pentateuch, and could not have been known to Moses. It is also a.s.serted, that the 'book of the law' cannot possibly be identified with the Pentateuch, or even with the Book of Deuteronomy. (See remarks on page 7, and also Dr. Cooper's letter to Professor Silliman, pp. 29 and 38.)

*Chapter x.x.xii. This is a song full of Oriental hyperboles. The language attributed to the Deity is absurd in the extreme, if read literally.

Verse 4. The words 'He is the rock,' are omitted, both in the Douay and Breeches Bible.

Verse 8. 'When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.' This verse is not very explicit; but if it means that G.o.d had apportioned the promised land to the Israelites, it then becomes a curious question as to how the Canaanites ever became possessed thereof. In a marginal note to my Breeches Bible, I find these words:--'When G.o.d by his providence divided the world, he lent for a time that portion to the Canaanites, which should after be an inheritance for all his people Israel.' If this be true, I can only add, that when G.o.d reclaimed his loan, he, like a modern Shylock, took a great quant.i.ty of blood as interest for his 'pound of flesh.' It does not appear, anywhere, that the Canaanites ever were informed of this strange tenure. Instead of holding the land as a loan, they looked upon it as their country, but suddenly found (if the Bible be correct) that G.o.d had 'sent them a strong delusion, that they might believe a lie.' (_Vide_ 2 Thessaloni-ans, chap, ii., v. 11.)

Verses 12 to 15. The Israelites, according to the Pentateuch, never had much of the 'honey, oil, b.u.t.ter of kine, milk of sheep, fat of lambs, and rams, and goats, and fat of kidneys of wheat,' during the {90} life of Moses; on the contrary, it is alleged that they had no bread, but fed on manna in lieu of it; that they were short of water, and were without flesh meat, having to subst.i.tute a diet of quails.

Verses 15 and 17. These verses are remarkable as containing the singular of the plural word [------] (Aleim, or Elohim), and have given rise to much controversy amongst the learned Divines, because it is apparent to even the most prejudiced, that if the singular word [------] or [------]

(Aloe, or Ale), signifies 'G.o.d,' the plural must mean more G.o.ds than one.

Verses 18, 30, and 31. For the word 'rock,' in these verses, the Douay and Breeches Bible each have the word 'G.o.d.' The Hebrew word is [------]

(tsorem), which, Parkhurst tells me, is a plural noun, and 'a name of certain idols, representative of the heavens, under the attributes of compressors, givers of strength or firmness.' This would convey an impression that the Jewish religion was strongly connected with Tsabaism.

Verses 20 to 43. I shall not attempt to comment on the language attributed in these verses to the 'infinite, immutable, and merciful Father of us all;' it is quite sufficient for me to repeat the terrible threat from a G.o.d of love, 'to devour flesh with his sword, and to make his arrows drunk with blood;' and that 'the sword without and the terror within shall destroy the young man, and the virgin, the suckling, and the old man with grey hairs.

Verses 48 to 52. It is impossible to ascertain what offence was committed by Moses. In Numbers, chap, xx., we find that the Lord threatened to punish Moses and Aaron on account of their unbelief; but it is evident some portion of the Book must be lost, as the particular instance of unbelief is not mentioned.

*Chapter x.x.xiii., v. i., has been noticed on page 6.

Verse 2. 'He shined forth from Mount Paran.' This is an expression more applicable to the sun, in a Tsabaistic form of worship; so also is verse 26. 'There is none like the G.o.d of Jeshurun, who rideth upon the heaven, in thy help, and in his excellency on the sky. The eternal G.o.d is thy refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms.' The Douay reads, 'There is no other G.o.d like the G.o.d of the lightest; he that is mounted upon the heaven is thy helper. By his magnificence, the clouds run hither and thither; his dwelling is above, and underneath are the everlasting arms.'

Verse 5. In our version are these words: 'And he was King in Jeshurun.'

The Douay reads, 'He shall be king with the most right.' The Breeches Bible has it--'Then he was amongst the righteous people as king.'

Simeon is altogether forgotten in this chapter. Although it is headed 'The blessings of the twelve tribes,' only eleven are mentioned.

*Chapter x.x.xiv., vv. 1 to 4, identifies the land which G.o.d swore he would give (but which he did not give) to the Jews for ever.

Verse 2. Which was the 'sea' mentioned here; it would have required good powers of vision to have seen the Mediterranean.

The following is from the pen of Dr. Giles:-- {91} 'As it is impossible for a writer to relate his own death, those who maintain that the Pentateuch is the work of Moses, make an exception in favour of the last chapter. Dr. Gray has the following remarks upon this subject:--

'"The account of the death and burial of Moses, and some other seemingly posthumous particulars described in this chapter, have been reduced to prove that it could not have been written by Moses; and, in all probability, these circ.u.mstances may have been inserted by Joshua, to complete the history of this ill.u.s.trious prophet; or were afterwards added by Samuel, or some prophet who succeeded him. They were admitted by Ezra as authentic, and we have no reason to question the fidelity of the account."

'This language is authoritative and dictatorial. Truth, when questioned, comes out purer and brighter for the ideal through which it has pa.s.sed: whereas error is scorched and withered by the touch of criticism. The chapter before us is admitted by all not to have been written by Moses.

Why, then, was it ever attached to the Book of Moses, without some strong mark, to denote that it was only an appendix? It cannot be allowed that Joshua, Samuel, or Ezra, could connive at such a deception.

There is internal evidence that neither Joshua nor Samuel made this addition to the Pentateuch; for the word Nabi, rendered in English prophet, indicates an age later than that of Samuel. We learn from the 1st Book of Samuel, chap, ix., v. 9, which was written after Samuel's death, that he who

'Is now called a prophet was before time a seer.

'If, therefore, the x.x.xiv. chapter of Deuteronomy had been written before, or in the time of Samuel, Moses would have been designated as a seer [in Hebrew, Roech], and not Nabi, a prophet. This exculpates both Joshua and Samuel from having added to the Book of Moses without mark of such addition. There are also other indications in the same chapter that Joshua could not have written it; for he would hardly have written of himself that Joshua the son of Nun was "full of the spirit of wisdom;"

neither would he have said, "There arose not a prophet _since_ in Israel like unto Moses;" for there was no other prophet to whom Moses could be compared except Joshua himself. The word _since_ implies that many years had pa.s.sed since the death of Moses, and that many prophets had arisen, none of whom could be placed in comparison with him who led them out of Egypt. Moreover, the words, "no man knoweth of his sepulchre"--i.e., the sepulchre of Moses--"unto this day," are another proof that the chapter was not added by Joshua, for they imply that a considerable s.p.a.ce of time had elapsed, during which the sepulchre of Moses remained unknown.

As Joshua died only twenty-five years after Moses, these words coming from his mouth would lose half their force, and would, probably, also convey an untruth; for we cannot believe that the great Hebrew legislator was buried clandestinely; or that Joshua, the next in command, and almost his equal, could be ignorant where his body was laid.' {92} The Book we have last examined professes in part to be a repet.i.tion by Moses, of various events mentioned in the previous Books; but as there are omissions of former statements, and additions of statements, before left unnoticed, as well as positive disagreements between some portions of the various texts, we are placed in the position of being compelled to deem one or the other as less worthy of our credence. This is at the best an embarra.s.sing position; but our embarra.s.sment is increased when we are gravely a.s.sured that both statements are from the pen of the same writer. We are tempted to doubt whether in an age when writing was a task of great difficulty (both from the inferiority of the materials then used, and the general ignorance of the people), any man would be likely to indulge in such long repet.i.tions as those here found, and our inquietude is nowise allayed by the additional a.s.surance that the Book is a revelation from G.o.d, especially when we read the list of terrible curses threatened in his name, but we feel that it is impossible a revelation from a loving G.o.d could include the directions for wholesale slaughterings of the human family, such as contained in this Book; or that an immutable G.o.d could have revealed that he had repented or changed his mind towards his people. There is no feature connected with the Book of Deuteronomy which enables us to place it in a better position than the four 'Books previously examined; its historical and educational character stands on the same basis. In quitting the Pentateuch, I must ask several questions of my readers.

1st. Are you satisfied that Moses is not its author? I have cone with you carefully through every verse, and nowhere have we round anything which should induce us to regard Moses as the author of the first four books; with regard to a portion of the fifth Book, it is possible that a few scattered phrases may lead some to conclude that Moses might have been its author. But this supposition is dissipated when we ascertain that whatever books of the law the Jews possessed, were burnt either prior to, or during their captivity under the Persians. (See 2 Esdras, chap, xiv., v. 21.) 'For thy law is burnt, therefore no man knoweth the things that are done of thee, or the works that shall be done.' I submit, therefore, that there is no evidence whatever to support the hypothesis that Moses is the author of the Pentateuch; against the proposition the evidence a.s.sumes a very strong character.

There are numerous verses which I have specially noticed, which it is utterly impossible Moses could have written, as they relate to events which transpired after his death; and there are other pa.s.sages which are very unlikely to have been the product of his pen, from the mode of reference to himself.

There are numerous pa.s.sages directly contradictory one of the other, and which compel the belief that more than one man must have been concerned in writing the Books.

The incoherency of many portions of the Books betrays the fact, that they have been compiled from various ma.n.u.scripts, and that in some pa.s.sages due attention was not paid by the compiler to the manner in which he joined the different doc.u.ments. {93} The reference to the book of the wars of the Lord admits the existence of other doc.u.ments at the time Numbers was written; and the pa.s.sages referred to on pages 76 and 77, are evidence that doc.u.ments have existed containing more complete accounts of the life and times of Moses, than those we are commenting on.