that the Book of Deuteronomy was written, either in the latter part of Manasseh's reign, or in the early part of Josiah's. their supplies, not surely by the laborious land-journey, but by ships; and so it is not improbable that he possessed already a rather considerable navy, and that Pharaoh-Necho, of whom HERODOTUS tells us, ii.159, that he built two fleets, only carried on in this instance, as in others, his father's undertakings. That, however, through Psammetichus the Egyptian kingdom, altogether weakened tending to its fall, suddenly attained to new through internal dissension, and, as it seemed, power, and raised itself to such might that it became very dangerous to its neighbours, 871. EWALD, RIEHM, BLEEK, KUENEN, and others, are of opinion that the most probable supposition is that the book was written in the latter part of Manasseh's reign; DE WETTE, VON BOHLEN, KNOBEL, &c. (with whom we agree, for reasons which shall be pre-and even, in course of time, was destrucsently stated), place its composition in tive to the Jews, 2K.xxiii.29, is well known. the reign of Josiah. The difference in Since, however, at that time the Assyrian this point of detail is, of course, incon- power, after the death of Esarhaddon II, was siderable, and of no importance what- manifestly tending more and more to its end, while Babylon was not yet an independent ever with reference to the main question, mighty kingdom, our writer might probably whether or not this Book of Deutero-expect the greater danger for the kingdom of nomy was written by Moses. The above able critics may vary within a limit of thirty or forty years in fixing the precise date of its composition; but they are all agreed in assigning it to the same later period of Jewish history. And this, indeed, may be ranked among the most certain results of modern scientific Biblical criticism. 872. RIEHM, p. 98-105, fixes the age of the Deuteronomist, with EWALD, in the latter half of Manasseh's reign, and writes as follows: Judah from the rejuvenescent Egyptian power, especially since the army of Psammetichus, which was besieging Ashdod, was in such threatening neighbourhood. That Psammetichus sought and employed strange soldiers, and particularly Arabians, we know from ancient authorities. If, therefore, at any time, the possibility existed of an alliance of the above kind between Judæa and Egypt, it existed in the time of Psammetichus. We must then, with EWALD, assume that Deuteronomy was written during the reign of Psammetichus, ... in the latter half of the reign of Manasseh. Who, however, was the author, it is impos How could sible to say. The assumption of EWALD, that That the author must have been a very In D.xxviii. 68, among the punishments threatened to the people in case of their departing from Jehovah, this is threatened as the sorest and last-that Jehovah will carry them back to Egypt in ships, so that they would be sold there to their enemies into shameful and endless slavery. Hence it appears, first, that, in the time of the Deuteronomist, Egypt had become again so strong that he might expect the full destruction of the Israelitish State not from the Assyrians (to whom v.36,48-50, refer,)--but from the Egyptians, and, secondly, since a removal in ships is threatened, that the Egyptians were at that time already powerful at sea. Lastly, it follows from the passage about the king, D.xvii.16, which forbids the king to 'cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses, that at that time already the Egyptian kings sought and employed foreign soldiers; so that the Israelitish king could only obtain horses out of Egypt upon the condition that he, on his part, should send Israelitish footsoldiers (comp. Is.xxxvi.8), and place them at the disposal of the Egyptian king. All this suits Egypt only during the reign of Psammetichus, but does not suit the state of Egypt before that reign. Certainly, we cannot maintain from ancient testimony that Psammetichus had a remarkable fleet. But, since he besieged Ashdod for twenty-nine years, (HEROD.ii.157,) he must have brought the troops which he marched thither, and Ans. (i) The moral difficulty remains the eminent man, in a spiritual point of view, is certain, and equally so that he, on one side, was well acquainted with the ancient legislation, and, on the other, was influenced by the writings of the earlier Prophets, and himself highly gifted with the prophetical spirit. And so one might, perhaps, assume that the author was a Priest, who, however, was at the same time conscious of a prophetic gift. More nearly to determine, is impossible without arbitrariness. That we do not know so great and very remarkable a man ought not to perplex us, since it is just the same with us in the case of the not less remark able author of the second part of Isaiah, and since analogous phenomena are not wanting in the New-Testament literature, (e.g. Ep. to the Hebrews). same whether Jeremiah, or any other eminent | the living Deuteronomist, may have producea person, or prophetical Priest,' of those days this change of relations, which ended, howwrote the Book of Deuteronomy. ever, fatally for the young king. (ii) It seems to us almost incredible that so great a writer as the Deuteronomist evidently a master-mind, and a man of political as well as religious activity,-should have so completely disappeared from history, and left no other work of a similar kind behind him. (vi) We shall consider fully in the proper place the negative arguments of KÖNIG, as well as the positive indications, however strong or weak, of JEREMIAH'S authorship. 873. The following argument, how(iii) The case of the later Isaiah is not a ever, tends strongly (in our opinion) parallel case, since he lived in the midst of to fix the composition of Deuteronomy the confusion and distress of the Captivity, in the early years of Josiah. of which no historical records have come If it really was written in Manasseh's in a well-known age, of which distinct ac-time, we are then met by the following counts are left to us, possibly by the hand of difficulties. In that case, the author down to us; whereas the Deuteronomist lived Jeremiah himself. (iv) The Epistle to the Hebrews is still less a case in point, especially if written by ST. PAUL, since he left many other signs of his activity behind him. But many eminent ever he may have been: whereas the Deuteronomist must have been almost the only writer of great eminence in his own age; and we cannot but suppose that so copious an author must have composed other writings, and that some of these would have come down writers lived in the time of this writer, who to us. (v) While admitting that the Book may have been written, as far as internal evidence shows, in the latter half of Manasseh's reign, yet it seems to us more probable, from the same internal evidence, that its author lived in a yet later age, perhaps in the earlier part of Josiah's time, for the following reasons:(a) The expressions in D.xxviii.49,50,Jehovah shall bring a nation against thee from far, from the end of the earth, as the eagle flieth, a nation whose tongue thou shalt not understand, a nation of fierce countenance, &c.'-seem hardly to refer to the weak and sickly Assyrian power, manifestly tending more and more to its end,' but to the young and vigorous Babylonian kingdom; and this last, as RIEHM says, was not sufficiently developed till towards the end of Manasseh's days; (8) We do not know for certain that Psammetichus had notable fleets; but we do know this of his son Pharaoh-Necho, who was reign ing at the time when Josiah came to the throne; (y) The Deuteronomist appears to have doubted from which of these two great powers the danger was most likely to come; which corresponds to the fact that Pharaoh Necho, king of Egypt, went up against the king of Assyria (? the Babylonian power) to the river Euphrates,' on which occasion Josiah also went up,-apparently, to fight with the Egyptians, and was killed, 2K.xxiv.29, in the thirty-ninth year of his life and the thirty first of his reign; (8) The book of the Law' was found in the eighteenth year of his reign, thirteen years before; and previously to that time Josiah seems to have been on friendly terms with Egypt, Jer.ii.18,36, and, perhaps, was lending soldiers, and obtaining horses, in the very way condemned in D.xvii. 16. It is probable that this very language of Deuteronomy, or rather (as we suppose) the remonstrances of - may have placed it in the Temple in Manasseh's lifetime, without the knowledge of anyone, which of course is conceivable. But then he must have gone his way, leaving so valuable a fruit of so much abour to the chances of the future,- -or, we may say, to the overruling of Providence, without communicating to anyone the fact of its existence. And, further, he must have died without betraying the secret,without showing any personal interest in the success of his great enterprise, or caring to see any result of it in his own days, nay, without even making any provision against the possibility of the Book itself being neglected, destroyed, or lost, while it lay unknown and unheeded in the Temple, during the latter portion of Manasseh's idolatrous reign. For we take no account of the Chronicler's story of Manasseh's repentance, 2Ch.xxxiii. 18,19, of which the Book of Kings says nothing. 874. Or, if the writer himself survived the reign of Manasseh, and the short reign of Amon, and so was living in the early years of Josiah,-or if any one was then living to whom the writer, before his death, had communicated his secret,-it seems very difficult to account for the long and total silence with respect to the existence of this Book, which was maintained during seventeen years of Josiah's reign, when the king's docile piety and youth would have encouraged the production of such a Book, if it really existed, and there was such imperative necessity for that Reformation to be begun as soon as possible, with a view to which the Book itself was written. 875. Thus it seems to us, on the CHAPTER XXV. CONCLUDING REMARKS. above grounds only, most reasonable to May it be that the two writers are suppose that the book was in process of identical,—that among the prophecies composition during these first seventeen of Jeremiah, during the first five years years of Josiah's reign. The youth of of his labours, may be reckoned the the prince his piety-his willingness addresses, which are here delivered to follow the teaching of the Prophets under the name of Moses? around him-gave every encouragement for such an attempt being made to bring about the great change that was needed. Possibly some years of Josiah's reign had passed before the work was begun, though we can scarcely doubt that it must have taken some time for its completion. Still two or three years, at most, might suffice for this. And during that interval, however short or long, we may conceive insertions to have been made from time to time, as fresh ideas occurred to the writer; and thus we may account, in some measure, for the numerous repetitions of the same sentiment, by which the book is characterised. Independently of this "free handling' of the earlier records, the man who could conceive, and carry out so effectively, the idea of adding another book to the existing Tetrateuch, must have been, indeed, a remarkable person. A writer of such originality, power, and eloquence, of such earnest piety, such ardent patriotism, such tender human affections, must have surely filled a very prominent position in the age in which he lived. As we have said, he can hardly have disappeared so completely from the stage of Jewish history, in an age when historical records were diligently kept, without leaving behind any other trace of his existence and activity than this Book of Deuteronomy. That Jeremiah lived in this very age we know, and that he began to prophesy in the thirteenth year of king Josiah,' Jer.i.2, four or five years before this Book was found in the Temple. And we have also seen, as our investigations have advanced, not a few very striking indications of a close resemblance between the language of Jeremiah and that of the Deuteronomist. 877. 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. 878. 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. 6 879. 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 | When we speak of the 'Law of Moses,' many made plain for the first time, we mean chiefly the Book of Deutethough long well-known to a few scho-ronomy. And we cannot but remember lars here in England, and to very many that it is this Book also, which is quoted on the Continent,-that, whatever may again and again, with special emphasis, be true of the rest of the Pentateuch, in the New Testament: e.g.the Book of Deuteronomy, at all events, was not the work of Moses. We must accept this, I repeat, with all its important consequences. 880. 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 cars of Joshua,' E.xvii.14; hovah... And Moses wrote all the words of JeIand 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. 881. 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.' '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 shall 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. the above are quoted from Deuteronomy, are they the less true-have they less binding power upon the conscience-because they were written by some later prophet, and not by Moses? Are they true only because they are written' in this 'Book of the Law'? Are they not rather true, because they are true in themselves, by whomsoever written or spoken,-eternally and unchangeably true, and, as such, come home at once, with living power and authority, to the hearts and consciences of living men? 883. When, however, such words as 884. It is written' in the Bible,'Truly the light is sweet, and a pleasant thing it is for the eyes to behold the sun,' Eccl.xi.7. But is the light sweet to our eyes 882. But this Book also it is, in point because it is thus stated in the Bible of fact, which forms, so to speak, the-by Solomon, as is generally believed, most living portion, the very sum and writing under Divine inspiration? Or substance, of the whole Pentateuch. would it be less sweet, if the results of modern criticism should show that the | conflict at once with the plain lessons of the Gospel, and with those eternal principles of right and wrong, which the Great Creator has planted within us, in respect of which it is specially true that man is made in the image,' and after the likeness,' of God. Book of Ecclesiastes, though ascribed to the Son of David, king in Jerusalem,' Eccl.i.1, was not written by Solomon, but by some unknown author long after the Captivity? Is not the light sweet to our eyes, because our gracious God and Father has made the Sun, and given us our visual powers, that we may open our eyes and they shall be filled with light, and we shall behold the glorious beauty of His universe? 885. And is the Light of Truth only sweet to us - does it only exist for us-because we find the bright reflection of it in the Bible? Is it not rather joy for us to know that God's Truth exists eternally, and shines like the Sun in the spiritual heavens, and we, His children upon earth, have a spiritual sense and spiritual eyesight given us, to which this Light of the inner man is 'sweet,' by which we can 'behold' its brightness,-whether it comes to us direct from the Father of Lights' in some moment of blessed inspiration, or shines upon us as reflected from the pages of the Bible, or, rather, as refracted through the human media, by which in the Bible the Word of God' is given to us? 886. For will it be any longer maintained, in this age of scientific enlightenment, that all our hopes for eternity' depend upon every 'line' of the Bible being vouched by Divine authority as infallibly true? Is the statement, that 'the hare chews the cud,' to be received as true, because written down in Leviticus and Deuteronomy? Or would it have become true, if quoted, as it might have been, in the New Testament, as part of the Law of Moses'? No one, surely, with the known facts of science before him, will hesitate to give the answer to such a question. 887. But, if we are obliged to allow that some portions of the teaching of the Bible cannot be regarded as having Divine authority,-as being 'faithful' and trustworty' statements, 'infallibly true,'-because they contradict the known facts of science, there are surely others which we must equally reject, because they are at variance, with the laws of our moral being, because they 887. Must we not feel, for instance, that the Eternal Law of Justice and Equity, which God himself has written with His own Finger upon the tables with such commands as these quoted of our hearts, is directly at variance below,-that these cannot, at all events, be regarded as utterances of the blessed Will of God,—that the writer of them, though an inspired man, cannot certainly have written thus by Divine inspiration? e.g. (i) D.xxiii.1, which excludes from the congregation of Jehovah one mutilated, perhaps in helpless infancy; while those, by whose agency the act in question was encouraged or, perhaps, performed, are allowed free access to the Sanctuary; (ii) D.xxiii.2, which excludes in like manner an innocent base-born child, but takes no account of the vicious parent; that a 'stubborn and rebellious son' (iii) D.xxi. 18-21, which commands shall be stoned to death, when oftentimes the father and mother, who by their bad example had corrupted, or by their faulty training had ruined, their child, deserved rather to suffer punishment; 888. So, too, D.xx.10-15 orders that any city of any distant people, with whom Israel might be at war, shall first be summoned to surrender; and, if it will make no peace on condition of all the people becoming tributaries and doing service to Israel, shall then be besieged, and with Divine help captured; and then it is written into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male very Thus |