would not hearken thereto.

And in like manner they sent unto the king of Moab;

but he would not consent.'

589. KURTZ remarks,

iii.p.332:

On the western side the mountains of Edom rise abruptly from the Arabah. There are only a few passes, which are at all accessible from this side, and these can easily be occupied. But, on the east, the mountains slope gently off into a desert tract of tableland, which is still a hundred feet higher, at least, than the desert of El Tih. On this side, therefore, the land was open; and they were not very likely to assume a hostile attitude towards the 600,000 fighting men of Israel. And the very fact that they had offended the Israelites, by opposing them on the western border, would make them more eager to avoid everything that could give occasion for anger or revenge, now that they had come round to the eastern side.

dark basalt which abounds in the district of Bashan. Many of these stone

coffins still exist in these regions, and are used as water-troughs by the inhabitants.

the ruined cities of Bashan, described in 592. For an interesting account of v.4,5, as 'threescore cities, all fenced with high walls, gates, and bars,'which now remain, 'crowded together' in the country S.E. of Damascus, called the Haurân,

of great size, of very high antiquity, and in a high state of preservation,-not mere sites, in many cases not even ruins, but still standing almost uninjured, the streets perfect, the houses perfect, the walls perfect, the stone

590. But this does not dispose of the doors still hanging on their hinges difficulty; for in D.xxiii.3,4, we read-see papers by C. C. GRAHAM, Esq. in the Journal of the Geog. Soc. for 1858 and Cambridge Essays for 1858.

'An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter

into the congregation of Jehovah, because they met you not with bread and with water in the way, when ye came out from Egypt, and because they hired against thee Balaam,

the son of Beor, to curse thee.'

KURTZ and HENGSTENBERG say that D.ii.29 refers to a request to sell bread and water to the Israelites, which the Moabites did, but not out of any kindness, they did it only as a manifestation of their selfish and grasping disposition'; whereas in D.xxiii.4 the charge made against them is that they did not come forward of their own accord to greet their brethren, the Israelites, and meet them' on the way with presents of food. But, whatever Edom may have done in the way of kindness, (of which, however, there is no indication in the book of Numbers,) there is not the least sign in the older story that Balak, king of Moab, and his people, supplied the Israelites with bread and water at all, whether for love or for money.

Doubtless these massive Cyclopean ruins existed in the time of the Deuteronomist, as they do now, and as they probably existed for ages before him.

593. D.iii.29.

This will be evident, when it is considered that, according to the story (162), the facts related in this chapter

-to which the phrase 'at that time' is repeatedly applied-had only just occurred, a few days before, and that they were actually now abiding in the valley over against Bethpeor,' according to the notice in iv.46,

594. D.iv.3,4.

'Your eyes have seen what Jehovah did because of Baal-Peor; for all the men that followed Baal-Peor, Jehovah thy God hath destroyed them from among you. But ye, that did cleave unto Jehovah your God, are alive every one of you this day.'

Dean GRAVES remarks, i.p. 137, 138:The legislator, in order to deter the Jews from idolatry, alludes to this fact. But he in the original narrative not stated, was innotices no circumstance but one which, though finitely the most important to advert to on this occasion, but which no persons but specwith every individual concerned in it, could tators of the fact, and perfectly acquainted possibly feel the truth of.

Upon such frail foundations are based | Planets and to all the Host of Heaven,' many of the much-commended argu- v.5, 'the chariots of the Sun,' v.11. ments of our standard books on the authenticity and historical veracity of the Pentateuch! It is obvious that the whole question at issue is begged in the first instance, when it is taken for granted as a fact, that Moses actually did deliver this address.

*595. D.iv.19.

And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven,

and when thou seest the Sun and the Moon and the Stars, and all the Host of Heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, &c.'

=

The Sun' seems to have been an object of worship in early days among the tribes of Canaan, as is implied by the fact that, the name of the town Beth-shemesh means 'House of the Sun,' corresponding to Beth-el, ‘House of God.' Probably, the Sun was worshipped under the name Baal or Adon, 'Lord,' Jao, &c. (see Part II,p.159,160,) and the Moon under that of 'Astarte.' 596. But the worship of the Host of Heaven' is first named in the history, as one of the sins for which the Ten Tribes were carried captive, in 2K.xvii. 16; and it seems to have been first generally practised in Judah in the reign of Manasseh, the father of Josiah,

2K.xxi.3,5, 2Ch.xxxiii.3, and is explained by KNOBEL, Deut.p.226, to have arisen out of Assyrian and Chaldee influences. Manasseh's grandfather Ahaz may, indeed, have introduced it. as appears from a comparison of 2K. xxiii.12, where we read of—

the altars that were on the top of the upper chamber of Ahaz,'

with Jer.xix.13,

'the houses upon whose roofs they have burnt incense unto all the Host of Heaven.'

597. But it is not mentioned among the special offences of king Ahaz in 2K.xvi.3,4, and, therefore, if introduced in that reign, probably was not much practised, and it was certainly not adopted by his son Hezekiah. In Manasseh's reign, however, it seems to have flourished. Hence we find express mention made of this worship in the story of Josiah's reformation, 2K. xxiii, where we read of the vessels that were made for all the Host of Heaven,' v.4, the Priests that burned incense to the Sun and to the Moon and to the

598. Though put down by Josiah so strongly, it appears, however, to have revived again, since we find in this very reign Zephaniah prophesying the destruction of them that worship the Host of Heaven upon the housetops, 1.5. And Jeremiah says,

'Seest thou not what they do in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem ?

The children gather wood, and the fathers dough, to make cakes to the Queen of Heaven,' kindle the fire, and the women knead their &c., vii.17,18;

'And they shall spread them before the Sun and the Moon and all the Host of Heaven, whom they have loved, and whom they have and whom they have sought, and whom they served, and after whom they have walked, have worshipped,' &c., viii.2';

And the houses of Jerusalem, and the houses of the kings of Judah, shall be defiled as the place of Tophet, because of all the houses upon whose roofs they have burned incense unto all the Host of Heaven,' &c.,

xix.13.

And see Jer.xliv. 17-19,25, Ez.viii. 16. 599. We may observe a strong indication, of the Book of Deuteronomy having been written in a later age than the other four Books (generally) of the Pentateuch, in the fact that this worship is not mentioned in any part of the Pentateuch, except D.iv.19,xvii.3. So, too, complete phrases, similar to this,

the Sun and the Moon and all the Host of Heaven,' occur only in D.iv.19, xvii.3, Jer.viii.2, and 2K.xxiii.5, which may have been written by Jeremiah himself (557,v).

*600. D.iv.25-28.

'When thou shalt beget children, and childin the land, and shall corrupt yourselves. ren's children, and ye shall have remained long

I call heaven and earth to witness

And Jehovah

against you this day, that ye shall utterly
perish from off the land whereunto ye go over
Jordan to possess it.
shall scatter you among the nations, and ye
shall be left few in number among the heathen,
whither Jehovah shall lead you. And there
ye shall serve gods, the work of men's hands,
wood and stone, which neither see, nor hear,
nor eat, nor smell.'

Assuming that these words were not spoken by Moses prophetically, with a view to future events, they seem to imply that the writer had before him the captivity of the Ten Tribes, and wished to preserve Judah from the same judgment.

601. D.iv.29-31.

'But, if from thence thou shalt seek Jehovah thy God, thou shalt find Him, if thou seek him with all thy heart and with all thy soul. When thou art in tribulation, and all these

things are come upon thee, in the latter days,

if thou turn to Jehovah thy God, and shalt be obedient unto His Voice,-for Jehovah thy God is a merciful God,-He will not forsake thee, neither destroy thee, nor forget the covenant of thy fathers which He sware unto them.'

Here also the Deuteronomist evidently contemplates the possibility of the Ten Tribes being restored from their captivity, and reinstated in their own land, if only they would repent and return to Jehovah their God. His hope was, doubtless, that the tribes of Israel would all be gathered again one day under the government of the House of David. We shall see other similar indications of these warm, patriotic expectations of brighter days for Israel.

the address of Moses, or, rather, it is inserted abruptly between two separate addresses, which have no connexion either with it or with each other, for D.v.l begins very abruptly.

604. D.v.2-5.

'Jehovah our God made a covenant with us at Horeb. Jehovah made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are

all of us here alive this day. Jehovah talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire. I stood between Jehovah and you at that time, to show you the word of Jehovah; for ye were afraid by reason of the fire, and went not up unto the mount.'

of the oversight referred to in (579). Here we have very strong instances It may, of course, be said that Moses, in all these cases, is addressing the people collectively, and that the fathers, with whom the covenant was made at Horeb, included the children to whom he was now speaking at the end of the wanderings. But, if every one of those fathers was dead, as the narrative tells us, and only a small proportion of those now listening to Moses was present on the former occasion, as children under age, the above words could scarcely have been used by one taking note of this circumstance. Comp. also xi. 2-7 :

We have here another indication that the writer was living in an age after the Conquest; though the proof is not so decisive as that in (585), since it might be argued that the above lan- 'I speak not with your children, which have not known His miracles and His acts, guage is sufficiently explained by which He did in the midst of Egypt, unto reference to the Conquest of the trans-Pharaoh the king of Egypt, and unto all his Jordanic lands, which had already taken place.

603. D.iv.41-49.

This section, as it now stands, is rather perplexing, and may, perhaps, contain a fragment of the older document, removed from its proper place in connexion with the narrative in N.xxxv.* In its present position, it interrupts very awkwardly *If this be, as we suppose, a passage of mixed origin,—that is, a fragment of the older

land, &c.; but your eyes have seen all the great

acts of Jehovah which He did.'

605. D.v.6-21.

That the later Deuteronomist had no very strong sense of the unspeakable sacredness of the earlier document, is sufficiently plain by the liberties he has taken with its contents, in altering several of its expressions, and, in particular, modifying in a remarkable manner, the Fourth Commandment. One would have thought that anyone-even Moses himself-while repeating words believed to be ineffably holy, which In v.44, however, the expression, 'the Law,' had not only been uttered in the ears savours strongly of the Deuteronomist (517); of all Israel by Jehovah Himself, but while v.45 is certainly Deuteronomistic. The had been written down by the Finger multiplication in this verse of synonymous of God, twice over, terms, the testimonies, and the statutes, and

document, retouched by the Deuteronomist,yet it is still difficult, if not impossible, to separate the different portions which are due

to different anthors.

on the Tables the judgments,' is very common in Deuter- of stone, I would not have varied by onomy, e.g. iv.1,5,8,14,40, v.31, vi.1,17,20, &c., a single letter from the Divine original. and the plural hedoth, is used, as here, in the 606. Yet how stands the case in this respect? In the Hebrew there are

sense of precepts,' or ' ordinances,' in D.iv.45, vi.17,20, but nowhere else in the Pentateuch.

several minor discrepancies, such as changes or additions of words, some of which may be observed in the English translation. Thus we may note the insertions, as Jehovah your God has commanded thee,' v.12,16, nor thine ox, nor thine ass,' v.14, that it may go well with thee,' v.16, 'his field,' v.21, and the inversion of the order of the clauses in v.21. This last, indeed, completely changes the original meaning of the word 'house': for in E.xx.17 it denotes the house and all that belongs to it, so that v.17 sums up the different parts of the house,' whereas in D.v.21, the word denotes merely 'dwelling.'

spoken by Jehovah Himself, at the very same point of time.

'God spake all these words, saying, &c.' E.xx.1.

the Mount, out of the midst of the fire.... 'Jehovah talked with you, face to face, in saying, &c.' D.v.4,5.

These words Jehovah spake unto all your assembly in the Mount, out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice, and He added no more. And He wrote them in two Tables of stone, and

delivered them unto me.' v.22.

(ii) This excludes the notion that one passage gives a mere reminiscence of the other, which might be defective, or might vary in some points, without materially affecting the general credibility of the narrative.

(iii) Hence the two statements in607. But the latter part of the Fourth volve an absolute contradiction. Commandment is completely altered, (iv) Independently of the above conand a totally different reason is as-tradiction, the variation here observed signed, in the passage of Deuteronomy, is so remarkable that it cannot be supfor sanctifying the Sabbath, from that laid down in the book of Exodus, and, what is still more remarkable, without any reference to the latter reason as even existing.

E.xx.8-11.

Remember the Sabbath Day to hallow it. Six days shalt thou labour and do all thy work. But the seventh day is the Sabbath of Jehovah thy God. In it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: for in six days Jehovah made heaven and earth, the sea and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day; WHEREFORE Jehovah blessed the Sabbath Day and hallowed it.

D.v.12-15.

But

Keep the Sabbath Day to hallow it, as Jehovah thy God hath commanded thee. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work. the seventh day is the Sabbath of Jehovah thy God. In it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thine ox, nor thine ass, nor any of thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: that thy man-servant and thy maid-servant may rest as well as thou. And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that Jehovah, thy God, brought thee out thence, through a mighty hand, and by a stretched-out arm; WHEREFORE Jehovah thy God commanded thee to make (=keep) the Sabbath Day.

608. Upon the above we may remark as follows.

(i) Each writer distinctly professes to give the identical words which were

posed that Moses wrote the passage in Deuteronomy, either forgetting, or designedly modifying, the words of the original commandment, which he had received in so solemn and wonderful a

manner.

(v) The variation, therefore, between these two passages, is enough to show that the book of Deuteronomy, at all events, could not have been written by Moses.

(vi) From the agreement between the two passages there can be no doubt that the later Deuteronomist had before him the passage in Exodus.

(vii) As the Deuteronomist ventured to make so important a change in this Commandment, it is plain that he did not think it a sacrilegious act to alter the original form of the command,that, in short, he regarded it as merely a human composition, emanating from some writer of a previous age.