A

of the extent to which a merely literal exegesis of the Scriptures may go astray. whole series of both Jewish and Christian commentators interpret these passages, with out the least hesitation, as meaning that the grew with their growth, and remained for the whole of the forty years not in the least the worse for wear. Thus JUSTIN says (Dial. c. Tryph. c. 131), 'The strings of whose sandals never broke; nor did the sandals themselves get old, nor their clothes wear out: but those of the children grew with their growth.' So PFEIFFER, ' By a remarkable miracle, not only did the clothes of the Israelites in the desert never get old, but they grew with the growth of the Israelites themselves, so as to fit both boys and men in succession.' PFEIFFER also quotes a Rabbinical saying with approbation: Go, and learn from the snail, whose shell grows with its body.' Other Rabbins suppose the angels of God to have acted as tailors to the Israelites, while they were in the desert, and interpret Ez.xvi.10-13 as containing a literal allusion to the fact. Without going to such an absurd length as this, AUGUSTINE, CHRYSOSTOM, THEODORET, GROTIUS, and even DEYLING, abide by the literal explanation, that, through the blessing of God, the clothes and shoes never wore out; so that those, who grew to manhood, were able to hand them over, as good as new, to the rising generation. By thus assuming a succession of wearers, these commentators, at all events, escaped the fatal notion that the clothes and shoes grew with the bodies of the wearers. When first PEYRERIUS denied that the clothes and shoes of the Israelites were miraculously preserved for forty years, and maintained that the meaning of the

clothes and shoes of the Israelitish children

Mosaic account was nothing more than this,

that the Jews were never in want of any thing, during the whole of the forty years that they were in the desert, but had so abundant a supply of everything, especially of wool from their flocks, of cloth, of skins, and of leather, that they never were without materials from which to make their clothes,'

--DEYLING, who is usually so very temperate, protested most vehemently against such 'petulantia et impietas.' Nevertheless, the opinion expressed by PEYRERIUS became gra

the true one, and plainly implies a
miracle of some kind, which prevented
their clothes and shoes from wearing
out, whatever may be the difficulty of
conceiving what kind of miracle it
could possibly have been.
611. D.viii.9.

'A land whose stones are iron, and out of whose hills thou mayest dig brass.'

We may notice, in passing, the familiar mention of iron in this and other places of Deuteronomy, as where the writer speaks of the 'iron furnace,' iv.20, and iron tools, xix.5, xxviii. 23, 48, in the (supposed) age of Moses, preceding that of Homer by about five centuries.

'I fell down before Jehovah as at the first, forty days and forty nights: I did neither eat bread nor drink water."

Nothing is said in E.xxiv.18 of Moses' fasting' on the first occasion of his spending 'forty days and forty nights' on the mount. But this the Deuteronomist has very naturally assumed, from the fact being recorded of his fasting thus on the second occasion, E.xxxiv.28.

however, he fasted these forty days and 614. According to the older story, nights, after he had obeyed the command, 'Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first,' &c., and had gone up into the

dually the prevailing one. We find it advocated, for example, by CLERICUS, BUDDEUS, and LILIENTHAL. The last of the three, how-mount the second time, E.xxxiv.1,2,28. ever, thinks it necessary to point, not only Whereas the Deuteronomist, x. 1, repreto the flocks possessed by the Israelites, from which they could obtain both wool and sents this very command to have been leather in great abundance, but also to the issued after the forty days' fasting of fact, that every Israelite must certainly have Moses, and as a gracious answer to it. brought some clothes and shoes with him out of Egypt, that they asked the Egyptians for clothes, and obtained them (E.iii. 22, xii.35), -that they would, no doubt, take off the clothes of the Egyptians, who were drowned in the Red Sea, and afterwards washed on shore (E.xiv.30), and, lastly, that they took the booty of the conquered Amalekites, including, according to Josephus, a quantity of clothes.

610. But, surely, the literal interpretation of the texts in question is

CHAPTER IX.
DEUT.X.1-XI.32.

615. D.x.1-5.

Great discrepancy exists between the narrative here and that in the Book of Exodus. It will be observed that in E.xxxiv.29 the two stone-tables with

the Ten Commandments are in the tioned in the middle three Books of hands of Moses, before any receptacle the Pentateuch, is never once named has been made in which to place them. Here, however, the Ark is commanded to be made, v.1, and is actually made, v.3, at the same time with the second set of tables, before Moses goes up into the Mount to receive them. But the account in Exodus makes this impossible. Not only is there nothing said about the Ark in E.xxxiv.1, where he is commanded to make the tables; but it is only after coming down with the second set of tables that Moses, E.xxxv. 10-12, summons the 'wise-hearted' tocome and make all that Jehovah hath commanded, the Tabernacle, and his tent, and his covering, &c., the Ark and the staves thereof with the Mercy-seat, &c. ;'

and afterwards, in E.xxxvii.1-9, we have the full account of Bezaleel making it. And yet the Ark of the Deuteronomist was not, as might be suggested, a mere temporary Ark; for he makes Moses say, v.5:—

'I turned myself, and came down from the Mount, and put the tables into the Ark which I had made, and there they be, as Jehovah commanded me.'

616. Upon this point Scorr says:Probably, before Moses ascended the Mount the second time, he gave express orders to Bezaleel to get the Ark ready against he came down; and, having directed and ordered the making of it, he speaks as if he had made it; as Solomon is said to have builded the Temple, which he caused to be builded by the hands of others.'

Ans. Of course, there is no difficulty in supposing that, what Moses ordered to be made, he may be said to have made himself. The difficulty is that, according to the story in Exodus, the orders were plainly given, xxxv. 10, and executed, xxxvii.1-9, after Moses came

down from the Mount with the second set of tables, which involves a direct contradiction to the account in Deuteronomy.

Some, however, think that Moses prepared the Ark himself, as made of shittimwood, and carried it up with the tables into the mount, and that Bezaleel afterwards covered it with gold.'

Ans. But the text of E.xxxvii.1,2, will

not allow of this- Bezaleel made the Ark of shittim-wood: two cubits and a half was the length of it, and a cubit and a half the breadth of it, and a cubit and a half the height of it. And he overlaid it with pure gold within and without, &c.'

617. But may we not have here also a sign of time? We have already noticed the fact (523.xiv) that the Tabernacle, which is so constantly men

by the Deuteronomist. May not this, perhaps, have arisen from the fact that he was living in a later age, when David's Tabernacle had long passed away out of the sight and memory of men, and the writer, consequently, did not recognise its existence to himself so vividly, as he did that of the Ark, which he mentions in x.1,2,3,5,8, xxxi. 9,25,26, and which was actually present, in his own days, in the Holy Place of the Temple? On the other hand, the, earlier writer, living, as we suppose, in the later days of David, or the beginning of Solomon's reign, would have had the Tabernacle on Mount Zion before him, as his help in realising the idea of the Tent in the wilderness. 618. D.x.6,7.

'And the children of Israel took their

journey from Beeroth of the children of Jaakan to Mosera. There Aaron died, and there he was buried; and Eleazar his son ministered in the Priest's office in his stead.

From thence they journeyed unto Gudgodah, and from Gudgodah to Jotbath, a land of rivers of waters.'

This passage is evidently quite out of its place, and, as here introduced, it involves a complete contradiction. For the death of Aaron is here described as happening before the separation of the Levites, v.8,9,

' at that time Jehovah separated the tribe of Levi, &c.,'

which took place, according to the older story, in his life-time, N.iii.5,6. Nor can the difficulty be relieved by understanding the expression 'at that time' in a general sense, as equivalent to about that time;' for the death of Aaron took place in the fortieth year of the wanderings, N.xxxiii.38, and the separation of the Levites in the second, N.i.1.

619. It is probable that D.x.6,7, is a fragment of the older record, inserted here, out of its proper place, by the Deuteronomist.

SCOTT observes:

These verses so break in upon the connection of Moses's discourse, that they perplex commentators. It is evident that Moses did not much regard exactness of method in his discourse.

620. D.x.8,9.

'At that time Jehovah separated the tribe and his sons, that is, it is confined to of Leri, to bear the Ark of the Covenant of the Priests. And in N.xxxi.28,29, Jehovah, to stand before Jehovah to minister unto Him, and to bless in His Name, unto this Jehovah's tribute' of the spoil of the day. Wherefore Levi hath no part nor in- Midianites was given to Eleazar the heritance with his brethren; Jehovah is his Priest; while the Levites received their inheritance, according as Jehovah thy God promised him.' share from the children of Israel,'

Jehovah is the inheritance' of Levi, generally; and in xviii.1,2, we read :

-:

'The Priests the Levites, all the tribe of Levi, shall have no part nor inheritance with Israel... Jehovah is their inheritance, as He hath said unto them.'

It was the duty of the Kohathites-v.30. Whereas here it is said, D.x.9, not of the Levites generally,-to bear the Ark, N.iv.15. Also the duty of 'blessing in the name of Jehovah' is assigned, not to the Levites, but to the Priests, Aaron and his sons,' in N.vi.22–27, and is, accordingly, performed by Aaron, in L.ix.22. So, too, 'the Priests, the sons of Aaron,' were to stand before Jehovah to minister unto Him, whereas the Levites were to be presented (Heb. 'made to stand') before Aaron the Priest, that they may minister unto him, N.iii.6, or to stand before the congregation, to minister unto them, N.xvi.9, xviii.2.

621. This agrees with what we have already observed of the Deuteronomist, that he knows nothing whatever of that very sharp distinction between the dignities and duties of the Priests and Levites, which the Books of Leviticus and Numbers exhibit throughout, and which Jehovah himself is supposed to have made only a few months previously in N.xviii. Accordingly, he calls the Priests always sons of Levi,' or 'Levites,' and never, as the other writers do, 'sons of Aaron.'

622. Hence he says:

-

For Jehovah thy God hath chosen him (Levi) out of all thy tribes, to stand to minister in the name of Jehovah, him and his sons for ever,' xviii.5;

And, if a Levite come from any of thy gates out of all Israel where he sojourned, and come with all the desire of his mind anto the place which Jehovah shall choose, then he shall minister in the Name of Jehovah his God, as all his brethren the Levites do, which stand there before Jehovah. They shall have like portions to eat, beside that which cometh of the sale of his patrimony,'

xviii, 6-8.

And the Priests, the sons of Levi, shall come near; for them Jehovah thy God hath chosen, to minister unto Him and to bless in

the Name of Jehovah,' xxi.5.

623. So, too, in the older laws, the declaration,

I am thy part and thine inheritance among the children of Israel,' N.xviii.20-is made only with reference to Aaron

624. Here also, and in xxxi.25, the Levites are to carry the Ark, which agrees, as we have said, to some extent, with the command in N.iv.15, and the practice in N.x.21. But in xxxi.9 we read of the Priests, the sons of Levi, the bearers of the Ark.' So in 1K.viii.3 the Priests took up the Ark;' and in 1K.ii.26 Solomon says to the Priest Abiathar,

'I will not at this time put thee to death, because thou barest the Ark of Jehovah Elohim before David my father.'

In like manner, the Levites are to utter the curses, xxvii.14, and to put the Book of the Law 'beside the Ark,' xxxi.26; whereas, according to N.iv.15, the Levites were not even to come near to carry the Ark, till the Priest had covered it; and Aaron was expressly ordered to keep them from touching the holy vessels, N.xviii.3:—

'Only they shall not come nigh the vessels of the Sanctuary and the Altar, that neither they, nor ye also, die.'

*625. D.x.9.

'Wherefore Levi had no (E.V. 'hath,' but the Hebrew says, literally, there was not to Levi') part nor inheritance with his brethren."

The Deuteronomist, in order to have carried out properly the part of Moses, should have written,—

'Wherefore Levi shall have no part with his brethren';

for the Israelites are still supposed to be only on the point of crossing the Jordan, and no partition of the Holy Land had yet been made among them. It is plain that he writes from a later state of things than that of Moses, when the separate position of the Levites, as ministers of the Sanctuary, was recognised in Israel.

626. D.xi.6.

Here the destruction of the Reubenites, Dathan and Abiram, is mentioned; but nothing is said about the death of the Levite Korah, who, according to N.xvi, perished fearfully at the same time, and who was, indeed, as represented in that narrative, the leader in the rebellion in question. Nor is any notice taken of the destruction of the 'two hundred and fifty men, who offered incense.' v.5-11,35.

This, too, agrees with the practice of the Deuteronomist, in making no distinction between Priests and Levites. The sin of Korah and his company is stated to have been this, that, though only Levites, they sought the Priesthood also,' N.xvi. 10. This, it would seem, was considered to be not such a very grievous offence in the days of the Deuteronomist.

627. D.xi.14,15.

'I will give you the rain of your land in his due season, the first rain and the latter rain, that thou mayest gather in thy corn, and thy wine, and thine oil. And I will send grass in thy fields for thy cattle, that thou mayest eat and be full.'

Here the writer passes unconsciously, from speaking in the assumed character of Moses, to speaking directly in the person of Jehovah. This single instance (see also the similar case in xxix.5,6,)—is sufficient to satisfy us as to the real nature of this book and its unhistorical character.

*628. D.xi.29,30.

CHAPTER X.

DEUT.XII.1-XIII. 18.

*629. D.xii.2-8.

'Ye shall utterly destroy all the places, wherein the nations which ye shall possess served their gods, upon the high mountains, and upon the hills, and under every green tree; and ye shall overthrow their altars, and break their pillars, and burn their Asheras (E.V. 'groves') with fire, and ye shall hew down the graven images of their gods, and destroy the names of them out of that place. Ye shall not do so unto Jehovah your God. But unto the place which Jehovah your God shall choose out of all your tribes to put His Name there, even ther thou shalt come; and thither ye shall unto His habitation shall ye seek, and thibring your burnt-offerings, and your sacrifices, &c. ... Ye shall not do after all the whatsoever is right in his own eyes.' things that we do here this day, every man

630. Here we have for the first time this announcement, which we find in none of the earlier books of the Pentateuch-not even in N.xxviii, xxix, where the laws of the offerings at the different festivals are laid down, it is supposed, by Jehovah himself, only a few months previously,-but which is repeated again and again in this Book of Deuteronomy,-viz. that there should be one special place, which Jehovah would choose out of all the tribes to put His Name there.' All this-(if we assume that Deuteronomy was written at a later age than the rest of the Pentateuch)— is indicative of such a time as that of Hezekiah, 2K.xviii.4, or, more probably, Josiah, 2K.xxiii.4-20, for the composition of this book.

I have already (229) drawn attention to the fact, that the name 'Gilgal' is here supposed to have been uttered by 631. The idea, indeed, of drawing the Moses in his address, before the name affections of the people to Jerusalem, exwas given to the place by Joshua, asisted, no doubt, in the time of David and related in Jo.v.9. And in the larger Solomon. But the notion of requiring edition, III.p.460-465, I have shown them to bring to the Temple all their that there is no reason to doubt that 'burnt-offerings, sacrifices, tithes, heavethe Gilgal here mentioned is the famous offerings, and vows,' v.11, and making Gilgal-by-Jericho, and that, conse- attendance at Jerusalem compulsory quently, we have here a remarkable three times a year, xvi. 16, could scarcely anachronism in the narrative. It is have arisen in an age, when Solomon, open, of course, for any one to say that though he loved Jehovah, walking in v.30 is a later interpolation. But what the statutes of David his father,' yet did the Israelites know of Ebal or Ge-sacrificed and burnt incense in the rizim, at the time when the words in D.xi.29 are supposed to have been addressed to them?

high places,' 1K.iii.3, and specially at the 'great high place' of Gibeon, v.4, whereas the Ark, the symbol of God's