(2.) The Rest of the Old-Testament Scriptures. — These were in existence centuries before these testimonies of Jesus and his apostles, and they contain copious evi- dence that the Pentateuch was written at the time of Moses, and by himself or under his directions. Beyond all doubt there are numerous most striking references both in the prophets and in the books of Kings to pas- sages which are found in our present Pentateuch. One thing is certain, that the theory of men like Yon Boh- len, Vatke, and others, who suppose the Pentateuch to have been written in the times of the latest kings, is utterly absurd. It is established in the most convincing manner that the legal portions of the Pentateuch al- ready existed in writing before the separation of the two kingdoms. Even as regards the historical portions, there are often in the later books almost verbal coinci- dences of expression, which render it more than prob- able that these also existed in writing. All this has been argued with much learning, the most indefatiga- ble research, and in some instances with great success, by Hengstenberg in his A uthentie des Pentateuchs. We will satisfy ourselves by pointing out some of the most striking passages in which the coincidences between the later books and the Pentateuch (omitting Deuter- onomy here) appear.
(rt) Beginning with the historical books, the refer- ences to the law of Closes as a written work of supreme authority in Israel are particularly numerous and dis- tinct in the book of Joshua, as might be expected in the history of the personal friend of Moses, and the close attendant upon him, to whom, by divine direction, Moses intrusted the completion of the work of conquer- ing the Promised Land, and settling the people in it, and establishing among them the worship and the laws of God. The evidence is so abundant and indubitable that the only resource of our opponents has been an al- legation, without any evidence, that the book of Joshua is comparatively of very recent origin, written perhaps after the Exile, or at least not long before it; an allega- tion which has been somewhat modified by others, but onlj- to make it more arbitrary and improbable, when they pronounce it to be a sixth book of that history of the original of the Hebrew nation which has come down to us under the name of iha five books of Moses, with certain ancient elements in it, yet wrought up to its present form only in a very late age, much as they imagine the Pentateuch to have been. The book of Judges has been said to want such clear evidence to
PENTATEUCH
909
PENTATEUCH
the Pentateuch ; if so, the reason must be sought, partlj- in the greater distance from it in point of time, and still more in its nature, as a series of sketches of the defections of the people and tlie chastisements which followed in order to lead tliera to repentance. Yet the entire work is meant to bring the conduct and condition of the ])C(iplc to the test of the law of God, as the known and acknowledged standard of duty : the opening ac- count of the criminal neglect which left so many rem- nants of Canaanites in the midst of the tribes of Israel is meaningless except on the supposition that the law of Moses and the transactions of Joshua are already known ; and some parts of it, such as the histories of Gideon and of Samson, abound in admitted references both to the facts of the Pentateuch and to its language. Nay, the cases of grossest divergence from the law of 3Ioses which it records are no proof that this law was unknown, or destitute of authority, at the time its au- thor lived, as has been rashly asserted : on the contrary, they carry evidence within themselves that they were sinful ; because they were the acts of men whose whole conduct was vile and disorderly, or because it is noticed that they drew down divine judgments on those who were concerned in perpetrating them. The succeeding historical books of Ruth, Samuel, and Kings present similar evidence. In the books of Kings we have ref- erences as follows: 1 Kings xx, 42 to Lev. xxvii, 29; xxi, 3 to Lev. xxv, 23, Numb, xxxvi, 8; xxi, 10 to Numb. XXXV, 30 (comp. Dent, xvii, 6, 7 ; xix, 15) ; xxii, 17 to Numb, xxvii, 10, 11; 2 Kings iii, 20 to Exod. xxix, 38, etc. ; iv, 1 to Lev. xxv, 39, etc. ; v, 27 to Exod. iv, 6, Numb, xii, 10; vi, 18 to Gen. xix, 11 ; vi, 28 to Lev. xxvi, 29; vii, 2, 19 to Gen. vii, 14; vii, 3 to Lev. xiii, 4G (comp. Numb, v, 3).
(b) Especially remarkable is the testimony arising from the existence of the line of prophets in Israel; men who spoke in the style of the law of Moses, and used its language, and enforced and applied its lessons, without any civil support, often in opposition to the habits of the people and the wishes of the government; not without suffering persecution occasionally, yet with- out one word being uttered against the authority of the prophetic office and their abstract right to prophesy in the name of Jeht)vah and in support of his law. In Joel, who prophesied only in the kingdom of Judah; in Amos, who prophesied in both kingdoms; and in Hosca, whose ministry was confined to Israel, we find references which imply the existence of a written code of laws. The following comparison of passages may satisfy us on this point: Joel ii, 2 with Exod. x, 14; ii, 3 with Gen. ii, 8, 9 (comp. xiii, 10); ii, 17 with Numb, xiv, 13; ii, 20 with Exod. X, 19; iii, 1 [ii, 28, E.V.] with Gen. vi, 12; ii, 13 with Exod. xxxiv, t»; iv [iii], 18 with Numb. xxv, 1. — Again, Amos ii, 2 with iSTumb. xxi, 28; ii, 7 with Exod. xxiii, 6, Lev. xx, 3 ; ii, 8 with Exod. xxii, 25, etc.; ii, 9 with Numb, xiii, 32, etc.; iii, 7 with Gen. xviii, 17; iv, 4 with Lev. xxiv, 3, and Dent, xiv, 28, xxvi, 12; V, 12 with Numb, xxxv, 31 (comp. Exod. xxiii, 6 and Amos ii, 7); v, 17 with Exod. xii, 12; v, 21, etc., with Numb, xxix, 35, Lev. xxiii, 3G; vi, 1 with Numb, i, 17; vi, G with Gen. xxxvii, 25 (this is probably the reference : Hengstenberg's is wrong) ; vi, 8 with Lev. xxvi, 19 ; vi, 14 with Numb, xxxiv, 8 ; viii, G with Exod. xxi, 2, Lev. xxv, 39; ix, 13 with Lev. xxvi, 3-5 (comp. Exod. iii, 8). — Again, Hos. i, 2 with Lev. XX, 5-7; ii, 1 [i, 10] with (ien. xxii, 17. xxxii, 12; ii, 2 [I, 11] with Exod. i, 10; iii, 2 with Exod. xxi, 32; iv, 8 with Lev. vi, 17, etc., and vii, 1, etc.; iv, 10 with Lev. xxvi, 2G ; iv, 17 with Exod. xxxii, 9, 10; v, 6 with Exod. x, 9; vi, 2 with (ien. xvii, 18; vii, 8 with Exod. xxxiv, 12-lG; xii, G [A. V. 5] with Exod. iii, 15; xii, 10 [9] with Lev. xxiii, 43; xii, 15 [14] with Gen. ix, 5. This fact is the more worthy of consideration, inasmuch as these prophets were to be found actively at work, not merely in the kingdom of Judah, in which the process of elaborating the Pentateuch is imagined to have been carried on, but also in the kingdom of the