The Pulpit Commentary — Genesis — Section 73

both were in the book which Hilkiah found and Shaphan and the king read. Then, as to the discovery of the roll just at the moment when it was needed, it is not at all !!urprising th11t the wave of religious enthusiasm which had set in upon Jud11h with Josiah's coming to the throne should have caused the forgotten Pentateuch to be inquired after, and if so, it is less surprising still that Hilkiah should have found it. It may therefore be held as certain, in default of satisfactory evidence to the contrary, that the Pent&teuch eidsted in the seventh century n.o. That the prophets who laboured among the Israelites in the eighth century n.c., i. e. Isaiah, Mioah, Amos, and Hosea, appealed to the early history of the people as it is contained in the Pentateuch might be verified by numerous citations from their writings containing allusions to every one of the five books of the law; but this is not required, inasmuch as that is con- ceded by the'advocates of the post-Mosaic origin, only that to which they appealed, it. is alleged, was not a formal history like the Pentateuch, but simply a traditional history which had not yet been reduced to writing (vide Kuenen, 'The Religion of Israel,' vol. i. eh. ii. p. 101), which, however, is begging the question in dispute. Tlien, passing to the times of David, it is comparatively easy, in spite of what Bleek nssert.s to tile contrary, to detect the existence and influence of the Mosaio Pentateuch. In that "Law of the Lord" the entire poetical literature of the Davidic age may be said to have had its roots. Accepting only those Psalms which are confessedly the work of the shepherd king, it would not be difficult to show that they not only pre- suppose the entire Levitical system (vide Ps. :u:., :u:vii., xl., l., Ii.), but also allude to the story of the Exodus and the Sinaitic legislation ( cf. Ps. iv. 6 v,:ith Numb. vi. 26 ; Ps. xv. 5 with Exod. xxii. 25 ; xxiii. 8; Levit. :u:v. 36 ; Deut. xvi. 19 ; Ps. xvi. 4 with Exod. :u:iii. 13; P ... xvi. 5, 6 with Deut. xxxii. 9; Pe. xvii. 8 with Deut. x.u:ii. 10; Ps. xxiv. 1 with Exod. xix. 5: Deut. L 14; Ps. xxvi. 6 with Exod, XXX. 19, 20; Ps. m. (title) with Deut. xxx. 5 ; Pe. :u:xiL 12 with Levit. :u:v. 23 ; Pe. ciii. 17, 18 with Exod. xx. 6: De11t. vii. 9), and even refer to the incidents of early patriarchal history (e. ;. Ps. i 3 to Gen. miL 3, 23; Pe. viii. 6, 7, 8 to Gen. i. 26, 28; Ps. ix. 12 to Gen. ix. 5; Ps. ex. 4 to Gen. xiv. 18). Indeed the entire Hebrew Psalter, when- soever it was compiled, is a precious fruit of the religious life of Israel under the law, and everywhere requires for its full understanding just such a national history and just such an ecclesiastical system as are presented in the Pentateuchal books. Nor when we reach the ages of Samuel and the Judges does this Book of the Law cease to arrest OW' attention. 1 Sam. viii. 7 and Judges viii. 23 are indeed quoted as con• clusive evidence that the Denteronomic law of the kingdom (Deut. xvii. 14) was not at that time known. The toleration of several high places at one time, as in Shiloh (1 8nm. i. 3; iv. 3), Mizpah (Judges xi. 11; ll. 1, 18; ui. 1 ; 1 Sam. vii. 5), Bethel (1 S1m. x. 3), Ramah (1 Sam. vii. 17), in opposition to the Mosaio ordinance (D.eut. :..ii. 5) commanding worship to be offered at only one high place, is advanced as implying that the people were not acquainted with any such legislation as that con- tained in the last book of the Pentateuch ; whence the inference is meant to be deduced that the Pentateuchal books had not been at that time composed. Bleek, however, is candid enough to recognise (' Introduction,' vol. i. § 124) that the mere fact that the Mosaic laws were not observed is not sufficient proof that they did not exist, or were not known, e.nd Keil (' Introduction,' vol. i.§ 34) has satisfactorily shown that not only were Gideon's refusal of the crown of Israel and Samuel's unwillingness to elect a king in perfect harmony with the Mosaic law upon the subject of their future monarch, but that it is doubtful if even during those troublous o.nd unsettled times between Joshua and David there ever was more than one nntional ennct1.Jary, viz., nt Shiloh, the ot4er instances specijied bein~ plac:es at which excep,  '£HE AUTIIOHSHIP OF Tlrn PENTATEUCII. xvll