RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Hexateuch
the law of foods the speaker omits the reptiles, which are included in the earlier law among the forbidden articles of diet (cf. Lev. xi. 29, 30 with Deut. xiv.); passing them by without mention probably because the land of promise was before him a land flowing with milk and honey, a land of corn and wine, of figs, pomegranates, and olives. Its fertility east of the river had already been seen by the people, and it was plain that there would be no temptation in the new home to eat the grosser forms of flesh. Again, the law which required animals that were slain for food to be slaughtered at the door of the tabernacle would necessitate a long journey on the part of those who dwelt in remote districts. It was changed so as to permit the people to slay for food in the town where they resided (Deut. xii. 15, 21; Lev. xvii. 3, 4). To meet the same difficulty a change was made in the law regarding the transport of certain tithes to the sanctuary (Deut. 22-25) and, apparently, in the age at which the firstling of the herd and flock should be offered (xv. 19, 20; cf. Ex. xxii. 30). The same intention probably led to the omission of a clause from the statute defining the procedure to be followed for legally confirming the Hebrew bondservant's choice, who at the end of his period of service should elect to remain with his master. Henceforth he need not appear at the sanctuary before -the Lord (Ex. xxi. 5, 6; cf. xxii. 8, 9) in order to declare his voluntary relinquishment of his right to go free; from this time on the ceremony of attachment was alone required, and that act was always performed at the master's own house, in whatever part of the country it might be (Deut. xv. 16, 17). (3) It leads to grave concern for the tribe of Levi, in view of the peculiar situation in which it would soon be placed: a tribe without an inheritance. The entire tribe of Levi had been set apart for service at the sanctuary. It was to receive no land in Israel; and was without support except from the gifts of the people to the Lord for the maintenance of worship. In his parting words he dwells on their rights and privileges, refers repeatedly to their dependent condition and exhorts the people to call them in as guests at their joyous feasts, and never to forsake them nor leave them in need (xii. 12, 18, 19 et passim). In alluding to their perquisites (x. 8, 9, xviii. 1-8) he takes for granted a thorough familiarity on the part of the people with the distribution of duties among the several families of the tribe, which had been adopted in the wilderness, and accordingly he uses the general designation Levi and Levites (xviii. 1, 6); just as the Hebrew historians often do who wrote after the legislation of Leviticus and Numbers had been enacted, leaving it to be understood that each order of ministers had its own peculiar duties and privileges (ver. 7; cf. Num. xxxv. 1-8; Josh. xxi. 3-7, 8-11, 13-20; I Kings xii. 31; I Chron. xv. 2, 4, 11, 15; II Chron. v. 4, 5; Mai. ii. 1-10, hi. 3). He uses also the designation " the priests, the Levites " (xvii. 9, xviii. 1, xxiv. 8), as do subsequent historians and prophets, even the latest (Jer. xxxiii. 18, 21; Ezek. xliii. 19, xliv. 15; II Chron. xxiii. 18). It was eminently appropriate as a means of distinguishing the legitimate priests, who
had just been restricted to the family of Aaron, tribe of Levi, from the former ministers among the Israelites to whom it pertained to offer sacrifice (Ex. xix. 22, xxiv. 5; cf. xviii. 1, 12), and perhaps also from civil ministers to whom the title kohen applied (Paton, JBL, 1893, pp. 1-14). (4) It leads to insistence upon resort to the one altar by the whole nation, located at the place which Yahweh should choose out of all the tribes to put his name there (xii.), and the urgent exhortation to destroy all heathen altars. The unity of the altar was intended to counteract the tendency of the people to lapse into idolatry by preventing them from worshiping at the numerous local sanctuaries of the Canaanites and by keeping the service of Yahweh under proper control; to render the worship of Yahweh a grander spectacle and of greater pomp than the rites of the idols of the Canaanites by uniting the numbers and wealth of the Hebrews at one sanctuary; and to strengthen the national feeling and deepen the sense of brotherhood by giving to every member of the nation a common home and bringing all the tribes together at stated seasons as a great family. The spirit of jealousy between individuals and between tribes, the popular proneness to idolatry, and the willingness of large sections of the people to separate from their brethren and settle in attractive pastoral regions had already become manifest. And therefore the old idea of the priestly legislation, " one God, one sanctuary " (Wellhausen, Hist, of Israel, p. 34), the idea of the book of the covenant also, is insisted upon at this crisis. It was essential to the unity of the nation and the continuance of the theocracy. The exodus of the children of Israel from Egypt, and the activity of Moses, are usually referred to the time of the eighteenth or nineteenth dynasty of Egypt, thirteen or fourteen or fifteen centuries before Christ. The age was one of culture. Evolution in government and religion had been going on for hundreds of years. Society had become highly organized and regulated by law. Sacred architecture had reached an excellence that 19. Legis- for its purpose has never been surlation passed. Religious symbolism and ritand the ual had advanced to a stage of develop- Age. ment, probably the highest they have ever attained. The primitive, crude, and simple had long since become the complex and refined. The imperfect had become the perfect. Moses and his contemporaries were born to this civilization, as children to-day are born into the civilization of the twentieth century. Men do not start de novo; they build on the achievements of the past. So did Moses. When he began his work, the organized state was already a definite conception before the minds of men, its conditions were understood, and a standard of attainment had been set. The institutions of which the origin is ascribed to Moses represent this civilization. (1) The book of the covenant contains a body of laws of which the form of statement, the organization into a code, the rights guarded, and the developed sense of justice, are an inheritance from a Semitic antiquity already hoary in the days of Moses. These facts have been completely established by the dis-
Hexateuch Heylyn