ABLE OF THE STATIONS OF THE ISRAELITES IN THE WILDERNESS.1

n Dr. Hales's Analysis of Chronology, Vol. I. pp. 395-400., or pp. 394-400. (edit. 1830).)

In the Bible de Vence, tom. iii. pp. 365-405., there is an elaborate geographical dissertation, Sur les xlii. stations des Israelites.

VOL. II.

M M

66

[For a somewhat different table, adopted from Dr. Robinson, see Kitto's Cycl of Bibl. Lit. art. Wandering. In both it is assumed that the Israelites were twice at Kadesh Barnea. Some writers imagine that that place was visited but once. An article, entitled Sinai, Kadesh, and Mount Hor, or a Critical Inquiry into the Route of the Exodus," in the Journal of Sacred Literature, April 1860, pp. 1-60, may be advantageously consulted. VII. Few passages in the Pentateuch have more exercised the ingenuity of biblical critics, than the book of the wars of the Lord mentioned in Numb. xxi. 14. Aben-Ezra, Hottinger, and others, are of opinion that it refers to this book of the Pentateuch, because in it are related various battles of the Israelites with the Amorites: Hezelius, and after him Michaelis, think it was an Amoritish writing, containing triumphal songs in honour of the victories obtained by Sihon king of the Amorites, from which Moses cited the words that immediately follow. Fonseca and some others refer it to the book of Judges. Le Clerc understands it of the wars of the Israelites who fought under the direction of Jehovah, and, instead of book, he translates, with most of the Jewish doctors, narration, and proposes to render the verse thus: "Wherefore, in the narration of the wars of the Lord, there is (or shall be) mention of what he did in the Red Sea, and in the brooks of Arnon." Lastly, Dr. Lightfoot considers this book to have been some book of remembrances and directions written by Moses for Joshua's private instruction, for the prosecution of the wars after his decease (see Exod. xvii. 14-16.). This opinion appears to us the most simple, and is, in all probability, the true one.2

1 See Winer, Realwörterbuch, art. Wüste.

2

See Hävernick, Einleitung, § 132, I. ii. pp. 443, 444.; Hengstenberg, Dissertations on the Genuineness of the Pentateuch, diss. vi. vol. ii. pp. 182--185.

["We dwell for a moment," says Hävernick, "on the consideration of the great fact, which is the basis of the narrative of the whole book, namely, the sojourn of the Israelites during forty years in the wilderness. The manner in which the narrator states this fact we have mentioned above. (The period of Israel's rejection,' he there says, is characterized by the circumstance that the historian is almost silent respecting it, as being a period not strictly belonging to theocratical history.') A view so strictly theocratical, and a description so purely objective, are most befitting the lawgiver himself, Modern criticism has chiefly taken offence at the statement that Jehovah had announced all this as a punishment to be inflicted upon the people. This, they say, is incomprehensible. However, the fact stands firm, that the Israelites really abode forty years in the wilderness. This fact is proved in the scriptures by many other testimonies. Hence arises the question how this protracted abode was occasioned, and what induced Moses to postpone or give up the conquest of Canaan. De Wette says that such resignation, in giving up a plan to which one has devoted the full half of a life, is not human. Göthe asserted that by such a representation the picture of Moses is entirely disfigured. All this renders the problem of our opponents the more difficult. De Wette says, 'Who knows what happened in that long period?' This question would amount to a confession of our entire ignorance concerning what was most important, and what is the real turning-point of the history of Israel, and would make an enormous and most striking gap in universal history. It is incredible that no tradition should have been preserved, in which was told to posterity what was here most important, even if it should only have been in a very disfigured form. It is incredible that what was most important should have been passed by, and that there should have been communicated only what was comparatively insignificant. If this were the case, the traditions of Israel would form a perfectly-isolated phenomenon. Thus the history of Israel itself would be something incomprehensible. Either the history is inconceivable; or the astounding fact is indeed a truth. And so it is. The resignation of Moses, and the sojourn of the people in the wilderness, can be explained only by assuming an extraordinary divine intervention. A merely-natural interpretation is here completely futile. The problem can only be solved by assuming that the whole proceeded from the command of God, which is unconditionally obeyed by his servant, and to which even the rebellious people must bow, because they have amply experienced that without God they can do nothing."

The history of Balaam, one of the most remarkable narratives of this book, has given rise to much discussion. That, though an ungodly man, he was a true prophet seems undeniable. But it is not so clear whether the speaking of the ass was a literal fact, or whether it occurred in vision. The testimony of St. Peter (2 Pet. ii. 16.) would appear decisive. But then there are grave doubts whether

'Kitto, Cycl. of Bibl. Lit. art. Numbers.

the second epistle ascribed to St. Peter be genuine.' In behalf of the supposition that the event did not literally occur, but was seen in vision, it is urged that the prophet expressed no surprise at the portent, that those who accompanied him do not seem to have witnessed it, and that Balaam himself afterwards (xxiv. 3, 4, 15, 16.) says that, falling into prophetic ecstasy, he had his eyes opened. It is a matter on which men will differ: the present writer believes that the supernatural event literally occurred.]

SECTION VI.

ON THE BOOK OF DEUTERONOMY.

I. Title, date, and chronology.—II. Scope.-III. Predictions of the Messiah. -IV. Synopsis of contents.—V. Observations.— Table or harmony of the Mosaic law.

I. THE Jews call this fifth book of Moses '77 [or, shortly, D'], that is, These are the words, because the original commences with these words: by some rabbins it is called in näin, or the repetition of the law; while others term it ningin p, or the book of reproofs, on account of the numerous reproofs of the Israelites by Moses. The Greeks and Latins respectively call it AETTEPONOMION, Deuteronomium (whence our English title Deuteronomy is derived), that is to say, the second law (▲ɛútɛpos Nóμos), because it contains a second statement of the laws which Moses had formerly promulgated to the Israelites. From a comparison of Deut. i. 5. with xxxiv. 1. it appears to have been written by Moses in the plains of Moab, a short time before his death; and this circumstance will account for that affectionate earnestness with which he addresses the Israelites. The period of time comprised in this book is five lunar weeks, or, according to some chronologers, about two months, viz. from the first day of the eleventh month of the fortieth year after the exodus of Israel from Egypt, to the eleventh day of the twelfth month of the same year, A.M. 2553, B.C. 1451. [The Mosaic origin of Deuteronomy is asserted chap. xxxi. (comp. xvii. 18.), and is cor roborated by such passages as Josh. i. 5, 7.; 1 Kings ii. 3.; 2 Chron. xxv. 4.; Dan. ix. 13.; John i. 45.; Acts iii. 22. Hävernick has well discussed this topic, and has shown that the alleged contradictions and anachronisms may be explained; while he has produced from the book itself various plain though indirect traces which contribute to prove that it came from the hand of Moses.] From the account of Moses's death recorded in the thirty-fourth chapter of this book, and the insertion of some explanatory words in other parts of Deuteronomy, it has been insinuated that Moses could not have been its author; but the following remark will clearly prove this notion

1 For arguments in favour of its genuineness, see Vol. IV. pp. 604–608. 'Kitto, Cycl. of Bibl. Lit. art. Deuteronomy. More will hereafter be said on this subject.