But these doubts were first confirmed, by the science of historical criticism, in modern times. But this, how

περιεχόμενος τῇ Μωσέως Πεντατεύχῳ οὐ πρὸς ἑνός τινος νομοθέτηται, λέγω δὲ οὐχ ὑπὸ μόνου θεοῦ· — διαιρεῖται δὲ καὶ εἰς τὸν Μωσέα, οὐ καθὰ αὐτὸς δι' αὐτοῦ νομοθετεῖ ὁ θεὸς, ἀλλὰ καθὰ ἀπὸ τῆς ἰδίας ἐννοίας ὁρμώμενος, καὶ ὁ Μωσῆς ἐνομοθέτησέ τινα· καὶ εἰς τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους τοῦ λαοῦ διαιρεῖ ται, οἱ πρῶτοι εὑρίσκονται ἐντολάς τινας ἐνθέντες ιδίας.

-

The Nazarenes, also, had dogmatic doubts, as it appears from Jo. Damascus, De Hæres. xix. vol. i. p. 80, ed. Le Quien, (see Neander, Gnostiche Systeme, p. 386,) and from the Pseudo-Clementine Homilies, [Hom. ii. ch. 41-44, 52, in Cotelerius, Pat. Apost. ed. Clericus; Amst. 1724, vol. i. p. 632, sqq.] (See Neander, 1. c. p. 386. Baur, Christ. Gnosis, p. 319.) Jerome, Cont. Helvid. Opp. vol. iv. pt. 2, p. 134, says, "I will not complain, whether you call Moses the author of the Pentateuch, or Ezra the restorer of the same work.” 2. Critical Doubts are expressed by the following writers: Aben Ezra, who died A. C. 1167, — in his Comment. on Deut. i. 1. [But since the Pharisees condemn men as heretics who doubt the genuineness of the Pentateuch, he did not dare express himself openly, but only to hint his opinion in obscure words. See Spinoza, Tract. Theol. polit. ch. vii. p. 104.] But his doubts related only to some particular passages. Isaac Ben Jasos, in the beginning of the eleventh century, did more, as Maier has shown, in the Stud. und Kritiken for 1832, p. 634, sqq. Carlstadt, De Script. canon., 1521, G. 4, a. b., went farther still, and said, "Defendi potest: Mosen non fuisse scriptorem quinque librorum: ista de morte Mosis nemo nisi plane dementissimus Mosi velut autori tribuet." (See Unschuldige Nachrichten for 1707, p. 550.) And. Masius, Com. in Jos. 1574, Præf. p. 2, ad cap. x. 13, and xix. 47, [says, "The books of Moses, in their present form, were not composed by him, but by Ezra, or some other divine man, who, instead of the ancient and obsolete names of places, inserted the modern names."] Thos. Hobbes, Leviathan, ch. xxxiii. [Works, ed. Molesworth, vol. iii. Lond. 1839, p. 369, says, "It is sufficiently evident that the five books of Moses were written after his time." Yet he thinks Moses "wrote all that he is there said to have written."] Is. Peyrerius, Syst. Theol. ex Præadamitarum Hypothesi, 1655, lib. iv. c. 1, [supposes that only fragments and extracts from the genuine Mosaic books now remain.] Benedict Spinoza, 1. c. 1670, ch. viii. ix. [He brings forward most of the modern arguments against the genuineness of the Pentateuch, and adds, that none but Ezra can be suspected of writing these books. For his influence on biblical criticism, see, who will, Amand Saintes, Hist. de la Vie, &c., de B. de Spinoza; Paris, 1842; and his Hist. du Rationalisme en Allemagne; Paris, 1841.] Rich. Simon, Hist. crit. du V. T., 1678, i. 5, [thinks the Pentateuch was not written by Moses, but by different men at various times.] Leclerc, Sentimens

de quelques Theologiens de Hollande, &c., 1685, letter vi., [refers it to

ever, was not done satisfactorily, or without mistakes." The investigation was, for the first time, thoroughly made by Vater. Others have pushed the inquiry still further. Those who defend the later origin of the Penta

the priest sent by the Assyrian king to teach the new Gentile settlers in Palestine "the way of the God of the land." (2 Kings xvii. 24-28.) But he expresses a different opinion in the Dissertation (diss. iii. De Script. Pent. Moses, &c.) prefixed to his Commentary on the Pentateuch.] Ant. Van Dale, De Origine et Progressu Idololatriæ, 1696; in his Dissertationes, p. 71, sqq.; and his Epist. a Steph. Morinum, p. 686. Hasse, Aussichten zur kiinft. Aufklärungen üb. d. A. T., 1785; though he thinks otherwise in his Entdeckungen im Felde der ält. Erd- und Menschengesch. vol. ii.; 1805.

Fulda, in Paulus, N. Rep. vol. iii.; 1791. His Memor. vol. vii. Corrodi, Beleucht. d. jüd. u. christl. Bibelkanons; 1792, vol. i. p. 58, sqq. Otmar, (Nachtigall,) Fragmente üb. d. allmähl. Bildung der den Israeliten heil. Schr., in Henke's Mag. vol. ii.; 1794, p. 433, sqq.; iv. p. 1-36, 329 -370; v. p. 291. Comp. Eckermann, Theol. Beitr. vol. v. p. 1; 1796. Bauer, Einl. 2 Aufl.; 1801, p. 242, sqq., 309, sqq. E. Chr. Schuster, Aelt. Sagen d. Bibel nach ihrem hist. u. prakt. Gehalte; 1804. H. E. G. Paulus, Comment. üb. d. N. T. vol. iv.; 1804, p. 230, sq.

• Abhandlung über Moses und der Verfasser d. Pent., in his Commentary, vol. iii.; 1805, p. 393, sqq.

De Wette, Beitr. z. Einl. ins A. T. vol. i., or Krit. Vers. üb. de Glaubwürdigk. d. BB. d. Chron. mit Hins. auf d. Gesch. d. mos. B.B. u. Gesetzgeb. Ein Nachtr. z. d. Vaterschen Unters. üb. d. Pent.; 1806, vol. ii. Kritik d. Israel. Gesch.; 1807. Augusti, Einl.; 1806; 2 Aufl. 1827. Gesenius, De Pent. Sam.; 1815. Gesch. d. hebr. Spr.; 1815. Bleek, Aphorist. Beitr. z. d. Unters. ü. d. Pent. in Rosenmüller, Rep. vol. i.; 1822, p. 1, sqq. Beitr. z. d. Forsch. ü. d. Pent. in Theol. Stud. u. Kr.; 1831, vol. iii. p. 488, sqq. Hartmann, Hist. kr. Forschungen üb. d. Bildung, d. Zeitalter u. d. Plan d. 5 BB. M. nebst e. beurtheilenden Einl. u. e. genauen Charakteristik d. hebr. Sagen u. Mythen; 1831. Comp. his Aufklärungen üb. Asien; 1806, p. 19, sqq. Die Hebräerin am Putztische, &c.; vol. ii. 1809, p. 5, sqq.; iii. p. 163, sqq. Linguistische Einl. in d. Stud. d. BB. d. A. T.; 1818, p. 311, sqq. Schumann, Prolegg. in Pent. p. xxxvi. Von Bohlen and Tuch, in their Introductions to Genesis. Bertholdt (1. c. p. 759, sqq.; 1813) was not so intimately connected with these inquiries. Without reference to these authorities, a similar view was taken by Volney, Recherches nouv. sur l'Hist. anc. pt. i.; Paris, 1814. See the Review in Bertholdt, Krit. Journal, vol. viii. p. 55, sqq.

The following are some of the modern defenders of the genuineness of the Pentateuch: Michaelis, Einleit. Eichhorn, Einleit., who has con

teuch, however, are divided among themselves as to the positive date of its composition and compilation. This difference, in part, results from their different views of the history and literature of the Hebrews.

ceded a good deal in his last edition. Jahn, Einl. u. Beiträge zur Vertheid. der Aechtheit des Pentat. in Bengel, Archiv. vol. ii. iii. Lüderwald, Untersuch. einiger Zweifel üb. die Aufrichtigkeit u. Göttlichkeit Mosis u. seiner Begebenheiten; 1782. Jerusalem, Briefe üb. d. mos. Schriften u. Philosophie, 3 Aufl.; 1783. Hasse, in his Entdeckungen, &c.; 1805. Griesinger, Ub. d. Pentateuch; 1806. Kelle, Vorurtheilsfreie Würdigung der mos. Schriften, als Prüfung d. myth. u. offenbarungsgläubigen Bibelerklärung, vol. i.—iii.; 1811, 1812. Ch. A. Fritzsche, Prüfung der Gründe, mit welchen neuerlich d. Aechtheit d. BB. Mosis bestritten worden ist. ; 1814. .; J. G. Scheibels, Unters. über Bibel- u. Kirchengesch. vol. i.; 1816. J. G. Herbst, Observ. de Pentateuchi IV. Librorum posteriorum Auctore et Editore; 1817, 4to.; imp. in Commentt. theol. ed. Rosenmüller, Fuldner, et Maurer, vol. i. pt. 1; 1825. In a modified form, Kanne, Bibl. Untersuch. u. Ausleg. mit. u. ohne Polemik. vol. i. ii.; 1820. Rosenmüller, Schol. in Pentateuchum, vol. i. ed. 3; 1821, Prolegg. Pustkuchen, Hist. krit. Untersuchung d. bibl. Urgesch. nebst. Untersuchungen über Alter, Verfasser u. Einheit der übrigen Theile des Pentateuchs; 1823. Ranke, Untersuch ub. d. Pent. vol. i. 1834; vol. ii. 1840. Hengstenberg, Beiträge zur Einleit. in A. T. oder die Authentie d. Pent. erwiesen; 1836-1839. [See, too, his Christology of the O. T., translated by Reuel Keith; Alexand. D. C. 1836–1839, 3 vols. 8vo.] Hävernik, 1. c. Drechsler, Einheit und Acchtheit d. Gen.; 1838. König, Altest. Stud. vol. ii.; 1839. The following occupy the old position: Richard Graves, Lectures on the Four Last Books of the Pentateuch, designed to show the divine Origin of the Jewish Religion; Lond. 1808. Thomas Hartwell Horne, 1. c. [Turner, Companion to the Book of Genesis; New York, 1841. See, too, the peculiar theory of Dr. Palfrey, Acad. Lectures, vol. i. and ii.; Boston, 1838, 1840. (See a review of vol. i. in Boston Quarterly Review for July, 1838.) Laborde, Commentaire sur l'Exode et les Nombres, &c.; Paris, 1841, folio.]

CHAPTER II.

THE BOOK OF JOSHUA."

§ 165.

CONTENTS OF THE BOOK.

It was forbidden to Moses to conquer the theocratic land, and Joshua, following in his footsteps, and with similar divine assistance, advanced to this work. He contended triumphantly with the Canaanites, and conquered the greatest part of them, though many were still left to possess large parts of the land. Joshua divided it among the ten tribes and a half, but the conquest still remained incomplete; he set apart the cities which Moses had appointed for the Levites, and likewise the cities of refuge. He departed after he had admonished the people, and pledged them to observe the covenant. Thus this attaches itself to the Mosaic books, as a supplementary portion, as well to the history of the establishment of the theocracy, as to the laws. relating to it. Now, since the book treats of the di

Josuæ Imperat. Hist. illustr. ab Andr. Masio; Antverp. 1574, fol. Seb. Schmidt, Prælect. in viii. prior. Capp. Lib. Jos.

Jo. Clerici Comment. Jo. Drusii Annotat. in loca diff. Jos., &c.

A. J. Osiandri Comm. in Josuam; Tub. 1681.

Jac. Bonfrerii Comm. in Jos., Jud., et Ruth; Par. 1631, fol.

Nic. Serrarii Comm. in Libr. Jos., Jud., Ruth, Regg., et Paralipp.; Mog. 1609, 1610, 2 vols. fol.

Exegetisches Handb. des A. T. 1 and 3 pt.

Paulus, Blicke in d. B. Jos., in his Theol. exeg. Conservator. vol. ii. p. 149, sqq.

F. J. V. D. Maurer, Comm. üb. d. B. Jos.; Stuttg. 1831. Geddes, 1. c. Palfrey, I. c. vol. ii.

vision of the land, which Moses had already conquered and divided; of the portion which Joshua conquered; that which was conquered after him, and that which remained unconquered,—it has the value of a primitive theocratical model. It has a close connection with the Pentateuch, and particularly with Deuteronomy." It is very obviously divided into two parts. The first includes chapters i.-xii., and contains the history of the conquest. The second includes xiii.-xxiv., and contains the history of the division of the land, and the assemblies of the people which Joshua convoked to sanction the theocracy.-[It is further related that, after the death of Moses, Joshua sent secretly two messengers to Jericho. They were discovered, but escaped through the intervention of Rahab. They brought back an account of the fear of the inhabitants. Then the whole nation marched over, through the Jordan, for its waters were stopped miraculously at Zaretan. After this, those were circumcised who, during the last forty years, had not previously received that rite, on account of the inconvenience it would have occasioned on the march. The passover was then celebrated, and the manna ceased. An irrevocable curse was then pronounced upon Jericho, and after the Jews had marched round it seven times, its walls miraculously fell to the ground. These events increased the fear of the Canaanites, and gave the Hebrews new courage, so that, after messengers

See chap. i. iii. 7, iv. 23, viii. 30-35, xi. 15, xvi. 5, 6, xx. xxi. 43—45, xxii. xxiii. 6.

b [There is a Jewish tradition that Joshua married Rahab, who was twenty years old at the time of the departure from Egypt. But Jerome (Cont. Jovinian. lib. i. c. 12) says, indignantly, "Ostende mihi Jesum Nave vel uxorem habuisse vel filios, et si potueris monstrare, victum me esse fatebor."]