The question involved in the denial of the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch is not one of merely correct literary and historical criticism. If so, simple believers could well afford to let the critics of one school strive with the critics of the other schools, while they chose the better part of enjoying the Christ of the scriptures, Who is the theme of the Old Testament no less than of the New, and of the Pentateuch no less than of the Psalms or the Prophets. It is not however the soundness of human theories, but the character of our Lord Himself that is involved. For if Moses did not write the first five books of the Bible— “the law” —as our Lord asserted more than once, but which the advocates of “modern criticism” deny, then the Holy Son of God stands convicted of ignorance or error, if not deliberate deception. Such a horrible and blasphemous imputation to the Person of Christ, which it is painful even to repeat, needs only to be mentioned to be instinctively repudiated by every godly and devout soul. Can the saints of God allow for a single moment that He Who was emphatically the “Truth” was either imposed upon by the baseless traditions of the day, or ignorant of the true writer of the very scriptures He came to fulfill? Yet such is the daring and defiant position occupied by that which vaunts itself as “higher criticism.” And as this inflated assumption of worldly wisdom is developing in pernicious influence upon the people of God, and widening its line of attack upon all that is holy and divine, it may be profitable to briefly examine the words of Christ in reference to this subject, and also the principal arguments of those who have the unblushing effrontery to refuse to accept our adorable Lord as even a credible witness in the matter.
In the first place then it is proposed to refer to the direct statements of the Lord as reported by the Holy Ghost through the evangelists. In the latter part of John 5 the Lord Jesus is reproving the unbelief of the Jews. He points out the abundant witness to His Person and mission. John the Baptist testified to Him (verses 32-35). The character of the works He was doing in obedience to His Father testified to Him (ver. 36). The Father himself testified to Him (ver. 37). S I did the Father Himself witness from heaven (ver. 37). And the scriptures, which it was their duty to search, likewise testified to Him (ver. 39). Yet in spite of this fourfold testimony they refused to come to Him. And the Lord thereupon solemnly warns them of the gravity of such an attitude of unbelief. Not that He would accuse them of hardness of heart to His Father; but the very Moses in whom they trusted and boasted would rise up in judgment against them. “Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses in whom ye trust. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed Me: for he wrote of Me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe My words?” (verses 45-47). Now it is submitted that the Lord here emphatically affirms that Moses under God was the author of those books commonly ascribed to him; “περὶ γὰρ έμοῦ έκεῖνος έγαψεν,” “for HE wrote of Me.”
In fact nothing else can be drawn from the passage. Moses, not Christ, was to be the accuser; therefore the writer, Moses, must be referred to as much as the person of Christ. Thus no room is left for the objection that Moses is here used tropically for the writings which bore his name; for if such be true in some other places, here, at any rate, Moses is expressly distinguished from his writings. “He wrote of Me. But if ye believe not his writings, etc.” Surely the most violent rationalist would never seriously contend for the interpretation, “the Pentateuch wrote of Me.” So that this portion appears decisive in establishing that our blessed Lord accepted and confirmed the current belief of the Jews, that Moses was God's agent in composing the Pentateuch. Compare also Mark 10:55And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. (Mark 10:5) with 12:19.
Further, the denial of Moses as the author of the first five books robs this appeal of the Lord of its entire force. He adduces Moses, the human founder of their system of worship, as a witness to Himself. And it is well known with what reverence Moses was acknowledged by the Jews; therefore of what extraordinary weight with them would be the evidence of one who was their leader out of Egypt, and their law-giver at Sinai? And where was his testimony to be found at that late day? Nowhere but in his own writings, as our Lord plainly states. Now if it be true, as the critics dream, that the Pentateuch was fathered upon Moses, centuries after his death, how can it possibly be said that he witnessed of Christ in writings which he never wrote? But such theories are neither true nor worthy, but self-destructive; and the truth is sealed by our Lord's words before us, and expressed as the ordinary belief of every godly Jew by Philip of Bethsaida when he said “We have found Him of Whom Moses in the law, and the prophets did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of Joseph” (John 1:4545Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. (John 1:45)).
Moreover, this scripture— “he wrote of Me “indicates a unity of purpose in the writings of Moses, as well as a prophetic outlook into the future which could be nothing short of divine inspiration. However many “documents” Moses may have used in the compilation of the Pentateuch, all were coordinated to subserve one dominant purpose viz. testimony to Christ. And “if Moses testified the truth of Christ some fifteen centuries before He lived and died, he was a prophet, and inspired of God in what he wrote; and if God gave him, according to the Lord Jesus, to prophesy truly of Him, is it credible that he has written falsely of that of which even an ordinary man might have written truly? If the rationalist speaks aright, the Pentateuch is not Moses' writing, but a bundle of tales true and false, and in not one word written really of Christ; else it would be bona fide prophetic, which the system denies in principle; because true prophecy implies God's supernatural communication, and this would be necessarily a death-blow to the criticism of the rationalist.”
And the indication of this lofty object in the writings of Moses is by no means confined to these verses. The Lord points out the same thing to His disciples after His resurrection. To the dejected and sorrowful pair wending their way to Emmaus He reproachfully says, “O fools and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into His glory? And beginning at Moses, and all the prophets, He expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning Himself” (Luke 24:25-2725Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: 26Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? 27And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. (Luke 24:25‑27)). Thus the true spiritual nexus of those ancient writings, missed by the dissecting critics, is “Christ,” as another passage in the same chapter also states, “These are the words which I spoke unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms concerning Me” (Luke 24:4444And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. (Luke 24:44)). Here, too, the Lord alludes to the well-known triple division of the books of the Hebrew canon, viz. the law, the prophets, and the psalms. These together comprised the “scriptures” as the next verse shows, “Then opened He their understanding that they might understand the scriptures.” So that as has been said, “we may accept the Hebrew scriptures from the pierced hands of Christ Himself in resurrection:” though it is not hereby implied that His words were more true one time than another.
Other references in the evangelists also agree in teaching that our Lord added the whole weight of His authority to the generally received view of the authorship of the Pentateuch. When the rationalists of that day came to Him with their alleged difficulty about the resurrection, they said “Master, Moses wrote unto us, If a man's brother die and leave his wife behind him &c.", quoting from Deut. 25:55If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband's brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband's brother unto her. (Deuteronomy 25:5), and manufacturing there from a highly complicated objection, as they thought (Mark 12:18-2318Then come unto him the Sadducees, which say there is no resurrection; and they asked him, saying, 19Master, Moses wrote unto us, If a man's brother die, and leave his wife behind him, and leave no children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. 20Now there were seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and dying left no seed. 21And the second took her, and died, neither left he any seed: and the third likewise. 22And the seven had her, and left no seed: last of all the woman died also. 23In the resurrection therefore, when they shall rise, whose wife shall she be of them? for the seven had her to wife. (Mark 12:18‑23)). The Lord, at once, utterly condemns their interpretation of Holy Writ, saying, “Ye know (μὴ εὶδύτες) not the scriptures nor the power of God.” But it is important to notice that He does not condemn them for ascribing Deuteronomy to Moses, and He did not accept their fabulous interpretation. Why should He accept their fabulous authorship, if indeed it be fabulous, as the critics groundlessly imagine?
The Lord, however, proceeding to instruct them concerning the resurrection, takes up the very one to whom they had just referred and shows that he was opposed to their erroneous and skeptical notions. Neither was there any excuse for their ignorance of this. If they had read Deuteronomy, surely they must have read Exodus which Moses also wrote. “Have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham &c?” The Lord thus directly appeals to the Pentateuch as the book of Moses. And this phrase means simply the book which Moses wrote. For the word of God in another gospel, as if anticipating the mouse-holes through which the critics would fain creep, entirely forbids any thought to the contrary, such as the “book containing the law of Moses.” Accordingly in Luke we read in the same connection, “Now that the dead are raised even Moses showed in the bush, (or “the place concerning the bush.” R.V.) when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham” &c. (Luke 20:3737Now that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. (Luke 20:37)). This indicates unmistakably that the human author was Moses, while the parallel passage in Matt. 22:3131But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, (Matthew 22:31) adds a word as to the divine inspiration of the same. “Have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham” &c. And it should he observed that it is the written word which is thus authorized in this scripture. For though the words themselves were originally addressed by God to Moses, in the written form they are said to be addressed by God to them, being divinely preserved for the profit of all. Compare also Mark 7:1010For Moses said, Honor thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death: (Mark 7:10). with Matt. 15:44For God commanded, saying, Honor thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. (Matthew 15:4).
In another place also the Lord again affirms in very precise terms that Deuteronomy was written by Moses. It was this time to the Pharisees, who, though they agreed with the Sadducees as little as possible, had at any rate no difference of opinion as to owning the hand of Moses in writing the law. They came to Him temptingly with a question concerning divorce. Jesus said, “What did Moses command you?” They at once referred to Deut. 24:11When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favor in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. (Deuteronomy 24:1). Jesus answered and said unto them “For the hardness of your hearts he wrote you this precept” (Mark 10:3-53And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you? 4And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away. 5And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. (Mark 10:3‑5)). Language can scarcely be more distinct and definite than this. So that we can but marvel at the audacity of men professing to be shepherds of the flock of God who appear to have no compunction whatever in contradicting their Master and saying “it is certain that Moses himself could not have written the book of Deuteronomy." And again “on the dramatic hypothesis, Deuteronomy (was) not written by Moses but in Moses' name to incorporate the Mosaic tradition.” “We may suppose Deuteronomy to be a republication of the law in the spirit and power of Moses put dramatically into his mouth.”
It is hoped (D. V.) to attempt next month to point out in more detail the real character of these and similar assertions contrary to the words of our Lord.
(To be continued.)