easily accounted for; the writer applies the rules about the purification from a dead body, to the object then most familiar with him, a tent. And as its lying in a house would produce no effect different from its lying in a tent, and require no difference of purification, he says nothing about a house, but leaves the nature of the thing to suggest the regulation when it should become necessary. Whereas, in detailing the rules for discovering and purifying the leprosy, all the materials of which tents are made,* wool, and canvas, and leather, are particularized, as exhibiting each of them peculiar symptoms of the plague;† and this being done, it was unnecessary to say any thing of a tent itself; but as the materials of a house were quite different, and the appearances of infection in it peculiar, this required a particular specification. All this has the appearance of reality, and is exactly the way in which an eye-witness would have spoken: but it is such a difference as a writer of fiction would scarcely have thought of. A similar observation may be made, on the manner in which the service of the Levites, in taking care of the tabernacle, is described. We find the families of the Levites enumerated, the numbers of each, and the heads of them, and which were to be entrusted with the most holy things. If it should be conceived that all this may have been inserted in a fictitious narrative, like the catalogues of Homer and Virgil, to preserve the semblance of probability, and to compliment existing families, by representing their supposed ancestors in situations of peculiar dignity; yet, how can we on such a principle, account for the exact detail which is given, not only of the arrangement of these families round the tabernacle, but the particular parts § of that structure, and the particular sacred vessels which each family was to carry on the march; and still more, the minuter directions given, as to the mode of taking these different parts asunder, protecting them from the injuries of the weather during the march, carrying and setting them up? How unnatural and irrational would all this appear in the remote compiler of a general history, who lived long after these marches had ceased, when all such directions were utterly superfluous, + Ibid. 48. 59. Numbers, iii. and iv * Lev. xiii. 47 to 58. Surely we cannot suppose that such particulars as these should proceed from any writer but an eye-witness of the events; nor even from an eye-witness, except he had been engaged as Moses was, in originally directing and constantly superintending these operations. Different circumstances occur in the detail of these directions, which seem to supply more decisive characters of truth and authenticity; because they display coincidences more minute, or more circuitous and indirect. Thus it is mentioned, that Aaron as High Priest, and his family, had charge of the Ark of the Lord, and the furniture of the Holy of Holies; but they were to be carried, during the progress of each march, by an inferior family; and the writer remarks, these were not to approach them, until "Aaron and his sons had made an end of "covering them, at the commencement of the journey."* What forger or mere compiler would have thought of such a circumstance? A coincidence still more remarkable on this subject, is the following. In the third and fourth chapters of Numbers, the parts of the tabernacle to be carried by each family of the Levites, on the march, are minutely specified. The fifth and sixth are taken up with a detail of Laws entirely unconnected with this subject; the seventh begins with relating, that the different princes of Israel made an offering of six covered waggons and twelve oxen, which Moses employed to carry the tabernacle, and distributed to two families of the Levites, "according to their service;"+ (for the third were to carry the part assigned to them, the furniture of the Holy of Holies upon their shoulders ;) to one are assigned two, to another four waggons. The reason of this inequality is not specified; but on turning back, we find that the family to which the fourt waggons are assigned, had been appointed to carry the solid, and therefore heavy parts of the tabernacle, its boards, and bars, and pillars; while that family to which the two § waggons are assigned, was appointed to carry the lighter, its curtains and coverings, its hangings and cords. Such a coincidence as this is extremely natural, if Moses, who directed this matter, recorded Numbers, iv. 15. Compare Numb. vii. 8, with iv. 31. Ibid. vii. 5 to 9. § Compare Numb. vii. 7, with iv. 25. it; but is it not wholly improbable, that a forger or compiler should think of detailing such minute particulars at all, or if he did, should detail them in such a manner as this? The more minute and apparently unimportant such coincidences as these are, the more unlikely is it they should arise from any thing but reality. Another coincidence of somewhat a similar nature is the following. In the second chapter of the book of Numbers, the writer describes the division of the twelve tribes into four camps, the number of each tribe, and the total number in each camp. He fixes the position each was to take round the tabernacle, and the order of their march; and he directs that the tabernacle, with the camp of the Levites, should set forward between the second and third camps.* But in the tenth chapter occurs what seems at first a direct contradiction to this; for it is said,† that after the first camp had set forward, then "the tabernacle was taken "down; and the sons of Gershon, and the sons of Merari, set "forward, bearing the tabernacle; and afterwards the second “camp, or standard of the children of Reuben." But this apparent contradiction is reconciled a few verses after, when we find that though the less sacred parts of the tabernacle, the outside tent and its apparatus, set out between the first and second camp; yet the sanctuary, or Holy of Holies, with its furniture, the ark and the altar, did not set out till after the second camp; as the direction required. And the reason of the separation is assigned, that those who bore the outside tabernacle might set it up, and thus prepare for the reception of the sanctuary against it came. Would a forger or compiler who lived when these marches had wholly ceased, and the Israelites had fixed in the land of their inheritance, have thought of such a circumstance as this? In comparing the direct narrative with the recapitulation in the last book of the Pentateuch, some differences occur well worth noticing. In the eighteenth chapter of Exodus, Moses, with singular impartiality gives the credit of originating one of the most salutary and important parts of the Jewish civil government to his father-in-law, Jethro; who, observing the variety and weight of business which oppressed the legislator, from his acting Numbers ii. 17. Numbers, x. 17. Ibid. x. 21. D 66 as judge of every private litigation between the people, tells him,* "The thing that thou doest is not good. Thou wilt surely wear away, both thou and this people with thee: this thing is to "heavy for thee; thou art not able to perform it thyself alone "Hearken now unto my voice: Thou shalt provide out of all the "people able men, such as fear God, place such over them, to be "rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and "rulers of tens; and let them judge the people. If thou shalt do "this thing, and God command thee so, then thou shalt be able "to endure, and all this people shall also go to their place in peace. So Moses hearkened to the voice of his father-in-law, "and did all that he had said. And Moses chose able men out "of all Israel, and made them heads over the people, rulers of "thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of "tens. And they judged the people at all seasons; the hard "causes they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they "judged themselves." Such is the direct narrative. In the very beginning of his address to the people, Moses is represented as alluding to this fact, but with this remarkable difference; that he not only says nothing of Jethro, but that, instead of representing himself as the person who selected these magistrates, he states that he had appealed to the people, and desired they should elect them. "I spake unto you at that time, saying, I am not "able to bear you myself alone: The Lord your God hath multiplied you, and behold, ye are this day as the stars of heaven "for multitude. (The Lord God of your fathers make you a "thousand times so many more as you are, and bless you as he "hath promised you.) How can I myself bear your cumbrance, "and your burden, and your strife? Take you wise men, and understanding, and known among your tribes, and I will make "them rulers over you. So I took the chief of your tribes, wise "men, and known, and made them heads over you. And I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes be"tween your brethren, and judge righteously between every man "and his brother, and the stranger that is with him. Ye shall "not respect persons in judgment, but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man, "for the judgment is God's: and the cause that is too hard for 66 * Exod. xviii. 17, &c. " 99* you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it." There is a great and striking difference between these statements, but there is no contradiction: Jethro suggested to Moses the appointment; he probably after consulting God, as Jethro intimates, "if God "shall thus command thee," referred the matter to the people, and assigned the choice of the individuals to them; the persons thus selected he admitted to share his authority as subordinate judges. Thus the two statements are perfectly consistent. But this is not all; their difference is most natural. In first recording the event, it was natural Moses should dwell on the first cause which led to it, and pass by the appeal to the people as a subordinate and less material part of the transaction; but in addressing the people, it was natural to notice the part they themselves had in the selection of those judges, in order to conciliate their regard and obedience. How naturally also does the pious legislator in his public address, dwell on every circumstance which could improve his hearers in piety and virtue. The multitude of the people was the cause of the appointment of these judges: How beautifully is this increase of the nation turned to an argument of gratitude to God! How affectionate is the blessing with which the pious speaker interrupts the narrative, imploring God, that the multitude of his people may increase a thousand fold! How admirably does he take occasion, from mentioning the judges, to inculcate the eternal principles of justice and piety, which should control their decisions! How remote is all this from art, forgery, and imposture! Surely here, if any where, we can trace the dictates of nature, truth, and piety. A similar difference occurs between the direct narrative of the appointment of those who were sent to spy out the land of Canaan, and the manner in which Moses recapitulates this fact, when he addresses the people. In the former it is stated, "The Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Send thou men, that they "may search the land of Canaan, which I give unto the Chil“dren of Israel : of every tribe of their fathers shall ye send a man, every one a ruler among them. And Moses, by the "commandment of the Lord, sent them from the wilderness of "Paran." The history then reckons up their names, and re Deut. i. 9, to the end. Numb, xiii xiv. |