of their parents. But if the signs of silver or gold appear in the children of the bronze or iron castes, they must then be raised to their due places. And if bronze or iron appear where we look for gold, that too must be reduced to its proper rank.'

So,

He adds:

"We shall not persuade the first generation that it is but it may be in time that their descendants will believe our tale. And the belief would contribute greatly to the good of the State and to the good of one another."

The early history of all peoples is in legends; the early philosophy of all peoples is in myths. There is no reason to believe that the Hebrew people are any exception to this otherwise universal rule. When the literary critic says that the Book of Genesis is a collection of legends and myths, he does not stigmatize it as valueless.2 He affirms

1 Ibid., pp. 9, 10.

2 Bishop Westcott points out the providential use of the myth, and indirectly indicates that it might well be used as a vehicle for the conveyance of divine truth in a divinely inspired writing. From his suggestive essay on The Myths of Plato, above referred to, which is well worthy of the student's careful reading, I quote a few sentences. “Thus there are two problems with which the Platonic myths deal, the origin and destiny of cosmos, and the origin and destiny of man. Both problems obviously transcend all experience and all logical processes of reason. But no less both are ever present to the student of life, though he may neglect them in the investigation of details or deliberately set them aside as hopelessly insoluble " (p. 11). "Whatever may be the prevailing fashion of an age, the Myths of Plato remain an unfailing testimony to the religious wants of man. They show not only that reason by its logical processes is unable to satisfy them, but also in what directions its weakness is most apparent and least support

that its value lies, not in the historical or scientific accuracy of its stories, but in the indications which they afford of the pre-natal character of this Hebrew people, and in the spiritual truths of which these stories are the vehicle. What these indications are, what that truth is, I have already indicated. The story of creation is not a scientific treatise on cosmogony. When neighboring peoples deified nature, worshiping the sun and moon and stars, the birds and beasts, the sacred river Nile, the cattle that browsed upon its shore, the crocodiles that swam in its waters, and the very beetles which crawled along its banks, the Hebrew myth of creation embodied the truth that God is Spirit, and Spirit is creative; that God has made man in his own image; that of created beings man alone is divine; and that nature, which by pagan religions men were taught abjectly to worship, is man's serf whom he is to tame, harness, and make do his bidding. The Hebrew myth of Eden embodied the truth that sin is willful disobedience of law; that conscience makes cowards of us all; that between sin and the human soul is to be eternal and undying hate; that sin will corrupt the able. They form, as it were, a natural scheme of the questions with which a revelation might be expected to deal, Creation, Providence, Immortality, — which as they lie farthest from the reason, lie nearest to the heart. And in doing this, they are so far an unconscious prophecy of which the teaching of Christianity is the fulfillment. . . . But more than this: the Myths mark also the shape which a revelation for men might be expected to take. The doctrine is conveyed in an historic form: the ideas are offered as facts; the myth itself is the message" (ibid., pp. 48, 49).

whole human race, but that the human race will destroy sin, or, to relate it in the language of the myth, the serpent shall poison the heel of man, and man shall crush the serpent's head. The Hebrew myth of the expulsion from the garden embodied the truth that sorrow is disciplinary, and the road from the garden of innocence to the victory of virtue is through the struggle of the wilderness. The Hebrew myth of the deluge embodied the truth that destruction of sinners can never cure the world of sin. The Hebrew myth of Abraham taught the truth that he who seeks God shall find him, and that to find him no sacrifice of home or friends or child is or can be too great; the Hebrew myth of Jacob, that God is the God of sinner as well as of saint, and remembers his mercies unto children's children of such as love him and keep his commandments; the myth of Joseph, that he is the Providence of all who put their trust in him God in Egypt as in the Holy Land, in Pharaoh's prison and Pharaoh's palace, God of gods and Lord of lords.

This ancient compilation of prehistoric myths and legends is valuable, not because of any scientific addition which it makes to our knowledge of early history, but because it shows us the consciousness of God in the early experiences of that remarkable people to whom more than to all other peoples combined the world owes its knowledge of God, its standards of righteousness, and its impulse to the divine life.

CHAPTER IV

THE BOOK OF THE COVENANT

Ir is a common belief among primitive peoples that their code of laws was dictated to the lawgivers by a god or the gods. This seems to have been the opinion of the ancient Hebrews concerning their system of laws contained in the Books of Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. That opinion has passed over into the Christian Church, where it has been widely held that this entire code, with all its complex regulations respecting both civil life and ecclesiastical offices, was given by Jehovah to Moses and reduced by him to writing. According to this view, the entire code, civil and ecclesiastical, dates from about 1450 B. C.1 References in these codes to conditions that did not exist until long after the death of Moses are supposed to have been prophetic and preparatory for conditions yet to come. Some of the scholars of the olden time even maintained that the account of the death of Moses, contained in the last chapter of Deuteronomy, was written by Moses prophetically before the death occurred, though no one, I think,

1 Or according to modern chronology 1250 B. C. See chronological table on page xi.

any longer entertains that opinion. It is generally conceded by the most conservative critics that this postlude to the book, and perhaps some other special provisions scattered through the Pentateuch which are wholly inapplicable to the nomadic life of the wilderness, were added by an unknown writer subsequent to the death of Moses.1

The modern critic believes that no part of these law books was written by Moses in their present form; that they contain laws and prescribe customs which grew up gradually among the Hebrew people during a checkered history of nearly ten centuries; that while the oldest portion of the codes of which these books are composed probably embodies substantially his teaching, the latest civil code, as we have it in Deuteronomy, was not formulated until

66

1 This is the substantially unanimous opinion of scholars who insist upon the Mosaic authorship of the rest of the book, e. g.: "This chapter could not be written by Moses himself, but was added by Joshua or Eleazar, or, as Patrick conjectures, by Samuel, who was a prophet, and wrote by divine authority what he found in the records of Joshua, and his successors, the judges." Matthew Henry, Commentary on Deut. xxxiv. 1-14. It seems most probable, and is commonly believed, that this chapter was not written by Moses, but by Eleazar or Joshua, or Ezra, or some other man of God, directed herein by the Holy Ghost; this being no more impeachment to the Divine authority of this chapter, that the penman is unknown, which also is the lot of some other books of Scripture, than it is to the authority of the acts of the king or parliament, that they are written or printed by some unknown person." Pool's Annotations, vol. i. p. 407. The thoughtful reader will probably observe that this argument applies with as much force to the whole Book of Deuteronomy as to a single supplementary chapter of the book.