A comprehensive view of the system may be taken under the three principal heads of— I. RELIGION.

II. GOVERNMENT.

III. GENERAL LAW.

With such divisions and sub-divisions as may seem convenient. Thus—

I. RELIGION may be divided into DOGMAS and REGULATIONS.

1. DOGMAS.-These comprehend the ideas concerning GoD and his government which were communicated to the Hebrews; and, for the sake of preserving which, ripening in the world, the Hebrews were set apart as a peculiar people, and the whole ritual system was organized. Or, perhaps, it will be clearer to continue, as before, to describe them as measures taken to preserve in the world that knowledge of God which was possessed by the first men, and which had at this time all but disappeared under the operation of idolatry and polytheism, by which the whole earth may be said to have been overspread. It is as levelled against these errors, and against the mistaken views of the Divine character in which the world was already lost, or rather as designed to guard the chosen race from their most contagious influence, that most of the great body of the Mosaical law is to be understood.

The positive doctrines are few and simple; but their massive grandeur becomes apparent when we duly estimate their bearing upon the problems which perplexed the ancient world, and contrast them with the frivolities of doctrine and worship which characterised all other systems of belief.

The whole system of a plurality of gods, of whatever kind, was precluded by the grand declaration that Jehovah, who delivered the seed of Abraham from Egypt, was the only God in heaven or in earth.* His eternity and self-subsistence is not obscurely intimated in such names as JEHOVAH, I AM, I AM THAT I AM, when the force of the original terms is apprehended, and seems also to be assumed as a matter known from of old.† That God was the Creator of the heavens and the earth-of all nature and of all beings, was, in those days, a truly grand and distinguishing doctrine. We are taught it from our infancy; and, therefore, to recognise its importance and grandeur, as a peculiar doctrine of Mosaism, it is necessary to recollect that for more than 1200 years after Moses the ancient mind was unable to form the idea of a God so exalted in character as to be an agent in the formation of the universe. Some of the most mentally endowed men of ancient times fell far short of this and other important doctrines, which were matters of familiar knowledge to every man, woman, and child among the Hebrews; and this fact affords a most emphatic answer to the question-“ Canst thou by searching find out God? Canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection?" Anaxagoras (who came to Athens B.C. 456) was the first who taught that the world was organised or constructed, by some MIND or mental being, out of matter which this philosopher supposed had always existed. This opinion was adopted and enforced by Socrates, Plato, and others. But Aristotle supposed the world to have existed eternally in its organised form; while the Epicureans held that a fortuitous concurrence of atoms was the origin of all things. Thus we see that the most capacious intellects could grasp no higher doctrine than the existence of a supreme architect or framer of the universe out of materials which existed before all time; and this, after the Hebrews had for ages entertained the belief in a Supreme Creator of all things. No other people believed in an act of creation, properly so called. They were likewise taught that this Supreme Creator was also the Governor of the world,—a doctrine which, although as familiar to the Hebrews and to ourselves as the other, was equally incomprehensible to the ancient mind. Even those of the old philosophers who believed in the existence of a Supreme Architect [not Creator] of the world, were far from thinking that the world was practically governed by him. They held the opinion of an animating principle in matter, originating with the Supreme Framer, by which the material world was governed. Things of minor importance, especially those which influenced the destiny of man, were

Exod. xx. 2, 3; Deut. iv. 35, vi. 4, xxxii. 39.

+ Deut. xxxiii. 27.

Gen. i.

referred by all classes to the government of many gods, who were accordingly the objects of worship, and not the Supreme Architect.

Further to estimate the supreme importance of these two doctrines that Jehovah was the Creator of the universe and the sole Governor of the world, it is necessary to recollect the prevalence of the belief in national or tutelary gods; the tendency to which belief is constantly manifested in the Old Testament, by the disposition of the heathen to regard Jehovah as merely the national God of the Jews, on a level with their own national gods;§ and there is strong evidence that the chosen people did themselves, at times, fall into this opinion. Hence there is visible a constant anxiety to impress upon the Hebrew mind the universality of the Divine attributes, these being among the greatest of the great truths which they were destined to preserve. Moses calls him by the name JEHOVAH who created heaven and earth,* and who sent the deluge.† Abraham and Melchisedek address Him as the Most High God, who created heaven and earth. He is acknowledged by Joseph to be the all-wise Governor of the universe.§ He calls himself Jehovah who is always the same ;|| who both predicted and performed those wonders in Egypt and in Arabia, which proved him to be omniscient and omnipotent; who is the author of every living thing;** who is invisible (for the descriptions which represent him as appearing at times in a bodily form are symbolical) ;†† who is the Lord of heaven and the earth, and everything in them; and the Friend of strangers as well as of the Hebrews. Moses everywhere exhibits him as the Omnipotent; the Ruler of all men; One who cannot be swayed by gifts and sacrifices, but who is kind and merciful to the penitent.

On the question-" Whether the character of JEHOVAH, as represented by Moses, is that of a Being inexorably just ?" we are happy to introduce the following observations of Professor Jahn-SS

"God is often represented by Moses as a just Judge, who punishes with severity those who are wicked and disobey his commandments. The inconstant, stiff-necked and intractable people with whom Moses had to deal could not be restrained from vice, nor brought into subjection to the laws, without holding up such a representation. Such a representation was the more necessary, because JEHOVAH was not only the GoD, but, in a strict sense, the KING of the Jews, whom it behoved, consequently (in order to render due protection to the righteous), to condemn transgressors, and make them objects of punishment. Had it been otherwise,—had he not defended the good from the attacks of the bad, or had free pardon been offered to all the guilty, all his laws, as a KING, would have been useless. Still, although what has been now said be true, the statement which some have made, that Moses has made God an inexorable Judge, and that only, is utterly untrue.

"The original promises to the patriarchs, which were so often repeated to their descendants; the liberation from Egyptian bondage; the laws enacted in the wilderness; the entrance granted to the Hebrews into the land of Canaan; are deeds of kindness which prove the beneficence of God. Hence it is often inculcated upon the Hebrews to exhibit gratitude towards God; and the fact also that they were expressly commanded to love God, is at least an implied admission of his kindness and beneficence.¶¶ Moses calls God the Father of his people, the merciful, the clement, the benign, the faithful JEHOVAH, who exhibits, through a thousand generations, the love of a Parent to his good and faithful followers; who forgives iniquity and transgression, but to whose mercy, nevertheless, there are limits, and who visits the sins of the fathers on the posterity to the third and fourth generation.

"The infliction of punishments, even to the fourth generation (i. e. by means of public calamities, the consequences of which would be experienced even by posterity), a principle which appears even in the FUNDAMENTAL LAWS,††† has given offence to many, who are either unwil

* Gen. i.; Exod. xx. 8-12, xxxi. 17; Deut. iv. 3. Gen. xxxix. 9, xlv. 5,1. 20.

** Num. xvi. 22, xxvii. 16.

Biblische Archæologie,' sect. 205.

¶¶ Deut. vi. 4, 5, 11, 12, 15, 22.

+ Deut. vi. 17.

Gen. xiv. 18-20, xvii. 1, xviii. 16-25. Exod. vi. 3. Exo. vi. 7, vii. 5, x. 1,2, xvi. 12, xxix. 46; Deut. iv. 32-36, x. 21. tt Exod. xxxiii. 18-23; Deut. iv. 12-20, 39. Deut. x. 14-18. Deut. vii. 6-9, viii. 2-20, ix. 4–8, x. 1–11. *** Dent. viii. 5, xxxii. 6; Exod. xxxiv. 6,7; Num. xiv. 13; Deut. vii. 9, 10.

ttt Exod. xx. 5, 6.

ling or unable to perceive that the prospect of misery falling on their posterity would be a real source of punishment to the parents, who, it may be observed, were, in that age, particularly solicitous about the well-being of their descendants. We learn, nevertheless, from various passages, that the punishments due to the fathers were not so much designed to be really inflicted on their posterity, as to remain to them warnings, that if they trod in their fathers' footsteps, they would expose themselves to the same evil and fearful consequences; and that when they had done evil, their only course was to repent. That such would be the case, the deep and serious evils of the Babylonish captivity gave them so clear a proof, as to preclude all subsequent doubts on the subject: they repented of their evil ways, and, as Moses himself had predicted, became the constant worshippers of God."*

In representing these as the doctrines which the Hebrew people were instructed to believe, and for the sake of preserving which among them the whole system of law was instituted, we have endeavoured to show how important these first principles were, and how necessary their preservation, in the state and tendencies of religious opinion which in those times prevailed. Through the doctrine of Christ, our own religious knowledge is so much in advance of that which the books of Moses communicate, that when its amount is thus nakedly stated, and found to consist of the most plain and simple elements of our own belief, we are rather apt to wonder that higher mysteries are not found in a system so elaborately produced and guarded with such care. But these plain facts were high mysteries to the world at large. And if we, nourished, as we are, by the strong meats which our advancing age requires, feel the inadequacy for our sustainment of the milk with which the infant was satisfied, let us remember that what is as the food of infants to us was as strong meat to the world at large. The church lay a naked infant in the wilderness. God sent Moses to feed it—not with the strong meats of adult age—but with the milk which was best suited to the infant state. As the child grew, one prophet was sent after another to strengthen gradually her nourishment, and to direct her attention forward to that time when ONE would come to admit her to the stronger food and more sober raiment of her adult age and perfected growth. He came; and let not the generous diet by which she has since been nourished make her unmindful that this strong food, by which she now lives, would have been unsuitable to her, and could not have been borne by her in her earlier state. Her" nursing fathers " gave her food as she was able to bear it.

The point of view which we therefore take is, that the religion of the Mosaical dispensation is to be regarded not otherwise than as offering the elementary principles which alone the people were then in a condition to receive. These laid a broad foundation for whatever might afterwards be built thereon. But our present concern is exclusively with the Law of Moses; and we have had to consider only what that law taught, without anticipating the developements which the later prophets gradually supplied, and through which the Hebrews ultimately arrived at some stronger and clearer opinions than they could have derived from the books of the law alone.

After this limitation of our present object, it is only necessary to advert to the absence in the books of Moses of any notice of the future existence of the soul, or of a future state of rewards and punishments, which appear of such high importance to ourselves, that any religious system seems incomplete without them. That traces of these doctrines may be collected from the Hebrew Scriptures we have no doubt. The references to them and to others grew clearer in the times of later prophecy; and in the time of Christ, and long before, the Jews certainly did believe in the immortality of the soul and in a state of future rewards and punishments. Nearly all nations have believed this; and the belief of the Hebrews may be traced, probably, like theirs, to original primitive traditions, before the sons of Noah had corrupted their way. If these doctrines were known to Noah and his sons, they were of too intimate concernment to man himself to be ever forgotten, into whatever fanciful ideas of God and his government men might fall. The references to these doctrines which have been traced in the sacred book, are rather passing references to existing ideas, than authoritative declarations from God. There is nowhere any distinct information conveyed-least of all in the

Lev. xxvi. 20-25; Deut. iv. 28-31, xxx. 1-10.

books of Moses-nor in any one passage are the prospects of a future life held forth to deter from sin or to encourage holiness. No other motives were placed before the ancient Hebrews to pursue the good and avoid the evil, than those which were derived from the benefits and calamities, the rewards and punishments, of this life.

Why, on these important points, the Hebrews were left to the limited and obscure ideas of their patriarchal fathers admits, we think, of a very satisfactory answer :

There was something to satisfy the minds of those few whose hearts were ardently drawn forth beyond the things which belong to this life; while the people at large-whom it was the object of the system to act upon in a body, and keep them together as standing witnesses to certain doctrines-were not of a disposition to be acted upon by the remote considerations of a future life, and of results which could not be sensibly manifested to them; while the plan of acting upon them through the hope of present good, or the fear of present evil, was suited to the temporal and temporary character of the whole system, and, more particularly, to the position which it pleased God to take as the King of the Hebrew people, and as a king bestowing on his faithful subjects present and manifest evidence of his favour, and inflicting on wrong-doers present and manifest tokens of his displeasure. In fact, it seems to us that the distinct promulgation of this spiritual doctrine would have been an anomalous feature in a system altogether temporal, and which even required the exhibition of temporal sanctions.

The distinct and prominent exhibition of this doctrine was therefore most fittingly reserved for the developements of a more spiritual system. It was reserved for JESUS CHRIST" to bring life and immortality to light." The broader doctrine which He taught had no temporal sanctions it refused to allow the servants of God to look any longer for the temporal benefits which were offered under a temporal system; but while it led them rather to expect outward trouble in this life, from the conflict of adverse principles, it directed their view with all possible distinctness to a state of reward and glory—a treasure-an inheritance—a home— beyond the grave.

2. REGULATIONS.-The regulations which were made to preserve and enforce the dogmas to which our attention has been directed may be comprehended under the terms of Injunctions and Institutions.

i. Injunctions. The posterity of Abraham were, long before the time of Moses, set apart for the great object of preserving and transmitting the true religion, as contained in the doctrine that there was but one God, the Creator and Governor of the universe, and that he only ought to be worshipped. By the time the Israelites had grown into a people, idolatry and polytheism had become universal; very many of the chosen race had become tainted with these errors; and it was very evident that the Hebrews could no longer live in the midst of nations given to idolatry, without the danger of becoming like them. They were, therefore, assigned to a particular country, the extent of which was so small, that they were obliged, if they would live independently of other nations, to give up, in a great measure, the life of shepherds, and apply themselves to agriculture. The miracles which attended their deliverance from Egypt, their journey to their new country, and their entrance there, brought them back to the faith of their fathers, by affording them convincing evidence that the God who had taken them under his peculiar care was indeed All-powerful and Omniscient, and that the gods of Egypt and of other nations were nothing before Him. With this also must have come to the mass of the people the conviction that Moses, through whom all these wonders had been predicted and performed, was indeed His messenger. This conviction was necessary to engage them to receive those laws and institutions, without which, surrounded as they were by nations who regarded idolatry as conformable to right reason, their religious integrity could not well have been preserved. All these laws and institutions were, with differing intensity, concentrated upon the great object of moulding their habits and ideas, and of engaging them in such pursuits and relations as might form and maintain their character as conservators of the true religion.

To secure these objects, GoD, in the first instance, proposed Himself, through Moses, as KING to the Hebrews, and was accepted in that character by the united voice of the people. This was evidently with the design that the obedience which they rendered him as KING might become in some measure identified with the reverence to which he had a right as God; and while they yielded the former, they would be the less likely to withhold the latter. Accordingly, the land of Canaan, which was destined to be occupied by them, was declared to be the land of Jehovah, according to the Oriental notion of sovereignty which makes every monarch the supreme proprietor of the soil. And that this was not to be a mere theoretical sovereignty, but a practical one, was shown by the demand that they, as hereditary occupants of the soil, should pay to the sovereign proprietor a rent of two tithes, such as the Egyptians paid to their king.*

It was then, and not before this, his character as their immediate Ruler was recognised— that God promulgated from the clouds of Mount Sinai the prominent laws for the government of the people, regarded as a religious community, which we find in the twentieth chapter of Exodus. The subsequent developements and illustrations of these laws they received, at their own desire, through Moses. The rewards which should accompany obedience, and the punishments which should be the lot of the transgressor, were at the same time announced; and the Hebrews promised by a solemn oath to obey.†

Professor Jahn, whose views we have, to a considerable extent, followed in this branch of our inquiry, proceeds to observe :

"Since, therefore, God was the Sovereign of Palestine and its inhabitants, the commission of idolatry by any inhabitant of the country, even by a foreigner, was a defection from the true king. It was, in fact, treason; it was considered a crime equal to that of murder, and was, consequently, attended with the severest punishment. Whoever even encouraged idolatry was considered seditious, and was obnoxious to the same punishment. Incantations, necromancy, and other practices of a similar nature, were considered equally nefarious with idolatry itself, and deserving an equal punishment. Any one who knew a person to be guilty of idolatry was bound by the law to accuse that person before the judge, although the criminal were a wife, a brother, a daughter, or a son.

"The law, with the penalty attached to it, as we may learn from other sources, had reference only to overt acts of idolatry: it was rather a civil than a religious statute; and the judge who took cognizance of the crime, whilst he had a right to decide upon the deed, the undeniable act, in any given instance, evidently went beyond his promise if he undertook to decide upon the thoughts and feelings of a person implicated, independently of any overt commission of the crime.

"It has been observed that the law was not so much a religious as a civil one. The distinction is obvious. A religious law has reference to the feelings; and those laws, consequently, which command us to love God, to believe in him, and to render him a heart-felt. obedience, are of this nature.§ It should be remarked that the severe treatment of idolatry, of which we have given a statement, was demanded by the state of society at that period, when each nation selected its deity, not from the dictates of conscience, but from the hope of temporal aid. It was an age when idolaters were very numerous, and when nothing but the utmost severity of the laws could prevent them from contaminating the soil of the Hebrews."

The fact, that the repression of idolatry among the Hebrews was one great and principal object of the law, throws light on many of the precepts and injunctions of which it seems, otherwise, difficult to discover the meaning or to define the object. Many of these injunctions must, probably, always remain obscure, from our ignorance of the idolatrous practices to which they refer. Maimonides, in his excellent treatise, the More Nevochim,' acquaints us with many superstitious or indecent practices of the ancient idolaters which were understood to have been aimed at by particular injunctions and prohibitions of the Mosaical law. The

Exod. xix. 4-8; Lev. xxvii. 20-34; Num. xviii. 21, 22; Deut. xii. 17-19, xiv. 22, et seq.; xxvi. 12-15. + Exod. xxi.-xxiv.; Deut. xxvii.-xxx. Deut. xiii. 2-9, xvii. 2-5. § Deut. vi. 4-9, x. 12, xi. 1, 13.