Lectures Introductory to the Pentateuch.

Deut. 1 - 16.

In examining Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, we have found what may be called an abstract typical system. That is, we see in them a number of institutions laid down by Jehovah, the pattern of which was shown in the mount. These figures Moses was inspired to give as a whole to the people, entirely apart from the question whether they were or could be carried out according to the letter while passing through the wilderness. I have called it therefore an abstract typical system; for the value of it does not at all depend on the fidelity of the people to it. It is very possible that not a single institution during that time may have been strictly enforced or obeyed among the people.

Thus we know for certain that the most fundamental requirement of all, the Levitical ritual, was not practised; and if they did not prove faithful in that which was most urgent as well as least difficult in point of means for executing it, we can hardly suppose that they carried out their obedience in what was surrounded with immense if not insuperable obstacles. Even before the law from Abraham’s days there certainly was no injunction more solemn or more obligatory than the circumcision of every male child; yet we are assured that no male was circumcised during Israel’s wandering for forty years through the wilderness. This fact appears to be of some importance, because notoriously difficulties have been raised, on the score of practicability, as to the various ordinances requiring sacrifices and offerings where the means did not appear. We hear of sin and trespass-offerings, peace and burnt-offerings, meat-offerings and drink-offerings, not to speak of the daily lambs and occasional victims. Men have reasoned with great detail, especially in recent years, enquiring how all this could be done in the desert by a people who found it hard enough to pass unscathed themselves, though they had Jehovah their God with them to feed them with angels’ bread, and water if need were from the rock. But God, in fact, is always left out of the calculations of unbelief. For although there were flocks and herds led into the wilderness with the children of Israel at the command of Jehovah, and they may have added more from enemies they conquered, the fact just now referred to meets and removes a host of objections raised about it, and proves that the nature of these ordinances has not been understood.

The fact is that, no matter what might be the measure of carrying them out in the wilderness, God was setting forth by them the shadows of good things to come. This was their real object. It is not therefore a question of how far the offerings, etc. were then offered but of a vast body of systematically-ordered teaching by types. What God was displaying by them has now found its meaning, since Christ was revealed and the mighty work of redemption effected. It is a different thing however with the book of Deuteronomy; and this was my reason for remarking it at this point.

Deuteronomy is an eminently practical book. Types are but sparsely presented over the great bulk of the instruction which crowds its pages. We are far from being then on the ground of a mere rehearsal of what has been shown in the previous books. Deuteronomy, spite of its Septuagintal title, is no such repetition; but the Spirit of God by Moses has given us, along with special moral exhortation, such types as bear on the position of the people on the very edge of the promised land. They had marched round to the eastern side of the Jordan; they were now on that border of the land, after God’s long-continued process of dealing with them in the wilderness had come to its full measure. kind this book, while it does not want allusions to what God had said in all the other books, has, no less than the rest of them, its own peculiar character. It is not then a grouping of types, whatever might be the particular scope and aim of those employed, such as we have seen in distinct forms throughout the books of Exodus, Leviticus, or Numbers; but here all that the Spirit is using, whether it be direct moral application which forms much the larger part of the book, or whether it be a selection of such shadows as fall in with its. practical object, seems to be from first to last an enforcement of obedience, grounded on the relationship between Jehovah their God and Israel, whom He was just bringing as His people into His land. Accordingly the very large introduction is an address to the people for the purpose of enforcing these claims.

There is another peculiarity in the book of Deuteronomy which it is well to present briefly before we descend to particulars; it supposes the failure of the people. It was after the golden calf, nay more than this; it was after the whole disciplinary dealings of Jehovah had now come to an end. They had had many a sight of their own hearts, and they had had ample experience of God’s ways in patient and gracious government. All this was now closed. This therefore gives its tone to the book. The lawgiver, about to be taken from them, looks back on all the past; but he looks forward also to the land they were about to enter. Hence there is a tone of exceeding seriousness, as well as of chastened affection; there is a solemnity founded on the grand dealings of a God whose faithful and holy hand was now ushering them into His land. Above all the prime object is to press obedience on the people of God, but the obedience of a people who had already found what it was to have utterly broken down on their own assumed responsibility. That generation had passed away no doubt. The question was, did the present generation about to be brought into the holy land profit by the past? The aged lawgiver in these last words was led of the Holy Ghost to speak home to their souls.

This too explains why the book of Deuteronomy is made use of in the New Testament in so very striking a manner, and in circumstances so eminently critical. It is the book which our Lord quotes in His temptations with Satan. He cites from none other. In all the three occasions the Lord Jesus draws His answers from the book of Deuteronomy. Surely this is highly significant. He could have cited from any other, had any other been in all respects so suitable to the occasion. It was not necessarily, I conceive, because there were no words elsewhere admirably adapted to meet the case. May I not venture to think that other considerations entered, and that His citation of Deuteronomy only is in no way meant to disparage fitting words found elsewhere? It is not to be doubted that the words cited from Deuteronomy were the very best — that they were chosen according to divine perfection. But also it would appear that the deepest wisdom lay in citing from that book, as well as its most applicable words. The book from which they were selected had itself a special appropriateness to the occasion, as we shall see: can it be doubted that the blessed Lord knew this infinitely well when He was pleased to use it?

Now wherein lay this fitness not only in the words that were cited, but in the particular book from which they were extracted? Wherein lay the superior propriety of Deuteronomy to furnish answers at that juncture for Christ, as compared with any other book of scripture? I have no hesitation in subscribing the opinion that our Lord Jesus chose them not only because they were in themselves exactly such as met and confronted Satan’s temptations perfectly, but because there was a moral suitability in the fact that they were the words addressed to the people when ruin had already come in — when nothing but the grace of God was afresh appealing to them before they were brought into the holy land. The Lord, by the simple fact that He quotes Deuteronomy, gives evidence that He had before His eyes the condition of the people of God, whatever might be their own insensibility. Not only did the Lord say the right thing, but the ground, the line, and the spirit of the book whence He chose His answers were such as took the becoming place under such circumstances before God. The less that Israel felt they had failed, the more Jesus felt it for them. If they betook themselves to rites and ceremonies as a means of pleasing God, Jesus gave Himself up to unreserved obedience — was Himself the constant pattern of One who never sought His own will. Indeed He found His moral glory in this very fact, that He alone of all men that ever lived never in a single particular swerved from that which after all is the sweetest, loveliest, highest thing in man here below — absolute devotedness to another, doing the will of His God and Father. Such was the uniform walk of Jesus.

Now Israel had totally failed in their place. The book of Deuteronomy acknowledges this failure, and takes its stand not only on the fact that it was impossible to deny, it but on the duty of confessing it. At the same time there is the gracious bringing in of God, and of what was suited to the people of God, when ruin was there. This supposes a heart that knows God; and certainly so it is with Moses. We know well that, if God made known His acts unto Israel, He made His ways known unto Moses. But Jesus knew God Himself as Moses never did, and by His use of it put honour on the book that makes plain how in a state of ruin the one saving principle is obedience. We shall find more than that before we have done with the book of Deuteronomy, though we may in this lecture not look fully at a special character of it which is presented in the latter part of the book, where it will be proved that the New Testament also uses it in a very striking manner. But inasmuch as the Lord’s three answers are taken from the early portion of Deuteronomy, which comes before us on this occasion, I have at once referred to this patent fact. We never can duly understand the Old Testament unless in the light of the New; and if there is anyone who is personally and emphatically “the light,” need it be said that it is Jesus? This men forget. No wonder therefore that Deuteronomy in general has been but little understood, even by the children of God; that the thoughts of expositors are comparatively vague in explaining it; and that men are apt to read it with so little insight into its bearing that the loss might seem comparatively trifling if it were not read at all. In short how could it be respected as it deserves, if regarded as an almost garrulous repetition of the law? Now, apart from the irreverence of so treating an inspired book, such an impression is as far as possible from the fact. Deuteronomy has a character of its own totally distinct from that of its predecessors, as has been already pointed out and will appear more fully.

Let us now look at the details as far as it can be done in so brief a glance as we can afford to give it at present.

The first thing introduced here is the fact that Jehovah had spoken to them in Horeb, saying, “Ye have dwelt long enough in this mount. Turn you, and take your journey, and go to the mount of the Amorites, and unto all the places nigh “hereunto, in the plain, in the hills, and in the vale, and in the south, and by the sea side, to the land of the Canaanites, and unto Lebanon, unto the great river, the river Euphrates. Behold, I have set the land before you: go in and possess the land which Jehovah sware unto your fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give unto them and to their seed after them. And I spake unto you at that time, saying, I am not able to bear you myself alone: Jehovah your God hath multiplied you, and, behold, ye are this day as the stars of heaven for multitude.’’ Moses reminds them how he had shared the burden of care for them with others. “Take you wise men, and understanding, and known among your tribes, and I will make them rulers over you.” So it was done; but it is added that, when they did depart from Horeb and went through the wilderness, “which ye saw by the way of the mountain of the Amorites, I said unto you, Ye are come unto the mountain of the Amorites, which Jehovah our God doth give unto us. Behold, Jehovah thy God hath set the land before thee: go up and possess it, as Jehovah God of thy fathers hath said unto thee; fear not, neither be discouraged.”

Then comes (ver. 21 et seqq.) the relation of the inner motives for the sending of the spies.¹ This it is well to note, as we should not have discovered it from the Book of Numbers. What we have here is not a repetition; it leads us into things secret — what wrought in the people and hindered their blessing. The chief point to observe is that there was not a spirit of obedience in the people, and this they lacked because there was no faith in God. This is clearly shown. Consequently it is not an isolated fact that they wished spies, or that Jehovah acceded to their desire to have them (this we have already seen), but here — “Ye came near unto me every one of you, and said, We will send men before us, and they shall search us out the land, and bring us word again by what way we must go up, and into what cities we shall come.” Moses mentions how the saying pleased him: here things are stated exactly as they were. He may not at all have understood at the moment what was working in the people; but all is told out. “The saying pleased me well, and I took twelve men of you, one of a tribe: and they turned and went up into the mountain, and came unto the valley of Eschol, and searched it out. And they took of the fruit of the land in their hands, and brought it down unto us, and brought us word again, and said, It is a good land which Jehovah our God doth give us. Notwithstanding ye would not go up, but rebelled against the commandment of Jehovah your God: and ye murmured in your tents, and said, Because Jehovah hated us.” Was this their trust? “Because Jehovah hated us, he hath brought us forth out of Egypt.” Was it not the pettishness of disobedient children, if ever there were such? “Because Jehovah hated us, he hath brought us forth out of the land of Egypt, to deliver us into the hand of the Amorites, to destroy us. Whither shall we go up? our brethren have discouraged our heart, saying, The people is greater and taller than we.”

Such was the genuine result of sending the spies. “The people is greater and taller than we; the cities are great and walled up to heaven; and moreover we have seen the sons of the Anakims there. Then I said unto you, Dread not, neither be afraid of them. Jehovah your God which goeth before you, he shall fight for you, according to all that he did for you in Egypt before your eyes; and in the wilderness, where thou hast seen how that Jehovah thy God bare thee, as a man doth bear his son, in all the way that ye went, until ye came into this place. Yet in this thing ye did not believe Jehovah your God, who went in the way before you, to search you out a place to pitch your tents in, in fire by night, to show you by what way ye should go, and in a cloud by day.” Then the bitter consequences came. “Jehovah heard the voice of your words and was wroth, and sware saying, Surely there shall not one of these men of this evil generation see that good land which I sware to give unto your fathers.”

These were solemn words to bring before the minds of Israel just about to enter into the good land. We may without difficulty see the admirable appropriateness of such an introduction. They were about to enter it by special grace; for it is of importance to bear in mind that it was not by the covenant which was made at Horeb that the children of Israel entered the land at all. If God had held to the terms of that covenant, never could the people have found their way into Canaan; but God was pleased to bring in fresh terms by a way which will be shown before we have done with this sketch of Deuteronomy; and it was simply and solely because of those fresh terms of mercy which God Himself brought in of His own grace that Israel entered there. At the same time Moses, though well aware of this, reminds them of the real source of their misery, and of the judgment that had fallen on them from God.

It is evident therefore, that this book has the most sensible difference from all that preceded it. Its moral turns on this — the only possible way of maintaining relationship with God, namely, obedience; what the nature of that obedience is, and how it is modified; how God graciously takes into account the weakness of those brought into this relationship, and how He provides for His own glory in it. At all events, whatever may be His grace, whatever His ways with His people, obedience is that with which He cannot dispense. Hence therefore we see why it is that the first circumstance in their history brought before them was that God told them not to go up to the mountain of the Amorites; but they would go up in self-will and self-confidence, and utterly failed before their enemies. The land was straight before them, and they might, as far as that was concerned, have gone in and taken possession of it at once. Why did they not? The book of Deuteronomy discloses it. Because they had not a particle of confidence in God. Therefore it was that, when God told them to go up, they refused and suffered the consequence of their disobedience.

This then is the crucial test, so to speak, which Moses applies throughout; this is the homily; for indeed Deuteronomy we may call a book of divine homilies in this respect. It consists of moral addresses, and appeals in a tone quite unexampled in all the five books of Moses. Need one point out how suited all this is for the last words of one who was just about to depart? They possess that inimitable solemnity which cannot be so much uttered in words as felt in the general bearing of the book. Moses himself had the deepest sense of the situation, but in no way as one who distrusted Jehovah, for he had well learned to count on His love. He knew fully that Jehovah was doing nothing but what was for His own glory; how could His servant then find fault? There were reasons due to God’s character why Moses should not bring the people into the laud. He had compromised Him at a critical occasion, and could not but feel that so it was. Not that this made the smallest cloud between Master and servant. As God loved Moses, so Moses confided in God. Nevertheless the circumstance that he too had failed to sanctify Jehovah their God in his heart as he ought — that even he had misrepresented Him when it was above all due to God that His grace should be clearly seen, all this added gravity to the appeals and style of the departing man of God.

Thus then the circumstances of Moses, as well as of the people, were precisely those suited to impress the lesson of obedience. For a people in relationship with God such is the only possible way, either of pleasing Him, or of tasting that joy of the Lord which is the strength of His people.

Obedience is the real spring of blessing, as disobedience is the sure pathway of ruin. Such is the fertile topic which we find throughout the book.

Hence the story of the Amorites, as we saw, is given. Hence, while he fails not to show that Jehovah was with himself, and how Joshua was to displace him, he does not hesitate to set before all the story of his own shame, so to speak. What love there was in this, if by any means he might impress obedience on the people that were just going into the land! How good are the ways and the words of God! So it is that the New Testament gives us the failure of the apostle Peter, not merely at the beginning but in the very midst of his career. So it is that it does not withhold from us the over-heatedness of a Paul, as well as the weakness of a Barnabas; that it tells out the stumbling both of Thomas and of Mark: all is openly communicated for our instruction. The prime duty for every creature, whether Jew or Christian, is obedience. This then is the leading truth of Deuteronomy. So, after it has been brought before us from the first, we find their failure to trust Jehovah leads to a fresh command. They are no longer to go up and take possession of the land, but to turn back and take their journey into the wilderness. With this they did not at all like to comply; and thus the same spirit which declined to go up in obedience to Jehovah refuses to go back in submission to Him.

“Then ye answered and said unto me, We have sinned” — “we have sinned against Jehovah: we will go up and fight.” Ah! it is an easy thing to say, “We have sinned;” but how often we have to learn that it is not the quick abrupt confession of sin which affords evidence that sin is felt! It is rather a proof of hardness of heart. The conscience feels that a certain act of confessing the sin is necessary, but perhaps there is hardly anything which more hardens the heart than the habit of confessing sin without feeling it. This, I believe, is one of the great snares of Christendom from of old and now — that is, the stereotyped acknowledgment of sin, the mere habit of hurrying through a formula of confession to God. I dare say we have almost all done so, without referring to any particular mode; for alas! there is formality enough, and without having written forms, the heart may frame forms of its own, as we may have observed, if not known it in our own experience, without finding fault with other people, For notoriously, in a legal state of mind people are apt to get through the acknowledgment of sin in what they know has grieved the Lord; but even then there is a want of bowing to His will. Here then we have all laid bare. The Israelites thought to settle the whole matter with God by saying, “We have sinned;” but then they proved that there was nothing settled, nothing right; because what really pleases God is this — the acceptance of His good will, whatever it be. Faith leads to obedience: first of all the acceptance of His word brings and secures blessing by faith for our souls; and then, having received it, we surrender ourselves to His will. For what are we here but to please God? The Israelites realized nothing of the kind. The spring of obedience was wanting. This is what Moses is enforcing by every possible kind of declaration and motive; by his own example and by theirs, as well as the example of their fathers. All this is made to converge on the children. He wanted to leave them his blessing — nay, he wanted them to have the best blessing that God could give them. Next to having Christ Himself is the following in His steps. What better blessing after all can be on earth, except Christ Himself, if indeed it be not a part of Christ, than that life of Christ which walks in obedience?

This is then what he was pressing. But their fathers would not obey at that time. They would not go up when Jehovah bid them, and when He commanded them to turn back, they wished to go forward. They said, “We have sinned against Jehovah: we will go up and fight according to all that Jehovah our God commanded us.”

This is a solemn lesson — that there may be a thorough spirit of disobedience at the very time that people talk of doing whatever God is pleased to command. And it is obvious, beloved friends, obedience depends on this — that we really do what God commands us now — that we are doing what is suitable to our present position and state. What God lays on one He does not necessarily enjoin on another. For instance, it is not everybody that is called to serve God in a public way; nor is everyone called to take a particular step or course which might involve him in trouble and persecution. We have to consider whether we are undertaking it out of some human desire of heroism. How many one has known who would have liked much to be martyrs! I do not regard this as evincing the spirit of obedience, but rather a spice of self-confidence. When such a death is really before one in service, then perhaps the difficulties would be incomparably more felt; for the Lord does not call to such a course or end to gratify human nature, or to give an opportunity for glorifying man, but always for His own glory. In such a case there is no room for will, nor sparing of the heart. Every step in really obeying God puts the man morally to the test, and is more or less attended with severe trial. Where the world or the flesh governs, the trial is not felt. The man who said, “Master, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest,” had no faith at all. The other whom Jesus called thought about his father and mother; he would like to see them first. So it habitually is where the faith is real; but nature is not yet judged root and branch. The heart may be made up to follow the Lord, but the difficulties are still felt keenly; whereas the man who only theorises is ready in his own conceit, in word at least, to do anything; but there is no seriousness of spirit: he does not know himself yet. No matter what it may cost, he assumes that he will at once go through with the will of the Lord. It is exactly so here.

Such then is the early and remarkably striking introduction to the book.

Next we see what was the fact when they did go up spite of the warning of God to fight the Amorites. “Jehovah said unto me, Say unto them, Go not up, neither fight; for I am not among you; lest ye be smitten before your enemies. So I spake unto you; and ye would not hear, but rebelled against the commandment of Jehovah, and went presumptuously up into the hilt And the Amorites, which dwelt in that mountain, came out against you, and chased you, as bees do,” — there was a most ignominious flight — “and destroyed you in Seir, even unto Hormah And ye returned and wept before Jehovah; but Jehovah would not hearken to your voice, nor give ear unto you. So ye abode in Kadesh many days, according unto the days that ye abode there.” I am afraid there was not much more in the weeping than in the acknowledgment of the sin.

Then in Deuteronomy 2 the law-giver reminds them how they took their weary journey. But what wonderful grace! Jehovah went along with them; and of course the faithful turned back just as much as the unfaithful. How good is the Lord! This is now developed. Moses says, “We turned,” not “Ye,” merely. “We turned, and took our journey into the wilderness by the way of the Red Sea, as Jehovah spake unto me; and we compassed Mount Seir many days. And Jehovah spake unto me, saying, Ye have compassed this mountain long enough: turn you northward. And command thou the people, saying, Ye are to pass through the coast of your brethren the children of Esau, which dwell in Seir; and they shall be afraid of you: take ye good heed unto yourselves therefore: meddle not with them; for I will not give you of their land; no, not so much as a foot breadth; because I have given Mount Seir unto Esau for a possession.” Thus Jehovah from the very first was teaching them that they were not called out on an errand of indiscriminate conquest. It was not in His mind to offer men His law or the sword. They could take possession of no lands whatever of their own will. Jehovah gave them no such license as the right to slay, burn, or plunder others as they liked. It was simply a question of subjection to God and obeying Him, who had from the first a plan for the nations round Israel as their centre. “When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.”

It is the same principle here again as elsewhere. Man must not presume to choose. Israel was called in everything to confide in Jehovah and obey. Is there anything so wholesome! I am persuaded that above all the Christian, who has a still nearer relationship with God, is the very last person who ought to exercise a choice in self-will. How great the blessing of one who walks, as Christ walked, in dependence on God, not consulting Him only if constrained, but of a ready mind, and assured that by His Spirit, through the written word, He deigns to guide every step of your way where self is judged, and to give you to take the right path with a simplicity incomparably better than all the wisdom the world could muster, if one sought in independence to choose for oneself!

This seems to me put to the test in the question of the land of Edom. There was no doubt whatever that Esau had behaved so ill that the children of Israel were not likely to forget it. We know how these traditions linger among men, particularly in the East. But no, God would not have them to meddle. “I will not give you of their land.” Jehovah was most careful exactly where He had least sympathy. The fact of Esau’s pride and contempt of Israel gave them no license to take their land. “I have given Mount Seir unto Esau for a possession.” God always holds to His own principles, and He teaches us to respect them in others. “Ye shall buy meat of them for money, that ye may eat; and ye shall also buy water of them for money, that ye may drink. For Jehovah thy God blessed thee in all the works of thy hand: he knoweth thy walking through this great wilderness: these forty years Jehovah thy God hath been with thee; thou hast lacked nothing.” Why should they covet? They must learn not to seek what God would not give them. That is the point — to do God’s will. Jehovah had blessed Israel, and would have them content and thankful instead of coveting their neighbour’s goods. He too it was who had given the Mount to Esau: that was enough. And Israel bow to the will of their God. “And when we passed by from our brethren the children of Esau, which dwelt in Seir, through the way of the plain from Elath, and from Ezion-gaber, we turned and passed by the way of the wilderness of Moab.”

Then comes out another instance. Were they to lay hands on the Moabites who were not so near of kin as the Edomites? Not so. “Distress not the Moabites, neither contend with them in battle: for I will not give thee of their land for a possession; because I have given Ar unto the children of Lot for a possession.” Thus, we see, the second exhortation contains a lesson about other people, as the first was the danger of disobedience on their own part. What we find here is a warning not to yield to the sight of their eyes or the violence of their hands, guarding against a covetous spirit which pays slight regard to that which God had assigned to others. It is ever the same duty of submission to God’s will. The first chapter takes cognizance of themselves; the second chapter puts them to the test in the presence of other people. It did not alter their duty, if the antecedent history of Moab and Ammon, just as much as that of Esau, was far from good. We know the profanity of Esau; we know the solemn circumstances of Moab and Ammon from their very origin; but for all that God would not permit His people to indulge in what did not become Himself as represented however feebly in and by Israel. This is the plain gist of the book. It is the due conduct of a people in relationship with Jehovah; no longer the bringing out of typical institutions, but the development of the moral ways which become the people with whom Jehovah had a present connection and intercourse on earth. The grand duty and safeguard is evermore to heed His word, and the consulting Him not only for their own path but in respect to others. The same principle is steadily pursued on all sides.

They were tried after this by another case of forbearance. “So it came to pass when all the men of war were consumed from among the people, that Jehovah spake unto me, saying, Thou art to pass over through Ar, the coast of Moab, this day: and when thou comest nigh over against the children of Ammon, distress them not, nor meddle with them.” But the same duty abides for them. We see from this that it is mere ignorance to suppose that there is not a divine system in the book; and this is more remarkable, I think, in Deuteronomy, if possible, than in the preceding books. We can all understand an orderly arrangement where there are types all arranged in a consecutive manner; but here in these moral exhortations it is, though in another way, just as sensible. In this case too we have the fact that there had been a great deal of fighting in previous days. The children of Moab had had their wars. Was there any reason in this why the children of Israel should have wars with them now? And as for the children of Ammon, they too had passed through similar experience. Giants had dwelt there in times past, and the Ammonites called them Zamzummims. They were “a people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakims; but Jehovah destroyed them before them; and they succeeded them, and dwelt in their stead.” But this was no reason why they were to expect Jehovah to destroy the Ammonites now. Both were powerful motives not to dread the Canaanite races, who were destined to extirpation.

Thus was kept up a thorough sense of discipline in the people, and above all dependence on and confidence in Jehovah. They were to be guided simply not by what Jehovah had done in providence by Ammon, Moab, or Esau, but by His will as to themselves. This was a lesson for Israel of prime moment. May we not forget it ourselves! Covenant favour would surely do as much for Israel as providence had done for Moab and Ammon!

All this then precedes another lesson. It is well to remark here that verse 24 is exactly parallel with verse 13; that it is not Moses in verse 13, but Jehovah who commands to “rise up,” etc., in both; and that verses 10-12 are a parenthesis of instructive past history for moral profit like verses 20-23. “Rise ye up, take your journey, and pass over the river Arnon.” Now comes another promise: “Behold,” says He, “I have given into thine hand Sihon the Amorite.” Here then they are called to action. It will be observed that first of all in this chapter, it was not activity but subjection. It might be, and no doubt was, trying enough for Israel to take quietly the unfriendliness of the Edomites, Ammonites, and Moabites; but no matter what the provocation given, no matter how they might be insulted by them (and they were), a hand of Israel must not be lifted up against their brethren; for Jehovah reminds them of the connection, and gives those races the closest name possible — their brethren. Edomites or Moabites or Ammonites, — unfeeling and disposed to injure Israel, still God would educate His people in remembering whatever bond of nature there was: if blows came, God would not forget the delinquent. Meanwhile they were not to meddle with their kindred, even though jealous and unkind.

But Israel is called to action. “Rise ye up, take your journey, and pass over the river Arnon: behold, I have given into thine hand Sihon the Amorite, king of Heshbon, and his land: begin to possess it, and contend with him in battle. This day will I begin to put the dread of thee and the fear of thee upon the nations that are under the whole heaven, who shall hear report of thee, and shall tremble, and be in anguish because of thee. And I sent messengers out of the wilderness of Kedemoth unto Sihon king of Heshbon with words of peace.” Is not this very notable? What a difference between God’s conduct of His people, and man’s corruption of it! When we compare, for instance, the way in which Moses, under the direction of God, was to lead on the Israelites, and the way in which Mahomet perverted the word into a fable for ambitious ends, and allowance of human lusts and passions, who cannot see the difference? In the one case there was the thorough sifting and scrutiny of God — with whom most? With the enemies? Not at all, but His own people. In His dealings with them He applied a higher standard, and far more severity. There was incomparably greater strictness of judgment with the children of Israel than with all their enemies put together. Mark the very fact here set before us: not a single man of the congregation of Jehovah that left Egypt passed into the holy land save two individuals, who identified themselves by faith from the very first with the glory of Jehovah. Where else can be found such jealous care as this? It is granted that they did not all perish in the same way, but they all fell in the wilderness. Whatever then the blows which fell on Sihon, or on Og, or on any of the others; whatever the ways of God with Moab and Ammon afterwards, or even with Egypt, there never was seen such unsparing strictness as with Israel.

When man builds up a society, when he founds a religion or any other scheme, how wholly different his course! What gentle censures, if any, what palpable favouritism towards his own party, where they most deserve reproof and rebuke or perhaps still more stringent measures! On the other hand, there is no mercy but ruthless severity always served out to those who refuse to fraternise, not to speak of ceaseless enmity to those who condemn and oppose. But in Israel’s case God enforced a far more thorough and searching discipline in all their ways. No compulsion was used to the nations outside. In special instances judgment to the full took its course. Was anything like this the rule where man even took up the Bible for his own ends? It was otherwise with Mahomet. He might not grant such a liberal concession to others as he left to himself. I do not dwell on this. We all know that it is natural to wretched, wilful man. But there never was a system that more thoroughly pandered to the evil heart of man, and gratified it in its violence against others, and in its corrupt lusts for itself, than that frightful imposture. Whereas, even in God’s dealings with a nation after the flesh (and such is the truth as to Israel here), there was an admirable check on man and witness of divine government, though the law made nothing perfect. It was not yet Christ manifested, but man under trial of the law and its ordinances and restraints, dealt with as living in the world, and instructed in view of this present life. Yet for all that, even though it was but the governmental display of God with a nation (not fully as with Christ, but provisionally by Moses), there is not a fragment of it that does not, when candidly examined, prove the goodness and the holiness of God, as much as it illustrates also on the other side the rebelliousness of man, chosen man, even the people of God.

In this case let us see the principles of Jehovah’s discipline. Did He warrant Israel to coerce Sihon with threats of vengeance or win by cajolery? Did He offer him the book of the law with the one hand or the sword with the other? Nothing of the sort. Look at the way in which Jehovah treated even these enemies of Israel. “Let me pass through thy land: I will go along by the highway, I will neither turn unto the right hand nor to the left. Thou shalt sell me meat for money, that I may eat; and give me water for money, that I may drink: only I will pass through on my feet.” “But Sihon,” it is said, “king of Heshbon, would not let us pass by him: for Jehovah thy God hardened his spirit, and made his heart obstinate, that he might deliver him into thy hand, as appeareth this day. And Jehovah said unto me, Behold, I have begun to give Sihon and his land before thee: begin to possess that thou mayest inherit his land. Then Sihon came out against us, he and all his people, to fight at Jahaz. And Jehovah our God delivered him before us; and we smote him, and his sons, and all his people.” Israel kept the path of right and courtesy. Sihon rushed on them to his own ruin; and only so did Israel smite and dispossess the king of Heshbon.

In Deuteronomy 3 it is substantially similar with Bashan. Og the king came out, and as with Heshbon, so with Bashan. “Jehovah said unto me, Fear not: for I will deliver him, and all his people, and his land, into thy hand; and thou shalt do unto him as thou didst unto Sihon king of the Amorites, which dwelt at Heshbon. So Jehovah our God delivered into our hands Og also, the king of Bashan, and all his people.” All this is brought out to Israel as the fruit of obeying Jehovah.

Deuteronomy 1 lets us see the end of disobedience; Deuteronomy 2 and 3 give us to know as clearly the result of obedience. Nothing can be more manifest than the moral groundwork which Moses is preparing for all the rest of the book that follows.

In Deuteronomy 4 we find another line of things. The law-giver sets before them the manner in which the law dealt with themselves, in one feature particularly, which he presses on them. “Now therefore hearken, O Israel.” It appears to be a fresh discourse to a certain extent. “Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes and unto the judgments which I teach you, for to do them, that ye may live, and go in and possess the land which the Jehovah God of your fathers giveth you. Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of Jehovah your God which I command you.” Surely this again makes it too plain to call for many words of ours to demonstrate what Moses, or rather God Himself, has in view in all these chapters. It is obedience. “Your eyes have seen what Jehovah did because of Baal-peor: for all the men that followed Baal-peor, Jehovah thy God hath destroyed them from among you. But ye that did cleave unto Jehovah your God are alive every one of you this day.” So this fact also is used. Jehovah had cut down the former generation for their disobedience. “Behold, I have taught you statutes and judgments, even as Jehovah my God commanded me, that ye should do so in the land whither ye go to possess it. Keep therefore and do them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.”

Next, he presses their singular privilege in His presence with them. What nation had such a wonder as God Himself in their midst — God Himself near the least of them? “For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, as Jehovah our God is in all things that we call upon him for? And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day.” It was not merely a sight of God, but One who deigned to take the liveliest and most intimate interest in His people Israel. “Only take heed to thyself, and keep thy soul diligently, lest thou forget the things which thine eyes have seen, and lest they depart from thy heart all the days of thy life: but teach them thy sons, and thy sons’ sons.”

The point urged here is, that when they came and stood, as far as any then could stand, in the presence of God, they had seen no similitude of Jehovah. What a guard this was against the misuse of outward forms! God Himself did not disclose Himself by an external creature-shape. Jehovah their God did not make Himself visible to them by a similitude. Consequently there is here a heavy blow struck at the tendency towards idolatry. For when severed from Christ then those ordinances only became a snare to men. Still more since Christ: misused ordinances are practically the same thing in principle, as Galatians 4 teaches. This was guarded against from the first by the fact that no similitude of God was vouchsafed. “Ye came near and stood under the mountain; and the mountain burned with fire in the midst of heaven, with darkness, clouds, and thick darkness. And Jehovah spake unto you out of the midst of the fire: ye heard the voice of the words” — because they were called to obey — “but saw no similitude; only ye heard a voice. And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.” And then comes the exhortation to beware of corrupting themselves by idolatries, by the likeness of any creature. This is pursued to the end of the chapter, with the institution of the cities where the manslayer might find refuge.

In Deuteronomy 5 we come to still closer quarters. “And Moses called all Israel, and said unto them, Hear, O Israel, the statutes and judgments which I speak in your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and keep and do them.” Obedience is the claim. “Jehovah our God made a covenant with us at Horeb.” We shall find a fresh one made in the land of Moab, but first of all they are reminded of the Sinaitic covenant. “Jehovah made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day Jehovah talked with you face to face in the Mount out of the midst of the fire. (I stood between Jehovah and you at that time, to show you the word of Jehovah: for ye were afraid by reason of the fire, and went not up into the Mount.)” Then is laid down the memorial that Jehovah, who gave them His law, was the same who had brought them out of the land of Egypt. They were a people brought into relationship with God, and the object of His words was to guard them from practical inconsistency with that relationship.

It is remarkable that, even though in this connection Moses gives them what are called the ten commandments, there is nevertheless an express and manifest difference in the form as compared with Exodus; so little is Deuteronomy a mere rehearsal of the earlier books.² It is a familiar point to many, but may claim a brief notice here, especially as all do not see its bearing in by no means the least striking of the ten words; I speak of the law of the sabbath. Some wonder why it should be joined with the other commandments; but the sabbath is so much the more important here, because it is not strictly a moral command. This makes the principle at stake to be felt the more. The sabbath law rests entirely on the word of God Himself. It was a question of His authority, not of that which a man might intrinsically discern. What is meant by a moral law is that which one can pronounce on from within even without a prescription from God. For instance, a man knows perfectly well that he has no right to steal. If a person takes what does not belong to him, every man, even a heathen, can judge it. There may be lands where everything morally is at the lowest point, and where therefore a wrong is less severely estimated than elsewhere. But where is the savage even who does not know the wrongness of stealing? For although he may allow himself a dispensation to take from others, let a man steal from him, and it will soon be seen whether he does not condemn the wrong. Plainly then the savage knows quite well that it is unjustifiable to steal. But nobody knows about the sabbath-day unless Jehovah command it. Yet He joins its observance with prohibitions of evil which man could himself judge. It is therefore the strongest assertion of His authority.

This is constantly forgotten when men talk about the moral law. One of the most weighty duties is not properly a moral question at all, but depends simply on the commandment of God. Not that I doubt the sabbath-day to be of the deepest possible moment, and so lasting in its claims that, when the millennium comes, that day of rest will be in full force again. It is not correct therefore that the sabbath-day is done with: many people in Christendom think so; but I take the liberty of having a stronger view about the sabbath than even those who think themselves strongest. Many count it buried in Christ’s grave, but it is not. Far from being done with, we know from the word of God that He will maintain the sabbatical rest strictly, and enforce it in the days of the kingdom; so that, if a man does not bow to His authority, he will assuredly come under divine judgment: so much does Jehovah make of it in itself, and so much will He make of it for the obedience of others in the day that is coming.

We however are not under law but grace. The law of the sabbath is not given to Christians. Grace has brought us out of the condition of a nation in the flesh or of men in the earth. The Christian is not a mere man, nor is he a Jew. If one were simply a man, one must have to do with the place and state of Adam fallen. For a Jew no doubt there is the law of Moses. But for the Christian a very essential feature of his standing is that he is delivered from the status of man or Israel, and called to Christ and heavenly things. His death to the law is not therefore to weaken the authority of the law, but because of the principles of divine grace which are now brought out in Christ risen from the dead, founded on His death, manifested in His resurrection, and maintained by the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven. Such is the reason why a Christian even now on earth passes into a new state of things altogether. Consequently, when Christianity began, the first day of the week was made the distinguishing mark, the Lord’s-day, and not the sabbath. For we must remember that the sabbath does not mean a seventh day, as some persons (I am sorry to say) equivocate; but the seventh day and no other. This is so decided that in the millennial age there will be a strict maintenance of that day with all the authority of God Himself, vested in and exercised by the Messiah governing Israel and the earth.

Let me just refer to this for a moment longer, lest there should be any mistake about what appears to me to be the truth about it. In the commandment to keep it Jehovah the God of Israel speaks to this effect: “Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work; but the seventh day is the sabbath of Jehovah thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work.” But the motive here is not because God rested upon that day, but because they were to remember that they were servants in the land of Egypt, and that Jehovah had brought them out through a mighty hand, and by a stretched out arm: “Therefore Jehovah thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath-day.” Surely this is very significant, and points out a manifest difference in the character and scope and design of the book of Deuteronomy as compared with Exodus. In the one case there was a remembrance of creation; in this case, of symbolic redemption, the bringing out of Egypt. The fact is that redemption, even in type, is a stronger motive to obedience than creation itself. This seems the reason why it is brought in here, as the time was long past; whereas all was fresh in Exodus, which is the main display of that truth. If we have seen the object of all this part of Deuteronomy to be the enforcement of obedience, there is nothing which maintains obedience so much as redemption; and if that were the case when it was only an outward deliverance, how much more when it is eternal?

It is freely allowed that the ten words have a specific character of the deepest moment for man on earth, as distinguished from what was judicial and ceremonial. Hence Moses says, “These words Jehovah spake unto all your assembly in the mount out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice: and he added no more. And he wrote them in two tables of stone, and delivered them unto me.”

Next follows the account of their fear before God’s solemn words, their promise to obey, and the mediatorial place which the people desired and God sanctioned for Moses.

In Deuteronomy 6 we find the first of those texts which our Lord quotes. Hence, I need not say, there is peculiar solemnity in its character. The passage insists on the unity of the true God. This was a truth which Israel was most prone to disregard. The very point of faith, for which we are especially responsible, is what we are in most danger of forgetting under pressure or carelessness. Whatever we are called out for is what Satan endeavours to destroy. By whom? Our adversaries? No, not merely so, but by ourselves. To apply what now occupies us here, give me the chief, fundamental, and most salient points of Christianity, and I will show you that these are the very truths that Christians are most in danger of forgetting. What is it that characterises Christianity? Redemption accomplished; Christ the head of the church above; the Holy Ghost sent down here below; and all this borne witness to in the worship and in the ways of Christians and the church. Is this what you feel? Is this what you read? Is this what you hear? Nothing less. The hardest thing to find now in a Christian is real intelligence about Christianity. Commonly indeed we see that Christians understand a great deal better what the Jews ought to have done, than what they themselves ought to be doing. In short, whatever it be to which God summons us is precisely what the devil endeavours to obscure, and so to hinder our testimony.

The point then for the Jew was the one true God. “Jehovah God that hath brought thee out of the land of Egypt” — He was the only God. To what were they always inclined? Setting up other gods in the wilderness. Accordingly this is the solemn and central truth that is brought in here. “Hear, O Israel.” They were about to go into the land to enjoy it; but “Hear, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one. And thou shalt love Jehovah thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart. And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children;” and they were to bind them for a sign; they were to make much of them at all points — outside the house and inside, and always. And this is enforced in the very words which our Saviour employed. “Thou shalt fear Jehovah thy God, and serve him, and shalt swear by his name.” It was to be a real fealty: it was not merely a dogma pure and simple, but to be known as a fact. It was revealed as the great operative truth, continually impressed on Israel — their one true God.

It seems needless to say that this is altogether short of Christianity; and as we have referred to the difference of a Jew and a Christian as to the sabbath-day and the first day of the week, so as to this. The essential revelation of God to us is the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost — the Father displayed by the Son, and made known by the Spirit. This is just as characteristic a truth for us as the one Jehovah was for a Jew. Now notoriously as a dogma it is acknowledged everywhere in Christendom except by heretics; but the moment it is appropriated as a practical fact, people stand back and begin to qualify and mutilate. “Is He then indeed your Father?” “Can you call Him Father?” “Oh, this might be dangerous, and that were presumptuous;” and so men talk on — that is, the moment it becomes a real living truth, and not words on paper. The acknowledgment in a creed is all well; but when it comes to be the truth for one’s own soul, stamping its value on our communion and also on our ways, men at once retreat back into some “dim religious light,” where it is all forgotten and lost, merely owned verbally, but without power for the heart and life.

Before we pass to the next chapter, it would be well to observe for a moment the second answer of our Lord — “Ye shalt not tempt Jehovah your God.” What was meant by this? Not any ordinary fleshly sin on our part, as many suppose. Tempting God was to doubt Him, as many, all of us, are apt to do. Satan took advantage of the scripture that said that He should not dash His foot against a stone. He quotes accordingly Psalm 91, intimating to Jesus that, if He were the Son of God, all He had to do was to throw Himself from the pinnacle of the temple; and all must endorse His claims. Was not this a positive promise? God would “give his angels charge concerning him;” and what a fine proof it would be that He was the true Messiah, if He threw Himself down from such a height, and withal the angels preserved Him! But Satan as usual tampered with the plain written word, alike with its letter and its spirit; for after “to keep thee” he omitted “in all thy ways.” This he tried to conceal from One, all whose ways were obedience, venturing to insinuate what a noble demonstration of His Messiahship it would be. And what was the Lord’s answer? “Thou shalt not tempt Jehovah thy God.” The true Israelite does not require to put God to the test. If you suspect a rogue is in your employment, you may test him by marking a piece of money to see whether he steals or not: am I then going to mark something for God to see whether He will keep His word or not? I know God will do it; I do not require to put Him to the proof. This is the meaning of it, and such is precisely the path of duty. He that believes may calmly confide in God under all circumstances. His Father will take care of him. Is not this in wonderful harmony with the rest, following on the confession of the one true God of Israel?

Deuteronomy 7 one may sum up in a very few words. We have the consecration of the people to God. This is the grand pith of the chapter as it appears to me. It is the people repudiating the ways of the heathen, and consecrated to God. And this characterizes the book of Deuteronomy. It is not at all a people or a class kept at a distance by intervening priests. Of course it is a fact that the priests are there; but one of the peculiar features of this book is that, although sacerdotalism existed, the priests are designedly swamped with the Levites, as the whole of the people are gathered round Jehovah. Thus it is not a book which defines strict canonical usage in these matters. The object is quite different. The other had its place when God was giving the book of Leviticus. There He assigned this as the portion of the high priest and his sons, that of the Levites, this again of the people. But in Deuteronomy the point is to centralize them all around Jehovah Himself. The consequence is that, though all have their place, these distinctions may here seem small indeed. If it is a question of access to God in His sanctuary, priests are definitely brought out, and the proper book for this is Leviticus; but there is a larger truth than this — that God has a people whom He puts in a place of consecration to Himself. Such is the point here in the seventh chapter. We shall find how thoroughly this applies all through the book to the perplexity of poor proud rationalism, but in itself a simple yet very important truth indeed.³ So difficult is it to unbelief that some take the ground of making Deuteronomy belong to an older age when the distinction of priests from Levites was not yet brought in. Still more take the opposite hypothesis and contend that its legislation is of a later character than that of the preceding book. The truth is that the difference is due to moral development of Israel according to Jehovah’s wisdom on the eve of introducing His people into the land, and the more settled and social habits He would have them cultivate there. But the tone, mind, and heart of Moses are nowhere more characteristically apparent than in these his last words to the people of Jehovah whom he loved.

In Deuteronomy 8 we have quite a different character. It is not the people’s consecration to God, but their discipline, the trial of heart, and exercise by the way to which Jehovah subjected the people; and a most instructive section it is in this point of view.

And this is another chapter from which our Lord quotes when tempted, to which we may refer in passing. “And thou shalt remember all the way which Jehovah thy God led thee these forty years in the wilderness, to humble thee, and to prove thee, to know what was in thine heart, whether thou wouldest keep his commandments, or no.” We see that what has been remarked is just what is expressed in this verse: “And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only,” (what exercise of faith was there in that?) “but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of Jehovah doth man live.” This is precisely what does put man to the proof morally. The word of God tests whether he submits to it, whether he lives on it, whether he delights in it, whether his meat is to do the will of God as the Lord Jesus proved His meat was.

It was by this Scripture that the Lord, as we know, repelled the first temptation of the adversary. None ever honoured God’s word as Christ did.

We need not dilate on the beautiful detail but at the same time simple truth of this chapter. Clearly it traces the discipline of Jehovah by the way.

In Deuteronomy 9 another topic is prominent. It is not the Jewish people in the school of Jehovah to manifest what was in their heart, and what He was towards them; but the people strengthened by Jehovah in presence of a power mightier than their own. It was because of this very truth: Jehovah was with them. What did it matter about all others? They might be greater, stronger, wiser, more than the Israelites; but what of Jehovah? This was their boast. Could they match with Him? Certainly they could not; this Jehovah spreads in the most forcible manner before His people for their cheer and stay.

But we must not overlook another part of the chapter — not the Lord strengthening the people against the mightiest of adversaries, but Israel reminded of their rebellious heart even under such circumstances against Jehovah.

In Deuteronomy 10 we find the provision of Jehovah’s goodness is stated in a very striking way. Thus when the story of their rebellion is mentioned, it leads Moses to go back and to trace how this spirit betrayed itself even so early as at Horeb; for when it is a question of rebellion, we must go to the root of it. We are also shown the astonishing patience of Jehovah, and with that which might be difficult to understand if we did not look to the moral scope of the book — the destruction of the first tables, the writing out of fresh ones, and the place in which they were to be kept. At the same time we are told how the tribe of Levi was separated, after having brought in (in an episodical way) an allusion to Aaron’s death. It seems just a parenthesis, and not a question of chronology.⁴

A fair question arises for those who honour the divine word, why events so long severed in time are thus introduced seemingly together. No doubt the malicious mind of the sceptic takes occasion from it to turn what he does not seek to understand to the disparagement of inspiration. But there is no discrepancy whatever, nor confusion of Aaron’s death in the last year of the wilderness sojourn with the separation of Levi some thirty-eight years before. The truth is that the solemn circumstances appear to recall to the mind of Moses the awful lapse of Israel when “they made the calf which Aaron made,” and Levi, of odd perfidious to the stranger for a sister’s sake, consecrated themselves to Jehovah in the blood of their idolatrous brethren; and Moses hews at Jehovah’s command tables of stone like the first, and put them, written as before, in the ark which he had made. It was not then and there that Aaron died, as he alas! deserved. The intercession of Moses prevailed so far for his brother and the people, that the one lived till near the end of the wanderings in the desert, and the others, instead of perishing as a whole at once, lived to take their journey from a land of wells (Beeroth) to Mosera where Aaron died at Mount Hor, and thence to Gudgodah, and to Jotbath, “a land of rivers of waters:” such was the patient goodness of God to both, as the long interval made the more marked.⁵

In Deuteronomy 11 is given the summing up of the whole matter, the practical conclusion which the lawgiver keeps before their eyes. They were to remember what rebellion must end in. Hence it is that he alludes to the fate of Dathan and Abiram whom the earth swallowed up in consequence of their flagrant apostasy and fighting against God. “Your eyes have seen all the great acts of Jehovah which he did. Therefore shall ye keep all the commandments which I command you this day, that ye may be strong, and go in and possess the land whither ye go to possess it; and that ye may prolong your days in the land which Jehovah sware unto your fathers to give unto them and to their seed, a land that floweth with milk and honey” (ver. 7-9). To the end of the chapter follow the most earnest warnings, as well as bright promises: disobedience or obedience would be the turning point in the land. The mount of blessing and the mount of curse were there on the other side Jordan.

This closes the first part of Deuteronomy. A few words on the next few chapters will suffice for the present.

In Deuteronomy 12 we have statutes and judgments. Thus we come to what might be called the direct charges, having done with all the introductory part. All the previous part prepares the way. Now we find what would test their obedience. “These are the statutes and judgments, which ye shall observe to do in the land, which Jehovah God of thy fathers giveth thee to possess it, all the days that ye live upon the earth.” In the very first place is laid down utter destruction of the high places. The reason is obvious. The first of all rights, and the highest of our duties, is that God should have His rights. With this then most fittingly He begins. It is no use talking about Israel: the first object is God. If therefore God was dishonoured by the high places, they must all come down. Besides, if these high places had been dedicated to heathen gods, Israel must not dare to consecrate them to the true God. Such conversion does not suit God, who must have His own.

God must and does choose for Himself — a simple yet most important consideration (ver. 5, 11, 14, 18, 21, 26). Will-worship is intolerable. It ought most of all to shock the Christian. If it were merely a question of man, nobody would think of choosing for another. Nobody likes this. If people like to choose for themselves, as mere men, what an awful delusion it is to be choosing for God — to be really governed by your own will in matters of religion! We can all see how very bad it was in Israel; but do we feel that it is still worse in the Christian? He has given no title to adopt doctrines, practices, ways, government, or any one thing that is not His expressed will for His children. Some there are, no doubt, who assume that God has not in these things expressed any will of His, own. I do not envy them the thought that God has not revealed His mind about what is nearest to Himself, and what most of all is bound up with His glory! It is making God less than a man; for if he could not be content without it, how much less the living God?

Here we see that God had a most deliberate choice in the smallest matters as well as in the greatest; but He begins with what most nearly touches His presence. He sets Himself against the high places; He will not have them. He chose to have a place where He would put His name. This becomes the centre for all; and the book of Deuteronomy is founded on that fact, Israel being on the Point of entering into the land. Consequently it is an anticipation of what was before them. It is not a book for the wilderness, except for their hearts to look back on whilst on the borders before they entered the land.

And the grand principle too we may just notice in passing: Jehovah reminds them by Moses that He had allowed much while they were in the wilderness which could not be tolerated now (ver. 8). If they were going to possess the land, let them remember it was God’s land, not theirs. He might and would give it to them, but still He always kept His place. It was “the land which Jehovah thy God giveth thee.” In fact He acted as the landlord. They were only tenants, and had to pay Him rent. This was the substantial meaning of the tithes and other requisitions (ver. 11). They were the dues He demanded in virtue of His position as landlord of the people in the land. Therefore we can understand it as if He said, When you were in the strange country, when you left it in haste to wander here and there in the wilderness, there were great difficulties and many irregularities which cannot be allowed now. The greater the blessing of God, the more thoroughly you are put on the ground that God has given you, the more He insists on thorough and constant obedience. This is the point here, and thus we see the connection with all that has gone before.

Then in Deuteronomy 13 there is a similar line, all these early injunctions being what we may call religious statutes. We shall meet with others ere long, we shall come to civil ones, but we are not going beyond the religious charges at present. It is evident that they are somehow or another connected with God, and touch matters of religion, as men would say. Israel must not slight God’s claims in common things. For instance, as they must not trifle with blood, because it belonged to God (Deut. 12:16-25), the dreamer must be guarded against a dream (Deut. 13:1-5). It might belong to the true God; but “Thou shalt not hearken” if there was the smallest risk of going after other gods. Power supernatural has not the smallest value, nay, is to be shunned rigorously, if it weakens consciences as to the true God. The same Spirit which has the power of miracle is the Spirit of truth and the Holy Spirit. If truth be abandoned, it indicates the power of Satan as the source, and not the true God. Such is the principle: no sparing friends, relatives, “wife of thy bosom,” could be tolerated.

There is then (verses 12-18) pointed out the way to deal with a city guilty of idolatry. “Then shalt thou enquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you; thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword,” the small things as well as great. To have confidence in God is one of the important points here, to cherish full confidence that whatever He gives us is the very best thing for us. It is as true for us as for them, though not shown in the same legal way or outward manner.

Deuteronomy 14 insists on what became the children of Jehovah their God in abstaining from unseemly maimings or disfigurements for the dead, as well as from any food which He, who knew better than they, pronounced abominable. They are then shown what may or may not be eaten, whether beasts, fishes, or fowls. A people holy to Jehovah must not eat anything that dies of itself, nor accustom itself to an uncomely act, were it with a dumb and dead kid and the milk of its dam.

But there is another point peculiar to this book. Beside the tithe of their increase truly rendered from corn, wine, oil, with the firstlings, which, if distant from the place Jehovah would choose for His centre of worship, might be turned into money, and there spent before Him with a joyful household and the Levite not forsaken, there was to be a tithe at the end of three years, mentioned in the 28th and 29th verses: “At the end of three years thou shalt bring forth all the tithe of thine increase the same year, and shalt lay it up within thy gates.” They were not compelled to take this to the one place that God had consecrated. It had more of the family character; but a beautiful feature is connected with it: “And the Levite (because he hath no part nor inheritance with thee), and the stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow, which are within thy gates, shall come, and shall eat and be satisfied; that Jehovah thy God may bless thee in all the work of thine hand which thou doest.” Even in the very witness of domestic blessing there must be the largeness of heart that goes out to those who have no friends to care for them. How good is our God, and what a witness of His grace! We know well how the family is apt to trench on generous feeling, and how it is apt to shut itself up to no more or better than a refined selfishness. It is not so where God governs. There, even were it the family gathered in such a sort as this within their gates, the Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, all have their part. Why should they not rejoice? It was God who made the family rejoice, and they were to go out to those that were strangers to it. Is it not a beautiful indication of what the true God is, even in His least institutions? ⁶

In Deuteronomy 15 we find a similar principle as to the year of release. On this we need not particularly dwell, but they are reminded of their own place. They had been bondmen themselves; and if they had been delivered of God, they should cultivate the same spirit as He had shown. This was their point of imitating God.

In Deuteronomy 16:1-17 (where I now stop) we have the winding up of all this part — the termination of the statutes which had to do with religion. Let me ask, Why were there these three feasts, and these three only? For a reason given already. These feasts made an appeal to a male Israelite which none besides could make. Others might be optional, but these feasts were obligatory. It is a call to obedience. The book of Deuteronomy throughout pre-eminently brings in the authority of God over a people in relationship with Himself, displayed and proved in obedience. What did not so much manifest obedience is left out, though it might have an important spiritual meaning in its place; for certainly other feasts (as the feast of atonement, for instance) had. But it was not a question here of truth or its forms, but of obedience: this is ever in view. It is not the tabernacle, nor the priest, not the wilderness, but obeying God as His people in the land.

There is another remark to be made. The obedience spoken of in this chapter, which called every male of Israel up to remember Jehovah at these three feasts, gathered them to the place which Jehovah their God would choose. Then again we have what is always brought out in the book of Deuteronomy. It is Jehovah gathering the people round Himself. In the delight of His people He delights. He would have them happy in Himself, and enjoying all He had given them to enjoy. Consequently we have these three feasts, which set forth particularly Jehovah providing to fill the heart of His people with peace and joy to overflowing

Yet at the first of these feasts Israel were not told to rejoice. In a certain sense it might be a season too good and deep for joy. The character of it was so solemn as scarce to admit of this. It represented that death which befell the Lamb, and arrested the judgment of God which had gone out against us because of sin. We may rejoice in the God that has so dealt with us, but is it becoming that Christ’s death should be a call to transports? There are deeper feelings in the heart than joy. Times we know when the sense of what we have been, of what we are, and of God’s putting all our evil away for ever by the death of His own Son, is too deep for joy if not for tears. I do not mean that there should not be the profoundest feeling of gratitude, and the fullest expression of thanksgiving to God. Still it is too solemn to admit of what is so buoyant, which has its own proper exercise. But God is very careful, in the face of the passover, that there should not be a forgetfulness of that escape which brought them out together then. Hence, in the first feast, we find they were to eat unleavened bread. “Thou shalt eat no leavened bread with it; seven days shalt thou eat unleavened bread therewith, even the bread of affliction; for thou camest forth out of the land of Egypt in haste: that thou mayest remember the day when thou camest forth out of the land of Egypt all the days of thy life.” Then they are told not to celebrate the feast indiscriminately where and as they please. “Thou mayest not sacrifice the passover in any of thy gates, which Jehovah thy God giveth thee: but at the place which Jehovah thy God shall choose to place his name in, there thou shalt sacrifice the passover at even, at the going down of the sun, at the season that thou camest forth out of Egypt. And thou shalt roast and eat it in the place which Jehovah thy God shall choose; and thou shalt turn in the morning, and go unto thy tents.”

But the second feast brings out joy in a very distinct and delightful manner. “Seven weeks shalt thou number unto thee: begin to number the seven weeks from such time as thou beginnest to put the sickle to the corn. And thou shalt keep the feast of weeks unto Jehovah thy God with a tribute of a freewill offering of thine hand, which thou shalt give unto Jehovah thy God, according as Jehovah thy God hath blessed thee: and thou shalt rejoice before Jehovah thy God, thou, and thy son.” It is not the death of Christ with all its solemn, however blessed, issues. It is founded on the life of Christ in resurrection, when the Holy Ghost brings us into the power of enjoyment. It is pentecost. Consequently it is that great feast which finds its answer in Christianity more particularly (the passover being of course the foundation); but this is pre-eminently its character as a present fact. And mark this; that it is not only joy in the Lord, but calling others to joy (ver. 11). Besides, “Thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in Egypt: and thou shalt observe and do these statutes.” We were bondmen, and are not. We are to observe the statutes and to do them. Once more obedience is pre-eminently the matter, and this too as delivered men — once bondslaves, but now free to obey (ver. 12).

There is a third feast, that of tabernacles. It is not the liberty of grace, which the feast of pentecost is, but rather the epoch in type when the liberty of glory shall arrive. Mark how very strikingly this is shown. “Thou shalt observe the feast of tabernacles seven days, after that thou hast gathered in thy corn and thy wine.” Undoubtedly the gatherings in of the corn and the wine (that is, the harvest and the vintage) are the well known types of God’s final dealings: the harvest when He separates the wheat from the chaff, or at any rate from that which is not wheat; and the vintage when He executes unsparing judgment upon the vine of the earth — upon all religion that is vain and denies heaven. There is no mercy shown in the vintage. In the harvest there is the gathering in of the good and the extinction of the evil; but the vintage knows nothing but vengeance from God. It is after this will come the full time of joy for the earth. Blessing for the world is after God has thus cleared the scene: in the prospect of this the Christian is called to rejoice — to have the joy not only of liberty now but of the glory that is about to displace the oppression, the sorrow, the wretchedness, the sin, of this poor long-groaning earth, when all shall be put under the only One who is competent to bear the burden and to govern it to the glory of God. Hence the language differs most sensibly even from the joyous scene of blessing of which the feast of weeks was so redolent. It is not merely “thou shalt keep the feast of weeks unto Jehovah thy God with a tribute of free-will offering of thine hand, which thou shalt give, according as Jehovah thy God hath blessed thee,” but “seven days shalt thou keep a solemn feast unto Jehovah thy God in the place which Jehovah shall choose: because Jehovah thy God shall bless thee in all thine increase, and in all the increase of thine hands; therefore thou shalt surely rejoice.”

May the Lord give us hearts to rejoice in all His, grace and truth and glory!

Deuteronomy 16:18 — Deuteronomy 34.

It is clear that a new division of the statutes and judgments of this book begins with the later verses just read from Deuteronomy 16. What belonged to the religious life of Israel was closed with the three feasts which fill the previous part of the chapter.

Now we touch on the instruments and means which Jehovah established for the purpose of carrying out the life of the people in judicial matters. Judges and officers were to abound. They were to be made in all their gates, and with watchful care there is a guard against respect of persons and anything calculated to turn aside the sentence of righteousness. The land which Jehovah their God gave must have justice; loving-kindness, and mercy between man and man, and all pleasant affections among the people must not interfere in such questions. Along with all this we suddenly find what the spirit of man cannot understand — the introduction of a fresh allusion to religious matters. “Thou shalt not plant a grove of any trees near unto the altar of Jehovah thy God, which thou shalt make thee. Neither shalt thou set thee up any image; which Jehovah thy God hateth. Thou shalt not sacrifice unto Jehovah thy God any bullock, or sheep, wherein is blemish, or any evil-favouredness: for that is an abomination unto Jehovah thy God.”

With this beginning of Deuteronomy 17 there goes a strong warning as to any man or woman that had wrought wickedness in the sight of Jehovah in transgressing His covenant, going and serving other gods, more particularly worshipping the host of heaven. It appears to me that, so far from presenting the smallest real difficulty, so far from being an interruption of the great subject of the judicial life of Israel, we have to face here the important truth that what touches God, what falsifies Him as such, has the closest bearing on the daily life of His people, both in their households and also in matters of public judgment. If we are wrong in what we allow as to God Himself, if there is a tampering with that which sullies His glory, a dishonour allowed (for instance) as to His nature in admitting these false gods, or setting up creatures in the place of God Himself, all the lower part of the life will feel at once the destructive and corrupting consequences of it.

Hence the difficulty which divines have found, in what they supposed the going back to matters of religion, is in point of fact a mere mistake of their own from divorcing that which God has joined together. We have had fully the direct instruction as to what concerned His own glory, but now even when He is touching on that which bears on man’s life, He interweaves religious elements not at all as a repetition of the past, but as connecting it with the present subject. Further, we find that the subject is pursued to show the place of testimony. By the mouth of two witnesses or three it was ordained that he who was worthy of death should die. This was of great value in practice, and is made use of largely in the New Testament — a principle which no man can ever neglect without loss.

At first sight it may seem singular that the Spirit of God should attach so much importance to the requirement of two or three witnesses; but let us remember that we are here learning the ways of God actively dealing with a people on earth, after He had brought them into relationship with Himself. Undoubtedly, if God took no active concern in man or his ways, there might be difficulties. Israel alone, of all the nations on the face of the earth, stood on such a ground as this; and on them God laid the necessity of demanding such testimony. But He is always wise, and besides He would teach His people to trust that He will always give whatever is necessary according to His’ own order.

So the New Testament uses the principle with us, who have to do with Him and who deals with us in a far more intimate way than He ever did with Israel. We have to do with One that has deigned to make us His dwelling-place by the Spirit. Hence where He has laid down His word with clearness, as for instance in such a matter as this, we may unqualifiedly count on Him. People may bring all kinds of objections, and say that we cannot always expect such an amount of testimony as this, — that we must look at the circumstances, and, if it be impossible to produce evidence sufficient, we must act on what seems most probable. But this is neither more nor less than to abandon divine ground for what is human; and I am persuaded that a deeper injury by a long way would be done to the people of God by a single departure from His word and mind and way in such a matter as this, than by failure to convict in ten cases where there might be evil underneath. Our business is never to leave the plain word of God, but to cleave to it, and, whatever the pressure of circumstances, to wait on God. He is able to produce witnesses when we least see how or whence they come.

Thus we are kept in peace while trusting in His word; and what is the spirit of him who in such matters could bear to be hasty, or wish to condemn another before God has brought out the evidence? Thus the heart abides confiding and calm, knowing that He who beholds and knows all is able to bring forward whatever is necessary at the right moment. It may be His way to try the faith of His people and to humble by keeping them in ignorance for a time. Where there existed greater spiritual power, there might be a more ready use of the means that God puts at our disposal; but whatever His ground for withholding anything they needed, our plain call is to cherish perfect confidence that He cares for us not only in what He gives, but in what He with-holds. We therefore can stand to His word — “In the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established;” and where this is not vouchsafed, where the testimony fails, our duty is to wait on the Lord.

This brings us to another point. If there arose matters too hard for them, as it is said, they were to get up to the place which Jehovah their God should choose. “And thou shalt come unto the priests the Levites, and unto the judge that shall be in those days, and enquire; and they shall show thee the sentence of judgment: and thou shalt do according to the sentence, which they of that place which Jehovah shall choose shall show thee; and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they inform thee.” Here again the principle is good and valid for the present time; for we must remember particularly in this book of Deuteronomy that priests are used in a sensibly different way from what is found elsewhere, as was pointed out in the last lecture. It is not a question here so much of their service in standing between the people and God, as of their helping the people in what they owed to Him. In Leviticus it is the former, because there it is a question of drawing near to God, and the people could not go into the sanctuary, but the priests for them. In Deuteronomy, which supposes the people about to enter on the land, we have more the family order of the nation, with Jehovah their God; and the priests the Levites help this on, although of course in the sanctuary the priests would still retain their place. The two books are in no way inconsistent with each other. There is a difference made, which consists in this, that the priests are regarded more as a part of the people, not so much as an intervening class between God and them.

Accordingly here we find that in these matters of judgment which belong to the practical difficulties of daily life, where questions were too hard for ordinary men, appeal must be made to them, not so much in their sacrificial capacity, but as those who ought to have greater practical acquaintance with the word of God, and thereby their senses more exercised to discern good and evil. It is granted at once that nothing can be more ruinous in Christendom than the assertion of an earthly priesthood, based on the notion of some having an access to God more than others in point of title; it is in effect to deny the gospel.

At the same time all must feel the value of a spiritual man’s judgment where we fail. There is no one perhaps, unless of a singularly proud and independent spirit, who has not found the want of it; not a few have practically acted upon it, and proved its value when enjoyed. So the apostle James lets us know the value of a righteous man’s prayers. Surely this does not mean every believer. Although every Christian is justified by faith, and may be expected to display a just and good man’s ways practically; still it cannot be denied that there are wide differences of measure among real believers, and that we all have the consciousness that there are those among the people of God, to whom we could not happily open our difficulties, and some to whom one could most freely; some who have such a spiritual tone and ripe acquaintance with His mind, who therefore help their brethren, not in the least by assuming an authority over the consciences of others, not by claiming dominion over their faith (not even an apostle would do this), but who nevertheless help decidedly by spiritual capacity to give a judgment formed by habitual walking in fellowship with Him, so as to meet others in practical difficulties and trials here below. This seems to be the principle at any rate of what we have here.

But this leads to another step. Jehovah would raise up judges in an extraordinary way from time to time: a fact familiar to all in the Old Testament history. Further, there is the supposition even of a king being called for in due time. But in a most striking manner God guards against the very snares into which the king, though he were the wise son of David himself, fell away, and so brought shame on God and misery on His people. Alas! the king when raised up among them, though not a stranger but their brother (as it is said) did multiply wives to himself, as we all know, and his heart was turned away. Multiplying to himself silver and gold beyond all measure, the law of Jehovah had not its place in his soul. The consequence was that the closing days even of that wisest and richest King of Israel notoriously became fruitful in sorrow and vanity; which burst out publicly as soon as he was taken away.

In Deuteronomy 18 we have the priests the Levites introduced in another way. It is said that they were to have no part nor inheritance with Israel; but they were to “eat the offerings of Jehovah made by fire and his inheritance. Therefore shall they have no inheritance among their brethren. Jehovah is their inheritance, as he hath said unto them.” God thus marks afresh their special place of having Himself for their portion, so that what went to Him fell to them. This gave a deep sense of identification with Jehovah; as also it will be found that, all through the book of Deuteronomy, this is sustained and applied beyond all the other books of Moses. We may see before we have done what was the ground of it. For the present I only call witnesses to the fact. Hence it was, said, “And this shall be the priest’s due,” — not only certain parts of the offerings, but also “the first-fruit of thy corn, of thy wine, and of thine oil, and the first of the fleece of thy sheep shalt thou give him. For Jehovah thy God hath chosen him out of all thy tribes to stand to minister in the name of Jehovah, him and his sons for ever.” Then comes the Levite, his service, and his portion.⁷ “And if a Levite come from any of thy gates out of all Israel, where he sojourned, and come with all the desire of his mind unto the place which Jehovah shall choose; then he shall minister in the name of Jehovah his God, as all his brethren the Levites do, which stand there before Jehovah. They shall have like portions to eat, beside that which cometh of the sale of his patrimony.”

At the same time there is the sternest guard against all curious prying into the will of God that was not revealed, against tampering, as it follows here, with divination or observation of times, against enchantments or charms, against consulting familiar spirits, wizards, or, necromancers. “For all that do these things are an abomination unto Jehovah: and because of these abominations Jehovah thy God doth drive them out from before thee. Thou shalt be perfect with Jehovah thy God. For these nations, which thou shalt possess, hearkened unto observers of times, and unto diviners: but Jehovah thy God hath not suffered thee so to do.”

Assuredly this principle is in no way weakened in the present day. I take this opportunity of solemnly warning every soul — more particularly the young — from levity in hankering after that which they do not understand, and very especially in the way of giving up their will to any one but the Lord Jesus. This is the essential point of danger. I do not raise the smallest doubt that there are powers in the natural world which lie quite beyond the explanation of men. It is not my wish therefore to excite a kind of hue and cry against that which may not be yet explained. Let us avoid the presumption of supposing that we can account for everything. But in our ignorance (which the wisest most feel and own) this wisdom at least ought to belong to the least of God’s children, that they know in whom they believe, that they have His word and His Spirit, and can count on infinite love and power as well as wisdom on their behalf. They can well afford therefore to leave what is beyond themselves or any others in the hands of God their Father. They with sorrow see others rush in who have nothing higher, who have no God to count on or look to.

But above all beware. Whenever any one asks you to give up your mind or will to another — were it but for a moment — there is the evident hand of the devil in it. This is no question of physical powers, or of what is naturally inexplicable. What is behind giving up yourself, your will, to any one but God, is plain enough in its character and consequences; it is too easy to understand it. The divine axiom is that the Lord and He alone has a right to you. Consequently such a demand proves that Satan is taking advantage, it may be of what is natural, but certainly of you. Hence under cover of occult laws, there is something deeper than what is natural behind the call. Do not therefore be deceived by the fact that there may be and are properties beyond our ken in the realm of nature. There is also the working of the enemy, which under new forms reveals the same principle of evil which has wrought since the flood. It has changed its name, but it is substantially the identical evil against which Jehovah was here warning His earthly people. Now we, if drawn aside, are far more guilty than they, from the very fact that God has spread out His word with incomparably greater fulness, and given us by the Holy Ghost since redemption the power of entering into His mind and will, far exceeding anything on which even a high priest could draw in times of old. Here no doubt a divine oracle was looked to, and an answer received in peculiar cases; but there is no possible case of difficulty, there is no point whatever that concerns God or man, for which there is not an answer in the written word, although we may have to wait on Him for profiting by it.

In due order then we find not merely all this curious dabbling with evil peremptorily set aside and superseded, not only now the introduction of priests, Levites, and judges, ordinary or extraordinary, but of the great prophet — Christ Himself. It is one of those striking sketches which the Spirit of God intersperses throughout scripture. Here and there Christ more than usually shines. I admit that the Spirit of Christ (or allusion to Him) in one way or another is found everywhere; but here it is most manifest. “Jehovah thy God will raise up unto thee a prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; according to all that thou desiredst of Jehovah thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of Jehovah my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not. And Jehovah said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.” Undoubtedly every word has acquired a force far beyond what could be looked for before this revelation, but each expression now is bright when we see its verification in the Lord Jesus. But not only is their fulness of truth made known by Jesus alone, but also the utmost danger of slighting Him, and thus losing all the more. “It shall come to pass that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.”

Thus plainly we have the true prophet put forward, Christ Himself. For its application to Him, in the face of all the unbelief of men, is affirmed by the Holy Ghost over and over, by Peter in Acts 3, and by Stephen in Acts 7; and in point of fact we do not even need these citations of the passage. The entire New Testament is itself the irrefragable demonstration that Christ is the prophet here referred to, and of the consequent folly and sin of listening to another. For He is come; and God made this fact to be so much the more manifest in a more glorious way still for chosen witnesses. His own voice set aside Moses and Elias, though the one might be the introducer of the law and the other its great restorer. For it was the Son that was now to be heard, and He alone is left, the others disappearing. Unquestionably this goes beyond the revelation that was given by Moses here, while it is the highest possible confirmation of it.

In Deuteronomy 19 we have the order in detail for the three cities of refuge, and then for three more, as in the early part of the book we saw the first set apart on the other side of the Jordan; for God on the one hand would mark the seriousness of blood-shedding; on the other, He would not confound a death at unawares with that which was deliberate murder. In no case however would God have His people to forget that it was His land, and consequently if blood were shed there, that it was thereby defiled. It called for serious thought. Man that was made in the image of God had his blood shed there. God takes notice of it, but that which had a higher and a deeper reference requires not to be proved now. I have already dwelt upon it. Only take notice of the difference between the allusion here and in Numbers. There we saw it was applied especially to the blood-guilty while out of the land of their possession. Here is not a word said about the death of the priest that was anointed with the oil. The reason is manifest. The book of Deuteronomy applies to the people when they are just on the point of entering the land. Thus the insertions and omissions of the Spirit of God are as notable in the books of Moses as in the Gospels themselves. We may be more familiar with the idea and effect of design in the Gospels, but it is just as true here and everywhere else.

In verses 12-13 the greatest care is enjoined to hinder all abuse through the cities of refuge. No facility must be given thereby for a murderer to find permanent shelter there. If blood was shed intentionally and deliberately, the elders of his city were bound to send and fetch him thence, delivering him over to the avenger of blood that he might die.⁸

Then we find further care taken as to witnesses, and this affirmed by the great law of just retribution; that is to say, that when a witness testified what was deliberately false, and of course therefore malicious, the punishment which would have been adjudged in case of its truth was ordered to fall on him that raised the evil report. All this is carefully seen to. “And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.”

Then in Deuteronomy 20 comes in the law of battles. We have the utmost care taken that they should be in no way conformed to the Gentile license. The governing principle here, as elsewhere, is confidence in Jehovah, the God who had taken His people, brought them out of Egypt into relationship with Himself, and was now placing them in His own land. It would be beneath the honour of God that any should be forced to fight His battles. He would give His people in everything to think of Himself. It was not a question of soldiery or strategy, of force or skill or fraud, but of Jehovah their God. It is evident that no means could more thoroughly purge from those who were to engage in battle what was unworthy of such a God and of such a people. It is referred to now as being not the least striking of the peculiarities of Deuteronomy, and it is obvious how it suits the case in every way. The heavenly land is for us the scene of contest with the enemy. There are no such laws of war in the other books of Moses; they are here only. The wilderness is the scene of temptation. Canaan is the place where the enemy must be fought and beaten. But there is no power by which he can be overcome but that of God. Consequently faintheartedness would be intolerable; for it could only arise from this — that the people were thinking not of Jehovah their God, but of themselves or their enemies. Impossible thus to win the battles of Jehovah. What secures victory is the certainty that our God calls to the fight, that it is His battle, not ours: where it is so, we are as sure of the end as of the beginning. We are calmly convinced that as He does not send us at our own charges, so further He who calls to fight will secure that the enemy shall be vanquished.

Hence it is that God lays down in the most minute manner His consideration for His people. In the case of a new house, or of one who had planted a vineyard or betrothed a wife, all is cared for: where fearfulness of heart prevailed, such are made to feel that they were unworthy to enter on the battles of Jehovah. Further, there is beautiful consideration on His part for the enemy; for when they came nigh the threatened city, they were first called to proclaim peace to it: a singular way of making war, but worthy of God. He took no pleasure in war, and would accustom His people to go forth, even were it to fight, remembering themselves “shod with the preparation of peace,” if I may so say. “And it shall be, if it [the city] make thee answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee, and they shall serve thee. And if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war against thee, then thou shalt besiege it: and when Jehovah thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword.” There is just as serious a dealing with them, in proportion to the reality with which the offer of peace had been made before. God’s ways are not as ours.

Further, “Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities which are very far off from thee.” There was one exception: there must be no peace with the Canaanites; not because they were dreaded as rivals, but doomed to destruction because of their abominations and seductions. It is well known that some find a difficulty in this. Possibly it may interest others, if it do not relieve the first of their difficulty, to know that, typically considered, the Canaanites represent the emissaries of Satan, the spiritual wickedness in heavenly places, — those rulers of the darkness of this world with whom we are called to wrestle now. They are specifically the powers of evil which continually turn every link of religion into a means of deliberate and ruinous dishonour of God. With such there can be, there ought to be, no terms, no compromise, no cessation of the fight at any time or under any possible circumstances. This is the typical force of what is referred to here.

I may just add the further remark, that of all the nations on the face of the earth, there was no such hotbed for every kind of corruption among men, and for all wickedness and abomination in the sight of God, as the Canaanites whom God devoted to destruction. It was therefore perfectly just, as far as righteousness was concerned, to hold up these Canaanites for a solemn warning to all the world and to all times. If national righteousness was sought, if there was to be the honour of God maintained in Israel, they must be extirpated; and there were the wisest reasons for doing that work by the sword of Israel. In the last lecture we saw that, so far from passing over His own people, God never dealt with any nation with the same strictness as with Israel. We saw that every soul of Israel perished in the wilderness except the two spies who stood for God even against their fellows as well as the multitude, and certainly, if God caused that all Israel should fall in the wilderness because of their sins, if He did not even spare the single fault of Moses which he himself records, where can men complain justly of the doom that befell such corrupters of the race, sure above all to be the moral destroyers of Israel had they been spared? In fact the children of Israel had not the faith to destroy them as they ought; they had not therefore the fidelity according to God’s word to exterminate the Canaanites, and so much the worse for themselves; for they became the means of dragging Israel into abominations, and thus drew judgments down on them after no long time.

This then will suffice, I trust, to make plain the folly of distrusting scripture, and the wisdom of always setting to our seal that God is true, and that He is righteous. In short God is always good, true, wise, and right.

Remark another thing. When Israel did besiege a city, God showed His care, even if it were only for a tree good for human food, binding it with His own hand on His people in the midst of that which proved His face set against the enemies of His glory in the world. Nevertheless He would not allow them even there to act without consideration where was any food fit for the use of man. “The trees which thou knowest that they be not trees for meat, thou shalt destroy and cut them down;” but in case of those that furnished food, it was absolutely forbidden. Such is God, acting in time as He counsels from eternity to eternity, but condescending to speak and to exercise the thoughts of His people about the smallest matters for this life.

In Deuteronomy 21 we have some particulars of a remarkable nature, and peculiar to this book, on which a few words must be said. “If one be found slain in the land which Jehovah thy God giveth thee to possess it, lying in the field, and it be not known who hath slain him.” What was to be done? “Then thy elders and thy judges shall come forth, and they shall measure unto the cities which are round about him that is slain.” All was to be done with great care. “And it shall be that the city which is next to the slain man” — God takes care even of that — “And it shall be that the city which is next unto the slain man, even the elders of that city shall take an heifer, which hath not been wrought with, and which hath not drawn in the yoke. And the elders of that city shall bring down the heifer unto a rough valley, which is neither eared nor sown” (a figure of this world), “and shall strike off the heifer’s neck there in the valley: and the priests the sons of Levi shall come near; for them Jehovah thy God hath chosen to minister unto him, and to bless in the name of Jehovah; and by their word shall every controversy and every stroke he tried: and all the elders of that city, that are next unto the slain man, shall wash their hands over the heifer that is beheaded in the valley: and they shall answer and say, Our hands have not shed this blood, neither have our eyes seen it. Be merciful, Jehovah, unto thy people Israel, whom thou hast redeemed, and lay not innocent blood unto thy people of Israel’s charge. And the blood shall be forgiven them.”

It is just so that Christ has been found slain in this world: God is willing to regard it so. He is found slain among them, among Israel themselves. This appears to be a gracious provision when God shall have cleared the godly remnant in the days that are coming, and these are about to be made the strong nation) and to enter on the land of their inheritance once more and for ever. It is the means by which God will wash them from the taint of blood in the land. He will not excuse them because their hands did not actually do the deed. It was of course done long before; still it was done there. Christ was found in the valley which was nearest to them. Hence, for Israel of that day, God will not pass by the fact. He will neither take excuses for it on the one hand, nor on the other will He judge them as irretrievably guilty. He will provide for them when grace has turned their heart, that the very sacrifice of Christ may serve in all its expiatory power to clear them of the guilt of shedding His precious blood. We must remember that the death of Christ has two aspects if closely looked at whether on man’s part or on God’s side. Humanly it was the worst possible guilt; in God’s grace it is what alone cleanses from guilt. The man who cannot discern between these two truths, or who sacrifices one or other, has a great deal to learn of scripture, and indeed of his own sin and God’s grace Here we have the type. The very principle disputed in a recent and painful controversy seems to me unanswerably decided by the Spirit in this shadow of good things to come.

Further: supposing there was the case of a wife, or the child of one that was beloved. “If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have borne him children, both the beloved and the hated, and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated: then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn: but he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath.” Here too we have in God’s ways another remarkable type; for having first chosen Israel, He afterwards (as we know, because of their sin) was pleased to take the Gentiles to Himself. The Jews refused the testimony; and as for the Gentiles, it is said that they will hear. Nevertheless here He gives a beautiful provision to show that He has not done with that which shall come forth as the firstborn son of the apparently hated one — of her he had first. On the contrary this is the very one for whom the rights of the inheritance will be preserved when repentance will be wrought in their hearts. Thus it is evident that the godly remnant of the latter day will have its rights reserved, according to His own precious word in this chapter.

But another direction follows. There is the case of the stubborn and rebellious son. To whom does this apply? To the people of Israel in their obstinate self-will and irreverence toward Jehovah their God. In all sorts of forms God sets it forth. Alas! when blessing is wrought, when the contrite heart of the remnant desires the Messiah, they will not all turn to God. Contrariwise the great mass of the nation will be more than ever rebellious and apostate. The end of this age will not see united hearts among the Jews, but a people severed and broken — a people with the widest possible breaches among them: some whose hearts are truly touched by grace, as we have seen, who are destined to the place of the firstborn on the earth; most, on the other hand, who will fight to the last against God, and reject to their own perdition His testimony. This is the stubborn son; and as to him it is said, “Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place: and they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.” And such has Israel been. “And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.”

But the chapter does not even close with this. There is another scene, and a deeper one than all. “And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree: his body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) that thy land be not defiled, which Jehovah thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.” This may not call for lengthened remark, but assuredly for solemn reflection and profound thankfulness at the grace in which God turns the deepest shame and suffering which man heaped on Jesus to the purposes of redeeming love; for who knows not that Jesus took this place of the curse on the cross, to bear our judgment in the sight of God? He too knew what it was to be hanged on a tree — knew what it was to be made a curse for us. Our souls have already entered into the blessing. But all shows how thoroughly Jesus is the object of the Holy Ghost; for a chapter, which looked somewhat obscure at first sight, is rendered plain and luminous and full of instruction the moment we bring Jesus in and see Him in relationship with His ancient people. Its substance and its spirit of course are equally true of the Christian, and in a higher way. It is entirely a question of whether we use the true light, or overlay the word of God with our own darkness. Unbelief not merely fails to see, but excludes and denies the only light of men.

In Deuteronomy 22 we have a group of different institutions as to questions of righteousness, care, love, tenderness — the smallest matters as well as the greatest — but they are so numerous, in themselves purposely the minutes” as well as the most momentous, that to dwell on them one by one would occupy much too long for the present design. All can understand however how the great object here is that God would form the heart of His people in this relationship and measure according to His own affections. God would give them not bare righteous but holy thoughts, and not this only, but mingled with tenderness when called for. This will be found true if the contents of the chapter be duly weighed.

But there is another consideration. In Deuteronomy 23 He would teach us differences in our Judgments and thoughts of others, and consequently in our conduct towards them. There are few things that men so much dislike in general as to be taunted with partiality — specially those who may have a sense of righteousness according to God. Yet we must distinguish (though without partiality, which is always wrong); but if we are wise, we shall not be driven out of the painstaking and conscientious appraisal of all the circumstances which require to be taken into account; and we shall weigh also what God may give us to judge of each particular case and person, — for He makes differences, though no respecter of persons. Where it is a question of His grace, difference there is none, but a dead level. On the one hand sin is a great leveller in presence of His eternal judgment; on the other hand grace is no less so in an opposite way, but there it is a question of the value of Christ and His work for bringing souls into His presence in favour and in peace. Alike lost in sins, we are alike saved from them by the faith of Jesus. But then in saying this we have said all here, and come into a host of differences on either side. This seems to me most clearly shown in our chapter.

For instance, see how this applies to those forbidden to enter into the congregation of Jehovah. And here note that it is His congregation; for this is the great subject-matter of the book: all finds its centre and its spring in Him. It is not merely the congregation of Israel; and this is an important thing to bear in mind as a matter of practical dealing. One will never act right in the church, if he looks at it merely as the church of saints, though in itself perfectly true. It is the church of God; and although we know many shrink from this as high ground, it is just so much the better. If it be the truth, can it be too high? We want all that can lift us above our own littleness and our own lowness. We are apt to get low enough without abandoning the only leverage calculated and adequate to give us the elevation we need. We want and have God; but giving up the place and relationship His grace has conferred on us through redemption is not the way to make us lowly. On the contrary the very fact that we bear in mind that it is God’s church is the best and divine mode of making us most sensible of our shortcomings. If we regard it as merely an assembly of the saints, well we know that saints are poor creatures for the matter of that; so that we easily slip from poor thoughts into an excusing of sin; just as, on the other side, the flesh professing the highest theory will the sooner make itself manifest. If it be God’s church, it becomes a serious matter how we act and how we speak.

In this case then we find that Jehovah lays down certain things as irreconcileable with their place and relationship to Him. They must carry themselves in a way suitable to His congregation; and amongst the rest “An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of Jehovah; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of Jehovah for ever; because they met you not with bread and with water in the way, when ye came forth out of Egypt.” Jehovah does not forget where it is a matter of government. He does forget (and it is precisely what He does) when it is a question of grace. Further He says, “Thou shalt not seek their peace, nor their prosperity all thy days for ever.” But it is remarkable too that when speaking about the Edomite — and I am not aware that it is ever said that He hated either of them as He hated Esau; but when speaking of the Edomite — He says, “He is thy brother.” So with those that once opposed them, “Thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian, because thou wast a stranger in his land.” Thus, we see, it is not a question of hatred on our part, but of subjection to God, of taking the direction of our thoughts from His word, and of forming our judgments and our conduct according to it. I have no doubt at all that, when we weigh scripture, we shall in due time see the wisdom of it all. But it is not a question of how far we can appreciate the wisdom of God. Our business is to believe and obey Him; and there is the way in which He cares for the least of us. The simplest child of God may follow and be subject to His word.

Very probably the wisest have a difficulty in entering into all His wisdom — nay, I am sure that they have. It is only a matter of very gradually growing up into His truth and infinite mind; but still it is open to us in the written word. We are invited to read and understand; for He has revealed what was wholly beyond man to His children by the Spirit, and the Spirit searches all things, yea the deep things of God. It is our privilege to say “we know:” who can then put limits to the gracious power of God in giving us really to understand His ways? But understand or not, the word of God is imperative in its authority, and there is the greatest comfort too when we have done a thing simply because it is the will of our God. Then we begin to learn how blessed it is, how good and wise. This is far better than slowly coming to a judgment of our own and then acting. If we gave up faith for such guidance, how deep and irreparable the loss! In the first instance if we accept His word with simplicity, the wisdom given is a fruit of His grace instead of being ground gained to our credit. In the one case we glorify ourselves because we count it wise for reasons we think good; in the other case we are subject to God because it is His own will in His word. There is nothing so good as this, nothing so holy and humble as the wisdom of faith.

In the chapter before us various regulations of this kind are laid down. There is also the prohibition of anything that was uncomely and unbefitting for the camp. What camp? The camp of Israel? Of course, but much more. It was natural that there should be infirmity in the camp of men. This is not the question, but whether it be not the camp of Jehovah. Whatever the allowance when we remember that we are men, God would have His people trained up in the feeling that they have Him in their midst, and that all must be decided by what suits His presence.

So again in Deuteronomy 24 the question of divorce is treated, where we must say that a certain allowance was made them for the wilfulness of man in this respect. This is no matter of opinion; for our Lord Jesus Christ has ruled in this. Nobody can understand the law aright, or the Scriptures of the Old Testament in general, unless he bear in mind that in it God is dealing with man as such. Consequently, though there is wisdom and goodness and righteousness, it is man in the flesh under trial, and hence it is not yet the perfection of the divine mind displayed. This last is only found when Christ comes. The first Adam is not the Second; and it was with the first man that God was then at work. No part of the law lacks the wisdom of God; but, Christ not being yet revealed, He did not as a fact go beyond man as he then was. To have brought in what was suitable for the Second man could not have applied to Israel in their then condition.

And God, it seems to me, has distinctly marked this in Scripture even in an outward fashion, inasmuch as He has not been pleased to give us His word even in the same tongue. The standing witness against the folly of confounding the two Testaments finds its rebuke in the patent fact that the Old Testament is in one language, the New Testament in another. So plain a difference on its very face one might have thought it impossible to overlook; but even believers accept shortsightedness in divine things, and just so far as tradition influences them; for people scarcely think about Scripture, and thus they do not know how to apply the clearest and surest facts, as well as God’s words, before all eyes.

But there is much more than the use of different languages — there is the difference between the first man fallen into sin and the Second man who first descended into the lower parts of the earth, and then ascended above the heavens after accomplishing the mighty work of redemption. Assuredly this is all the difference possible, and it is just what reigns between the Old and the New Testament, not in the hearts of saints, but as a state of things. Consequently the relationship is altogether of another sort. Hence the provisions that were suitable and appropriate, when God had as an object before Him the first man, could not apply to the Second, under whose revelation and redemption we find ourselves. This must be borne in mind if we would judge rightly about these types, or the law in general which made nothing perfect.

Again we find in the rest of Deuteronomy 24 as well as in Deuteronomy 25 a number of precepts of mercy and goodness as to the people even in the most ordinary matters of household life — not the wife only but one’s fellows, servants too, strangers, harvests and vineyards, down to the care of the cattle. The poor man who was in fault and got beaten was not forgotten. There must be no over-passing a certain measure, nor be anything that would make one’s brother vile. Stripes may be due and needful; but there must be nothing to destroy respect. Jehovah finds His own interest in all the belongings of His people, and He would train up in His own nurture and admonition — an important point for us to consider betimes.

Further, we find that anything like an advantage taken where feelings were raised against another is rebuked in the sternest manner. A righteous and equal measure is insisted on. But Amalek must not slip out of mind. “Remember what Amalek did unto thee by the way, when ye were come forth out of Egypt; how he met thee by the way, and smote the hindmost of thee, even all that were feeble behind thee, when thou wast faint and weary; and he feared not God. Therefore it shall be, when Jehovah thy God hath given thee rest from all thine enemies round about, in the land which Jehovah thy God giveth thee for an inheritance to possess it, that thou shalt blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; thou shalt not forget it.” Now, who will dare to say that this was wrong? Shall not the Judge of all the earth do and say what is righteous?

And this gives me occasion to press a few words from the New Testament, often forgotten in its spirit when its words may be remembered. It is the part of a Christian to abhor evil as much as to love what is good. Beware of the smallest sympathy with him who counts it good to be indifferent, lukewarm, not zealous, who likes no doubt what is pleasant and kindly in itself, but without detestation of that which dishonours God. There is a total defect in the Christian character which (to speak typically) has not the badger’s skin as well as the covering of blue. Our Lord Jesus felt strongly against evil. He alone is perfection, and has shown this for our profit and example. Here we see the same principle inculcated in Amalek’s case.

The truth is quite contrary to the spirit of the age, entirely different from what people call a sweet tone, or the spirit of Christ. They know little of Christ who talk thus. The fact is that had they heard Jesus denounce religious forms and men who walked not in faith, had they or their friends fallen under the censure which filled His soul — say in Matt. 23 — it is to be feared that a similar strain of thought and feeling would have condemned the Son of God. This is of the more importance for those who, like us Christians, have to walk in communion with Christ and His cross at the same time that the power of evil reigns in the world We cannot escape trial of a serious kind, and to take it in grace — such exactly is Christianity in practice. The millennium will be the overthrow of the power of evil, and consequently righteousness will govern. But what brings in the difficulty now is the perfection of God’s ways in Christianity, whilst outwardly evil remains. God permits, but lifts the Christian above, the very worst evil. It rose up against the Son of God Himself; and the Christian follows Him and His cross. Accordingly this is precisely where and how he has to walk. The evil God permits to rage to the uttermost, but grace and truth in Christ in the power of the Spirit is brought into his heart and governs his ways. Hence he is called to abhor evil just as much as to love that which is good; and the heart which does not show divine hatred of evil has really but scant love for what is good. The one is the measure of the other: they are inseparable from Christ, and should be from the Christian.

In Deuteronomy 26 we arrive at a brighter scene: we anticipate Israel entering on their own land. Here we find a relief from the numerous exhortations which suppose dangers on every side. On the contrary blessing flows richly in prospect; for God is seen accomplishing what He had promised His people of old. If He has brought them into the land, they come in grateful acknowledgment of His grace. “And it shall be when thou art come in unto the land which Jehovah thy God giveth thee for an inheritance, and possesses” it, and dwellest therein, that thou shalt take of the first of all the fruit of the earth, which thou shalt bring of thy land that Jehovah thy God giveth thee, and shalt put it in a basket, and shalt go unto the place which Jehovah thy God shall choose to place his name there. And thou shalt go unto the priest that shall be in those days, and say unto him, I profess this day unto Jehovah thy God.” Here then is the full confession that God’s hand had accomplished what His mouth had promised. This in a higher atmosphere is the characteristic of the Christian. It is the same principle, not of promises only, but these made good in Christ. The Christian is not merely a man that is passing through the wilderness, but already blessed with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ. Both are true. If we have our march through the wilderness, we have also our portion in the heavenly land.

Now what becomes of him who is conscious of this place? For what does God look? Remember, it is the place of every Christian, and a part of the ministry of Christ to put every Christian into the consciousness of it. He cannot worship God fully unless he have in his soul the certainty of his nearness to God through Christ and His work as the ground of his relationship. As to his body, he is no doubt in the earth, still surrounded with what is far from God; but when he looks up into the presence of God, he knows that his home is there. It is not merely that he will find his home there, but that his life and righteousness being there, the Holy Ghost has come down to give him a present link with Christ in glory. The consequence is that there is that in him which corresponds with the Israelite’s here bringing of the fruits of the land before Jehovah. His praise of God is to be founded on the Spirit’s leading him to worship according to the new place of blessing, but with a far deeper sense than ever of his unworthiness in the light of such grace on God’s part.

“Thou shalt speak and say before Jehovah thy God, A Syrian ready to perish was my father, and he went down into Egypt, and sojourned there with a few, and became there a nation, great, mighty, and populous: and the Egyptians evil entreated us, and afflicted us, and laid upon us hard bondage: and when we cried unto the Jehovah God of our fathers, Jehovah heard our voice, and looked on our affliction, and our labour, and our oppression: and Jehovah brought us forth out of Egypt with a mighty hand, and with an outstretched arm, and with great terribleness, and with signs, and with wonders: and he hath brought us into this place, and hath given us this land, even a land that floweth with milk and honey. And now, behold, I have brought the first-fruits of the land.” He had been brought into Canaan, as it is said, “which thou, O Jehovah, hast given me.” “And thou shalt set it before Jehovah thy God.” In whatever form the most important exercise of life in the Christian is worship. “And thou shalt rejoice in every good thing which Jehovah thy God hath given unto thee, and unto thine house, thou, and the Levite, and the stranger that is among you.” This is another trait; that is, the heart going forth towards those that are poor, despised, miserable in the earth. This is supposed to follow afterwards.

Then, further, we find a peculiar direction as to the giving of tithes. “When thou hast made an end of tithing all the tithes of thine increase the third year, which is the year of tithing, and hast given it unto the Levite” (it was a special tithe), “then thou shalt say before Jehovah thy God, I have brought away the hallowed things out of mine house, and also have given them unto the Levite.” It is not only that the heart considers what God has done for it, but it is brought also to regard those that are outwardly friendless in the world as the special object of our care. Are we learning such a duty before our God, and caring for them according to that which His bounty has given us? This is what is next introduced. Thus the Israelite was called not only to an expression of praise, but to the confession, in an exercised conscience, how he used the place of blessing into which he was brought; how far he diffused the sense of the blessing around.

Last of all is a prayer; for no matter how God may bless us, to whatever extent He is pleased to make us a means of blessing to others (and both these are clearly the points we have had), there is this further consideration — that we are not taken out of the place of dependence. Worship does not weaken prayer. “Look down from thy holy habitation, from heaven, and bless thy people Israel, and the land which thou hast given us.” Now we desire a blessing for the people of God, suitable to the position of grace in which we stand. This makes us feel the need of God moment by moment. “This day Jehovah thy God hath commanded thee to do these statutes and judgments.” Again, obedience, instead of being in any measure enfeebled, is strengthened by the sense of the nearness to God into which we are brought. “Thou has avouched Jehovah this day to be thy God, and to walk in his ways, and to keep his statutes, and his commandments, and his judgments, and to hearken unto his voice: and Jehovah hath avouched thee this day to be his peculiar people, as he hath promised thee, and that thou shouldest keep all his commandments; and to make thee high above all nations which he hath made, in praise, and in name, and in honour; and that thou mayest be an holy people unto Jehovah thy God, as he hath spoken.”

Next we come to another and a very important division of this book. The first remark I would make is that we must beware of confounding Deuteronomy 27 with Deuteronomy 28. The two chapters are distinct in principle. It is not merely a question of form, but they are altogether distinct in character. A scripture which will help much to put this in a clear light is the use that the apostle Paul makes of Deuteronomy 27 in citing it in Gal. 3. He does not quote from Deuteronomy 28. One may boldly say that it would have been incompatible with the object of the Spirit of God to have there cited anything hence but from Deuteronomy 27. Certainly such is the fact; and in scripture, if not in nature fallen as it is, whatever is is right.

Now this calls for our notice. In the 9th and 10th verses it is said, “So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham. For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.” This is a quotation from the last verse of Deuteronomy 27. Of what is the apostle treating? Not merely of that which pertains to the present life. He is looking at law as that which brings in the curse for ever. Using this light then, it is not a question of present things, but of a curse in the sight of God. This gives the true key to the passage as compared with the next chapter. We shall see that the blessings and the curses of Deuteronomy 28 are strictly those that pertain to the actual curse of man here below.

In Deuteronomy 27 we read, “And Moses with the elders of Israel commanded the people, saying, Keep all the commandments which I command you this day,” and he directs that when they passed over Jordan they were to set up great stones. “And it shall be on the day when ye shall pass over Jordan unto the land which Jehovah thy God giveth thee, that thou shalt set thee up great stones, and plaster them with plaster: and thou shalt write upon them all the words of this law, when thou art passed over, that thou mayest go in unto the land which Jehovah thy God giveth thee, a land that floweth with milk and honey; as the Jehovah God of thy fathers hath promised thee. Therefore it shall be when ye be gone over Jordan, that ye shall set up these stones, which I command you this day, in mount Ebal, and thou shalt plaster them with plaster. And there shalt thou build an altar unto Jehovah thy God, an altar of stones: thou shalt not lift up any iron tool upon them. Thou shalt build the altar of Jehovah thy God of whole stones: and thou shalt offer burnt-offerings thereon unto Jehovah thy God: and thou shalt offer peace-offerings, and shalt eat there, and rejoice before Jehovah thy God.” But further he says (verse 12), “These shall stand upon mount Gerizim to bless the people, when ye come over Jordan; Simeon, and Levi and Judah, and Issachar, and Joseph, and Benjamin: and these shall stand upon mount Ebal to curse; Reuben, Gad, and Asher, and Zebulun, Dan, and Naphtali.” Thus the charge is given that half the tribes were to stand on one mountain to bless, the other half on another mountain to curse. Here we find how it is carried out. “And the Levites shall speak, and say unto all the men of Israel with a loud voice, Cursed,” and so it was through every verse to the last.

How comes this? Where are the blessings? Nowhere. Nothing remains but the curses. Is not this solemn? The point is, as the apostle puts it, the bearing of the law on souls before God. By Moses’ word half the tribes are directed to take one mountain to pronounce the blessing, the other half to pronounce the curse; but when all has been carried out, scripture has nothing to record but the curse, without a word of the blessing whatever. It is impossible for man to find blessing from the law in the presence of God when we come to its positive application. No matter what may be the call, when we stand before the fact, there is nothing but a curse to speak of. One scarcely knows a more solemn scripture, or more characteristic of this book.

It is not that there is the least unwillingness on God’s part to bless, far from it; and the charge was given to bless as much as to curse. But alas! the creature, the first man, was under probation by the law of God; and the result is, and can only be, that if it depends on man, the only thing he gets when we come to the fact is the curse. The curses were pronounced, and not a word about blessings. There was a call and due preparation to bless; but in result there were no blessings to pronounce, nothing but the curse. And what an awful thing it is that in this Christendom of ours, after the gospel itself has been brought in at the cost of the death of Jesus the Son of God, this is what is thundered out still — the curse and not the blessing! Is it a legitimate excuse, that an entire want of spiritual understanding prevails? Why should it exist with Deuteronomy commented on by the apostle Paul to the Galatians? There is no want of divine light there. What we see in both is the perfect matchless wisdom of God. In the one Moses speaks of the awful issue, himself full of love to the people, and of fervent desires for them; in the other, the light which the gospel gives by Paul confirms it: on the ground of law there remains nothing for man but the curse. Blessings may be held out, but there is no hand that can take up the blessing, any more than a mouth here to pronounce them: there is a dead and ominous silence as to the blessing. The curses sound out from the mountain of cursing, and are recorded in all their minute sternness; but there is no blessing here reported from the mountain of blessing. Not a hint of these is given in Deuteronomy 27. In order to eke out an appearance of blessing, men have confounded the chapters and their wholly distinct bearings. They have looked for the blessing in the next chapter. They are quite wrong. There is not the slightest ground for such a connection.

Let us turn to Deuteronomy 28 and the distinction will be seen with singular clearness. “And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of Jehovah thy God, to observe and to do all his commandments which I command thee this day, that Jehovah thy God will set thee on high above all nations of the earth.” It is merely national It has nothing to do with the soul in the sight of God. “And all these blessings shall come on thee, and overtake thee, if thou shalt hearken unto the voice of Jehovah thy God. Blessed shalt thou be in the city, and blessed shalt thou be in the field.” This is not what a poor soul wants. It in no way meets a sense of guilt or a dread of judgment. The sinner needs something which will stand for ever. He wants what will be in heaven, and not merely in the field or in the city. He wants acceptance for himself with God, not merely to receive in his basket and in his store; there is nothing of that sort here. Thus the distinction is radical and quite plain. What shows that these are not the blessings which were to have been pronounced on the mount of blessing is that we find at the end of the blessings these analogous curses follow after verse 15. “But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of Jehovah thy God, to observe to do all his commandments and his statutes which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee: cursed shalt thou be in the city, and cursed shalt thou be in the field.” In the previous chapter it is no question of where we are cursed, but rather of the person cursed. Here it is a particular curse which falls on a particular sphere.

In Deuteronomy 27 it is an absolute and a personal curse; it is not in mere circumstances, however great the change. Such is the difference. In short then in this chapter we have the profound intimation of what the law comes to in man’s — the first man’s — hands. Whatever may be the goodness of God, man is ruined. The consequence is, there is only a curse and no blessing.

In Deuteronomy 28 we have law, not looked at in its own nature as a question between God and man, but regarded as the rule of earthly government, as having to do with the circumstances of man. And here accordingly we have the blessing on the one hand and the curse on the other. Nothing can be plainer than the teaching conveyed when the idea is once seized.

It is in vain to say that we receive the blessing which belongs to Deuteronomy 27. We do not. There we get the curse and no blessing. But in Deuteronomy 28 we get certain blessings and then curses. Thus as a part of this chapter we have the state in which Israel was to be found to the present day. “Jehovah shall cause thee to be smitten before thine enemies. Jehovah will smite thee with the botch of Egypt, and with the emerods, and with the scab, and with the itch, whereof thou canst not be healed. Jehovah shall smite thee with madness, and blindness, and astonishment of heart,” and so on. This is detailed. “And thou shalt become an astonishment, a proverb, and a byword, among all nations whither Jehovah shall lead thee.” It is not a question therefore of dealing according to God’s nature, but a matter of His dispensational ways with a nation in this world, and nothing more.

In Deuteronomy 29 another important point comes up — a change still more manifest. We have the fact that “These are the words of the covenant, which Jehovah commanded Moses to make with the children of Israel in the land of Moab, beside the covenant which he made with them in Horeb.” Now it is important to bear in mind that, if it had been merely the covenant made in Horeb, the children of Israel could never have entered the land at all. It was necessary, according to the far-counselling wisdom and mercy of God, that there should be another covenant. I say not the new one, but that God should bring in fresh terms, and not merely insist on the strict application of the law that was pronounced in Horeb. He brings in governmental mercy. Thus God now as it were says, Here you are on the very borders of the land, and I will bring you in. You must take care how you behave when you are there. Hence it is God making fresh terms for the very purpose of putting His people in the land without compromising Himself. This is here shown with care.

The end of the chapter gives us even more. When the people had altogether and publicly failed, grace can bring out from God Himself the only suited remedy. Now Israel take their place before God. They are called to keep the words of the covenant; the very children are brought in and put before Jehovah, with solemn warning against idolatry, as well as other acts of rebellion. But the point lies here: “The secret things belong unto Jehovah our God, but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.” The character of this has been often noticed before; but it cannot be too much insisted on always; that grace, though in a distant and enigmatic manner, alludes to an unrevealed secret, whereby, when the people have utterly failed, as we have seen, on the ground of law, God will not fail to find ways and means of justifying them by faith. It is not merely words by which He can bring them all provisionally into the land, but means as yet secret by which He can justify them in the face of all their faults, and work in their hearts according to what is in His heart — in short, His secrets of grace.

Accordingly all is strongly confirmed by that which Deuteronomy 30 reveals. Jehovah takes them up where they are. He supposes them driven out of every land under heaven; yet that in their low estate their heart, no longer haughty but circumcised, turns before Himself. “Thou shalt return and obey the voice of Jehovah, and do all His commandments which I command thee this day. And Jehovah thy God will make thee plenteous in every work of thine hand,” etc.... “if thou shalt hearken unto the voice of Jehovah thy God to keep his commandments and his statutes which are written in this book of the law, and if thou turn unto Jehovah thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul. For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it.”

Now these words, it is notorious, are applied by the apostle Paul in Romans 10; and we never can overlook the applications of the New Testament without losing a deeply interesting and weighty key for understanding the Old. For what does the apostle use them? For the very purpose which has been already hinted in the close of the last chapter. The children of Israel had completely ruined themselves under the law. They had failed before God. The righteousness which the law claimed had only proved their actual unrighteousness. What was to become of them Christ is brought in — “the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.” Hence therefore the apostle by the Spirit gives the passage of Deuteronomy this admirable turn, that it is no question of going up to heaven to find the Saviour, nor of going down into the bowels of the earth to bring Him from the dead — that the gospel brings the word of salvation near to the very door, “in thy mouth and in thy heart.” It is only to believe and confess the risen Lord Jesus Therefore, in virtue of the gospel of God, let them take the full everlasting blessing of His grace, once wicked, defiled, lost, but now “washed, sanctified, justified, in the name of our Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God,” if I may quote another scripture.

On this principle will God surely bless His ancient people Israel, scattered and broken among the Gentiles, when it becomes impossible therefore, as far as their state is concerned, to carry on their Jewish ritual. What will become of them? Their heart bows to the word of God; they look up to the Messiah, and God will work in grace. Powerless, sensible of past wickedness, full of darkness (for I have no doubt that they are those described in the end of Isaiah 50 as the servants of Jehovah who walk in darkness, and see no light), nevertheless their heart turns to Jehovah, and they stay on their God — a condition that may not suit the Christian now, but which grace will open to a Jew then. Such is precisely the happy turn furnished by the apostle in Romans, only of course with a fuller application to the Christian; but it is on the same principle that God will deal with the remnant of the Jews by and by.

After this, in Deuteronomy 31, we find Moses about to close his ministry. He had given, so to speak, his last discourse, and addresses to them a most solemn warning, telling them that he knew the rebellion of which they would be guilty. Joshua is charged, and the Levites also.

But Moses does not end without a song (Deut. 32); and this song is grounded on the secret things of God’s grace, though it also embrace the judgments of the latter day. Not ignorant of the evil, he looks onward to the blessing that would surely come to them. He deeply feels what they would do against Jehovah in their stiff-necked folly and ingratitude; but he beholds in prophetic vision what He will do for them.

Accordingly he says, “Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth.” Because he would publish the name of Jehovah, they were to ascribe greatness to their God. He is the rock abiding in unshakeable strength for His people. Not they but He is this tower of strength. “His doing is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth without iniquity, just and right is he.” As for the people, it was manifest what they were. The corruption was theirs, not His; it is that of His children, theirs is the spot — a perverse and crooked generation The lawgiver indignantly reproves their ingratitude and clenches it the more by reminding them that it was no new thought on God’s part. Their place in the world to His glory was no last resource that would be taken up in the last days. “When the Most High (Elion) divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.”

This, it is true, has not the eternal character of our election as Christians. (Eph. 1) The difference is just and appropriate. When God reveals His counsels in Christ touching His children, His choice is declared to be before the foundation of the world. Not so with Israel. It is always said to be in time, though just as sovereign as in our case. Eternal election would not suit that of a nation. The choice of Israel is strictly connected with the earth. The speciality in His choice of us is that it is outside creation; it attaches to the eternity of God Himself, and is altogether apart from the created scene that was about to be ruined by man and Satan. God would have saints to share His nature morally and to enjoy Himself, no less than angels to do His pleasure as His servants. What had that to do with creation? It is a question of God forming according to His own wisdom and love those who would be able to share His mind and enjoy His love. And this is done by Christ His Son, and made known by the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven. It is altogether above a question of creature condition. Nobody doubts that those who were to be so blessed did in fact form part of the creation, yea, in its deepest ruin and guilt. We had our part in that world which rejected and crucified Jesus. Then comes in the triumph of grace. It was necessary that there should be not merely eternal life given us in Christ but redemption. Life would have been enough, had we never been sinners. But we were guilty and lost, and therefore Christ comes to die in atonement. He took our judgment on Himself and suffered for our sins, the just for the unjust, to bring us to God. The consequence is that He in His death on the cross conciliated what was otherwise irreconcileable, and made it righteous for God to deliver us, as well as free to bring out withal those eternal counsels which He had in Christ before the world was. With Israel the case is different. There, as we have said, the election is in time, the people separated to Jehovah in the midst of the bounds assigned to the other nations among the sons of Adam; for it is no question here of the divine nature, but of the human race. “He set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel. For Jehovah’s portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.”

Then Moses sings of His wonderful love and goodness and patience to that people and their falling into every kind of iniquity, sacrificing even to demons (“he-goats” they are contemptuously called), not to God, but “to gods whom they knew not, to new gods that came newly up, whom your fathers feared not. Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful, and hast forgotten God that formed thee.” Alas! Jehovah then has to prepare arrows against His people, has to pour out His vengeance even on His loved Israel — more guilty than any other, and in fact to leave them for a no-people (the Gentiles), by whom He would provoke the Jews to jealousy.⁹ Then the heathen take advantage of God’s indignation against His people, till He at last in mercy: to Israel will rise up to deal with their enemies. “For Jehovah shall judge his people, and repent himself for his servants, when he seeth that their power is gone, and there is none shut up or left. And he shall say, Where are their gods, their rock in whom they trusted, which did eat the fat of their sacrifices, and drank the wine of their drink-offerings? let them rise up and help you, and be your protection. See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand. For I lift up my hand to heaven, and say, I live for ever. If I whet my glittering sword, and mine hand take hold on judgment; I will render vengeance to mine enemies, and will reward them that hate me. I will make mine arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh; and that with the blood of the slain and of the captives, from the beginning of revenges upon¹⁰ the enemy. Rejoice, O ye nations, with his people: for he will avenge the blood of his servants, and will render vengeance to his adversaries, and will be merciful unto his land, and to his people.” Then not only will God deliver His people Israel, but He will cause the very nations themselves to rejoice with His people in the enlarging circle of His grace; for though the principle apply under the gospel, it is only in the millennial reign that the full import of their predicted joy together will be realized.

In Deuteronomy 33 we have a blessing pronounced on the various tribes of Israel. This may be entered into rather more closely just now, though one cannot hope to do so with satisfaction in so small a space. Let me only just say that it is altogether in reference to the land which the people were on the point of entering. This is perhaps the chief difference as compared with Jacob’s blessing. In the latter case notice was taken of the tribes from the beginning of their history to the end, and apart from their possessing the land or not; whereas the blessing that Moses pronounces here is in the strictest subordination to the great object of Deuteronomy. from first to last the point of the book is God’s bringing His people into the land, and putting them into a relationship as immediate with Himself as was consistent with the first man. This we have systematically and always: so the blessing here is suitable to it. Moses does not therefore show us historically the course of things as when Jacob prophesied, but a more specific benediction of the people in view of their place in relation to Jehovah in the land.

The song opens with the vision of Jehovah coming from Sinai and shining forth from Seir as well as Paran. It is His judicial manifestation to His people, His saints, around Him in the wilderness: from His right hand [went] a fiery law for them. “Yea, He loveth the peoples: all his saints are in thy hand; and they sat down at thy feet, each receive thy decisions.” The special place of Moses is then named as commanding a law, the possession of the congregation of Jacob; he is king in Jeshurun when the heads of the people, the tribes of Israel, gathered together.

As to the first-born, the word is, Let Reuben live and not die, and his men be few.¹¹

The next, though a singular choice in appearance, is ordered in divine wisdom so as to bring forward that tribe which would take the place of Reuben, politically soon, but eventually according to the counsels of God. For of Judah Christ was to be born after the flesh. “And this is for Judah; and he said, Hear, O Jehovah, the voice of Judah, and bring him unto his people: let his hands be numerous for him, and be thou an help from his adversaries.” We know that the Jews have long had a separate place; but the day is coming when Judah and Israel shall be joined in one people according to the expressive symbol of Ezekiel, which may illustrate the language of Moses.

His own tribe has then his blessing. “And of Levi he said, Thy Thummim and thy Urim are for thy holy [i.e. pious] one, whom thou didst prove at Massah, with whom thou didst strive at the waters of Meribah; who said of his father and of his mother, I have not seen him; neither did he acknowledge his brethren, nor know his own children; for they kept thy word, and guarded thy covenant. They shall teach thy judgments to Jacob, and thy law to Israel: they shall put incense before thee, and whole burnt-offering upon thine altar.¹² Bless, Jehovah, his force, and accept the work of his hands: strike through the loins of those that rise up against him, and of those that hate him, that they rise not again.”

The blessing of Benjamin¹³ alludes to Jehovah’s dwelling there; for Jerusalem was within the limits of that tribe which Judah just skirted. Joseph has his full twofold portion in the land. Zebulun’s blessing¹⁴ is rather without, Issachar’s within. Gad’s haste to get rich appears, though he shared the trials of the people, Dan’s warlike impetuosity is noted; and Naphtali’s peaceful satisfaction with his portion; and Asher’s acceptance among his brethren, and abundant resources and vigour.

Nothing can exceed the grandeur of the closing words of Moses; and they will assuredly be fulfilled in the future brightness and glory of restored Israel. He has dealt with His people according to the fiery law in His right hand; but He has not exhausted the resources of His tender mercy; nay, the best wine is kept to the last, to be brought in by Him whom they knew not in His humiliation but will own to theirs, yet in the end with exceeding joy when He returns in glory to change the water of purifying after their manner into that which gladdens the heart of God and man. “There is none like the God of Jeshurun, riding the heavens for thy help, and for his excellency the Skies. The God of ages is a refuge, and underneath the everlasting arms; and he shall drive away the enemy from thy presence, and say, Destroy. Israel dwelleth in safety, the fountain. of Jacob on a land of corn and new wine; his heavens also drop down dew. Happy thou, O Israel: who is like thee, O people saved by Jehovah, the shield of thy help, and who is the sword of thy excellency! And thy enemies shall lie to thee; and thou shalt tread on the¹⁵ high places.”

Moses (Deut. 34) goes up to the top of Pisgah, and there Jehovah points out to him the land in detail. It was impossible that the fault of Moses could be slighted without weakening the authority of law. There was surely righteousness in the ways of God; but this did not in the smallest degree hinder the perfectness of His love to Moses. It was part of His government to chasten his fault: His grace to Moses remained entire. Had it been possible, consistently with the ways of God (which it was not), that Moses should have entered the land, what grief to Moses to have beheld the unfaithfulness of His people, their slighting of His law, their imperfect conquest of the enemy, their readiness to turn back to iniquity and idolatry even in that land! Can this be compared with the blessedness of looking down on it from beside Jehovah — not seeing it in the hands of man, imperfectly rescued from the Canaanites, but God Himself calling it already the land of this tribe and of that, and thus giving His servant’s heart to look to the time when no Canaanite should be in the land?

Faith has always the best portion.

¹ Dr. Davidson (Introd. O. T. i. p. 235) ventures to set portions of this chapter in juxtaposition with two from elsewhere, in order to show that God’s speaking to the inspired writer was simply his own mind and conscience enlightened from on high. He and other sacred authors are to be regarded as nothing more than representatives of the intelligence of their age in relation to the Deity. “The Deuteronomist, writing at a later period of the same arrangement [the mission of the spies in Numbers], represents the people proposing the measure to Moses, who on consideration resolved to execute it, because it approved itself to his heart and conscience: ‘Ye came near unto me every one of you, and said, We will send men before us, and they shall search us out the land; and the saying pleased me well: and I took twelve men of you, one of a tribe.’ (Deut. 1:22, 23) In the same manner an important social arrangement is declared to have been made by Moses at the suggestion of Jethro his father-in-law, who says in prophesying, ‘If thou shalt do this thing, and God command thee so, then thou shalt be able,’ etc. (Ex. 18:23) But in Deut. 1:9, etc., Moses speaks of the same institution as his own without any reference to Jethro, or the divine command of which Jethro spoke.” Such is the sceptic’s puny effort to lower the character and credit of scripture. But the believer sees wisdom and grace in comparing the first historical statement with the solemn use the legislator makes to the generation about to enter the land, and the added information is of grave import.

Numbers 13 gives the fact when God warranted Moses to send the spies; Deuteronomy supplies the motives which wrought in the people to desire them. For he had himself told them to go up into the land; but they begged spies to search it first. The wish emanated neither from God nor His servant but from the people, though Moses, at God’s command, did send them to the ruin of that generation, as it turned out And it has been well remarked on the one hand, that he graciously omits to repeat God’s offer to make himself a fresh stock after their destruction but for his intercession; while on the other he confesses how he, no less than their fathers, had grieved Jehovah, so that he was not to lead them into the land any more than they, but to give that place of honour to Joshua. Conceive the state of mind which could say that “in Deuteronomy Moses repeatedly lays the blame of his expulsion on the people (Deut. 1:37; Deut. 3:26; Deut. 4:21); but according to Num. 20:12 God punished him thus for not believing Him, while in Num. 27:14 his punishment was occasioned by the legislator’s own disobedience”! (Dr. D.’s Introd. O. T. i. 367.)

Again, what can be more simple and appropriate than that Moses at the close should omit the name and counsel of Jethro, and bring the people into greater prominence than himself in the choice of rulers? This he had fully shown in the history. Now he dwells chiefly on their part in the matter, confessing his own inability to cope with their great increase, which ho touchingly entreats God to swell a thousand times, but withal urges on the rulers to judge righteously.

² It is distressing that any man bearing the Christian name should write as does Dr. Davidson. (Introd. O. T. i. pp. 226-228.) “On comparing the decalogue as recorded in Ex. 20:2-17 and Deut. 5:6-21, it will be observed —

“1. That it is said of both, ‘ God spake all these words.” (Ex. 20:1; Deut. 5:22.)

“2 Notwithstanding such express declaration, the following diversities occur. In Deut. 5:12 the term keep corresponds to remember in Ex. 20:8, and the last clause of the former verse, ‘as the Lord thy God hath commanded,’ is wanting in Exodus. In Deut. 5:14 is the addition, ‘thine ox nor thine ass,’ as well as the clause, ‘that thy man-servant and thy maid-servant may rest as well as thou.’ Again, in Deut. 5:16 two new clauses are supplied, ‘and that it may go well with thee,’ and ‘as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee.’ The copulative conjunction is prefixed to the last four commandments in Deuteronomy. In the ninth and tenth the terms ‘falsehood’ and ‘covet’ are not the same as in Exodus. The tenth has also the first two clauses in a different order from that in Exodus, and adds ‘his field.’

“3. The above diversities show that the ipsissima verba spoken by God cannot be in both, because both do not exactly agree.

“4. It is possible, however, that the ipsissima verba may be in one or other. Accordingly the majority of expositors take the record in Exodus for the exact one, supposing that, as Moses was speaking to the people in the latter case, he recited from memory, not from the tables of stone, and therefore there is some variation of terms. A few, however, think that the record in Deuteronomy is the more exact, because when Moses recorded the words in Exodus he had heard the decalogue pronounced; whereas, when he repeated it in Deuteronomy, it was in his hands, inscribed in permanent letters.

“5. If the rigidly literal meaning of the phrase ‘God spake these words’ is not adhered to in the case of the one record, it need not in the case of the other. Or, if the cognate clause used in both books, ‘that God wrote them on two tables of stone,’ be not literally pressed in one case, there is no necessity for doing so in the other. It seems probable to us that the record in Exodus is the more exact. That in Deuteronomy has an amplification corresponding to the style of the book.

“6. We suppose that the record in Exodus is the older one. Yet it would be hazardous to assert that it is the exact original. It is very improbable that both proceeded from one and the same writer, because on the principle of strict literality of language he contradicts himself. Both are substantially the decalogue; but Moses did not write both. Indeed he could not have written either in its present form, because that in Exodus is Jehovistic, and older than the record in Deuteronomy. If we have,” &c.

In the same sceptical spirit follows Dr. Colenso. (The Pent. pt. ii., pp. 364-366.)

Now I affirm that on the face of the scriptures no candid person can deny that Exodus is professedly given as the history of the matter; Deuteronomy as a subsequent recital to the people, without the least aim at reiterating the words, which would have been the easiest thing in the world; for even these free thinkers do not pretend that the Deuteronomist did not possess Exodus. Hence, if darkness had not veiled their eyes, they would have seen that the latter clause of Deut. 5:12 cited could not be in Exodus, and that its existence in Deuteronomy proves that we have here a grave and instructive reference to the commandments formally given in the second book of Moses. Such moral motives as are added are therefore as appropriate in Deuteronomy as they could not, ought not to, be in Exodus. The remembrance of their own estate as slaves in Egypt till delivered by Jehovah is most suitable in verse 15; but it is certain that this is an appeal to their hearts, not the ground stated by God in promulgating the fourth commandment. All is perfect in its own place, and the imputation of self-contradiction as baseless as it is malicious and irreverent. But one must only expect this from men whose aim is to reduce the inspired writers to their own level, and who think that piety can co-exist with fraud, yea, with fraudulent falsehood about God.

³ Nothing can be weaker than the harping on the phrase “the priests the Levites,” as in the writings of Davidson and Colenso (following the superficial scepticism of foreign authors, who themselves followed the old Deists of our own country). The broader character of the book, with its aim of bringing forward the people, and consequently the tribal divisions, rather than particular families, fully accounts for this. Lad the phrase been inverted to “the Levites the priests” (which never occurs), there would have been some force in the argument: as it is, there is none. The priests were Levites. It is the design of the book which governs the description in each case.

⁴ Dr. D. (Introd. O. T. p. 65) says: “From Deut. 10:8 it is plain that the Levites were not appointed at Sinai but later; whereas we learn from Num. 8. that their institution took place at Sinai.” A disgraceful perversion; for Deut. 10:6, 7 is manifestly a parenthesis. Bearing this in mind, any reader can see that “at that time” in verse 8 really coalesces with “at that time” in verses 1-6, and therefore is in perfect accord with Num. 8; and yet is it repeated in p. 336.

⁵ See Dr. Lightfoot’s Works, ii. p. 136 (Pitman’s Edition).

⁶ The effort of rationalists to show that “the Deuteronomist” wrote long after Israel were in the land of Palestine is mere ill-will and want of depth. At the same time it is in no way opposed to the strictest views of inspiration to hold that the law was edited by an inspired man, whether Ezra (according to the Jews, as Josephus, etc.) Jeremiah, or any other prophet. The inspired editor may have given later names, and added “as it is in this day,” or explanatory remarks.

⁷ Verses 1 and 2 bring forward “the priests the Levites, the tribe of Levi,” giving emphasis to the priests, but joining all the tribe to which they belonged with them. Then in verses 3-5 the priest and his sons are specified, as in verses 6-8 the Levite. There is no ground for the rationalist dream of another age and state from that contemplated in Exodus, Leviticus, or Numbers.

⁸ People must be hard set for a fault who can, like Dr. Davidson (Introd. O. T. i. 96), array this chapter against Num. 35:14; because the latter, written before the former, speaks of six cities of refuge, three on either side of the Jordan, whereas the latter book speaks only of three at first, to which three were to be added after Moses’ death. It is a ridiculous inference that the same writer did not compose both books, or at least the passage respecting these cities. The second is the general law of the institutions, the second gives the more minute ordering of the details. And this is confirmed, not weakened, by Deut. 4:41-44 where it is said Moses set apart three on the east side, just as Num. 35 enjoined; while Deut. 19 shows us not these only but three more, if Jehovah enlarged their coast as He had sworn to do. Only an evil eye could find want of order or harmony here.

⁹ It is hard to imagine a greater lack of spiritual intelligence than is displayed in the remarks of Dr. Davidson (Introduction to O. T. i. 391-393) and the German authors he controverts. The choice lies between deeper or shallower pits of error. “The thirty-second chapter as far as verse 43, contains Moses’ song referred to in 31:19, 22, 30. It is pretty clear that the song was not written by the Deuteronomist himself, who never appears as a poet, and from whose style it strongly differs. Neither can it have been written by the Jehovist, for the difference of diction and manner is too great. It proceeded from some unknown poet, whose historical allusions and linguistic peculiarities show that he lived after Moses (!) and even after Solomon (!!). Thus the fifteenth verse presupposes that the Israelites had passed through highly prosperous and peaceful times; and in the twenty-first the people referred to are the Assyrians, who had attained to the height of their power, and are described in the thirty-third chapter of Isaiah All internal evidence tends to the last quarter of the eighth century as the period when the song was written, as Ewald has proved (!!!). The Deuteronomist, thinking it worthy of Moses, though it was not written for the purpose of passing as Mosaic, adopted and put it into his mouth. We cannot agree with Ewald,” etc. “These observations show that we differ from Knobel, who assigns the song to the Syrian period. Instead of referring verses 21, 30, 31, 35, to the Assyrians, he supposes the Syrians to be meant, chiefly because he thinks that the former would have been spoken of in stronger language, and that the captivity would have been announced. But Knobel relies much on the seventh verse [there is confusion here: it must be of Deuteronomy 33], which relates to Judah, as evidence that the chapter belongs to a much earlier time than is commonly (!) assigned to it. He takes the allusion in the verse to be to David’s living at a distance from Saul in banishment; while the twelfth verse he applies to Gibeon, whither the tabernacle had been brought after Nob had been destroyed by Saul. These are precarious allusions to rely upon. We do not believe with Knobel that the poem belongs to the time of Saul, and are surprised to find the critic asserting that the writers of Genesis 49. and Deuteronomy 33 were independent of one another without perceptible imitation on the part of either.

“The verses immediately succeeding the song, viz., Deut. 32:44-47, belong to the Deuteronomist himself, as the allusion in verse 46 to all the words of Moses plainly shows. The remainder of the chapter, viz., 48-52, is Elohistic, having been taken from the Elohim-writer and put here by the Deuteronomist. It is partly a repetition of Numbers 27:12-23, as Bleek has pointed out.”

I have given this long extract as a specimen not only of the speculative mania that characterises the school, but also of their readiness to impute the basest dishonesty to the holy men of God who spoke from Him as they were borne on by the Holy Spirit. They think little of imputing to their imaginary Deuteronomist the fraud of putting into Moses’ mouth what, according to them, Moses never uttered. Such an imposture God’s word! But enough of this. The apostle Paul refutes them all beforehand in a few words which carry the force and light of truth, as theirs do of clashing inanities. He declares that verse 21 is the language of Moses, and that the allusion is to the Gentiles called while God counts Israel Lo-ammi. (Rom. 10:19) Neither Syrians nor Assyrians are in view then, but, during the temporary exclusion of the ancient people, the call of those not a people to move Israel to jealousy. Compare Romans 11.

¹⁰ Literally, “from the split head of the enemy.”

¹¹ There are cases, in Hebrew as in other tongues, where the negative particle may and must be understood from the context; and so our translators took the passage before us. But this should never be, unless it be implied from the chief clause, which is not the fact here.

¹² Thus, if Simeon disappear, Levi gains a good degree by fidelity at the severest crisis in the desert history of Israel. No doubt the word in Deuteronomy 33 is supposed to be after that in Genesis 49; but there is not the smallest ground for the assumption of incredulity that the writer of the one lived after the other. As the representation of Scripture is that Moses wrote both, so the differences in the view taken on each occasion are perfectly compatible and indeed remarkably verified. Levi is involved in the sentence with Simeon according to Genesis 49. But Deut. 33, though it omits Simeon, does not reverse the scattering predicted of Levi by Jacob; but it turns that very circumstance into a blessing for Israel and an honour to the tribe which covered over their old fault with the truest zeal for Jehovah’s honour and a burning love for the people at all cost to their own feelings and appearances. Ability to plead for man is in proportion to faithfulness for God. The priesthood was within that tribe, and the service of the sanctuary, and the teaching of the people.

¹³ ”Of Benjamin he said, The beloved of Jehovah shall dwell in safety by him; he shall harbour him all the day, and he shall dwell between his shoulders.” The prophet alludes to Jerusalem as the place of the sanctuary and throne, the city of the great King. But the notion that the language savours of the reign of Josiah or near Jeremiah’s day is wholly unfounded. There was anything but safe tabernacling then for Benjamin. This is yet more evidently refuted in what follows.

For on Joseph the inspiring Spirit dwells largely. “Blessed of Jehovah be his land for the precious things of the heavens, for the dew and for the deep couching beneath, and for the precious things brought forth by the sun, and for the precious things driven out by the moon, and for the chief things of the ancient mountains, and for the precious things of the lasting hills, and the good pleasure of him that dwelt in the bush: let it come on the head of Joseph, and on the top of the head of him that was separated from his brethren. The first-born of his herd is honour to him, and his horns the horns of a buffalo: with them he shall push peoples together to the ends of the earth; and they are the myriads of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.” It is absurd to suppose such a blessing written, I will not say under Josiah’s reign, but even in the earliest days of the rent kingdom of Israel.

¹⁴ ”And of Zebulun he said, Rejoice, Zebulun, in thy going out; and, Issachar, in thy tents. They shall call the peoples to the mountain; there they shall sacrifice sacrifices of righteousness; for they shall suck the abundance of the seas, even treasures hidden in the sand. And of Gad he said, Blessed be he that enlargeth Gad: he dwelleth as a lioness, and feareth the arm, also the crown of the head. And he provideth the first part for himself, for there is the portion covered for the lawgiver; and he came with the heads of the people; he did the righteousness of Jehovah, and his judgments with Israel. And of Dan he said, Dan is a lion’s whelp; he shall leap from Bashan. And of Naphtali he said, O Naphtali, satisfied with good will, and full of the blessing of Jehovah, possess thou the west and the south. And of Asher he said, Asher, blessed among sons, let him be acceptable to his brethren, and dip his foot in oil: thy shoes iron and copper; and thy strength as thy days.” Will it be seriously pretended that all this was put forth as a prophecy after the most sweeping storm had fallen on all these tribes, and the last blows were about to fall on Judah and Benjamin? The credulity of infidels is proverbial, and can alone account for such senseless theories, even if one lays aside for a moment their one point in common — opposition to the revealed truth of God.

¹⁵ Literally “the eye” of Jacob.