The jahweh religion

1. A\l attempts to rele- gate the person of Moses to the realm of myth have quite properly been abandoned. It is another question how far the traditions concerning him rest on pure legend. As points that are quite beyond suspicion may be noted: his descent from the tribe of Levi; his name Mosheh (res ee mesu ‘son,’ possibly combined originally with the name of a god); his flight to Sinai on account of a homicide, and his marriage with a Midianite priest’s daughter, Zipporah, who became the mother of two sons; his return to Eg of the Israelite serfs from Viareoh ; further, his strife with his brother Aaron (whose historicity has been denied on insufficient grounds) and his sister Miriam on account of a Cushite woman ; and, finally, his prolonged sojourn in Kadesh, and his death on the east side of Jordan. All these data are derived from the early sources, and their invention is either inconceivable or at least ex- tremely improbable. On the’ other hand, the legend of his birth and exposure may have been woven about the (linguistically impossible) inter- pretation of his name in Ex 2”; the names of his parents, Amram and Jochebed, are first known to the Priests’ Code. The assumption that he was ‘instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians’ (Ac 7”) is connected, of course, with his being brought up by Pharaoh’s daughter, but it finds no real support in Ex 2 In any case there is no justification for finding in Moses’ acquaintance with Egyptian mysteries the Pair not only of his intellectual superiority to his fellow-country- men, but even of the Divine name Jahweh and of certain institutions (for example, the sacred Ark) connected with worship, if not, indeed, of the whole activity of Moses as a founder of religion. Such borrowing on his part is not only incapable of proof, it is extremely improbable ; for it is not the way of one ancient people to adopt the gods of another, or even elements of their cultus, at a time when it sees this other people and its gods overcome by another god. Whether Moses was moved to his work by other influences, such as that of the Kenites about Mt. Sinai, will have to be afterwards considered. The ancient tradition of Israel knows of nothing except that he was directly called by Jahweh at Sinai, and, in spite of his refusal at first, sent to deliver his people. The work of Moses is thus traced to Divine revela- tion. How this produced its effect on the mind of Moses, remains a secret to us as much as in all similar cases when God reveals Himself to His chosen instruments. But the fact is not on that account any the less certain to us, for it is wit- nessed to by its results. However many of the features of that Pandemonism which was common to the Semites may have continued to adhere to the religion of Israel after the time of Moses, it exhibits, even as early as the bestia of the Judges, features which raise it far above the popular re- ligions of the neighbouring peoples, and which can be explained only as due to the continued influ- ence of a highly endowed spiritual personality. So esp. Schiller in his brilliant essay, ‘ Die Send Mose's’ (first published in Heft 10 of Thalia). We leave quite out of account the fables cited by Josephus (¢. Apton. i. 26, 28) ‘trom Manetho’s Egyptiaca about the identity of Moser with the priest Osarsiph of Heliopolis. pt, and deliverance | i ae Lew’ ae ees RELIGION OF ISRAEL It is true that elsewhere we frequently meet in history with similar instances where a far- reaching influence is very palpable, and yet we do not feel compelled on that account to postulate a special Divine revelation. But in the case of Moses it is the peculiar character of the new ideas romulgated by him that forbids us to derive these om his own reflexions or to ascribe them to shrewd calculations for selfish ends. Upon the foundation laid by him there has arisen in the course of three thousand years the building which includes also the Christian nations. But the laying of a foundation like this is beyond a man’s power; the capacity must have been given hin by God. And on this very account the im- ae of the personality of Moses can hardly e exaggerated. Such is the conviction of the Deuteronomistic author of Dt 34° when he re- marks: ‘There hath not arisen a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the Tose knew face to face.’ _ 2. It is true, indeed, that it has been felt to be very surprising that in the Old Testament, and especially in the Prophets, the references to Moses are so few in number and so late in date. “Apart from the interpolation added in Hos 12"04 (‘By a Peephet the LorD brought Israel up out of Egypt, and by a prophet was he preserved’), we find allusions to Moses and Aaron as the deliverers of the people in Mic 64 (along with Miriam; although, it is true, the attributing of this passage to Micah is strongly contested), 1S 12%8 (in a Deuterono- mistic address), Ps 105° 1067, Moses alone as leader of the people is referred to in Is 63', Ps 1062; the power of his intercession with God is mentioned in Ps 106% and Jer 154. The last-cited passage shows clearly in what light the import- ance of Moses appeared even to a Jeremiah, and that it is thus evidently a mere accident that he is not more frequently mentioned elsewhere. It might appear even more strange that Moses as the founder of a religion appears to be practi- cally unknown to the Prophets and the Psalms et from Ps 998, where Moses and Aaron are ea led ‘priests,’ and 103’). But over against this must be set the fact that throughout the OT all the various legislations (except, of course, that con- tained in the vision of Ezekiel, chs. 40-48) are said to have been introduced, and in part even written down, by him. This would be quite un- intelligible unless there had been an indelible re- collection which demanded his recognition as the real author of religious traditions and institutions, so that later codifications could obtain authority only if they were carried back to his weighty name. If any one feels compelled to call this last course of procedure by the name of furgery (and therefore to repudiate it with indignation), he is radically mistaken as to the notions that prevailed in ancient Israel with respect to literary property. So far from being looked upon as forgery, it was regarded as a sacred duty to give as Moses’ own words anything that had to be promulgated for the good of the people in continuation of his work and in the sense and spirit of his laws (for instance, and very specially, the legislation of Deuteronomy). The idea of forgery, however natural it may be to us, is quite out of the question here. li. JAHWEH PROCLAIMED BY MOSES AS THE Gop or ISRAEL.—1. All the sources of the Pentateuch are at one in pointing out as the fundamental act of Moses his proclamation of Jahweh as the God of Israel, i.e. as the God who means certainly to deliver Israel from the slavery * Of. Hunnius, Natwr und Charakter Jahwehs nach den vor- deuteronoimischen Quellen der Biicher Genesis-Kénige, Strass- burg, 1902.