The author of "The Religion of Israel," referring to this subject, says:

As we cannot go into an extended account, and show how this is known, we will simply say that it is principally by internal evidence that these facts are ascertained.[92:5]

Now that we have seen that Moses did not write the books of the Pentateuch, our next endeavor will be to ascertain when they were written, and by whom.

We can say that they were not written by any one person, nor were they written at the same time.

We can trace three principal redactions of the Pentateuch, that is to say, the material was worked over, and re-edited, with modifications and additions, by different people, at three distinct epochs.[93:1]

The two principal writers are generally known as the Jehovistic and the Elohistic. We have—in speaking of the "Eden Myth" and the legend of the "Deluge"—already alluded to this fact, and have illustrated how these writers' narratives conflict with each other.

The Jehovistic writer is supposed to have been a prophet, who, it would seem, was anxious to give Israel a history. He begins at Genesis, ii. 4, with a short account, of the "Creation," and then he carries the story on regularly until the Israelites enter Canaan. It is to him that we are indebted for the charming pictures of the patriarchs. He took these from other writings, or from the popular legends.[93:2]

About 725 B. C. the Israelites were conquered by Salmanassar, King of Assyria, and many of them were carried away captives. Their place was supplied by Assyrian colonists from Babylon, Persia, and other places.[93:3] This fact is of the greatest importance, and should not be forgotten, as we find that the first of the three writers of the Pentateuch, spoken of above, wrote about this time, and the Israelites heard, from the colonists from Babylon, Persia, and other places—for the first time—many of the legends which this writer wove into the fabulous history which he wrote, especially the accounts of the Creation and the Deluge.

The Pentateuch remained in this, its first form, until the year 620 B. C. Then a certain priest of marked prophetic sympathies wrote a book of law which has come down to us in Deuteronomy, iv. 44, to xxvi., and xxviii. Here we find the demands which the Mosaic party at that day were making thrown into the form of laws. It was by King Josiah that this book was first introduced and proclaimed as authoritative.[93:4] It was soon afterwards wove into the work of the first Pentateuchian writer, and at the same time "a few new passages" were added, some of which related to Joshua, the successor of Moses.[94:1]

At this period in Israel's history, Jehovah had become almost forgotten, and "other gods" had taken his place.[94:2] The Mosaic party, so called—who worshiped Jehovah exclusively—were in the minority, but when King Amon—who was a worshiper of Moloch—died, and was succeeded by his son Josiah, a change immediately took place. This young prince, who was only eight years old at the death of his father, the Mosaic party succeeded in winning over to their interests. In the year 621 B. C., Josiah, now in the eighteenth year of his reign, began a thorough reformation which completely answered to the ideas of the Mosaic party.[94:3]

It was during this time that the second Pentateuchian writer wrote, and he makes Moses speak as the law-giver. This writer was probably Hilkiah, who claimed to have found a book, written by Moses, in the temple,[94:4] although it had only just been drawn up.[94:5]

The principal objections which were brought against the claims of Hilkiah, but which are not needed in the present age of inquiry, was that Shaphan and Josiah read it off, not as if it were an old book, but as though it had been recently written, when any person who is acquainted, in the slightest degree, with language, must know that a man could not read off, at once, a book written eight hundred years before. The phraseology would necessarily be so altered by time as to render it comparatively unintelligible.

We must now turn to the third Pentateuchian writer, whose writings were published 444 b. c.

At that time Ezra (or Ezdras) added to the work of his two predecessors a series of laws and narratives which had been drawn up by some of the priests in Babylon.[94:6] This "series of laws and narratives," which was written by "some of the (Israelitish) priests in Babylon," was called "The Book of Origins" (probably containing the Babylonian account of the "Origin of Things," or the "Creation"). Ezra brought the book from Babylon to Jerusalem. He made some modifications in it and constituted it a code of law for Israel, dove-tailing it into those parts of the Pentateuch which existed before. A few alterations and additions were subsequently made, but these are of minor importance, and we may fairly say that Ezra put the Pentateuch into the form in which we have it (about 444 B. C.).

These priestly passages are partly occupied with historical matter, comprising a very free account of things from the creation of the world to the arrival of Israel in Canaan. Everything is here presented from the priestly point of view; some events, elsewhere recorded, are touched up in the priestly spirit, and others are entirely invented.[95:1]

It was the belief of the Jews, asserted by the Pirke Aboth (Sayings of the Fathers), one of the oldest books of the Talmud,[95:2] as well as other Jewish records, that Ezra, acting in accordance with a divine commission, re-wrote the Old Testament, the manuscripts of which were said to have been lost in the destruction of the first temple, when Nebuchadnezzar took Jerusalem.[95:3] This we know could not have been the case. The fact that Ezra wrote—adding to, and taking from the already existing books of the Pentateuch—was probably the foundation for this tradition. The account of it is to be found in the Apocryphal book of Esdras, a book deemed authentic by the Greek Church.

Dr. Knappert, speaking of this, says:

From the time of Ezra until the year 287 B. C., when the Pentateuch was translated into Greek by order of Ptolemy Philadelphus, King of Egypt, these books evidently underwent some changes. This the writer quoted above admits, in saying:

In answer to those who claim that the Pentateuch was written by one person, Bishop Colenso says:

Having ascertained the origin of the Pentateuch, or first five books of the Old Testament, it will be unnecessary to refer to the others here, as we have nothing to do with them in our investigations. Suffice it to say then, that: "In the earlier period after Ezra, none of the other books which already existed, enjoyed the same authority as the Pentateuch."[96:3]

It is probable[96:4] that Nehemiah made a collection of historical and prophetic books, songs, and letters from Persian kings, not to form a second collection, but for the purpose of saving them from being lost. The scribes of Jerusalem, followers of Ezra, who were known as "the men of the Great Synagogue," were the collectors of the second and third divisions of the Old Testament. They collected together the historical and prophetic books, songs, &c., which were then in existence, and after altering many of them, they were added to the collection of sacred books. It must not be supposed that any fixed plan was pursued in this work, or that the idea was entertained from the first, that these books would one day stand on the same level with the Pentateuch.[96:5]

In the course of time, however, many of the Jews began to consider some of these books as sacred. The Alexandrian Jews adopted books into the canon which those of Jerusalem did not, and this difference of opinion lasted for a long time, even till the second century after Christ. It was not until this time that all the books of the Old Testament acquired divine authority.[96:6] It is not known, however, just when the canon of the Old Testament was closed. The time and manner in which it was done is altogether obscure.[97:1] Jewish tradition indicates that the full canonicity of several books was not free from doubt till the time of the famous Rabbi Akiba,[97:2] who flourished about the beginning of the second century after Christ.[97:3]

After giving a history of the books of the Old Testament, the author of "The Religion of Israel," whom we have followed in this investigation, says:

It will be noticed that, in our investigations on the authority of the Pentateuch, we have followed, principally, Dr. Knappert's ideas as set forth in "The Religion of Israel."

This we have done because we could not go into an extended investigation, and because his words are very expressive, and just to the point. To those who may think that his ideas are not the same as those entertained by other Biblical scholars of the present day, we subjoin, in a note below, a list of works to which they are referred.[98:1]

We shall now, after giving a brief history of the Pentateuch, refer to the legends of which we have been treating, and endeavor to show from whence the Hebrews borrowed them. The first of these is "The Creation and Fall of Man."

Egypt, the country out of which the Israelites came, had no story of the Creation and Fall of Man, such as we have found among the Hebrews; they therefore could not have learned it from them. The Chaldeans, however, as we saw in our first chapter, had this legend, and it is from them that the Hebrews borrowed it.

The account which we have given of the Chaldean story of the Creation and Fall of Man, was taken, as we stated, from the writings of Berosus, the Chaldean historian, who lived in the time of Alexander the Great (356-325 B. C.), and as the Jews were acquainted with the story some centuries earlier than this, his works did not prove that these traditions were in Babylonia before the Jewish captivity, and could not afford testimony in favor of the statement that the Jews borrowed this legend from the Babylonians at that time. It was left for Mr. George Smith, of the British Museum, to establish, without a doubt, the fact that this legend was known to the Babylonians at least two thousand years before the time assigned for the birth of Jesus. The cuneiform inscriptions discovered by him, while on an expedition to Assyria, organized by the London "Daily Telegraph," was the means of doing this, and although by far the greatest number of these tablets belong to the age of Assurbanipal, who reigned over Assyria B. C. 670, it is "acknowledged on all hands that these tablets are not the originals, but are only copies from earlier texts." "The Assyrians acknowledge themselves that this literature was borrowed from Babylonian sources, and of course it is to Babylonia we have to look to ascertain the approximate dates of the original documents."[98:2] Mr. Smith then shows, from "fragments of the Cuneiform account of the Creation and Fall" which have been discovered, that, "in the period from b. c. 2000 to 1500, the Babylonians believed in a story similar to that in Genesis." It is probable, however, says Mr. Smith, that this legend existed as traditions in the country long before it was committed to writing, and some of these traditions exhibited great difference in details, showing that they had passed through many changes.[99:1]

Professor James Fergusson, in his celebrated work on "Tree and Serpent Worship," says:

John Fiske says:

Prof. John W. Draper says:

Professor Goldziher also shows, in his "Mythology Among the Hebrews,"[99:5] that the story of the creation was borrowed by the Hebrews from the Babylonians. He also informs us that the notion of the bôrê and yôsêr, "Creator" (the term used in the cosmogony in Genesis) as an integral part of the idea of God, are first brought into use by the prophets of the captivity. "Thus also the story of the Garden of Eden, as a supplement to the history of the Creation, was written down at Babylon."

Strange as it may appear, after the Genesis account, we may pass through the whole Pentateuch, and other books of the Old Testament, clear to the end, and will find that the story of the "Garden of Eden" and "Fall of Man," is hardly alluded to, if at all. Lengkerke says: "One single certain trace of the employment of the story of Adam's fall is entirely wanting in the Hebrew Canon (after the Genesis account). Adam, Eve, the Serpent, the woman's seduction of her husband, &c., are all images, to which the remaining words of the Israelites never again recur."[100:1]

This circumstance can only be explained by the fact that the first chapters of Genesis were not written until after the other portions had been written.

It is worthy of notice, that this story of the Fall of Man, upon which the whole orthodox scheme of a divine Saviour or Redeemer is based, was not considered by the learned Israelites as fact. They simply looked upon it as a story which satisfied the ignorant, but which should be considered as allegory by the learned.[100:2]

Rabbi Maimonides (Moses Ben Maimon), one of the most celebrated of the Rabbis, says on this subject:—

Philo, a Jewish writer contemporary with Jesus, held the same opinion of the character of the sacred books of the Hebrews. He has made two particular treatises, bearing the title of "The Allegories," and he traces back to the allegorical sense the "Tree of Life," the "Rivers of Paradise," and the other fictions of the Genesis.[100:4]

Many of the early Christian Fathers declared that, in the story of the Creation and Fall of Man, there was but an allegorical fiction. Among these may be mentioned St. Augustine, who speaks of it in his "City of God," and also Origen, who says:

Origen believed aright, as it is now almost universally admitted, that the stories of the "Garden of Eden," the "Elysian Fields," the "Garden of the Blessed," &c., which were the abode of the blessed, where grief and sorrow could not approach them, where plague and sickness could not touch them, were founded on allegory. These abodes of delight were far away in the West, where the sun goes down beyond the bounds of the earth. They were the "Golden Islands" sailing in a sea of blue—the burnished clouds floating in the pure ether. In a word, the "Elysian Fields" are the clouds at eventide. The picture was suggested by the images drawn from the phenomena of sunset and twilight.[101:1]

Eating of the forbidden fruit was simply a figurative mode of expressing the performance of the act necessary to the perpetuation of the human race. The "Tree of Knowledge" was a Phallic tree, and the fruit which grew upon it was Phallic fruit.[101:2]

In regard to the story of "The Deluge," we have already seen[101:3] that "Egyptian records tell nothing of a cataclysmal deluge," and that, "the land was never visited by other than its annual beneficent overflow of the river Nile." Also, that "the Pharaoh Khoufou-cheops was building his pyramid, according to Egyptian chronicle, when the whole world was under the waters of a universal deluge, according to the Hebrew chronicle." This is sufficient evidence that the Hebrews did not borrow the legend from the Egyptians.

We have also seen, in the chapter that treated of this legend, that it corresponded in all the principal features with the Chaldean account. We shall now show that it was taken from this.

Mr. Smith discovered, on the site of Ninevah, during the years 1873-4, cylinders belonging to the early Babylonian monarchy, (from 2500 to 1500 B. C.) which contained the legend of the flood,[101:4] and which we gave in Chapter II. This was the foundation for the Hebrew legend, and they learned it at the time of the Captivity.[101:5] The myth of Deucalion, the Grecian hero, was also taken from the same source. The Greeks learned it from the Chaldeans.

We read in Chambers's Encyclopædia, that:

This idea was abandoned after it was found that the Deucalion myth was older than the Hebrew.

What was said in regard to the Eden story not being mentioned in other portions of the Old Testament save in Genesis, also applies to this story of the Deluge. Nowhere in the other books of the Old Testament is found any reference to this story, except in Isaiah, where "the waters of Noah" are mentioned, and in Ezekiel, where simply the name of Noah is mentioned.

We stated in Chapter II. that some persons saw in this story an astronomical myth. Although not generally admitted, yet there are very strong reasons for believing this to be the case.

According to the Chaldean account—which is the oldest one known—there were seven persons saved in the ark.[102:2] There were also seven persons saved, according to some of the Hindoo accounts.[102:3] That this referred to the sun, moon, and five planets looks very probable. We have also seen that Noah was the tenth patriarch, and Xisuthrus (who is the Chaldean hero) was the tenth king.[102:4] Now, according to the Babylonian table, their Zodiac contained ten gods called the "Ten Zodiac gods."[102:5] They also believed that whenever all the planets met in the sign of Capricorn, the whole earth was overwhelmed with a deluge of water.[102:6] The Hindoos and other nations had a similar belief.[102:7]

It is well known that the Chaldeans were great astronomers. When Alexander the Great conquered the city of Babylon, the Chaldean priests boasted to the Greek philosophers, who followed his army, that they had continued their astronomical calculations through a period of more than forty thousand years.[102:8] Although this statement cannot be credited, yet the great antiquity of Chaldea cannot be doubted, and its immediate connection with Hindostan, or Egypt, is abundantly proved by the little that is known concerning its religion, and by the few fragments that remain of its former grandeur.

In regard to the story of "The Tower of Babel" little need be said. This, as well as the story of the Creation and Fall of Man, and the Deluge, was borrowed from the Babylonians.[102:9]

"It seems," says George Smith, "from the indications in the (cuneiform) inscriptions, that there happened in the interval between 2000 and 1850 B. C. a general collection of the development of the various traditions of the Creation, Flood, Tower of Babel, and other similar legends." "These legends were, however, traditions before they were committed to writing, and were common in some form to all the country."[103:1]

The Tower of Babel, or the confusion of tongues, is nowhere alluded to in the Old Testament outside of Genesis, where the story is related.

The next story in order is "The Trial of Abraham's Faith."

In this connection we have shown similar legends taken from Grecian mythology, which legends may have given the idea to the writer of the Hebrew story.

It may appear strange that the Hebrews should have been acquainted with Grecian mythology, yet we know this was the case. The fact is accounted for in the following manner:

Many of the Jews taken captive at the Edomite sack of Jerusalem were sold to the Grecians,[103:2] who took them to their country. While there, they became acquainted with Grecian legends, and when they returned from "the Islands of the Sea"—as they called the Western countries—they brought them to Jerusalem.[103:3]

This legend, as we stated in the chapter which treated of it, was written at the time when the Mosaic party in Israel were endeavoring to abolish human sacrifices and other "abominations," and the author of the story invented it to make it appear that the Lord had abolished them in the time of Abraham. The earliest Targum[103:4] knows nothing about the legend, showing that the story was not in the Pentateuch at the time this Targum was written.

We have also seen that a story written by Sanchoniathon (about B. C. 1300) of one Saturn, whom the Phenicians called Israel, bore a resemblance to the Hebrew legend of Abraham. Now, Count de Volney tells us that "a similar tradition prevailed among the Chaldeans," and that they had the history of one Zerban—which means "rich-in-gold"[103:5]—that corresponded in many respects with the history of Abraham.[103:6] It may, then, have been from the Chaldean story that the Hebrew fable writer got his idea.

The next legend which we examined was that of "Jacob's Vision of the Ladder." We claimed that it probably referred to the doctrine of the transmigration of souls from one body into another, and also gave the apparent reason for the invention of the story.

The next story was "The Exodus from Egypt, and Passage through the Red Sea," in which we showed, from Egyptian history, that the Israelites were turned out of the country on account of their uncleanness, and that the wonderful exploits recorded of Moses were simply copies of legends related of the sun-god Bacchus. These legends came from "the Islands of the Sea," and came in very handy for the Hebrew fable writers; they saved them the trouble of inventing.

We now come to the story relating to "The Receiving of the Ten Commandments" by Moses from the Lord, on the top of a mountain, 'mid thunders and lightnings.

All that is likely to be historical in this account, is that Moses assembled, not, indeed, the whole of the people, but the heads of the tribes, and gave them the code which he had prepared.[104:1] The marvellous portion of the story was evidently copied from that related of the law-giver Zoroaster, by the Persians, and the idea that there were two tables of stone with the Law written thereon was evidently taken from the story of Bacchus, the Law-giver, who had his laws written on two tables of stone.[104:2]

The next legend treated was that of "Samson and his Exploits."

Those who, like the learned of the last century, maintain that the Pagans copied from the Hebrews, may say that Samson was the model of all their similar stories, but now that our ideas concerning antiquity are enlarged, and when we know that Hercules is well known to have been the God Sol, whose allegorical history was spread among many nations long before the Hebrews were ever heard of, we are authorized to believe and to say that some Jewish mythologist—for what else are their so-called historians—composed the anecdote of Samson, by partly disfiguring the popular traditions of the Greeks, Phenicians and Chaldeans, and claiming that hero for his own nation.[104:3]

The Babylonian story of Izdubar, the lion-killer, who wandered to the regions of the blessed (the Grecian Elysium), who crossed a great waste of land (the desert of Lybia, according to the Grecian mythos), and arrived at a region where splendid trees were laden with jewels (the Grecian Garden of the Hesperides), is probably the foundation for the Hercules and other corresponding myths. This conclusion is drawn from the fact that, although the story of Hercules was known in the island of Thasus, by the Phenician colony settled there, five centuries before he was known in Greece,[105:1] yet its antiquity among the Babylonians antedates that.

The age of the legends of Izdubar among the Babylonians cannot be placed with certainty, yet, the cuneiform inscriptions relating to this hero, which have been found, may be placed at about 2000 years B. C.[105:2] "As these stories were traditions," says Mr. Smith, the discoverer of the cylinders, "before they were committed to writing, their antiquity as tradition is probably much greater than that."[105:3]

With these legends before them, the Jewish priests in Babylon had no difficulty in arranging the story of Samson, and adding it to their already fabulous history.

As the Rev. Dr. Isaac M. Wise remarks, in speaking of the ancient Hebrews: "They adopted forms, terms, ideas and myths of all nations with whom they came in contact, and, like the Greeks, in their way, cast them all in a peculiar Jewish religious mold."

We have seen, in the chapter which treats of this legend, that it is recorded in the book of Judges. This book was not written till after the first set of Israelites had been carried into captivity, and perhaps still later.[105:4]

After this we have "Jonah swallowed by a Big Fish," which is the last legend treated.

We saw that it was a solar myth, known to many nations of antiquity. The writer of the book—whoever he may have been—lived in the fifth century before Christ—after the Jews had become acquainted and had mixed with other nations. The writer of this wholly fictitious story, taking the prophet Jonah—who was evidently an historical personage—for his hero, was perhaps intending to show the loving-kindness of Jehovah.[105:5]

We have now examined all the principal Old Testament legends, and, after what has been seen, we think that no impartial person can still consider them historical facts. That so great a number of educated persons still do so seems astonishing, in our way of thinking. They have repudiated Greek and Roman mythology with disdain; why then admit with respect the mythology of the Jews? Ought the miracles of Jehovah to impress us more than those of Jupiter? We think not; they should all be looked upon as relics of the past.

That Christian writers are beginning to be aroused to the idea that another tack should be taken, differing from the old, is very evident. This is clearly seen by the words of Prof. Richard A. Armstrong, the translator of Dr. Knappert's "Religion of Israel" into English. In the Preface of this work, he says: