This Is Appendix 92 From The Companion Bible. It is alleged by modern critics that, while
Deuteronomy was the work of some anonymous writer in the reigns of Josiah
and Manasseh, the ritual portions of Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers were
the work of Ezra and the priests in Babylon. Thus, practically, the
greater part of the Pentateuch is assumed to be post-exilic, and therefore
not written by Moses; and this in spite of the fact that the claims of the
whole Bible necessitate the Mosaic authorship.
On the other hand, it is admitted by the same modern
critics that the prophets lived and wrote in the reigns of those kings
with whose reigns they are respectively associated.
But the Pentateuch is full of technical terms and
legal phraseology; and has its own peculiar vocabulary. The constant
reference to these by all the prophets proves conclusively that the
Pentateuch as a whole must have had a prior existence; and must have been
well known by the prophets, and understood by those who heard the
prophetic utterances and read the prophetic writings.
Throughout all the books of the prophets such
references to the Pentateuch have been noted in the margin of The
Companion Bible with the brief indication "Reference to
Pentateuch", followed by the passages referred to. It is not
claimed that none have been overlooked : so that the number will be
greater rather than less.
It would occupy too much space here to give the table
which had been prepared. Any reader can collect the whole from the notes,
and arrange them in the order of chapters and verses of the Pentateuchal
books.
An examination of these references will show that
altogether 1,531 have been noted, and are distributed as follows :
G Thus D It is also remarkable that the references to
technical, legal, and ritual terms are more numerous than to those
relating to historical events. The latter would necessarily be better
known and remembered; but the former could not have been thus referred to
unless the ritual itself (less easily remembered) had existed in writing,
and thus been generally known and understood. It is evident that it would
have been perfectly useless for the prophets to write and quote aught but
what was well known, or could be easily referred to and verified.
Regard must also be had to the fact that the
canonical order of the prophetic books is not the same as their
chronological order; for Malachi (the latest prophet) refers (Malachi
1: |