Because the bulk of
Deuteronomy is verbal, its literary style, delivery and vocabulary are markedly different from the previous four books.
This does not indicate that authorship should be ascribed to anyone other than Moses. Introduction to the Book of Deuteronomy
Deuteronomy 1–34
Introduction: Thirty-eight years previous, the children of Israel, gen X, stood at the brink of the Land of Promise and suddenly broke into tears, whining about the giants in the land. For their lack of faith, God destroyed that generation almost in its entirety, leaving less than a handful of believers from them. The next generation, the generation of promise, now stood at the edge of the Land of Promise, with the same concerns. They had to go into the land and face the same peoples. However, the true fight is the spiritual one. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness; against the spiritual [forces] of evil in the heavenlies (Eph. 6:12). The people of Israel are related by covenant to the true God, the Maker of the Universe. If God be for us, who can stand against us? (Rom. 8:31b). But God demands obedience and exclusive devotion to Him.
The emphasis of the book of Deuteronomy is upon the common man and his entrance into the land. The laws and regulations presented herein deal more with the lay person than with the priests. Most of the regulations concerning the priests have to do with the support and distribution of the Levites and the priests.
Authorship: It is possible that Joshua wrote the first five verses of Deuteronomy and it is very likely that he pieced
together the last three or so chapters, interweaving it with explanatory narrative. However the majority of
Deuteronomy is messages delivered by Moses to the people of Israel. These messages are said to be spoken by
Moses in Deut. 1:5 31:9, 22, 24 and this is attested to throughout Scripture by Old Testament writers (1Kings 2:3
8:53 2Kings 14:6 18:12), by the Apostles (Acts 3:22–23 7:37–38 Rom. 10:19) and by our Lord Jesus Christ
(Matt. 19:7–8 Mark 10:3–5 12:19 John 5:46–47). To assert that He Who is “the Truth” believed Deuteronomy to
be the work of Moses and quoted it expressly as such, though it was in fact a forgery introduced into the world
seven or eight centuries after the Exodus, is in effect, even though not in intention, to impeach the perfection and
sinlessness of His nature, and seems thus to gainsay the first principles of Christianity.
Because the bulk of
Deuteronomy is verbal, its literary style, delivery and vocabulary are markedly different from the previous four books.
This does not indicate that authorship should be ascribed to anyone other than Moses.
The authorship of Deuteronomy has been disputed by the Graf-Wellhausen hypothesis, which came out of the
German universities a century ago. They claimed that writing did not exist during the time of Moses and that the
purpose of the book of Deuteronomy was to glorify the priesthood at Jerusalem and to centralize the worship at
Jerusalem. Several scholars have concurred, placing the date of the writing of Deuteronomy somewhere between
680–621 bc by a prophet who hid the book in the temple so that it would be found and adhered to. Then, in 621 bc,
Hilkiah found this book, gave it to Josiah, and Josiah used this bogus book in order to bring about the religious
reform found in 2Kings 22–23. Now let’s be realistic: if there was a prophet who was so intent upon religious
reform, he certainly would not have been willing to wait several decades in order for religious reform to occur.
Furthermore, why would a person so devious and duplicitous be interested in religious reform? How can these
scholars even call this man a prophet? Furthermore, this book is littered with prophecies and a stern warning that
if a prophet predicts something and it does not come to pass, then he should be executed as a false prophet. How
could someone so duplicitous write such accurate prophecies? Furthermore, archeology has shown that writing
predated Moses by easily a millennium. And finally, if the purpose of this book as a forgery was to centralize
worship in Jerusalem and to glorify the priesthood, then why is the priesthood only alluded to only a few times and
why is Jerusalem not even mentioned at all by name? In fact, Luther wrote: that Deuteronomy was: ...a
compendium and summary of the whole law and wisdom of the people of Israel, wherein those things which related
to the priests and Levites are omitted, and only such things included as the people generally required to know.
Vestiges of this corrupt theory can be found throughout certain reference books; I find it in the Zondervan Pictorial
Encyclopedia once and awhile, and throughout the otherwise excellent BDB Lexicon. One reason to write a bogus
book of Scripture would be to convey new and different ideas—ideas opposed to known revelation. A good case
in point is the Book of Mormon. However, as we examine this book verse by verse, what will become apparent
is that there is not the slightest trace, throughout the whole book, of any intention whatever to give a new or second
law.
Some claim that this book was written by an earnest student of Isaiah, but one of his repeated topics is the
remnant of Israel, a phrase never found in this book; and one of Isaiah’s favorite titles for God is the Holy One of
Israel, also not found in this book. My point is that the idea this books is a forgery, written almost a millennium after
the fact in order to achieve religious reform is illogical from any standpoint. This is simply a Satanic attack upon
God’s Word. If you deny that Moses wrote this, then you deny that this book is God’s Word and that every reference
in the Old Testament and New to Moses as the human author indicates that those books are not God-breathed
either. The fact of Mosaic authorship is more than just a minor detail.
There are three basic reasons which we will examine: Deuteronomy as a whole is completely consistent with the
times of Moses as to geography, local color, nations. (2) Deuteronomy continually asserts the authorship of Moses,
which is confirmed throughout the Scripture. (3) The material herein contained are appropriate for a nation on the
brink of entering into the Land of Promise; and not with a nation in the desert, a nation occupying the land, or a
nation divided in the land. It is a military book of law, a code of conquest designed to take a people into a land to
conquer it.
Let’s take this in more detailed points as to why it is most logical for Moses to be the author:
1. The book of Deuteronomy continually claims to be the words of Moses (Deut. 1:1 4:44 29:1). Continually, the use of the 1st person singular is tied to Moses and continually, we are told that Moses spoke these words to Israel (Deut. 1:16, 18 3:21 4:5, 14 5:31 29:5). No other book in Scripture so clearly identifies its author as does this book. To assert otherwise is to completely negate the divine inspiration of God’s Word. That is, God’s Word cannot contain a flaw (other than material which has been added or changed in Scripture); if this were not the words of Moses, then it would be clear that this cannot be God’s Word.
2. There is a distinct paternal vein running throughout the book of Moses, which belies Mosaic authorship. Moses has led these young people, many of them since birth and the balance since their teens and younger. Their parents have died out. There are no elders to consult, they have no parents or grandparents to go to. Therefore, we see continued heartfelt warnings of Moses as one would prepare one’s own child upon separation.
3. Joshua, the successor to Moses, also testifies that this is the writing of Moses, in Joshua 1:7 and throughout the last couple of chapters of Deuteronomy, assuming that Joshua pieced those chapters together (Deut. 31:30 32:44 33:1).
4. Other writers of Old Testament Scripture also attributed the authorship of Deuteronomy to Moses (Judges 3:4 2Kings 14:6 Ezra 3:2 Neh. 1:7 Psalm 103:7 Dan. 9:11 Mal. 4:4). To deny that these are the words of Moses is to deny that the rest of the Old Testament is God’s Word. Furthermore, we have many references to Deuteronomy or to the laws found therein in books which were written after the actual date of Deuteronomy, but prior to the date that Deuteronomy was supposedly forged (Joshua 6:17–18 7:25 8:27, 29–30, 32, 34–35 10:40 11:12, 15 Judges 1:17 17:13) Hosea 4:4 5:10 8:13 9:3 Amos 2:6–8). See either the exegesis of these passages or the Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible; ©1976; Vol. 2, pp. 116–117 for the exact ties to Deuteronomy. Now how exactly to you make references to a book which has not been yet written or how do you follow the laws and precepts of a book which has not yet been written?
5. As has been mentioned, the most quoted book in the New Testament is Deuteronomy, with such phrases as Moses truly said (Acts 3:22), Moses said (Rom. 10:19), and it stands written in the Law of Moses (1Cor. 9:9). To deny the authorship of Moses is to deny the divine nature of New Testament Scripture.
6. Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Creator of the Universe, also quoted from the book of Deuteronomy more often than any other Old Testament book and attributed authorship to Moses when He said Moses permitted (Matt. 19:8), Moses said (Mark 7:10) and Moses wrote (Luke 20:28). To deny that Moses wrote Deuteronomy is tantamount to denying that Jesus Christ is God, our Savior. Most of you have been sheltered and don’t realize that this sort of teaching exists—that Deuteronomy was not written by Moses. In fact, there are many seminaries which teach this blasphemy. The reason we are spending time with it is that the inspiration of God’s Word, the divine nature of Jesus Christ and our salvation all hang upon the authorship of Moses of this book. Remove Moses as the author and this calls into question the most basic issue of our Christian life—our salvation through Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Now perhaps you see why this is an important issue.
7. We would naturally expect this book to be filled with issues and experiences personally important to Moses. He refers to Egypt as a house of slaves (Deut. 5:6b); the burden of being the leader and judge of this people (Deut. 1:9–18); the viciousness of the attack of Amalek is recalled (Deut. 25:17); the murmurings of the people against him (Deut. 9:22–24); the construction material of the ark of the covenant (Deut. 10:3); and, of course, there is the mention of those close to him: Joshua (Deut. 3:21, 28 31:3, 7, 14, 23), Aaron (Deut. 9:20 10:6) and Miriam (Deut. 24:9). As has been mentioned the bulk of the first four chapters are historical and throughout the rest of the book, there are personal references and remembrances. No later prophet comes anywhere close to mentioning this much about Moses in his own work; and no later prophet reflects upon this history with the close, personal involvement that we see in Deuteronomy.
8. An example which should be dealt with separately is in Exodus, Moses prays on behalf of the people of Israel
when they sinned with the golden calf—however, nothing is said of Aaron. However, in Deut. 9:20, Moses
mentions that he prayed on behalf of Aaron as well. This is the sort of additional information we would expect
from Moses, but not from a writer from a millennium later. Could all these personal Mosaic features have been
introduced by some reformer, priest, prophet, or Levite, in order to invest his collection of laws with a Mosaic
dress? Is it probable that such an author would have succeeded in establishing a correspondence so natural,
so close in manifold and minute particulars, and so profound? Or is it more reasonable to thin that this result
proceeds from a true historical connection between the book of the law and the man whose name it has always
borne? On every hand if Deuteronomy is acknowledged to be a great book which exerted great influence,
should it not also have a great author? Who can fill that place so worthily as the old and tried leader who
brought the Israelites out of Egypt, shared their experiences and laid the foundations of their faith?
9. Other than one remark that Moses was the meekest man on the earth, nowhere throughout the entire Pentateuch do we find a single verse praising Moses until Deut. 34:10 in his eulogy.
10. Another remarkable proof of Mosaic authorship is the sudden intrusion of history when dealing with the Law, e.g., the hiring of Balaam to curse Israel (Deut. 23:4) and the evil attack of the Amamlekites (Deut. 25:17). We would expect to find these things mentioned in the historical section; however, they are so fresh on the mind of Moses that they come out in the area dealing with Law.
11. There are geographical and historical information which suggests the writer was a person who observed these
things firsthand. Manley wrote: The account of the journeyings in chapters i-iii is altogether realistic and quite
unlike an introduction prefixed to a collection of old laws; it bears every sign of originality. The views described
and the features of the omissions are also significant: there is not hint of Jerusalem, nor of Ramah, dear to
Samuel’s heart, not even of Shiloh, where the Tabernacle came to rest. Everything points to its historical
character and early date.
The detailed geographical observations would be superfluous in a document
designed to set religious precedence.
12. Throughout Deuteronomy, there are fervent commands to destroy the Canaanites (Deut. 7:16, 22) and to
completely blot out Amalek (Deut. 25:17–19),
commands which would have been archaic if written in the time
of Josiah.
13. There are also historical significance to the early portion of Deuteronomy which would have been meaningless had they been written hundreds of years later. Moses mentions the areas where the kings of Bashan dwelt in Deut. 1:4; kings who disappeared from history. Moses comments about the Emmin, a people who also disappeared after his time (Deut. 2:10–11; see Gen. 14:5). Moses gives a brief history of the Horites in Deut. 2:12, a point of interest to his listeners, but entirely irrelevant to an audience a millennium later. And Moses mentions the Zamzummin, a Canaanite race, which was known to his audience, but unknown to history (Deut. 2:20–21). How many writers of forgery would have thought to have included this minutiae?
14. In Deuteronomy, we have an area called the hill country of the Amorites (Deut. 1:7, 19, 20, 44) which, soon thereafter becomes the hill country of Judah (Joshua 11:16, 21). A later author may not have thought to make these changes back.
15. Had Deuteronomy been written as a forgery sometime prior to the reign of Josiah, then we would expect to see something about the divided kingdom or Assyrian oppression. However, the names of Judah and Ephraim only occur once each in the blessing of Moses (Deut. 33) and the Assyrians are not mentioned (however, Assyria is mentioned twice in the book of Genesis). The threat of exile should involve Assyria or Babylonia, and not Egypt (Deut. 28:68). It is almost impossible for someone to forge a document which supposedly existed a millennium previous without in some way betraying his present period of time.
16. Had some prophet written Deuteronomy as a forgery a millennium later, he would have been required to study intensely the previous three books of Moses to retrieve all of the details found in Deuteronomy. That being done, that prophet could have easily cited the pertinent passages from the previous books to centralize the worship in Jerusalem (the men had already been instructed to gather three times a year in a place which God would appoint) (Ex. 23:17 34:23 this is by implication of Lev. 16); to extol the support and authority of the sons of Aaron and the Levites (Num. 3:9–10 4:1–49 8:18–26 81:–18); and to call for the destruction of idolatry (Ex. 34:14–17 Lev. 19:1–8 Num. 25:1–18 31:1–16). What is clear is that in Deuteronomy, there were more references to a place of centralized worship (Deut. 12:5, 11–13) than in the previous books. Since they were about to enter into the land immediately after the completion of the book of Deuteronomy and since the laws previously given applied to both their worship in the desert and in the land, it would only stand to reason that centralized worship would be implied in Exodus, Numbers and Leviticus (recall, they built one tabernacle only) and emphasized in Deuteronomy. The problem with these silly non-Mosaic authorship theories is that their originators never studied the previous books of the Bible very carefully. If Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers are carefully studied, then the precept that Deuteronomy was necessary to centralize worship, to strengthen the priesthood and to stamp out idolatry becomes a flawed foundation on which to build a flawed theory of authorship.
17. At the time of the writing of Deuteronomy, the authority to uphold the Law was placed in the hands of priests (Deut. 17:9), judges (Deut. 16:18) and the elders of Israel (Deut. 21:21). Had this been written during the time of the divided kingdom, the emphasis of enforcement of the Law would have been upon the king of Israel; however, the concept of kingship is discussed once and that in a way to limit and guide one who would later become king (Deut. 17:14–20).
18. During the time of Moses, there were covenants which followed a certain form called suzerainty-vassal treaties (which we have covered before). There was a particular form for these covenants to be written in and it has been shown by several authors that the book of Deuteronomy follows that form, e.g., G.E. Mendenhall, Law and Covenant in Israel and in the Ancient Near East; Pittsburgh: Biblical Colloquium, 1955 and Meredith Kilne, Treat of the Great King, Eerdmans, 1963.
19. Among those who accept Deuteronomy as Scripture—Christians, Jews and Muslims—all have historically accepted this book from its inception as the writing of Moses.
20. Moses had spent forty years out in the wilderness with the Israelites while God destroyed generation X and one thing that he would logically like to leave with this next generation is the fact that they will go into the land and they will conquer it. Thirty-five times in the book of Deuteronomy, we find Moses using the phrase “go in and possess”; thirty-four times he says “the land which Yehowah your God is giving you.” It is logical that Moses would continually use these phrases; it is less logical for a writer of several centuries later to do so.
Specific Objections to the authorship of Moses, apart from the JEPD theory:
1. Some references appear to come from a period of time subsequent to the time of Moses. Deut. 2:10–12 for instance has information which may not have been known by Moses. However, most scholars see these verses as being parenthetical, added after Israel entered into the land (and very likely by Joshua who would know this information). These short, parenthetical additions are given as explanatory clauses or to update the names of certain cities or groups of peoples.
2. The book of Deuteronomy differs in style, content and vocabulary from the previous three books of the Pentateuch. Most of the quotations in the previous few books were direct quotations from God. God would have a different vocabulary and style than Moses. Furthermore, some of the writing in the previous books was written narrative, therefore naturally differing in style from the oratory message. As a teacher, I have read many student reports and only one written report comes to mind as a report which sounded as though it were spoken. I recall even making a comment to that effect on the student’s paper, noting that it was a very pleasant, readable style. The subject matter of the previous books was very different. Moses dealt with the building of the tabernacle, the numbering of the tribes, the positioning of the troops, the dietary laws, the leprotic laws, etc. etc. Different subject matter requires a different vocabulary. I have personally written hundreds of mathematical worksheets and the vocabulary found in those worksheets are different than the vocabulary found in this book. What would be unreasonable would be to expect that the style found in the previous three books and this book would be similar. This would be like the fact that the Book of Mormon, although written in the 1800's, was written in an old English style, much like the KJV of the Bible. Now that is silly. A book written in America over two centuries after the KJV, which was produced in England, should not be in the same style.
3. Critics charge that the discovery of this book by Josiah was a fraudulent occurrence and that he used this forgery (written by himself or by trusted men of no character) to (a) destroy idolatrous worship, (b) to give greater power and authority to the priesthood and (c) to centralize the worship of Yehowah in Jerusalem. (a) First off, objections to idolatry occur throughout the previous four books and the book of Joshua. Josiah (or some priest from his era) do not need to use some forgery in order to support the destruction of idolatrous worship. (b) The priesthood is given very little mention in the book of Deuteronomy; their powers and authority are nowhere specifically increased. (c) Finally, as has been pointed out, the name Jerusalem, does not occur in the book of Deuteronomy. In a book so filled with prophecy, it would be natural in the hands of a forger to name Jerusalem by name as a prophecy.
4. It is said that certain laws found in Deuteronomy differ from those in the previous three books. The easy, general explanation is that some of what is found in the previous three books deal with a nation on the move in the desert and wilderness. A simple example of this is the troop movement and organization surrounding the ark. This is specific to those circumstances at that time. A major change which was about to take place was that Israel would soon settle into her own land and there were be some minor differences due to that.
5. The phrase beyond the Jordan is used to describe the land east of the Jordan, which is where Moses and company were encamped. This would appear to be a phrase used by those living on the western side of the Jordan. However, this was a specific term which means the other-side land and was applied to the portion east of the Jordan, despite the location of the writer or speaker. Today, we still call the land Trans-Jordan, whether we live in the United States, in Israel or in Trans-Jordan.
6. Occasionally, we find the phrase until this day. This can refer to (a) the period of time of Moses, looking back over the past forty years; (b) the perspective of Joshua, who amended the book of Deuteronomy in perhaps a half dozen places. In no case are we ever looking backwards several hundred years.
7. Deuteronomy contains an account of the death of Moses. When we get to the final chapters of Moses, we will find that most of them were pieced together and edited by Joshua, adding in the blessing and the song of Moses. Therefore, to find an account of the death of Moses is perfectly natural and more indicative of an eyewitness account rather than a writer from a time period several hundred years later.
For most of you, it is sufficient to say that Moses wrote the book of Deuteronomy because this is God’s Word and that is what God’s Word says. So the past couple of pages may b=have seemed as though I was beating a dead horse. However, since this theory persists and continually finds its way into Christian literature and Christian seminaries, it is important that it be dealt with carefully. Whereas, the bulk of the quotations found in the previous three books are direct quotes from God which Moses conveyed to the people, Moses spoke to the people in this book in his own words, as moved by the Holy Spirit. Now, don’t get me wrong—he didn’t just start speaking and all of these things came out. We have a written document which recorded what he said, and since voice to print had not been perfected on their computers as of yet, this would indicate the Moses first wrote these dissertations out and then presented them. If you didn’t catch that, let me explain: with their writing materials and their speed of writing, even without vowels, it would have been quite difficult to keep up with Moses and take word-by-word dictation. Since we have this information recorded for us in written form, that would logically indicate that Moses wrote it down first and then read from his notes.
As I had mentioned from the outset, it is likely that Joshua pieced together the last few chapters and possibly wrote the first five verses of this book. A reasonable but distant second choice is Eleazar. I would choose Joshua as my first choice for several reasons: (1) It would be natural for the writer of the b