CHAPTER I                         
THE CHRONOLOGICAL SUSPENSION BRIDGE

PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS

At the outset of this work I wish to state that I believe in the verbal inspiration of the Scriptures. Hence for me they are infallible. This conviction is not based upon a blind acceptance of traditions handed down from my fore-parents without personal investigation; on the contrary, it is founded upon the unshakable facts of scientific investigation. From childhood I have always demanded the reason for the acceptance of any position. This attitude, being a dominant characteristic of my very make-up, has caused me to examine thoroughly a matter before accepting it.
We are living in an age which is permeated by the scientific spirit. Men are toiling in the laboratories of the world in an effort to explore the regions beyond our present knowledge. As a result many great and useful inventions have been made which have alleviated the sufferings of humanity and made living conditions more tolerable and pleasont than ever in the history of the world. The correct use of anything within the bounds of moderation proves a blessing. On the other hand, the abuse of that which normally is a boon to humanity is a positive curse.
What constitutes the scientific spirit? Several things: first of all, an open mind; secondly, readiness to gather all the facts whatever the cost; thirdly, an impartial examination of all evidence and data with a view of ascertaining the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; and finally, courage to discard whatever is found to be untrue, to accept the newly discovered facts, and to act accordingly. To be otherwise minded is to be unscientific. A refusal to examine something because it is contrary to one's present views or allowing one's prejudices to overrule one's better judgment is proof of an unscientific mind.
Since the subject matter of this volume is doubtless new to many of my readers, both Jewish and Gentile, all that I am asking of them is an unbiased and careful study of the facts presented herein. The message is of vital importance to every student who wishes to understand the past, present, and future. There is no subject that is more fascinating than that of chronology.

page 2

Biblical chronology may be compared to a suspension bridge which is held aloft by two large pillars over which the supporting cables are hung. The weight of the structure is borne by these two columns. In the same manner our chronological data from the eternity of the past ("In the beginning") to the eternity of the future ("the ages of the ages") are suspended upon two mighty piers of Scripture, Genesis and Daniel. The other books furnishing chronological data constitute sections of the main portions of the bridge. If the pillars, can be undermined in the minds of men by human reasoning, then, for those accepting such positions the entire superimposed structure collapses. On the other hand, if they are proved to be founded upon bedrock historical and scientific facts, our bridge remains intact regardless of the storms of criticism which blow against it.
No two portions of the Word of God have been assailed by the rationalistic (irrational) destructive critics more than these. Evidently Satan-the great adversary of man's soul-realizes the strategic place in the revelation of God occupied by these two books. In view of the attacks of unbelievers made upon them, it becomes necessary in a work of this nature to demonstrate beyond a peradventure the unassailable character of these records. It must be shown that these two piers rest upon the solid rock foundations of concrete, historical facts. Of course, it is to be understood that there are chronological data in most of the books of Scripture, but, since these two occupy unique places in the calculation of time, they may properly be considered as the piers of this great chronological bridge.

Prior to the World War little was known, comparatively speaking, concerning archaeology in certain portions of the ancient Biblical world. Since then faithful scientific explorers have been busily engaged in bringing to light the civilization of 5,000 years ago in the Tigris-Euphrates valley and also in that of the Nile. The result of the newly discovered knowledge is that practically most of the theories which were advanced by modern rationalistic scholars and held as "the assured results of scientific criticism" have been discredited. Those still advocating such antiquated positions are, in fact, the traditionalists and are far behind in the procession of the march of time. To be scientific one must accept any and all facts which can be demonstrated to be true. The discoveries, especially those in the Tigris-Euphrates valley, have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that civilization of a very high order was hoary with

page 3

age in the days of Abraham, who was a citizen of no mean city, Ur of the Chaldees. Centuries prior to his day, civilization had reached an amazingly high state.

P. J. Wiseman in New Discoveries in Babylonia about Genesis gives us a survey of the work that has been conducted during recent years in Mesopotamia. Following it is his summary of the situation:

"Most of these sites go back to the days of Genesis; in fact, it is with the earliest civilizations that archaeologists are now concerned. Their investigations have brought to light the culture and writing of men who lived 5000 years ago, even in pre-Flood days. These researches have revolutionized thought, for concerning the civilizations of this early period we previously knew next to nothing. It has done more, for it has painted in the background on a canvas which previously was almost blank. We now understand much concerning the environment of the Patriarchs and methods of writing prevalent in the times of Genesis. Before the excavations of the last few years this early period was considered legendary even by archaeologists, but almost beyond their highest hopes they have been able to dig and plan settlements which were previously in the realm of pre-history, but now, in the opinion of these able men, Sumerian civilization had reached its zenith centuries before Abraham.

"It is important to remember that these archaeologists are by no means engaged in an attempt to find evidences which agree with the Bible. I know from personal contact and repeated discussions, that this is far from being their aim; they sift their evidence in a most critical spirit and if there is any bias it was in favor of the critical standpoint rather than that of the Bible. Yet in the words of more than one, they express the truth of the matter when they affirm that they have been compelled by the evidences they have unearthed to believe that Genesis in this or that respect is accurate. It has been my privilege to be present with these excavators when some of these finds have been unearthed, and on the spot to listen to their statements regarding the things mentioned in the earliest chapters of the Bible. I have been impressed with the tremendous change which has taken place in recent years among archaeologists in their outlook on these early Biblical records. Nothing is more noticeable or more remarked in Iraq than the assurance with which archaeologists speak of events recorded in Genesis."

In a short chapter following this quotation he gives us a resume of the amazingly high state to which civilization had attained in those early years. In the next chapter he presents an interesting discussion on writing in those early centuries and begins with these words:

"One of the most remarkable facts which has emerged from the archaeological research is that the art of writing began in the earliest historical times known to man.
"It is now generally admitted that history first dawned in the land known as Babylonia, and that the civilization there is older than that of Egypt; yet, however far the excavator in Babylonia digs down into the past, he finds written records to illuminate his discoveries. Until recent times it was the general tendency to insist on the late appearance of writing, now the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction, and the present tendency is to thrust back the period for which written records are claimed to dates before 3500 B.C.

page 4

Egyptologists have discovered documents written on papyrus which they claim may be dated as early as 3000 B.C."

From all indications the first writing took the form of pictures and gradually developed into the cuneiform script, as is seen on the oldest tablets which have been discovered. "A conservative estimate is that the pictographic forms of writing which have been found may be dated from 3300 to 2800 B.C.; thereafter cuneiform writing came into view."

Ordinary cuneiform writing came into vogue at an early date. At present it is estimated that at least a quarter of a million of clay tablets are stored away in the museums of the world. This type of writing was so very common that Friedrich Delitzsch wrote:

"In truth, when we find among the letters which have survived from those ancient times in great abundance, the letter of a woman to her husband on his travels, wherein after telling him that the little ones are well, she asks advice on some trivial matter; or the missive of a son to his father, in which he informs him that so-and-so has mortally offended him, that he would thrash the knave, but would like to ask his father's advice first; or another letter in which a son urges his father to send at last the long-promised money, offering the insolent inducement that then he will pray for his father again-all this points to a well organized system of communication by letter and of postal arrangements."

According to Delaporte, writing was prevalent at an early age.
"Schools existed where lessons were given in reading, and in tracing on clay the elements of the script's signs. That of Nippur, was, in the first millennium, the most famous for the antiquity of the texts preserved in its archives. A number of tablets from the century of Hammurabi, as well as models and copies, illustrate the methods of instruction-first reading and writing simple signs with a study of their various phonetic values; then the pupils' initiation into the use consecutively of groups of signs and ideograms, and then of current formula. He was next given instruction in grammar in the guise of paradigms-declensions and conjugations. Finally, he finished his education with mathematics."

One of my professors in the University of Chicago, the late Dr. Luckenbill, in his preface to Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia states: "This writing material was cheap, which may account in part for the fact that the Sumerians, Babylonians, and Assyrians seemed unwilling to transact even the smallest items of business without recourse to a written document." Sir Leonard Woolley in the introduction to his volume Abraham, says: "We have, it is true, found thousonds of inscribed tablets, and the greater number of them date from about the time of Abraham, but we have excavated the merest fraction of the city's area, and within that area the tablets which survive are not the hundredth part of what were written there during the quarter of a century or so that Abraham may have passed at Ur. The chances that there should

page 5

have been tablets bearing the name of Abraham, that anyone of them should have been preserved, and finally that this one should have happened to be within the limits of our narrow field were indeed infinitesimal."

In Egypt writing was in vogue in the earliest time. One of the earliest papyrus manuscripts now in existence dates back to a time approximately 3000 B.C.E. Of course the inscriptions on the walls of the earliest temples and tombs go back to the early centuries of the country's history.

In the present state of our knowledge we know that writing goes back as far as human history takes us. Of one of the kings of the Tigris-Euphrates valley it was said that he delighted to read the accounts of the happenings before the Flood. In the light of the discoveries of recent years no informed person will question for a moment the existence of writing even from the very dawn of history.

I. THE BOOK OF GENESIS
Since Genesis is the first book of the Torah (Pentateuch), it is well for us to take a general glance at it before investigating it in detail. The Torah as a revelation from God is accepted, with more or less confidence, by four religious faiths: Moslem, Samaritan, Jewish and Christian. But there are differences of opinion in each of these groups, unless it be that of the Samaritans, who are so very small in number and clannish in character that there is unanimity of opinion. In regard to the Moslems, let me say that, since this work is not primarily intended for them, I shall say nothing.
The great Jewish nation falls normally into four divisions: the karaite, the orthodox, the conservative, and the reformed. The position held by the karaite and the orthodox Jews is practically the same; namely, that the Torah is an infallibly inspired revelation of God. As to the conservative element, there is quite a scope of opinion, ranging from the extreme orthodox position to that of the reformed. This latter group, however, rejecting the absolute inspiration of the Mosaic writings, hold to the modernistic position; namely, that the Torah, as we now have it, is a composite document, the result of editing and combining certain original works of uninspired men. In other words, we have not the revelation of God to man but, on the contrary, the discoveries which men have made in their search for God.

I wish to concede in the very start that I consider all of these groups as honest and conscientious, living up to the light that each

page 6

has, but let us remember that honesty and sincerity, though indispensable, are no substitutes for correctness and truth.

Many scientific men whose conclusions give positive proof of superficial thinking and of passing on only what others before them have said, assail, from time to time, the historical character of the first chapters of Genesis. All too frequently scholars whose training has been in a given field forsake their realm, enter that of the theologian, and make pronouncements on Biblical questions about which they know little or nothing. Prudence, however, would dictate to them, that they should know their places and confine their remarks to things with which they are familiar. For instance, the specialist in biology who has devoted his entire time and thought to some one phase of his chosen subject is not in a position to pass judgment upon some difficult theological question on which sincere Biblical scholars are not agreed. As a concrete example of a man's leaving his field, entering that of another, becoming a professorial parrot, and voicing the unbelief and unproven hypotheses of rationalistic critics, I well remember some lectures by my English professor in the university who glibly presented to the students the Wellhausen hypothesis of the literary composition of the Old Testament. Being familiar with the theory and even the popular phraseology of its exponents, I instantly recognized that there was no original thinking or knowledge of the facts discussed, but simply a dishing out to unsuspecting and immature minds the long exploded theories of the radical Biblical critics.

If one wishes to discourse upon things outside his chosen realm, he should at least investigate the findings of masters in that particular field and present the material as coming from them. When there is a difference of opinion on some vital question, the inquiring student will consult the pronouncements of the scholars on both sides of the controversy, try to weigh all the evidence, and arrive at his own conclusion. Caution and wisdom dictate such a policy. Since, however, history teaches that scientific men are constantly forced by new discoveries of facts to repudiate former positions to which they have held tenaciously, it would be best for all to hold themselves by a modest reserve while seeking for additional light. With these facts before us as a warning, let us address ourselves to the subject in hand.

The proper method of procedure in this case is first to analyze the problem; secondly, to make a thorough examination of all relevant material and to evaluate scientifically all the data; and, finally, to

page 7

demonstrate the fallacy of the popularly-held and dominant theory regarding the literary composition of Genesis. With this outline in mind we shall approach our task.

A. Some Literary Phenomena Characteristic of Genesis What does one see when he conscientiously examines the book of Genesis? Among the many things which force themselves upon his attention, there are five which demand an answer, a straightforward explanation devoid of special pleading in favor of a given theory, or of an effort to force upon the facts a meaning which is foreign to the context. In other words, the interpretation advanced must accept and evaluate all the data, must allow the facts to speak for themselves in a natural and normal manner, and must not contradict any known evidence. Guided by these principles, we shall notice, as briefly as possible, these five items and attempt to set forth their true significance.

1. THE ABSENCE OF MOSES' NAME FROM GENESIS
One will look in vain in an attempt to find the name of Moses in Genesis. In contrast with this literary phenomenon, we are impressed with the numerous occurrences of it in the rest of the Torah (Pentateuch). In the first chapter of Exodus we have a brief statement of the cause which led up to the persecution of the Hebrews in Egypt and the bondage itself. According to the second chapter Moses was born into this hostile environment. Providentially he was reared at the court of Pharaoh. At the age of forty he fled from Egypt, going to Midian where he remained until he was eighty. In chapter 3 are recorded his call and commission by the God of Israel. From this point onward we see that his name occurs constantly. Throughout the remaining books of the Torah we read that the Lord spoke to him. In Exodus 17:14 we see that God commanded him, saying, "Write this for a memorial in a book and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua," etc. Of course, Moses did as he was commanded. In Exodus 24:4 we learn that "Moses wrote all the words of Jehovah." Again he is commanded to write: "And Jehovah said unto Moses, Write thou these words" (Ex. 34:27). Throughout the rest of the books of the Torah we read of the Lord's speaking to him and of his writing what God commanded. But in the book of Genesis not one word is said about God's speaking to him or of his writing any of its contents. This fact is significant and demands an explanation. It stands to reason that, if he sustained the same relation to the revelation in Genesis

page 8

that he did to the other four books, he would have spoken of it as he did in regard to them. If not, why not?


2. THE DIVINE NAMES If one will but casually read Genesis, he will be impressed with the fact that different names for God appear in various sections. For instance, in chapter one elohiym is the name given to the Almighty. It occurs thirty-four times. In striking contrast with this fact is the further one that in chapters 2-4 we have the appellation yahweh elohiym, with the single exception of the conversation between Eve and Satan (Gen. 3:2-5). In this instance, both of them used elohiym the form seen in chapter 1. The situation is different in the third natural division. Here this compound name does not occur. A glance at 5:1-6: 8 shows that the writer employed booth terms separately. In one verse he used one, and in another, the other. The same situation is found in the next section (6: 9b-9:29). In this division elohiym is used in the majority of instances, though yahweh occurs several times. In the fifth section (10:1b-11:9) yahweh alone is used. But in the next division (11:10b-26) no name for the Deity occurs, since this portion deals only with the genealogy of Terah. In the seventh section (11:27b-25:18) both names occur. But in 17:1 we learn a new name for the Divine Being, which is al shadday. A situation similar to that which we have observed also appears here. Why these different names? And why this peculiar combination of the divine appellation? What is the meaning of each? These and other important questions arise, which demand an answer. They cannot be dismissed by the thoughtful student.

3. DIFFERENCES OF STYLE
A cursory survey of Genesis reveals the fact that there are different styles appearing in certain sections of this most interesting and important book. For instance, if one will only read the first chapter and then peruse the second, third, and fourth, he will see immediately the style in the first chapter differs greatly from that in chapters 2-4. What is true of these two po1"tions is also true of other sections. This fact must not be ignored but must be fairly met and an answer, which is faithful to all the facts, must be given. Why these different styles? There evidently is a reason.

page 9

4. DUPLICATE NARRATIVES
In Genesis 1 we have a majestic account of the creation of the universe, a brief statement of the catastrophe which wrecked the earth, the six days of reconstruction during which the Lord repaired, to a certain extent, the damage done and remodeled it to make it habitable for man and beast, and the creation of man by a direct act of God. In the second chapter we have a duplicate record especially of the creation of man, which is much fuller and more explicit than the first account. As noted in the last section, this second narrative is written in a style different from that of the former. No one who will face the facts can deny the truthfulness of these assertions.
A second duplication, which has been noted by scholars and which is given more in detail than the first (Gen. 6:1-8) and with additional material, is found in chapter 6:9-22. Another one is in 11:27, which is simply a repetition of verse 26. There are other examples* which must be acknowledged.

5. DIFFERENT STRATA OF CULTURAL DEPOSITS
Upon a close investigation of the literary and linguistic data of the book, one soon discovers that, figuratively speaking, it was laid down in successive deposits. What is meant by this statement is that there are evidences of different racial and social as well as religious contacts. It is admitted by Assyrio-Babylonian experts

------------
* Often attention is called to the similarity of certain experiences and actions which are common to chapters 12:10-20 and 20:1-18. Those pointing these things out and seeing in them only duplications seem to ignore the many dissimilarities in the two accounts and to forget the further facts that human nature is the same the world over, and that people who have developed certain traits will, under like conditions, respond similarly. To be more specific, let me note the fact that oriental monarchs in the ancient world, un-regenerated and without a knowledge of God, did not hesitate upon seeing a beautiful woman to take her to his harem. The person who will tell one lie will tell another, unless there has come a radical change in his heart. The same thing is true of deception. These facts of human nature and experience account adequately for the similarities in the actions of the participants. On the other hand, God always deals righteously with everyone. He has certain fixed principles upon which He acts. Since the circumstances in these cases are similar, naturally He handled both alike. But the dissimilarities must also be reckoned with. The only scientific way to account for these is to admit that the two chapters are giving truthful records of what actually occurred on two different occasions. These same scholars claim that the events recorded in 26:12-33 are but another and a distorted version of that narrated in 21:22-34. An examination of these passages shows that the same situation faced both Abraham and Isaac and that they acted in the same manner. Often a son adopts the tactics used by a parent. This case is to he explained upon the same general principles as the one discussed in the preceding paragraph.


page 10

that the first eleven chapters of Genesis are permeated with Babylonian concepts and words. To be more specific, it is evident that the writers of this section of the Word of God lived in that environment and spoke in terms of that civilization. This position is disputed, I must admit, by certain Egyptologists. Nevertheless, when all the facts are known, the evidence seems to be in favor of a Babylonian background for this portion of the Word.

When one reads chapters 12-36, he passes into a different world of ideas and civilization. Here one does not meet with the Babylonian influence which is so very apparent in the first section, but rather with a Palestinian culture. The customs, habits and civilization of the time of the events recorded in this section are reflected therein. A vividness of the Palestinian background is apparent throughout this section. The only scientific conclusion to which one can come is that it was written by those who lived in that part of the world.

In passing out of this section into the third and last one into which the book naturally divides, one enters an Egyptian atmosphere. Everything in the last fourteen chapters, except chapter 38 which deals with Palestine, reflects the culture and the civilization of the Valley of the Nile. This position has been proved conclusively by Egyptologists. Concerning this fact there can be no question.
At the same time scholars have detected a touch of Egyptian influences in all three sections of the book. Upon what hypothesis can these unusual phenomena be accounted? Obviously there is a reason for it. On this point experts are not agreed, but we shall see to what conclusion the evidence points when we come to that phase of the discussion.

B. A Scientific Analysis of the Data and the Logical Explanation of the Facts The key which is to unlock the door into the proper understanding of this entire question is the _expression,
"These are the generations of . . . “

1. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE FORMULA, "THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS. . . "

The thinking student who delves into the book of Genesis is impressed by the recurrence of the phrase, "These are the generations of . . ." Writers call our attention to the fact that around this statement cluster the contents of the book. A careful examination of all the data confirms this conclusion. This statement is found

page 11

in the following passages: 2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; 11:10; 11:27; 25:12; 25:19; 36:1; 36:9; 37:2. What is the meaning of this formula? Many scholars reply that it is an introduction to a genealogical list, because it occurs frequently in more or less close connection with such tables. But the only scientific approach to this question is to investigate each passage and its context, accepting every statement at its face value without forcing an unnatural meaning upon it. With this thought in mind let us address ourselves to the task.

The first occurrence is in 2:4, "These are the generations of the heavens and the earth." When we examine that which has preceded it, we are immediately convinced that the account of the heavens and the earth is given in 1:1-2:3. In the passage following it we simply have the account of the garden eastward in Eden, of the creation of woman, and of the beginning of the race. In view of these facts one would logically say that this sentence is a summary of that which has preceded it.

The meaning of the word rendered generations is from the root which indicates "to beget or to bring forth." The noun form, therefore, contains the fundamental root idea as well as that which was derived from current usage. Lexicons define its primary meanings as "birth," "generation," "family register," "origin," "historical origin," and "historical account." In the light of these facts one is led to the conclusion that our _expression here is retrospective and is a summary of the historical account of the heavens and the earth and of things therein, as set forth in 1:1-2:3.

The second occurrence of the phrase appears in 5:1 and reads as follows: "This is the book of the generations of Adam." The word book inserted in our formula is of special importance. Some Hebrew scholars claim that its significance is "historical narrative," or "historical writings."* Delitzsch renders it, "finished writing."

-------
* The most recent discoveries of archaeology in the ancient orient prove beyond a doubt that writing is as old as man. The clay tablets which have been unearthed in old Babylonia show that there was an ancient script which even antedated the old Sumerian. The discoveries at Kish and Ur of the Chaldees have revealed the fact that, in the strata below the one laid down by the Noahic Flood, there is found positive proof of the existence of civilization before the Deluge which was equal in every respect to that which followed it. In truth, the findings of the most recent diggings have unearthed pottery, instruments, artifacts, the majority of which, by chemical analysis, reveals a very extensive knowledge of science. All well-informed persons, abreast of the times, acknowledge the high state of culture of the men from the dawn of time, as is evidenced by the relics found in the lowest strata of Babylonia, the cradle of the human race.


page 12

With this understanding we see in our statement the claim that there was a book which gave the historical account of Adam and which was incorporated by Moses into Genesis, the Book of Beginnings. Assuming for the moment that our formula has the same significance as in 2:4, we would say that it is here retrospective. With this interpretation of the phenomena we see that Moses by his declaration labels the material from 2:4-4:26 as that which was found in a book either written by Adam or in his possession.

The account which occurs in 2:4-4:26 records events which occurred in the lifetime of Adam because the history of the line of Cain is traced to the eighth generation. From chapter 4 we cannot tell how many years are covered by this history, but when we look in the fifth chapter and total the number of years that had passed at the birth of Methuselah, the eighth in the line of Seth, we learn that his birth year was 687 A.H. Since Adam lived 930 years, we see that the eighth generation had appeared on the scene in his lifetime. We may logically conclude, therefore, that the eighth generation of the line of Cain likewise was in the lifetime of Adam. Hence we conclude that everything that is found in 2:4-4:26 (occurred in the lifetime of Adam.

Since Moses concluded this section with the statement, "This is the book of the generations (or historical account) of Adam," we logically maintain that this utterance is a summary of the section under discussion and that Adam by inspiration wrote this book or that it was written by some other and was in his possession. Hence Moses gives us the source of this material.

The next occurrence of our formula is found in 6:9 and appears as, "These are the generations of Noah." This third section of the book of Genesis begins with this statement, "In the day that God created man," (5:1) and extends through 6:8. This material consists of the genealogical table of Seth's line down to the five hundredth year of Noah. This statement is followed by one which speaks of the birth of his three sons-Shem, Ham, and Japheth (Gen. 5:32). In 6:1-8 we have a description of the corrupt condition of the world in the days of Noah and God's decision to destroy man from the face of the ground. Therefore all the material in this section occurred in the lifetime of Noah. After giving us all this data (5:1-6:8), Moses informed us that what he presented in this section is that which was the historical account of

page 13

Noah; i.e., that either Noah wrote this record or that it was in his possession.
The fourth section begins with 6:9b and extends to 9:29. This portion of the historical record is called "the generations of the sons of Noah, namely, of Shem, Ham, and Japheth" (Gen. 10:1). In this portion of Scripture we have the account of the Flood, which was written by the sons of Noah or was in their possession. Everything in this section occurred in the lifetime of these men, as a reading of the account shows.
The fifth normal division consists of 10:1b-11:9. Here we have an account of the descendants of Shem, Ham, and Japheth after the Flood and of their multiplying and spreading over the whole earth. Genesis 10 has correctly been called "The Table of Nations." This portion of the Word is the chart and compass for the one who wishes to investigate the earliest civilization of the human race. Competent scholars who have followed archaeological discoveries in Bible lands have pronounced this chapter as being the key to the proper understanding of earth's earliest tribes and peoples. Two most important historical facts of the first magnitude are in this chapter simply alluded to or briefly mentioned: the existence of Sodom and Gomorrah* and the division of the original continent. *2
------

* Before leaving this section I wish to note a very significant statement which has bearing on our present discussion. It occurs in 10:19. Here we find an account of the border of the Canaanites, which is traced from city to city. "And the border of the Canaanite was from Sidon, as thou goest toward Gerar, unto Gaza; as thou goest toward Sodom and Gomorrah and Admah and Zeboiim, unto Lasha." When this section of Genesis was written, these cities were in existence, because they are pointed out as landmarks, indicating the boundaries of the Canaanites. According to the Scriptural records, they were not destroyed until the year the promise regarding Isaac was made. This was given when Abraham was ninety-nine, the year 2107 A.H.; therefore, this year is the date of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. The reader is urged to study Genesis 17-21 on this point. If the earth was divided the year Peleg was born, 1757 A.H., then Sodom and Gomorrah were not destroyed until 350 years later, in 2107. From Genesis 10: 19 and its context we are driven to the irresistible conclusion that the fifth section of Genesis, namely, 10:1b-11:9, was written while Sodom and Gomorrah were still standing. From this conclusion there can be no escape.
--------
*2In 10:25 we are informed that in the days of Peleg the earth was divided. What is the significance of this statement? According to 1:9, the waters which were left upon the earth after some of those of the mighty deluge, mentioned in 1:2, had been removed and placed above the firmament were gathered together into one place. Then the dry land appeared. When we take these statements at their face value, we see that originally there was but one continent and one sea. In the days of Peleg, who was of the fifth generation in the line of Shem, this one original continent was divided, as we see today. Much evidence has been discovered in recent years, which shows that the territory now forming the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean was at one time part of this original continent. Abundant is the evidence which proves the correctness of this Scriptural statement; Peter's affirmation in II Peter 3:5 also confirms this contention.
The division of the earth into continents occurred in the days of Peleg, as his name indicates. In the Biblical system of chronology the Flood occurred in the year 1656 A.H. Peleg was born in 1757 A.H., or 101 years after the Flood, and yet he is fifth in the line of Shem. He was given a name which commemorates the disaster befalling the earth. One would naturally suppose that this catastrophe occurred immediately prior to the birth of Peleg. With this inference, which is logical, we would place this world-cataclysm one hundred years after the Flood.


page 14
 
The building of the tower of Babel, the design of which was to maintain the unity of the human race and to centralize its interest in one locality, evidently was prior to the division of the earth. Such is the logical necessity of the data which we have. This attempt at Babel seems to have been an effort to centralize human power in defiance toward the Almighty. This conclusion is drawn from the fact that the Lord frustrated the design of the promoters by confounding the speech of the race and by scattering it abroad throughout the earth. Therefore this confusion of tongues was prior to the division of the earth into continents. When one realizes these facts, he can understand how people originally reached the various continents and islands of the sea. They were on those portions of the original continent when the disaster which split it asunder occurred; hence they were marooned in their special sphere and continued to live there and propagate their species. What was true of the human race was also true of the animal kingdom.
In this connection we might notice another unusual phenomenon and find a reasonable, rational explanation for it. Everyone is acquainted with the fact that there are racial characteristics stamped indelibly upon the various ethnological groups. These cannot be predicated solely upon climatic conditions or upon the operation of the Mendelian ratio. How, then, account for them? My suggestion is that they are distinguishing marks which give evidence of the judgment from God the same as that which produced the various languages. The Biblical account states that God confounded the speech of the peoples at that time so that one could not understand the other; hence the work was frustrated. This was indeed a judgment of God upon them. Since He differentiated them by language, He could likewise and as easily distinguish them by these racial characteristics.
This portion of Genesis is attributed, according to 11:10, to Shem: "These are the generations of Shem." Shem was born in


page 15

1558 and lived for six hundred years; hence he died in 2158. The tenth chapter of Genesis brings us through the history of Shem to the sixth generation; namely, to the descendants of Joktan, the brother of Peleg, who was fifth in the line of Shem. Since after the Flood a new generation arose every thirty or thirty-five years, as we see from the genealogical tables in chapter 11, and since Peleg, the fifth in Seth's line was born in 1757, we see that the sixth generation, the last mentioned in the eleventh chapter of Genesis, arose during that eighteenth century; but Shem did not die until the twenty-second century. Everything in Genesis 10:1b-ll:9 occurred within the lifetime of Shem; therefore, the expression, "These are the generations of Shem," means either that Shem was the author of this section or that it was written by some other and was in his possession.
The sixth division of the book consists of 11:10b-26. This is purely a genealogical table, without any narration whatsoever. It begins with the birth of Arpachshad in 1658 A.H. and runs to the birth of Abraham which we shall see occurred in the year 2008 A.H. In other words, it covers exactly 350 years. Without question Terah had access to genealogical records and facts. He also had the advantage of association, doubtless, with Shem whose life overlapped his by 150 years. Thus, humanly speaking, he had every opportunity possible to gain the exact information concerning this genealogical table which is attributed to him. It stops 75 years short of his death. In view of these facts there is no room for the gathering of floating legends or saga, as we are told by destructive critics.
The formula, "Now these are the generations of Terah," in this case, as in all others, simply means that Terah either was the writer or that it was composed by another and was in his possession.

The seventh section begins with 11:27b and extends to 25:12 and 19. In this portion Abraham occupies the prominent position on the stage and every thing revolves around him as its center. It ends with his death and burial by his two sons, Ishmael and Isaac. In 25:12 we have this statement, "Now these are the generations of Ishmael, Abraham's son, whom Hagar the Egyptian, Sarah's handmaid, bare unto Abraham." In verse 19 this sentence appears, "And these are the generations of Isaac, Abraham's son." Here we have a situation somewhat different from that with which we have met heretofore. The history of the great patriarch and father of the Hebrew race is here terminated by the two statements just

page 16

quoted. Though Abraham, throughout this section which we have under consideration, is the central figure, Ishmael and Isaac are indeed playing important roles. This passage begins with the record of the promise which God made to Abraham when he was 75 years of age (Gen. 12). Ishmael was born when his father was 86 (Gen. 16). Hence 11 years elapsed between the call of Abraham and the birth of Ishmael and 25 years before Isaac was born. Abraham lived to be 175 years of age (Gen. 25:7). The lives of Abraham and Ishmael coincided for 89 years. Since Ishmael lived to be 137 (Gen. 25:17), he outlived his father by 48 years. Isaac lived 180 years (Gen. 35:28). Since he was born when his father was 100, and the latter lived to be 175, their lives coincided for 75 years; hence Isaac outlived his father 105 years. Therefore, with the exception of the 11 years of the history prior to the birth of Ishmael, everything in this section of the book occurred in the lifetime of Ishmael and Isaac.

Since these two brothers buried their father, and since their names are given in the order in which they appear in chapter 25, it seems quite plausible that Moses in using the regular formula desired to indicate that this portion of his composition was derived from the book that was in the possession of both Ishmael and Isaac. As to who was chosen by the Lord to write this section, no one can say. It is altogether possible that Isaac was the honored author.

The next two occurrences of our formula are found in 36:1, 9 and appear as, "Now these are the generations of Esau (the same is Edom)," and "And these are the generations of Esau the father of the Edomites in mount Seir." This eighth section of the book, which begins with 25:19b and extends to 37:1, gives us an account of the historical events which occurred in the lifetime of Jacob and Esau, for it begins with an account of their birth, continuing the history to the time that Joseph, the son of Jacob, was 17 years of age.

In the second year of the famine Joseph was 39, and Jacob was 130. The latter, therefore, was 108 at the time Joseph was sold into Egypt. Since Jacob lived to be 147 (Gen. 47:28), and since our present section ends with the year when he was 108, we see that everything recorded in this portion of the book occurred in his lifetime. The expression, "These are the Generations of Jacob," (Gen. 37:2) means either that Jacob was the author of this section or that it, having been written by some other, was in his possession.

page 17

This survey proves that the first thirty-six chapters of Genesis cluster around our formula, "These are the generations of. . . ." It has also shown that the one whose name appears in this sentence lived throughout the period, the history of which is recorded therein, the only exceptions being the cases of Terah and of Ishmael. But as we have seen, the Terah section consists simply of genealogical data which he could have gathered either from historical records of the family or from Shem whose life covered the entire period. As seen before, Ishmael's life extended throughout the time covered by his section of the book with the exception of the first eleven years. He was, however, in close touch with his father who could have given him all the information needed. Therefore we conclude that the first thirty-six chapters of Genesis were written by historical characters contemporaneous with the events which they narrated. These statements being true to facts, it is absolutely arbitrary and unscientific for one to claim that Genesis consists of folklore and legends gathered and collated at a much later date by those interested in antiquities.

In this connection let us also bear in mind that the histories do not go beyond the life of the man whose name appears in the formula. Therefore we may conclude that we have an accurate, firsthand account from eyewitnesses of the things to which the testimony is borne.
In view of all the facts which have been discussed in this section, it is perfectly obvious that the statement, "These are the generations of . . . ," is a summary which gives the source from which the material was obtained. Positive evidence proves this point, but, since it has been maintained by many scholars that our expression is the preamble to a genealogical table, it becomes necessary for us to investigate thoroughly this position.
As has already been shown, the first occurrence of our expression has no connection whatsoever with a genealogical list; therefore it is gratuitous for one to claim that it is an introduction to a genealogy. A casual survey of chapters one and two shows conclusively that it is a summary of the contents of 1:1-2: 3. Since the first mention of a doctrine or a symbol usually gives the general outline of its significance, scholars would do well to take heed to this intimation found in the first appearance of this word and be guided by it and by the facts of each context.

Let us now examine the second example to determine whether or not it has any connection with a genealogical table as its preamble

page 18

or introductory statement. In Genesis 4:25, 26 we have the brief genealogical data concerning Adam, Seth, and Enosh. During the lifetime of the latter, men began to call upon the name of the Almighty. These statements are followed by, "This is the book of the generations of Adam." The genealogical table found in chapter 5 begins normally with verse 3; thus between this and our expression occurs a rather long statement relative to the creation of man and woman in the image of God. This sentence puts a chasm between our expression and the genealogy which follows in verse 3.

The third instance of our expression is in 6:9. In the first eight verses there is no genealogical material. Separating our statement from the genealogical data beginning in the next verse is this declaration, "Noah was a righteous man, and perfect in his generations: Noah walked with God." This sentence makes a gap between our formula and the following genealogy and disassociates it from this material altogether.

The next occurrence is in 10:1. In our regular version the translators have supplied namely after Noah in order to make the names Shem, Ham, and Japheth in apposition with the expression, "the sons of Noah." The insertion of this italicized word was made by those who evidently held the position that our formula was the introduction to a genealogical table. This is not the only possible, grammatical rendering. May I suggest another? "Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah. As to Shem, Ham, and Japheth, unto them were sons born after the flood." With this reading it becomes immediately apparent that our formula is not very closely connected with the genealogical table which follows. In this case, however, there is nothing that separates our formula from the following genealogy. The same thing is true with the next appearance of our sentence in 11:10. The same situation exists in 11:27.

The connection between our formula in 25:12, 19 and the material which follows is indeed very loose and, strictly speaking, does not necessarily connect therewith. The same situation exists in 36:1, 9.

In this connection it might be well to note the fact that in the cases of the section attributed to Ishmael and Isaac together with the one ascribed to Esau and Jacob, Ishmael and Esau, who were rejected from the ancestral lineage of Messiah, are mentioned in the record. This is, to Occidentals, rather strange. The probable answer to why they appear is to be found in the fact that they were

page 19

the first-born of the theocratic line although disfranchised. This fact would be more in keeping with the customs and legal requirements of the time.

Following our formula in Genesis 37:2 there is no genealogy whatsoever; neither is there any preceding it. The statement in this connection is that "These are the generations of Jacob." In chapter 36 we see the descendants of Esau and yet in 37:2 appears our expression. In this instance it can have no connection whatsoever with a genealogical table. Jacob has been the leading character in the drama of the section 25:19-36:43. From chapter 37 onward Joseph occupies the principal place; therefore, in this last instance of its occurrence in Genesis we must conclude that it has no connection whatsoever with a genealogical table. The only other significance it can possibly have here is that in the section which it terminates evidently it means that this portion of the book was either written by Jacob or that it was in his possession.

As further proof that this formula has no connection whatsoever with a genealogical table, I wish to call attention to its use in Numbers 3:1, "Now these are the generations of Aaron and Moses in the day that Jehovah spake with Moses in mount Sinai." In the first two chapters of this book we have an account of the first census of the children of Israel and the number, encampment, and princes of the tribes. Nothing of a genealogical nature is found here. After it, we have the list of the names of Aaron's sons and the account of Nadab and Abihu. Not one word is given concerning any of Moses' descendants either before or after our formula. This fact shows that it has no connection with a genealogical table. In this case we are driven to the irresistible conclusion that the contents of chapters 1 and 2 were written at the time of the events recorded either by or for Aaron and Moses and that the latter incorporated this material in the final codification of the Law.
The fact that each one of these sections closes within the lifetime of the one whose name appears in our formula cannot be accidental. Writers living several centuries afterwards would never have been so precise and exact in such an arrangement. The fact that the history in each section thus ends is positive proof that there was design in this arrangement. But let us not conclude that there was any manipulation of the records but rather the natural logical outworking of the cold hard facts of life. We, therefore, have in the first 36 chapters of Genesis the testimony and accounts of competent eyewitnesses to the things of which they wrote.

page 20

2. PROOF FOR THE EARLY DATE OF GENESIS

A careful study of Genesis and an analysis of the data connected with our formula prove that it was compiled from ancient documents by an editor at a very early date. The evidence is clear and convincing to the one who will open his mind and heart and look facts squarely in the face. The testimony supporting this proposition is based upon six different considerations.

a.  Babylonian Words in the First Eleven Chapters of Genesis

According to the best and leading scholars there appear in the first eleven chapters of Genesis different Babylonian words. In fact, as the dewdrop reflects the environment around it, these chapters mirror more or less distinctly a Babylonian environment. For proof of this fact consult the standard works on the subject.*

b. Palestinian Environment Reflected in Chapters 12-36

The second major division of Genesis consists of chapters 11:27-37:1. The experts are unable to find in this section the influences of Babylonia as they clearly point to them in the first section. Furthermore an unmistakable Palestinian background is apparent throughout this portion of the book. The geographical data together with the customs and life of Palestine are seen on every page. These facts are proof that it was written by those to whom Moses gives credit. To the truth-seeker it is also obvious that this section must have been written by an eyewitness.
-------

* The traces of Babylonian influence, which are so very evident in the first eleven chapters of Genesis, argue for Israel's contact with that country. Two schools of thought have arisen in regard to this matter. One insists that all the data can be accounted for upon the basis that Abraham was a native of Ur of the Chaldees, and that, since these early chapters give the account of the beginnings of civilization which arose in the Tigris-Euphrates valley, normally traces of Babylonian influences would appear in this portion of the narrative. The other school, with a great array of learning and dogmatism, proclaims that the contact was made only when Nebuchadnezzar took the Jews to Babylon.
There is truth in the position taken by the first school. Abraham's contact with his native land cannot be doubted in the light of our present knowledge. There is, therefore, of necessity, traces in these early chapters of Babylonian influence. No one can deny this proposition. That Israel's contact with Babylon at the time of the captivity did color her civilization and culture subsequent to that time, and that traces of such influences do appear in the later books of the canon cannot be denied. But a scientific and unbiased investigation of Genesis can discover no evidence of Chaldean influences of the time of the exile.
The explanation appearing in the following pages, which accepts all the data at face value, accounts fully and scientifically for the evident Babylonian influences.

page  21

c. Egyptian Words in the Last Fourteen Chapters of Genesis

In great contrast with the early chapters of Genesis the last ones are permeated with Egyptian words and ideas. In fact, the entire background of these chapters is purely Egyptian with, of course, the ancient Hebrew civilization. In other words, in these chapters we see the Hebrew culture and civilization amid Egyptian environment.

d. Geographical Notations

Another line of proof that the first thirty-six chapters of Genesis constitute a primitive revelation is to be found in the geographical notations scattered here and there in this section of Scripture. Since in Genesis 14:2, mention is made of the king of Bela, an explanatory clause follows it stating that "the same is Zoar." In the next verse mention is made of "the vale of Siddim" which is explained by the clause "The same is the Salt Sea." Again in verse 7 En-mishpat is explained: "the same is Kadesh." Once again, we see another such note in the statement which spoke of Abraham's pursuing the five kings "unto Hobah, which is on the left hand of Damascus." Finally in verse 17 the vale of Shaveh is explained: "the same is the King's Vale." Why are these place names explained? The most plausible answer is that by a later writer they were inserted into documents which he received. For instance, the original which came into his hands simply spoke of the king of Bela. The author assumed on the part of the reader a knowledge of the city or state of Bela which was at that time well known. By the time of Moses its name had been changed to Zoar. Hence, in order to make the record intelligible to his readers, Moses added the explanatory clause.
Another example of this type of notation for the purpose of identification is found in 16:14: "Wherefore the well was called Beer-lahai-roi; behold, it is between Kadesh and Bered." In the record of Rachel's burial place (Gen. 35:19) mention is made of Ephrath which is followed by the clause "the same is Bethlehem." Sarah died, according to Genesis 23:2, at Kiriath-arba which Moses explained as being Hebron.
Why all of these interpolations? The careful intelligent reader demands an answer. These additional explanatory notes obviously were inserted by Moses to make intelligible to his readers these ancient documents which he was placing in their hands. When Sarah died the place where Abraham lived was known as Kiriath-arba. Between that time and Moses' day the name had been

page 22

changed to Hebron. The Israelites in his day would not have known by reading this document where Sarah was buried unless indeed they had done some special research work or made particular inquiry about the ancient name of this city, which thing very few would have done. But to make intelligible to his readers the facts, Moses inserted this explanation. Neither could this note have been added at a date later than the time of the entrance of the children of Israel into Canaan, because in the original passage we are told that Hebron was in the land of Canaan. The translators of the Revised Version were unfortunate in including in the parentheses only the words "the same is Hebron," whereas they should have placed within these marks the entire statement, "the same is Hebron in the land of Canaan." Anyone who knows the Hebrew language and who will glance at the original text will see that the phrase, in the land of Canaan, is a part of the inserted note which Moses placed there to identify Kiriath-arba. There was no occasion for this note's being placed in the document after Israel entered the land, because Hebron was one of the principal cities of refuge and played a very important role in the life of the country. David set up his kingdom and reigned there for seven and a half years. Therefore it is unthinkable that this explanation could have been placed there after the conquest of the land. In the face of these stubborn facts there is but one conclusion to which one can reasonably come; namely, that it was inserted by Moses for the children of Israel just before they entered the Promised Land. What is said about this note is true also of the one which occurs in verse 19 of this same chapter.
Another fact which is positive proof of the antiquity of the book of Genesis is the use of the terms, "south country" (Gen. 20:1; 24:62) and "the east country" (Gen. 25:6). After the conquest of the land these places had well-known names. These primitive names bear silent testimony, therefore, to the ancient character of these documents which Moses passed on to Israel.

e. The Primitive Character of the Political Situation Reflected in Genesis

In Genesis we see a primitive political state reflected. Petty city states were the order of the day. The tribal character of this early civilization is reflected especially in such chapters as Genesis 10. At the time of David and Solomon, however, empires were developing, as we see in the cases of Babylon, Assyria, and Egypt. Most

page 23

recent finds of archaeology prove the correctness of the representation of this primitive order as set forth in Genesis. From this standpoint, therefore, we are driven to the conclusion that Genesis consists of ancient primitive documents.

f. Parallel Between Literary Composition of Genesis and Cuneiform Tablets

When the Jewish people spoke Hebrew, God made His revelation to them in that language; when they were using partially the Aramaic at the time of the Babylonian captivity, He gave some of His messages in that language; and after they began to speak Greek He naturally adopted this tongue in giving His revelation. Speech is the vehicle of thought. God's Word is the means by which He conveys His message to people. Hence, naturally He adopted the language which they were using at the time of the revelation. Furthermore, when papyri were used as writing material the men of God naturally employed that which was in use in their day. These facts are in accordance with common intelligence and good sense.
From the facts stated above we may conclude that when clay tablets and stone were used for writing material, God naturally employed them in preserving His revelation. Furthermore, when the cuneiform language was the international writing of the ancient world, it stands to reason that the Lord would use that language in giving His Word.
Do we have any evidence of these facts? Most assuredly. From the mounds of Mesopotamia, Asia Minor, Palestine, and Egypt have been unearthed various clay tablets written in the language of the day-namely, Babylonian-Assyrian wedge-shaped writing. The Tell el-Amarna tablets from one of the ancient capitals of Egypt as well as others dug up in Palestine prove that clay tablets and cuneiform writing were used universally in Egypt and Palestine at the time of Moses and the Exodus. We naturally conclude, therefore, that God would give His revelation in the permanent form according to the methods employed at that time. These facts have long been recognized by conservative scholars but have not been emphasized, because of the scarcity of the evidence for comparison available to former generations. In the most recent discoveries, however, sufficient data have been brought to light and have been studied thoroughly to prove conclusively that the book of

page 24

Genesis is a series of ancient documents which have been put together in permanent form by the great Lawgiver of Israel-Moses.
There were certain literary methods employed by the old Babylonian-Assyrian scribes which are very clearly demonstrated by the tablets that have been unearthed. As with the Hebrew, so' with the ancient Babylonian tablets, the first words of tablet one of a series were used as the title of the following ones. They also employed the numerals which indicate the serial number of the tablet. Another safeguard in preserving the correct order came in the form of catchwords or catch-lines. The first words of the first tablet of the series were repeated at the bottom of each succeeding one to indicate that it belonged to the same set. The numbering showed the numerical order and the catch-lines were used as a check to confirm the serial order. In addition to these devices there was a colophon which appeared at the end of a document or a series of documents. This consisted largely of the name of the scribe and the date of the writing and corresponded largely to our title page of a book. These data came at the end of a document instead of at the beginning as in our case. Instead of the scribe or the writer's signing his own name, frequently his seal was used to close the communication and in addition sometimes the scribe gave his name.
An examination of the book of Genesis shows the remains of some of these ancient literary devices. The presence of these embedded in the text argues for a very early date of the composition of Genesis.
Evidence of this fact is to be found in the following examples:

Chap. Verse

i              1      "God created the heavens and the earth."
ii             4      "Lord God made the heavens and the earth."
ii             4      "When they were created."
v             2       "When they were created."
vi           10      "Shem, Ham and ]apheth."
x             1       "Shem, Ham and ]apheth."
x             1       "After the Flood."
xi          10       "After the Flood."
xi          26       "Abram, Nahor and Haran."
xi          27       "Abram, Nahor and Haran."
xxv       12       "Abraham's son."
xxv       19       "Abraham's son."
xxxvi      1       "Who is Edom."
xxxvi      8       "Who is Edom."
xxxvi      9       "Father of the Edomites" (lit.: Father Edom).
xxxvi      43      "Father of the Edomites" (lit.: Father Edom).

page 25

I wish the reader to note carefully that Genesis 1:1-2:4 begins and ends exactly alike. The same thing is true with the section 2:4-5:1. This section begins a certain way and closes with a repetition of the same words. The same thing appears in each of these pairs of sentences. This phenomenon cannot be accidental because it is too uniform and exact. Since in it is reflected the ancient literary method of writing in the orient, and since these repetitions occur where our formula appears, which takes the place of the original colophon, we cannot avoid the conclusion that Moses took earlier documents and welded them into the form which they now have in Genesis 1-36.
A study of the cuneiform tablets shows that many of them were dated in the year of certain outstanding events. For instance, one document is dated: "Year in which Canal Hammurabi was dug." In perfect conformity with this method of dating we see in Genesis 2:4 the words "In the day that the Lord God made the heavens and the earth." A similar example of dating is found in 5:1, "In the day God created man." Later tablets were not dated so much by the year in which a specific incident occurred but rather were given in terms of the residence of some leading personage. For instance, in 25:11 the date of the writing of this tablet was when "Isaac dwelt by Beer-lahai-roi." Compare also the method of dating in 36:8; 37:1.

As noted above, the cuneiform tablets always ended with a colophon, giving the name of the scribe along with the date. The counterpart of this device in the Scriptures is found in our recurring formula, "These are the generations of . . . ." In view of these facts we cannot avoid the conclusion that Genesis 1-36 was first written in the language of the day whose authors used the literary contrivances common at that time. Moses adopted this method which the scribes of Ashur-bani-pal used in their copying tablets from earlier generations.
The proper understanding of the literary composition of the first thirty-six chapters of Genesis forever demolishes the critical, destructive theory which asserts that it was composed of documents unrelated and coming from different centuries. The unity of the book of Genesis is guaranteed by the manner in which it was welded together by Moses.

3. WHO WROTE THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS CONSTITUTING THE BOOK OF GENESIS?

As has already been seen, archaeology has proved conclusively that writing extends back to the dawn of history-the beginning of

page 26

the human race. Tablets have been unearthed which are admitted to have been written at least five and a half millenniums ago. Thanks to the tireless work of faithful archaeologists in bringing to our attention the historic past, we no longer have to depend upon the guesses and speculations of theorists concerning this matter. Accepting the cold facts which have been brought to light by archaeology, we are now in a position to affirm that the documents out of which Genesis was composed could have been written by any of the prediluvian patriarchs, beginning with Adam himself. It is now in order for us to examine minutely each of these original documents.

a. The Creation Document

We have already seen that the earliest material used for writing, especially in Babylonia, the cradle of civilization, was the clay tablet. We have also learned that there is abundant evidence in Genesis which proves that it was composed of documents which had the literary characteristics appearing in the early Babylonian clay tablets. We are, therefore, justified in concluding that these early documents were written on clay tablets; hence we shall think of them in such terms.
Genesis 1:1-2:4 is one of the most sublime pieces of literature extant today, being judged from the standpoint of simplicity, comprehensiveness, clarity, universality and majesty. Who could pen such an account? According to Commander Wiseman, who quotes Professor Wade in his Old Testa1nent History, this account is most accurate. Here are the words of the Professor who speaks "of the inherent improbability of an ancient writing anticipating accurately the conclusions of modern science." Of course, the Professor, viewing things as he does, wished to claim for this record a late date. According to him and the critical school, the Pentateuch came into its present form during and after the Babylonian captivity. Were science and knowledge, as developed by men, taking the position set forth in Genesis 1 at the time of the reputed composition of the Pentateuch? Those acquainted with the historical facts must answer in the negative. In fact, it is utterly absurd to think that a scribe or historian at the time of the Babylonian captivity could have by his own natural powers written an account like Genesis 1. The Professor, together with all others occupying the same position as he does, was driven by facts to the statement that this portion of Scripture is absolutely accurate.

page 27

If no one after the days of Moses and before the present scientific age could have written this account, who did? And when was it composed? If any man today thinks that he can write an account of the Creation, let him try it. Evidence pointing to the date of its composition is found in the record of the work of the fourth day (1:14-16). According to it,
"God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years: 15 and let them be for lights in the firmament of heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16 And God made the two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also."

The name here given to the sun and the moon is "lights," or "luminaries." These two greater heavenly lights are not called in this document by the name which they later bore in Babylonia. According to the tablets unearthed there, the sun at a later date was called "shemesh." Likewise in the Biblical account of the time of Abraham the greater luminary is called by the corresponding word in the Hebrew language (Gen. 15:12). Hammurabi in his code depicted on his stele himself as receiving the laws from the god "shemesh." The moon god also was worshiped in Ur of the Chaldees. The chapel in which he was worshiped was erected on the great tower in the central part of the city about 250 years prior to the birth of Abraham. He was also worshiped in Haran, Upper Mesopotamia. Had Genesis one been written after names had been given to the two luminaries, the writer would have spoken of them by these names instead of simply calling them ""lights." This very fact in and of itself is absolute and positive proof of the primitive character of Genesis 1:1-2:3.
Throughout this section the author repeatedly states, "and God said." The personal element together with the vivid portrayal of what was done and said all indicate clearly that the record was written by one to whom these events were told. In this connection let us bear in mind that the writer did not say "I saw," "I beheld," and "1 heard." It is direct speech. Everything throughout the account argues for its primitive character as having been recorded by the Lord Himself. Compare the style, the brevity, and the majesty of this record with the two tablets of the ten commandments given directly by the Lord.
Another bit of evidence pointing to the conclusion just stated is that in the section attributed to Noah (Gen. 5:29) is an echo of

page 28

the promise contained in 3:15. As a final statement relative to Genesis 1, I wish to quote the words of Commander Wiseman, which are clear, explicit, and most accurate:
"This first chapter is so ancient that it does not contain mythical or legendary matter; these elements are entirely absent. It was written before myth and legend had time to grow, and not as is often stated, at a later date when it had to be stripped of the mythical and legendary elements inherent in every other account of Creation extant. This account is so original that it does not bear a trace of any system of philosophy: yet it is so profound that it is capable of correcting philosophical systems. It is so ancient that it contains nothing that is merely nationalistic, neither Babylonian, Egyptian nor Jewish modes of thought find a place in it, for it was written before clans, or nations or philosophies originated. Thus it is the original, of which the other extant accounts are merely corrupted copies. Others incorporate their national philosophies in crude polytheistic and mythological form, while this is pure. Genesis chapter one is as primitive as man himself, the threshold of written history.-New Discoveries in Babylonia about Genesis.

b. The Tablet of Adam
The second tablet, or series of tablets, is attributed to Adam (2: 4-5: 1). In chapter 2 we have a description of the earth's being watered by a mist which went up from the ground. This is followed by a brief statement concerning the creation of man. This narration has been designated as a second record or duplicate account of man's creation. Unfortunately, some scholars have seen a contradiction between it and that which is contained in the first chapter. Furthermore, they have sought in these two accounts to find proof for the long-exploded documentary theory of the composition of the Torah. Since we are dealing with another tablet, or series of tablets, in the material found in 2: 4-5: 1, it is only natural to expect another reference to the creation of man. Since it was originally a document separate from 1:1-2: 3 and since it recounts God's dealings with the human family, naturally it relates, in a different way, the story of man's creation as given in the first tablet. In a set of books today, which is well-written, each succeeding volume takes up the story where the former left off and ties the new volume to the preceding one. Exactly this is what we see here. Hence the myth concerning a duplicate narrative, which the destructive critics have used in support of their visionary hypotheses, vanishes in the light of the plain facts.
In verses 8-17 of the second chapter we have a very vivid, detailed, and graphic description of the Garden eastward in Eden. There is nothing fantastic, visionary, or mythical connected with this straightforward account. It is just such a story as one would

page 29

expect an honest narrator to tell. It is tied down to earth-to realities and facts.
In this garden was planted every tree that was desirable for man's food and comfort. He was granted the privilege of partaking of the fruit of each one, except of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. He had access all the time even to the tree of life. Nothing was withheld from him that was calculated to bring a blessing and make his stay in Eden all that was to be desired. A prohibition was imposed upon him, however, concerning the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. God warned man, saying, "in the day thou eatest thereof dying thou shalt surely die" (literal translation). This statement is absolutely correct. The very day that man partook of the forbidden fruit the catabolic processes, which are known to medical science, began to prey upon his physical body and they continued to eat at his very vitals until his life became extinct. The same destructive forces prey upon the bodies of everyone from the beginning of life and ultimately cause death. Thus this statement in this most primitive of all documents has been verified by modern Science.

In verses 18-25 we have an account of Adam's naming the various animals and also of the creation of woman. Unfortunately and mistakenly some men have spoken of Adam and his intellectual capacities as being very limited. The facts here narrated indicate otherwise. He had a great mind and intellectual capacity to give names appropriate to the different animals. As they filed before him, each with his mate, there was found no companion for man. Thus at this point of the history God brought the woman into being.
The account of this miracle is told very simply in a straightforward manner and in language that all can understand. According to it, God caused a deep sleep to come over the man, at which time He removed from his side a rib. Out of this He created woman. Some theologians correctly, I believe, conclude that this surgical operation was performed in order to remove from man's body the feminine organs. Hence around them He built up the body of the woman and breathed into her nostrils "the breath of lives," and she became a living, i.e., an immortal, soul.
Unfortunately many light and flippant people have ridiculed this majestic account of the creation of woman and have dubbed it "the rib story." The making of such a frivolous remark reveals immediately the shallow thinking of the person thus speaking. The first

page 30

great step in surgery was taken by a man who believed this account and who saw the practicability of it. God gave Adam an anesthetic before He performed this operation. The man who discovered modern anesthesia found his idea in this account. Everyone who has undergone a surgical operation in modern times owes the absence of suffering at the time to the knowledge that is here set forth in this precious passage.
In Genesis 3:1-8 we have the record of the tempter's deceiving Eve. He is spoken of as the serpent. The curse falling upon him made him crawl in the dust of the earth. Here only in the Old Testament is he referred to as the serpent. After this time he is never thus designated, but is called the adversary or Satan. Since he was known by this latter appellation, it is absolutely certain that had this record arisen from later times, he would not have had this name. Therefore the presence of this primitive designation argues for an early date for this section of the record.

The account of God's coming and talking in the cool of the evening with Adam and Eve is very personal and, at the same time, graphic and vivid. The Almighty is represented as appearing in human form and conversing with man.* In the books of Moses and throughout the Hebrew Scriptures, the Almighty is never spoken of thus, but rather is represented and thought of as the King of the universe, high, exalted, and lifted above the heavens. It is, therefore, inconceivable that the account in the third chapter of Genesis, narrating God's visit to man in the Garden, came from a later time in Jewish history. This fact argues most conclusively for the early origin of this portion of the Word.
In 3:9-21 we have an account of the Almighty's conversation with Adam and Eve announcing the coming of the world-Redeemer and at the same time pronouncing the curse upon man, woman, and the ground. This promise of a Redeemer, while definite enough, is veiled more or less in mystery. It becomes intelligible, however, when read in the light of later predictions. It is of such a character
-----
* In the narration concerning the events of the tower of Babel, God is spoken of as coming down to earth (Gen. 11:1-9). In 17:1 we are told that Jehovah appeared to Abraham. Whether or not He appeared only in vision, or similarly to His appearance in Eden we are not told. A like situation appears in chapters 18 and 19. But from the days of Jacob and onward we read of the appearance of "the Angel of Jehovah," One would conclude naturally that the use of the primitive expression relative to the Lord's appearing in the early chapters of the book argue for the composition of the chapters prior to the time when the later half of the book was written.


page 31

that one would expect it to be the primitive or the initial promise. This fact, likewise, argues for an early date of this original section.

In the fourth chapter we have the account of the birth of Cain and Abel and the former's slaying the latter. This incident is followed by the pronouncement of the curse upon Cain. The section concludes with a short history of Cain's descendants up to and including Lamech. Here is found the record of the beginning of a materialistic culture, built up by those who have little regard for God and spiritual interests. This record closes with the eighth generation of Adam through Cain, the worldly branch of the human family which developed a godless civilization.
As stated before, Moses claims that this is "the book of the generations of Adam." Since the personal touch is so very evident and the narrative reflects most positively the earliest primitive civilization, the only reasonable explanation of this formula is that Adam was the one either who wrote this account, or, in whose possession it was.

c. The Tablet of Noah

This third tablet, which claims to give the generations or the historical account of Noah, begins with Adam and traces the former's genealogy to himself. This is found in the fifth chapter and is followed by an account of the corrupt condition of the world in Noah's Day (Gen. 6:1-8).
Some in modern times have stumbled over the record in this fifth chapter because of the extremely long span of life of the ancient patriarchs. Various efforts have been made to read into the record some other idea than that which is the simple, straightforward, plain meaning of the words. All efforts to make the chapter mean something different from what it says meets with failure.
It is logical to believe that primitive man had greater vitality and strength in the early period of the history of the race than in our day. The characteristic which we observe everywhere, and which affects both animate and inanimate creation, is that everything is tending towards dissolution and a general breakdown. Chemistry teaches this great lesson. It is visible on every hand in nature. As one grows older, the less vitality he has; consequently the smaller is his capacity for recuperation. As a person in youth has greater vitality and power, so did the human family in those early, primitive days. It is not unreasonable, therefore, to believe the record as it is given in the fifth chapter of Genesis which shows longevity at its best.

page 32

According to Genesis 5, there were ten of the patriarchs from Adam to Noah. Skeptics have often ridiculed the Biblical record on this point but confirmation has come to us from archaeology which confirn1s the Scriptures. For instance, Mr. H. WeldBlundell obtained a number of clay prisms which had been found at Larsa. These have been placed in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford and have been deciphered by Professor Langdon. One of them, which is designated W.B.444 gives a list of those who "ruled before the Flood." Following this, we have a list of those who ruled "after the Flood" up to about 2000 B.C.E. of the current chronological scheme. On another tablet is found the list of ten persons who "ruled before the Flood" (See Tablet W.B.62).

The material in this section, as stated above, consists of the genealogical list of Noah's ancestors and of the culture and environment in which he lived, and which was very wicked-so very much so that God had to bring the judgment of the Flood on that generation to purge the world of its gross corruption.

Adam lived until the year 930 A.H. Methuselah was born in the year 687 A.H.; hence their lives overlapped for 243 years. Methuselah lived 969 years and died in the Flood year, 1656 A.H. Since that disaster occurred in the 600th year of Noah, his life overlapped with that of Methuselah for 600 years; therefore, he had ample opportunity to procure all the genealogical data from Methuselah who in turn could have gathered it from Adam and others of the early patriarchs. Therefore in this section we have a well authenticated genealogical table giving the exact facts of the theocratic line and a short description of the corruption of Noah's day. Since Moses attributed this section to Noah and since all the data are in harmony with this position, we are logically forced to believe that Noah was the author or the possessor of this tablet.

d. The Tablet of Noah's Sons

The fourth tablet, or series of tablets, as already seen, is found in Genesis 6:9-10:1. This section begins with 6:9b and speaks of Noah as a righteous man and places him in contrast with the corrupt world of his day. This is doubtless done to show that God always uses men whose lives are pure, chaste, and clean. Naturally in this new series of tablets the writer would depict the lost, corrupt condition of the world and God's pronouncing the curse upon it. This account is followed by the record of the Flood, of which we read in chapters 7 and 8. After Noah emerged from the Ark he

page 33

made certain sacrifices to God, at which time the Lord entered into a covenant with him and gave the Magna Charta of civil governments. These things are recorded in chapter 9.
We are still living in the land of Babylonia in this section of the book and only leave it to see the Ark resting upon Mount Ararat north of Babylonia, which was probably in the present country of Armenia. The description of what took place at the time of the Flood is so very clear and minute that only eyewitnesses could have written such a vivid account. This record is by Moses attributed to the three sons of Noah. Since we are moving in the realm of ideas of ancient Babylonia in this section, we are again logically driven to accept the position that the authors are the three sons of Noah who passed through the experiences here narrated.

e. The Tablet of Shem

The fifth tablet, or series of tablets, is found in Genesis 10:2-11:9. This portion was written when the political situation had developed into small city-states consisting largely of clans 0" certain small tribes. This picture of the ancient orient shows the conditions as they existed from the time of the Flood to the breaking up of the original continent into the present land distribution which occurred in all probability, as stated before, in the year 1757, or 101 years after the Flood. But since the record takes us into the next generation after Peleg, we, of course, realize that it went for another generation beyond that of the catastrophe which befell the earth, and which is crystallized in the name of Peleg.
Nimrod, the founder of the kingdom of Babylon, was third in the Hamitic line. From Shinar he went out into the land of Assyria and built Nineveh and Some other cities.
Let us remember that at the time of the writing of this tenth chapter of Genesis, Sodom, Gomorrah, and the cities of the Plain were still standing, as is evident from the nineteenth verse. Since they were destroyed in the days of Abraham, probably when he was 99, in the year 2107 A.H., it is likely that this judgment fell 350 years after the division of the earth. Therefore Shem's account was written before Abraham's day.
Moses, the compiler of the book of Genesis, attributes this section to Shem, who lived 502 years after the Flood, and whose life overlapped that of Abraham by 150 years; hence we may conclude that Shem either wrote the book or that it was in his possession. The probability is that he wrote it.

Page 34

f. The Tablet of Terah

Terah's tablet is the shortest of the series. It consists only of the ancestral line of Terah, the father of Abraham, who traced his lineage from Shem. He had the opportunity of learning the facts from Shem and of continuing the genealogy to include himself.

g. The Tablets of Ishmael and Isaac

The next and longest division of Genesis is chapters 11:27-25:11. This is followed by what might be properly called a postscript consisting of verses 12-19. Abraham, of course, is the chief character in this section. Contrary to Dr. Driver's dictum, Abraham's name is not connected in any way with our formula as one would expect if Driver's assertion were correct.
This section properly ends with verse 11, which gives the data of the composition of this series of tablets in terms of Isaac's dwelling at Beer-lahai-roi. The last statement (vss. 9 and 10) tells of the burial of Abraham by his two sons, Isaac and Ishmael. Moses added his colophon in the form of our formula in verse 12 and followed that with the postscript concerning Isaac. This addition is concluded with the colophon regarding Isaac in verse 19. In keeping with his usual custom, Moses recognized the priority of the birth of Ishmael and placed him before Isaac, just as he did in the case of Esau and Jacob in 36:1, 9 and 37:2. We see the same thing in Numbers 3:1 where Moses placed Aaron, his elder brother, before himself.
There are a vividness, a graphicness, and the personal touch throughout this section which show first-hand information concerning the most minute details of the various incidents recorded therein. It is just such an account as one would expect Abraham to recount to his sons, Ishmael and Isaac, especially to the latter. The original tablet must have been in possession of Ishmael and Isaac and finally reached the hand of Moses, who welded it with the other documents which came into his possession.

h. The Tablets of Esau and Jacob

The final tablets, or series of tablets, are found in Genesis 25:20-36:1. There are two postscripts to this section as indicated by verses 1 and 9 of chapter 36.
Here again we have a vivid, graphic description of various epochs in the lives of Esau and Jacob. The personal touch is in evidence throughout the section. It finally concludes with the burial of

page 35

Isaac by his two sons, Esau and Jacob. Chapter 36 constitutes, as stated above, the postscript to this section of the narrative. Finally in 37:2 we find a colophon which attributes this history to Jacob. Without doubt, therefore, the material forming this section of Genesis was the property of Esau and Jacob, which providentially was brought into the hands of Moses, and which he has incorporated in the, account of this wonderful book of Beginnings.
The portraits of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as set forth in the last two sections discussed, are consistent in every detail. From this account we can see that the incidental references strewn throughout the text brighten the picture of Abraham. He was a man of influence and power, not only in Canaan but in Egypt. He had the respect of all with whom he associated. The same is true with reference to Isaac and Jacob, even though they did not tower in the public eye so much as Abraham did. Genuineness and historicity are stamped upon every chapter of this narrative as well as upon all the primitive oracles which later came into the hands of Moses.
In view of all the evidence which we have discovered during this study, we are driven to the irresistible conclusion that the first thirty-six chapters of Genesis form a composite document made up of primitive records which were in the hands of the leaders of the theocratic line, and which came finally into the possession of Moses. They were welded together by him into one continuous narrative as we possess them today.

i. The Last Fourteen Chapters of Genesis

The next question arising in this investigation is, Who wrote the last fourteen chapters of Genesis, or what connection did Moses have with this part of the record? In order to answer this question, one must study Genesis in connection with the other four books of the Torah. In the first two chapters of Exodus we have an account of the birth and miraculous preservation of Moses and his life at the court of Pharaoh. Following this narrative is the episode of his flight from Egypt to Midian where he met the girl whom he married. After forty years' residence in that country God called him to deliver His people from the bondage of Egypt. The account is found in the third chapter. From this time onward God constantly spoke to him. In Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy we see the recurring statement, "and Jehovah spake unto Moses."

page 36

In striking contrast with this reiterated and emphasized statement as we have already seen, is the fact that not one single word is to be found in the book of Genesis which declares that God spoke to 1'Ioses. There is not even an intimation to this effect. This is a fact which demands consideration on the part of the one who is studying this question.

The liberal critics tell us that the expression, "Jehovah spoke unto Moses," was inserted into the materials which the imaginary redactors of the time of the Babylonian captivity inserted into the supposed original documents that they wove into the literary fabric now known as the Torah, or that the authors of the supposed original documents falsely inserted the great Law-giver's name into their writings. This was done, they assert, in order to give to these forged documents the authority and prestige of the name of Moses. Let us, for the sake of discussion, assume the correctness of this position. How is it, then, that they would with great profusion inject his name throughout the last four books of the Torah, but never once put it into the first one, Genesis? These imaginary editors would want his authority for this part of their work just as much as for the latter part. This fact is conclusive evidence that the critical theory evades the issue and is absolutely contrary to facts.

Since I have in this connection mentioned the false documentary theory of the composition of the Pentateuch, it might also be well to note the fact that Genesis refers to a primitive revelation which God made and which Abraham obeyed. It is found in 26:5; but, in order that the reader might see the connection, I will quote the first part of this chapter:

And there was a famine in the land, besides the first famine that was in the days of Abraham. And Isaac went unto Abimelech king of the Philistines, unto Gerar. 2 And Jehovah appeared unto him, and said, Go not down into Egypt; dwell in the land which I shall tell thee of: 3 sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee; for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these lands, and I will establish the oath which I sware unto Abraham thy father; 4 and I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these lands; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; 5 because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws" (Gen. 26:1-5).

According to verse 5, God told Isaac that Abraham, his father, had obeyed His voice, had kept His charge, His commandments, His statutes, and His laws. Let us remember that Abraham lived approximately 400 years prior to the days of Moses, through whom God gave the Law at Sinai. Nevertheless the Lord stated to Isaac


page 37

that his father had kept His commandments, statutes, and laws. Evidently He had given a primitive revelation, which was in effect at that time, and which Abraham obeyed. Who had those laws, statutes, and commandments? The order of the items of this verse gives a little hint. Abraham first obeyed God's voice and then kept His charge, His commandments, statutes, and laws.
Abraham was born into an idolatrous environment (Josh. 24:1, 2). God gave him a call to leave his father's house and the land of his nativity and to go to the land which He would afterwards show him (Gen. 12:1-3). In obedience to this challenge to separation, Abraham journeyed northward into Haran and thence, when his father was dead, down into Canaan and finally located at Hebron. The facts recorded in Genesis 14 throw quite a bit of light on this question. After he had rescued Lot, Abraham carne and paid tithes to Melchizedek, king of Salem, which was Jerusalem. At the same time he was also priest of God Most High. Being king of a petty city-state and priest, he evidently l1ad the law and the services together with the ritual of God Most High. Obviously the Lord called Abraham out of his heathen environment and brought him over into this kingdom of Melchizedek in which the statutes of God were the laws of the land. Being a subject in the kingdom of Melchizedek, he obeyed these laws of God and worshiped Him according to the ritual over which Melchizedek presided.
Since there was a primitive revelation-statutes, commandments, and laws-which God originally committed to men, and which Abraham obeyed, where are they today? No one can answer this question absolutely. They have not been preserved to us, so far as we know. It is quite likely that the Lord through Moses incorporated the abiding elements of the primitive code in the law which he delivered to Israel at Mount Sinai. Let me illustrate this principle. My native state of Tennessee came to statehood in 1796. At that time a constitution was drawn up and adopted. This commonwealth functioned under it as long as it met the needs. When, however, the state developed so that the old constitution was not sufficient, another one was drawn up and adopted by the legislature. Under this it is operating at the present time. Doubtless there were many of the original statutes in the old document which have been brought over and incorporated into the new, because of their universal application and their adaptability even to the newly developed situation. In all probability a like situation existed in those primitive times. In fact, we see various sacrifices and offer-

page 38

ings mentioned throughout the book of Genesis. In the Law delivered at Sinai a very elaborate, sacrificial ceremonialism was inaugurated. This doubtless consisted of much that was in this primitive revelation, and that was essential to make out the full message of the law.
We have already seen that Genesis 1-36 is the compilation of genealogies and histories which were attributed to Adam, Noah, Noah's sons, Shem, Terah, Ishmael and Isaac, and Esau and Jacob. These documents, as we have already noted, reflect most vividly and accurately the conditions of the times during which the authors lived. They were taken by one person and welded into a continuous narrative. The one doing this work, I have hitherto assumed, was Moses but a little below I shall give the positive reasons for this conviction.
In order to support or bolster up the claims of the documentary theory, those holding it refer to such passages as I Chronicles 29:29, 30:

"Now the acts of David the king, first and last, behold, they are written in the history of Samuel the seer, and in the history of Nathan the prophet, and in the history of Gad the seer, 30 with al1 his reign and his might, and the times that went over him, and over Israel, and over al1 the kingdoms of the countries."

The writers of Kings and Chronicles in summing up the reigns of certain sovereigns make statements to this effect: "Now the acts of Rehoboam, first and last, are they not written in the histories of Shemaiah the prophet and of Iddo the seer, after the manner of genealogies?" (II Chron. 12:15). These passages are relied upon to prove that the material constituting the present books of Kings and Chronicles was taken over en masse by the sacred writers, edited, and welded into continuous documents. In like manner, the books of the Torah, according to this theory, came to their present form. These quotations and similar ones when accepted at their face value do not in the least support the documentary theory. They simply tell us that the things recorded of those concerning whom the statements are made may be found in certain books which were extant in that day and time. In other words, this is simply a reference note showing where the reader could find confirmation of the things recorded. Histories today in connection with each chapter often give a list of reference works where the first-hand information may be gained, but the authors do not wish the reader to understand that they have simply taken certain earlier documents and patched them together into a hotchpotch of a literary narrative.

page 39

On the contrary, the compiler of Genesis has told us that he took primitive documents and welded them together, has shown us exactly where he made the connections and has given us the names of the authors, or the ones in whose possession they were originally or by whom they were handed down.
These original documents were written by inspired writers who were guided infallibly by the Spirit of God to record the events narrated. Moses, the inspired lawgiver of Israel, collected these primitive documents, the oracles of the Living God, and united them into one continuous whole. Hence we may take our stand positively on the proposition that Genesis 1:1-37:2 was infallibly inspired by the Spirit of God in every detail and that every word is correct and accurate. Hence we can depend upon each statement therein contained.
All the Biblical writers in referring to the Scriptures written prior to their day as a rule are very accurate in ascribing a quotation to a given writer. This practice is seen throughout the Bible. For instance, various prophets and apostles in referring to Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy attribute certain statements to Moses, the servant of God, but in quoting the book of Genesis they never say that Moses spoke or wrote it. The reason is obvious; namely, that he did not do it originally, but simply took inspired records and, by the guidance of the Spirit, combined them into one continuous, glorious revelation.
Thus far I have assumed that Moses was the compiler, honored of God, to combine preexisting, primitive revelations into one continuous whole. Now let us investigate this question more thoroughly. There are four cogent reasons for believing that Moses was the compiler of the former revelations and the author of the last fourteen chapters of the book of Genesis. On this point I wish to quote from Commander Wiseman:

"What internal evidence then have we of the connection of Moses with the Book? In the first place, there is the obvious unity of plan which it presents. Secondly, there is the authorship of the story of Joseph in Egypt. Moses was learned in all the arts of the Egyptians, and his acquaintance with literature and the ability to write it was perhaps the greatest. He was born sixty-four years after Joseph had died. Joseph may have written a great part of hig story, but we are not told that he did so, for there is no such phrase as, 'These are the origins of Joseph,' at the end of Genesis. Besides, in this instance Joseph's death and embalming are recorded, and he would not have written that. The whole of the story contains numerous Egyptian expressions, and shows an exact acquaintance with Egyptian customs. Every indication points to Moses as the writer of the narrative. Thirdly, there are the 'notes' and 'explanations' made by a compiler. These (as we have seen in Chapter VI) fit in exactly with the

page 40

circumstances of a people on the edge of the Promised land, for whom Moses was writing. The fourth piece of evidence is that the Book of Exodus commences just where Genesis leaves off, and is unintelligible without the explanation, given in Genesis, of the circumstances leading up to the state of affairs with which it opens."

In view of these four most cogent and powerful reasons, I am convinced that Moses was the servant, honored of God, to gather these primitive revelations, to weld them into one document, and to write the history of Joseph and the narrative of Israel's deliverance from Egyptian bondage and of the giving of the Law and ritual at Sinai.
Conservative scholars call attention generally to the fact that Moses was the author of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy and say very little about his connection with Genesis. They seem to assume that he wrote it because his name is connected with it and because the first five Books are called "The Books of Moses." On this point Wiseman states, "Doubtless the reason why most have hesitated to say that he received the whole as we have it, as a direct revelation from God on Mount Sinai, is a very sufficient one, that he himself omits to say that he did so, and surely had he so received it, Moses would have stated the fact, just as he so constantly does in Exodus to Deuteronomy." Since he repeatedly stated that he received a revelation from God which he wrote down in Exodus to Deuteronomy, since he does not say one word as to his having received directly from God the revelation found in Genesis, and since all five books are spoken of as the Law of Moses, we naturally conclude that his relationship to the book of Genesis is different from that which he bore to the other four. In the light of all the facts which we have studied thus far, we see that this relationship to the first thirty-six chapters of Genesis was in the nature of the inspired editor who welded the previous revelations into a continuous narrative as an introduction to the oracles which he received directly from God both at Sinai and during the wilderness journeyings, and which terminated with the repetition of the Law, the book of Deuteronomy, received in the plains of Moab east of Jordan.
Possibly the reader is wondering why believing scholars have not called attention to the nature of the book of Genesis as here set forth. If this position is true, a number of outstanding conservative scholars have told us that Genesis was originally written on clay tablets but have not given us the information explaining in detail its composition. As to the reason why these experts have not given

page 41

us this information, I wish to quote from Commander Wiseman again:

"There have been so many eminent scholars who have suggested, and some who have asserted, that Moses used previously written documents from which he compiled Genesis, but none, so far as I am aware, have even suggested the precise nature and contents of the document which came into his possession, notwithstanding the fact this information is given in Genesis. There are three reasons for this: firstly, it is due, as we have seen in Chapter V, to a misunderstanding of the use of the phrase, 'These are the generations (or origins) of. . . " and secondly, to a lack of acquaintance with or oversight of the literary methods in use in the times of Genesis or a failure to apply these to the Book. These methods, such as dating, catch lines, titles, and colophons, are rarely referred to except in technical archaeological works. Thirdly, it is due to acquiescence in the now obsolete, but commonly accepted, opinion of the conservative school, that the contents of Genesis were handed down to Moses by word of mouth, and the long ages to which the pre-Flood Patriarchs lived is emphasized to show that oral transmission as far as Abraham would have entailed the narratives and genealogies passing through but few memories. There is nothing whatever in Genesis, or elsewhere, to support this opinion of an oral transmission, but it would seem that it was not possible until the results of the past few years' excavations had become known, to read such a verse as chapter v. 1, 'This is the book (tablet) of . . . " as though it could mean precisely what it says. This oral transmission theory originated at a time when men were unacquainted with the facts concerning the early development of writing."

In view of the fact that archaeology has proved beyond a shade of a doubt that writing dates back to the beginning of the human race and in view of the further fact that records were kept of historical events, we must discard the obsolete theory that tradition concerning the creation of the world and man together with the history of the early patriarchs was transmitted from generation to generation by word of mouth. Moses did not collect floating stories and legends, as is usually supposed by some scholars, for he himself gives us the exact data as to the sources of his information, which he declares to have been written records, historical accounts in the possession of certain patriarchs of the theocratic line. These accounts, beginning from the dawn of creation, continued to increase in number as Noah, his sons, Shem, Ishmael and Isaac, and Esau and Jacob added their tablets to the collection. On the transmission of these precious documents from one generation to another and their being brought together into one collection, let us see the graphic way in which Wiseman presents the case:

"How did these tablets get into the hands of Moses? They contain records from the creation of man to his own birth. We have seen that the tablet of Creation was in the possession of the sons of Adam, and we find that the record of the Garden and the Fall had been written by their time. These would descend to Noah, for we notice that in his own tablet (ch. v. 29) he makes a reference, chapter iii, 17, to Adam's account. Noah added the genealogical list

page 42
 
contained in chapter v. Already several cuneiform tablets bearing some resemblance to this chapter have been found; they refer to ten men who 'ruled before the Flood.' Noah's tablet is simple and straightforward compared with these, and the ages given not a tenth of those stated in the Babylonian tablets. Noah also adds a short statement regarding the corruption existing in the world in his day. His sons, we are informed in Genesis, wrote the account of the Flood, Shem, the genealogical list which now occupies chapter x, and also the brief description of the building of the Tower of Babel. Thus we see how Noah, possessing Tablet I (The Creation) and Tablet II (The Fall), would pass these on to Shem, together with his own tablet, and as Shem already had the tablets relating to the Flood, these, including his own (Genesis x, and the Tower of Babel), would naturally pass down to Abraham with the genealogical tablet written by his father Terah, thus to him were committed these ancient 'oracles of God,' now Genesis i to xi, 27."*

4. THE CONNECTIONS WELDING THE SERIES OF TABLETS INTO A SINGLE LITERARY UNIT

Having seen that the first thirty-six chapters of Genesis consist of the oracles of God written by some of the leading patriarchs in the theocratic line, we will now give our attention to the question of the transmission and preservation of these various tablet~ from one generation to another until they came into the hands of Moses, the servant of God, inspired by the Spirit to weld these primitive oracles into one continuous narrative. In order to do this thing, we shall have to notice how these tablets are connected.
----

* Since writing was prevalent from the dawn of history; i. e., from the Creation of man and since, as we learn from the clay tablets of Babylonia, many documents were copied, we may be absolutely certain that these sacred tablets were copied by interested people. That such is true is evident from the fact that we have the "seven tablets of Creation" and the tablets relating to the Flood, known as the Gilgamesh tales. These Babylonian accounts are evidently the outgrowth of copies that were made of the original. When men refused to retain God in their knowledge, He gave them over to a reprobate mind to do those things that were unseemly and absolutely sinful. Their minds became darkened. Their perverted imaginations began to work; philosophies sprang up; various cults and religious systems came into being, and speculations in every sphere became the order of the day. Hence there was injected into these copies of the true tablets, strange, weird, mythical, and idolatrous elements. Although these foreign additions all but covered up the originals, yet the faint outlines of the true copies are discernible underneath the rubbish of pagan myths and legends. All of these accounts when stripped of their legendary and pagan elements are recognized as copies of the original. Wherever there are counterfeits, we may be certain there is an original. We are told by the critics that the Biblical writers copied from the Babylonian legends; then stripped from them all mystical, legendary, and polytheistic ideas, thus giving us the majestic account which we have in the form of the Holy Scriptures. No evidence which we have bears out such a theory but all of the facts which have been discussed in this section thus far prove that the originals which we have embedded in the text of Genesis were copied and corrupted by later generations.

page 43

As stated before, we learn from the cuneiform tablets that there were several literary aids or devices whereby a series of tablets were connected. The methods employed were the repetition of the title of the document, the catchword and catch line, and the colophon consisting of the name of the writer and usually of the date together with other relevant material. The title consisted usually of the first word or words of the initial tablet, which were repeated at the beginning of each succeeding tablet. The catch-line or words appearing at the end of a given tablet were repeated at the beginning of the next one in order to indicate that these tablets were in serial order. Finally, the colophon consisting of the signature of the scribe or author together with the date was placed at the bottom of the tablets constituting the series and sometimes only at the end of the last of the set.
As an illustration of the use of the first few words of the book as its title, I wish to call attention to the book of Genesis in the Hebrew Bible which is called Bereshith, the first word of the Book, and is printed at the top of every page of Genesis. The same thing is true of the rest of the books of the Hebrew Bible. In modern volumes the title of a given chapter is usually placed at the top of the right-hand page. At the top of the left-hand page, the title of the book appears. Of course, there are some variations from this well-established order, but I am calling attention to this practice only to show that we preserve even in modern books a remnant of the method employed by the ancients.
The first tablet in the oracles of God consists of Genesis 1:1-2:3. At the conclusion of this majestic account Moses gives us the statement that "These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth" and concludes his sentence by saying "in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven." Let the reader note the fact that in the first verse of the passage our attention is called to the fact that God created the heavens and the earth. In order to weld the second tablet with the first one, Adam adopted the method of the use of the catch line by calling our attention to the fact that "the Lord God made earth and heaven." This is a repetition of the first line and since it is used after our regular formula to introduce the second chapter and since it uses the same words that appear as the first statement of the first tablet we are absolutely certain that this was used to connect the first two documents. An examination of the methods employed by the scribes to connect a series of docu-

page 44
 
ments which they copied illustrates that which was used by the writer of the second document,  that is called the tablet of Adam. Adam having this original tablet, giving the account of the creation of the heavens and the earth, thus tied his tablet to the one which God had given him by repeating the statement that the Lord God made earth and heaven. This fact shows that it was Adam's purpose to add his tablet (2:4-4:26) to the first one in beginning a series of these primitive Oracles of God.