120 



PROFESSOR JAMES ORR, D.D., ON THE 



Again, when the wisdom and power of Moses is considered, can we 

 do better than follow the Hebrew record with its statement that 

 the law-giver received instruction from God, and that those that 

 executed his commands shared a like enduement from Heaven 1 

 As we read, everything was done " according to the pattern, shown 

 in the mount." 



In a word, Criticism cannot " have it both ways," either with 

 regard to the people of Israel, or to Moses "the man of God." 

 Ark, Tabernacle, and people go together, and Moses occupies the 

 central place. No other nation of antiquity had such a deliverance, 

 such a leader, such institutions. The history presented by the Old 

 Testament documents is one that throbs with the acts of men, and 

 tells of the over-ruling power of God, neither of which factors have 

 due representation in the processes of Criticism, which, in separating 

 itself from history in its most simple expression, yields, as might be 

 supposed, results that are discordant in themselves and mutually 

 destructive. 



Sir Robert Anderson, K.C.B., said : The tent of meeting, which 

 wc all mean Avhen we speak of " The Tabernacle," never stood out- 

 side the camp. On account of the apostasy of the golden calf, 

 which occurred v/hile Moses was on the mount receiving instructions 

 to make the Tabernacle, he pitched the then tent of meeting outside 

 the camp. But when the Tabernacle was made, it was dedicated by 

 blood-shedding, and placed in the middle of the camp, a position 

 which it occupied ever afterwards. 



" The historicity of the Tabernacle " is a question to be decided 

 by evidence ; and questions of the kind should be left to men who 

 have practical experience in dealing with evidence — a category which 

 does not include the Critics. Indeed if the matter were not so 

 serious and so solemn, the methods of the Critics might amuse us. 

 Any clever nisi prius lawyer could do their work better and make 

 a stronger case against the Bible. But those of us who have been 

 accustomed to attend the Law Courts know how little that sort of 

 talk weighs with sensible men. 



One word more. I think that in dealing with this question we 

 should not forget the testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ. For 

 with the Christian the Lord's testimony to the " historicit}^ " of the 

 Pentateuch is an end of controversy. One is amazed at the blindness 

 of the Critics in ignoring the fact that it was after the Resurrection 



