TEE UNITY OF GENESIS. 



335 



which we discover in the book is really the design of one 

 particular writer."* 



Let us now test the value of the combination proposed hy the 

 learned commentator, leaving aside all philological arguments 

 which, as we shall see further, are out of question, and weighing 

 the system against the character of the book, its purpose and 

 the historical circumstances in which it must have been written. 

 The plan determines the position of Israel among the nations of 

 the world, the book relates the origin of the covenant which is 

 the raison d'Stre of Israel's existence. If they are faithful to 

 the covenant, their number will be like that of the stars, and 

 they will possess as an inheritance the land of Canaan. Who 

 could draw these precise lines, and who had the necessary 

 authority to hold this language ? I have no hesitation in 

 saying : one man only, Moses, the man who was put at the 

 head of Israel, when out of a single family it had developed 

 into a nation, the leader who took them out of Egypt, who was 

 at their head during their wanderings in the wilderness, who 

 gave them their laws, and who was taken from them when they 

 were on the threshold of the Land of Promise. 



Not only was he the only man in position to devise this 

 definite plan, but the plan was the sanction given to his works 

 and to his words. He kept in view the promise made to the 

 forefathers : he had to remain faithful to the covenant, and to 

 carry it out, whatever might be the murmurs and the opposition 

 of the people who were under his command. When the laws 

 of the Pentateuch were put in writing, they had to be prefaced 

 by Genesis, because there only could the Israelites learn who 

 they were and what was their special mission in the world. 

 Moses alone could leave them this record, which was necessary, 

 for otherwise they might easily have forgotten their origin and 

 the duties which they had to fulfil. 



Now let us turn to Professor Skinner's theory. It seems hardly 

 possible that such a plan could have been designed by the 

 writer to whom it is attributed. This author is supposed to be 

 the redactor who lived probably in the fourth century, a man 

 absolutely unknown. Was his abode in Palestine ; did he 

 share the trials which his countrymen had to endure at the 

 hand of Alexander or his successors, or had he followed the 

 example of many of his countrymen : had he taken refuge on 

 the banks of the Nile ? And what reason could he have for 



* Genesis, IntrocL, p. xxxii. 



