DEUTERONOMY
tions.
Political
events
helped
them.
The
fall
of
N.
Israel
(B.C.
722)
carried
with
it
the
condemnation
of
the
worship
which
was
practised
there,
and
swept
away
the
worshippers
who
were
attached
to
it.
The
deliverance
of
Jerusalem
from
Sennacherib
threw
a
glory
round
the
sanctuary
of
which
Jahweh
had
so
signally
vindicated
the
inviolability.
Probably
a
body
of
reformers
framed
their
code
in
Hezekiah's
later
years.
They
did
not
create
a
new
legislation,
they
recast
and
put
a
new
spirit
into
an
older
code.
It
would
have
been
impossible
to
secure
the
acceptance
of
a
brand-new
code
from
a
whole
people.
ESForts
have
been
made
to
break
up
Dt
5-26
into
several
sections,
and
to
trace
their
origin.
These
have
not
been
very
convincing:
they
have
rehed
too
much
on
a
proof
of
difference
of
origin
derived
from
the
use
of
the
singular
or
the
plural
number
in
forms
of
address
to
the
people.
But
they
have
proved
that
older
elements
and
varied
elements
have
been
fused
together
into
this
Law-book.
Under
Manasseh
there
followed
a
strong
reaction,
which
resorted
even
to
persecution.
The
reformers'
Law-book
was
forgotten,
the
reformers
themselves
may
have
been
martyred.
But
the
code
itself
survived
to
be
discovered
under
Josiah,
and
to
become
the
basis
of
a
pregnant
reform.
Opinion
is
divided
as
to
whether
chs.
1-3
are
by
the
hand
which
wrote
the
main
work.
The
fact
that
In
ll^f-
Moses
is
represented
as
speaking
to
men
who
had
witnessed
the
Exodus,
while
in
2»<*-
that
generation
is
represented
as
dead,
seems
decisive
that
they
are
not.
The
chapters
may
have
been
added
as
an
historical
introduction
to
a
separate
edition
of
the
code.
The
fact
that
their
history
is
based
on
JE
proves
that
this
must
have
been
early.
Chapters
4>-<"
29
f.
belong
together,
and
are
a
later
addition
in
view
of
new
circumstances,
viz.,
the
prospect
or
the
reality
of
exile.
The
Song
(32'-^'),
with
its
double
introduction
(3Ha-!2.
30)
and
close
(32"),
is
a
didactic
poem,
giving
an
interpretation
of
Israel's
entire
iiistory,
and
bearing
traces
of
influence
from
the
Wisdom
literature.
It
may
date
from
the
7th
cent,
or
the
Exile.
The
Blessing
(ch.
33)
dates
from
a
time
when
N.
Israel
in
the
flush
of
its
vigour
could
anticipate
further
conquests
(v."),
since
Eastern
Israel
had
regained
part
of
its
lost
territory
(v.^").
It
may
belong
to
the
reign
of
Jeroboam
ii.
(b.c.
782-43),
by
whom
the
Syrians
of
Damascus
were
defeated.
Ch.
27
is
difficult
to
assign.
It
evidently
breaks
the
connexion
of
26
and
28,
and
as
evidently
is
composite.
The
Levites
in
v.'*^-
carry
out
what
in
v}^-
the
tribes
are
commissioned
to
do,
and
there
are
no
blessings
uttered
at
all.
'There
may
be
early
elements
in
v.^-,
but
it
is
best
to
confess
that
the
chapter
is
still
a
crux.
2.
Main
principles.
—
(a)
The
fundamental
principle
of
the
book
is
the
unily
of
Jahweh,
who
is
God
of
the
whole
earth
(10"),
and
who
is
more
than
the
God
of
Israel,
since
He
has
relations
to
other
nations
apart
from
their
relations
to
Israel
(9*
123').
This
carries
with
it
the
consequence
that
idolatry
is
the
supreme
sin
(6"
172^-
etc.).
To
avoid
even
the
possibiUty
of
such
a
crime,
intercourse
with
other
nations
is
severely
restrained
(7"'-
etc.),
and
older
customs
of
worship
are
forbidden
(162'
etc.).
—
(6)
As
He
is
God
of
the
whole
earth,
Jahweh's
will
is
the
moral
law,
and
in
connexion
with
its
requirements
He
rewards
and
punishes
(cf.
the
teaching
of
Amos).
As
God
of
Israel,
the
fundamental
principles
of
His
relation
to
His
people
are
also
ethical.
—
(c)
Yet
Jahweh
is
not
merely
a
Ufeless
moral
principle
or
glorified
code.
His
love
to
His
people
was
shown,
before
they
could
prove
any
desert
(9"-
etc.).
He
gave
them
their
land
—
a
gift
they
must
not
imagine
them-selves
to
have
merited
(8™).
Hence
love
is
the
supreme
return
for
His
love
(6"-
etc.,
and
cf.
Hosea).
Hence
also
there
is
room
for
worship
and
for
prayer.
Their
cult,
an
expression
of
their
loving
gratitude,
is
to
be
joyous
in
character,
not
like
the
darker
superstitions
to
which
DEVIL
national
disaster
and
foreign
rites
were
making
them
in-cUne
(12"
etc.).
—
(d)
A
religion,
the
heart
of
which
is
loving
gratitude,
naturally
expresses
itself
in
humanitv
towards
all
with
whom
men
live,
and
even
towards
the
lower
animals
(22"-
etc.
»'•
etc.).
A
religion
also
with
so
strong
a
sense
of
the
Divine
personality
brings
with
it
respect
for
human
personality
(24ii").
—
(c)
As
personal
and
loving,
Jahweh
can
and
does
rexieal
Him-self.
Through
His
self-revelation
He
is
the
historic
God
of
Israel.
This
is
emphasized
in
contrast
with
the
baalim
,
who,
as
gods
of
Canaan,
had
no
historic
connexion
with
Israel.
Jahweh
has
made
known
Himself
and
His
will
by
the
deeds
He
has
wrought
for
and
among
His
people.
(Hence
it
was
a
right
instinct
which
led
to
the
addition
of
chs.
1-3
with
their
record
of
Jahweh's
past
guidance.)
—
(/)
This
element
enters
now
into
the
cult.
It
gives
fresh
historic
associafions
to
the
national
festivals
and
weds
them
to
the
great
events
of
their
past.
See
especially
ch.
26,
where
all
Israel's
past
is
made
to
enter
into
the
worship
of
the
individual
Israelite,
and
where
also
emphasis
is
laid
on
the
truth
that
the
fruits
of
the
land
are
not
from
the
baalim,
but
from
Jahweh's
bounty
(cf.
Hos
2').
—
(ff)
Such
a
religion,
with
its
strong
sense
of
the
historic
unity
of
God's
dealings
with
His
nation,
and
its
conviction
of
the
reasonableness
of
God's
demands,
can
and
ought
to
be
taught.
Children
are
to
have
it
explained
to
them
(66f.
11");
and
means
are
to
be
used
to
bring
it
to
men's
thoughts
daily
(6'
ll^").
Most
of
the
outward
observances
are
thus
brought
into
connexion
with
great
vivifying
principles,
so
that
this
code
becomes
the
finest
illustration
of
an
effort
made
to
bring
religious
principles
home
to
a
nation
in
its
entire
work
and
life.
A.
C.
Welch.
DEVIL.
—
The
word
came
into
English
from
Greek
either
directly
or
through
its
Latin
transliteration.
Used
with
the
definite
article,
its
original
meaning
was
that
of
the
accuser
or
traducer
of
men
(see
Satan),
whence
it
soon
came
to
denote
the
supreme
spirit
of
evil,
the
personal
tempter
of
man
and
enemy
of
God.
With
the
indefinite
article
it
stands
for
a
malignant
being
of
superhuman
nature
and
powers,
and
represents
the
conception
expressed
by
the
Greeks
in
the
original
of
our
term
'
demon.'
At
first
the
idea
of
malignancy
was
not
necessarily
associated
with
these
beings,
some
being
regarded
as
harmless
and
others
as
wielding
even
benign
influence;
but
gradually
they
were
considered
as
operating
exclusively
in
the
sphere
of
mischief,
and
as
needing
to
be
guarded
against
by
magic
rites
or
religious
observances.
1.
Earlier
conceptions.
—
Jewish
demonology
must
be
traced
back
to
primitive
and
pre-Mosaic
times,
when
both
a
form
of
animism
was
present
in
a
belief
in
the
ill-disposed
activity
of
the
spirits
of
the
dead,
and
a
variety
of
places
and
objects
were
supposed
to
be
rendered
sacred
by
the
occupation,
permanent
or
temporary,
of
some
superhuman
power.
Of
these
views
only
traces
are
to
be
found
in
the
earliest
parts
of
Scripture,
and
the
riper
development
of
later
ages
may
fairly
be
ascribed
to
foreign,
and
especially
Bab.
and
Greek,
influences.
That
certain
animals
were
believed
to
be
endowed
with
demonic
power
appears
from
Gn
3>-«,
though
here
the
serpent
itself
is
repre-sented
as
demonic,
and
not
yet
as
possessed
by
an
evil
spirit
(Wis
2«,
Ro
!&").
So
with
the
'he-goats'
or
satyrs
(Lv
17',
2
Ch
lli«.
Is
13"
34"),
which
were
evidently
regarded
as
a
kind
of
demon,
though
without
the
rich
accompaniments
of
the
Greek
conception.
Their
home
was
the
open
field
or
wilderness,
where
Azazel
was
supposed
to
dwell
(Lv
16"),
and
whither
one
of
the
birds
used
in
cleansing
cases
of
leprosy
was
let
go
to
carry
back
the
disease
(Lv
14'-
•»).
On
the
contrary,
the
roes
and
the
hinds
of
the
field
(Ca
2'
3^)
seem
to
have
been
thought
of
as
faun-like
spirits,
for
whose
aid
a
lover
might
hopefully
plead.
Under
Bab.
in-fluence
the
spirit
was
conceived
as
abstracted
from
any
