- 140-
And as we derive our knowledge of it from the pages of Jeremiah, we bear in mind that
the beginning of his prophetic activity, in the thirteenth year of Josiah (Jeremiah 1:2),
synchronized with the commencement of the reformatory movement. Thus we further
understand why the changes inaugurated, however extensive, could not avert, as the
prophetess Huldah announced, the Divine judgment from the nation, but only from their
king (2 Kings 22:14-20). A reformation such as this could be but transient, and the people
hastened only the more rapidly to their final apostasy.
It was during the extensive repairs in the Temple that a discovery was made of the
greatest influence on the movement about to begin, and which has, especially of late,
been connected with some important critical questions regarding the Pentateuch. As we
read in Holy Scripture, the high priest Hilkiah informed "Shaphan the Scribe," that he had
"found the book of the law (in 2 Chronicles 34:14: "the book of the law of the LORD, by
the hand of Moses") in the house of the LORD" (2 Kings 22:8). This book Hilkiah gave
to Shaphan. Its perusal led Shaphan not only to inform the king of it, but to read the book
to him. On this Josiah "rent his clothes," in token of mourning for the guilt which Israel
had incurred in their long absolute breach of its commandments.
Into the complicated questions, What was the exact compass of this special book
(whether it comprised the whole Pentateuch, or what parts of it), and again, What was the
date of this copy, and how it came to be found in the Temple - the present is not the place
to enter. On some points, however, all sober-minded and reverent inquirers will be at one.
Assuredly the finding of the book was not a fraud on the part of Hilkiah,* nor yet the
book itself a forgery, either by Hilkiah or any priest or prophet of that or the immediately
preceding period.
- Comp. here even the emphatic language of Ewald (Gesch. d. V. Isr. III, p. 754). See
also Kautzsch in Herzog's Real Encykl. VII., p. 119. We refer the more readily to these
critics that their views in regard to this "book of the Law" widely differ from those
expressed in this History.
Assuming, as there is every reason to do, that certainly it contained the Book of
Deuteronomy, and probably also other portions, if not the whole, of the Law,* we cannot
imagine any reasonable motive on the part of the priesthood, and still less of the prophets,
for the invention of such a book.**
- Most German writers regard it as comprising Deuteronomy, or the parts of the
Pentateuch which they designate as the work of the Deuteronomist. But this is not the
place for critical discussions, and we have only generally indicated in the text the
differing views propounded.
** See Kautzsch, u.s.
(^)