Modern Judaism, that is, the religious and social life of the Jewish people, since they fairly entered into the current of modern history, has been marked by many strong and characteristic peculiarities. They have been zealously and almost fanatically attached to the idea of one Supreme God, Jehovah, with whom they had a special covenant inherited from Abraham, and whose will, in regard to all religious rites and ceremonies and social usages, was conveyed to them in a sacred book containing the inspired writings of Moses and the Prophets. This led them to consider themselves a peculiar people, and to regard all other nations with aversion, as being idolaters and unclean, feelings which were returned by the rest of the world, so that they stood alone, hating and being hated. No force or persuasion were required in order to prevent them from lapsing into idolatry or intermarrying with heathen women. On the contrary, they were inspired to the most heroic efforts, and ready to endure the severest sufferings and martyrdom for the pure faith. The belief in the sacred character of their ancient writings gradually crystallized into a faith as absolute as that of the Moslems in the Koran; a canon was formed, and although, as we have seen in the case of the Chronicles and Psalms, some time must have elapsed before this sacred character was fully recognized, it ended in a theory of the literal inspiration of every word of the Old Testament down even to the commas and vowel points, and the establishment of learned schools of Scribes and Pharisees, whose literary labours were concentrated on expounding the text in synagogues, and writing volumes of Talmudic commentaries.
Now during the period preceding the Exile all this was very different. So far from being zealous for one Supreme God, Jehovah was long recognized only as a tribal or national god, one among the many gods of surrounding nations. When the idea of a Supreme Deity, who loved justice and mercy better than the blood of bullocks and rams, was at length elaborated by the later prophets, it received but scant acceptance. The great majority of the kings and people, both of Judah and Israel, were always ready to lapse into idolatry, worship strange gods, golden calves, and brazen serpents, and flock to the alluring rites of Baal and Astarte, in groves and high places. They were also always ready to intermarry freely with heathen wives, and to form political alliances with heathen nations. There is no trace of the religious and social repulsion towards other races which forms such a marked trait in modern Judaism. Nor, as we shall see presently, is there any evidence, prior to the reign of Josiah, of anything like a sacred book or code of divine laws, universally known and accepted. The Books of Nehemiah and Ezra afford invaluable evidence of the time and manner in which this modern Judaism was stamped upon the character of the people after the return from exile. We are told that when Ezra came to Jerusalem from Babylon, armed with a decree of Artaxerxes, he was scandalized at finding that nearly all the Jews, including the principal nobles and many priests and Levites, had intermarried with the daughters of the people of the land, "of the Canaanites, Hittites, Perizzites, Jebusites, Ammonites, Moabites, Egyptians, and Amorites." Backed by Nehemiah, the cup-bearer and favourite of Artaxerxes, who had been appointed governor of Jerusalem, he persuaded or compelled the Jews to put away these wives and their children, and to separate themselves as a peculiar and exclusive people from other nations.
It was a cruel act, characteristic of the fanatical spirit of priestly domination, which never hesitates to trample on the natural affections and the laws of charity and mercy, but it was the means of crystallizing the Jewish race into a mould so rigid, that it defied wars, persecutions, and all dissolving influences, and preserved the idea of Monotheism to grow up into the world-wide religions of Christianity and Mahometanism, So true is it that evolution works out its results by unexpected means often opposed to what seem like the best instincts of human nature.
What is important, however, for the present object is, to observe that clearly at this date the population of the Holy Land must have consisted mainly of the descendants of the old races, who had been conquered but not exterminated by the Israelites. Such a sentence as, "for the Canaanites were then in the land," could not have been written till long after the time when the Jews were intermarrying freely with Canaanite wives. Nor does it seem possible that codes, such as those of Leviticus, Numbers, and the Priests' Code, could have been generally known and accepted as sacred books written by Moses under Divine inspiration, when the rulers, nobles, and even priests and Levites acted in such apparent ignorance of them. In fact we are told in Nehemiah that Ezra read and explained the Book of the Law, whatever that may have included, to the people, who apparently had no previous knowledge of it.
By far the most important landmark, however, in the history of the Old Testament, is afforded by the account in 2 Kings xxii. and xxiii. of the discovery of the Book of the Law in the Temple in the eighteenth year of the reign of Josiah. It says that Shaphan the scribe, having been sent by the king to Hilkiah the high priest, to obtain an account of the silver collected from the people for the repairs of the Temple, Hilkiah told him that he had "found the Book of the Law in the house of the Lord." Shaphan brought it to the king and read it to him; whereupon Josiah, in great consternation at finding that so many of its injunctions had been violated, and that such dreadful penalties were threatened, rent his clothes, and being confirmed in his fears by Huldah the prophetess, proceeded to take stringent measures to stamp out idolatry, which, from the account given in 2 Kings xxiii., seems to have been almost universal. We read of vessels consecrated to Baal and to the host of heaven in the Temple itself, and of horses and chariots of the Sun at its entrance; of idolatrous priests who had been ordained by the kings of Judah to burn incense "unto Baal, to the Sun, and to the Moon, and to the planets, and to all the host of heaven"; and of high places close to Jerusalem, with groves, images, and altars, which had been built by Solomon to Ashtaroth, the goddess of the Sidonians, Chemosh the god of the Moabites, and Milcom the god of the Ammonites, and had apparently remained undisturbed and places of popular worship ever since the time of Solomon.
On any ordinary principles of criticism it is impossible to doubt that, if this narrative is correct, there could have been no previous Book of the Law in existence, and generally recognized as a sacred volume written by Divine inspiration. When even such a great and wise king as Solomon could establish such a system of idolatry, and pious kings like Hezekiah, and Josiah during the first eighteen years of his reign, could allow it to continue, there could have been no knowledge that it was in direct contravention of the most essential precepts of a sacred law dictated by Jehovah to Moses. It is generally admitted by critics that the Book of the Law discovered by Hilkiah was Deuteronomy, or rather perhaps an earlier or shorter original of the Deuteronomy which has come down to us, and which had already been re-edited with additions after the Exile. The title "Deuteronomy," which might seem to imply that it was a supplement to an earlier law, is taken, like the other headings of the books of the Old Testament in our Bible, from the Septuagint version, and in the original Hebrew the heading is "the Book of the Law." The internal evidence points also to Deuteronomy, as placing the threats of punishment and promises of reward mainly on moral grounds, and in the spirit of the later prophets, such as Isaiah, who lived shortly before the discovery of the book by Hilkiah. And it is apparent that when Deuteronomy was written, the Priests' Code, which forms such an important part of the other books of the Pentateuch, could not have been known, as so many of the ceremonial rites and usages are clearly inconsistent with it.
It is not to be inferred that there were no writings in existence before the reign of Josiah. Doubtless annals had been kept of the principal events of each reign from the foundation of the monarchy, and many of the old legends and traditions of the race had been collected and reduced to writing during the period from Solomon to the later kings.
The Priests' Code also, though of later date in its complete form, was doubtless not an invention of any single priest, but a compilation of usages, some of which had long existed, while others had grown up in connection with the Second Temple after the return from exile. So also the civil and social legislation was not a code promulgated, like the Code Napoleon, by any one monarch or high priest, but a compilation from usages and precedents which had come to be received as having an established authority. But what is plainly inconsistent with the account of the discovery of the Book of the Law in the reign of Josiah, is the supposition that there had been, in long previous existence, a collection of sacred books, recognized as a Bible or work of Divine inspiration, as the Old Testament came to be among the Jews of the first or second century b.c.
It is to be observed that among early nations, such historical annals and legislative enactments never form the first stratum of a sacred literature, which consists invariably of hymns, prayers, ceremonial rites, and astronomical or astrological myths. Thus the Rig Veda of the Hindoos, the early portions of the Vendedad of the Iranians, the Book of the Dead of the Egyptians, and the penitential psalms and invocations of the Chaldæans formed the oldest sacred books, about which codes and commentaries, and in some cases historical allusions and biographies, gradually accumulated, though never attaining to quite an equal authority.
There is abundant internal evidence in the books of the Old Testament which profess to be older than the reign of Josiah, to show that they are in great part, at any rate, of later compilation, and could not have been recognized as the sacred Thora or Bible of the nation. To take a single instance, that of Solomon. Is it conceivable that this greatest and wisest of kings, who had held personal commune with Jehovah, and who knew everything down to the hyssop on the wall, could have been ignorant of such a sacred book if it had been in existence? And if he had known it, or even the Decalogue, is it conceivable that he should have totally ignored its first and fundamental precepts, "Thou shalt have no other gods but me," and "thou shalt not make unto thyself any graven image"? Could uxoriousness, divided among 700 wives, have turned the heart of such a monarch so completely as to make him worship Ashtaroth and Milcom, and build high places for Chemosh and Moloch? And could he have done this without the opposition, and apparently with the approval, of the priests and the people? And again, could these high places and altars and vessels dedicated to Baal and the host of heaven have been allowed to remain in the Temple, down to the eighteenth year of Josiah, Under a succession of kings several of whom were reputed to be pious servants of Jehovah? And the idolatrous tendencies of the ten tribes of Israel, who formed the majority of the Hebrew race, and had a common history and traditions, are even more apparent.