The question of how Moses could have written the book of Deuteronomy, which records his own death, is an interesting one. Here is a 9000 word examination of what the Bible tells us about this topic:
The book of Deuteronomy consists mainly of three lengthy speeches or sermons given by Moses to the Israelites before they entered the Promised Land. The first speech reviews the 40 years of wilderness wanderings. The second speech reiterates the Ten Commandments and presents the core laws of the covenant. The third speech warns the people to remain faithful to God. The setting is on the plains of Moab, as the Israelites prepared to cross the Jordan River into Canaan.
In Deuteronomy 31:9, we read that “Moses wrote this law and gave it to the priests.” This seems to imply that Moses wrote at least the core section of laws in Deuteronomy. In Deuteronomy 31:22, God tells Moses “Write this song and teach it to the Israelites,” referring to the Song of Moses which follows in chapter 32. This indicates that Moses wrote this song and delivered it to the Israelites.
In Deuteronomy 31:24-26, there is another reference to Moses writing “the words of this law in a book” which was placed beside the Ark of the Covenant. Some scholars believe this statement refers to the entire book of Deuteronomy up to that point. So Moses seems to be presented as the author of the first 30 chapters of Deuteronomy.
The difficulty arises when we get to the account of Moses’ death and burial in Deuteronomy 34. “Then Moses climbed Mount Nebo…There the LORD showed him the whole land…And Moses the servant of the LORD died there…He buried him in Moab.” (Deuteronomy 34:1,5,6). Obviously, Moses did not write about his own death, since he was already dead when it occurred.
There are several possible explanations for this:
1. Moses wrote the first 30 chapters of Deuteronomy before his death, and Joshua or a later editor added chapter 34 after Moses died. This view suggests that Moses was the primary author of Deuteronomy but that a later writer added a few comments to complete the book.
2. The entire book was written by a secretary or scribe under Moses’ supervision during his lifetime. In this view, Moses authorized and approved the material that went out under his name, similar to how political leaders today have speechwriters who write speeches while striving to maintain the leader’s voice and perspective.
3. The entire book was written by someone after Moses’ death, but was written as from his perspective and with his authority. This would be similar to how the books of 1 and 2 Chronicles were written after the deaths of the kings they describe, but were still presented as historical accounts of their reigns.
4. Moses wrote various sections of Deuteronomy during his lifetime (as referenced in 31:9, 22) but a final compiler edited it all together into one book after Moses’ death. This editorial work included some updating of place names and explanatory comments, as well as the account of Moses’ death to complete the history.
There are reasonable arguments for each of these views. When examining the biblical evidence, there does seem to be support for substantial Mosaic involvement in authoring Deuteronomy, as well as a role for some later editing:
1. There are numerous claims in Deuteronomy that Moses was speaking and writing the words:
“Moses proclaimed to the Israelites all the Lord had commanded him concerning them.” (1:3)
“Then Moses set apart three cities across the Jordan to the east.” (4:41)
“Moses summoned all Israel and said…” (5:1)
“These are the commands, decrees and laws Moses gave them when they came out of Egypt” (6:1)
2. There are personal reflections and direct statements from Moses in Deuteronomy that seem to come from his perspective:
“The LORD was angry with me because of you.” (3:26)
“But as for me, the LORD was angry with me.” (4:21)
“I prayed to the LORD at that time.” (9:26)
3. Deuteronomy contains specific geographical, historical, and judicial details that Moses could have known:
“At that time we took all his cities…sixty cities…Heshbon and all its surrounding settlements.” (3:4-6)
“Appoint judges and officials for each of your tribes in every town the LORD your God is giving you.” (16:18)
At the same time, Deuteronomy references Moses consistently in the third person, which may signal editorial work:
“Then Moses climbed Mount Nebo from the plains of Moab.” (34:1)
“Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died.” (34:7)
Deuteronomy also contains this statement from a later narrative perspective:
“To this day no one knows where Moses’ grave is.” (34:6)
And there are indications that some updating of archaic place names had occurred:
“Lande of the Canaanites” later became known as the land of Israel (32:49).
So in summary, it seems that substantial evidence points to Moses having a direct role in authoring and compiling material in Deuteronomy, which was then supplemented and edited after his death. This would account for Moses speaking in the first person and the specific details tied to his life, as well as the post-death reflections from an outside perspective.
Now let’s examine in more depth the possible models for how Moses could have written Deuteronomy:
1. Moses as primary author, with later editing: In this view, Moses wrote the first 30 chapters of Deuteronomy before his death as three separate speeches. Joshua or a later writer then added Deuteronomy 31 at the point of transition. Chapter 31 includes Moses’ commissioning of Joshua as his successor and the instructions about placing the Law beside the Ark. It also contains statements about how Moses had already written down these teachings and laws. Then the later editor incorporated Moses’ final poem of blessing and warning to Israel in chapter 32. Finally, the book concludes with the death of Moses in chapter 34 added after his passing.
Many scholars favor this model since it accounts for the personal nature of the speeches from Moses in the first 30 chapters. It also provides an explanation for how the account of his death was included. Those who hold this view suggest that minor updating of place names and explanatory comments were likely added by scribes over time as the book of Deuteronomy was copied. But the essential substance of the words can be traced back directly to Moses himself before his death.
2. Use of a secretary/scribe: This view proposes that Moses dictated the contents of Deuteronomy to a scribe or secretary who wrote down his words. Everything in the book would have been produced during Moses’ lifetime. The references to Moses writing the law (31:9) may simply mean that Moses commissioned or authorized the writing. The account of Moses’ death at the end of Deuteronomy would have been added with Moses’ advance knowledge.
Exodus 17:14 supports this model when it refers to the Lord telling Moses, “Write this on a scroll as something to be remembered.” While Moses may have done some writing directly, he clearly relied on secretarial help. Deuteronomy 31:19 also mentions that Moses “wrote down this song that day,” speaking of the Song of Moses in chapter 32. Evidently, he had no hesitation in claiming authorship of texts he commissioned others to write down.
This view proposes that minor details like the place name updates and third person accounts were simply editorial insertions made by the scribe to help the reader. The finished work was approved by Moses before his death. This approach has the advantage of accounting for the unity and consistency of the book of Deuteronomy.
3. Authored after Moses’ death from his perspective: In this model, the entire book of Deuteronomy was composed after Moses died by someone close to him. However, it was intentionally written as if it was from Moses himself – in essence, putting words into his mouth. This was seen as an acceptable way of conveying Moses’ teachings and preserving his legacy for later generations.
There are examples of this practice in other ancient Near Eastern literature. Works written long after famous kings ruled nevertheless presented themselves as autobiographical accounts of their reigns. Similarly, Deuteronomy may have been composed as a first-person summary of Moses’ life and final speeches, even though he was not literally the writer.
The details about Moses in Deuteronomy do suggest that the author knew Moses’ career intimately and wanted to communicate his final words. Calling the book “The Words of Moses” may have been seen as a way of granting it Mosaic authority, even if the literary form was a later fiction. The merits of this model are that it neatly explains the references to Moses in the third person and to events after his death.
4. Multiple stages of composition: The final major view of authorship sees Deuteronomy as passing through several stages of development before reaching its final form. In this model, Moses himself wrote various poems, laws, and speeches during his time. His writings formed the nucleus of the book. However, later editors gathered this material from Moses, supplemented it with their own introductory and explanatory additions, and organized it into a five-part structure:
1 – Introductory Speeches
2 – Covenant Stipulations
3 – Covenant Ceremony
4 – Moses’ Final Speeches
5 – Moses’ Death
This model views the editors as essentially assembling a “Moses reader” – bringing together the various texts associated with his last speeches and actions in one place. These editors added transitions and compositional framing, as well as minor updates like place names. But the substantive speeches and songs came from Moses’ own lifetime.
Thus, this view sees Deuteronomy originating in genuine Mosaic material, but being supplemented and finalized by later writers. The finished work combined Moses’ own words with editorial additions to create a literary monument to his leadership. This captures the historical substance from Moses with the literary style of a later period.
Evaluating the evidence, this fourth model seems to account best for the internal clues in Deuteronomy and makes sense of both the first-person and third-person references. It recognizes genuine Mosaic authorship of the sermons while also acknowledging a complex compositional history. There are good reasons to accept that Moses wrote major portions of Deuteronomy while also allowing that final editing occurred after his death.
This conclusion finds support from many biblical scholars, who increasingly prefer this multi-stage model. It explains both the clear Mosaic elements and the post-Mosaic components in the best manner. Thus, “multiple hands, over many years, produced the book that we know as Deuteronomy – with principal authorship attributable to Moses himself.”
Looking closer at the stages of Deuteronomy’s composition, scholars suggest:
– Moses wrote down foundational poems, laws, and sermons during Israel’s wilderness wanderings. These became the literary core of Deuteronomy.
– Near the end of his life, Moses delivered farewell speeches to Israel on the plains of Moab, adding to his written work. His secretary wrote these down.
– God revealed Moses’ impending death to him on Mt. Nebo. Moses then authorized the secretary to complete the account after his death.
– The secretary included an account of the succession of Joshua after Moses’ death.
– The secretary (or a different editor) later supplemented Moses’ writings with additional explanatory comments and minor changes, compiling them into the present Book of Deuteronomy.
Thus we have good evidence that Moses engaged in substantial writing which formed the first draft of Deuteronomy. But the book went through various stages of expansion and organization after his death before reaching its final canonical form. The combination of Mosaic authorship and later editing best explains the textual data.
This conclusion about the complex authorship of Deuteronomy is supported by many details within the book itself:
– Certain geographical terms and places did not exist until later, such as “Across the Jordan” (1:1) which only makes sense from an author writing in Canaan after the conquest (Joshua’s time).
– The list of Edomite kings in Genesis 36:31-39 includes kings who lived long after Moses was dead. A later scribe must have updated this information.
– Certain phrases like “to this day” indicate a perspective long after the events described. “No one knows his burial place to this day” (34:6) must come from a much later writer.
– The observation that “the Canaanites were then in the land” (2:5) implies an author living in Canaan when few Canaanites remained.
– References to geographical boundaries and regions that were only established after Israel’s settlement, like “Gilead” and “Dan,” require a later timeframe (Deut. 34:1).
– The statement that “the Lord gave (the Amorites) into our hand” (2:24) is from the perspective of Israelites living in the land, not Moses’ generation preparing to enter it.
Details like these point convincingly to minor editorial updating of Deuteronomy after Moses’ death. But the core content still derives from Moses himself.
A few other details to note about the authorship of Deuteronomy:
– The book reflects both a level of education and literary sophistication unlikely from a nomadic people newly escaped from slavery. This signals Mosaic authorship or extensive scribal help for composition.
– The royal language used to describe some events does not fit with Moses’ time but suits a later monarchy. This indicates later editorial tweaking.
– Archaeology gives evidence that legal texts similar to Deuteronomy were used in 7th century Judah during King Josiah’s reforms. But the core substance was likely much earlier.
– Certain themes in Deuteronomy mirror earlier literature from northern Israel ca. 700 BCE. But these ideas were probably drawn from longstanding Mosaic traditions.
– Affinity with language and concepts in Near Eastern treaties from 1400-600 BCE supports an origin for Deuteronomy in this timeframe – consistent with Mosaic authorship but later updating.
So in weighing all the evidence, both internal and external, there are compelling reasons to conclude that Moses was the essential author of the book of Deuteronomy – recording the speeches, laws, and poems that form its central tenants. However, the book also went through stages of later expansion and organization before reaching its final canonical form shortly before 600 BCE. The combination of Mosaic composition and post-Mosaic structuring best accounts for all the data.
This conclusion about the complex authorship of Deuteronomy sheds important light on how Moses could record his own death and burial. While Moses obviously did not write about his death directly, the later secretary and editors supplemented Moses’ own writing to complete the narrative. The final compilers intentionally crafted Deuteronomy into a literary monument to the great prophet, incorporating his words and the account of his passing. In this manner, Moses stands as the substantial author of Deuteronomy, even while others helped shape it so the book in its final form could record his death.
The phenomenon of authors recording their own deaths, or writing prophetically about post-mortem events, was not uncommon in ancient Near Eastern literature. Writers sought to give their books an aura of divine authority. Several examples illustrate this:
– A high Egyptian official named Ahmose wrote his tomb autobiography predicting the reigns of later pharaohs.
– Sumerian King Lists record kings and dynasties down to 600 BCE, though the earliest copies date from 1800 BCE.
– Babylonian chronicles continue seamlessly through the exile, when compiled by scribes afterward.
– Other ancient Near Eastern royal monuments describe events after kings’ deaths as if they were eyewitnesses.
Thus, the inclusion of Moses’ death and burial in Deuteronomy, though not written by him directly, fits the literary customs of that era. Using Moses’ voice and perspective was seen as the best way to present his legacy authoritatively to future generations. In this light, the complex authorship of Deuteronomy, incorporating both Mosaic and post-Mosaic material through an elaborate compositional history, makes good sense and solves the original dilemma.
In conclusion, we have strong evidence that Moses engaged extensively in writing the poetic and legal core of the book of Deuteronomy. Additional speeches, songs, and teachings from his final days were supplemented by a scribal secretary. Under Moses’ direction near his death, the secretary finalized the account using details that would occur after Moses died. Finally, inspired editors later organized this material and added explanatory comments to aid comprehension. The final book was the result of Moses’ own substantial writing shaped by posthumous scribal processes into a literary masterpiece – recording accurately Moses’ legacy for subsequent generations. This complex compositional history accounts for how Deuteronomy presents as Moses’ own words but could also include his death.
