Wherefore it is said in the book of the wars of the Lord: As he did in the Red Sea, so will he do in the streams of Arnon.
עַל־כֵּן֙ יֵֽאָמַ֔ר בְּסֵ֖פֶר מִלְחֲמֹ֣ת יְהוָ֑ה אֶת־וָהֵ֣ב בְּסוּפָ֔ה וְאֶת־הַנְּחָלִ֖ים אַרְנֽוֹן׃
2 Church Fathers comment on this verse
Following numerous baseless interpretations regarding the work "The Battle of the Lord," it is justifiable to acknowledge its loss. Such an admission does not compromise the sanctity of the Holy Scriptures in any way; for since this text offered little that was dramatic, apart from certain conflicts among the faithful and some political contexts involving Jews and Gentiles, it is understandable why Divine Providence has permitted its disappearance.
Critics note that references to the Book of the Lord's Wars, which are not unique to Moses, could be considered anachronistic. In Numbers 21:14, it states: "Wherefore it is written in the book of the Lord's wrestling: Bageb in Sufa, and the streams of Arnon, and the head of the streams, which inclines to Shebeth-ar, and adjoins the borders of Moab." Scholars have drawn varied interpretations and formed hypotheses from this statement. Some earlier critics, like Fater, argued that the ‘Book of the Lord's Wars’ could not originate in Moses' time since the conflicts of Israel had just commenced during his leadership. They claimed that if such a book could exist, Moses would not cite it to substantiate the borders between the Moabites and the Ammonites, which were already known to everyone.
Other critics, including Ewald, attempted to ascertain the contents and origins of the ‘Book of the Lord's Wars.’ He believed it contained not only proper names but also the song of Moses (Ex. 15), a record of the encampments (Num. 33), and perhaps even a segment from Num. 17:14-18. Knobel viewed the Book of Breviary as a significant Jehovistic work with historical and legal content, suggesting it emerged during the reign of David, specifically in southern Palestine. Meanwhile, Bleck and Wielhausen perceived this book's subject matter as relating to Joshua’s victories in the Promised Land along with the Israelites' songs of thanksgiving.
Overall, these critical analyses conclude that the ‘Book of the Lord's Wars’ was compiled after the era of Moses and that its mention undermines the authenticity of the Pentateuch. However, is there any textual evidence to support these critical views? No. Why do critics claim that the Book of Brokenness must have originated after Moses? There are no legitimate reasons; during Moses' time, there were indeed numerous acts of divine warfare. For instance, the Lord referred to the judgments against Egypt as a military campaign against them and their deities (Ex. 12:12; Num. 33:4). The conflict between Israel and the Amalekites was described as the Lord’s war (Ex. 17:14-16). Furthermore, Moses and the Israelites characterized the destruction of Pharaoh in the Red Sea in similar martial terms, declaring the Lord as ‘a man of war’ (Ex. 15:3), and this interpretation applied to their following military engagements chronicled in the Pentateuch (Num. 21:3, 34; Num. 31:3, etc.). It’s plausible that these wars were documented by Moses' contemporaries, and segments from such records could have been incorporated by Moses into his writings to affirm the collective acknowledgment by the people of Israel that their wars were indeed the wars of the Lord, continuously placing their faith in Him during these struggles. Despite the absence of evidence in the Book of Joshua to confirm the preservation of the Book of Wars during the time of Joshua, there is likewise no indication of its later Mosaic authorship. To attribute a Jehovistic or Eologistic character to it or to incorporate legislation and extensive narratives is merely speculative. It remains our aim to demonstrate that the ‘Book of the Lord's Wars’ could indeed have been composed during Moses' time, rendering any reference to it non-anachronistic.
Passages read together with this verse.
THEOSIS