Books as well as of all others and in their first Originals having been lost it was in some sort impossible but that there must needs happen some changes as well by reason of the length of time as the carelesness of Transcribers as it is impossible it may be to find one English Bible in all England without some Letter Sillable or Word Misprinted yet God by his special Providence hath taken such care of the Sacred Scripture as that it is preserved to this Day perfect intire and uncorrupt in all things relating to Faith and Manners and necessary to be believed or practised in order to Salvation This is proved also from his own words pag. 7. The Fathers were perswaded that these Errors that were crept into the Bible by the means of these Transcribers had no relation to Faith or good Manners or carried any weight to the framing of the Judgment which we ought to make of the Scriptures in general This does not hinder us but that we should acknowledg the Divine Providence in the preservation of this Book which has past through so many hands and so many Ages a great many of these Errors of Transcribers relate to the Chronology and Genealogies in the Books of the Old Testament but we may say with S. Augustin that these difficulties are in the number of those of which we may speak freely and we may be ignorant of Salva fide qua Christiani sumus This same Providence has likewise not permitted the Jews malitiously to corrupt the Holy Scriptures as many Fathers seem to reproach them Origen S. Jerome and S. Augustin have done them more Justice and those who at this day reproach the Jews with the same thing have not throughly examined the matter And pag. 9. This Author Mariana shews very plainly that the intention of the Council of Trent in declaring the Vulgar Translation Authentick was not to exempt it from all sorts of Faults but only from Errors which might introduce a change either in Faith or Manners which he confirms by several Authorities and principally by the Testimonies of Andrew de Vega and Jacob Lanis at that time superior of the Order of Jesuits who assisted at that Council Thirdly He agrees with us in this That being sure that God is the primary Author of the several Books of Scripture it is no great matter whether we certainly know or not the names of the Men by whom God was pleased to commit them to writing this is proved from his own words in his Preface pag. 2. Having Established in the Hebrew Common-wealth the Prophets or Publick Writers who took care of collecting faithfully the Acts of what past of most importance in the State we need not too curiously inquire as usually Men do who were the Authors of each particular Book of the Bible because it is certain that they were all writ by Prophets c. And in Book 1. Chap. 1. Pag. 3. We ought not to search with too much curiosity who have been the particular Authors of every Book of the Bible it sufficeth according to the Maxime of Gregory the Great praefat in lib. Job that these Books were written by Prophets Quis haec scripserit valde supervacue quaeritur cum tamen Author libri Spiritus Sanctus fideliter credatur Fourthly yet farther He agrees with us so far as to hold That in a true and good sense Moses may be the Author of the whole Peutateuch This is clearly proved from his own express words in Book 1. Chap. 1. Pag. 3. If these Publick Writers were in the Hebrew Common-wealth from the time of Moses as is extreamly probable it will be very easie to satisfie all difficulties that may be brought to shew that the Pentateuch was not wholy written by Moses which is ordinarily proved by the manner of its writing which seems to insinuate that some other than Moses collected the Acts and put them down in writing supposing these Publick Writers to them we may attribute what relates to the Historical part of these Books and to Moses all that which belongs to the Laws and Ordinances and it is this which the Scripture calls the Law of Moses thus one may say in this sense that the whole Pentateuch is truly Moses's because those who made the collection lived in his time and did not do it but by his Order And Pag. 20. According to this principle we ought to expound that passage where it is said that Moses wrote what God commanded him for there is nothing more ordinary in the Scripture than to ascribe unto one person what he Orders another to do chiefly when the thing is done in his name Thus we see wherein Pere Simon agrees with us in the common belief of all Christians He agrees with us so far as to acknowledg not only that the whole Scripture of the Old Testament is of Divine Inspiration and that it is uncorrupt in all things that relate to Faith and Life and are necessary to be believed or done in order to Salvation but also that the whole Pentateuch is truly Moses's because if it was not all written by himself immediately yet it was written by others in his time and in his name and by his order and then sure what was so written was reviewed and approved by himself If P. Simon were sincere in all this and did not deny it again by his self-contradiction we needed not much to oppose him in this matter for we are under no necessary obligation to believe that Moses wrote down with his own hand all the occurrences of every Day during the whole space of the Churches being in the Wilderness he might possibly appoint some other person or persons of known Integrity to do that for him and in his name and being so done and then reviewed and approved by himself it was all one as if he had done it with his own hand But notwithstanding this agreement we shall find that there remains yet a difference between P. Simon and other Christians as to this matter and that is it we are next to take into consideration And First He differs from the whole Church of God and from himself too by self-contradiction in this That he thinks Moses may have written the Pentateuch by an humane and fallible Spirit I prove this by consequence from his own words Pag. 40. It is true says he that the best Authors sometimes fall into little mistakes so likewise do we not pretend to draw from thence an infallible consequence to prove that Moses could not be the Author of the Pentateuch in the Order that it is Here he manifestly supposes that Moses in writing the Pentateuch might fall into little mistakes and so he might be the Author of it notwithstanding the disorder that is in it and is not this to suppose that Moses might write it by an humane and fallible Spirit for none I think will say that a Man writing by Divine Inspiration can fall into any mistakes little
him to resist and stand out against it 6. But we are so much the more obliged diligently to apply our selves unto an accurat search for finding out of these Proofs by how much it hath not pleased God that they should consist in such gross and palpable Principles as might be discovered at first glance and might be seen equally by all men they are rather an heap of circumstances which all men do not put together or do not look upon them the same way but which are nevertheless sensibly evident unto the meanest capacities when their eyes are once opened and do produce when they are gathered up and put together a certainty if not more full at least more intimate and more natural than that which we have of speculative and abstractive demonstrations because the ways and means of attaining unto the assurance of those matters of Fact are more proportionable and sutable unto the humane understanding and there is no man but will find the Principles of them in himself 7. It is for this end to give a Specimen how those matters of Fact are to be considered whose certainty necessarily inferreth the certainty of our Religion that we shall choose to discourse of the particular matters of Fact in Moses his History and of the Truth of his Books which are the Foundation of the Jewish Religion as the Jewish is the Foundation of the Christian Religion according to Saint Paul 8. I think there is no need that I should first prove before I proceed any further That if really there hath been a Man affirming that he was sent from God and who not desiring to be believed upon his bare word or for some Actions not much above those which we know to be within the compass of humane power hath for proof of his mission wrought that astonishing multitude of Miracles which we find Recorded in the Pentateuch hath evidently shewed that he had power of life and death hath commanded the Elements and made the whole frame of Nature to bow at his word and obey his orders I say there is no need that I should prove he ought to be believed for I doubt not but that upon supposition that there hath been such a Man who hath really done such things to prove his mission from God all Men in the World will grant that this person deserves to be believed in all that he hath written of that God in whose name he hath wrought all those Miracles and that the Religion which he hath instituted ought to be received as true and Divine 9. The most obstinate Spirits of Men are as it were overwhelmed with the weight of those Miracles and find no other means to satisfie their byass to unbelief than to seek to find out some frivolous reasons on which to ground their doubts of the truth of those Miracles and of the Book that contains them 10. But if they have any remainder of honesty sincerity I defie them to go far or continue long in those doubts for they will find their doubts so born down and vanquished by the abundance of proofs which accompany this History that they will be forced either to acknowledg it to be true or else to fall in with the senseless stupidity of those persons who for fear of being powerfully perswaded to believe the things which Religion teacheth them resolvedly choose never to think on them at all 11. For by what suppositions will they pretend to shake the certainty of what is written in those Books and dispose their minde to believe that there was never any such thing Let them give as much liberty as they will unto their Fancy and let it furnish them with all the Chymerical suppositions that possibly it can yet they shall never be able to conclude any thing from thence which hath the least shadow of probability and which a Man of the least solid Judgment would not be ashamed to propound 12. Will they say there was never such a Man as Moses and that whatever hath been said of him are fables invented for delight But let them consider that the Jews and Christians are not the onely persons who have been known to speak and write of this Moses since we find there are even prophane Historians who make mention of him yet if they deny what is written of him in the Penteatuch and affirm all those things to be Fables then let them also deny all the Histories in the World and affirm them all to be fables since there is none of them of whose Truth we could be sure if it were allowed as any way rational to doubt whether there was ever a Man called Moses who brought the Jews out of Aegypt after a long captivity for all the Reasons by which Men judge of the Truth of other Histories are equally to be found in that of Moses For example no Man doubts but that Alexander and Cyrus have been because many Authors have written of them and it never came into any Mans mind deliberatly to doubt thereof and it is evident that neither hath any Man upon serious thoughts ever doubted whether Moses hath been this hath been constantly believed by a very numerous people and by all who have known and have conversed both with him and them and was never contradicted by any Body whosoever But moreover there is this difference that the Books of Moses have singular and peculiar proofs of their certain truth which are not to be met with in any other for there was never any Book preserved with so much care and affection as that Book which containeth his History and yet never had any men more sensible and strong Reasons taken from their own Interest to disprove the truth of a Book if they could have done it with any colour of probability than the Jews have had to disprove the truth of the Books of Moses since by so doing they should have at once freed themselves from the most uneasie Law that ever was from a Law I say that was most rigorous and grievous most dreadful and burdensome to the observers of it in so much that there appeareth no motive that could perswade them to submit unto and endure the whole burden of it but a firm perswasion of its infallible Truth and divine Authority 13. Unbelief then not being able to keep its ground upon this first Chymerical supposition it must pass unto and fix upon some other and the Infidel must say for example that it is true there was a man called Moses and this man was the head of a great Nation which he brought out of Aegypt but withall that he was a great Impostor who deceived that people by false Miracles and forged all the prodigious things which he mentions in his Books to the end he might the better bring them under Subjection to the Law he had devised and by that Law to himself in making them to esteem it as come from Heaven and to consider himself as the Interpreter of God's Will
ea quae non comprehenduntur ita neque scripturae divinitati per eam totam diffusae quidquam detrahitur ex eo quòd ad singulas dictiones imbecillitas nostra non possit adesse arcano splendori doctrinae qui in tenui contemptâ locutione delitescit Orig. Philoc. cap. 1. pag. 5. Edit Cantabrig 1658. London Printed for Tho. Parkhurst 1682. The Second Part. WHat is contained in these following Sheets was first intended for a Preface unto the foregoing Discourse Translated out of French into English but when I had finished it I found it would be too long a Preface unto such a short Discourse and therefore upon Second thoughts I concluded it would be better to subjoin◠it thereunto by way of Appendix or Second Part. Who was the Author of the Discourse I do not certainly know but it is probable that Monsieur du Bois de la Cour who wrote the Discourse on Paschal his Thoughts or Meditations on Religion c. was likewise the Author of this Discourse for they are frequently bound together and were both Published the one in 1671 and the other in 1672 with the approbation of the same Doctors of the Sorbon excepting one whose name is not subscribed with the other Six unto the approbation of this Discourse But who ever be the Author he is a Man of Parts and has done worthily in this Discourse in which he hath shewed his high Veneration of the Holy Scriptures and hath irrefragably proved the truth of the most Signal and Miraculous matters of Fact contained in the Books of Moses and by that means he hath proved the Divine Original and Authority of all the Laws and Ordinances given by Moses unto the Israelites and Recorded in his Books So that the Translation of it cannot but be of good use unto English Readers for confirming them in the Faith and strengthening them against Tentations unto Infidelity in these Backsliding Times The Discourse is so well Penned by the Author that it needs no Recommendation from any it s own great Excellency and Usefulness will abundantly suffice to commend it unto any ingenious Man that shall be at the pains of spending half an Hour in Reading of it It would therefore have been altogether needless for me to have added unto it what follows here in this Second Part if there had not been lately Published in English a Book of P. Simon 's Intituled A Critical History of the Old Testament where Book 1. Chap. 5. Pag. 36. in the Contents of that Chapter he hath these very Words Moses cannot be the Author of the Books which are attributed to him I had no sooner Read this in the contents of the Chapter but I was desirous to know what Arguments he used to prove such an uncouth Assertion as had seldom been heard of from any before but such as Hobs in his Leviathan Pereyre in his Systema Praeadamiticum and Spinosa in his Tractatus Theologico-politicus all Atheists or Infidels And thereupon having Read and Examined all he says to prove his Assertion I thought it would be necessary together with the Precedent Discourse to Publish a few short Animadversions on what he has written in his Critical History against the Pentateuchs being written by Moses And that what I have to say may be the better understood and the more convincing and satisfactory unto the Reader I shall proceed in this Method First I shall shew what is the Truth to be believed and what is the Belief of the Christian Church Secondly What is the opinion of P. Simon and wherein he agrees with or differs from the common Faith of the Church in this matter Thirdly Answer his Arguments whereby he endeavors to prove his Opinion That Moses could not be the Author of the Books which are attributed to him Now for the First The Truth to be believed is 1. That the whole Scripture of the Old Testament and consequently the Pentateuch or first Five Books of the Bible were written by Divine Inspiration and that God is the primary Author thereof this is proved from Luke 16. 29 31. They have Moses and the Prophets let them hear them c. And Luke 24. 25 27 44 45 46. And from 2 Tim. 3. 16. where it is expresly said That all Scripture or the whole Scripture is given by Inspiration of God And 2 Pet. 1. 20 21. where it is expresly affirmed that the first thing to be known concerning the Scriptures is this That no Prophecy of the Scripture is of any private Interpretation that is of any Man 's own Inventing for the Prophecy came not in old time by the will of Man but Holy Men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost The same Truth is clearly proved from Psalm 147. 19. compared with Rom. 3. 2. 9. 4. 2. That this being first known and believed and so the Divine Authority of the Holy Scriptures secured it matters not very much whether we ever certainly know the names of all the Holy Men whom God used as his Instruments in writing the several Books of Sacred Scripture for there are some Books of Scripture that bear the names of no Man as Author of them under God and yet they are as much of Divine Authority as those Books that have the name of some Prophet or Apostle expressed in their Title and the names which Books of Scripture bear do not always import that the Man whose name the Book bears was the Writer of the Book but that the Book was written of and concerning him and his Acts. Thus the Book of Joshua is so called because it was written of and concerning Joshua though it is probable it was not written by him but by some other Holy Man of God after his Death see for this Bishop Richardsons Observations on the Old Testament pag. 45. the like may be said of some other Books of Holy Scripture That then which concerns us most is to know whether God be the Author of the several Books in the Canon of Scripture and if we be once sure of this we need not trouble our selves much about the knowing of the names of the several Men by whom it pleased the Lord God to consign them to Writing Gregory the Great in his Preface to his Exposition on Job has this Remarkable saying Si Magni cujusdam viri susceptis Epistolis c. If having received the Letters of some great Man we should read the Words and enquire by what Pen they had been written truly it would be ridiculous if we should endeavor not to know the Author of the Letters nor to understand the sense but to find out by what Pen the several words of them had been written since then we know the thing and that the Holy Spirit is the Author of it what else do we in enquiring after the Writer but in reading the Letters stand asking by what Pen they were written Yet 3. when a Book of Holy Scripture bears the name of its
Author and an Universal Historical Tradition assures us that such a Man was indeed the Author of it we are bound to believe it and cannot rationally disbelieve it without a demonstration to the contrary Thus we know the Books of Plato Aristotle and Cicero to have been written by those Authors and this is so clear and certain a truth Vt de istorum librorum Authoritatibus dubitare dementis sit utque ridendus sit non refellendus qui de iis questionem movet That none but a Madman will doubt of the Authors of those Books and he is to be laughed at and not confuted who moves a Question concerning them as holy August writes contra Fanstum Manich. lib. 32. cap. 21. And as he says That he knew the writeings of the New Testament to be the writings of the Apostles by the same means that the Manichees knew the writeings of Manes to be the writings of Manes so I say That by what means we here in England know the late Critical History of the Old Testament to be the writing of Pere Simon a Priest of the Oratory by the like means we know the Pentateuch to be the writing of Moses and we ought not to disbelieve it having the Universal Testimony of Jews Christians Mahumetans and many Heathens to ground our Faith upon unless it be first clearly demonstrated to us that it implies a contradiction that Moses should have written it which I know that neither Pere Simon nor any Man else can do And the reasonableness of what I have now said will yet further appear if it be considered that our Lord Christ himself gives Testimony unto the writings of Moses in general John 5. 46 47. Moses wrote of me But if ye beleive not his writeings how shall ye beleive my words and both he and his Apostles frequently appeal unto them and quote passages out of them This is the truth to be believed and this is actually believed by the Christian Church Yet it is no matter of Faith that there are no various Lections in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament nay it is a matter evident to Sense that there are various Lections it is no matter of Faith that through the length and injury of time and Negligence of Transcribers and Printers there are no mistakes at all in the Originals of Holy Scripture on the contrary we acknowledg that there may possibly be some mistakes even in the Pentateuch through the length and injury of time and the negligence of Transcribers and Printers but those mistakes we believe do not at all hinder the Holy Scriptures from being a perfect Rule of Faith and Life in all things necessary to the Glorifying of God and Saving of our Souls Nor lastly is it matter of Faith That Moses wrote every Word and Sentence Chapter and Verse of the Pentateuch with his own hand It is sufficient that we believe he wrote it himself or by other persons whose help he used in the writing of it and when it was written he revised it and approved it and in this he was assisted by the Holy Spirit inspiring guiding and directing him And if there be any thing in the Pentateuch besides the mistakes of Transcribers and Printers that was written after Moses's time it was added upon good Reasons by Joshua or Ezra and the great Assembly who were Men of a Prophetical Spirit and inspired by God in what they did of that nature Now in the Second place let us see what is the opinion of Pere Simon and wherein he agrees with or differs from the common Faith of the Church in this matter And First He agrees with us in these following particulars 1. That the whole Scripture of the Old Testament and consequently the Pentateuch was of Divine Inspiration and that God was the primary Author thereof this is demonstratively proved from his own express words in his Preface pag. 4. But besides that this Principle of a Divine of Paris That the whole Scripture is not equally Divine and Canonical is dangerous it is directly opposite to the Doctrine of the New Testament which acknowledges every thing throughout the whole Scripture for Prophetical and to have been inspired wherefore I thought I ought to lay down some Principles whereby we might ascribe every thing in the whole Scriptures to Prophets or Persons inspired by God even to the alterations themselves those only excepted which had happened through length of time or negligence of Transcribers And Book 1. Chap. 1. Pag. 3. I have divided this work into Three Books the First of which Treats at large of the Authors of the Bible which I have called Prophets with Josephus contra App. and most of the Fathers because they were in effect directed by the Spirit of God and that St. Peter calls the whole Scripture Prophecies During the Hebrew Common-wealth there were from time to time among them these sorts of Persons inspired by God were it to write Divine and Prophetick Books as the same Josephus has remarked or as Eusebius says to distinguish betwixt those that were truly Prophetick and others that were not And Pag. 4. They the publick Writers had the liberty in collecting the Acts which were in their Registeries to add diminish and change according as they thought fit and the Books as Eusebius says which were declared Sacred were reviewed by Persons inspired by God who Judged whether they were truly Prophetick or Divine And Pag. 21. I know it is expresly forbidden in Deuteronomy either to add or diminish any thing from the Word of God But we may Answer with the Author of the Book Intituled Cozri that this prohibition relates only to private Persons and not to those whom God had expresly commanded to interpret his Will God promised to the Prophets and to the Judges of the Sanhedrim who succeeded Moses the same Grace and the same Spirit of Prophecy as those had who lived in his time and therefore they have held the same Power not only of Interpreting the Law but also of making new Ordinances which were afterwards writ and placed in the Registeries of the Republick And Pag. 22. The Church has not the Right of making Books Canonical and Divine as the Prophets had in the Old Testament but only to declare them Canonical In fine Book 1. Chap. 1. Pag. 1. None can doubt but that the truths contained in the Holy Scripture are infallible and of Divine Authority since they proceed immediately from God who in this has only made use of the Ministery of Men to be his Interpreters So there is no Person either Jew or Christian who does not acknowledg that the Scripture being the pure Word of God is at the same time the first principle and foundation of Religion Here is clear and full proof from his own express words of his agreement with us in the first particular before mentioned Secondly He agrees with us in this That though Men having been the Depositories of these Sacred
be called by that name among the Hebrews for we see that God called it by that name and the signification of the name agreeing so admirably well with what followed thereupon it is not likely that ever it was wholly forgotten amongst the Posterity of Abraham If any should say that it may seem the name Moriah was given to that Land rather after than before the Lord had manifested himself to Abraham on the Mount I Answer First That can never be proved why might not the Lord God give it that name before-hand which should signifie what he was there to do on the behalf of Abraham The Text says That God bid Abraham get him into the Land of Moriah and their offer c. I Answer Secondly Granting that it was given to that Land after the Lord had manifested himself to Abraham on the Mount yet it does not follow that therefore it must be after Moses also and in Solomon's time when the Temple was Built upon Mount Moriah 2 Chron. 3. 1. Certainly it might have that name long before Moses and yet not have it till after Abraham had done offering the Ram instead of his Son for as Abraham immediately after called the name of that place Jehovah-jireh the Lord will provide with respect to the Answer which he had given his Son Vers 8. My Son God will provide himself a Lamb for a Burnt-Offering So he might at the same time call that part of the Countrey the Land of Moriah or the Land of Vision as the Vulgar Interpreter and Symmachus render it because there he had seen God in a most signal manner there God had given him a sensible and most convincing demonstration of his special Providence and of his peculiar discriminating Grace and Love to him and his Seed Thirteenthly and Lastly P. Simon Objects Deut. 3. 11. and thereupon says If we diligently read what is writ concerning the Bed of Og King of Bashan we shall find that those who have collected these Books have added some words to illustrate the words of the Text by conforming them to the practice and custome of their own times Answer I have diligently read what is there written concerning the Bed-stead of Og King of Bashan both in the Original and in several Translations and yet I do not find by what I read there either that any Body besides Moses collected those Books or that he who collected them hath added some words to illustrate the words of the Text by conforming them to the practice and custome of his own time I suppose P. Simon would have us believe that the last words Beammath Ish after the Cubit of a Man have been added to the Text after the time of Moses but he must first prove that there was no such distinction of Cubits known in the World in the time of Moses and so that Moses could not write these words which express one Member of the distinction methinks it is very easily conceivable that Moses himself might be moved to add this explication of his own words if we consider that there might be diverse sorts of Cubits than in use of which some might be longer than others now if it had been only said that Nine Cubits was the length and Four Cubits the breadth of the Giants Bed-stead the Reader would not have known what Cubits he meant and consequently would have still remained ignorant of the exact measure of the Bed-stead therefore Moses to take away all ambiguity adds for explication of his own words that it was the Cubit of a Man i. e. the common ordinary Cubit which was then so well known amongst the Israelites that there remained no more ground of doubting of what measure the Giants Bed-stead was and if any were so incredulous as not to believe Moses relation of the length and breadth of the Giant Bed-stead they might go themselves to Rabbath and there see it and measure it by the Cubit of a Man But some may say How came King Og's Bed-stead to be at that time in Rabbath amongst the Ammonites I Answer it might come to be there any of these Three ways 1. In time of War the Ammonites might have plundered the Countrey of Og King of Bashan and might have carried his Iron Bed-stead with other spoil into their own Countrey or 2. King Og being to fight with Moses and the Israelites at Edrei and fearing the event of the Battel as he had good reason might send his own Iron Bead-stead with many other necessary things to Rabbath to be secured for him amongst the Ammonites whither he might intend to flee in case he should be vanquished in the Battel at Edrei and be able to make his escape or 3. the Israelites having Conquered the whole Kingdom of Bashan and utterly destroyed all the Inhabitants King Og and all his Subjects taken all his Cities to the number of Sixty and possessed themselves of all that belonged to him or his People if this Bed-stead was in the whole Kingdom at that time it must of necessity fall into the hands of the Israelites and Israel being at Peace with the Ammonites they might come and Trade with the Israelites and especially at such a time they might come to buy part of the Spoil and amongst other things their curiosity might prompt them to buy the Iron Bed-stead of the Giant Og and to carry it into their own Countrey which in former times had been a Land of Giants as appears from Deut. 2. 19 20 21. and no doubt they might have ancient Monuments of those Giants whom they called Zamzummims remaining amongst them and those that wanted might be desirous to have by them some such Monuments of Giants to show as well as their Neighbours and this might be done before Moses either spoke or wrote the words of that Verse Objected by P. Simon Thus you see that any of these Three ways the Iron Bed-stead of Og might come to be in Rabbath of the Children of Ammon when Moses wrote the Book of Deuteronomy There are yet Two Objections against Moses his being the Author of the Pentateuch which I remember I have read in Spinosa his Tractatus Theologico Politicus and because I would omit nothing of any Moment that the Adversaries have written against the Truth which the Church of God believes and I defend I shall here set them down and Answer them as I have done with P. Simon 's Fourteenthly Then Spinosa Objects Deut. 2. 12. where it is said That the Children of Esau destroyed the Horims and dwelt in their stead as Israel did unto the Land of his Possession which the Lord gave unto them now he pretends that this could not be written by Moses because Israel did not destroy the Canaanites and take possession of Canaan till after his Death I Answer At this rate of arguing a Man might prove that our Lord Christ when he instituted the Sacrament of the Eucharist did not speak these words This is my Blood which is shed
for many This is my Body which is given or broken for you because his Blood was not shed nor his Body broken till the Day after and yet it is most certain that he did speak those words when he instituted the Holy Sacrament the Night before his Death But then you will ask why did our Lord speak so why did he say This is my Blood which is shed this is my Body which is broken when neither was the one shed nor the other broken I Answer He did so because it was an ordinary way of speaking amongst the Jews to express themselves in the Preterit or Present Tense when they were talking or writing of a thing that was shortly and certainly to come to pass and therefore the Vulgar Interpeter attending more to the sense than to the bare words of our Lord renders them Hic est sanguis meus qui pro multis effundetur hoc est corpus meum quod pro vobis tradetur this is my Blood which shall be shed and my Body which shall be given after the same manner may we understand the words of Moses as Israel did i. e. as Israel shall shortly and certainly do to the Land of his Possession besides there was this good reason why Moses should use the Preterit Tense because the thing he was writing of was partly past already Israel had already destroyed the Inhabitants of Two Kingdoms and taken actual possession of the Land and it was partly to be within a short time Israel was shortly to do so by all the other Inhabitants of the Land of his possession which God had given him Moses then having reason to write as he did Spinosa had no reason to cavil at the manner of his expression Fifteenthly He Objects Deut. 3. 14. and from these words Jair called them after his own name Bashan-havoth-jair unto this Day infers that this must have been written long after Moses Answer Some think that these words VNTO THIS DAY have been after Moses put in the Margin and in process of time have crept into the Text or else that Ezdras hath inserted them into the Text. But there is no necessity of Answering thus for First Moses wrote the Book of Deuteronomy some Months after Jair had taken the Countrey of Argob and called it after his own name Bashan-havoth-jair therefore Moses himself might very well say that the Countrey of Argob was called after the name of Jair unto this Day that is from the time of Jair his taking of it and calling it Bashan-havoth-jair unto the Day of Moses writing that part of the Book of Deuteronomy for there was nothing but truth in his so saying Secondly Moses wrote the Book of Deuteronomy not only for the present Generation but also for the Generations to come according to that of the Psalmist Psal 102. 18. This shall be written for the Generations to come and consequently knew that these words unto this Day would be further verified in after Ages Therefore he might purposely use these words unto this Day as intending thereby to signifie unto the Israelites in their several Generations that the Countrey of Argob was called after the name of Jair Bashan-havoth-jair from Jairs first taking of it unto their time there being then no falsity nor absurdity in the words unto this Day as here used Moses himself might very well be the Author of them nay they are so significant with respect to future Generations as I have shewed that Moses his Wisdom appears in choosing to express himself in such words as were actually true when he first spoke and wrote them and yet were to be further verified in all succeeding Generations so long as the Hebrew-Commonwealth stood so much for Answer unto Spinosa his Two Objections I have now gone through all that P. Simon hath written to prove that Moses could not be the Author of the Pentateuch I have examined all his Arguments and Answered every one of them there is not one good Argument amongst them all not one that can prove his position That Moses cannot be the Author of the Books attributed to him and verily many of them are I think such pitiful trifling things that a reasonable Man and Christian should be ashamed of them The reason why I meddle with no more of his Critical History than what concerns the Pentateuch is First Because this was defigned to accompany the precedent Discourse concerning the proofs of the Books of Moses and therefore I thought fit to deal with P. Simon only upon that point wherein he seemed to contradict what the Author of the excellent Discourse affirms and proves that so his Objections being all Answered that Discourse may remain firm and unshaken and in its full strength and that Infidels may not pretend that P. Simon has confuted it which is so far from being true that the vain succesless attempt of so great a Man as P. Simon is accounted to prove that Moses could not be the Author of the Pentateuch is an Argument that the thing is not practicable it cannot be done for if it could P. Simon is counted as able and to me seems to have been as willing to have done it as any other Man Secondly Because if the Divine Truth and Authority of Moses and his Law and of Christ and his Gospel be well secured our Christian Religion is secured in its main strength and fundamental grounds against Atheists and Infidels As for the rest of P. Simon 's Book I doubt not but some Men of greater Abilities for such a work than I will in due time thoroughly examine it and separate the Chaff from the Wheat allowing him his due praise where he hath done well and chastising him where he hath done evil you may guess by this that it will not be so difficult to do it as some may apprehend In the mean time if his vain Cavils at several expressions here and there in the Holy Scriptures should be a tentation unto any to think meanly of the Scriptures themselves I desire such if they can to read some part of Origens Philocalia Chap. 1. Pag. 4 5. in Spencers Edition at Cambridge 1658. and to consider that as Origen says Every one of the Works of God do not equally but some more and some less declare and shew forth the Glory of God in his Beeing and Providence after the same manner all the parts of God's written Word do not equally but some more clearly and some more obscurely evidence themselves to be of God And as there are some dark occurrences in Providence that tempt weak and sinful Men to doubt of God's Beeing and Providence just so there are some dark and difficult passages in Holy Scripture that tempt Men to doubt of the Divine Verity and Authority of of the Scriptures and yet as none but Fools Psal 14. 1. will disbelieve the Beeing and Providence of God because there are some things in his Nature and Providence which they cannot comprehend so no Wise Man will disbelieve the Holy Scriptures because there are here and there some passages in them which he cannot understand Lo they have rejected the word of the Lord and what Wisdom is in them says the Prophet Jeremiah Jer. 8. 9. Indeed there can be no true Wisdom in them who reject the Word of the Lord for his Word believed and practised is our Wisdom and our Understanding and makes us a wise and understanding People Deut. 4. 5 6 The Testimony of the Lord is sure making Wise the Simple Psal 19. 7. If ever then we would be truly Wise let us against all Tentations to the contrary esteem highly of and adhere stedfastly unto the Holy Scriptures of Truth for it is they that are able to make us wise unto Salvation through Faith which is in Christ Jesus 2 Tim. 3. 15. If what I have here written do contribute any thing towards the helping of Christian Readers to keep up in their Souls a due esteem of and reverend regard unto the Holy Scriptures and towards the strengthning of them against Tentations to unbelief I have obtained my end and desire them to let me have the help and benefit of their Prayers but let him have all the Praise who is the Father of Lights and the God of all Grace unto whom be Glory in the Church by Christ Jesus throughout all Ages World without End Amen FINIS a Exod. 5. 1 2 3. 7. 1 2 3 4 5. 3. 14 15 16 17 18. 4. from 1 to 9. 6. from 1 to 8. Deut. 4. 9 to 24. b Exod. 20. 3 4 5 6 7 c. ibid. v. 20 22 23. 23. 13. Deut. 4. 5 6 7 8 9 10. 7. 1 2 3 4 5 6. 12. 29 30 31 32. 18. 9 10 11 12 13 14. Deut. 4. 32 to 41. Exod. 20. 24 latter part of the Verse Deut. 4. 7. c Exod. 20. 17. Lev. 19. 17 18. d Exod. 21. 13. Deut. 19. e Levit. 25. 23 c. f Exod. 21. 1 2 c. Deut. 15. 12 to 19. 24. 14 15. g Deut. 15. 6 to 12. Exod. 22 25 26 27. h Exod. 22. 21. Levit. 19. 33. 34. i Exod. 22. 22 23 24. k Exod. 20. 12. 22. 28. Deut. 17. 11. l Deut. 1. 16 17. 17. 16 17 18 19 20. 25. 1.
An Excellent DISCOURSE Proving the Divine Original and Authority OF The Five BOOKS OF MOSES Written Originally in French by Monsieur Du Bois de la Cour and Approved by six Doctors of the Sorbon To Which is added a SECOND PART OR AN EXAMINATION Of a considerable part of PERE SIMON 's Critical History of the Old Testament wherein all his Objections With the Weightiest of Spinosa's against Moses's being the Author of the first Five Books of the Bible are Answered and some difficult places of Holy Scripture are Explained By W. L. London Printed for Tho. Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns in Cheapside near Mercers Chappel 1682. A PREFACE Opening the true Nature and Reasons of a Saving-Faith § 1. THere is no Man that ever heard the Gospel and hath such a care of his everlasting State as beseemeth a reasonable Creature but must needs perceive of how great weight it is to be well assured of the truth of those supernatural Revelations delivered to us in the Sacred Scriptures Much may be known by the well studied Book of Nature But not enough to quiet the mind of Man by assured hopes of future Happiness and the way thereto And therefore almost all the Heathen and Infidel World have their Augures or Prophets on whom they depend as Conscious of the necessity of more than common natural Light Besides that it requireth greater helps and longer studies to understand the Book of Nature than the generallity of Mankind can use whereas God by his word hath made all necessary truth so plain that Children in a short time may grow wiser than the Philosophers § 2. No wonder then if it be the great work of the Prince of Darkness the Enemy of God and Man to deprive the World of the benefit of the Sacred Sacriptures which he doth First By keeping most of the Earth from knowing it for want of Teachers mostly kept out by the Persecution of Tyrants and Idolatrous Priests Secondly By keeping those that hear it from believing it Thirdly By keeping those that believe it from the right understanding of it Fourthly By keeping those that partly understand it from a serious considering what they understand Fifthly By keeping Men from a willing obedience to what they know and think of § 3. Among professed Christians it is the want of a sound Belief which is the great cause of all Ungodliness and Misery And no wonder For it is an high and excellent work to live on the joyful belief and hope of an unseen everlasting Life And in this dark State believing must conquer many difficulties which slothful Men will rather yield to than duely strive to overcome § 4. First We have contracted so inordinate a Love to this kind of life in Flesh that corrupt Nature is loth to think of any other because it would not part with this And when Men are convinced only of a necessity of looking forward beyond the Grave this changeth not their love but still an unwilling backward heart receiveth the notices of the Life to come but as unpleasant Physick which nothing but meer necessity will get down And how ill a Receiver an unwilling mind is experience telleth all the World Yea so backward and senseless is depraved Nature that even this necessity is seldom seriously considered till the Sentence of Death awaken the Soul and are Men then fit to begin so hard a study as must shew them the certainty of the Gospel and the Life to come and to get Faith when they must use it § 5. Secondly And I write it as necessitated and with Lamentation it is not all Mens Lot to have Teachers that shew them the right way even of founding their Belief and discerning the certainty of the Gospel and the Immortality of Souls If I should tell you how many Parishes that have Weekly Sermons in which Faith and Christianity and Heaven are mentioned have Teachers that cannot confute an Infidel or Sadducee or teach Men clearly how to be sure that their Faith and Hope are not meer Errour and that cannot tell which way well to prove the truth of their profest Religion some would be offended at it that are not offended at their own sad defect who are ignorant of so needful a part of the Catechisme which every Christian should be taught § 6. Sad numerous instances are too clear a clear a proof First It is become so great a controversie whether Faith have any Evidence or not and whether we can certainly prove the Gospel to be true or rather must merit the more by believing it without proof that the Papists are together by the Ears about it and those Protestants that handle it differ among themselves But the most keep their peace by not daring to decide it And how can those Teachers shew the people the ascertaining Evidence and Proof who hold that there is none to be shewn The objects of Faith are not evident to Sense not seen not tasted c. but the truth of the Revelation hath ascertaining proof And nothing is provable but by intelligible Evidence Secondly The whole Papal Church almost holds That the method of believing the Gospel is to believe it on the Authority of the Church's proposal or affirmation As if Men must believe that Christ hath a Church and that it is thus Authorized before they believe that he is the Christ and hath Authority himself or any Law that gives Authority A multitude of impossibles are here supposed before Man can be a true believer which I have fully manifested elsewhere Thirdly Some that see how unable the vulgar and unlearned are to manage a matter of such weight and difficulty and fearing least a tryal of their Faith against hard objections should but overturn it perswade the weak only to believe and not to doubt but not to ask why nor to search for Reasons for their Faith least disputing the case and hearing objections which they cannot answer should make them Infidels or crack their Brains Fourthly Some tell them that it is only the inward witness of the Spirit in themselves that can assure them that the Scriptures are the word of God Not telling them well what that Testimony is nor how those that yet hear it not shall be convinced of unbelief Fifthly Some by overdoing tell us that the Scripture so shineth propria luce and conteineth its own evidence of Divinity so clearly that a Man that doth but read it though he found it by the high-way and never before heard of it may there see sufficient evidence that it is all of God Sixthly Some by greater overdoing distinguish not the Essentials of Religion from the Integrals or Accidents nor the words from the matter nor the Law and Gospel from the subordinate parts of the Bible in point of evidence and necessity and so would tempt Men to think that if any sentence in our Bibles translation or original be mistaken we can have no certainty of the truth of any of
is not caring to know whether it be true or false as if it were a thing whereof the truth were unsearchable and indifferent or who shall dare desperately to run-counter unto such abundance of truth and light as that Sacred Book holds forth and without other help than that of his own Fancy and wretched Reason to Determine from the bottom of that dark Dungeon where Nature hath confined him that there is no Being in the whole Universe able to work so many Miracles and that they are but so many Fable and Visions 60. But the reason why some persons are not moved and affected with these proofs which are so sensible unto others is because their Interest and their Passions have so much command of them that they see other things but by halves This is the true Spring of all the Doubts that are moved against Religion because there is really nothing so contrary to their lusts as the manner of Life which it prescribes and so it is no ways difficult to conceive that Mens Lusts should oppose a thing which doth directly fight against them and can never be established but by their Extirpation and Ruine 61. And indeed this may well be so on the account of the contrariety that is between Religion and Mens Lusts since we see the like even in natural things and if sometimes the meer imagination of a thing which Men do not at all like though it be impossible the thing should ever come to pass makes them Act as if they really doubted it would come to pass even when they cannot really doubt how much more may the necessary forsaking of all that is dear and near to Men in the World be apt to blind them and to make them doubt of Religion unto the belief of which the Heart and Will must contribute no less than the Reason and Understanding 62. To give an instance there is a well known Person of great Wit and of great Judgment but so much afraid of Death that being one Day asked if he would not lay his Life that there is such a City as Rome thought the gain were small to be got by the wager he freely answered That he would not now certainly such a doubt as that there may not be such a City as Rome never came into his thoughts before and if the proposal had been made to him upon any other terms than the laying down of this Life it had not been possible for him to have made the least hesitation at the matter but as soon as the Idea of Death presented it self to his mind it wholy took up his thoughts all the Evidences he had to prove it impossible for Rome not to be vanished and came to nothing and if there did not arise in his mind a formal doubt that all which hath been said for the existence of Rome may be false at least there came something into his head or rather into his heart which made him Act as if he had indeed doubted of Romes existence 63. I know very well no Man will confess that addictedness to Pleasures or love of Life can thus far blind him and that every one pretends his doubts are very sincere and that the aversion he hath from believing the things of Religion proceeds only from his Reason and Understanding neither is it good to press Men upon this point since we cannot make them to see that in their our own hearts which they see not there of themselves for the motions of the Heart or Will are not like the motions of the Head or Undestanding These of the Head arise either by degrees and a Series of ratiocinations or else by a certain quick and clear light which makes us take up our Resolutions and fall to Action and it is not possible that this should be unknown to us and that we should not feel it But now as for that which we do by the Byass of the Heart it is far otherwise for there it is certain Springs hidden in us and Born with us which prompt us to this or that without proceeding in a discursive way of Reasoning and almost without our knowledg and hence it comes to pass that except we reflect frequently and attentively upon the motions of the Heart and timely accustom our selves so to do it is almost impossible not to be deceived in Judging of them for the Heart if one may so say doth so mix it self with the Reason or rather doth so much master it that it becomes the principle of all the Actions yet so as it is scarcely perceived to have any influence upon them 64. But let such doubting Persons at least acknowledg that they do not do all that is in their power to get a clear Resolution of their Doubts which must needs be from some defect in the Will they will easily grant this if they have the least measure of sincerity since they cannot deny but that the whole Life-time of Man should be employed in the search of so important a truth as that of Religion is whereas they have scarcely thought upon it a few Minutes and of all things in the World it may be the truth of Religion is that on which they have made least reflection 65. When Men are brought unto 〈◊〉 sincere willingness to apply themselves unto the serious consideration of the proofs Religion it will not be difficult yet further to set forth unto them the Evidences of it taking the way which we have here chalked out for besides the proofs taken from matters of Fact whereof we have given an Essay or Specimen in this Discourse there is yet a very great number of proofs that depend upon sensible perception and which appear to us in great abundance when we read the Scriptures with attention and it is even these last sort that deserve chiefly to be minded because they have this advantage that in perswading us to believe the truth they move us also to love it without which all is unprofitable It is true there are but few Persons duely qualified with the dispositions necessary to their being feelingly moved and affected by them that is to say with a certain Spiritual Gust of Truth and an uprightness of Heart which are rarely to be met with But we must at least endeavor to help others unto these dispositions and to awaken and stir up in them that Spiritual sense which shall be revived in them sooner or latter if ever they believe in a saving manner The End of the First Part. THE SECOND PART Containing An EXAMINATION Of a considerable part of Pere Simon 's Critical History of the OLD TESTAMENT WHEREIN All his Arguments with the weightiest of Spinosa's against Moses's being the Author of the first Five Books of the Bible are fully and clearly answered and several difficult places of Holy Scripture are explained By W. L. Sed quemadmodum apud eos qui semel providentiam probè receperunt non minuitur aut perit fides providentiae ob
or great I am sure not into such disorderly mistakes as he pretends to find in the History of the Creation of Man Secondly He differs from the whole Christian Church in affirming that for so much of the Historical part of the Pentateuch as Moses wrote or might write he copied it out of other ancient Books or else committed to writing what he had learned from Oral Tradition This difference is the same upon the matter with the former and I prove it also from his own express words Book 1. Chap. 3. Pag. 27. A Book of the Wars of the Lord of which mention is made in the Numbers Numb 21. 14. is an evident proof that the Stories which are related in the Five Books of Moses have likewise been taken out of several collections which have been lost And Pag. 54. most clearly We may likewise apply says he to the Book of Genesis what we have already said touching the manner of the inregistering the publick Acts in the time of Moses this Book contains the Creation of the World and many things which happened many Ages before him and in all Genesis there is no observation of Gods dictating to Moses what is there related it is not likewise said that he writ it by the Spirit of Prophecy but all these Histories and Genealogies are simply related as if Moses had taken them from some Authentick Books or else had had a constant Tradition And in the same place Moses without doubt has had other Records than the fabulous Books of Adam Seth Sem Abraham c. were they writ or were they preserve viva voce down to him in the Families which God had chosen to be faithful to him in the Worship of true Religion Doth not this look too like unto what I mentioned before that Moses might write the Book of Genesis by an humane fallible Spirit which is contrary unto Gal. 3. 8. 4. 21 22 30. Rom. 4. 17. 23 24. 1 Cor. 15. 45. James 2. 23. for these Scriptures do plainly assert the Divine Original and Authority of the Book of Genesis Thirdly He differs from the generality of Jews and Christians in that he not only says there may be some few things in the Books of Moses as we now have them which were not written by Moses but he positively and peremptorily affirms that there are de facto a great many things now in the Books of Moses which could not be written by Moses This is proved from his own words Pag. 4 5. The publick Writers which were in his time and writ out the ancient Acts have spoke of Moses in the Third Person and have used several other such like expressions which could not be Moses's but they for all that have never the less Authority because they can be ascribed only to persons which Moses had commanded to put into writing the most important Actions of his time And Chap. 2. Pag. 19. We shall distinguish in the Five Books of the Law what has been writ by Moses from what has been writ by these Prophets or publick Writers We may attribute to Moses the Commandments and Ordinances which he gave to the People and allow these same publick Writers to be the Authors of the greatest part of the History Moses in quality of Legislator writ all which relates to the Statutes and left to the Scribes or Prophets the care of collecting the Acts of the most material Transactions which past that they might be preserved to Posterity And Pag. 20. But if we consider with never so little attention the whole Body of the Pentateuch we may observe this diversity of Writers which I speak of which will more appear in the sequel of this Discourse where I evidently make the falsity of the reasons appear which the Jews use to prove that Moses is the Author of the whole Law And as was observed in the beginning in Pag. 36. Contents of Chap. 5. Moses cannot be the Author of the Books which are attributed to him Thus I have given a faithful account of the Judgment of P. Simon and shewed wherein he both agrees with and differs from the common Faith of Gods Church And since he hath the generality of Jews and Christians yea Christ himself and his Apostles against him he had need of very clear and strong irrefragable Arguments to support his singular opinion to wit that in his sense Moses could not be the Author of the Books which are attributed to him And now we come in the Third place to consider the grounds of his Opinion and to answer the Arguments by which he endeavors to prove it His Arguments may be reduced to Three Heads First He argues from the Repetitions that are in the Pentateuch Secondly From the Transpositions that are in it Thirdly From several passages in it where there are such expressions as seem to intimate that Moses could not be the Author of them I begin with the First His Argument from Repetitions There are says he Pag. 37. many Repetitions of the same thing in the Pentateuch which are apparently not Moses's but rather theirs who have made a collection of the Holy Scriptures and have joined together several Readings or Explanations of the same words not thinking it convenient to leave out of their Copies what might illustrate the Text. And then he gives Instances of these Repetitions But before I come to examine his Instances in particular I answer to all in general Since P. Simon acknowledges that those who made the collection of the Holy Scriptures were Men of a Prophetical Spirit and Divinely Inspired as Moses was what greater absurdity is there in Moses his being the Author of these Repetitions than in any other Prophets their being the Authors of them Was not God as free to repeat the same thing over and over again for illustrating the Text by the Ministry of one Prophet as by the Ministry of another P. Simon seems to be better acquainted with the Rules of Grammar than with the Rules of Reasoning now I come to his particular Instances First He begins with Gen. 7. v. 17 18 19 20 24. v. 21 22 23. and first finds fault with its being said Five times over in Five Verses That the Waters prevailed But I Answer If his Self-conceit had not blinded him he might have seen that there was good reason for and great Grace in this Repetition for as the Waters of the Flood prevailed gradually and still rose higher and higher so it was fit that the words should be adapted to the thing First The Waters increased so far on the Earth that they bore up the Ark and set it a floating and this is expressed as we have it in Verse 17. Secondly The Waters increased to that degree that they set the Ark a going or moving progressively from one place to another and this is expressed as in Verse 18. Thirdly The Waters increased so exceedingly that the highest Mountains in the World were covered with them and this
is sutably expressed Verse 19. Fourthly The Waters increased yet so wonderfully upwards above the highest Mountains that they were Fifteen Cubits under Water and this is expressed as in Verse 20. And then Fifthly and Lastly Since the space of time in which the Waters prevailed upon the Earth was One Hundred and Fifty Days this is appositly expressed as in Verse 24 and last of the Chapter What now doth this Man deserve who quarrels with the Spirit of God for these repeated expressions which carry such a Grace in them being so well fitted to the nature of the thing spoken of Next he finds fault with the Repetitions in Vers 21 22 23. I Answer Here indeed is a Repetition of the same thing but it is in somewhat different words and who knows but it might be to assure us of the Truth of the thing which God foresaw some Men would not believe to wit That the Flood was so Universal as to destroy utterly every Living thing from off the Face of the whole Earth except Noah and them that were with him in the Ark and whatever be said of that yet it cannot be denyed but it is free for God to express his mind as he pleases if there be nothing in the expressions but what is true as certainly there is not in this place And it may be that in expressing himself thus he condescended to accomodate himself to the genius of the Hebrew Tongue and to speak with his People in their own way of speaking P. Simon himself confesses that there are some Repetitions which have their Grace in the Books of Moses as well as in the Poems of Homer And says he Pag. 40. it may be that good part of these Repetitions belong to the genius of the Hebrew Tongue which is a very plain Language and repeats often the same thing by different terms which appears in almost all the Books of Scripture and which we find even in the Ordinances of our Kings and in the Stile of the Chancery of Rome as well as in the Stile of our Courts for Civil Affairs where several words are placed after one another which signifie but the same thing Thus he And this Answer may serve to his other Instances from Exod. 31. 14 15 16. and Exod. 32. 15. But why Exod. 16. 33. compared with Verse 36. Levit. 6. 9. should be objected I can see no colour of reason Is it possible that ever a reasonable Man should think that these passages can afford so much as a probable Argument that Moses cannot be the Author of the Books attributed to him And if Pere Simon did not think that they could do him any Service in this matter why did he alledg them And moreover why any Man should find fault with the expressions there used I do not understand unless it be a fault for Almighty God so clearly and fully to express his mind as that his People cannot but understand his meaning might not P. Simon have been affraid least God should say to him as it is written Matth. 20. 15. Is thine Eye Evil because I am Good Lastly Under this head of Repetitions is alledged Levit. 3. 3. and here he finds fault with these expressions The Fat that covereth the Inwards and all the Fat that is upon the Inwards pretending that there is no difference between these two the Fat that covereth the Inwards and all the Fat that is upon the Inwards but this critical Objection ariseth from his own inadvertency for if he had weighed and considered the words he would have seen a manifest difference between these two the Fat that covereth the Inwards and all the Fat that is upon the Inwards and would have perceived that the words are very significant and give us plainly to understand that not only some of the Fat but all the Fat on the Inwards of the Sacrifice must be taken away not only the outward covering of Fat that is upon the Inwards but every bit and crum of Fat that adheres most closely to the Inwards here is an inadequat distinction between these two the Fat c. and all the Fat c. as there is an inadequat distinction between the part and the whole the thing included and the thing including I proceed to his Second Head of Arguments Secondly He Argues from the Disorder and Transpositions that are in the Pentateuch To which I Answer in general That no solid Argument can be drawn from this pretended Disorder to prove that Moses could not be the Author of the Pentateuch for if any other Man writeing by Divine Inspiration might be the Author of such passages as are pretended to be out of their proper places there can no reason be given why Moses might not as well be the Author of them surely it was as free for the Spirit of God to transpose things by the Pen of Moses as by the Pen of any other Man But as we have shewed P. Simon confesses that the whole Pentateuch except any little mistakes of Transcribers that may be in it was written by Men Divinely Inspired Secondly I Answer That in all such passages God may be supposed to have accommodated himself to the genius of the Hebrew Tongue and to have condescended to write unto his People in their own usual way of writing if it be true that P. Simon says Pag. 40 41. in these words following It seems to me that the Jews themselves did not much regard writing in Method as it would be easie to prove by the Stile of the Epistles of Paul and Haron a Caraite Jew who has made literal Commentaries on the whole Pentateuch observes often this confusion of Order which he calls Haphuck and says That it is usual enough in Scripture to begin with one thing then to pass unto another and afterwards to resume again the first If this be true no reason can be given why God might not make choice of writeing to them by the Pen of Moses in this very way and method which was usual amongst them there being nothing of Falshood in it So much in general Now let us come to a particular Examination of the several Instances he gives of this pretended disorder and First He begins with the History of the Creation and finds fault with its Order As that after the Man and Woman were Created Gen. 1. 27. The Woman is supposed not to be made and in the following Chapter the manner how she was taken from Adams side is described nevertheless in the same Chapter it was before forbidden him as he was her Husband whom she accompanied in the Garden to eat the Fruit of a certain Tree This is his first Argument in which there are several Falshoods shuffled in as if it were to make the History of the Creation seem ridiculous But if any Man will impartially and in the fear of God consider the words of Moses in the Two first Chapters of Genesis he will find no such disorder or falshood in