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
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
body must have written those Books and accommodated them to the Ceremonies and Laws which were already in use adding thereunto those Miracles the more to engage the People unto the observance of that Law But all this is so far void of all probability that there was never any till now that durst in earnest assert it 37. How could it be said for example that the Pentateuch was written and published long after the Death of Moses and that it caused the Establishment of the Law and Worship of the Jewish Religion which it contains Then it must be said also that the Ark and Tabernacle which are the Foundations of that Religion were not made till long after Moses and till that Book had been published but this is a thing absolutely impossible for all the Jews firmly believed that their Ark and Tabernacle were made by Moses as that Book relates and it is not conceivable why or on what account they could have taken up such an opinion if they had made them both themselves after they had seen and recived that Book which is now supposed not to have appeared in the World till a long time after Moses it would be doubtless one of the prettiest things in the World and the most unparallel'd either that this Book having been compiled all at once and beforehand with that prodigious number of Ceremonies and Laws as already in use they should afterwards have been Instituted and setled or that being compiled by degrees and according as all those things were Instituted and Established it should always have had as they say a retractive effect or influence and have wrought backwards so as to cause each of those Institutions to be Ascribed unto Moses 38. Likewise how could this People who at their first Imbracing of this Law must at least have known that it was not true that it had been in use amongst them ever since Moses his time and that there had been a continued Succession of Priests ever since Aaron how I say could this People have been able to perswade themselves Universally to believe that what was prescribed by that Book had always been practised amongst them and that the Priests whom it Ordained had received their Ministry from Aaron by an uninterrupted Succession And finally how upon the same principle could all the other Tribes and Families have suffered the Tribe of Levy and Race of Aaron to appropriate unto themselves all the priviledges belonging to the Priesthood and to the Office of the High Priest 39. There is no less absurdity in the other Supposition to wit that the Law having been given by Moses by word of Mouth was preserved for a time among the Jews by means of Tradition only and that afterwards those who committed it to writing added thereunto all those Miracles For besides that even this would be a kind of Miracle and a thing very hard to conceive that that People should have received a Law so strict and severe as that was from a Man who had done nothing extraordinary for proving that he had it from God how could it be that Moses who doubtless had the use of writing should have omitted a thing so necessary and not have committed to writing a Law that contained so many Observations so many Ceremonies and so many Rules that it was necessary to have it always before ones Eyes for fear of failing in some or other point of duty prescribed by it 40. And indeed we learn also from the Book it self that Moses did not sail to commit it to writing Moses as it is said Deut. 31. 9 10 11 12 13. wrote this Law and delivered it unto the Priests the Sons of Levy and unto all the Elders of Israel and commanded that it should be read before all Israel in their hearing at the end of every Seventh Year in the Feast of Tabernacles And it is also said in I do not know how many places of that Book That God commanded Moses to write that which he revealed to him upon the Mount if the Jews then had received that Law from him only by word of Mouth how could they have ever received a Book which should have contained a Lie so gross evident and which should have carried in it an express order from God which their Law-giver had not obeyed 41. That very Order to read the Law every Seventh Year at the Feast of Tabernacles as having been given by Moses doth further clearly show that it could not have been changed nor corrupted for it would have been impossible for such corruptions not to have been discovered or that being discovered they should have been suffered by a People devoted to that Law and whose devout Subjection to it was grounded upon their believing it to be of God and written by Moses besides that those Miracles being most visible to the Eye scattered throughout the Books repeated in divers places of them and linked with the principal transactions therein Recorded there had been a necessity of making a new Book to take them in and not meerly to alter for that purpose an old Book which had been already received 42. The Infidel then must yet once more return to that pretended vain-glorious humor of the Jewish Nation and maintain that the Jews could easily suffer this falsification and that they were even glad that all those Miracles were added to their Law and that their Chronicles were filled with them 43. This might have some probability if the Question were only about a matter of Civil or Political concernment as for example The Romans could have been content that one should have told them that they were the Off-spring of Aeneas and it may be the French would be well enough pleased that one should derive their Original from the Trojans these are things which please some Mens Fancies and may pass without contradiction it being no Bodies interest to oppose them and they do not interfer with other things that have been established and stedfastly believed time out of mind and that are looked upon as the only considerable But as touching the Jews a People so devoted to their Religion so faithful Observers of the least Traditions and to whom lying was so severely forbidden this supposition is altogether without any appearance of truth 44. For I cannot believe that the Infidels boldness to deny any thing that makes against them dare adventure so far as to dispute all the Evidence we have of the Jews Zeal for their Religion since even yet to this day they have so great a veneration for that Law that though they have been dispersed above these Sixteen Hundred Years and see no accomplishment of what was promised to them notwithstanding they observe it still as far as they can with the same strictness as they did at first and wait continually for the fulfilling of those promises how improbable is it then that they should have suffered that which they looked upon as God's own word to be mixed and blended with
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
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
them at all For in the First Chapter Man is generally considered according to the common nature of both Sexes and there it is affirmed That on the first Day after the other works of God were finished God Created Man Male and Female in his own Image This is common to Adam and Eve the Male and the Female that they were both Man of the same specifical humane Nature and that they were both Created by God in his own Image on the Sixth Day after the other Works of God were finished But in the Second Chapter Man is considered more particularly and distinctly according to the proper differences of Sex and the way is described how the Individuals of humane Nature were Created each in their own Sex and 1. The Spirit of God by Moses declares how Man was Created in the Male-Sex and that he was put into the Garden before Planted and that he was appointed to dress and keep it and allowed to eat of the Fruit of it excepting the Fruit of one Tree only which God forbad him to eat of under pain of Death 2. The Spirit of God by Moses relates how Man was Created in the Female-Sex out of a Rib of a Male-Sex and then that the Female being thus of the Male was Married unto him and made one Flesh with him for his help and comfort In all this appears no Disorder nor Transposition nor is there the least shadow of Falshood or Contradiction But P. Simon Objects First That after Man and Woman were Created as it is written Chap. 1. 27. the Woman is supposed not to be made Chap. 2. I Answer He might have said as well that the Man is supposed not to be made in Chap. 2. But the truth is neither the Woman nor the Man are supposed to be yet unmade after they were really made nor doth the Second Chapter at all contradict the First for what the First and Second Chapters say of the Creation of Mankind relate to the same thing and to the same time with this difference that what the First Chapter relates of Man's Creation is expressed in a few general Words which equally concern both Sexes Whereas the Second Chapter gives a full and particular account of the manner how and of the order of time in which each Sex were Created But he Objects farther That before the Woman was made it vvas forbidden the Man as he vvas her Husband vvhom she accompanied in the Garden to eat the Fruit of a certain Tree I Ansvver This is notoriously False I appeal to common Sense vvhether there be any such thing in the Text of Moses as that Adam vvas the Husband of Eve and that she accompanied him in the Garden before she vvas made of his Rib. Adam indeed vvas forbidden to eat the Fruit of a certain Tree before Eve vvas Created this is plain in the Text of Moses but that he vvas then the Husband of Eve or considered as her Husband before she had a Being there is not one Syllable of this in the Text nor any thing from vvhence it can ever be proved When Adam received that positive Command he neither vvas her Husband nor considered as such nor did she then accompany him in the Garden but he rally vvas the common Root of all Mankind of vvhom the several individuals vvere to spring he vvas moreover I believe the federal principal and head of all his Posterity excepting the Messias and as such he was considered in receiving that Law which the Lord God revealed unto Eve also after she was Created though it be not expressed in the Text for she had it revealed unto her one way or other otherwise she had not actually sinned in transgressing it and we have her own confession related by the Sacred Historian that God had revealed it unto her Chap. 3. 3. But whether God revealed it unto her immediately or by the mediation of her Husband we find not in the Text and therefore we cannot certainly say whether of the Two ways it was revealed unto her but we are sure that one of them it was and that is enough Here P. Simon has discovered himself and by this instance we may Judge what Spirit he is of an honest Heathen would have abhorred to have been guilty of such a gross Falsification that he might the better expose the Author of the History of the Creation whoever he was Sure I am that Longinus did not take the Author of that History to have been a Fool when having occasion to mention the History of the Creation he wrote thus of Moses whom he believed to be the Author of it He that gave Laws unto the Jews was a Man of no ordinary parts for he hath both conceived and spoken worthily and becomingly of the power of God In the very beginning of his Laws writing thus God said but what Let there be Light and it was Let the Earth be and it was Such an high opinion of the Sacred Historian had Longinus as is to be seen in his Book De Sublimi dicendi genere extant in several Languages unto this Day Secondly P. Simon Instances in Gen. 21. 3 4 5. and says That to understand the Books of Moses one must often join many Verses together by beginning with the last and coming up to the first That is in plain English we must read them backwards or we cannot understand them Thus Vers 5. And Abraham was One Hundred Years old when his Son Isaac was born unto him Vers 4. And Abraham Circumcised his Son Isaac being Eight Days old as God had commanded him Vers 3. And Abraham called the name of his Son that was born unto him whom Sarah bare to him Isaac And then he gives his Reason why these Three Verses should be read backwards in these numerical words This Order methinks the Historian ought to have kept for the Jews do not name their Children till after their Circumcision This is his Second Argument under the head of Transpositions to prove that Moses could not be the Author of the Pentateuch And is it not a goodly one Sure P. Simon must have very mean thoughts of the Learned Men of this Age to believe that he can perswade them by such ridiculous Reasoning as this to be of his opinion that Moses could not be the Author of the Pentateuch But it is no wonder that he have mean thoughts of the Men of this Age when he takes upon him to teach the Sacred Historian whom himself acknowledges to have been a Prophet how he ought to have written This Order methinks the Historian ought to have kept says P. Simon And your reason good Father why the Historian ought to have kept the Order that you fancy to be best Why that we have in the very next words For the Jews do not name their Children till after their Circumcision Now Reader I pray thee consider what a senseless Reason this is The Author of the Book of Genesis ought to have written in
that Order as P. Simon would have it and we ought to read the Three Verses aforesaid backwards because the Jews in this Age do not name their Children till after their Circumcision But can P. Simon prove that in Abrahams time Children were not named till after their Circumcision might they not be numbred at their Circumcision yea or before their Circumcision in Abrahams time God left it free unto Abraham and his Posterity to name their Children at vvhat time they pleased before at or after their Circumcision and no Man living can prove that in Abrahams time People vvere bound to name their Children after their Circumcision or that they generally used so to do such Arguments as this of P. Simons deserves no Ansvver but to be hissed at and his Immodesty in saying That the Sacred Historian ought to have kept the Order he speaks of is to be lamented by all that desire to fear God Thirdly He Objects Gen. 31. 46. This Verse says he is methinks likewise out of its Order as well as all the Discourse which treats of the Covenant between Jacob and Laban because they did not eat till the Alliance was made Answer Here is an Argument little better than the former only it is more modestly proposed They did not eat till the Alliance was made ergo all the Discourse which treats of the Covenant between Jacob and Laban is out of its order Any Man that attentively reads the Text of Moses would conclude the quite contrary that seeing they did not eat till the Alliance was made therefore all the Discouse that treats of the Covenant c. is in its Order because it is all set down before the offering of Sacrifice or killing of Beasts and eating of Bread mentioned Vers 54. As for Vers 46. there is nothing affirmed in it but what is most true It is most true that Jacob's Brethren gathered Stones it is most true that they made an heap and it is as true that they did eat there upon the heap But says P. Simon They did not eat till the Alliance was made I Answer Nor does the Historian say in Vers 46. that they did eat before the Covenant was made there he only says That they did eat upon the heap but does not say when and a little after in Vers 54. he tells us when it was they eat upon the heap to wit after the Covenant was made So that here is nothing to cavil at and find fault with only the same thing is twice expressed in somewhat different words First The matter of Fact is related in general without telling what was meant by it Vers 46. They took stones and made an heap and they did eat there upon the heap Secondly The meaning of the heap of stones and of their eating upon the heap is cleared up and the time mentioned when they eat upon the heap there it is shewed that the heap of stones was by agreement between Jacob and Laban ordained to be a Witness or Token of the Covenant between them Two and their eating upon the heap is clearly implyed to have been a federal Feast signifying and sealing up a lasting Friendship between the Parties Covenanted and last of all it is expresly declared when this Feast upon the heap of stones was to wit after the Covenant between Jacob and Laban was made and confirmed by the Oaths of both Parties Vers 53 54. To conclude this Answer Let it be considered that Vers 46 speaks only of the place where they eat without mentioning the time when But Vers 54 speaks only of the time when they eat without mentioning the place where that is without mentioning that it was upon the heap of stones and now why Moses yea why Gods Holy Spirit might not be the Author of both these 46 and 54 Verses and of all that comes between them it is above my capacity to understand I dare challenge any Man to bring an Argument from this place to prove that Moses could not be the Author of the Pentateuch an Argument I say that any Man of Judgment would not be ashamed of Fourthly He Objects Gen. 35. 28 29. The Death of Isaac there related seems to be out of its place says P. Simon because Isaac died not at that time and that Joseph was sold Twelve Years before the Death of Isaac yet nevertheless the History of Joseph begins but at the 37th Chapter of the same Book I Answer The Death of Isaac hath that place in the History which the wisdome of God thought fit to assign unto it and that we should account to be its place which Gods Wisdome by his Prophet hath put it in But says P. Simon Isaac died not at that time I Answer There is no other time of his Death mentioned there but that after he was One Hundred and Eighty Years Old he Died and was Buried which is most true but it is not at all said by the Sacred Historian that Isaac Died at that time when his Son Jacob came unto him unto Mamre for that had been false and I desire this may be taken notice of But says P. Simon Joseph was Sold Twelve Years before the Death of Isaac and yet the History of Joseph begins but at the 37th Chapter of the same Book I Answer This is indeed true for Isaac was Sixty Years Old when Jacob was Born Gen. 25. 26. And Jacob was One Hundred and Thirty Years Old when he stood before Pharaoh Gen. 47. 9. Now 60 and 130. make One Hundred and Ninety which is but Ten Years more than the Years of the Age of Isaac who Died when he was One Hundred and Eighty Years Old that is Ten Years before Jacob stood before Pharaoh so that Isaac must have Died about the time of Joseph's advancement in Aegypt as appears from Gen. 41. 53 54. compared with Gen. 45. 6. where we see that Seven Years of Plenty and Two Years of Famine had passed from the time of Joseph's advancement until the time of Jacob's coming into Aegypt Isaac then Living One Hundred and Eighty Years could not Die till about the time of Joseph's advancement either the Year of his advancement or the Year before his advancement and if it was the Year before his Advancement that Isaac Died then it was about Twelve Years after Joseph was Sold that Isaac Died for Joseph was Seventeen Years Old when he was Sold Gen. 37. 2. and Thirty Years Old when he was advanced in Aegypt Gen. 41. 46. and consequently he was not advanced till the Thirteenth Year after he had been Sold so that Isaac Dying the Year before his advancement he must have Died Twelve Years after he was Sold. But what is all this to the purpose this doth not prove that the Relation of the Death of Isaac is out of its place for as I have said that is its place which the Wisdome of God thought fit to assign unto it and there we find it in the end of the 35th Chapter