renounce all Sin the Devil and all his Works to confess all their Sins to fast and pray for God's Pardon in order thereunto What is this but Repentance as well with relation to Original as Actual Sins Besides he promises amendment in this particular Never to be lead by his corrupt Affections Agreeable hereunto is that in the Larger Creed in Epiphanius's Ancorate where Baptism is call'd Baptism of Repentance and in the Creed of the Church of Jerusalem I believe one Baptism of Repentance for the Remission of Sins Pag. 16. It hath been a Point very much disputed among several Foliticians in the Common-wealth of Learning Who was the real and true Author of the Pentateuch P. 17. It is evident that the five Books of Moses were written by another Hand after his Decease ANSWER Gregory the Great in his Preface on Job discoursing about the Author of that Book hath these Words Sen quis haec scripserit valde supervacue quaeritur cum tamen auctor libri spiritus sanctus fideliter credatur Ipsi igitur haec scripsit qui haec scribendo dictavit ipse scripsit qui illis operis inspirator extitit It is to no purpose to enquire after the Author of this Book it is sufficient to believe that the Holy Ghost is the Author He therefore writ the Book who dedicated the things that are written in it he writ it by whose Inspiration it was written Hieronymus a sancta fide p. 54. truly says Constat Theodoretum complures alios patres doctissimasque aetatis nostrae Theologes in ea esse sententia ut de autoribus multorum veteris instrumenti librorum nihil certi affirmari potest ut pluribus verbis ostendit sixtus senensis alis qui hoc argumentum tractarunt It is manifest that Theodoret and many other Fathers and the most learned Divines of our Times are of Opinion that nothing can certainly be determined who were the Writers of many of the Books of the Old Testament and this is proved at large by Sixtus Senensis and others who have examined and treated of this Argument Dr. Hammond discoursing concerning the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews whether it be St. Paul or St. Luke makes this Conclusion All which can be said in this Matter can amount no higher than too probable or conjectural it is no Matter of any Weight or Necessity that it be defined who the Author was whether St. Paul or St. Luke a constant Companion of St. Paul's for many Years and the Author of two other Books of the Sacred Cannon I know not any thing justly to be censured in the Opinions of those Divines those are to be blamed that misunderstand and misapply what they have truly written This I am sure of that nothing can be drawn from them which may be any way serviceable for Mr. Blount's design who with a strange Boldness dares to affirm that Moses was not the Author of the Pentateuch There is no Book in the World whose Author can be more plainly demonstrated than that of the Pentateuch it can be made appear out of the Holy Scriptures for which if Mr. Blount had any Reverence he could never have fallen into so great an Error It can be made appear from the Consent of all Nations and all Authors except some Modern ones who make any mention of the Pentateuch whether Jews or Christians or Gentiles they all admit it as a certain Truth that Moses was the Author thereof Our Saviour in the fifth Chapter of St. John Ver. 46 and 47 says Had ye believed Moses ye would have believed me for he wrote of me But if ye believe not his Writings how shall ye believe my Words Therefore Moses writ and he writ those Books which the Jews read as writ by him and no Man can deny but those Books are the Pentateuch 'T is certain that Christ always distinguished the Prophets from the Law of Moses and by the Law understood the Pentateuch Philip said to Nathaniel John 1. We have found him of whom Moses writ in the Law of whom the Prophets have spoken Luke 24. Ver. 27. And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets he expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself And in the 15th of the Acts Ver. 21. For Moses of old time hath in every City them that preach him being read in the Synagogues every Sabbath day Out of which it appears without all peradventure that Moses writ the Law by which Word Philo Judaeus and Josephus say the whole Pentateuch is meant And that the Modern Jews understand the Word Law in the same manner we have the Authority of Leo Modena a Rabbi of Venice in his History of the present Iews throughout the World in which Book p. 247. he hath these Words We shall here in the last place glve the Reader a View of the Thirteen Articles of their Belief as it is delivered by Rabbi Moses Egyptus in his Exposition upon the Miscna in Sanedim cap. Helech which Articles are generally believed by all Jews without contra diction The Seventh Article of their Faith is That Moses was the greatest Prophet that ever hath been and that he was endued with a different and higher Degree of Prophecy than any other The Eighth is That the Law which was given by Moses was wholly dictated by God and that Moses put not one Syllable in of himself What this Law is appears out of the first Page of that History among the Rites which are observed by all the Jews and he says are the Precepts of the Written Law Namely such as are contained in the Pentateuch or five Books of Moses which are in all Six hundred and thirteen in Number that is to say Two hundred forty eight affirmative and Three hundred sixty five negative And these they call Mizuoth de Oraita that is to say Precepts of the Law From hence we may conclude without all manner of doubt that by the Word Law in our Saviour's Speech and in those other places of Scripture which I have cited the whole Pentateuch is understood The Testimony which is brought from the Consent of all Nations is so fully explicated and declared by Huetius that none can doubt of the Truth thereof and to whom I had rather refer my Reader then here to transcribe him Especially considering I have so fully proved the same from the Holy Scriptures and Indisputable Authority I shall only add two or three Observations hereunto belonging and conclude this Point The First Observation is that neither Julian nor Porphiry nor any of the most inveterate Enemies of the Christian or Jewish Faith did ever make it a Question whether Moses was the Author of the Pentateuch The first that ever started those Objections against it and are now so much valued was one Abenezra a Jew who although he did not dare to be so bold fac'd as to deny openly so important a Truth yet by the Difficulties he proposed and by the manner
these Countries a very quick and easie Passage Gerard Vossius de Scientiis Mathematicis p. 242. says Ex Asia per fretum Anianum non difficilem fuisse Navigationem in Mexicanam atque inde facillimum transitum in peruanum I must confess nothing pleases me more than the common Saying Omnia modice intra moâ—um Yet I must subjoyn what Josephus a Costa says relating hereunto both upon the account of Mr. Boyle who in his History of Cold commends the said a Costa as a very inquisitive and philosophical Person as also upon the said Acosta's own account who was for a long time a Traveller in America In his Natural and Moral History of the West-Indies p. 303. he says The Old World joyns with the New in some Part by which Men and Beasts may pass And p. 503. If there be any Sea betwixt the Old World and America it is so narrow that wild Beasts may easily swim over and Men may go over in small Boats So that without a Miracle here is a plain Solution of this Difficulty how the remote Parts of the Earth might be Planted with Men Tygers Panthers Bears c. Pag. 5. 'T is a Paradox to me that Methusalem was the longest liv'd of all the Children of Adam and no Man will be able to prove it while from the Process of the Text I can manifest it may be otherwise ANSWER 'T is no Paradox to believe that which hath been opinioned by most Men and in most Ages and is Established on good Grounds although it may not unexceptionally be Established by the Process of a Text and such is the Case of Methusalem's long Life The Instances in Lucian de Longaevis and in Phlegon Trallian of the same Subject come very short of the Age of Methusalem Josephus indeed in the first Book of his Antiquities c. 4. cites Hesiod Hecataeus Hellanicus Acusilaus Ephorus and Nicolaus who affirm that some lived to a Thousand Years And Pliny in the seventh Book of his Natural Histry c. 48. confirms the same But each of those Authors leave us uncertain as to the Point in Hand Josephus lessens the Authority he produceth by insinuating the little Credit to be had to his Authorities 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neither doth he express how they made their Computation Pliny destroys the Authority he brings by telling us that some accouâ—t six Months to a Year some three Months some a Lunar Month as namely the Aegyptians and that this is the reason why some were said to live a Thousand Years Which Latitude should we assume Methusalem may be said to have lived some Thousands of Years But the Computation of Time in the Mosaical Writings is most certain the Years are there according to the Course of the Sun the Months according to the Course of the Moon as will plainly appear The time of the Children of Israel's eating Manna is accounted fourty Years in the end of the sixteenth Chapter of Exodus and reckoned from their departure out of Aegypt Numbers the 33d Chapter Verse 38. Which Number from the same Season of the Year to the same by the Years of the Sun is most exact for they came forth of Aegypt the fifteenth Day of the first Month in the beginning of Barley Harvest and the very same Day of the same Month in Barley Harvest their Manna ceased Josh 4. ver 12. In the 25th Chapter of Leviticus the Israelites are commanded to sow their Fields and cut their Vineyard and gather the Fruits thereof six Years and to let the seventh rest as a Sabbath Year to the Lord. And seven of those Sabbaths are accounted Fourty nine Years at the end whereof in the tenth Day of the seventh Month began the Jubilee These Years were manifestly Years of the Sun otherwise all the Fruits of those Years could not have been gathered in Harvest and Vintage as God appointed for Fourty nine Years of the Moon would very near have cut off One and a Half the last expiring in Winter before any Corn or other Fruit were ready to be gathered therein St. Austin in his fifteenth Book de Civitate Dei cap. 14. writing against the Opinion of some who were perswaded that the Years of the Ancient Fathers which lived in the first Age were not of the Sun useth these Words Tantus tunc dies fuit quontus nunc est Tantus tunc mensis quontus nunc est quem Luna caepta finita conclusit Tantus annus quontus nunc est quem duodecim menses Lunares addites propter cursum solis quinque diebus quadrante consummant The Day was as long then saith he as it is now the Month as long then as now contained within the compass of the Moon 's Course from the beginning to the end The Year was then as long as now perfected by twelve Months of the Moon with five Days and a Quarter added So that the Year in the Writings of Moses was a solar Year the same we use at this Day The Months mentioned by Moses were lunar Months compleat This is manifest by the History of Noah's Flood in the seventh and eighth Chapters of Genesis where we are taught that the Flood begun the seventeenth Day of the second Month and the Ark rested on a Mountain of Ararat in the seventeenth Day of the seventh Month which Space by God's holy Spirit is there counted a hundred and fifty Days which reckoning giveth to every Month thirty Days apiece neither more nor less Of this Opinion was St. Austin in hls fourth Book de Trinitate chap. 4. Si duodecim menses integri considerentur quos triceni dies complent talem quippe mensem veteres observaverunt quem circutius lunaris ostendit That is If the whole twelve Months be considered which contain thirty Days apiece such was the Month observed by Men of Old Time even that which the Course of the Moon sheweth According to this Measure of Time the Days of Methusalem were Nine hundred sixty and nine Years and it doth not appear that any other of Adam's Posterity lived so long I have been the longer on this pretended Paradox because this Instance is commonly made use of to invalidate the holy Scriptures and because the right stating of the scriptural Years and Months is of good Use in these Controversies Pag. 7. I know that Manna is now plentifully gathered in Calabria and Josephus tells me in his Days it was as plentiful in Arabia the Devil therefore made me quere where was then the Miracle in the Days of Moses since the Israelites saw but that in his time which the Natives of those Countries behold in ours ANSWER The Authority of Josephus is of little Moment in this case Mr. Gregory of Christ Church in his Discourse of the seventy Interpreters p. 33. hath these Words When Josephus cometh to the Miraculous Passages of holy Writ he useth a fair way of Dissimulation still moderating the wonder of a Work that he bring it
of his proposing them as Mr. Blount doth his Oracles he plainly enough insinuates to an intelligent Reader that his design was no other than to overthrow the Authority of the Pentateuch out of his Store-house it is that Hobbs Spinosa and other such Politicians in Mr. Blount's Common-wealth of Learning have furnished themselves with Objections such as they are and which have been often answered My Second Observation is That not only Philo Judaeus Josephus and all others as well Ancient and Modern Jews did understand by the Law the whole Pentateuch but also the Gentiles did understand it in the same manner and consequently it cannot be imagined that the Law mentioned by our Lord should be taken in a different Sense The Author I shall cite for Proof hereof is Dionysius Longinus in his Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sect 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So the Legislator of the Jews no common Person when he declares and makes known the Power of his God according to his Majesty presently in the beginning of his Laws he tells us that God said Let there be Light and it was so Longinus in this place calls the beginning of Genesis the beginning of Moses's Laws And if Genesis comes under that Denomination I think no question can be made of the other Books nor of the true Sense of those places by me brought out of the New Testament My Last Observation is That one of the great Proofs of revealed Religion depends on the Antiquity and Verity of the Mosaic Writings if these Books were not written by Moses a wide Gate would be opened for Libertines and Deists to redicule them and to expose them for Fables Preadamitism and the Eternity of the World might be received as uncontroulable Doctrines and Christian Religion deprived of the Support of those Writings to which our Lord was pleased to make an Appeal So that is is no wonder that Mr. Blount should be so positive and endeavour with such Confidence to subvert these Writings by affirming That it is evident that Moses was not the Author of them He well knowing that his pretended Oracles of Reason will be accounted Scandalous and False as long as this part of Holy Scriptures the Mosaic Writings can be defended SECT II. Of PARADISE IN this Section the Mosaic History of the Creation is wickedly ridiculed What Ireneus says of some of the Ancient Heresies viz. That the very naming of them is a sufficient Refutation the same may be said of some Passages I shall here Transcribe Pag. 25. There is a Dialogue between the Serpent and Eve It hapned upon a time that Eve sitting solitary under a Tree without her Husband there came to her a Serpent or Adder which I know not by what Means or Power civilly accosted the Woman in these Words or to this Purpose All hail most fair One What are you doing so solitary and serious under this Shade Pag. 26. Eve says Let me see had I best use it or no What can be more beautiful than this Apple How sweetly it smells but it may be it tasts ill Serpent If it tasts ill throw it away and say I am a great Lyar. Eve Well I 'll try thou hast not deceived me Give me one that I may carry it to my Husband Serpent Well thought on here 's another for you go to your Husband with it Farewel young Woman Pag. 27. God says to the Serpent Hereafter vile Beast instead of eating Apples thou shalt lick the Dust of the Earth and as for you Mistress Curious in sorrow shall you bring forth Children Pag. 33. It perplexes me how out of one Rib the whole Mass of a Womans Body could be built for a Rib doth not equal the hundredth perhaps not the thousandth Part of an entire Body Pag. 44. The Text says They sewed Fig-Leaves together and therewith made themselves Aprons From whence you may deduce the Original of the Taylors Trade But where had they Needles and where their Thread the very first Day of their Creation since the Thâ—ead-makers Art was not yet found out nor yet the Art of Working in Iron ANSWER In this Section are many such Queries but these are more then sufficient to make any Man Nauseate For what Man that hath but a Mâ—â—e of Piety will not be concerned to read such Expressions to read the Holy Oracles of God to be thus droll'd on by these pretended ones and this sacred Book of God to be thus exposed by a scurrilous Libel Our Author often cites the Canons of the Church when they serve his Turn Here he mentions none and I am certain there is good Reason for it for not to mention ancient Canons which he must necessarily know condemns this Practice The Council of Trent condemns it and in Session 4th condemns them who shall convert and wrest the Words of Holy Scripture to Prophaneness Scurrilousness Fabulousness Flatteries Distractions Superstitions or too scurrilous Libels The first Council of Millain declares That their Rashness is very wicked who absue the Words or Sentences of Holy Scripture to Flattery Contumely Superstition Impiety or to any prophane Purposes and that the Bishops are to punish such Offenders according to the holy Canons So that as far as I know this folly of our Author in sporting thus with Holy Scripture is condemned by all Christians of any particular Denomination in the whole World What is material and worthy of Consideration in this Section we will now examine Pag. 36. These are the Words of Moses There comes a River out of Eden to water the Garden and from thence it divides it self into four Branches the Name of the first is Pishon c. Gen. 2. Ver. 10. Whereby it is apparent that either in the Entrance or Exit of the Garden there were four Rivers and that those four Rivers did proceed from one and the same Fountain-head in Eden Now pray tell me in what part of the Earth is this Country of Eden where Four Rivers arise from one and the same Spring ANSWER That there may be a plain and a full Solution of the difficulties the Oracle proposes both in this Paragaph and in the other which shall be examined in this Section I shall premise a Consideration or Two of good use in the Matters under Debate The First Consideration shall be of the Opinions of the Ancient Jews and Christians as to this Book of Genesis The Second shall be of the great alterations that have happened to many places of the Earth since the Creation Out of which it will appear that many places then well known may now be wholy unknown to us Lastly I shall make a brief Reply to what the Oracle hath here declared The First Consideration relating to the Ancient Jews is that they always looked on the Book Genesis as a Book hard to be understood yet to contain a literal Sense St. Jerom in his Preface to his Commentaries on Ezechiel says Nisi quis apud eos aetatem Sacerdotalis
be wilfully blind that deny the completion thereof But our Author is not to be born withal as to what he says concerning the Prophecy's Authority and that the Jews reckon it not among their Canonical Books Father Simon who had well weighed this Point in his Critical History of the Old Testament Book 1. Chap. 9. says There are many learned Men who find fault that the Jews exclude Daniel from the number of the Prophets and Theodoret hath reproved them very severely But it is easie to reconcile their Opinion in this Point with that of the Christians since they agree that the Books of the Bible which are called Canonical have been equally inspired by God and moreover that the Book of Daniel is of the number of these Canonical Books Josephus in the Tenth Book of his Antiquities Chap. 12. writing of Daniel says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That he was endued with a Divine Spirit and that he was of the number of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He was one of the greatest Prophets that his Books were read by the Jews which abundantly demonstrated that he conversed with God For he did not only foretel things to come to pass as the other Prophets did but he determined the very time in which they were to be fulfilled And whereas other Prophets predicted Calamities and so lost their Esteem among the Princes and the People He foretold Good Things to come by which he conciliated the Favour of all Persons and as for the certainty of Events he obtained a Belief amongst all Men. Porphiry the Philosopher the Scholar of Plotinus and cotemporary with Origen who made it his Business to refel the Prophesies of Daniel when he found all things so punctually delivered as that there was no place for a Refutation he finally assumed the Impudence to affirm that not Daniel but an Impostor under his Name who lived in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes Published these Prophecies And this his Impudence was much more tolerable than that of Mr. Blount's who asserts that Daniel's 70 Weeks were uncertain as to their Authority Pag. 162. He never evinced his Genealogy from David for tho' some mean Persons called him the Son of David and the Mobb by that Title did cry Hosannah to him yet did he acquiesce in terming himself the Son of Man As also when he made his Cavalcade upon an Asinego they extolled him as the Descendant of King David ANSWER This is a very bold Stroke Infidelity unmasked To what purpose should our Saviour evince his Genealogy from David The honourable Du Plessis Chap. 30. observes Nusquam in Evangelio exprobratum Jesu legamus quod ex stirpe Davidis seu ex tribu Juda oriundus nonesset sed quod fabri filius ut diuturnae Davidicae domus erumnae ad inopiam nonnullos redegerant We never read in the Gospel that our Lord was upbraided with his not being of the Tribe of Judah or Lineage of David it was objected that he was a Carpenters Son for the Miseries that had befallen the House of David had reduced some of that Family to great Penury Agreeable hereunto is that of Episcopius lib. 3. Instit Jesum Nostrum ex tribu Judae ortum duxisse nemo circae ista tempora quibus discipuli ejus vivebant dubitavit That our Lord Iesus sprang out of the Tribe of Judah no one doubted in the Days of his Disciples The Jews did all acknowledge it as appears by the Question of our Saviour How say the Scribes that Christ is the Son of David What think ye of Christ Whose Son is he They say unto him The Son of David The Genealogy of Jesus shews his Family the first Words of the Gospel are The Book of the Generation of Jesus Christ the Son of David The Apostle in his 7th Chapter of the Hebrews Verse 14. For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah Benjamine Tudelensis whom Abraham Zacuth in his Chronicon calls the great Luminary in his Itinerary affirms that the very Mahometans call the Messiah the Son of David How impious is our Author then in this Expression That they were but mean Persons that called him the Son of David How blasphemous he is in his Expression of the Mobb the Cavalcade on the Asinego is manifest to all those that have any Reverence for the Holy Gospel and the Prophets Pag. 164. It is apparent that not only the Jews but also the Christians were Millenaries and did believe and expect the Temporal Reign of a Messiah together with the Vnion of the Jews and Gentiles under one most happy Monarchy ANSWER It must be granted that many eminent Persons for Sanctity favoured the Millenaries But if we impartially examin this matter we shall find that it wholly rests on the Authority of Papias who pretended Apostolical Tradition Now of what Authority this Author was I report from the Words of Casaubon in his 16th Exercitation Number 74. Narrat Eusebius in tertio Historiarum papiam hunc Scriptorem fuisse futilissimum qui omnes traditionum fabellas mirifice amplecteretur scriptis Mandaret Multa igitur falsa absurdaque de Christo Apostolis scripsisse quaedam etiam fabulis propriora Eusebius declares in the third Book of his History that this Papias was a most triflng Scribler who embraced all manner of fabulous Traditions and committed them to Writing He writ many false things of Christ and the Apostles and some of his Narrations look more like Dreams and Fables then true History And in that number Casaubon gives a pregnant Instance out of Oecumenius Now as Papias pretended this Tradition to come from the Apostles so he did nothing but what others in those primitive times were wont to do It was usual for Sectaries to boast that they taught the Doctrine of the Apostles or at least their Disciples We read in Clemens Alexand. lib. 7. Strom. That Basilides an ancient Heretick boldly avouched that he had for his Master Glaucias St. Peter's Interpreter and that Valentinus affirmed with the like boldness that he had been instructed in Religion by Theodad who was one of Saint Paul's familiar Acquaintance It would be difficult to show the difference in the Cases before-mentioned and consequently this Tradition of Papias may be as well rejected as that of Basilides or that of Valentinus and that Tradition can be no certain Rule for us to walk by Pag. 165. Not one of the two first Ages dissented from the Opinion of the Millenaries and they who oppose it never quote any for themselves before Dionysius Alexandrinus who lived at least 250 Years after Christ Of this Opinion was Justin Martyr and as he says all other Christians that were exactly Orthodox Irenaeus relates the very Words which Christ used when he taught this Doctrine This Pretence and Millenary Invention stopt the Mouths of the Unbelieving Jews ANSWER It is a great Boldness to affirm that not one of the two first Centuries opposed this Opinion For how could our
fame of which hath fill'd the whole World But peradventure their Records were incombustible or reserved in the great Wall for the Pre-adamites alone to consult But the mischief of all is That this King Chingi was an ambitious Prince and for this end burnt all those Histories that he might obliterate and blot out of Men's Remembrance all the noble Acts of his Predecessors The same Vossius in his Castigations ad Scriptum Hornii ch 12. cites Martinius who gives us an Account of their Traditional Antiquity Sciendum itaque extremam hanc Asiam primum septem habuisse Imperatores quorum ab Electione per suffragia ab anno nimirum ante Christum natum 2846 usque ad annum 2207 ante quae tempora nihil veri se habuisse in suis Historiis fatentur Sinae deinde hareditaria fuit successio We must therefore know that this extreme Eastern part of Asia had first of all seven Emperors who were created by the Election of the People before our Christian computation 2846 even to the Year 1205. before which time the Chinenses have no true Historical Account as they confess themselves and then their Government began to be hereditary How vastly wide and different is this Account from the Traditional account our Author gives us of the Posterity of Panzon and Panzona and from that of the Bramins of Guzarat Joseph Scaliger in his fifth Book de Emendat Tempor reckons the Chineses among those Qui veris historiae monumentis destituti hinc multa annorum millia quaedam immania temporum intervalla expressit ab illis tam temporum inscilia quam vetustatis affectatio They were destitute of the true Monuments of Antiquity and from hence it is that they boast of so many thousand Years and those wonderful Intervals of time which their Ignorance of History and their affectation of Antiquity occasioned From this Ignorance and Affectation sprang those infinite Dynasteis of the Egyptians and those monstrous Traditions of the Chinenses as have heard Besides 't is to be noted we have no certain knowledge what kind of Year they used which is necessary to be known as before we observ'd concerning the Mosaic History The Computation of the Egyptians is obnoxious to the same Objection And whereas our Author says They were not Lunar 't is not material for each of the 330 Kings might reign a competent number of Solar Years upon this his Supposition And this any Man may perceive that knows the difference between a Solar and a Lunar Year as they are vulgarly understood He that will defend the Egyytian Chronology must of necessity understand some form of Years different from the Mosaic as when they report of their ancient Kings that some of them lived 300 some 1000 Years and more as we find in Varro cited by Lactantius Book 2. Orig. Error c. 12. where altho' Lactantius differs somewhat from Varro yet as to the thing it self they may be well enough reconciled We shall therefore speak of the Egyptian Year forasmuch as Macrobius lib. 1. cap. 12. Satur. says Anni certus modus apâ—ld solos Aegyptios aliarum gentium dispari modo pari errore mutantur The Egyptians are the best skill'd in Chronology of any Nations For others altho' in a different manner yet they all err much in this particular Wherefore if we demonstrate the great variety and uncertainty that is among the Egyptians in this point we do according to Macrobius subvert the whole Pagan Chronology and the Dreams of the Preadamites Plutarch in the Life of Numa Pompilius affirms That before Numa who added January and February the Roman Year contained but ten Months Among some Barbarous People the Year contained but three Months In Greece among the Arcadians but four Months Among the Acarnanes six Among the Egyptians a Month was a Year and aftewards their Year contained four Months The Egyptians are thought to be most ancient and to compute an infinite number of Years in their Annals the reason of which proceeds from their using Months for Years Alexander ab Alexandro Book 3. c. 24. Dier Gen. writing of the variety of Years used by the Ancients says of the Egyptians Non una facie sed multiplici sorte variarunt ut quandoque trium saepius quatuor mensium annum efficerent plerumque mensis spatio ad cursum Lunae metiebantur The Egyptians did not use one kind of Year for sometimes their Year consisted but of three Months more often of four and for the most part it was but a Lunar Month. From whence it follows that nothing was more uncertain than their Account of time which yet is the basis of all true History and that in things so remote we can have no sure footing but in the Mosaic History of whose Chronology and the certainty thereof we have discoursed at large Pag. 192. As to the Origine of good and evil methinks 't is less contradictory and unreasonable to believe as the ancient Persians did That there were two Beginnings of things the one good the other evil For how can Evil proceed from a Being infinitely good and without whom nothing is If evil be not And if Genesis be a Parable the Persians may be in the right as much as the Jews ANSWER The Origin of Evil hath much exercised the Philosophers of old nor can we have any certainty thereof without Revealed Religion For how otherwise could we come to the right notion of sin or a deviation from Good in all Men a lapse from our first estate wherein God who is all good created us How perplexed our Author is about this Question for in this Page he affirms That if the Book of Genesis be a Parable and he supposes it to be so the Persians may be in the right as much as the Jews And yet Page 205. He affirms That this lapse of Nature may be discovered by Natural Reason if the opinion of the Jews be according to Natural Reason as Mr. Blount bears us in hand how can the Opinion of the Persians which is diametrically opposite to it be in the right these are great in consistencies If the Persians laying aside the Book of Genesis may be in the right our Author's Discourse of Natural Religion is ridiculous For he supposes Page 195. the first Article of Natural Religion to be That there is one GOD Infinite Eternal and Creatour of all things Whereas the Persians make two Anti-gods equally Infinite and Eternal and that one of them is the Author of Good and the other of Evil. So that the Sentiments of the Persians is repugnant to the Notion of a Deity For while they make two Gods they make none at all And consequently he is guilty of Idolatry and Atheism and the great Contradictions in the Opinion of the Persians are very palpable If this Persian Principle of Evil be absolutely contrary to the other Principle of Good it must in all its Perfections be contrary to it Now since all Perfections belong to that
there were divers othor Authors who wrote before Moses he thinks it sufficient to follow an Annotator on Dr. Browne who cites a Passage out of Apuleius whom the Pagans opposed to our Lord as they did Apollonius which proves nothing but that there were some Men before Moses But as for Writings we find not one Syllable in that place of Apuleius which was the thing to be proved As also when p. 219. he was obliged by the Procedure of the Subject insisted on to compare the Jews with the Egyptians Chaldees and Phaenicians in point of Antiquity or to compare the Writings of those respective Nations with each other he changeth the Terms of the Comparison and compares the Nation of the Jews with the Writings of the Egyptians Chaldeans and Phaenicians This is that which Aristotle justly condemns in Argumentations and Comparisons and calls it the passing from one Genus to another If this Method had been used and allowed of in the well known Controversie between the Scythians and the Egyptians the Scythians would have been vanquished and the generally received Opinion of the Scythians Antiquity would upon no good Grounds have been banished out of the World I have taken no notice of these or of such like weak Sophisms in the foregoing Discourse because they are in themselves very Childish and are easily to be observed by a considering Reader I have also pretermitted his palpable abusing good Authors if the Abuse be very obvious an Example of which I shall here produce Pag. 219. He thus writes What Josephus speaks of the Greeks and other Nations may with the same reason be applied to Moses and the Jews viz. That all Founders and Establishers of new Estates have each of them supposed in their own behalf that whosoever was of theirs he was the first of the World Contra Apionem lib. 1. Now howover Josephus boasts so much of the Antiquity of his Country-men the Jews yet he himself confesses that he nevertheless durst not presume to compare the Nation of the Jews with the Antiquity of the most Ancient and Infallible Writings of the Egyptians Chaldeans and Phaenicians who dwell in such Countries as are not subject to the Corruption of Air and are carefully provided that whatsoever has been done by them should not sleep in Obscurity but be kept in Memory in the publick Writings of the most learned Men Contra Apionem lib. 1. And Pag. 220. Which is as if Josephus had said forasmuch as no other Nations but the Egyptians Phaenicians and Chaldeans have certain Records of their Original therefore will I pretend my own Nation of the Jews to be ancienter then them who cannot disprove me but because the Egyptians Phaenicians and Chaldees have more ancient Records of their Country in being therefor to prevent being confuted I think it more convenient to yeild to them in Antiquity And this is the Secret meaning of what Josephus says Thus far Mr. Blount To whom I return this ANSWER He that will but take some pains to read over the two Books which Josephus wrote for the sake of his Epaphroditus and for such as he was lovers of Truth in opposition to Apion of Alexandria will soon perceive the perverseness of our Author to exceed that of this malapert and petulant Grammarian The design of Josephus in these two Books was to show that Apion's Negative Argument from the silence of the Greek Authors with respect to the Jews was of no moment forasmuch as the Egyptians the Chaldeans and Phaenecians who had ancienter and more sure Histories and had better ways and means of Writing then the Greeks make mention of his Country-men the Jews And this in effect is the Sum of all that Josephus writes on this Matter in his Books against Apion Josephus seems to make an Apology for the bragging Greeks in point of Antiquity when He says that all their Greek Writers supposed in their own behalf that whosoever was of theirs was the first of the World but Josephus also adds what our Deist omits and alters the case that this was for want of letters the ancient use of which came to the Greeks from the Phaenicians and Cadmus and that at that time the Greeks had no certain Records That Homer's Poem was the ancientest Book which they had and this was written after the Trojan War Nay that this Poem was not at first written but was preserved by Tradition and the People's Songs And that this was the cause of that great Dissonancy and Difference which appeared in Original Copies when it was first committed to Writing It was for want of Letrers they had no ancient Histories and that their Cadmus Milesius and their Acusilaus Argivus did not long preceed the Expedition of the Persians against the Greeks Whereas nothing is nor can be more evident to him that reads Josephus than this that the same Prejudice doth not affect Moses and therefore our Author hath with great Incogitancy affirmed that what Josephus speaks of the Greeks and other Nations may with the same reason be applied to Moses and the Jews Our Author by this Assertion overthrows his own Supposition for if Adam and Eve were the first Man and Woman in the World according to Moses or at least must be supposed to be such according to our Author's Method in this place then there could not be two Creations one in the first and another in the second Chapter of Genesis there could be no Praeadamites as is pretended and Adam and Eve were created in the first Chapter of Genesis Which yet Mr. Blount can by no means allow of without being repugnant to himself and contrary to his own Method in another place Josephus no where affirms that the Egyptians Chaldeans and Phenicians had more ancient Records than the Jews He no where affirms That he dares not compare the Writings of Moses so it ought to have been written and not the Nation of the Jews as I observed in another place with the most ancient and infallible Writings I use our Author's words of the foresaid Nations Josephus indeed says He will not enumerate the Jews with those Barbarous Nations with respect to the advantages of writing History but then he determines the advantage on the behalf of the Jews For in that Book he plainly asserts That Moses was the most ancient of all Legislators and that the Jews had a more certain way of transmitting their Memoirs to Posterity than the Egyptians Chaldeans or Phoenicians That Moses was a more ancient Historian than Berosus the Chaldean or Manetho the Egyptian or Sanchoniathon the Phenician is an unquestioned Truth among all such as know any thing of these matters nothing being more evident than this That Berosus and Manetho lived after the time of Alexander the Great and that Sanchoniathon wrote after the Trojan War Josephus no where affirms That the Writings of the forenamed Historians are infallible he only prefers them before the Greeks in point of Verity and Antiquity as for Infallibility