name They were wrought also both to cause Pharaoh to let go the Israelites and likewise to make the Israelites willing to leave Aegypt and to go with Moses and take possession of the Land of Canaan which the Lord God had long before promised unto their Fathers Abraham Isaac and Jacob. Thirdly It could not possibly be any Evil Spirit because Moses's Miracles were wrought to the prejudice of the Devil's interest in the World and for the destroying of the Devil's Kingdom by rooting out Idolatry from among God's People and driving Idolaters out of Canaan and for the setting up of the Kingdom of God visibly upon Earth Fourthly It could not possibly be any Evil Spirit because the Evil Spirit is the great Enemy of Mankind and of all humane Society rightly constituted whereas Moses's Miracles were wrought for the confirmation of a Doctrine which is manifestly for the good of Mankind of individual Men and of all Societies of Men Deut. 4. 6 8. This wile clearly appear unto any rational Man that shall duly consider these following Laws of Moses Concerning Mens Loving their Neighbours as themselves and not Coveting any thing belonging to them Concerning the City's of Refuge appointed for such Persons as should happen to kill a Man unwittingly Concerning the Redemption of Lands Concerning Goodness Lenity and Equity to Servants Mercifulness to the Poor Kindness to Straugers Justice and Equity to the Widows and Fatherless Reverence and Obedience to Superiors And concerning the Duties of Superiors towards their Inferiors and Subjects But not to insist upon these and many other excellent Laws of Moses which are manifestly for the good of Mankind and both evidence themselves to have been given unto Moses and Israel by an infinitely good God and also Moses's Miracles wrought in confirmation of them to have been from the same cause there is one thing which I cannot but touch upon to wit That whereas other Law-givers have set up some a Monarchy some an Aristocracy and others a Democracy Moses was the first that Established a visible Theocracy over the Israelites under which form of Government all things were to be managed by the counsel and direction of the infinitely wise God the People of Israel as a Kindom of Priests and a Holy Nation were to refer all their matters unto God and to ask advice and direction of him by VRIM and THVMMIM in reference to Peace and War and all things of any considerable importance or difficulty Exod. 19. 5 6. 20. 24 the latter part Exod. 28. 30. Deut. 10. 14 15 16 17. 12. 11 12 Levit. 26. 11 12. c. These things put together if no more could be said seem abundantly sufficient to prove that Moses was Authorized by God to give Laws unto the Israelites for no Man could have wrought such Miracles so circumstantiated except God had been with him and such is the weakness of Man's Vnderstanding that he could never of his own head have invented such a Law and such a way of Government And if Moses's Miracles and Law could not possibly be of any Evil Spirit nor of Man they must needs have been of a Good Spirit and that Good Spirit could be no other but God for though God used the Ministry of Good and Holy Angels in giving forth the Law yet they could not possibly be the Authors of it and if any of them had ever pretended unto that Honour he would by so doing have degenerated into a proud arrogant and lying Devil God himself then was the alone Author of Moses his Law and the Holy Angels with Moses were but Instruments and Ministers by whom God gave it unto Israel and indeed there is nothing in it but what well becomes God to be the Author of there is nothing in it that doth any way contradict the perfections of his Nature or destroy the natural notions of Truth and Falshood Good and Evil which he hath implanted in the mind of Man nay many of Moses's Laws are evidently agreeable unto and Representative of the transcendent excellencies of the Divine and perfective of the humane Nature and even those of them which are of a most adiapheros indifferent nature in themselves and derive all their morality from the will and pleasure of God did certainly by Gods appointment and blessing very much promote the happiness of his People Deut. 10. 12 13. 11. 12 to 16. Levit. 26. 3 to 13. Deut. 32. 16 17. As to what some Atheists Object from Exod. 12. 35 36. That Moses taught the Israelites to cheat the Aegyptians of their Jewels under pretence of borrowing them and that God himself is brought in as countenancing the Cheat which seems to be plainly contrary both to the perfections of God and right Reason of Man I Answer It is false that is Objected for there was really no borrowing and lending in the case but asking and receiving and carrying away what God had inclined the hearts of the Aegyptians freely to give and so there could be no cheat under pretence of borrowing This Answer is grounded upon the true import of the Hebrew Word Shaal which signifies to ask and accordingly the place Objected is rendred by Munster and the Tigurin in English thus The Children of Israel asked of the Aegyptians Jewels and the Lord gave the People favor in the sight of the Aegyptians so that they gave them such thiugs as they asked and they carryed them away from the Aegyptians the Aegyptians apprehended themselves to be all dead Men if the Israelites stayed in Aegypt any longer and therefore were willing to give them any thing they bad on condition that they would be presently gone Vers 33. And thus things were ordered by the wise Providence of God that the Children of Israel might be rewarded for the great Service they had done unto the Aegyptians Moreover It is very observable that some of Moses's Laws were such that it is impossible to conceive that any Men in their Wits would either have given such Laws unto others or have themselves received and submitted to them unless they had been sure that God was the Author of them and that he would take care to prevent the great inconveniences that might arise from the observance of them I Instance in Two First The Law for the Seventh Year Sabbath Exod. 23. 10 11 Levit. 25. 4 5. The Command not to Plow nor Sow every Seventh Year was of such consequence and might have produced so ill effects that Moses would never have attempted to bring the Israelites under such a Law nor would they have been such fools as to have received it and submitted to it unless he and they had been both sure that God had Authorized him to give them that Law and that God had undertaken to secure them from the great inconvenience that might arise from their Observance of it for if they had not been sure that God had by promise engaged
peaceable possession of the Land of Canaan after they had driven out another People that was there before them But I leave it to the Jews to Answer thus I adhere to the Answer given above to which I add that the Canaanites were actually driven out of the Two Kingdoms of Sihon and Og which lay on the East-side of Jordan before the death of Moses and shortly after his death they were to be likewise driven out of those Kingdoms which lay on the West-side of Jordan therefore Moses might very well say That the Canaanites were then in the Land as intimating thereby that now they were partly turned out and partly as it were a turning out of the Land and in a short time it might be truly said of them The Canaanite is not now in the Land By all which it plainly enough appears that there is no weight in this Objection of P. Simons Twelfthly He Objects Gen. 22. 14. and says It is not likely that Moses was the Author of this proverbial way of speaking in the Monnt of the Lord it shall be seen since he who has added this to the Text tells us that it was an usual Proverb in his time besides that this Mount seems to be one of the Mounts of the Countrey of Morea and the name of Morea was not given it till a long time after Answer First What though Moses was not the Author of this proverbial way of speaking Abraham or Isaac might be the first Authors of the Proverb and it might be continued amongst God's People from Abraham or Isaac down to Moses's time and Moses writing the History of those times as he was guided by the Spirit of God amongst other memorable things he relates this matter of Fact that that proverbial speech had been perpetuated in the Church of God and was used by the Godly in his time so that whoever was the first Author of the proverbial speech In the Mount of the Lord it shall be seen or in the Mount the Lord shall be seen i. e. in due time and place God will help and provide for his faithful obedient Servants and they shall see it God will shew himself to be a present help unto his People that trust him in their greatest straits and difficulties I say whoever was the first Author of this proverbial Speech nothing hinders but Moses might be and was under God the Author of the Historical Relation of it Answer Secondly But how does P. Simon prove that Moses was not the Author of it why says P. Simon because he vvho has added this to the Text tells us it vvas an usual Proverb in his time Ansvver A rare vvay of proving that Moses could not vvrite it because another has vvritten it since Moses and added it to his Text. But good Father this is begging not proving It is the thing in question vvhether another than Moses vvrote it and added it to his Text and hovv novv do you prove that another vvrote it and added it to Moses's Text for that is to be proved and not taken for granted And it vvill not prove it to say that he vvho vvrote it tells us that it vvas an usual Proverb in his time For suppose Moses himself had both been the first Author of it and also the vvriter of it in this place of Genesis he might tell us that it vvas an usual Proverb in his time he might have been the Author of it at the Red-Sea vvhen he said unto the People Exod. 14. 13. Fear ye not stand still and see the Salvation of the Lord which he will shew you to Day he might then have put the People in mind of vvhat God had done of Old for their Father Abraham vvhen he vvas going to Sacrifice his Son on the Mount vvhich the Lord had told him of and from thence he might take occasion to say In the Mount of the Lord it shall be seen or in the Mount the Lord shall be seen i. e. your extremity this Day shall be Gods opportunity to shevv himself to be your present and povverful Helper and Deliverer from vvhich Day forvvard it might have been remembered and so have passed into a Proverb among the People and Tvventy or Thirty Years after Moses might vvrite it vvith his ovvn hand What incongruity vvould there be in all this suppose it had been thus That Moses had been the first Author and likewise the Historical Relator of the same proverbial Speech for my part I can discern none at all but this I have said only to shew P. Simons pitiful lame way of reasoning for I adhere to what I have written before that whoever was the first Author of the Proverb whether it was Abraham or Isaac c. yet Moses might be and was the Historical Relator of it But P. Simon Objects further That this Mount seems to be one of the Mounts of the Countrey of Morea and the name of Morea was not given it till a long time after I Answer Granting what P. Simon says That the Mount on which Abraham was to have offered his Son may seem to have been one of the Mounts of the Countrey of Morea and that the name of Morea was not given it till a long time after I deny that it can be proved from thence that Moses was not the Author of the Pentateuch and of this passage in it for the name of Morea might be given unto that Countrey first by the All-knowing God when he commanded Abraham to go into it and offer his Son upon one of its Mountains Gen. 22. 2. and then a long time after the Inhabitants of it by common consent might give it the very same name of Morea and might be moved so to do by hearing and believing a credible report That God himself speaking with Abraham had a long time before given their Countrey the name of Moriah after which time it might be commonly known in those parts of the World by the name of Moriah whereas before it might have been known under that name only by Abraham Isaac and some Devout People of Abraham's Posterity by this I only intend to shew the inconsequence of P. Simon 's Argument he is still so unhappy in his reasoning that though the premisses be granted him yet the conclusion will not follow But now if by these words the name of Morea was not given it till a long time after P. Simon means That that Countrey was not called Moriah till a long time after Moses I Answer That he but begs the Question and what he affirms without Proof I utterly deny and give this good Reason for my denyal of it because the Text says expresly Gen. 22. 2. That God commanded Abraham to take his only Son Isaac and go into the Land of Moriah and offer him there for a Burnt-offering c. From which words it seems very evident that if that Land was not called by the name of Moriah before yet then at least it began to
He Objects out of R. Moses Cotsi Exod. 12. 40. where Moses says That the Sojourning of the Children of Israel in Aegypt was Four Hundred Years and yet it is certain that Kohath Son of Levi who was one of them that went into Aegypt lived but One Hudred Thirty Three Years that Amram lived only One Hundred Thirty Seven Years and that Moses was but Eighty Years Old when God spake to him which make in all but Three Hundred and Fifty Answer This Objection contains a great Falshood in affirming that Moses says the Sojourning of the Children of Israel in Aegypt was Four Hundred Years there is no such saying in the Text of Moses the Text says not that the Children of Israel Sojourned Four Hundred Years in Aegypt but that the Children of Israel who Sojourned or dwelt in Aegypt their Sojourning was Four Hundred and Thirty Years here it is not said how many of the Four Hundred and Thirty Years were past in Aegypt Indeed there being some ambiguity in the Hebrew words of the Text if it were not well known that they Sojourned in other places both in their own Persons and in their Progenitors Abraham Isaac and Jacob as Levi in Abraham paid Tithes to Melchizedec Heb. 7. 9. it might be thought perhaps that they Sojourned the whole Four Hundred and Thirty Years in Aegypt but it is a thing notorious to all that they Sojourned in the Land of Canaan and elsewhere before they went into Aegypt and therefore it is very unreasonable to think that the whole Four Hundred and Thirty Years Sojourning were past in Aegypt what Pere Simon intended by this Objection I do not well understand for if this were a good Argument to prove that Moses could not be the Author of the Pentateuch it would equally prove that no Prophet could be the Author of it which yet is contrary to his own Judgment if he believe what he writes for as Moses could not so no other Prophet could be the Author of any Falshood I shall say no more to this Objection because the Reverend and Learned Dean of Pauls has Answered it at large in his excellent Letter to a Deist unto which I refer the Reader Fifthly He Objects Gen. 46. 27. where it is said That all the Souls of the House of Jacob who went into Aegypt were Seventy and nevertheless in counting the number there related they are found to be but Sixty Nine Answer This difficulty if it deserve that name has been cleared already where it was shewed that Jacob himself did make the Seventieth Let any Man count them and setting aside Jacobs Sons Wives and Er and Onan who died in the Land of Canaan he will find that the Sum Total taking in Jacob as head of his own House is just Seventy Sixthly He Objects Numb 3. 39. Where are reckoned Twenty Two Thousand but if we join all the numbers together there remain Three Hundred above the account I Answer By distinguishing upon the words of the 39th Verse thus All the Males of the Levites that were numbered and were to be Devoted unto the Lord in exchange for the First-born of the other Tribes were Twenty Two Thousand and no more I grant it as being the genuine sense of the words of Moses All the Males of the Levites that were numbered and were partly already Holy and Devoted and partly to be Devoted unto the Lord were Twenty Two Thousand and no more I deny it as not being the genuine sense of the words of Moses I ground my distinction upon this That all the Males of the Levites of what sort soever were numbered from a Month Old and upwards now amongst them all of necessity there must be a certain number that were First-born Males and all such First-born Levites as had been Born from the time of Israels coming out of Aegypt unto the time of that reckoning were already Sanctified unto the Lord in a peculiar manner and were his own Devoted unto him as appears from Exod. 13. 2 13. and from the 13th Verse of this same Third Chapter of Numbers These First-born Levites then could not be substituted in the stead of the First-born of the other Tribes and so become Holy and Devoted unto the Lord in a peculiar manner for as First-born they were already the Lords they were Holy and Devoted unto God they therefore must have been excepted and left out of the number of Levites that were to be exchanged for the First-born of the other Tribes and so to be appropriated unto God and his Service in a peculiar manner But we plainly see that Three Hundred Levites are left out therefore it was on this account that they were the Lords already as they were First-born The rest that were not thus the Lords already were fit matter to be Sanctified and Devoted to God and his Service instead of the First-born of the other Tribes and the number of them all were Twenty Two Thousand and no more There are Two things very observable in this Chapter 1. That it is expressly said of these Twenty Two Thousand Levites that they shall be the Lords instead of the First-born amongst the Children of Israel Vers 45. therefore surely the First-born of the Levites cannot be included in that number of Twenty Two Thousand since they were the Lords already as well as the First-born of the other Tribes and so could not be given unto the Lord in exchange for them 2. It is observable that this number of Twenty Two Thousand Levites is compared with the number of the First-born of the other Tribes and the number of the First-born of the other Tribes being found to contain Two Hundred Seventy Three more than the number of the Levites that were to be exchanged for them it is expressly ordered by God that this Two Hundred Seventy Three of the First-born of the other Tribes should be redeemed with Money at Five Shekles apiece by the Poll Vers 46 47. Which is a demonstration that the Three Hundred Levites left out of the number of Levites which were to be exchanged for the First-born of the other Tribes were purposely left out in the casting up of the Sum Total as not being fit matter to be given unto the Lord in exchange because they were the Lords already as they were First-born if it had not been really thus they would not have been purposely left out but would have been certainly included in the Sum Total as they were in the particular Sums that so there might have been enow and more than enow of Levites to be given in exchange for the First-born of the other Tribes and that there might be no need of giving Five Shekels a piece for the redeeming of any of them But now if any ask why then were these Three Hundred First-born Levites numbered at all why were they put into the particular Sums of the Males of the several Families as appears from Vers 22 28 34. and yet left out of the
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
our graces and duty comes from the weakness of our faith And it is not the best Logick which is ever accompanied with the strongest Trust Though Reason be an excellent and necessary ingredient some trust in Christ with victorious confidence who cannot dispute best for their Faith Conclus XXIII Though Peace and holy Joy be a most desirable effect of Faith and by which the strength of it may be much tryed yet it is not this but Practical consent to the Covenant of Grace or Christs terms of Salvation in which its saving sincerity consisteth Conclus XXIV By all this it appeareth how ambiguously the Question de Resolutione fidei is too oft disputed And how fallaciously a mans faith is said to be unsound if his reasons be some unsound and none cogent to prove an undoubted absolute certainty that the Scripture is Gods word and that Faith is not so resolved into the antecedent reasonings as necessarily to be unsound if some of them are so That God cannot lie is known by Nature That the Gospel is his word is known by its proper notifying evidence forenamed where many things concur That therefore the Gospel is true is known as a rational Conclusion But these are by believers apprehanded oft with imperfection faultyness and disorder But Practical Trust in God in Christ in the Gospel Promise is Constituted by its formal object which is Gods Fidelity or Veracity grounded in his Perfection and in the apprehended Truth of his promises And this effectual faith is saving I have Prefaced this much that the Reader may the easilyer understand and profit by the two following Treatises one written and the other translated by Mr. William Lorimer my greatly valued Friend well known by me to be a man of Learning and Judgment and exemplary faithfulness to God and Conscience and of a prudent and peaceable Conversation with men If the Reader bring not a disposition of enmity against the Truth or gross neglect of it but a mind that hath necessary manly preparation and a receptive willingness and resolution for an impartial diligent search I doubt not but in these two Discourses he will find enough though not to remove every difficulty in the Bible yet to save his Faith from all such assaults as would overthrow it and make it uneffectual to his Salvation And verily a man that hath well digested the matter of such Controversies will find that Pomponatius Vaninus Hobbes Spinosa c were Ignorant men that knew not their own Ignorance nor what they wrote against and that Simon saith little but what Commentators have often Answered and though he and others truly prove the doubtfulness of some Readings and somâ— Translations which may be of man he saith nothing to shake a well-grounded belief of Moses Law the Gospel of Christ and any thing necessary to Holiness or Salvation Richard Baxter April 7. 1682. ERRATA Preface pag. 6. lin 2. read have In the Epistle to the Reader page 4. lin 11. read will page 7. lin 11. read adiaphorous page 16. lin 7. read where l. 18. r. be l. 20. r. servant l. 22. r. and First part p. 17. l. 1. 1. uncertain in so much ibid. l. 16. r. parity p. 28. l. 8. r. suppositions p. 35. l. 7. r. retro-active p. 43. l. 7. r. command ibid. l. 13. r. punishment p. 47. l. 2. for Table r. Fable p. 56. l. 14. r. proofs of Religion Second part p. 67. l. 5 6. r. Authoribus p. 80. l. 13. r. preserved p. 84. l. 24. r. floating p. 87. l. 7. r. afford p. 91. l. 7. r. sixth p. 96. l. 23. r. your p. 97. l. 10. r. named p. 104. l. 19. r. for p. 109. l. 16. r. unto p. 110. l. 4. r. may p. 132. l. 16. r. hundred p. 135. l. 8. r. sense p. 144. l. 7. 19. r. Be eber haijarden p. 150. l. 2. r. land p. 151. l. 15. r. mount p. 164. l. 7. r. say The Epistle to the READER Christian Reader IF thou weighest things in the Ballance of right Reason thou can'st not but see That Moses being the first Man by whose Ministry Almighty God thought fit to give a Body of Laws unto a whole Nation and to as many of the World besides as should join in communion with that Nation it was necessary God should enable him to make it evidently appear unto all rational Men that he was sent and authorized by God to give Laws unto that Nation and if thou read'st the Books of Moses and what thou wilt find in the following Discourse concerning him and them thou can'st not but likewise see that the infinitely Wise and Powerful God did in effect enable him evidently and certainly to prove his Mission and Commission to be from Heaven For through God's extraordinary assistance he gave the highest demonstrations of his being Authorized from above that can in reason be desired of any that speaks or writes unto Men in the name of God his works and writings hear the manifest signatures of God's Wisdom Power and Goodness his works were such as could never have been done without the assistance of an invisible Power far above any thing that falls under the perceptions of Sense and it is most evident to Reason That that invisible Power could be no other than the infinitely powerful wise and good God who made preserves and governs the World and all things therein For it could not possibly be any Evil Spirit First Because Moses in his contest with the Magicians of Aegypt did at the very first Encounter far out-do them and the Evil Spirit by whose assistance they wrought their wonders as evidently appears by Aaron's Rods swallowing up their Rods Exod. 7. 12. and by their not being able to remove the Frogs again from off the Land of Aegypt and therefore Pharaoh was forced to call for Moses and Aaron and desire them to intreat the Lord to take away the Frogs from him and his people Exod. 8. â—â—8 and at last he forced them to confess â—â—â—t they were overcome for when they â—â—â—ld not turn the Dust of Aegypt into Lice 〈◊〉 Moses and Aaron had done they then â—â—â—ved out and said unto Pharaoh This is the finger of God Exod. 8. 18 19. they â—onfessed that it was the power of God which â—nabled Moses and Aaron to turn the Dust into Lice and which hindered them from doing the like Secondly It could not possibly be any Evil Spirit because Moses's Miracles were wrought for the highest best and excellentest ends to wit for the glory of God and for the good of his People they were wrought to convince both Pharaoh and Israel That the Lord God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob who made and governs the World is the only true God who is above all to be Feared and Reverenced Adored and Worshipped Loved and Obeyed Pleased and Glorified and that Moses was his Authorized Messenger to be believed and obeyed for his sake in all that he said and commanded in his
his Providence to Bless them with extraordinary great abundance of Cornes on the Sixth Year they could not but foresee that there would have been a Scarcity and Famine on the Seventh Year especially when the Year of Jubile which was every Fiftieth Year succeeded the Seventh Year Sabbath for in that case the Law forbade them either to Plow or Sow for Two whole Years together Levit. 25. 8 to 12. upon which they could not but foresee that a Famine would certainly follow unless God had undertaken by an extraordinary Providence to prevent it Therefore Moses must have been sure of this otherwise he would never have attempted the giving them such a Law and he must have made the People sure of it also otherwise he could not but foresee that they would never have been so simple as to receive and submit unto such a Law as would expose them to the danger of a Famine every Seventh Year and in the revolution of Fifty Years would unavoidably bring a Famine upon them We read in the 25th of Leviticus where this Law is Recorded That God foreseeing the People would certainly move this Objection against it he prevented them and both moved and answered the Objection himself Vers 20 21. If ye shall say What shall we eat the Seventh Year behold we shall not Sow nor gather in our Increase Then I will command my Blessing upon you in the Sixth Year and it shall bring forth Fruit for Three Years c. Here they had God's word of Promise Sealed with the Broad-Seal of Heaven Moses's Miracnlous Works for the ground of their assurance that God's extraordinary Providence would secure them from Famine And it was upon this so well grounded assurance that they received and submitted to that Law And God never failed them in this but always fnlfilled with his hand what he had spoken with his mouth so that they were never forced to travel into other Countries to buy Corn for the supply of their necessities in those Sabbatical Years The other Law I instance in is that which obliged all the Males of Israel Thrice a Year to appear before the Lord at the place where the Ark of God should be Exod. 23. 17. 34. 23. Deut. 16. 16. this Law was given and written by Moses for the Generations to come and he could not but foresee that the People would be ready to Object against it That if after they were possessed of the Land of Canaan all their Males should Thrice every Year leave their several Houses and Countries and meet at one place as at Jerusalem or at any other place where the Ark of God should happen to be their Land would be in danger of being frequently invaded spoiled and wasted by the malitious and covetous Heathens that lived round about them and that therefore it was most unreasonable to desire them to be Governed by such a Law This Objection I say Moses could not but foresee and therefore if he had not been certain that it was God's will and pleasure that he should give them such a Law he would never have done it of his own head and likewise if they had not been certain that Moses was really Authorized and Commissioned by God to give them such a Law they would never have received it and submitted unto the observance of it to the visible hazarding the loss of all that they had in the World This God considered to be rational and therefore for their security he gave them his promise by Moses and by Moses's Miracles confirmed his Promise That no Man should DESIRE their Land when they went up to appear before the Lord their God Thrice in the Year Exod. 34. 24 as if God had said Be not afraid least the Heathen break in upon you and Burn your Cities and lay waste your Countrie whilst all your Males are from home attending npon me at the place of my Publick Worship for when you are about my Work I will not only be with you abroad but with your Wives and Children likewise at home and I will take such care of you and yours and so secure all your Concerns that your envious and Covetous Neighbours and Enemies shall not so much as desire your Land much less shall they be able to lay it waste and desolate with Fire and Sword as you may be apt to fear It was by this promise and the Miracles wrought by Moses that both Moses and the People were assured that this Law was of God and that God's special Providence would protect his People and secure all their concerns when they were doing the will of God according to this Law and without this assurance if Moses had gone about to impose upon them in a matter of such dangerous consequence they would certainly have refused to obey him By these Two Instances it manifestly appears that Moses both knew in himself and evidently proved unto Israel that he was Commissioned by God to give Laws unto them for if it had been otherwise he would neither have attempted to give them such Laws nor would they have ever received them and submitted to them To draw to an end Let it be considered that Moses Miracles tended all to the Glory of God the Author of Nature and to the advanccment of his Kingdom in the World as he is the Author of Grace and his Writings give us most high glorious and excellent and also most lovely and desirable Idea's and Notions of God and his Perfections Witness God's name I AM THAT I AM and I AM Exod. 3. 14. which signifies that he is the first and most perfect Beeing that gives Beeing to all other things and consequently implies his eternal and necessary Existence from everlasting and to everlasting And his name THE LORD THE LORD GOD MERCIFUL and GRACIOUS c. Exod. 34. 6 7. witness also that description of him Exod. 15. 11. WHO is like unto thee O LORD GLORIOUS IN HOLINESS FEARFUL IN PRAISES DOING WONDERS and that other description of him Deut. 32. 3 4. I will publish the name of the Lord ascribe ye greatness unto our God c. And what is written of him in Deut. 4. 35 to 40. 10. 14 to 19. These most sublime and excellent Notions of God and his Perfections with which Moses's Writings do furnish us are proper and fit to raise in us a most high esteem and reverence of God to make us admire and adore him to take us off from the inordinate love of our selves and of all other Creatures as mean and vile as shadows and nothing and to draw out our hearts and affections wholly unto him to make us love him and from a principle of Love careful to please him and fearful to offend him Deut. 6. 4 5 13 14 15. 10. 12 to 21. in fine to make us hope in him expect all needful good things from him and above all things desire to be united unto him as the most glorious excellent and blessed Beeing which was
general Sum of the Males of the whole Tribe as appears Vers 39 Answer They were numbered because God would have it a known truth upon Record that there were at that time so many Males of the whole Tribe of Levi and no more they were put into the particular Sums because the particular Sums were to contain all the Males of the several Families whether they were First-born or not but they were left out of the general Sum because it was to ballance the general Sum of the First-born of the other Tribes and so no First-born Levites were to be taken into it Secondly I Answer That it becomes not us to call God to an account and to ask why he doth such a thing when we know certainly that he hath done it he giveth not account of any of his matters Job 33. 13. Even an Heathen King when his Understanding returned unto him had so much Reason and Religion as to confess unto God's praise That he doth according to his Will c. and none can say unto him what doest thou Dan. 4. 35. This is as true of God's way of Writeing his Word as it is of his way of Governing the World But notwithstanding of some things that may be secret and to us unaccountable in both yet we are sure in general that God doth all things well and wisely in the one and the other Seventhly He Objects Exod. 16. 35. where it is said That the Children of Israel did eat Manna Forty Years until they came unto the Borders of the Land of Canaan It is pretended that Moses could not write this Verse because he died before the Children of Israel left off eating of Manna which was not before they came to Gilgal in the Plains of Jericho beyond Jordan as appears from Josh 5. 10 11 12. Answer I deny the consequence of this Argument that because the Children of Israel continued to eat Manna after the death of Moses therefore Moses could not write this Verse any strength that this Argument may seem to have depends upon a false supposition that Moses was no Prophet and knew no more than other ordinary Men or that he did not write by the Spirit of Prophecy for if Moses was a great Prophet as certalnly he was Numb 12. 6 7 8. Deut. 34. 10. and if he knew more than other ordinary Men as certainly he did Dent. 31. from Vers 1 to 8 and from Vers 27 inclusively unto Vers 30. then he might easily know by the Spirit of Prophecy how long the Children of Israel should eat Manna and when and where the Manna should cease and it is most certain that long before his death the Lord God revealed unto him That the Children of Israel should wander or feed as it is rendered on the Margine of our Bible in the Wilderness Forty Years as is evident from Numb 14. 26 33. 34 35. and he knew well enough without having it immediately revealed to him that they had nothing else but Manna to live upon in the Wilderness yet God might tell him that they should not be starved but the Manna should be continued to them and their Children till their Children were entered within the Borders of the Land of Canaan and sufficiently provided for in an ordinary way without Manna Now Moses believing this and knowing infallibly that it would be so as the Lord had spoken he might write of it before his death in the same manner as he would have done in case he had lived to see it all fulfilled he might write of it in the Preterit Tense because the whole Forty Years were almost expired before his death and they had already eaten Manna for many Years and as for the short time that remained in which they were to have the Manna continued to them he was so sure of it that the Manna should be continued to them and that they should eat of it till they passed over Jordan and entered into Canaan that he needed not to alter the Tense but might very well express it altogether in one and the same Preterit Tense for the use of that and succeeding Generations to whom it would certainly be a thing past After all the vain attempts made hitherto by P. Simon to prove that Moses could not be the Author of the Pentateuch at last out come the Arguments that Spinosa had formerly borrowed as he says from Aben Ezra to prove his position that Moses could not be the Author of the Books attributed to him Eighthly Then P. Simon Objects Deut. 1. 1. And to put some colour upon the business and to make the Objection seem to have some weight in it he thus renders the First Verse of Deut. These be the words which Moses spake unto all Israel beyond Jordan in the Wilderness and then he Argues that the Book of Deuteronomy could not be written by Moses because he never went over Jordan but lived and died on this side Jordan in the Wilderness he that wrote thus must have been in the Land of Canaan which therefore could not be Moses but some Body after his death that wrote thus of him that he spoke such words unto all Israel beyond Jordan Answer It seems strange to me that P. Simon who is such a Learned Hebrician was not ashamed of this Argument whereof the whole strength lies on the signification of the Hebrew word Beeber indeed if Beeber signifie only Trans beyond then the Argument is good but if Beebers signifie also Cis on this side as it is rendered in our English Bibles then the Argument is stark nought we must therefore for clearing of this matter inquire what Beeber signifies And First I grant that Beeber doth some times signifie trans beyond I grant also that the Vulgar Latine the Seventy and that Edition of Munsters Translation which I have render it beyond but that is no proof that Beeber signifies always beyond and that it should be so rendered in this place for P. Simon himself finds fault with all these Three Translations and acknowledges that they may be mended in several places why then may not this be one of the places that ought to be mended in these Translations For Secondly It is not to be granted because it is false that Beeber always signifies beyond I demonstrate as clearly as any thing of this nature can be demonstrated that Beeber signifies also Cis on this side and that in some places it must do so and cannot do otherwise as for instance in Josh 1. 14 15. where the same words Beeber Haijarden are twice repeated and of necessity must be Translated on this side Jordan and cannot be otherwise Translated For whosoever he was that wrote the Book of Joshua and when or wheresoever it was written yet still this is true That before any of the Israelites had passed over Jordan here Joshua is brought in making a Speech to the Reubenites Gadites and half Tribe of Manasseh in which Speech he tells them That Moses had
given them their possession Beeber Haijarden on this side Jordan here Beeber must of necessity be rendered on this side and so Masius renders it for it would have been notoriously false for Joshua in that place and at that time to have said that Moses had given them their Inheritance beyond Jordan it being evident to common sense that their Inheritance lay on that side Jordan on which Joshua was then speaking to them And in 1 Sam. 14. 4. Mehaeber Mizze i. e. Eber with the same prefixes twice repeated in one Verse signifies both on the one side and on the other side In fine Moses speaking of himself in the first Person uses the same expression Beeber Haijarden which must be rendered on this side Jordan Deut. 3. 8. otherwise it will be false for Moses was in the Wilderness when he uttered these words and he spoke them of the Kingdoms of Og and Sihon which in respect of Moses did then certainly lie on this side Jordan and not beyond Jordan by all this it appears that P. Simon 's Argument is grounded on a false bottom that Beeber always signifies beyond which is notoriously untrue In our own English Translation it is here rightly rendered on this side Jordan Ninthly He Objects the last Chapter of Deuteronomy as that which could not be written by Moses because it gives an account of his Death and Burial and of some things that were done after his Death and to those that say Moses wrote that Chapter by the Spirit of Prophecy P. Simon Answers that we ought not to believe them Answer First No Man who believes that Moses was a Prophet and the greatest Prophet that was before Christ can disbelieve the possibility of Moses his writing that Chapter and if it be said that it is not probable he should do it I Answer Undoubtedly Moses did as improbable things as that he foretold things at a greater distance of time than was his own Death and Burial and the Israelites Mourning for him Thirty Days in the Plains of Moah But Secondly I do not affirm that Moses wrote that Chapter at least the Eight last Verses of it but suppose he did not write it yet I deny that it follows from thence that he was not the Author of the Pentateuch for it may very vvell be said that that Chapter is really no part of the Pentateuch or Five books of Moses but an Appendix to it vvritten by some other hand as by Joshua or some other Holy Man of God after the Death of Moses Tenthly He Objects Deut. 31. 22 24. as if these Verses and other parts of Deuteronomy could not be vvritten by Moses because Moses is there spoken of in the Third Person Ansvver What a pitiful Argument is this is it not usual even with Prophane Authors to speak of themselves in the Third Person and doth not P. Simon himself acknowledg this in Pag. 20. of his Book Caesar says he speaks of himself in the Third Person in his Commentaries Josephus does the same thing in his History of the Wars of the Jews against the Romans and moreover he writes his own Elogy with what Conscience then did P. Simon produce this passage to prove that Moses could not be the Author of the Pentateuch surely any unprejudiced Man would think that this passage might be more pertinently alledged to prove that Moses was the Author at least of the Book of Denteronomy Eleventhly He Objects Gen. 12. 6. upon which he says If Moses was the Author of the Pentateuch after the manner as it is at present would he have used this way of speaking The Canaanite was then in the Land it is known that the Canaanites continued the possession of this Countrey here spoken of all the time of Moses so that this could not be writ but after they had been driven out Answer And why might not Moses use that way of speaking the Canaanite was then in the Land is there any falshood in it is it not a certain truth That the Canaanites were possessors of the Land of Canaan when Abraham came first to Sojourn in it But says P. Simon It is known that the Canaanites continued the possession of that Land all the time of Moses True it is so understanding it of the Land beyond Jordan but what then why then says P. Simon This could not be writ but after they had been driven out I deny that consequence for I know that all the Criticks in the World cannot prove it This passage under consideration might very well be written by Moses though it was well known that the Canaanites continued possessors of the Land of Canaan beyond Jordan all the time of Moses Moses did not write this passage to tell the People that the Canaanites were possessors of Canaan beyond Jordan all his time which none of them could be Ignorant of but he wrote it to make the common Ignorant People know that the Canaanites had been possessors of that Land even in the time of Abraham and that their Father Abraham was but a stranger in it and had not at his first coming so much as a foot of Ground in it that he could call his own Acts 7. 5. and that it was of those Canaanites that he afterwards bought the Burying-place at Hebron or Kirjatharba Now this was a truth though most certain yet not so evident but that many of the common People might possibly be Ignorant of it and therefore Moses writing this History for the benefit of the common People he might put in this passage once and again that they might take special notice of it and thereby know with what People it was that Abraham lived after he had left his own Countrey and Fathers House even with the Ancestors of those Canaanites whom they were now to destroy and drive out of that Land and likewise that they might thereby be moved to admire the Faithfulness and Goodness of God towards them in that he was then putting them in actual possession of that good Land which though promised unto Abraham and his Seed yet was never before actually possessed by him or them but was now to be given them according to promise I find Aben Ezra Answering this Objection another way he says It may be that the Canaanites took that Laud from some other People that were possessors of it before them And R. Salomon positively affirms That that Land fell to the share and Portion of Shem when Noah divided the whole World amongst his Sons and he proves it by this That Melchizedeck whom the Jews believe to be Shem was King of Salem but he thinks that the Canaanites took it violently away from Shem's Posterity and therefore God promised to Abraham that he would give it to him and his Seed because they were of the Posterity of Sem to whom it did originally belong if this were true and could be proved it might be thought that Moses his words here had reference unto the Canaanites being then in