in such a Succession Established upon the Authority of this Book ought ever to be admitted without very positive Proof Especially when we have such apparent Reasons to believe the contrary By Whom is it I ask that the Bible could be corrupted It must have been either by Jews Pagans or Hereticks 'T is plain the Jews have not done it for we find multitudes of Texts that give in a daily witness against them which doubtless had they attempted the Bible in such a way they would never have suffered so to remain upon Record against them No part of the Pagan World can be reasonably thought to have done it for the Scriptures contain such an eminent Revelation of the One true God and his Worship as puts an end to all Heathenish vanities and at once dispatches all False gods out of the world Nor have Hereticks done it for 't is this Sword of the Spirit the Written Word of God that upon all occasions mortally wounds them the Scriptures have slain their thousands and their ten thousands in this kind 'T is the purity of the Scriptures in asserting the Orthodox Truths of Religion that has in all Ages kept up the Christian Verity and still brought all sorts of Hereticks to an open shame It has been the Wresting or Perverting not the Corrupting of Scripture from whence all Heresies have chiefly arisen and the native and genuine Sense of the Bible has still proved their Ruine Nor is there upon the whole of this matter any tolerable Reason to Doubt but that as God was pleased by his special Providence to Secure the Old Testament which we are sure he did and preserve it intire till the time of our Saviour so by the same Providence he has secured the Old and the New since and delivered them over to the Church in these latter Ages without any considerable variation from what they were when they were first written And this ought to be duely considered as an eminent help towards a rational Satisfaction in this point That the very same Objections which some men now please themselves with against the New Testament the Old Testament was equally lyable to in the times of our Saviour and the Apostles For after Esdras's time the Old Testament came into no Infallible bands till the times of the Gospel was conveyed by fallible means through many Ages down to those times had the same possibilities of Alteration then that the New Testament has now Various Lections also in the Hebrew copies were then extant And yet for all this the Scriptures of the Old Testament were then pure and intire Nor does our Saviour or the Apostoles mention the least defect that was then in them Nor was there in those eminent times of Reformation the least Question or doubt ever raised upon any such account One grand Objection is usually made upon the whole of this matter and 't is thus framed All these Arguments brought either to prove the Bible in general or to answer such particolar doubts as arise about it are built say some upon no better foundation then Huâ—anâ— and in themselves fallible grounds And if so we still embrace our Religion but upon uncertain terms can never from chance arrive at any positive and absolute assurance nor come to such a Divine and Infallible faith as we ought to have in this case In answering to this Objection this must be acknowledged that although the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament were at first Penned by the infallible guidance of the Holy Ghost yet the manner of their Conveyance to future Ages has been by Humane and in themselves fallible means The Grounds and Reasons of which disposal of God though we cannot pretend fully to reach yet we are thus far informed First the Scriptures could not have been by means in themselves absolutely infallible handed down to all Places and Ages without the visible continuance and constant exertion of such a supernatural and extraordinary Power as would have wholly inverted that course we find God most generally takes in his Rule and dispose of the World Secondly it would have prevented all that case and industry God intended to exercise his Church withall to their great advantage in the exact preservation of these sacred Records Thirdly there had been no room for a belief of not occasion for a dependance upon that Wisdom and Power God has expressed and wherein he has greatly honoured himself in an over-ruling disposal of ordinary means to such extraordinary Ends who has providentially secured this Book through all the several Channels of Humane conveyance This Objection is much urged First by those of the Roman Church on the one hand to convince us of the great uncertainty of our own profession and the stability of theirs And Secondly by men of Sceptical Principles on the other hand either to fright or perswade us or both out of all Religion by telling us There is no positive or absolute certainty in the grounds of any How serviceable this Objection though it has filled the World with great noise and clamour as it has been pressed both ways will prove to either of these designs and indeed with how great absurdity t is managed in order to both will be soon made to appear All belief of things Divine in an ordinary way I speak not of such Divine illumination as God may particularly vouchsafe to any â—ust of necessity be ultimately resolved into that we call Rational and Moral assurance for when we speak most properly of Divine faith we mean such a faith as is built upon a Divine Testimony not denominating it from the Object of it nor from the Effect of it which is less proper but from the Foundation and Ground of it Now Divine faith in that best and truest sense of it will be reduced into no more then a Moral a ssurance at last for if I say my faith is Divine because built upon a Divine Testimony 't is in some sense true But if I am asked by what means I came to know that Testimony to be Divine That question must needs bring me back to a Moral assurance as the ground of all my previous belief about that Divine Testimony it self that it really is so Whatsoever Revelation God makes of his mind to me I must needs without Divine assistance receive it upon Humane and in themselves fallible terms and so judge of it as I judg of all other things No man can receive my Revelation from God with a faith a Divine and infallible as the Revelation is in it self unless there be an equal inspiration in both cases and God make men as infallible in Judging of Revelation when proposed as he made the Instruments of it in the Act of its Conveyance The plain Question in this Case is how I come to receive all other things into my belief that are Objects of belief It must be confessed upon the grounds of Rational credibility and Moral assurance and therefore upon the
we have now contained in our Bables all that was written by a Divine Inspiration and intended as a Rule to the Church and no more That is How can we now be safely assured about the Canon of the Scripture and be able upon good grounds to say what is Canonical and what is not 'T is too apparent a Truth that nothing by the power of its own worth and excellency has ever been able to scape contempt and reproach from the unruly wills and debauched minds of corrupt and unreasonable men The Bible has met with its share in this kind Some upon Fanatical Pretences have despised and rejected the Whole Others have mangled and severed it as themselves thought good receiving some part only as Divine and rejecting the rest as they pleased Of this Iraeneus Tertullian Epiphanius St. Austin and many of the Christian Writers have given us a large account The Manichees rejected the whole body of the Old Testament as coming from an Evil God The Ptolemaites as Epiphamus tells us rejected all the Books of Moses The Gnosticks with some other Hereticks rejected the whole Book of Psalms Cerdon and after him Marcion rejected all the Gospels but that of St. Luke the Acts of the Apostles and divers other parts of the New Testament as we find by Tertullian The Valentimans rejected all the Gospels but that of St. John as we see in Irenaeus Others rejected all that St. John wrote The Ebionites received no Gospel but that of St. Matthen and rejected in gross all the Epistles of St. Paul In a word There is not one Part of the Bible from the first to the last that has scap'd the reprobation of some bad Men. But all such attempts were soon blown away expired in the Birth bore about them their own shame and reproach made no considerable battery upon the Truth in any Age Nor did they reach further than the vitiated Minds and corrupt Breasts of such Profligate Hereticks as were the first Authors of them In answering to this Question How we come to be well assured about the Canon of the Bible and that those Books now received by the Church of England and other Protestant Churches as such are all Canonical and no other Two things only will occur that are of any seeming moment In the due consideration of which all will be said that is needful about this Matter First How we come to reject out of our Canon those Books commonly called Apocryphal which were written at least all but one of them during the times of the Old Testament And secondly Upon what grounds we now receive some particular parts of the New Testament which have sometimes layen under question If we mistake in the first we have less in our Bibles than we ought If in the latter we have much more than we should About the first concerning the several parts of the Old Testament there is amongst Christians themselves a present Disagreement But concerning the other the whole Christian World is at this day of the same opinion For the First That there is good Reason to reject those Books commonly called the Apocrypha that they were not written by any Divine Inspiration nor sent us from GOD as any part of those Supream Laws by which he intended to rule and judge the World and so ought not to be reckoned within the Canon will be made very evident to any reasonable Judge upon these Considerations following First After the time of Esdras and the erection of the second Temple 't is universally agreed by all the most Antient Jews and Christians that the Jews had no Prophet amongst them Nor did GOD raise up any Man with an Extraordinary Spirit from the time of Malachi who is agreed to be the last Prophet till John the Baptist Which was for the space of four hundred and odde years Now 't is sufficiently evident that these Apocryphal Books were all written after the time of Malachi and so can be of no extraordinary Mission And if any of them had been written before and had been extant in Ezra's time which they were not it had been an unanswerable Reason for their Rejection now Because they were not received then For 't is well known that none of these Books now in question were by Him incorporated with the rest of the Bible nor were within the Canon at that time setled That the Jews had no Prophets by whom all parts of the Old-Testament were written For the Church is built upon the Foundation of the Prophets and Apostles And the whole of the Old-Testament is called Prophecy nor any Men of an Extraordinary Spirit amongst them after the Captivity both Jews and Christians generally agree Josephus is express in it in his first Book against Appion he tells us that from the time of Artaxerxes though certain Books had been written yet they deserved not the same Credit and Belief that the Sacred Scriptures did because there was no succession of Prophers amongst them Saint Austine in the 45th Chapter of his 18th Book De Civitate Dei sheweth at large that the Jews had no Prophecy after Ezra's time And the same Eusebius affirmeth in his Demonstrationes Evangelicae Post Zachartam Malachiam non fuâ—sse amplius apud Judaeos Prophetam Et a reditu ex Captivitate ad tempora Servatoris nullum babucrint Judaei sacrum Volumen The Jews had no Prophets after Zachary and Malachi nor any Sacred Writings after the Captivity till our Saviour's time And some of these very Books tell us as much themselves For in the first Book of the Maccabees Chap. 9. 't is there said That there was then great Tribulation in Israel such as had not been since the dayes that there had been no Prophet in Israel relating to Ezra's time And indeed it appears very plain from the Scripture it self that there were no Divine Writings published between the Prophecy of Malachi and the writing of the Gospels For the Evangelists take things up just where he left them and begin the Gospel from the end of Malachi's Prophecy For he ending his Prophecy at John the Baptist under the Type and Title of Elias and the Evangelists beginning the Gospel with Him for St. Mark expresly declares the ending of that Prophecy to be the beginning of the Gospel There is a visible combination from thence from that period of Prophesie of the Old and New Testament together Secondly All the Writers of the Old Testament were Prophets to the House of Israel and to the Church of the Jews and their Writings and Prophesies were directed chiefly to them And so they were all writ except some Passages in Daniel and Ezra that were written in the Chaldee Dialect to which the Jews had in their Captivity been much accustomed in their own Native Language the Language of Canaan which was the Hebrew But these Books were confessedly most of them first written in Greek and could be of no use at all to the Jews at Jerusalem and
themselves were very long Preserved as most pretious Jewels in the Church Tertullian sayes some of them were extant in his time and we are told by some Authors of Credit that s Johns Gospel Written with his own Hand was preserved by the Church of Ephesus till the time of Honorius the Emperour Now let any reasonable man judge what a vast number of Copies were likely to be taken before the Originals perished and how highly improbable if not morally Impossible it was to impose a publick and general abuse upon the world by a false Transcription of such Writings while the Originals themselves lasted it could not be done Nor can we conceive the Christian Church so intollerable sottish and so universally Negligent as to take up with false Transcripts while the Originals were to be had to compare them withal and correct them by And before the Originals themselves perished such a vast multitude of True Copies generally known from the Originals so to be must needs be extant and we are historically assured actually were so that the scriptures were for ever thereby secured against any attempts that could possibly be made that way secondly If we consider how much this Book upon its first publication filled the world with Discourse what various Disputes there arose relating to all Parts of it wherein an Appeal on all sides was still made to the Letter of the Text and the Book it self how throughly all Passages in it were Discussed and Examined both by Jews Christians and Heathens urged and made use of in the warmest controversies in the pursuit of which by men of different Perswasions the mis-reciting or corrupting a Text would soon have been openly published If we consider by how many Authors in those times it was quoted and that it was then the continual and general study of the Christian-parts of the world and the constant and daily Work and Imployment of many amongst them to Preach and instruct the People out of it all this Considered it is most absurd to imagine that the least considerable Alteration could ever be made in such a Book without some notorious and universal discovery Nor could it ever possibly happen unless we 'l suppose that all men in some One Age of all Opinions that were possessed of the Bible should at once agree together to deface their Grand Charter their Magna Charta by which they held all to corrupt that sacred Depositum on which they wholly relyed for their present and eternal welfare to no other end but their own utmost ruine and to abuse all succeeding Generations secondly If we consider the New Testament it self as we now find it First ' t is in the Bulk of it so composed as does much secure us especially in all material things against all danger this way Either it must have been Generally attempted or in some Particulars To imagine any General attempt should that way be made is riâ—iculous nor do we hear one word that there was ever a Thought to endeavour any such thing And to effect an Altetation about any One Particular point is a thing could not easily be done because no little alteration would do it No considerable Truths could be Inverted without many alterations made because they are all generally grounded upon very many Texts witnessed unto from several places and indeed all the Eminent Truths of the New Testament are so interwoven together and have such a Dependency each upon other that it would be found a very hard Task to Deface the beauty of any One without giving a considerable Wound to the Wholes Nor in truth do we find any one Part of the New Testament that looks like a Patch set upon the rest nor any one Doctrine that savours in the least of any such sophistication This Book does not appear to be partly from God and partly from Men but there is One Divine spirit breathed visibly through the Whole ' T is all of a Piece Nor could any wicked design to Corrupt any one Part of it have taken effect but in all probability the rest would some way or other have made an opon Discovery of it Thirdly The various Readings we meet with in several copies of the New Testament are in themselves if duely considered a great evidence that the Originals have not been corrupted for such various readings of any place cannot be reasonably thought to arise from any design to vitiate and falsify the Text because such various Readings do rather accidentally tend to discover anything of that nature and secure against any Total and General Alteration and amongst them all to contain and preserve the Integrity and native sense of the Text and enable a diligent Reader by a through search and Examination of them to find it out Nor do we ever suppose that any Book that has passed through many hands and been often Transcribed to be totally Cortrupted or Changed because in some places of it we find various Lections but are thereby much secured that such Books have not been Designedly Altered And with good reason do judge that such various Lections are barely the effects of casual mistakes and that the Original sense of the Authour is still preserved and may by a careful and diligent inspection be found out amongst them And indeed those we find of some Texts in the New Testament are of such a nature that they all evidently appear the effects of humane frailty and onely such variations as might considering how vast a number of Copies were at first taken escape the best scribes and the greatest diligence Nor is there the least appearance of any Design or Contrivance to Vitiate the Original Text or any thing to be found that in the least degree looks that way in all those Various Readings that we find amongst such Copies as have been most anciently most generally and most publickly used in the Church by which we are to take out Measure in this matter 'T is in this case of great Consideration That no Particular designs of any bad men have been gratified nor any corrupt Ends attained nor indeed any Distinct Ends at all of any sort by any such diversity of readings which sufficiently shews they came not originally from Contrivement nor were Intended as the Foundation of any particular Notions but are the bare and single effects of Accident That the New Testament therefore has been in any Part of it wholly changed and corrupted there appeareth neither Certain not Probable ground to believe Nor indeed is there any good ground to believe that these Sacred Records have suffered the least violation in this kind First no man can prove that the Scriptures were ever Corrupted nor tell us by whom or When or the manner How which yet ought to be done if men will Reasonably Object in this case For no such Presumption as this that renders God in his Providence so Regardless of his Word and his Church and so Reproches the Christian Profession that has been
And indeed well might he tell them so for the Prophets Hosea and Isaiah were contemporary with the first Olympiad which began as Scaliger proves aut of Eusebius and others but in the Reign of King Ahaz whose Son Hezekiah lived at the same time with Numa in Rome and Eâ—dras himself and the latest Writers of the Old Testament wrote before Socrates Philosophized in Athens who taught not there till some time after the Captivity This Antiquity of Moses and his Writings and their precedency to all other written Religion or Learning is in fact so evident that 't is not capable of any tollerable denial And as Scaliger sayes in his discourse upon Eusebius the proof of it resulting so plainly from the universal Testimony of Heathen Authors themselves nihil superesse Paganis videtâ—r nisi aut ut ingeâ—ua confessio ab tis exprimcretur aut silentium pertinacâ—ae sinem faceret And he adds quod certe faeliciter câ—ssit ut hac in parte Porphrius manus daret 'T is not made out from any nice disputes between Chronologers comes not within any near compasses of time but from a general concurrence of all Histories and is so far beyond the â—each of all contradiction that the worst Enemies to our Religion have agreed it and given in their Testimony to it Of this Eusebius in the tenth book of his Praep. Evan. Chap. 3. takes special notice and tells us that Porphrie one of the most raging malicious Enemie that ever the Christians met with had in his fourth book which he writ against them given this Testimony to Moses and his Antiquity That he had written the History of the Jews truly which thing he had perceived by conferring it with Sanchoniathon the Berutian who rehearseth the very same Circumstances and Names and Places that Moses does the which he had learned out of the Registers of one Hierumbalus a Priest of the God of Levi and out of the Chronicles of the Cities and out of Holy Books dedicated to Temples and this Sanchoniathon sayes he was after Moses about the time of Semiramis By which it evidently appears he had such an Opinion of the Antiquity of Moses that he makes him to be much earlier in the World then we affirm him to be But 't is agreed on all hands he lived and writ in a time long before any other Authors of books or any other written Learning was known And this clear Evidence we have so clear that in such a case a clearer cannot be expected of the Antiquity of Moses in point of fact and the Preeminence of his Writings above all others in that respect gives us very probable ground to believe that he himself was the first introducer of Letters as well as the first Writer of Books whatever other Nations have fabulously boasted to the contrary and notwithstanding Plinies absurd supposition that Letters were Eternal because he imagined the World to have been so for 't is not reasonable to think if the World had enjoyed the use of Letters before but that there would have been some Monuments of it before his time remaining at the least to the next after Ages of which we should have had some credible account from them And therefore Diodorus Siculus gives this as the Reason why there were no more Antient Histories and that the Actions of Kings were not Recorded of old because the World wanted Letters Impossibile est sayes he primas Literas aeque ac primos Reges vetuslas extitisse And Josephus gives the very same Reason why we have no more Antient History then we have because the world antiently wanted the use of Letters but especially we cannot suppose but that those Revelations God made before of himself and his mind to some parts of the World would have been safely preserved in Writing and left upon Record to posterity long before Moses writ nor can we well imagine that those Holy men to whom at any time God pleased to reveal himself should not use their utmost diligence in the best way to secure and communicate so inestimable a Treasure of this we hear not the least upon any tollerable ground of credit nor of any other Writings before Moses but upon reports that appear grosly fictitious and fabulous 'T is a thing greatly probable that till Moses his time the World knew nothing of Letters for we neither find any Laws of God or of Men written before and 't is likewise most probable that we owe them not nor their use to Humane invention but to Divine Revelation and 't is likely Plato had learned so much from the Jews when he said in his Cratilus that the Original of Letters was from the Gods 'T is a thing offers its self very fairly to our belief that God himself when he gave the Ten Commandements written by his own singer to Moses introduced the first Alphabet and that Letters themselves and those Divine precepts are of an equal Date I insist not on this as capable of any certain and positive proof nor if it were is it to be urged as a convincing Evidence of the truth of the Bible But yet 't is a Circumstance of very considerable weight and has very good probabilities for its belief and that we shall find if we consult but what Chrysostome Theophilact and other of the Christian Writers have said in the justification of it Cyrill of Alexandria in his seventh Book against Julian insists much upon it Vives upon the thirty ninth Chapter of St. Austins 18 Book de Civ Dei sayes that 't is the most common opinion both of Jews and Christians that Moses first gave Letters to the Hebrew Language which doubtless has the Priority of all others and that Eupolemus Artapanus and many other profane Authors affirm it and that both the Egyptians and also the Phaenicians from whom the Graecians first learnt the use of Letters had their Letters from Him and that Moâ—es was that Mercury to whom the Egyptians ascribe the first invention of them The Objections that are usually made against this seem but of very little weight First we are told of certain Tractates of Enoch that were written before the Flood Secondly of two Pillars of the Sons of Seth with observations Astronomical engraven upon them which they set up to continue their Learning and that it might remain beyond the Flood which Adam had foretold them of The one of which remained in the Countrey of Syria till the time of Josephus as he himself sayes Thirdly that Moses in the 21 of Numbers makes mention of the Book of the Wars of the Lord as a Book extant before that time And fourthly that Moses himself is said to be Learned in all the Learning of the Egyptians which learning probably was written For the first That there were Books of Enochs Writing before the Flood which were preserved in the Ark for so they must be seems to be a story wholly fabulous we find not one word of them amongst
the Jews in the time of our Saviour and the Apostles nor before and 't is certain if there had been any Books then extant in truth written by him they would have been in great esteem and veneration in the Jewish Church though they had not been within their Canon which we are sure they were not and Philo or Josephus most diligent searchers of their Antiquities would have made some eminent mention of them in whose Works we find altum silentium about any such Books and therefore 't is not to be supposed they believed there were any such real Books then extant But 't is most probable that after the Apostle Jude had in his Epistle quoted a Prophecie of Enoch which Prophecie without doubt he came to the knowledge of either purely by Revelation which I rather believe or else by a Tradition the truth of which was ascertained to him by Revelation by which means came others also of the Sacred Writers in after-times to be ascertained of what they writ about divers things that relate to the History of Moses that were not to be found in his Books for in the Psalms we find mention of some things done in Moses his time that are not recorded in his Books St. Paul in the 9 to the Hebrews sayes that when Moses had spoken every precept according to the Law he took the blood of Calves and Goats with Water and Scarlet Wool and Hyssop and sprinkled bâ—th the Book and all the People saying this is the Blood of the Testament c. In which the Apostle has added several things that are not inserted by Moses in the selation of this passage in the 24 of Exodus So Stephens Speech set down in the 7 of the Acts tells us that Moses in killing the Egyptian supposed that his brethren would have understood how that God by his Hand would deliver them but they understood not By which we have a Reason given for Moses killing the Egyptian that he himself has no where set down and by which we come to understand that before Moses went into the Land of Midian God revealed to him that he was to be the deliverer of that people which Moses himself has not any where told us I say 't is probable that some Hereticks in the Church most likely the Gnosticks who much cryed up those Spurious Writings to promote their own corrupt Opinions and Interests took occasion from thence to frame certain counterfeit Books just as some others did under the names of Jaâ—nes and Jambres after St. Pauls mention of them as written by Enoch before the Flood which Books have sufficiently betrayed themselves for those that were published under his name were stuft as St. Austin sayes with such absurd and fabulous Stories of Angels and such ridiculous relations of Gyants whose Fathers were Angels and no men that they are to be justly rejected as pâ—lpably counterfeit and fictitious Of the same mind is Jerom Chrysostom and Epiphanius and when Celsus alledged some absurd Stories out of those writings in reproch to the Christians Origen in his fifth Book answers him by shewing what a mean esteem the Jews as well as the Christians then had of them For the second those Pillars of the Sons of Seth 't is beyond all compass of credit that any such Pillars should be set up with an intention to outlast the Deluge or that they should so do or that any Engravings upon them should be visible some thousands of years after especially upon one of Brick for Josephus tells us there were two at first erected one of Brick and another of Stone and that of Stone they made on purpose to last if the other should decay how he came to such an exact account of their minds the Reader may guess and yet he sayes 't was that of Brick that then remained upon which he does not absolutely say there was any thing written in Letters but that the Sons of Seth Engraved upon them such things as they had invented which might be by many other representations and other ways then by Letters for I doubt not but that a Symbolical representation of mens thoughts one to another was extream early in the World though they wanted Alphabetical Letters Nor does Josephus say that He saw it it himself or give any punctual account what it was that was engraven upon it or any certain Place where the Pillar was to be seen but only in general that it was then in the Countrey of Syria where he left men of leisure to enquire after it The truth is there are so very many improbable and unlikely if not impossible Circumstances do attend this vain Story that 't is plain Josephus though in the general a Historian of deserved credit took it upon bare report from others some late Authors think and perhâ—ps not amiss from the fabulous relation of Manetho who sayes he took his History from some Pillars set up before the Flood and was marvailously abused in that Countenance he seems to give to it nor ought it to seem strange that he should be so for we sind many of the best Historians have taken up things upon trust and fallen thereby into very great mistakes Suetonius and Tacitus are both eminent Historians amongst the Romans yet both guilty of strange mistakes Tacitus tells us in his History That the Jews worshipped an Asses Head with the highest veneration then which nothing could be more untruly and upon less ground affirmed and Suetonius so mistook that he thought Christ lived in the time of Claudius for he sayes In the time of Claudius Judaeos impulsore Chresto assidue tumultuantes civitate expulit That Claudius expelled the Jews out of Rome who were continually making uproars being stirred up thereunto by Christ Then which there could not be an absurder mistake nor a greater falshood well uttered For the third The mention that Moses makes in the 21 of Numbers and the 14 of the book of the wars of the Lord as a Book then extant his words are wherefore it is said in the Book of the Wars of the Lord what he didin the red Sea and in the brooks of Arnon First divers probable senses are given of the place that render it no Objection in this case The Geneva Translation not much differing from some others renders it thus Wherefore it shall be spoken in the book of the Battles of the Lord c. If so then 't is Prophetical and may relate to Joshuah who is said to sight the Battles of the Lord and to the Relations in the books of Joshuah or Judges that were to be after Junius reads the words thus Idcirco dici solet in recensione bellorum Jehovae c. Wherefore it is wont to be said in the rehearsal of the Wars of the Lord c. And so understands it not of any particular book but that amongst the Wars that God disposed for the good of the Israelites there was in those times a famous mention in the