out of the feveral Books of the Pentateuch, as the Law of Mofes.

I will (to put this matter out of doubt with all Chriftians) país on to the New Testament, where thefe Books of the Pentateuch are quoted frequently, and they are cited as the Books of Moses. I will not fhew how often they are quoted in the New Teftament, which would be more than is needfull; it will be enough to fhew that they are cited feverally, as the Law, and as the Law of Moses.

An historical Paffage of the Book of Genefis is cited by St. Paul under the Character of the Law, Gal. 4. 21. and the written Law that was, v. 30. and Rom. 4. 3. St. Stephen was charged to have spoken blafphemous Words against Mofes and against the Law, A&t.6.11,17. He was charged to have affirmed that Jefus fhould change the customs which Mofes delivered, v. 14. Upon this he makes his defence, and owns his belief of the matters related, even in the Book of Genefis, chap. 7. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15. Which had not been to his purpose, had not that Book been part of that Law which he was accused to have fpoken against, as well as against Mofes. Again, We have found him of whom Mofes in the Law, and the Prophets, did write, Joh. 1. 45. This Law here cannot be exclufive of the Book of Genefis, which contains the firft, and alfo the clearest Prophecy of the Meffias; of which no Chriftian can make any doubt that confults

Gen. 3.15.

Gen. 3. 15. and chap. 49. 10. Thefe Prophecies are allowed by the Jews themfelves (the great Enemies of Jefus) to belong to the Meffias.

The Book of Exodus is by our Saviour exprefsly called the Book of Mofes, Mark 12. 26. as it is called the Scripture by St. Paul, Rom., 9. 17. and the Law of the Lord by St. Luke, chap. 2. 23.

Leviticus is cited alfo by our Saviour as a part of the Law of Mofes, Matt. 8.4. And what that Book defcribes, St. Paul reckons as defcribed by Mofes, Rom. 10. 5. And Mofes is faid to Command what is commanded in that Book, Job. 8.5.

For the Book of Numbers, though I find it not particularly quoted as other Books under this character, yet have we no cause to exclude it from what that place referrs to, mentioned above, viz. Joh. 1. 45. To which we may add what our Saviour fays, Had ye believed Mofes, ye would have believed me, for he wrote of me, Joh. 5. 46. For fo indeed he did in the Book of Numbers, chap. 24. 17. And farther ftill our Saviour referrs to a paffage related in this Book of Numbers as a Type of himself: As Mofes lifted up the Serpent in the Wilderness, even fo muft the Son of Man be lifted up, Joh. 3. 14.

Deuteronomy is quoted as part of the Law of Mofes, Matt. 19.7,8. And what we find faid there, is imputed to Mofes as faid by him, which cannot be if he were not the Writer of it, Act.

1

3.22. 7.37. This Book is expressly called the Law of Mofes, 1 Cor. 9. 9. And what is therein contained, is faid to have been faid by Mofes, Matt. 22. 24.

The whole Pentateuch is included by the word Law in the ftyle of the New Testament, as well as in that of the other and later Jewish Writers. Our Saviour fays, That all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Mofes, and in the Prophets, and in the Pfalms concerning me, Luk. 24. 44. Whence 'tis manifest, that under the Law of Mofes the whole Pentateuch is comprized. For Jefus gives us the whole Scripture, as the Jews divide it to this day. For they divide it into three parts. The Law, which takes in thefe Five Books of MoJes, the Prophets (which the Jews divide into the former and latter) and the Kethuvim, or, Hagiographical Books. And the Book of Pfalms being the Principal of them, is put by our Saviour here for all that fall under that General Head.

This Law came by Mofes, Joh. 1. 14. He wrote it; and when the Law is read, Mofes is faid to be read, Act. 13. 15. and chap. 15. 21. 2 Cor. 3.15.

If I should add to what hath been faid, that Mofes hath been owned to be the Writer of thefe Books by all Mankind, by all forts of Authors, and by an Univerfal Tradition, I think nothing can be wanting to confirm us

in this belief. And yet is this not denied by our Adverfaries in this Question?

I fhall now proceed to confider what can be faid on the other fide. The Proofs had need be very clear before Mofes can be difpoffeffed of so just a claim and title, which he hath enjoyed fo many Ages, and which is attested by a mighty Cloud of unexceptionable Witnesses. We may juftly expect that our Adversaries, in this Question, will put forth all their Might and Force, and stretch their Wits to the utmost. They will leave no means unattempted, but pursue their defign with the greatest vigor and application. I will draw up all their force at once, and add some scattering Supplies to them, as I have had occafion to meet with them, that they may appear together in their full ftrength.

Their Objections, with Answers to them, are these that follow.

Obj. I. It is pretended that Mofes could not write those words, Deut. 1. 1. These be the words which Mofes fpake unto all Ifrael on the ther fide) Jordan (for it is pretended that it ought to be render'd on the other fide, or, beyond Fordan) in the Wilderness, &c. These words, fays the Objector, must be written by Ezra, or fome other Person who liv'd in Canaan, or at least on that fide of the River For

dan,

dan, whither Mofes was not permitted to come. And confequently Mofes could not be the Author of these Books. To which I answer,

1. Suppofing this to be the Senfe of those words, the Objection will bear as hard againft Ezra, or any other Perfon in the Land of Canaan, as against Mofes, Jacob was bury'd in the Land of Canaan, (Gen. 49. 30. with chap. 50. 11.) and 'tis exprefsly faid, that when they came to the threshing-floor of Atad, which is beyond Fordan ('tis the very fame word in the Hebrew which is used here) they mourned, &c. (Gen.50. 10.) If there be any force in the Ob jection at all, it lies against the Writer, fuppos'd to be in Canaan, as ftrongly as against Mofes, who was on the other fide of Jordan in the Wilderness. This Objection is defign'd to weak'n the Reader's belief of any certain Author of thefe Books.

2. I will confider the meaning of aya, which our English turn, on this fide, Deut.1. 1. For the whole Question does reft upon that. There would be fome force in this Objection, if that Hebrew word did neceffarily fignifie be yond, or, on the other fide. But that it does not, y fignifies a fide or paffage, Exod. 32. 15. with Joh. 22. II. And according to this account, all that it neceffarily fignifies, is, or on the fide or paffage. But then this fenfe is not fixed or determinate. And the Truth is, the word feparately confidered; fignifies in differently one fide or the other; It fignifies

iridiffe