observe all the precepts "which are written in the law of Moses." 1 Kings, ii. 3. Nor does the 2d Kings, xiv. 6, admit of any question, in which Amaziah, king of Judah, is said to have spared the children of the murderers of his father, "according to what is written in the book of the law of Moses ;" and to which there is subjoined the passage now read in Deut. xxiv. 16. Jehoshaphat, 2d Chron. xvii. 9, sends priests "with the book of the law of Jehovah" throughout the cities and villages to instruct the people. In the reign of Hezekiah, (2d Chron. xxx. 16—18; xxxi. 3, 4, 21.) this king causes the passover to be celebrated "as it is written in the book of the law of Jehovah." Under Josiah, (2d Chron. xxxiv. 15.) it is said that the book of the law of Jehovah, by the hand of Moses, was found in the temple.* During the captivity the book of the law of Moses is mentioned by Daniel, chap. ix. 13. References to this book after the return from Babylon, and before the time of Ezra, have been already cited in a former part of this discussion.

The above collection of passages, by which, we think, is proved the existence of the Pentateuch, in every period of the Jewish history, from the time of

* The supposition that this book is a forgery of Hilkiah, we shall consider elsewhere. Its being mentioned here, is a valid argument against those who ascribe the Pentateuch to Ezra, and refer it to a period subsequent to the captivity.

Moses to the era of the captivity, may suffice. Those who desire farther satisfaction may consult Jahn's Introduction. The only mode in which the argument grounded upon them can be evaded, is that adopted by Vater, who asserts that these citations only prove that certain laws and ancient written histories existed, but not the whole Pentateuch. In this opinion, which is a mere conjecture, he is, in substance, followed by Dr. C., who peremptorily denies that the phrases "law of Moses," &c. mean the Pentateuch. We have already seen how "lame and impotent" was the conclusion attempted to be drawn from modern Jewish opinion, by a reference to "Prideaux and his authorities," to prove that about which they affirm not one word. As no additional reason is urged to sustain an opinion which our author again pronounces "ex cathedra," we can only request a candid and careful examination of the testimonials above recited, and suggest some general considerations corroborative of the position which they are intended to sustain.

In what age and by what author any book was written, are facts which can only be determined by historical evidence. This evidence may be, first, the testimony of those who possess the means of information, and who have no inducement to mislead us. Second, certain marks in the work itself, as respects language, style and sentiment, which point

out its age and authorship. The evidence of the former class possessed by the work in question, is most ample. It has been handed down from generation to generation, as the production of him whose name it bears. Those who lived contemporaneously with its origin, and transcribed this book, together with those who in successive ages transcribed it, form a series of witnesses to its genuineness. This is a proof which we never hesitate to admit in regard to the profane authors of antiquity, and this national testimony is, in regard to the Pentateuch, particularly satisfactory. Books, at so early a period as the one at which it dates its origin, were rare, and it was less difficult to retain the recollection of the author from whom they proceeded. This recollection was preserved in the familiar instruction of fathers to their children. Deut. xxxii. 7; Ps. lxxviii. 3-7. A whole tribe, moreover, was devoted to the services of religion, which were intimately connected with a proper preservation of their sacred records. Nor was there any motive to induce the Hebrews to corrupt the pure tradition relative to the source whence they were derived; I mean so as to ascribe to Moses what did not belong to him. Rather might they have been tempted to deny that a book containing many representations discreditable to their nation had been written by their illustrious and honored legislator. And the very fact that the Jews ac

knowledged their ignorance of the date and authorship of several of their historical books, furnishes to us a guaranty that when they do affirm any thing on the subject, they speak from adequate information.

We find then, by a reference to the passages cited by the later writers of the Old Testament, that there was at all times a "book of the law of Jehovah, written by Moses." We perceive that the laws, the promises and threatenings, the historical narrations referred to, are all such as we now find in the Pentateuch. Particularly is this manifest from many allusions in the Psalms and prophets, which I have omitted to cite, but which may be seen in Rosenmueler's Prolegnomena,* and in Jahn. The book of the law," then, was the Pentateuch, as appears from the ancient national testimony of the Jews. Nor do their accredited modern traditions at all oppose this conclusion, NOTWITHSTANDING the REPEATED and CONFIDENT assertions of our

ANTAGONIST.

* An excellent abstract of his arguments, with additional considerations, may be seen in an article on the Samaritan Pentateuch, originally published in the North American Review, April, 1826; afterwards in Biblical Repository, October, 1832, by Professor Stuart. Dr. C. speaks respectfully of it, and opposes some assertions to its arguments.

SECTION VI.

Positive evidence of the Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch, continued.

BUT the internal marks of genuineness exhibited by this book are not less satisfactory than the external proofs which support it. The historical, political, and geographical details respecting the most remote antiquity which it contains, especially what pertains to the history and physical character of Egypt and Arabia, are so composed as to afford a strong presumption that they were written by a man who, at an ancient age, was liberally educated in the former country. What we read respecting the Exodus of the Israelites, and their journies through the Arabian desert, is in remarkable accordance with the statements of modern travellers. The genius and conformation of the entire work, are moreover in exact correspondence with the character and circumstances of the author. In the last of the five books, we hear the legislator addressing the people whom he had governed many years; but now advanced in life, as the more diffuse style, which all observe in Deuteronomy, proves. In this book, we hear the ruler, now near his end, recalling to the remembrance of his people all things which had happened to them during his government, and solemnly exhorting them to obey the laws