that the more circumstantial Prophecies belonged to him, it followed that the more general Prophecies could belong to no one else. When it had been shewn that he exactly resembled the most nice and finished Draughts of the Meffiah, what Occafion to add that he also resembled the more faint Outlines or Sketches? They made it appear that every minute Circumstance, that was to meet in the Character of the Meffiah, concurred in the Person of Jefus : could there therefore remain any Doubt whether he were intended under the more general Denomination of the promised Seed? Sure there could not. For it being fhewn that the Explanation belonged to him, that of which it was an Explanation must of Course also belong to him. This may ferve as a Reason why the Evangelifts did not expressly cite the most ancient of all Prophecies. It might have accounted for the Omiffion too, fuppofing it had been proved, that none of the ancient Prophecies were ever referred to in the Books of the New Teftament. For though they had both believed and acknowledged the Force of fuch Prophecies, it appears from this View that it was fuperfluous, at least that it was not requifite, they should refer to them. But, I think, Dr. M. has by no Means proved, that there are no Prophecies referred to in the Gofpel, which were delivered before the Time of Mofes. He tells Us, that it is affirmed by the Teftimonies of all the Evangelifts, how Jefus himself conftantly taught, that his Perfon and Character were particularly foretold

foretold and marked out by Mofes and all the later Prophets, as the Meffiah, or that great Prophet who was to come. In his Collections from the Evangelifts for proving this, he has always marked these Expreffions, Mofes and the Prophets, or the Law and the Prophets, in different Characters. I fuppofe therefore, by his thus diftinguishing them, he intends that these Expreffions fhould convey an Argument, (for otherwise I find not the least Shadow of an Argument for this Purpofe) and would infinuate that when the Writers of the New Testament refer to Prophecies as recorded in Mofes, or the Law, and the Prophets, they can only be understood to mean fuch Prophecies as are not of an earlier Date than the Time of Mofes. The Enquiry then must be into the Sense of these Expreffions, as they were used by the Jews and Writers of the New Testament. By Mofes, when they spoke of him as a Writer, they understood not the Perfon or perfonal Speeches, but the Writings of Mofes. And not only that Part of his Writings whereof Himself and his own Acts are the Subject, but the whole Volume of his Writings. The Law, in their Ufage fignified the fame Thing, as appears from the well-known Divifion of the Jewish Canon into the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa. Therefore Mofes and the Prophets, or, the Law and the Prophets, were general Names for the whole Canon of Scripture. The Five Books of the Law were divided into 54 Sections. This Divifion many of the

Jews

Jews held to be one of the Confiitutions of Mofes from Mount Sinai. But others, with more Likelibood of Truth, attribute it to Ezra. It was made for the Ufe of their Synagogues, and the better inftructing of the People there in the Law of God. For every Sabbath-Day, one of thefe Sections was read in their Synagogues. And this we are affured, in the Acts of the Apostles, was done amongst them of old Time. Chap. 15.21. which may well be interpreted, from the Time of Ezra. They ended the laft Section with the last Words of Deuteronomy on the Sabbath of the Feast of Tabernacles, and then began anew with the firft Section from the Beginning of Genefis the next Sabbath after, and fo went round in this Circle every Year. Till the Time of the Perfecution of Antiochus Epiphanes they read only the Law: But then, being forbid to read it any more, in the Room of the 54 Sections of the Law they fubftituted 54 Sections out of the Prophets, the Reading of which they ever after continued. So that when the Reading of the Law was again restored by the Maccabees, the Section which was read every Sabbath out of the Law ferved for their firft Leffon, and the Section out of the Prophets for their fecond Leffon; and fo it was practifed in the Time of the Apoftles. And therefore when Paul entred into the Synagogue of Antiochia in Pifidia, it is faid that he stood up to preach after the Reading of the Law and the Prophets, Acts 13.15. that is, after the Reading of the firft Leffon out of the Law, and the fecond Leffon out of the Prophets.a

a Prid. Con. Part 1. Book 5. Page 478. 10 Ed.

We

We fee then that all the Books of Mofes were read in the Synagogue-Service, and that this Reading is called, by St. James, the preaching of Mofes; (For Mofes of old Time bath in every City them that preach him, being read in the Synagogues every Sabbath-Day, Acts 15.21.) by St. Luke, the Reading of the Law. And therefore it is plain thefe Expreffions cannot bear that confined Meaning which Dr. M. for the Sake of his Argument, would give them. Whence it follows that when our Saviour or his Difciples appeal for the Truth of his Miffion to Mofes, or the Law, it is not only an Appeal to the Prophecies which Mofes in his own Perfon delivered, but to all those also that are contained in his Writings, though delivered originally by others, and in Times much elder than his own, and on

recorded by him. And indeed this Notion of the Expreffion is agreeable to the Custom of Language prevailing amongst Us at this Day. We use the Name of an Author for the Works of that Author, and refer to him for any thing contained in his Works, without any Hazard of being misunderstood. If any one should say that there was a Prediction of the Greatnefs of the Roman Empire under Auguftus Cæfar, delivered even before the Foundation of the City, and fhould refer his Hearers for it to Virgil, I am perfwaded that He would be received with Contempt or Laughter as a low Quibbler on Words, or one ignorant of the most common Forms of Speech, who should reply, that "it was impof

"fible

ye

"fible Virgil fhould be the Author of such à "Prophecy, for He lived not till the Days of Auguftus." But if Dr. M. will not yet confent to give this Meaning to Mofes, or, the Law, let him be reminded, for the further Eafe of his Scruples, that our Saviour himself ufes Mofes, and the Writings of Mofes, as fynonymous Terms: For bad ye believed Mofes, fays He, ye would have believed Me: For he wrote of Me. But if ye believe not his Writings, how will ye believe my Words? a-- -that He also appealed for the Evidence of his Miffion to all the Writings of the old Teftament under the more general Name of Scriptures: Search the Scriptures, fays he to the Jews, for in them ye think that have eternal Life, and they are they which testify of Me: b --that in a full Account we have of his perfwafive Discourse to draw his backward and difpirited Disciples to a Belief in him, he does not confine himself, in his Use of Prophecies, to any particular Part of the Scriptures, but ranges through the whole Compass of them, and gives the Argument compleat and in its full Extent: He expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the Things concerning himself: that Zacharias, in his Prophecy on the Circumcifion of his Son John, appeals to all the Prophets that have been fince the World began. As does St. Peter alfo in his Difcourfe after having wrought the Miracle of healing the lame Man: But thofe Things which God before bad fhewed by the Mouth of all his Prophets, that a John 5. 46, 47. b John 5. 39. c Luke 1. 70.

C

F

Chrift