cited the blush of reason and philosophy, and called forth the tear of generous pity and compassion. These prophecies, however, and their entire fulfilment, present a barrier, against which the foaming waves of skepticism will ever rage in vain. They challenge the power of all the enemies of revelation to contradict their truth, and defy the entire host of unbelievers to shake their imperishable foundations.

And now, my hearers, what does the skeptic offer against the prophetic inspiration of Moses, to justify your reason in rejecting his testimony? Does he prove by history, that the facts predicted did not transpire? He dare not pretend this. Does he show you that divine inspiration is absurd and impossible? So far from this, he is constrained to admit, what he dare not deny, that a revelation is possible. What then does he offer to justify his own unbelief, and persuade you to reject the testimony of Moses? Why, he simply proposes a few childish objections, backed with vollies of abuse and ridicule! And does he flatter himself that your sober judgment is thus to be trifled with? I trust that such pretenders to reason and philosophy will find themselves for once mistaken, and be compelled to abandon their vain and delusive attempt.

Let us now notice a few of their objections.-They tell us that Moses wrote many of his prophecies in the preter or past tense, and therefore is undeserving of credit. And does this method of employing language destroy the credibility of a prophet? The very suggestion is the monster of absurdity for who does not know that from time immemorial, predictions and promises that are prophetical, have been given in the preter tense, to impress the mind of man with the certainty of their truth and divine authority? And do we not see the fulfilment of such predictions, ages after they were uttered?

Again, we are told that Moses must have been an imposter, because the books ascribed to him contain an account of his own death. And would this fact prove that he was not an inspired prophet? certainly not, unless it could be shown that he did not die at the time, and in the manner there set forth: Where then is the mighty strength and cogency of the objection? Have skeptics ever attempt

ed to prove that the facts alleged were untrue?—No, nor will they attempt to do this. But do they not know, (and if they do not, it is civility in us to inform them,) that both Jewish and Christian writers have always believed and maintained, that the Pentateuch was finished by another hand; probably by Joshua; and that many remarks concerning Moses were probably inserted by the compiler of his Manuscript? Why then do they urge such puerile objections -Alas, it is for the want of more solid objections and arguments.

Once more, we are told that Moses pretends to have been commissioned to direct the warriors of Israel to fall upon whole cities and tribes of their enemies, and to exterminate men, women and children! And this is presumed to be sufficient to invalidate all his pretensions to divine inspiration. And is this so powerful an objection as to disprove the fact that Moses penned the most astonishing predictions, and that these predictions, which were totally unauthorized by any precedent in the history of man, were a tissue of deception and falsehood, notwithstanding their exact and literal fulfilment, merely because Moses asserts that such injunctions were imposed by divine authority? Would not the evident fulfilment of his prophecies, on the other hand, furnish undeniable proof of the divine authority of what he commanded?

What is there, we ask, in this account, that is so unlike the scenes which we daily meet, in contemplating the character of the God of nature? Deists acknowledge that God governs both the natural and moral world; and are there no sufferings, no destructions of men, women and children, No wild tornadoes, no unsparing earthquakes; no sweeping pestilences, depopulating kingdoms, and laying waste the fairest portions of the globe?-Have there been no wars of extermination, but among the Hebrews? That such wars have been far more numerous among the heathen, will not be denied by any historian, nor by any attentive reader of history: And why has not the God of nature interposed his power to prevent them, if they were subversive of the great designs of his government? If he did not design their existence, he certainly could have prevented their occurrence; and as he did not prevent

them by his powerful interposition, it must be conceded by every consistent Deist, that he has permitted them for some great and wise purpose, which is too deep for human penetration to fathom. Here you discover, my hearers, that the Deist himself is under the necessity of appealing to the mystery of an inscrutable Providence, to sustain and justify the character of the God of nature: He pleads that it must be for some wise and great end, which, were it fully unfolded to our view, would furnish an ample vindication of the wisdom, the goodness, and the justice of the Creator. With this vindication, we have no disposition to find fault; for our opponents, in this, appear like men of reason. It is a happy circumstance, however, that we are under no such necessity of appealing to mystery, in vindicating the justice and wisdom of God, in the case which this objection embraces; for an ample reason is assigned by the testimony itself.

Το

And I beg leave here to remark, that the Jews were not permitted to slay women and children, on any occasion, in a war with foreign nations; nor any except such as were found in arms against them, even of the men. the seven Canaanitish nations, they were expressly commanded to tender the olive of peace; and in case this offer was accepted, they were bound to spare their lives and treat them with humanity. But in case they refused to accept the offer of peace, and agree to abstain from the practice of idolatry, the Jews were then permitted to wage against them an exterminating war. For this permission, a reason is assigned in the very connexion where the permission is found :-See Exodus xx. 18-" That they teach you not to do after their abominations, which they have done unto their Gods, so should ye sin against the Lord your God." When we reflect that these Canaanitish nations were in the habit of offering their children in sacrifice to false gods, can it be a matter of surprise that the Jews should be made the instruments of their overthrow, as a token of the divine displeasure; any more, than that God should overthrow and destroy the ante-deluvian world, by a general deluge? Or that he should destroy the cities of the plain by fire, for their wickedness?-Where in the name of reason is the difference, except it be, that by de

stroying these incorrigible idolators by the instrumentality of the Israelites, their land and habitations would be left for another and less abominable race of men? Had the idolatrous femaies of these Canaanitish nations, no participation in the abominable and cruel rites of Paganism? Did they not seduce the men of Israel, by their artful intrigues, into the snares of their abominations ?— and were they not the means of bringing some of the greatest calamities upon the Jews? And pray, by what principle of philosophy and reason, is idolatry rendered innocent in females, and at the same time, a crime of the blackest die in men ?-There are other reasons given by the historian, which modesty compels us to pass in silence, but which confirm the justice of their punishment. Now, had the children of these nations been preserved, does not reason tell us that they would have sought to revenge the death of their ancestors ?-Or if they had been spared, and not fed and nourished by the Israelites, would they not have suffered incomparably more than they did by an instantaneous overthrow. And again, what is the mighty difference between a destruction of fire, water, or an earthquake, provided these engines be employed by the Deity for that purpose, and an army of men, employed by the same independent agency, for the same end?-For we have already shown that the Deity could have prevented any such events if he chose; and it therefore follows, that he either intended them, or was indifferent about the events: But the supposition of indifference, is a virtual denial of his government of the world. To avoid this conclusion, are we told that men are free agents; and therefore left to destroy whole nations, contrary to the design of God?-We reply,-they are not the authors of their agency, and the Being who gave them this agency must. have known what effects it would produce; if it were therefore liable to frustrate any of his designs, the gift itself would be indicative of infinite folly and weakness.

The only consistent view which we can take of this subject, is, that the Deity, designing to establish the true worship of his name, in opposition to the universal prevalence of idolatry, adopted such means as would tend to fix, in the minds of men, the most solemn dread of his

power to punish and destroy such as should oppose his worship and deny his authority: And that such an effect was produced, both upon the Israelites, and the surrounding nations, by the signal displays of his judgments, in the days of Moses and Joshua, must appear evident to every attentive reader of their history.

I have devoted eight Lectures to the consideration of some of the most interesting parts of the Pentateuch, and have found the historical facts there recorded, amply supported by profane authority. Two Lectures have been devoted to prove by history, the prophetic inspiration of Moses. The object has been accomplished, if the most respectable historians are worthy of credit. If our opposers are still determined to shut their eyes against these evidences; to deny and ridicule the plainest facts of revelation; to brand the whole with disdainful epithets; to pronounce and denounce these facts as preposterous, absurd and impossible; we demand of them, what tangible or historical evidence they have to justify their bold denial of the truth of these books? They have none, nor dare they pretend it. They may rage, and ridicule, and condemn the Bible, but they will never attempt to offer us such evidence to justify their unbelief, as we have produced in support of the writings of Moses.

There are other objections which have been employed by skeptical writers, but they have been fairly met and answered by numerous authors, who have written in defence of revealed religion : I shall therefore forbear to detain you by their recital or their refutation.

Weigh this subject with candor, my brethren, and may divine wisdom direct you in the path of judgment and truth.