To the Mosaic authorship of Genesis it has been objected, that it contains marks of a _later age_. But these marks, so far as they have any real existence, belong not to the substance of the book. They are restricted to a few explanatory notices, which may well have been added by Ezra or some prophetical man before him, in setting forth a revised copy of the law. See No. 3, above. The passages which can, with any show of probability, be referred to a later age, are, taken all together, very inconsiderable, and they refer only to incidental matters, while the book, as a whole, bears all the marks of high antiquity. To the Mosaic authorship of this book it has been objected again, that it contains the writings of _different authors_. This is especially argued from the diversity of usage in respect to the divine name, some passages employing the word _Elohim_, _God_, others the word _Jehovah_, or a combination of the two terms. Whatever force there may be in this argument, the validity of which is denied by many who think that the inspired writer designedly varied his usage between the general term _God_ and the special covenant name _Jehovah_, it goes only to show that Moses may have made use of previously existing documents; a supposition which we need not hesitate to admit, provided we have cogent reasons for so doing. Whatever may have been the origin of these documents, they received through Moses the seal of God's authority, and thus became a part of his inspired word. Several writers have attempted to distinguish throughout the book of Genesis the parts which they would assign to different authors; but beyond the first chapters they are not able to agree among themselves. All attempts to carry the distinction of different authors into the later books rest on fanciful grounds.