After he had long revolved this hypothesis in his mind, at last he met with a Rabbi well skilled in the Talmud, the Cabbala, and the allegorical books of the Jews.
This Rabbi had once embraced the Christian religion, but was again relapsed to Judaism on account of the idolatry of the Papists, yet not perfectly disbelieving the integrity of the New Testament.
Surenhusius asked him, what he thought of the passages of the Old Testament quoted in the New, whether they were rightly quoted or not, and whether the Jews had any just reason to cavil at them, and at the same time proposed to him two or three passages, which had very much exercised the most learned Christian commentators.
The Rabbi having admirably explained those passages, to the great surprise of Surenhusius, and confirming his explications by several places of the Talmud, and other writings of the Jewish commentators, and allegorical writers, Surenhusius asked him what would be the best method to write a treatise in order to vindicate the passages of the Old Testament quoted in the New?
The Rabbi answered, that he "thought the best way of succeeding in such an undertaking would be to peruse a great part of the Talmud, and the allegorical and literal commentators; to observe their several ways of quoting and interpreting scripture, and to collect as many materials of that kind, as would be sufficient for that purpose." Surenhusius took the hint immediately: he read such books as were recommended, observed every thing that might be subservient to his design, and made a book upon the subject.

And in the third part of that book he gives us the rules so long sought after, viz., the ten ways# used, he says, by the Jewish doctors in citing scripture.

And here they are:-- 1.

The first rule is--"reading the words of the Hebrew bible, not according to the points placed under them, but according to other points substituted in their stead," as is done by Peter, Acts iii.

3; by Stephen, Acts vii.