VOLUME I

On the Credibility, Antiquity, and Genuineness of
the Old Testament Scriptures

CHAPTER I
The nations of the earth are indebted to the Jews for theBible.—Taylor's assertion, that no such nation as the Jewishever existed. Its confutation. The Jews and Christianshold the Old Testament to be a revelation from God.Infidels hold this to be untrue. How the question at issueis to be settled. The frame of mind necessary to an impartialexamination of the subject.—Objections of theAtheistical Infidel against the claims of the Bible as adivine revelation. Mr. Olmsted's misrepresentation of theposition of the advocates of Revelation. The questions atissue between the Christian and Atheist. That betweenthe Christian and the Deist1
Section I.—Confutation of the theory of the materialist.Confutations of the positions of the two classes ofAtheists6
Section II.—Hume's argument to prove that Polytheismwas the first religion of mankind. Its confutation23
Section III.—Of the style of the Old Testament Scriptures.Example from Mr. Olmsted, showing the necessityof understanding its nature. The Scriptures speak the languageof appearances, but strictly philosophical40
CHAPTER II
Mr. Olmsted's assertion concerning the requisitions of the advocateof Revelation in examining the credibility of theMosaic writings. Its falsehood. His allegation that thefirst sentence in the Bible contains a falsehood. The confutationof his argument. His objection to the credibilityof the Mosaic narrative of the creation founded on thestatement that the world was made in six days. Vindicationof the Mosaic narrative.—Infidel objection to theMosaic narrative founded on the zodiacs in the temples ofLatapolis and Tantyra. Its fallacy.—Dr. Keith's proofsof the truthfulness of the Mosaic narrative of the creation48
Section I.—Mosaic account of the creation confirmedby tradition. The Hindoo account; that of Ovid; thePhenician; the Egyptian; that of Plato.—The heathentradition concerning the first man. Division of time intoweeks, a confirmation of the Mosaic narrative75
Section II.—Paine's and Olmsted's objection on accountof the narrative of the fall of man. Their confutation.The Mosaic narrative of the fall of man confirmedby heathen traditions; by the universality of serpent worship;by the condition of mankind; by the opinions of theheathen philosophers concerning the corruption of humannature; by the belief of the Brahmins; by the opinions ofthe classical mythologists, and by the universal practice ofanimal sacrifice.—The account of the translation of Enochconfirmed by the Grecian fables.—The longevity of theantediluvian patriarchs confirmed by heathen traditions.—Mosaicaccount of man of gigantic stature confirmed bythe Greek and Latin poets85
CHAPTER III
Objection to the Mosaic narrative of the deluge, because contraryto the philosophy of Nature. Its fallacy.—The truthof the narrative confirmed by the fossil remains of animals.—Objection founded on the size of the ark. Shownto be fallacious.—Objection founded on certain marks ofantiquity said to exist in the lava of Mt. Etna. Mr.Horne's confutation of the argument.—Objection on accountof the differences in color, existing among mankind.Its fallacy. Dr. Good's argument, confirmatory of theMosaic narrative.—Objections founded upon the supposedantiquity of the eastern nations. Confutation of the objection.—Objections founded on the condition of Americawhen discovered by Columbus. Proofs that two distinctraces of men immigrated into America from Asia. Thepresent Indians, of the same race with the tribes ofnorthern Asia. The ancient Mexicans and Peruvians,originally proceeded from the same stock with the nationsof southern Asia100
Section I.—Mosaic account of the deluge confirmed byPagan history. Its memory incorporated with almost everypart of the heathen mythology. Noah claimed by all theheathen nations as their founder, and worshiped by them asa god. Saturn, of the Greeks and Latins, Menu of theHindoos, and Noah identical. The Hindoo account of thedeluge. The Chinese and Grecian accounts. The ark mentionedby heathen historians. Plutarch's notice of the dovewhich was sent out of the ark. The heathens carried theirdeities in an ark. Ancient medals commemorative of thedeluge. American traditions of that calamity. Summingup of the argument125
Section II.—Confirmation of the Mosaic representationof the origin of families and nations. Testimony ofSir W. Jones.—Confirmation of the Mosaic accounts ofthe tower of Babel.—Of the destruction of Sodom andGomorrah. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, known to the ancientheathens. Mr. Olmsted's attempt to invalidate theMosaic account of the condition of the Israelites in Egypt.The confutation of his argument.—His argument to invalidatethe truth of the Mosaic narrative of the exode ofthe Israelites from Egypt and the circumstances attendingit. Vindication of the Mosaic narrative.—Explanation ofthe design of the miraculous interposition in behalf of theIsraelites. The fitness and tendency of each of the plaguesinflicted upon the Egyptians. Confutation of Mr. Olmsted'sallegation that Moses extorted permission for theIsraelites to leave Egypt, by false pretentions. Vindicationof the Mosaic account of the hardening of Pharaoh'sheart. Mr. Olmsted's supposition that the Israelites werea horde of rude barbarians, in behalf of whom there wasno divine interposition. The fallacy and absurdity of hissupposition135
Section III.—Collateral testimony confirmative of theMosaic account of the exode of the Israelites from Egypt,their sojourn in the wilderness, and settlement in Canaan.Curious discovery confirmatory of the Mosaic narrative.Trogus' account of the origin of the Jews. The account oftheir origin by Apion, an Egyptian writer. Manetho's accountof the shepherds who retreated from Egypt to Judea.Tacitus' account of the origin of the Jews. Artapanus'relation concerning Moses. Janes and Jambres, the Egyptianmagicians, well known to heathen writers. Strabo's accountof Moses. The account of the Heliopolitans concerning thepassage of the Red Sea. A similar tradition by Diodorus.The inhabitants of Corondel to this day preserve the remembranceof the passing of the Red Sea by the Israelites.The names of different places passed by the Israelitesduring their sojourn in the wilderness confirm the Mosaicnarrative. The writer of the Orphic verses speaks ofMoses and the tables of the Laws. Didorus Siculus noticesMoses. Dionysius Longius makes honorable mention ofMoses. Accuracy of the Mosaic narrative of the sojournin the wilderness confirmed by Laborde. The tomb ofAaron on Mount Hor, confirms the truth of the Mosaicnarrative. Summing up of the argument from collateraltestimony. A very conclusive evidence of the truth of theMosaic history quoted from Dr. Keith.—The history of theIsraelites subsequent to the settlement in Canaan corroboratedby profane writers. Curious discovery, illustrativeof the Scriptural account of the war carried on byPharaoh-Necho against the Jews and Babylonians.—Confutationof the objection founded by Infidels upon the supposedsterility of the soil of Palestine. Forcible testimonyto the credibility of the Old Testament Scriptures affordedby the present condition of the Jews159
CHAPTER IV
Efforts of Infidels to show that the books of the Old Testamentare forgeries of comparative modern date. Theirobjections considered. Curious discovery illustrative of theantiquity and exactness of the Mosaic writings. The utterimpossibility of the books being forgeries proven.—Mr.Olmsted's argument to prove that the book of the law wasforged by Ezra. Confutation of his argument. Proofsthat the law could not have been forged by Daniel nor byany of the captives in Babylon; that it could not have beenforged by Isaiah. A forgery could not have been effectedafter the revolt of the ten tribes. It could not have beenforged by David; nor by Saul: nor by any of the Judgeswho preceded Samuel. The law existed in Joshua's time.Joshua could not have forged the law. The impossibilityof practicing a fraud upon the Israelites during a sojournin the wilderness.—The books of the Pentateuch have internalmarks, which demonstrate that they were writtenby Moses. The book of Genesis included by the Jews inthe book of the law. Evidences of its antiquity and genuineness.—Profane testimony to the genuineness of theMosaic writings. Objection on the ground that althoughMoses wrote a book called the book of the law, we haveno evidence that it was the book now current in his name.The objection considered and answered193
Section I.—Objection of Infidels against the books ofJudges, Kings, and Chronicles, because they are anonymous.The objection answered.—The objections against the genuinenessof the other books of the Old Testament. In effectanswered in the foregoing arguments.—Mr. Paine's argumentto prove that the Mosaic writings are spurious,founded upon the style. Confutation of his argument. Hisargument founded on the passage "Now the man Moseswas very meek," etc. Its confutation.—His argumentfounded on the statement that Abraham pursued the fourkings unto Dan. Its fallacy.—His argument founded onwhat is said of the descendants of Esau. The argumentconsidered, confuted.—His argument founded on the passage"The children of Israel did eat manna until they cameto a land inhabited," etc. Its fallacy. His argument foundedon what is said concerning Og's bedstead. The argumentconfuted.—The argument founded on the record of thedeath of Moses being contained in the books attributed tohim. The argument confuted.—The evidence adducedestablishes the genuineness and credibility of the books.—Objectionthat Moses must have borrowed the history ofthe creation from the traditions which obtained in his time.Reply to the objection.—The question, Whence did Mosesderive the materials of his history? Answered by Mr.Horne.—Objections on the ground that no dependence is tobe placed in the present text of the Old Testament Scriptures.Its fallacy227
CHAPTER V
A number of objections necessarily omitted, stated and answered.—Mr.Olmsted's argument to prove that the authorof the book of Genesis was a polytheist. Its confutation.—Hisargument to prove that the author of the book ofGenesis believed God to be a corporeal being. Its confutation.Objections founded on the statements concerningCain. Their fallacy.—Cavil of Infidels at the curse pronouncedby Noah upon Canaan. Its unreasonableness.Objections founded on the cause assigned for the diversityof languages. Vindication of the Scriptural account.—Objectionfounded on the conduct of Lot. Its fallacy.—Objectionfounded on the misconduct of Abraham. Considerationof the objection as applied not merely to Abraham,but also to Jacob and David.—Objection on the ground thatGod is represented as commanding Abraham to sacrificeIsaac. Vindication of the Scriptural account of that affair.—Objection, on the ground that circumcision was firstpracticed by the Egyptians. Its fallacy.—Objectionfounded on the representation given by Moses of the worksof the Egyptian magicians during the plagues in Egypt.Mr. Farmer's satisfactory reply250
Section I.—Infidels assert that the pillar of cloud andfire is a fiction. The assertion considered and answered.—Theassertion that the Israelites crossed the Red Sea atSuez. Vindication of the Scriptural account. Assertionthat the tremendous scene upon Sinai was a cheat. Itsfallacy. Olmsted's objection founded on the length of timethe Israelites were in the wilderness. Explanation of thedesign of the dealings of Jehovah with the Israelites.Vindication of the dresses, rites, and customs enjoyed bythe ceremonial law. Objection founded on the repeatedapostacies of the Israelites. The objection considered andanswered. The objection founded on the treatment of theMoabites and the Midianites. Considered and answered.—Objection,on the ground that the Israelites were commandedto exterminate the Canaanites. Considered andanswered.—Assertion that the Old Testament Scripturessanction adultery and murder. Its falsehood.—Assertionthat Jehovah kept false prophets, and violated his promises.Mr. Horne's answer.—Objection founded on the speakingof Balaam's ass. Considered and answered. Mr. Paine'sobjection on the ground that the sun is represented asstanding still upon Mt. Gibeon. Vindication of the Scripturalaccount of that miraculous event. Dr. Clarke's verysatisfactory reply to the objection. Objection founded onthe passage, "Isaiah the prophet cried unto the Lord, andhe brought the shadow ten degrees backward by which ithad gone down on the dial of Ahaz."—Objection foundedon what is said of the Witch of Endor. Considered andanswered275

VOLUME II

The Genuineness of the New Testament Scriptures

CHAPTER I
The books of the New Testament written by eight Jews.—Whycalled New Testament? Infidels deny the genuinenessof the books.—Hold that the writers were impostors, andthe religion taught in them a fraud practiced upon mankind.The difficulties attending the examination of the claimsof the New Testament to genuineness and credibility.—Howthe subject should be approached.—The denial of thegenuineness of the books of modern dates. Toland chargedwith having betrayed his suspicion that the writings wereforgeries. The suspicion of an anonymous Italian.—Itsabsurdity.—Gibbon acknowledges the genuineness of thewritings.—Volney lays it down as a clear case, that no suchperson as Jesus Christ ever existed. His theory adopted,defended, and extensively circulated by Taylor. His positionsdefined in his manifesto.—His unblushing falsehoodspromptly met and refuted by English Divines. Hithertounanswered in this country.—His first and second propositionstaken up.—How the authorship which has no nameprefixed to it is to be ascertained. The rule applied to theNew Testament3
Section I.—Marks given by Michaelis by which thespuriousness of a book may be discovered.—How booksanciently found their way to the public. The congregationsbefore whom the original copies of the New Testamentwere read, vouchers of their genuineness.—The ancient adversariesof Christianity admitted the genuineness of thewritings. The testimony of Trypho, the Jew. The testimonyof Celsus. The writings of Celsus against Christianityof great value in enabling the advocate of Revelation,of the present day, to prove that Jesus Christ is theson of God. The testimony of Porphyry. Testimony ofHierocles, the philosopher.—Testimony of the emperorJulian. Testimony of Taylor himself. The quotationsfrom the New Testament by the most virulent enemies ofChristianity of ancient times. Demonstrate the genuinenessof the writings.—The immediate disciples of theapostles acknowledge the genuineness of the books. Theepistles of the Apostolic fathers. Their genuineness unquestionable.These writings prove the genuineness of theNew Testament. The epistles of Barnabas written shortlyafter the destruction of Jerusalem. Table illustrating thatthe New Testament writings were extant when Barnabaswrote, or, at least, that he was conversant with some ofthe writers of the book. The epistle of Clement, when andto whom written. Table exhibiting quotations from theNew Testament in the epistle of Clement. Writings ofHermas; when written. Table exhibiting the quotations ofHermas from the New Testament. Ignatius, when heflourished. Table of his quotations from the New Testament.Polycarp, the friend of the apostle John. Table ofhis quotations from the New Testament. Summing up ofthe testimony of the apostolic fathers.—Ignatius and Polycarpseal their testimony with their blood.—Martyrdom ofPolycarp13
Section II.—Papias ascribes two gospels to Matthewand Mark. Testimony of Justin, of Irenaenus, of Tertullian,of Clemens Alexandrinus. Table of quotations bythese witnesses. Testimony of Origen: His quotationsfrom the New Testament. Testimony of Eusebius andJerome.—Number and antiquity of the manuscripts of theNew Testament. An argument for the genuineness of itsbooks. Curious discovery which confirms the genuinenessof the New Testament writings.—The council of Laodiceadid not design to settle the Canon67
CHAPTER II
On the Genuineness of the Books.—Mr. Taylor's argumentsto prove that the writings of the New Testament are spurious.Exposure of his dishonesty in quoting from Dr.Lardner. Mr. P. Smith's refutation of his allegation thatthe Scriptures were altered by the Emperor Anastasius.Exposure of his dishonesty in quoting from Beausobre.Refutation of his allegation that the Scriptures were alteredby Lanfranc. Refutation of his argument drawn from thevarious readings. The passage of the Unitarian NewVersion cited by Mr. Taylor in support of his allegation.Dr. Bentley on the various readings. Gaussen on thevarious readings. Tables illustrative of the various readings.Trouble of Bengel about the integrity of the originaltext. The success of his labors in sacred criticism84
Section I.—Taylor's dishonesty in referring to theworks of Herbert Marsh, in support of his allegation thatthe manuscript from which the received text was taken wasstolen from the librarian. Explanation of the story of thesale of the manuscript to a skyrocket maker. Taylor's falsehoodin his pretended reference to Bishop Marsh, in supportof his allegation that for the principal passage in the book ofRevelation there was no original Greek. Notice of Mr.Taylor's charge that the tendency of the New Testament isimmoral and wicked. J. J. Rousseau's testimony to themorality of the Gospel. Exposure of Mr. Taylor's dishonestyin quoting from Mosheim in support of his allegationthat ecclesiastical historians admit their inability to showwhen or by whom the New Testament Scriptures werewritten. Refutation of his allegation. The Apocryphalbooks collected and published by Jeremiah Jones. Refutationof Mr. Taylor's assertion what he terms the true andgenuine gospel. Refutation of Mr. Taylor's objection onthe ground of modernisms contained in some passages ofthe New Testament, and the ignorance of the four evangelistsof the geography and statistics of Judea. Thesumming up of the argument on the genuineness of theNew Testament Scriptures107
CHAPTER III
Credibility of the New Testament Scriptures.—The numberof the witnesses who testify to the facts detailed in theNew Testament. How the credibility of a historical bookis to be ascertained. The rule as applied to Christianwritings. Their genuineness proves their credibility. Thewriters of the New Testament could not have falsified thefacts relative to Jesus Christ. The objection on the groundthat the Jews rejected the claims of Jesus Christ. Its confutation.The conduct of the Jewish nation in rejectingChrist accounted for. The conversion of many of theGentiles proves the credibility of the book. The character,circumstances, and conduct of the men who testify ofJesus prove their credibility. Difficulty to be surmountedby those who maintain that the apostles and evangelistswere impostors. Summing up of the argument on thecredibility of the witnesses125
Section I.—Collateral testimony of the truthfulness ofthe writers of the New Testament. Testimonies to thetruthfulness of St. Matthew's statement concerning Herodand Archalaus. Testimony to the truthfulness of the statementof Luke concerning Herod, Tetrarch of Galilee, andhis brother Phillip, Tetrarch of Itruria. Testimony to thetruthfulness of the evangelists relative to Herod marryingHerodias. Josephus corroborates Luke's account of thedeath of Herod Agrippa. Testimonies of the truthfulnessof the statements in the Acts concerning Felix. A numberof notices, by profane authors, of Pilate, confirmatory ofthe truthfulness of the evangelists. Testimonies to thetruthfulness of the evangelists in their statements of thetreatment of Jesus Christ upon trial and when crucified.Testimonies confirming statements of the evangelists concerningthe burial of Jesus Christ. Notice taken of Johnthe Baptist by Josephus. What he says concerning JesusChrist. Notices of Jesus Christ from the ancient JewishTalmudical writings. Testimony of the heathen adversaryto the leading facts detailed by the evangelists. Summingup of the argument140
Section II.—The same ground retraced, and the objectionsof Mr. Taylor considered and answered. Representationof Taylor's third and fourth propositions. Thefalsehood of Mr. Taylor's assertion that no such person asJesus Christ ever existed, proven by the testimony ofTacitus, of Suetonius, of Martial, of Pliny the Younger.Mr. Taylor's assertion that some, many, or all, of theevents related of Jesus Christ by the evangelists had formerlybeen related of the gods and goddesses of Greeceand Rome. Its confutation to be found in any of thePantheons or mythological dictionaries. Exposure of themalignity and falsehood of Mr. Taylor exhibited in hisattempt to identify Jesus Christ with the heathen idolCrishna. Citations from Sir W. Jones concerning Crishna.The testimony of Sir W. Jones impartial. The unreasonablenessand absurdity of Mr. Taylor's conclusions164
Section III.—The last refuge of the infidel is to maintaineither that Jesus Christ was a mistaken enthusiast ora wicked impostor. Mr. English's argument to prove thatJesus was a mistaken enthusiast. Its confutation181
Section IV.—Argument by Mr. Olmsted to prove thatJesus Christ was a wicked impostor. Its confutation190
CHAPTER IV
Objections Stated and Answered.—The objections urged byinfidels of such a nature that, though numerous, to answerone or two of each class is to answer all. Quotation fromGaussen, explanatory of the nature and causes of the supposedcontradictions in the writings of the evangelists. Examplesby Gaussen. Explanation of the seeming contradictionsbetween the genealogies of Matthew and Luke.Answer to the objection, that certain names occur in Luke'slist of the apostles, which do not appear in that of Matthew.Answer to the objection on account of the seeming contradictionin the title which was written over Jesus Christwhen on the cross. Answer to the objection founded onthe seeming contradiction in the different accounts of thehour when Jesus Christ was suspended on the cross. Answerto the objection urged against St. Luke when he says,"It came to pass in those days, that there went out adecree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should betaxed. And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius wasGovernor of Syria." Answer to the objection founded uponJesus cursing the fig-tree. Answer to Taylor's assertion thatRomans 3:7 recommends telling lies for the glory of God.His assertion that Jesus Christ was not crucified. Its confutation.His assertion that "Paul and Barnabas did notpreach the same story." Its falsehood demonstrated. Hisassertion that some preached a Christ who was not crucified.Its falsehood. His assertion that Paul called the otherapostles false apostles and dogs. Vindication of the apostlesfrom this calumny. His assertions that Paul curses the otherapostles and recommends that they should be privatelyassassinated. The falsehood of these accusations. The lastrefuge of Mr. Taylor in asserting that Christianity had itsorigin among the Therapeutae. Other infidels pretend thatthe Essenes were the originators of Christianity. Watson'saccount of the Essenes and Therapeutae214
CHAPTER V
Divine Authority and Inspiration of the Scriptures.—Whatis to be understood by inspiration? None but anatheist can deny its possibilities. The gift of inspirationproved by the performance of supernatural works, and bythe foretelling of future events with preciseness. If thesesigns accompanied the authors of the dispensations containedin the Old and New Testaments, it must be admittedthat the Bible is a revelation from God. The performanceof miracles by the authors of these dispensations atteststheir divine mission. A miracle defined. Mr. Hume's argumentagainst miracles. Lord Brougham's confutation ofthe argument. Keith's demonstration of its fallacy. Themiracles of Moses, of Jesus Christ and his apostles accompaniedby evidences which cannot be brought to substantiateany pretended fact whatever. Mr. Leslie's argumentin favor of this position. Mr. Olmsted's attempt to destroythe force of Mr. Leslie's argument. Exposure of the misrepresentationsand falsehoods contained in Mr. Olmsted'sargument. Confutation of his argument232
Section I.—Mr. Leslie's criteria applied to the miraclesrecorded in the Scriptures. Applied to those of Moses; theyall meet in his miracles. Applied to those of Jesus Christand his apostles. Their number, their variety, and thepublic manner in which they were performed, attest theirveracity. Miracles of Christ contrasted with those of impostors.The pretended miracles wrought by Vespasian.The pretended miracles of the Roman Catholics. Many ofthem have been proved to be impostors. The object ofthe miracles of Jesus attests their veracity. The greatmiracle which lies at the foundation of Christianity, theresurrection of Jesus Christ. The miracle examined.Testimony of the evangelists, that Jesus during his life predictedhis death and resurrection. The prediction wellknown to the Jewish rulers. The rulers took every necessaryprecaution to put his pretensions to the test. Thecrucifixion and death of Christ well attested. Precautionsthat the body should not be removed until life was extinct.The precautions of the rulers to prevent the body beingstolen out of the sepulchre. The whole question at issuebetween Jesus and the Jewish rulers, suspended on the nakedfact, whether He did or did not rise again on the thirdday. The Jewish rulers make their preparation on theSabbath to produce the body on the third day. On thethird day the body is missing. Different ways of accountingfor the fact. The disciples alleged that Jesus hadrisen from the dead. Their testimony examined. TheJewish rulers asserted that the disciples stole the body.The allegation examined. Its falsehood demonstrated.Subsequent conduct of the Sanhedrin confirms the testimonyof the apostles and evangelists. The adoption of the Jewishmode of accounting for the fact accompanied with manydifficulties. An acknowledgment of the resurrection ofJesus involves an acknowledgment of His divine mission.Mr. Olmsted's objection on the ground that Jesus did notshow Himself publicly and ascend to heaven in the presenceof the whole nation. Its fallacious nature. The testimonywe have of the resurrection of Jesus Christ much moresatisfactory and convincing than that required by Mr.Olmsted. Insuperable difficulties attending the denial ofthe resurrection of Jesus Christ279
CHAPTER VI
Divine authority of the Scriptures proved from prophecy andits fulfillment. A prophecy defined. Mr. Watson's argumentin support of the possibility of prophecy. Criteria bywhich true may be distinguished from false prophecies.The prophecies of heathen oracles examined. Proved tohave been impostures. Contrast between the pretended predictionsof the heathen oracles and the prophecies containedin the Scriptures. Mr. Paine's remarks in relation to themanner in which future events would be communicated bya true prophet. Mr. Olmsted's requisition and pledge if itbe met to acknowledge the truth of prophecy. Mr. Olmstedmet upon his own ground. Prophecy relative to the destructionof Tyre. Its fulfillment proved by the infidelVolney, and other competent witnesses. Mr. Olmsted,from his own showing, is bound to believe that Ezekielwas a true prophet of God. Table of quotations from theprophecies of the Old Testament, and from Volney's writings,showing that in spite of himself this infidel proves thetruthfulness of the seers of Israel. Mr. Olmsted's assertionthat the history of Isaiah is made up of scraps, and destituteof order and meaning. The truth of the assertion tested.Prophecy of Isaiah concerning Edom. Volney's testimonyof its fulfillment. Testimony of Mr. Stevens. Prophecyof Jeremiah concerning the capital of Edom. Burchkhardt'stestimony of its fulfillment. Testimony of Captains Irbyand Mangles. Testimony of Mr. Stevens. The infidelhaving been met on his own ground, and the fulfillment ofmany prophecies proved by competent witnesses, it followsthat the seers of Israel were the true prophets of God302
Section I.—The great theme of the Old Testamentprophets was the coming of the Messiah. The Christianmaintains that these prophecies found an accomplishment inChrist. This denied by the Jew and the infidel. Mr. English'sargument to show that Jesus was not the Messiah.First, on account of His genealogy, and, second, because theprophecies of the Old Testament found no accomplishmentin Him. Mr. English's argument refuted in all its particulars.Jesus proved to be the true Messiah. The Messiahshipof Jesus Christ being proved, it proves that theBible is a revelation from God. Closing address324
APPENDIX
Starkie's confutation of Hume's argument on evidence362

APPENDIX VIII

LINCOLN AND THE CHURCHES