Obrazy na stronie


Mr. Olmsted's assertion concerning the requisitions of the advocate of Revelation in exam-

ining the credibility of the Mosaic writings. Its falsehood. His allegation that the first sen-

tence in the Bible contains a falsehood. The confutation of his argument. His objection to

the credibility of the Mosaic narrative of the creation founded on the statement that the world

was made in six days. Vindication of the Mosaic narrative.-Infidel objection to the Mosaic

narrative founded on the zodiacs in the temples of Latapolis and Tantyra. Its fallacy.-Dr.

Keith's proofs of the truthfulness of the Mosaic narrative of the creation.


SECTION I-Mosaic account of the creation confirmed by tradition. The Hindoo account;

that of Ovid; the Phenician; the Egyptian; that of Plato.-The heathen tradition concern-

ing the first man. Division of time into weeks, a confirmation of the Mosaic narrative.


SECTION II.-Paine's and Olmsted's objections on account of the narrative of the fall of man.

Their confutation. The Mosaic narrative of the fall of man confirmed by heathen traditions;

by the universality of serpent worship; by the condition of mankind; by the opinions of the

heathen philosophers concerning the corruption of human nature; by the belief of the

Brahmins; by the opinions of the classical mythologists, and by the universal practice of ani-

mal sacrifice. The account of the translation of Enoch confirmed by the Grecian fables.-

The longevity of the antediluvian patriarchs confirmed by heathen traditions.-Mosaic ac-

count of men of gigantic stature confirmed by the Greek and Latin poets.



Objection to the Mosaic narrative of the deluge, because contrary to the philosophy of Na-

ture. Its fallacy.-The truth of the narrative confirmed by the fossil remains of animals.-

Objection founded on the size of the ark. Shown to be fallacious.-Objection founded on

certain marks of antiquity said to exist in the lava of Mount Etna. Mr. Horne's confutation

of the argument-Objection on account of the differences of color existing among mankind.

Its fallacy. Dr. Good's argument, confirmatory of the Mosaic narrative.-Objections founded

upon the supposed antiquity of the eastern nations. Confutation of the objection.-Objection

founded on the condition of America when discovered by Columbus. Proofs that two distinct

races of men immigrated into America from Asia. The present Indians, of the same race with

the tribes of Northern Asia. The ancient Mexicans and Peruvians, originally proceeded from

the same stock with the nations of Southern Asia.


SECTION 1.-Mosaic account of the deluge confirmed by pagan history. Its memory in-

corporated with almost every part of the heathen mythology. Noah claimed by all the
heathen nations as their founder, and worshiped by them as a god. Saturn, of the Greeks
and Latins, Menu of the Hindoos, and Noah identical. The Hindoo account of the deluge.
The Chinese and Grecian accounts. The ark mentioned by heathen historians. Plutarch's
notice of the dove which was sent out of the ark. The heathens carried their deities in an
ark. Ancient medals commemorative of the deluge. American traditions of that calamity.
Summing up of the argument.

SECTION 11-Confirmation of the Mosaic representation of the origin of families and nations.
Testimony of Sir W. Jones-Confirmation of the Mosaic account of the tower of Babel.-Of
the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob known to the ancient
heathens. Mr. Olmsted's attempt to invalidate the Mosaic account of the condition of the
Israelites in Egypt. The confutation of his argument.-His argument to invalidate the truth
of the Mosaic narrative of the exode of the Israelites from Egypt and the circumstances
attending it. Vindication of the Mosaic narrative.-Explanation of the design of the miracu-

lous interposition in behalf of the Israelites. The fitness and tendency of each of the plagues

inflicted upon the Egyptians. Confutation of Mr. Olmsted's allegation that Moses extorted

permission for the Israelites to leave Egypt, by false pretensions. Vindication of the Mosaic

account of the hardening of Pharaoh's heart. Mr. Olmsted's supposition that the Israelites

were a horde of rude barbarians, in behalf of whom there was no divine interposition. The

fallacy and absurdity of his supposition.


SECTION III.-Collateral testimony confirmative of the Mosaic account of the exode of

the Israelites from Egypt, their sojourn in the wilderness, and settlement in Canaan. Curi-
ous discovery confirmatory of the Mosaic narrative. Trogus' account of the origin of the
Jews. The account of their origin by Apion, an Egyptian writer. Manetho's account of the
shepherds who retreated from Egypt to Judea. Tacitus' account of the origin of the Jews.
Artapanus' relation concerning Moses. Janes and Jambres the Egyptian magicians, well

[ocr errors]

known to heathen writers. Strabo's account of Moses. The account of the Heliopolitans concerning the passage of the Red sea. A similar tradition by Diodorus. The inhabitants of Corondel to this day preserve the remembrance of the passage of the Red sea by the Israelites. The names of different places passed by the Israelites during their sojourn in the wilderness confirm the Mosaic narrative. The writer of the Orphic verses speaks of Moses and the tables of the Law. Diodorus Siculus notices Moses. Dionysius Longinus makes honorable mention of Moses. Accuracy of the Mosaic narrative of the sojourn in the wilderness confirmed by Laborde. The tomb of Aaron on Mount Hor, confirms the truth of the Mosaic narrative. Summing up of the argument from collateral testimony. A very conclusive evidence of the truth of the Mosaic history quoted from Dr. Keith.-The history of the Israelites subsequent to the settlement in Canaan corroborated by profane writers. Curious discovery, illustrative of the Scriptural account of the war carried on by Pharaoh-Necho against the Jews and Babylonians.-Confutation of the objection founded by Infidels upon the supposed sterility of the soil of Palestine. Forcible testimony to the credibility of the Old Testament Scriptures afforded by the present condition of the Jews.



Efforts of Infidels to show that the books of the Old Testament are forgeries of comparatively modern date. Their objections considered. Curious discovery illustrative of the antiquity and exactness of the Mosaic writings. The utter impossibility of the books being forgeries proven.Mr. Olmsted's argument to prove that the book of the law was forged by Ezra. Confutation of his argument. Proofs that the law could not have been forged by Daniel nor by any of the captives in Babylon; that it could not have been forged by Isaiah. A forgery could not have been effected after the revolt of the ten tribes. It could not have been forge by David; nor by Saul; nor by any of the Judges who preceded Samuel. The law existed in Joshua's time. Joshua could not have forged the law. The impossibility of practising a fraud upon the Israelites during the sojourn in the wilderness.-The books of the Pentateuch have internal marks, which demonstrate that they were written by Moses.-The book of Genesis included by the Jews in the book of the law. Evidences of its antiquity and genuineness.-Profane testimony to the genuineness of the Mosaic writings-Objection on the ground that although Moses wrote a book called the book of the law, we have no evidence that it was the book now current in his name. The objection considered and answered. 193

SECTION 1.-Objection of Infiels against the books of Judges, Kings, and Chronicles, be cause they are anonymous. The objection answered.-The objections against the genuineness of the other books of the Old Testament. In effect answered in the foregoing arguments.Mr. Paine's argument to prove that the Mosaic writings are spurious, founded upon the style. Confutation of his argument.-His argument founded on the passage "Now the man Moses was very meek," &c. Its confutation. His argument founded on the statement that Abraham pursued the four kings unto Dan. Its fallacy. His argument founded on what is said of the descendants of Esau. The argument considered, and confuted.-His argument founded on the passage "The children of Israel did eat manna until they came to a land inhabited," &c. Its fallacy. His argument founded on what is said concerning Og's bedstead. The argument confuted.-The argument founded on the record of the death of Moses being contained in the books attributed to him. The argument confuted-The evidences adduced establishes the genuineness and credibility of the books.-Objection that Moses must have borrowed the history of the creation from the traditions which obtained in his time. Reply to the objection.The question whence did Moses derive the materials of his history? Answered by Mr. Horne.Objection on the ground that no dependence is to be placed in the present text of the Old Testament Scriptures. Its fallacy. 227


[ocr errors]


A number of objections necessarily omitted, stated and answered.-Mr. Olmsted's argument to prove that the author of the book of Genesis was a polytheist. Its confutation.-His argument to prove, that the author of the book of Genesis believed God to be a corporeal being. Its confutation. Objections founded on the statements concerning Cain. Their fallacy. Cavil of Infidels at the curse pronounced by Noah upon Canaan. Its unreasonableness. Objections founded on the cause assigned for the diversity of languages. Vindication of the Scriptural account.--Objection founded on the conduct of Lot. Its fallacy-Objection founded on the misconduct of Abraham. Consideration of the objection as applied not merely to Abraham, but, also, to Jacob and David.-Objection on the ground that God is represented as commanding Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. Vindication of the Scriptural account of that affair.Objection, on the ground that circumcision was first practised by the Egyptians. Its fallacy. -Objection founded on the representation given by Moses of the works of the Egyptian ma gicians during the plagues in Egypt. Mr. Farmer's satisfactory reply. 250

SECTION I.-Infidels assert that the pillar of cloud and fire is a fiction. The assertion considered and answered.--The assertion that the Israelites crossed the Red sea at Suez. Vindi. cation of the Scriptural account. Assertion that the tremendous scene upon Sinai was a cheat. Its fallacy. Olmsted's objection founded on the length of time the Israelites were in the wilderness Explanation of the design of the dealings of Jehovah with the Israelites. Vindication of the dresses, rites, and customs enjoined by the ceremonial law.-Objection founded on the repeated apostacies of the Israelites. The objection considered and answered. The objection founded on the treatment of the Moabites and Midianites. Considered and answered.--Objection, on the ground that the Israelites were commanded to exterminate the Canaanites. Considered and answered.-Assertion that the Old Testament Scriptures sanction adultery and murder. Its falsehood.-Assertion that Jehovah kept false prophets, and violated his promises. Mr. Horne's answer.-Objection founded on the speaking of Balaam's ass. Considered and answered.-Mr. Paine's objection on the ground that the sun is represented as standing still upon Mount Gibeon. Vindication of the Scriptural account of that miraculous event. Dr. Clarke's very satisfactory reply to the objection.-Objection founded on the passage, "Isaiah the prophet cried unto the Lord, and he brought the shadow ten degrees backward, by which it had gone down on the dial of Ahaz." Sleigh's reply.-Objection founded on what is said of the witch of Endor. Considered and answered.


[ocr errors]




THE GENUINENESS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT SCRIPTURES.-The books of the New Testament written by eight Jews.-Why called the New Testament.-Infidels deny the genuineness of the books. Hold that the writers were impostors, and the religion taught in them a fraud practiced upon mankind. The difficulties attending the examination of the claims of the New Testament to genuineness and credibility.-How the subject should be approached.-The denial of the genuineness of the books of modern dates. Toland charged with having betrayed a suspicion that the writings were forgeries. -The suspicion of an anonymous Italian. Its absurdity.-Gibbon acknowledges the genuineness of the writings.-Volney lays it down as a clear case, that no such person as Jesus Christ ever existed.-His theory adopted, defended, and extensively circulated by Taylor. His positions defined in his maniPAGE 3 festo.-His unblushing falsehoods promptly met and refuted by English divines. Hitherto unanswered in this country.-His first and second propositions taken up.-How the authorship of a book which has no name prefixed to it is to be ascertained. The rule applied to the New Testament. SECTION 1-Marks given by Michalis by which the spuriousness of a book may be discovered.How books anciently found their way to the public. The congregations before whom the original copies of the New Testament writings were read. vouchers of their genuineness.-The ancient adversaries of Christianity admitted the genuineness of the writings. The testimony of Trypho the Jew. The testimony of Celsus. The writings of Celsus against Christianity of great value in enabling the advocate of Revelation, of the present day, to prove that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. The testimony of Porphyry, Testimony of Hierocles, the philosopher. Testimony of the emperor Julian. Testimony of Taylor himself. The quotations from the New Testament by the most virulent enemies of Christianity of ancient times, demonstrate the genuineness of the writings.-The immediate disciples of the apostles acknowledge the genuineness of the books. The epistles of the apostolic fathers. Their genuineness unquestionable. These writings prove the genuineness of the New Testament. The epistle of Barnabas written shortly after the destruction of Jerusalem. Table illustrating that the New Testament writings were extant when Barnabas wrote, or, at least, that he was conversant with some of the writers of that book. The epistle of Clement, when and to whom written. Table exhibiting quotations from the New Testament in the epistle of Clement. Writings of Hermas; when written. Table exhibiting the quotations of Hermas from the New Testament. Ignatius, when he flourished. Table of his quotations from the New Testament. Polycarp, the friend of the apostle John. Table of his quotations from the New Testament, Summing up of the testimony of the apostolic fathers.-Ignatius and Polycarp seal their testimony with their blood.-Martyrdom of Polycarp.


SECTION II.-Papias ascribes two gospels to Matthew and Mark, Testimony of Justin, of Irenæus, of Tertullian, of Clemens Alexandrinus. Table of quotations by these witnesses. Testimony of Ori67 gin: his quotations from the New Testament. Testimony of Eusebius and Jerom.-Number and antiquity of the manuscripts of the New Testament an argument for the genuineness of its books.-Curious discovery, which confirms the genuineness of the New Testament writings.-The council of Laodirea did not design to settle the canon.



ON THE GENUINENESS OF THE BOOKS-Mr. Taylor's arguments to prove that the writings of the New Testament are spurious. Exposure of his dishonesty in quoting from Dr. Lardner, Dr. P. Smith's ref utation of his allegation that the Scriptures were altered by the emperor Anastasius. Exposure of his dishonesty in quoting from Beausobre. Refutation of his allegation that the Scriptures were altered by Lanfranc. Refutation of his argument drawn from the various readings. The passage of the Unitarian New Version cited by Mr. Taylor in support of his allegation.-Dr. Bentley on the various readings. Gaussen on the various readings. Tables illustrative of the various readings. Trouble of Bengel about the integrity of the original text. The success of his labors in sacred criticism.


SECTION 1-Taylor's dishonesty in referring to the works of Herbert Marsh, in support of his allegation that the manuscript from which the received text was taken was stolen by the librarian, &c.-Explanation of the story of the sale of the manuscript to a sky-rocket maker. Taylor's falsehood in his pretended reference to Bishop Marsh, in support of his allegation that for the principal passage of the book of Revelation there was no original Greek. Notice of Mr. Taylor's charge, that the tendency of the New Testament is immoral and wicked. J. J. Rosseau's testimony to the morality of the Gospel. Exposure of Mr. Taylor's dishonesty in quoting from Mosheim, in support of his allegation that ecclesiastical historians admit their inability to show when, or by whom, the New Testament Scriptures were written. Refutation of his allegation.-The apocryphal books collected and published by Jeremiah Jones. Refutation of Mr. Taylor's assertion concerning what he terms the true and genuine gospels, 107 Refutation of Mr. Taylor's objection on the ground of the modernisms contained in some passages of the New Testament, and the ignorance of the four evangelists of the geography and statistics of Judea. The summing up of the argument on the genuineness of the New Testament Scriptures.


CREDIBILITY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT SCRIPTURES.-The number of the witnesses who testify to
the facts detailed in the New Testament.-How the credibility of a historical book is to be ascertained.
The rule applied to the Christian writings.-Their genuineness proves their credibility.-The writers
of the New Testament could not have falsified the facts relative to Jesus Christ-The objection on
the ground that the Jews rejected the claims of Jesus Christ. Its confutation. The conduct of the
Jewish nation in rejecting Christ accounted for.-The conversion of many of the Gentiles proves the
credibility of the books. The character, circumstances, and conduct of the men who testify of Jesus
prove their credibility. Difficulty to be surmounted by those who maintain that the apostles and
evangelists were impostors.-Summing up of the argument on the credibility of the witnesses. 125
SECTION I-Collateral testimony of the truthfulness of the writers of the New Testament -Testi-
monies to the truthfulness of St. Matthew's statements concerning Herod and Archelaus.-Testimo-
nies to the truthfulness of the statement of Luke concerning Herod, tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother
Philip, tetrach of Itraria.-Testimony to the truthfulness of the evangelists relative to Herod marrying
Herodias, &c.-Josephus corroborates Luke's account of the death of Herod Agrippa. Testimonies of the
truthfulness of the statements in the Acts concerning Felix.-A number of notices, by profane authors.
of Pilate, confirmatory of the truthfulness of the evangelists.-Testimonies to the truthfulness of the
evangelists in their statements of the treatment of Jesus Christ when upon trial and when crucified.-
Testimonies confirming the statements of the evangelists concerning the burial of Jesus Christ-No-
tice taken of John the Baptist by Josephus.-What he says concerning Jesus Christ.-Notices of Jesus
Christ in the ancient Jewish Talmudical writings.-Testimony of the heathen adversaries to the lead-
ing facts detailed by the evangelists. Summing up of the argument.

SECTION II.-The same ground retraced, and the objections of Mr. Taylor considered and answered.
Representation of Taylor's third and fourth propositions, The falsehood of Mr. Taylor's assertion that
no such person as Jesus Christ ever existed, proven by the testimony of Tacitus, of Suetonius, of Mar-
tial, of Pliny the Younger. Mr. Taylor's assertion that some. many, or all, of the events related of Je-
sus Christ by the evangelists, had formerly been related of the gods and goddesses of Greece and Rome.
Its confutation to be found in any of the Pantheons or mythological dictionaries.-Exposure of the ma-
lignity and falsehood of Mr. Taylor exhibited in his attempt to identify Jesus Christ with the Hindoo

idol Crishna. Citations from Sir W. Jones concerning Crishna. The testimony of Sir W. Jones impartial.-The unreasonableness and absurdity of Mr. Taylor's conclusions,

SECTION III.-The last refuge of the Infidel is to maintain either that Jesus Christ was a mistaken enthusiast or a wicked impostor.-Mr. English's argument to prove that Jesus was a mistaken enthu siast. Its confutation. 181

SECTION IV.-Argument by Mr. Olmsted to prove that Jesus Christ was a wicked impostor. Its





OBJECTIONS STATED AND ANSWERED.-The ojections urged by Infidels of such a nature that, though numerous. to answer one or two of each class is to answer all. Quotation from Gaussen, explanatory of the nature and causes of the supposed contradictions in the writings of the evangelists.-Examples by Gaussen.-Explanation of the seeming contradiction between the genealogies of Matthew and Luke. -Answer to the objection, that certain names occur in Luke's list of the Apostles, which do not appear in that of Matthew-Answer to the objection on account of the seeming contradiction in the title which was written over Jesus Christ when on the cross.-Answer to the objection founded on the seeming contradiction in the different accounts of the hour when Jesus Christ was suspended on the cross. -Answer to the objection urged against St. Luke when he says, "It came to pass in those days. that there went out a decree from Cesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria." Answer to the objection founded upon Jesus cursing the fig tree. Answer to Taylor's assertion, that Romans iii. 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 not preach the same story." Its falsehood demonstrated.-His assertion that some preached a Christ who was not crucified. Its falsehood.-His assertion that Paul called the other apostles, false apostles and dogs. Vindication of the apostle from this calumny.-His assertions that Paul curses the other apostles and recommends that they should be privately assassinated. The falsehood of these accusations.-The last refuge of Mr. Taylor, in asserting that Christianity had its origin among the Therapeute.-Other Infidels pretend that the Essenees were the originators of Christianity.-Watson's account of the Essenees and Therapeutæ. 214


DIVINE AUTHORITY AND INSPIRATION OF THE SCRIPTURES.-What is to be understood by inspiration. None but an Atheist can deny its possibility.-The gift of inspiration proved by the performance of supernatural works, and by the foretelling of future events with preciseness.-If these signs accompanied the authors of the dispensations contained in the Old and N. Testaments, it must be admitted that the Bible is a revelation from God. The performance of miracles by the authors of these dispensations attests their divine mission.-A miracle defined. Mr. Hume's argument against miracles. Lord Brough am's confutation of the argument.-Keith's demonstration of its fallacy. The miracles of Moses, of Jesus Christ, and his apostles, accompanied by evidences which cannot be brought to substantiate any pretended fact whatever.-Mr. Leslie's argument in support of this position. Mr. Olmsted's attempt to destroy the force of Mr. Leslie's argument. Exposure of the misrepresentations and falsehoods contained in Mr. Olmsted's argument, Confutation of his argument.


SECTION I-Mr. Leslie's criteria applied to the miracles recorded in the Scriptures.-Applied to those of Moses; they all meet in his miracles.-Applied to those of Jesus Christ and his apostles.Their number, their variety, and the public manner in which they were performed, attest their veracity. Miracles of Christ contrasted with those of impostors. The pretended miracles wrought by been impostures.-The object of the miracles of Jesus attest their veracity. The great miracle which lies at the foundation of Christianity, the resurrection of Jesus Christ.-The miracle examined. Testimony of the evangelists, that Jesus during his life predicted his death and resurrection, The prediction well known to the Jewish rulers, The rulers took every necessary precaution to put his pretensions to the test. The crucifixion and death of Christ well attested. Precautions that the body should not be removed until life was extinct. The precautions of the rulers to prevent the body from being stolen out of the sepulchre. The whole question at issue between Jesus and the Jewish rulers, suspended on the naked fact, whether he did or did not rise again on the third day. The Jewish rulers make their preparation on the sabbath to produce the body on the third day. On the third day the body is missing. Different ways of accounting for the fact. The disciples alleged that Jesus had risen from the dead. Their testimony examined. The Jewish rulers asserted that the disciples stole the body. The allegation examined. Its falsehood demonstrated. Subsequent conduct of the sanhedrim confirms the testimony of the apostles and evangelists. The adoption of the Jewish mode of accounting for the fact accompanied with many difficulties. An acknowledgment of the resurrection of Jesus involves an acknowledgment of his divine mission.-Mr. Olmsted's objection on the ground that Jesus did not show himself publicly, and ascend to heaven in the presence of the whole nation. Its fallacious nature. The testimony we have of the resurrection of Jesus Christ much more satisfactory and convincing than that required by Mr. Olmsted. Insuperable difficulties attending the denial of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.


« PoprzedniaDalej »