idolatrous priests and pretended prophets, lived in the days of Jotham and Ahaz, the idolatrous kings of Judah. Now to show how inconsistent these objectors are, I refer to page 37, where they say, "The Lord disclaims all connection with them, Jer. xiv. 14. The prophets prophesy lies in my name; I sent them not, neither spake unto them."" How designedly wicked then is it in these writers to say, "It would seem that these inspirations of the prophets, which we have such a veneration for, were nothing more than the effect of drunken orgies and Bacchanalian revels;' and thus apply them to the prophets of God; when it is obvious that the prophet Isaiah was directed to accuse the idolatrous priests of these vices.

OBJECTION.

"It was for fear that men should build a tower to reach to heaven, that made him confound their language; could he imagine men could ever reach heaven by a tower ?"

ANSWER.

It is not said in the Hebrew, "Whose top may reach unto heaven, but with his head (or top) like heaven." The meaning of which is, that the dome.or ceiling of the temple of Babel should be like the firmament; for the Babylonians were worshippers of the host of heaven.

OBJECTION.

"The great evangelical prophet Isaiah, could foretell the downfall of Babylon by Cyrus, but could not tell the name of the Messiah, though his coming was an event of infinitely greater consequence; nay, the prophet has made a blunder, if we admit the opinion, that Christ was intended by the names, Maher-shalal-hash-baz, and Immanuel, since he was never called by them."

ANSWER.

But there is no foundation for the opinion that Christ

was intended by the name Maher-shalal-hash-baz: because it is said in ch. viii. 3. that this was the name of the son of Isaiah's wife. And with regard to the name Immanuel not signifying Christ, because he was never called by that name. "This is a specimen of bad reasoning: for as he was never called by the names, STAR of Jacob-SHILOHPROPHET REDEEMER of Israel-MESSENGER of the covenant-or LION of the tribe of Judah; it may with the same propriety be said, that none of these terms were applied to him. Consequently the DEIST gives no proof that the prophet has made any blunder.

OBJECTION..

"Isaiah might take the advantage of writing his prophesy concerning Cyrus after the events took place, but could not avail himself of the same pious cunning in the affair of the Messiah."

ANSWER.

But Isaiah lived in the time of Uzziah, Jotham and Ahaz, kings of Judah; now Uzziah reigned 52 years, Jotham 2 years, and Ahaz 17 years, making 71 years; and he must at the commencement of his prophetic office, have been considerably advanced in life; so that at the reign of Ahaz, when he prophesied concerning the appearance of Immanuel, the prophet Isaiah must have been above 100 years old, which was near 180 years before the time of the conquest of Babylon by Cyrus. Consequently if the prophet Isaiah had “ taken the advantage of writing his prophesy concerning Cyrus after the events took place, he must have been near 200 years old. These writers have evidently paid no attention to the chronology.

This statement is contradicted in point of possibility, and it will appear that the staters of this objection must be sensible that this is so. For can any man possessed of common sense suppose, that the prophet would have attempted so barefaced a thing in the eyes of the whole Jewish nation, to which people he was then writing? Certainly not, he. would have been immediately detected. This needs no

comment.

OBJECTION.

"Ah, Lord God! surely thou hast greatly deceived this people and Jerusalem, saying, Ye shall have peace.' Gracious God! is this scripture? and is it to be called sacred? Is God who is said to have dictated the Bible to be called in that very Bible a deceiver? Jer. iv. 10."

ANSWER.

No, the error is made by the translators. The word hisheetha, which is rendered in the common version," thou hast deceived," means to cause a desolation, to desolate. The clause reads " Ah, Lord God! surely to desolation, thou hast desolated this people, even to Jerusalem, for saying, Ye shall have peace. So that in the original, God is not represented as saying, "Ye shall have peace, was the government, the people of Jerusalem, who having fallen into idolatry, opposed the prophet by declaring that notwithstanding what he had said, they should have peace.

OBJECTION.

"but it

"God is accused by the prophet Jeremiah of having deceived him, and the reason he gives is, that God is stronger than him, ch. xx. 7. O Lord thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived; thou art stronger than I.' Would not this be accounted blasphemy by any man? could the prophet tell God that he was the stronger of the two?"

ANSWER.

In this verse the word patitani is rendered," thou hast deceived me;" but it literally means to persuade, as in Prov. xxv. 15-1 Kings xxii. 20, 21, 22. And the word chazaktani, which is translated " thou art stronger than I," is also improperly rendered; there is no pronoun personal I in the word; it truly reads "thou wilt strengthen me." The passage reads " O Lord, thou hast persuaded me, thus I was persuaded: thou wilt strengthen me."

F

OBJECTION.

"It was believed by all the best informed fathers of the church, that the Jewish books had been lost during the captivity, and that Esdras had written them from inspiration."

ANSWER.

This could not be, as they took their books with them, and had their colleges and tabernacles in Babylon.

OBJECTION.

"In ch. vii. of the 1st book of Esdras, it is said, that Esdras had very great skill; so that he omitted nothing of the law and commandments of the Lord, but taught all Israel the ordinances and judgments."

ANSWER.

The

That Ezra was a teacher in Israel, we know. books of Esdras are not Bible authority; they were never admitted among the sacred books, but written originally in Greek.

OBJECTION.

"How came it to pass that Jesus the Son of God, should curse a fig-tree for being without fruit in March? was he by whom the world was made, ignorant that it was not the season for figs?"

ANSWER.

It is very plain that the objectors who have for ages brought this forward as an insurmountable objection, were as ignorant as the modern DEIST, that figs were ripe in the land of Canaan in the month of March. The land of Canaan produces figs at different seasons of the year, according to Pliny, lib. xiii. cap. 8. and lib. xv. cap. 18. It is said in Isaiah, there were early figs before the summer, ch. xxiv. 8. And in Hosea ix. 10. "I saw your fathers as the first ripe in the fig-tree at her first time."

The Greek scholar however will see that an error has

been made by the translators, of the Greek word ou, which they have rendered as a negative, whereas according to rule, it is an adverb, and should be rendered by where; as in Gen. xi. 11-John xi. 41. And the Greek fathers, among whom were Basil and Chrysostom, uniformly make the word ou, in this verse an adverb. The clause truly reads-Where it was the season of figs.

OBJECTION.

"There is a mysterious disagreement between John the Baptist and Jesus Christ. John being asked if he was Elias, answered, I am not; but Jesus affirms the contrary." As few even of the Christians have faith enough to believe that John was and was not Elias at the same time, a word or two of explanation would afford infinite satisfaction."

ANSWER.

Christians are not required to believe impossibilities. The Baptist on being asked, art thou Elias? as plainly and truly answered, I am not. But the passage in Matt. xi. 14. where Christ says, "This is Elias who was to come, has no reference whatever to Elijah, or Elias, who lived in the time of Ahaz; for in the 10th verse a quotation is made from Malachi, ch. iii. 1. where he is called my messenger: "Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare my way before me." Therefore he is not declared to be Elijah, or Elias, who HAD BEEN, but plainly the messenger, or one like Elijah, who, was to come. But the question is, how is the Baptist to be compared to Elijah ? If the reader will turn to the 2 Kings xviii. it will be seen that Elijah put an end to the idolatry of the nation, by detecting the priests of Baal; when he established the worship of God among the people, who declared, "The Lord he is the God; the Lord he is the God." In like manner when the Baptist, the messenger, was sent to prepare the way for the coming of the Messiah, the total overthrow of

1 John i, 21.

2 Matt. xi. 14.