Imágenes de página




The nations of the earth indebted to the Jews for the Bible.—Taylor's assertion, that no such

pation as the Jewish ever existed. Its confutation. The Jews and Christians hold the Old

Testament to be a Revelation from God. Infidels hold this to be untrue. How the question

al issue is to be settled. The frame of mind necessary to an impartial examination of the

subject.-Objections of the Atheistical Infidel against the claims of the Bible as a divine

revelation. Mr. Olmsted's misrepresentation of the position of the advocates of Revelation.

The questions al issue between the Christian and Atheist. That between the Christian and


SECTION 1.- Confutation of the iheory of ihe materialisi. Confuiation of the positions of the

two classes of Atheists.

SECTION 11.- Hume's argument to prove that Poiytheism was ihe first religion of mankind.

Ils confutation.

SECTION III.-or the style of the oia Testament Scriptures. Example from Mr. Olmsted,

showing the necessity of understanding its nature. The Scriptures speak the language of

appearances, but strictly philosophical.



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

ining the credibility of the Moraic writings. Ils falsehood. His allegation that the first sen.

tence in the Bible contains a falsehood. The confulation 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 Lata polis and Tantyra. Its fallacy.-Dr.

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


Section 1.- 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 lime 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 anlediluvian patriarchs confirmed by heathen iraditions.-Mosaic ac-

count of men of gigantic slature confirmed by the Greek and Lalin poels.



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 consulation
of the argument.-Objection on account of the differences of color existing among mankind.
Ils fallacy. Dr. Good's argument, confirmatory of the Mosaic narrative.--Objections founded
upon the supposed antiquity of the eastern nations. Confutation of the objectiun.- Objection
founded on the condition of America when discovered by Columbus. Proofs that i wo distinct
races of men immigrated into America from Asia. The present Indiang, of the same race with
the iribes 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 Hindvos, and Nuah identical. The Hindoo accouni 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 deitieg in an
ark. Ancient medals commemorative of the deluge. American traditions of that calanily.
Summing up of the argument.

Section T.-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 Sodon 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 consulation of his argument.-His argument to invalidate the truth
of the Mosaic narrative of the exode of the Israelites from Egypt and the circumstances
allending 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 exerted
permission for the Israeliles 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 testimoay confirmative of the Mosaic account of the exode of
the Israelites from Egypt, their sojourn in the wilderness, and selllement 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.
Anapanus' relation concerning Moses. Janes and Jambres the Egyptian magicians, well

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 con-

firmed by Laborde. The tomb of Aaron on Mount Hor, confirms the truth of the Mosaic narra-

live. Súmming 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 subse-

quent to the settlement in Canaan corroborated by profane writers. Curious discovery, illus-

trative of the Scriptural account of the war carried on by Pharaoh-Necho against the Jews and

Babylonians.-Consulation of the objection founded by Infidels upon the supposed sterility of

the soil of Palestine. Forcible lestimony 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 furgeries 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. Consulation

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 forged 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.- Profune

Lestimony to the genuineness of the Mosaic writings.--Objeciion 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.

SECTION I.--Objection of Infiels against the books of Judges, Kings, and Chronicles, be-

cause they are anonymous. The objection answered. The objections against the genuine-

ness 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 confulation.- His argument founded on the statement that Abraham

pursued the four kings unto Pan. Ils fallacy:-His argument founded on what is said of

The descendants of Esau. The argument considered, and consuled.- His argument founded

on the passage " The children of Israel did eal manna until they came to a land inhabited,"

&c. Ils fallacy. His argument founded on what is said concerning Og's bedstead. The argu-

ment confuted.-The argument founded on the record of the death of Moses being contained in

the books altributed to him. The argument consuled--The evidences adduced establishes the

genuineness aud credibility of the books.-Objection that Moses must have borrowed the his-

tory of the creation from the traditions which oblained 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.



A number of objections necessarily omilled, slated and answered.-Mr. Olmsted's argu.

ment to prove that the author of the book of Genesis was a polytheist. Ils confutation.-His

argument to prove, that the author of the book of Genesis believed God to be a corporeal

being. Ils consulation. Objections founded on the statements concerning Cain. Their fal.

lacy. Cavil of Infidels at the curse pronounced by Noah upon Canaan. Ils unreasonableness.

Objections founded on the cause assigned for the diversity of languages. Vindication of the

Scriplural account.--Objection sounded on the conduct of Lot. Its fallacy:-Objection found.

ed on the misconduct of Abraham. Consideration of the objection as applied not merely 10

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 ihat affair.-

Odjection, on the ground thai circumcision was first practised by the Egyptians. Ils 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 satisfaclory reply.


SECTION I.-Infidels assert that the pillar of cloud and fire is a fiction. The assertion con.

sidered 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

fouaded on the repeated a postacies of the Israelites. The objection considered and answer-

ed. The objection founded on the treatment of the Moabites and Midianites. Considered and

answered.--Objection, on the ground that the Israelites were commanded to exteriinate the

Canaaniles. Considered and answered.- Assertion that the Old Testament Scriptures sanction

Adultery and murder. Ils falsehood.- Assertion that Jehovah kept false prophels, 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 ihe shadow len 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]



Tar GENUINENESS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT SCRIPTURES.-The books of the New Testament writ-
ten 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 man-
kind. 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 guch person as Jesus Christ ever existed.-His
theory adopted, defended, and extensively circulated by Taylor. His positions defined in his mani

festo. His unblushing talsehoods promptly met and refuted by English diyinen. 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 Michælis 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 ad-

verraries of Christianity

admitted the genuineness of the writings. The testimony or Trypho the Jew.

The testimony of Celsug. 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 testi-

mony of Porphyry, Testimony of Hierocles, the philosopher. Testimony of the emperor Julian. Testi-

mony 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 epis-
tle 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. quo-

tations 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

SECTION LI.- Papias ascribes two gospels to Matthew and Mark, Testimony of Justin, of Ireneus,
of Tertullian, of Clemens Alexandrinus. Table of quotations by these witnesses. Testimony of Ori-
gin: his quotations from the New Testament Testimony of Easebius and Jerom. - Number and an
tiquity of the manuscripts of the New Testament an argument for the genuineness of its books. ---Curi-

ous discovery, which confirms the genuineness of the New Testament writings. The council of Laodi:

pea 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 ret
ntation of his allegation that the Scriptures were

altered by the emperor Anastasius. Exposure of his
dishonesty in quoling from Beausobre. Refutation of his allegation that the Scriptures were altered by
Lanfraac. 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 sacrer criticism.

SECTION 1. –Taylor's dishonesty in referring to the works of Herbert Marsh, in support of his allega.

tion that the manuscript from which the received text was taken was stolen by the librarian, &c.-Ex-

planation 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. Ex-

posure of Mr. Taylor's dishonesty in quoting from Mosheim, in support of his allegation that ecclesias-

tieal 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 gospelr.

Refotation 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 Judra.

The summing up of the argument on the genuineness of the New Testament Scriptures. 107


CREDIBILITY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT SCRIPTURES. --The number of tho witnesses who testify to
the facts detailed in the New Testament.-How the credibility of a historical book is to be ascertained.
The role 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 thọ books. The character, circumstances, and conduct of the men who testify of Jesus
prove their credibility. Difficulty !o be surmounted by those who maintain that the apostles and
evangeligts were impostors.-Summing up of the argument on the credibility of the witnesses. 125

SECTION 1. -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 Heroi, tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother
Philip, tetrach of Itraria.- Testimony to the truthfulness of the evangelisis 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, hy profane authors,
of Pilate, confirmatory of the truthfulness of the evangelista. -Testimonies to the truthfulness of the
evangelists in their statements of the treatment of Jesus Christ when upon trialanwhen crucified. -
Testimonies confirming the statements of the evangelists concerning the burial of Jesus Christ. - No-
tiee 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 (I.-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 yuch person as Jesus Christ ever existed. proven by the testimony of Tacitur, 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 evangelişts, had formerly been related of the gods and goddesses of Greece and Rome.
Ils confutation to be found in any of the Pantheons or mythological dictionarier, - Exposure of ihe ma.
lignity and falsehood of Mr. Taylor exhibited in his attempt to identify Jesus Christ with the Hindoo


idol Crishna. Citations from Sir W. Joneg concerning Crishna. The testimony of Sir W. Jones im-

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.

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





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

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 ap-

pear 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 seem-
ing 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 jii. 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 crucitied. 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

asgassinated. The

falsehood of these accusations. -The last refuge of Mr. Taylor, in asserting that Christianity

had its

origin among

the Therapeutæ. - Other Infidels pretend that the

Essenees were the originatorg of

Christianity.-Watson's account of the Esgenees and Therapeutæ.



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 gu-

pernatural works, and by the foretelling of future events with preciseness.- If these sigps accompanied

the authors of the dispensations

contained in the Old and N. Testaments, it must be admitted that the

Bible is & revelation from God. The performance of miracles by the authors of these dispensations at-

tests 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 con-


SECTION 1.--Mr. Les ie's criteria applied to the miracles recorded in the Scriptures.- Applied


those of Moses,

they all meet in his miracles. - Applied to those of Jesus Christ

and his apostleg.-

Their number, their variety, and the public manner in which they were performed, attest their vera-
city. Miracles of Christ contrasted with those of impostors.

The pretended miracles wrought by
Vespasian.-The pretended miracles of the Roman Catholics. Many of them have been proved to be
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 re-

moved until life war extinct. The precautions of the rulers to prevent the body from being stolen out

of the sepulchre. The whole question at issue between

Jerus 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 prepa-

ration 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 allega.
tion examined. Its false bood demonstrated. Subsequent conduct of the sanhedrim confirms the tes-
limony 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 ac-
knowledgment of his divine mission.-M. 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 regurrection of Jesus

Christ much more satisfactory and convincing than
that required by Mr. Olmsted. Insuperable difficulties attending the denial of the resurrection of Je.
sus Christ.

Divine authority of the Scriptures proved from prophecy and its falfillment. A prophecy defined
Mr. Watson's argument in support of the possibility of prophecy.-Criteria by which true may be
distinguished from false prophecies. The prophecies

of the heathen oracles examined. Proved to have
been impostures.-Contrast between the pretended predictions of the heathen oracles and the prophe.
cies contained in the Scriptures.-Mr. Paine's remarks in relation to the manner which future events
would be communicated by a true prophet. Mr. Olmsted's requisition and pledge if it be met to acknow.
ledge the truth of prophecy. Mr. Olmsted met upon his own ground.-

Prophecy relative to the

tion of Tyre. Its fulfillment proved by the Infidel Volney, and other competent witnesses.- Mr. Olmsted,
from his own showing, is bound to believe that Ezekiel was a true prophet

of God. - Table of quotations

from the prophecies of the Old Testament, and from Volney's writings, showing that in spite of bim.

self, this Infidel proves the truthfulness of the seers of Israel. Mr. Olmsted's ilskertion, that the his.


of Isaiah is made up of scraps, and

destilyle of order and meaning. The truth

of the assertion

tested.- Prophecy of Isaiah concerning Edom. Volney's testimony of its fulfillment. Testimony of Mr.

Stevens, Prophecy of Jeremiah concerning the capital of Edom. Burchkhardt's testimony of its fulfill:

ment. Testimony of caplaine Irhy and Mangles. Testimony of Mr. Steyens. The Infidel having

been met on his own ground, and the fulfillment of many prophecies proved by competent witnesses, it

follows that the seers

of Israel were the true prophets of God.

SECTION 1.- The great theme of the Old Testament prophets was the coming

of Messiah -The

Christian maintains that these prophecies found an accomplishment in Christ. This denied hy the
Jew and the Infidel. Mr. English's argument to show that Jesus

was not the Messiah. 1st, On ac.
count of his genealogy, and 2nd, because the prophecies of the Old Testament found no accomplish-
ment in him. Mr. English's argument refuted in all its particulars. Jesus proved to be the true Mes.
riah. -The Messiahship of Jesus Christ being proved, it follows that the Bible is a revelation from
God. Closing address.



« AnteriorContinuar »