{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_19879/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_19879","id":"gutenberg_19879","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/19879","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Everett, Edward, 1794-1865. Defence of Christianity","Rationalism"],"text":"Produced by Charles Klingman\n\n\n\n\n\nFIVE PEBBLES\n\nFrom\n\nTHE BROOK.\n\nA Reply\n\nTO\n\n\"A DEFENCE OF CHRISTIANITY\"\n\nWRITTEN BY\n\nEDWARD EVERETT,\n\nGREEK PROFESSOR OF HARVARD UNIVERSITY\nIN ANSWER TO\n\"THE GROUNDS OF CHRISTIANITY EXAMINED\nBY\nCOMPARING THE NEW TESTAMENT WITH THE OLD\"\n\nBY\nGEORGE BETHUNE ENGLISH.\n\n\"Should a wise man utter vain knowledge, and fill his belly with the\neast wind?\"\n\"Should he reason with unprofitable talk? or with speeches\nwherewith he can do no good?--Thou chooseth[fn1] the tongue of\nthe crafty. Thy own mouth condemneth thee, and not I: yea, thine\nown lips testify against thee.\"\n\"Behold I will make thee a new sharp threshing instrument having\nteeth.\"\n\nPHILADELPHIA:\n\nPRINTED FOR THE AUTHOR.\n\n1824.\n\n[PG Editor's Note: Many  printer's errors in this text\nhave been retained as found in the original--in particular\nthe will be found a large number of mismatched and\nwrongspace quotation marks.]\n\nADVERTISEMENT.\n\nWHEN I left America, I had no intention of giving Mr. Everett's\nbook a formal answer: but having learned since my arrival in the\nOld World, that: the controversy in which I had engaged myself\nhad attracted some attention, and had been reviewed by a\ndistinguished member of a German university, my hopes of being\nserviceable to the cause of truth and philanthrophy are revived,\nand I have therefore determined to give a reply to Mr. Everett's\npublication.\n\nIn this Work, as in my prior writings, I have taken for granted the\nDivine Authority of the Old Testament, and I have argued upon the\nprinciple that every book, claiming to be considered as a Divine\nrevelation and building itself upon the Old Testament as upon a\nfoundation, must agree with it, otherwise the superstructure\ncannot stand. The New Testament, the Talmud, and the Koran are\nall placed by their authors upon the Law and the Prophets, as an\nedifice is upon its foundation; and if it be true that any or all of\nthem be found to be irreconcileable with the primitive Revelation\nto which they all refer themselves, the question as to their Divine\nAuthority is decided against them, most obviously and completely.\n\nThis work was written in Egypt and forwarded to the U. States,\nwhile I was preparing to accompany Ismael Pacha to the conquest\nof Ethiopia; an expedition in which I expected to perish, and\ntherefore felt it to be my duty to leave behind me, something from\nwhich my countrymen might learn what were my real sentiments\nupon a most important and interesting subject; and as I hoped\nwould learn too, how grossly they had been deluded into building\ntheir faith and hope upon a demonstrated error.\n\nOn my arrival from Egypt I found that the MS. had not been\npublished, and I was advised by several, of my friends to abandon\nthe struggle and to imitate their example; in submitting to the\ndespotism of popular opinion, which, they said, it was imprudent to\noppose. I was so far influenced by these representations--\nextraordinary indeed in a country which  boasts that here freedom\nof opinion and of speech is established by law--that I intended to\nconfine myself to sending the MS. to Mr. Everett; in the belief that\nwhen he should have the weakness of his arguments in behalf of\nwhat he defended and the injustice of his aspersions upon me,\nfairly and evidently laid before him, that he would make me at\nleast a private apology. He chose to preserve a sullen silence,\nprobably believing that he is so securely seated in the saddle\nwhich his brethren have girthed upon the back of \"a strong ass\"\nthat; there is no danger that the animal will give him a fall.\n\nNot a little moved at this, I determined to do my myself justice, and\nto publish the pages following.\n\nThis book is not the work of an Infidel. I am not an infidel; what I\nhave learned and seen in Europe, Asia and Africa, while it has\nconfirmed my reasons for rejecting the New Testament, has\nrooted in my mind the conviction that the ancient Bible does\ncontain a revelation from the God of Nature, as firmly as my belief\nin the first proposition of Euclid.\n\nThe whole analogy of Nature, while it is in many respects opposed\nto the characteristics ascribed to the Divinity by the\nmetaphysicians, yet bears witness in my opinion, that this world\nwas made and is governed by just such a Being as the Jehovah of\nthe Old Testament; while the palpable fulfillment of predictions\ncontained in that book, and which is so strikingly manifest in the\nOld World, leaves in my mind no doubt whatever, of the ultimate\nfulfillment of all that it promises, and all that it threatens.\n\nI cannot do better than to conclude these observations with the\nmanly declaration of the celebrated Christian orator Dr. Chalmers,\n\"We are ready, (says he,) to admit that as the object of the inquiry\nis not the character, but the Truth of Christianity, the philosopher\nshould be careful to protect his mind from the delusions of its\ncharms.  He should separate the exercises of the understanding\nfrom the tendencies of the fancy or of the heart. He should be\nprepared to follow the light of evidence, though it should lead him\nto conclusions the most painful and melancholy. He should train\nhis mind to all the hardihood of abstract and unfeeling intelligence.\nHe should give up every thing to the supremacy of argument and\nhe able to renounce without a sigh all the tenderest\npossessions[fn 2] of infancy, the moment that TRUTH demands of\nhim the sacrifice.\" (Dr. Chalmers on the Evidence and Authority of\nthe Christian Religion. Ch. I.)\n\nFinally, let the Reader remember, that \"there is one thing in the\nworld more contemptible than the slave of a tyrant--it is the dupe\nof a SOPHIST.\"\n\nG. B. E.\n\nPEBBLE I\n\nAnd David \"chose him five smooth stones out of the brook, and\nput them in a shepherd's bag which he had, even in a scrip: and\nhis sling was in his hand: and he drew near to the Philistine.\"\n\nMr. Everett commences his work with the following remarks. \"Was\nJesus Christ the person foretold by the prophets, as the Messiah\nof the Jews?; one method, and a very obvious one, of examining\nhis claims to this character, is to compare his person, life, actions,\nand doctrine, with the supposed predictions of them. But if it also\nappear that this Jesus wrought such works, as evinced that he\nenjoyed the supernatural assistance and cooperation of God, this\ncertainly is a fact of great importance. For we cannot say, that in\nestimating the validity of our Lord's claims to the character of\nMessiah, it is of no consequence whether, while he advanced\nthose claims, he wrought such works as proved his intimacy with\nthe God of truth. While he professed himself the Messiah, is it\nindifferent whether he was showing himself to be as being beyond\ndelusion, and above imposture?--Let us make the case our own.\nSuppose that we were witnesses of the miraculous works of a\npersonage of pretensions like our Lord's, should we think it\nnecessary or reasonable to resort to long courses of argument, or\nindeed to any process of the understanding, except what was\nrequisite to establish the fact of the miracles? Should we, while he\nwas opening the eyes of the blind, and raising the dead from their\ngraves, feel it necessary to be deciphering prophecies, and\nweighing these[fn 3] difficulties? Now we may transfer this case to\nthat of Christianity. The miracles of our Lord are either true or\nfalse. The infidel if he maintain the latter must prove it; and if the\nformer can be made to appear, they are beyond all comparison\nthe most direct and convincing testimony that can be devised,\" p.\n1, 2. of Mr. Everett's work.\n\nTo this statement I would reply--that I do not know what right Mr.\nEverett has to call upon his opponent, to prove a negative. It was\nhis business to prove the affirmative of his question, and to show\nthat these miracles actually were performed, before he proceeded\nto argue upon the strength of them. It is, I conceive, impossible to\ndemonstrate that miracles said to have been wrought 1800 years\nago, were not performed; but it is, I believe, quite possible to show\nthat there is no sufficient proof that they were. One of the reasons\ngiven, in the 2d, ch. as I think, of the grounds of Christianity\nexamined, for throwing out of consideration the miracles recorded\nin the New Testament in examining the question of the\nMessiahship of Jesus, was, that the New Testament itself, was not\na sufficient proof that these miracles were actually wrought; and\nthis, with the reader's indulgence, I think I can plainly show.\n\nMr. Everett allows p. 450 of his work, what indeed he cannot deny,\nthat the four Gospels do sometimes contradict each other in their\nnarratives; and he refers with approbation, in a note to p. 458, to a\nwork of Lessing's, which he says, \"ought to be read by every one\nwho is overfond of Harmonies.\" This work of Lessing's, if I\nrecollect right, maintains, that all hopes of harmonizing the\nevangelists, of reconciling their contradictions, must be given up.\n[See Lessings Sammliche, Schriften, ch. v. S. 150, as quoted by\nMr. Everett, p. 458.]\n\nNow these contradictions, if they do exist, unquestionably argue\none of two things; either fraud, or want of accurate information in\ntheir authors, as no man who wishes to be considered \"compos\nmentis\" will deny, because, accurate information excludes the\npossibility of contradiction in authors willing to tell the truth, and\nmuch more in inspired authors, who must be incapable of writing\nanything but the truth.\n\nThe Christian, therefore, must, it seems to me, on account of\nthese contradictions, allow one of two things; either, that the\nevangelists were fraudulent men, or else that the Gospels were\nnot written by the Apostles and immediate followers of Jesus:\nbecause want of accurate information, cannot be supposed of the\nApostles and immediate followers of Jesus; as having been\nconstantly with him, from the beginning, to the end of his\nministery, they must have been perfectly acquainted with his\nactions and doctrines. Neither can lapse of memory be urged;\nbecause the Gospels represent Jesus as saying, John ch. xvi. 26,\nthat they should have the aid of inspiration, which \"should, bring\nall things, to remembrance;\" and in Acts ch. iv. 31, all the followers\nof Jesus are represented as having actually received the effusion\nof the Holy Ghost: of course want of accurate information, and\nlapse or memory in them cannot be supposed.\n\nThe Christian, therefore, must allow, since contradictions do exist,\nif he would avoid accusing the Apostles and disciples of Jesus of\nfraud, that the Gospels were not written by the Apostles and first\nfollowers of Jesus, but that they were written by men, who had no\naccurate information about the events they record. It is therefore\nplain, that the miracles recorded in the Gospels, are incapable of\nproof. For what Christian in his senses can ask another man to\nbelieve accounts of miracles, which accounts, he must at the\nsame time allow, were written by fraudulent men, or by men who\nhad no accurate information upon the subjects about which they\nwrite.\n\nThe edge of this, as I think, smites right through the neck of Mr.\nEverett's argument on which his work depends, and leaves his\nbook--\"a gasping head---a quivering trunk.\" Sic transit gloria\nmundi.\n\nBut in order to make Mr. Everett still farther Sensible how easily\nhis argument can be \"overturned, overturned and overturned,\" I\nwill suppose a reasonable and reasoning man, desirous to verify\nthe claims of the books of the New Testament as containing a\nRevelation from God, to set down to scrutinize with anxious\nsolicitude every argument of internal and external evidence, in\nfavour of their authenticity, and authority, in the hope of becoming\nsatisfied of the truth of their claims. But in the course of his\nexamination, such a man will assuredly find, that almost every\nstep in his inquiry, is an occasion of doubt and of difficulty.\n\nBooks containing Revelations from the Supreme, must be\nconsistent with themselves. But he will observe on a careful\nperusal of the evangelists, that the contradictions, particularly in\nthe narratives of the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus, are\nnumerous; and that all the ingenuity of Christian writers, has been\nexhausted in vain in the attempt to reconcile them; for example,\nthe Gospel called of Matthew says, ch. iii. 14, that John the\nBaptist, knew Jesus when he came to him to be baptised, (which\nwas very probable on account of the relationship and intimacy\nsubsisting between Mary the mother of Jesus, and: Elizabeth the\nmother of John, as mentioned in the Gospel called of Luke, ch. i.\n18, it could hardly have been otherwise) but the author of the\nGospel called of John says, ch. i. 31, that John knew him not, until\nhe was designated by the descent of the Holy Ghost upon him.\n\nAgain, it is said in the Gospel called of John, ch. ii. 14. that Jesus,\non his first visit to Jerusalem after he had commenced his\npreaching, cast the buyers and sellers out of the Temple, whereas\nthe Gospel called of Matthew, and also those called of Mark and\nLuke, represent this to have been done by Jesus at his last visit to\nJerusalem. See Matt. ch. xxi. 12. Mark ch. xi. 15. Luke ch. xix. 45.\n\nAgain, the author of the Gospel called of John, represents the last\nsupper or Jesus with his Apostles, to have taken place (See ch.\nxiii. 1. and ch. xviii. 28.) on the eve before the feast of the\npassover, and that Jesus was crucified on the feast day itself,\nwhile the authors of the other Gospels represent the first event to\nhave taken place, on the evening of the passover itself, and that\nJesus was crucified the day after. See Matt. Ch. xxvi. 18. Mark xiv.\n12. Luke ch. xxii. 7. Now Matthew and John must, according to the\nGospels themselves, have been present with Jesus when he\ndrove the buyers and sellers out of the Temple, and at his last\nsupper, and when he was seized in the garden of Gethsemane;\nthey must therefore have known perfectly whether Jesus drove\nthe buyers; and sellers out of the Temple, at his first visit to\nJerusalem in their company; or at his last, and whether his last\nsupper, and his seizure in the garden of Gethsemane took place\non the eve before this passover their great national festival, or on\nthe evening of the passover itself. They could not forget the time\nand place of events, so affecting and important as the last\nmentioned, and when we add to these considerations, that the\nGospels represent Jesus as saying, (John ch. xiv.;26.) that they\nshould be inspired by the Holy Spirit, which \"should bring all things\nto remembrance,\" the supposition that the real Matthew and John\ncould contradict each other in this manner, becomes quite\ninadmissable.\n\nIn the account of the resurrection of Jesus, the most important fact\nof Christianity, we also find several contradictions; for instance,\nthe Gospel called of Matthew says, that the first appearance of\nJesus to his disciples after his resurrection, was in Galillee, (See\nMatt. ch.xxxviii. 7,) while the other evangelists assert, that his first\nappearance to them after that event was at Jerusalem. See Mark\nch. xvi., Luke ch. xxiv. John ch.xx. The Gospel called of John\nsays, that he afterwards appeared to them in Galilee: but\naccording to that of Luke, the disciples did not go to Galilee to\nmeet Jesus; for that Gospel says, that Jesus expressly ordered\nhis disciples to tarry at Jerusalem, where they should receive the\neffusion of the Holy Ghost, and that after giving that order he was\ntaken up to Heaven. See Luke ch. xxiv. 49, 50, also, the first ch. of\nActs. [fn 4]\n\nThis greatly invalidates the credibility of these accounts; for as\nmuch as that the historical testimony in attestation of supernatural\nevents, ought, because such events are out of the common\ncourse of nature, to be strong and unexceptionable.\n\nHe will observe too that these writers, supposed to have been the\ninspired followers of Jesus Christ, have applied many passages of\nthe Old Testament as prophecies of Jesus, when it is most\ncertain, (and is at the present day allowed by Christian Biblical\nCritics of the highest standing) from examining those passages in\ntheir context in the Old Testament, that they are not prophecies of\nJesus; and that some of the passages cited are in fact no\nprophecies at all, but are merely historical. Nor is this all, these\nauthors have cited as prophecies and proof texts, passages which\ndo not exist in the Old Testament. From which it seems to follow\nthat they must have forged those passages, or quoted them from\nsome Apocryphal book; which they believed to be inspired. If they\nwere capable of the first, they were not the honest and inspired\nfollowers and disciples of Jesus Christ; if they were capable of the\nlast, they were not Jews but Gentiles, ignorant that the Jews in the\ntime of Jesus, acknowledged no books as inspired scripture but\nthe books of the Old Testament. See Appendix, A.\n\nA reasonable and reasoning man, such as I have supposed, may\nask himself if it be possible that men filled with the Holy Ghost,\nand whose minds were supernaturally opened to understand the\nscriptures, could make mistakes such as these.\n\nLastly, he will recollect, on discovering what is about to be stated,\nthat the Apostles and followers of Jesus Christ were Jews, and\nconsequently could not be ignorant of what was notorious to the\nwhole nation, for instance, that the Jewish Sabbath begins at\nsunset on Friday evening, and ends at sunset on Saturday\nevening. Nevertheless the author of the Gospel called of Matthew\nmakes ch. xxviii. 1. the Sabbath to end at dawn of day on Sunday\nmorning: while the author of that called of John apparently\nreckons, ch. xx. 19. the evening of the first day of the week as a\npart of the first day of the week; whereas it is in fact, according to\nthe law and customs of the Jews, who then and now reckon their\ndays from sunset to sunset, the beginning and a part of the\nsecond day of the week. Such mistakes appear to me to indicate\nthat the writers of those Gospels were Gentiles not perfectly\nacquainted with Jewish customs, and therefore not Matthew and\nJohn.[fn 6]\n\nThere are other traces of ignorance of Jewish customs, to be\nfound in the Gospel called of Matthew, which betray the Gentilism\nof the author of it. For instance, he says ch. xxvi. 24[fn7], that\nJesus told Peter, that \"before the cock crew he should deny him\nthrice;\" the same is also found in Mark ch. xiv. 30. in Luke ch. xxii.\n54[fn8], and in John ch. xiii. 38. Now it is asserted in the Mishna (i.\ne the oral law of the Jews.) in the Bava Kama according to Mr.\nEverett p. 448. of his work, that cocks were not permitted in\nJerusalem where Peter's denial took place; [probably because that\nbird is constantly scratching up the ground with his feet, and was\nthereby liable to turn up impurities, by touching which in passing\nby, a Jew would be ceremonially defiled, and rendered incapable\nof visiting the Temple to perform his devotions, till after the\nevening of the day on which the defilement took place], therefore\nall the four Gospels which all contain, this story, must have been\nwritten by Gentiles ignorant of the custom which belies the story.\n\nSome Christian writers have endeavoured to get rid of this\nobjection, by attempting to prove \"that the crowing of the cock\nhere mentioned, does not mean actually the crowing of a cock, but\n'the sound of a trumpet!'\" while others, blushing at the hardihood\nof their brethren, think it more prudent to maintain, that the author\nof the Mishna was ignorant of Jewish customs, and that the\nwriters of the Gospels were perfectly acquainted with them; and\nthat therefore every good Christian was bound in conscience not\nto regard the objection.\n\nBut the prohibition of cocks from entering the Holy city is so\nperfectly of a piece with many other cautions against defilement\nobserved by the Jews, and is so perfectly in the taste of the times\nof the Pharisees, \"the careful washers of plates and platters,\"--the\n\"tithers of mint, anise, and cummin,\" not to mention the reason\nabove expressed, which perhaps was, to say truth, according to\nthe regulations against defilement contained in the Pentateuch a\nsufficient reason for excluding that bird from the city, where stood\nthe Temple, that the reader will probably believe that such a\ncustom might have existed.\n\nAgain, it is said Matt. xxvii. 62, that the Chief Priests and\nPharisees went to Pilate; demanded a guard; went to the\nSepulchre of Jesus, sealed the door, and set watch. Now Jesus is\nsaid to have arisen on the day after this, on the first day of the\nweek, i.e. Sunday, of course the day before was Saturday of the\nJewish Sabbath. I maintain that the Chief Priests and Pharisees,\nwho objected to Jesus curing the sick and rubbing corn from the\near, in order to satisfy his hunger on the Sabbath day; I maintain\nthat it is utterly incredible, that these men should have gone to\nPilate on public business, and transacted all this on their Sabbath.\nFor such an action would have come completely within the spirit,\nand the letter of the Laws against breaking the Sabbath contained\nin the-Pentateuch, which makes the penalty of such actions as are\nhere ascribed to the Chief Priests and rigorous Pharisees, nothing\nless than stoning to death. I infer therefore, that the author of the\nGospel of Matthew was ignorant of this, and of course not a Jew,\nand consequently not Matthew.\n\nI would observe further, in connection with this subject, that Jesus\nis represented, Matt. xxiii. 35, as saying, that upon the Jews of this\ntime should come \"the blood of Zecharias the son of Barachias\nwhom ye slew between the Temple and the altar.\" Now, I believe\nthat it is recorded in Josephus' history, that the Jews slew this\nZecharias in the time of the Jewish war, about forty years after\nJesus is represented as saying, that they had killed him already.\nOf course Jesus never could have said this, nor would a Jew\nacquainted with the times, as Matthew must have been, have\nbeen guilty of such an anachronism. The writer of that Gospel\nmust therefore, have been a Gentile, and not Matthew. The same\nmistake is made by Luke xi. 51.\n\nOn turning his attention to the external evidence in favour of the\nauthenticity of the Gospels, the difficulties and objections\naccumulate. He will find, that they are not mentioned by any writer\nearlier than the latter half of the second century, after the birth of\nJesus. The first writers who name the four Gospels, were\nIrenaeus, and Tertullian.[fn9] The competency of the testimony of\nthese Fathers of the church, as to the genuineness of these\nbooks, is invalidated by the fact, (See Middleton's Free Enquiry)\nthat they admitted the principle of the lawfulness of pious frauds,\nand from their having acted upon this principle, in having asserted\nin their writings, as from their personal knowledge, things which\nwere certainly false; (See the work above referred to) while their\ncapability to distinguish the genuine writings of the Apostles, from\nthe numerous forgeries in their names that appeared about the\nsame time that the four Gospels begin to be mentioned, is\nrendered suspicious by the fact, that they also give their sanction\nas Divine Scriptures, to books notoriously apocryphal; for instance\nthe book of Enoch and the Sybilline Oracles.[fn11] The testimony\nof the Fathers who succeeded them is liable to the same\nobjections, with this aggravation that its value diminishes more\nand more, as the distance of the ages in which they flourished\nincreases, from that of Jesus Christ.\n\nThirdly, He will find that these Gospels were never received by the\nMother Church of Jerusalem and Judea, founded by the Apostles.\nThe Jewish Christians, the countrymen of Jesus, who one would\nthink had the best means of knowing the real history, and real\ndoctrines of Jesus and his Apostles, uniformly rejected not only\nthese Gospels, but all the other books of the New\nTestament.[fn12] They were also rejected, by several sects of\nChristians who flourished in the early ages of Christianity.\n\nFourthly, he will learn too that the Christians most distinguished\nfor their learning on this subject, for instance, Michaelis, Semler,\nLessing, Eichorn, and the erudite Bishop Marsh, do allow and\nmaintain in their works, that the Gospels according to Matthew,\nMark and Luke were compiled from accounts of the life and\ndoctrines of Jesus which became, after different additions,\nrevisions and translations, the BASIS of our present Gospels; from\nsuch separate materials, which had gone through different hands,\nand had acquired a variety of text and context, from the different\ntranscripts and translations in which they circulated, though for the\nmost part they were copied verbatim from one another, several\nGospels, among which were our three first Matthew Mark and\nLuke, were composed AFTER [fn13] the destruction of Jerusalem,\nand designated some by the names of the readers for whom they\nwere designed, and others by the names of their authors and\ncompilers. (See the life of Semler in Eichorn's Universal Library,\nas quoted by Mr. E. p. 465. of his work.)\n\n These Gospels then, in the opinion of these learned Christians,\nwere originally compiled from anonymous writings, which had\ngone through different hands and been variously altered, and\nadded to in the passage, before they became the BASIS,!! of our\npresent Gospels.[fn14]\n\nLastly, he will discover, that since their construction from such\nnameless materials, they have been further altered and\ninterpolated. Celsus accuses the Christians of his time (the latter\npart of the 2nd century) of \"continually altering their Gospels;\" and\nthe ancient Christian sects accuse each other of the same fact.\nThat these accusations were well founded, is evident from\nGriesbach's edition of the Greek Testament, where besides the\nnotice of some hundred thousands of various readings, we find\nnot only single words, but whole phrases, and verses, and even\nentire paragraphs rejected as corruptions and interpolations.\nNeither have all these corruptions been accidental; for as much as\nthe strongest text in the New Testament, in support of the doctrine\nof the Trinity and the Divinity of Jesus Christ, which is to be found\nin the first Epistle, called of John ch. v. 7, \"there are three that\nbear witness in Heaven. The Father, the Word, and the Holy\nGhost and these three are one,\" has been struck out of the text by\nGriesbach, himself a Trinitarian, as a pious fraud, and is now I\nbelieve universally acknowledged as such by learned Christians.\n\nThere are also, two other passages which for ages have been\ncited as proofs of the Divinity of Jesus (viz. \"The Church of God\nwhich he has redeemed with his own blood,\" Acts ch. xx. 28. and\n\"God was manifested in the flesh,\" in the first Epistle to Timothy,\nch. iii. 16.) which the same Critic has proved to have been altered\nfrom their original reading to favour the same doctrine, and it is\nimpossible to say how many more frauds of a similar nature might\nbe detected, if the learned and candid Christians before-\nmentioned were in possession of the primitive manuscripts of the\nNew Testament.[fn15]\n\nAll these enormities Mr. Everett, who has a light hand in writing\nupon some subjects, comprizes with great tenderness in the\nfollowing expressions, \"our copies of the New Testament by the\nlapse of time, have suffered some literal alterations, which may\nhave fallen occasionally on the quoted texts (he is trying to justify\nthe writers of the New Testament, for quoting the Old Testament\notherwise than it is written) and thus made them to differ from the\nreading of the Old Testament,\" p. 279.\n\nI have supposed that a reasonable and reasoning man, desirous\nto ascertain the truth of the religion of the Christians, and in the\nhope of finding it well founded, in the course of his examination of\nthe testimony for the authenticity and authority of the books of the\nNew Testament, comes to the knowledge of all these\ncircumstances. If the reader be such a man, I would ask him, if he\ncan rationally rest his belief in the moral attributes of God and his\nfaith in a future life, upon a foundation composed of such\nmaterials?\n\nMr. Everett observes \"that as prophecy and miracle are equally\ndivine works, it is impossible that they should contradict each\nother. They are equally the works of the God of truth, and\nwhatever contradiction there appears to be between them, must\nbe but apparent. If a person of whatever pretensions proposes to\nwork miracles in support of those pretensions, in which\nnevertheless he is contradicted by express prophecy, one of these\nthings is certain--that the prophecy is a forged one--or that we\nhave mistaken the meaning of it--or that the miracles are not real,\"\np. 3. of Mr. Everett's work.\n\nGranted--upon this ground I think that Mr. Everett can fairly be\nbrought to issue. I presume that he will hardly persist in\nmaintaining that the Gospels are a sufficient proof of the miracles\nthey record, in the face of the objections to their authenticity and\nauthority already stated--and as neither he nor myself maintain\nthat the prophecies, with regard to the Messiah, contained in the\nOld Testament were forged, it remains only to be considered,\nwhether he or I have mistaken the meaning of them. So that, as I\nhave repeatedly said in my former publications, the prophets, after\nall, are the only criterion which can be appealed to certainly most\nimportant to the great interests of humanity, were it only on this\naccount, that the dispute has occasioned the most unparalleled\ndegradation, misery, and oppression to one of the parties to\nit.[fn16]\n\n PEBBLE II.\n\n\"The Messiah expected by the Jews,\" says Mr. Everett, at the\nbeginning of the second chapter of his book, \"and which Mr.\nEnglish supposes to be predicted in the Old Testament, is 'a\ntemporal prince, and a conquering pacificator.' The Christians on\nthe other hand maintain, that the prophets foretold not a political,\nbut a religious institution, not a temporal prince, but a moral\nteacher, and spiritual Saviour. Which of these opposite views of\nthe predicted character of the Messiah is correct, must be decided\nof course by an appeal to particular predictions. But it is also a\nmatter of reason, and we have a right to argue upon the question\nfrom the character of God, and the nature of man. Which of these\nviews the Jewish or the Christian doth most commend itself to the\nsincere believer in the moral government of God, and the rational\nand accountable nature of man?\"\n\nThis statement, I cannot help considering as both artful and unfair.\nThat I have represented the Messiah as predicted to be \"a\ntemporal Prince and a conquering pacificator,\" is true, but it is not\nthe whole truth; Mr. Everett would have it to be understood, that I\nmaintained that the Messiah was to be merely \"a temporal Prince;\"\nwhereas, those who will take the trouble to refer to the prior\nchapters of \"the grounds of Christianity examined,\" will find that I\nhave endeavoured to prove that the prophets predict, that he was\nalso to be \"a just, beneficient, wise, and mighty monarch, under\nwhose government righteousness was to flourish, and mankind be\nmade happy:\" and I believe that there is not a single passage from\nthe prophets quoted in Mr. Everett's 2d. chapter to prove his views\nof the Messiah, that I have not also myself quoted to prove the\nbeneficent character of him I suppose to be predicted.\n\nMr. Everett unwarily betrays his own unfairness in the following\npassage of his work, p. 63.---\"Mr. English objects, that whereas\nthe first characteristic of the Messiah was, that he was to be the\nPrince of Peace, in whose time righteousness was to flourish and\nmankind be made happy,\" &c.[fn17]\n\nHow is it possible, I might ask Mr. Everett that I could have\nmaintained that the Messiah was to be merely \"a temporal Prince,\nand a conquering pacificator,\" when it is also true, as Mr. Everett\nconfesses, that I maintain that \"the first characteristic of the\nMessiah was that he was to be the Prince of Peace, in whose time\nrighteousness was to flourish and mankind be made happy?\" I\nconfess, that I feel both contempt and indignation at such an artful\nmis-representation of my opinions, in order to attack them with\nmore hopes of success, and as I do not profess to be a Christian, I\nmay be excused for expressing what in this case I certainly have a\nright so feel.[fn18] The prophets, literally understood represent (as\nMr. Everett will not deny) that the Messiah is to be a mighty\nMonarch, enthroned at Jerusalem under whose reign the Jews\nshould be restored to their country and converted from their sins\nand errors, and established in the most perfect and endless\nhappiness; that he will put down all opposition to his authority, and\nexterminate the wicked out of the earth, and unite the pious and\ngood of all the human race under his government, making them\nparticipators of the eternal happiness of the favoured descendants\nof Abraham, that all sin, sorrow, and error shall be no more, and\nthe earth become all Paradise.\n\n\"Far more bless'd than that of Eden, And far happier days.\" [fn19]\n\nThe difference between Mr. Everett's and my view of this\nrepresentation is, that I understand the prophets to mean that the\nwhole will be literally fulfilled; and Mr. Everett maintains that, that\npart which accords with the Christian view of the Messiah is to be\nliterally understood, but that that part which is opposed to it must\nbe taken figuratively.\n\nWho is so blind as not to perceive the motives for such an\nincoherent system, of interpretation! The passages which\nrepresent the Messiah as a Monarch reigning at Jerusalem, and\nwhose temporal authority should extend over all the earth, Mr.\nEverett would interpret to signify, (by a figure) \"a preacher of\nrighteousness, and a spiritual Saviour of the souls of men;\"\nbecause Jesus had no temporal authority whatever, and therefore\nto understand them literally would exclude the claims set up for\nhim. The earth's being restored to a Paradisiacal state, and the\nextinction of all sin, violence, and misery throughout its\ncircumference, Mr. Everett would interpret to signify, (by. a figure)\n\"the blessed events,\" which have occurred, and the \"changes that\nhave taken place,\" since the promulgation of Christianity!! [fn20]\n\nMr. Everett, in support of his system of interpretation, shows us,\nthat the Supreme Being is frequently spoken of in the Old\nTestament, as a King and as a victorious warrior; and therefore\ninfers, because such passages must be understood figuratively,\nthat the passages in the prophets which speak of the Messiah in\nsimilar terms, must be also understood figuratively.\n\nTo this it seems to me to be a sufficient answer to observe, that\nmen who speak of the Deity, are obliged to employ human\nlanguage and human ideas; because:\n\n\"What can we reason but from what we know?\" and therefore a\ngreat part of such language will be necessarily figurative; but it by\nno means follows from this, that the writers who are obliged to use\nthis figurative language when speaking of the Deity, intend to be\nunderstood in the same sense when they apply the same\nexpressions to describe men and their actions. On the contrary, as\nthey were writing to men and for men, it is natural to presume, that\nthey meant to be understood in the way that such expressions are\nuniversally understood by all men, when they relate to men and\ntheir actions. Such a system, of interpretation as this of Mr.\nEverett's, turns the Bible into a Babel of confusion: a man\nproceeding upon this system, might with equal plausibility turn all\nthe good and prosperous kings of Israel and Judah into \"Spiritual\nSaviours.\"[fn21]\n\n\"What, says Mr. Everett, p. 63. would be thought of one, who after\nmaking a collection of passages which ascribe these attributes of\nroyalty and conquest to God, such as Mr. English has made of\nthose which ascribe such attributes to the Messiah, should infer as\nhe does, that God is a just, beneficent; wise and mighty monarch\nreigning on a throne in Jerusalem?\"\n\nTo this I answer by asking in my turn, what should we think of one,\nwho after making a collection, of passages which ascribe these\nattributes of royalty and conquest to God, as Mr. Everett has\ndone, should therefore think himself authorised to infer, that the\nhistory of David the son of Jesse, contained in the Bible, (which,\nas all the world knows, is an oriental book abounding in figurative\nexpressions) was not to be understood literally, but that it was\nvery possible that this supposed monarch of Israel, who is\nrepresented as having \"saved it from its enemies on every side,\"\nwas after all, probably only a spiritual saviour of the souls of the\nIsraelites, by having distinguished himself as a prophet, a\npreacher of righteousness, and a composer of Psalms!! [fn22]\n\nAs Mr. Everett says, I \"cheerfully leave this part of the controversy,\nwith the answer to this question which every rational inquirer will\ngive;\" p. 63.\n\nMr. Everett, however, in maintaining that the Messiah, was to be\nmerely a preacher of righteousness, a founder of a new religion,\nand a. spiritual saviour of the souls of men, not only opposes dicta\nof the prophets of the Old Testament, but is expressly\ncontradicted by the doctrine of the New, which maintains the same\nideas of the Messiah that the prophets teach and the Jews\nbelieve; and this with the indulgence of the reader's patience I will\nplainly show.\n\nThe angel is recorded, Luke, ch. i. 31, to have told Mary,\nconcerning Jesus whom the author of that Gospel supposes to\nhave been the Messiah, that \"the Lord God shall give unto him the\nthrone of his father David: and he shall reign over the house of\nJacob forever, and of his kingdom there shall be no end.\" Now this\nis precisely the doctrine, concerning the Messiah, believed by the\nJews from that time to the present; for we see that Luke\nrepresents that the Messiah was not to be merely a spiritual\nsaviour of the souls of men, but was actually to set upon the\nthrone of David, and reign over the house of Jacob for ever; which\nis precisely what the prophets teach and the Jews believe.\n\nAgain, in the same ch. 68, the writer of that Gospel represents\nZecharias, when filled with the Holy Ghost, as predicting\nconcerning Jesus as follows. \"Blessed be the Lord God of Israel,\nfor he hath visited and redeemed his people, and hath raised up a\nhorn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David: as he\nspake by the mouth of his holy prophets which have been since\nthe world began: that we should be saved from our enemies, and\nfrom the hand of all that hate us: to perform the mercy promised to\nour Fathers, and to remember his holy covenant: the oath which\nhe swore to our father Abraham, that he would grant unto us, that\nwe being delivered from the hand of our enemies, might serve him\nwithout fear in holiness and righteousness before him all the days\nof our life.\"\n\nHere we see again that in Luke's opinion the Messiah was not to\nbe merely \"a spiritual saviour of the souls of men,\" but that he was\nto \"save Israel from their enemies and from the hand of all that\nhated them,\" and this too is precisely what the prophets teach and\nthe Jews believe.\n\nAgain, from the first ch. of Acts 6. it is evident, that the primitive\nChristians did not believe that the Messiah was to be merely a\nspiritual saviour of the souls of men, but that he would perform for\nIsrael what was promised by the prophets. For the Apostles are\nrepresented there as asking Jesus, previous to his ascension,\nsaying \"Lord wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to\nIsrael?\"\n\nThe way the writers of the New Testament, get over the objection\nto the Messiahship of Jesus, founded on the nonfulfillment by him\nof the splended visions of the prophets relative to the restoration\nof the dispersion, the punishment of their oppressors, and the\ndiffusion of universal happiness to the tribes and of the world,\n(which they represent as the consequence of the coming of the\nMessiah) is, not by maintaining that the Messiah was to be merely\n\"a spiritual Saviour of the souls of men,\" but by affirming that\nJesus would shortly come again into the world to fulfill them. \"The\nLord Jesus,\" says the writer of the second Epistle to the\nThessalonians ch. i. 7, \"shall be revealed from Heaven with his\nmighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that\nknow not God and obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.\nWho shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the\npresence of our Lord, and from the glory of his power: when he\nshall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired of all\nthem that believe.\"[fn23]\n\nAgain, in the xii. ch. of the Revelations, Jesus is apparently\nspoken of as destined \"to rule all nations with a rod of iron.\" And in\nthe ii. ch. Jesus is represented as saying, that \"he that overcometh\nand keepeth my words unto the end, to him will I give power over\nthe nations; and he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the\nvessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers even as I\nreceived of my Father,\" v: 26, and lastly, not to be tedious, there is\na passage in the xix. ch. of Revelations, which proves decisively\nagainst Mr. Everett, that the primitive Christians had even more\nsanguinary ideas of the vengeance of the Messiah upon the\nwicked of the earth, than are even entertained by the Jews. Jesus\nis there, described thus, \"I saw Heaven opened, and behold a\nwhite horse; and he that set upon him was called Faithful and\nTrue, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war, and out\nof his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the\nnations; and he shall rule them with a rod of iron, and he treadeth\nthe wine press of the fierceness of the wrath of Almighty God,\" v.\n11, 15. Some idea of the slaughter meant by the writer of the\nRevelations by \"treading the wine press of the fierceness of the\nwrath of Almighty God,\" may be understood from ch. xiv. 20,\nwhere it is represented that the blood of men came out of this\nwine press \"by the space of a thousand and six hundred\nfurlongs!!\"\n\nI suppose that the reader is quite satisfied by what has been\nadduced, that Mr. Everett's idea of the Messiah's being merely \"a\nspiritual saviour of the souls of men,\" is equally rejected by the Old\nTestament and the New, and since Mr. Everett does not and\ncannot pretend, that Jesus during the long space of 1800 years\nhas fulfilled the predictions relating to the Messiah in a literal\nsense, which is the sense in which they must be fulfilled in order\nto be made good, Mr. Everett is left without better proof of the\nMessiahship of Jesus than bare opinion only, which attaineth not\nto any certainty.\n\nMr. Everett supposes that a mere \"Preacher of righteousness,\" is\ncapable of fulfilling all the predictions of the Messiah, which\nrepresent him as putting an end to all wickedness and misery\nthroughout the World. How absurd!! there never was,[fn24] a\nbetter or greater \"Preacher of righteousness,\" than Jesus Christ\nhimself, and what did he effect among the people of his age? the\nGospels say, that they whipped him, and nailed him to a cross.\nThere has been since his time, for eighteen hundred years, I know\nnot how many millions of \"preachers of righteousness,\" and what\nhave they effected? look at the history of the decline and fall of the\nRoman Empire: look at the histories of mankind for the last 400\nyears. What scenes do they for the most part, present to the\nshocked contemplation! are they not generally a complication of\nfolly, madness, and devilism, worthy of being recorded in triumph\nby the evil one himself, in letters of blood and infernal fire?\n\nWhat success have the \"Preachers of righteousness,\" of the\npresent day? Do not these pious and good men, and pious and\ngood they generally speaking undoubtedly are, do they not feel\nthemselves obliged to tell you, that such is the depravity of human\nnature, that \"teaching and preaching are all in vain;\" that they are\nwearying themselves in \"throwing pearls before swine,\" who\nreceive them with a grunt, and \"trample them under their feet?\"\n\nDoes not Mr. Everett himself tell us p. 80, that \"it is too true that\nthe mighty passions, which agitate the public intercourse of the\nworld, are almost beyond the direct reach of moral means,\" i. e. of\nthe \"Preachers of righteousness.\"\n\nHow then can he expect that a mere \"Preacher of righteousness,\"\nis capable of subduing these \"mighty passions,\" whose existence\nis incompatible with peace and happiness, and fulfilling the\npredictions relating to the Messiah? No, all history and experience\ntestify that no merely human power can put an end to them. It\nmust be done by the strong and armed hand of Heaven.\n\nThen, and not till then, shall exiled \"justice look down from\nHeaven, and righteousness and peace shall kiss each other.\"\nThen, and not till then, shall \"the wicked cease from troubling;\"\nand the afflicted enjoy happiness.\n\n\"These be the last words of David. David the son of Jesse said,\nand the man who was raised up on high, the Messiah of the God\nof Jacob, (See the Heb.) and the sweet Psalmist of Israel; The\nspirit of Jehovah spake by me, and his word is in my tongue. The\nGod of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, he that ruleth\nover mankind (see the Heb.) shall be just, ruling in the fear of\nGod: And he shall be as the light of the morning, when the sun\nriseth, even a morning without clouds; as the tender grass\nspringing out of the earth by clear shining after rain.\n\nBut the sons of Belial shall be all of them as thorns thrust away,\nbecause they cannot be taken with hands. But the man that shall\ntouch them must be fenced with iron, and the staff of a spear; and\nthey shall be utterly burned with fire in the same place.\" 2 Sam.\nch. xxiii.\n\nPEBBLE III\n\nLet us, however, follow Mr. Everett in the consideration of those\nprophecies, which he says p. 83, \"are really to be regarded as\nproofs of the (Christian) religion.\"\n\nIt is not necessary for me to say any thing further, in defence of\nthe interpretation of the prophecy in Deut. xviii. 15, contained in\nmy first publication, where I consider it as referring to a\nsuccession of inspired messengers from God to the Israelites;\nbecause Mr. Everett allows, that \"in granting that this interpretation\nis correct, we should only follow the example of the most learned\nand judicious Christian interpreters,\" p. 84.\n\nI will pass therefore to the passage in the Psalm xvi. 10. \"Thou wilt\nnot leave my soul in hell, (i. e. the place of the departed,) nor\nsuffer thy Saints (or thy pious ones[fn25]) to see destruction,\" as I\nhave translated it. Mr. Everett maintains that the word translated\nby me in this place \"destruction,\" sometimes means \"corruption.\"\nGranted, but Mr. Everett will not deny that the original word\nsometimes signifies \"destruction,\" and assuredly therefore I have\nas good a right to translate it my way, as he has to interpret it to\nsignify \"corruption.\"[fn26] I maintain, moreover, that I have a better\nright in this place to translate it \"destruction,\" than he has to render\nit \"corruption;\" if the whole psalm manifestly relates to David, as is\nI think evident from the context, whose body underwent the\nnatural decomposition occasioned by death; which therefore\nnecessitates the translation I have given if the psalm relates to\nDavid which I think is evident.\n\n\"I have set the Lord always before me, because he is at my right\nhand I shall not be moved. Therefore my heart is glad, and my\nglory rejoiceth, my flesh shall also rest in hope: for thou wilt not\nleave my soul in hell, nor suffer thy saints (or thy pious one) to see\ndestruction. Thou wilt show me the path of life, in thy presence is\nfulness of joy, and at thy right hand there are pleasures for ever\nmore.\" Since therefore the psalm evidently relates to David, I do\nnot see how it is a prophecy of Jesus' rising from the dead on the\nthird day after his crucifixion, as it is said to have been applied to\nprove, by Peter in the book of Acts ch. ii.\n\nI would observe also, that the modern German Theological\nscholars, who as Mr. Everett says (p. 247. of his work.) \"are\nsupposed to excell in Critical learning,\" do allow and maintain, by\nthe confession of Mr. Everett himself p. 247 of his work, that this\npassage in the psalms is not a prophecy of Jesus, no more than\nany of the others adduced in the New Testament from the Old, but\nthat it is quoted merely by way of accommodation or allusion.\n\nI presume therefore that Mr. Everett will cease to regard this\npassage as one of \"the prophecies,\" which are really to be\nregarded as proofs of the Christian religion.\n\nThe next passage of the Old Testament, which Mr. Everett relies\non as a prophetical proof of the Christian religion, is the 2nd.\npsalm; \"why did the nations (according to the Heb.) rage, and the\npeoples (ac. to the Heb.) imagine a vain thing. The kings of the\nearth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against\nJehovah, and against his Messiah saving, let us break their bands\nasunder, and cast away their cords from us,\" &c. To the\napplication of this prophecy to Jesus, I objected in my first\npublication, on account of these reasons, 1st. That \"the nations,\"\nas it is in the original, did not assemble to crucify Jesus, as this\nwas done by a few soldiers. To this Mr. Everett replies, p. 90. of\nhis work, that \"the Apostle (Peter in Acts ch. iv. 45,[fn27]) does not\nsay, they assembled to \"crucify him,\" their joint opposition was not\nlimited to this single act, they were gathered together against him.\nAnd it is certainly true, that Jesus was an object of the united\npersecution of the nation of the Jews, by means of their bigotted\npriests and furious multitudes, and of the Romans, by means of\ntheir tributary sovereign, Herod, and their Proconsul Pilate.\" In\nreply to this I would observe, that the words \"nations,\" and\n\"peoples,\" in the original of the passage never signified the Jewish\nnation, but are used in the Hebrew Bible to signify all other nations\nbut the Jews, or what is expressed by the word \"Gentiles.\"\n\nNow it is said in the psalm, that \"the nations and peoples,\"\n(exclusive of the Jews for the reason above-mentioned) should\nrage and that \"the kings of the earth should stand up, and the\nrulers (of the earth,) take counsel against Jehovah, and against\nhis Messiah.\" I do not see, therefore, how this passage could have\nbeen fulfilled by the Romans, who were but one nation, by means\nof their Proconsul Pilate and his soldiers: who (the Romans) were\nso far too from being enraged against Jesus, that it is certain, that\nall the Romans out of Jerusalem, did not even know what was\ndoing against him, and Pilate himself was so far from being\n\"enraged,\" and \"taking counsel,\" against Jesus, that he befriended\nhim as far as he dared, and made great exertions to save his life.\n\nMoreover, in the psalm, these \"nations and peoples, and kings\nand rulers,\" are represented as saving \"let us break their bands in\nsunder, and cast away their cords from us.\" This passage refers to\nthe Messiah and the Jewish nation taken together, whom the Old\nTestament represents as to have \"dominion over all peoples,\nnations and languages,\" and that \"the nation and people that will\nnot serve them shall perish, yea those nations shall be utterly\nwasted.\" Is. lx. [fn28]\n\nTherefore, these refractory nations and kings could not, and\nactually never have said this of Jesus, who was but an individual,\nto whom the expression \"their bands and their cords,\" cannot\napply; and finally, since Mr. Everett maintains that Jesus was\n\"merely a spiritual saviour of the souls of men,\" I do not see how\nhe can consider him as a character pretending to impose \"bands\nand cords,\" upon any body.\n\n2. I had also objected to the application of this prophecy to Jesus,\nbecause \"God has not set Jesus as his king upon the holy hill of\nSion, (as the psalm imports) nor given him the nations for his\ninheritance, nor the uttermost parts of the earth for his\npossession.\" To this Mr. Everett, p. 91, replies in the usual way,\ni.e. after interpreting as much of the psalm, as he thinks he can\nmake accord with the history of Jesus, in a literal sense, he\ninterprets this passage of the Messiah's being enthroned on\nMount Sion, which he cannot make accord with it, in a figurative\none. The reader must judge whether this be fair or reasonable.\n\nThe latter part of the psalm, Mr. Everett contends, was fulfilled by\nthe rapid spread of Christianity, and he quotes, in proof of this,\nsome passages of the Fathers. To this I would reply, that those\npassages of the Fathers are notorious exaggerations, and\nconvicted of falsehood by Middleton in his Free Inquiry.\n\nAnd lastly, I would observe, that even those nations who have\nembraced Christianity, can by no means be called the inheritance\nor subjects of Jesus, since they have since the days of\nConstantine and the Counsel of Nice renounced his doctrines, and\nperverted his religion into \"a fabulous, irrational and blasphemous\nsuperstition,\"[fn29] for as much as all of them, except a handful of\nUnitarian Christians, are worshippers of three Divine Beings\nunited by an ineffable union; and by far the greater part of them\nare adorers of idols, images, and pictures.[fn30] And if I may,\nwithout offence, be allowed to express the sincere opinion of my\nheart upon this subject, I would say, that it is my serious belief,\nthat if Jesus the son of Mary could return into the world, and learn,\nthat his professed followers had placed him between the\nCherubim, at the right hand of the Almighty, worshipping him as\n\"God equal to the Father,\" as, \"God of God, very God of every\nGod:\" and that by far the greater part had also placed Mary his\nmother on the other side of the Deity, worshipping her as \"the\nmother of God!\"[fn31] he would in my opinion renounce and\ndenounce them as impious heathens, and possibly believe that\nthey were possessed with devils.\n\nThe next passage which Mr. Everett quotes as a prophecy of\nJesus, is the 2d verse of the 5th chapter of Micah, \"and thou\nBethlehem Ephratah, it is little to be among the thousands of\nJudah; out of thee shall come forth unto me, him who is to be ruler\nin Israel, whose goings forth have been of old, from the days of\nancient years:\" [according to the Hebrew.] This I interpreted to\nsignify, not that the birth of the Messiah should be in Bethlehem,\nbut the descent of the Messiah should be derived from Bethlehem,\ni.e. from Jesse the father of David; (and that therefore a future\nMessiah who should be derived from this family, would fulfill the\nprophecy;) and this interpretation, I represent as being known and\nacknowledged by Hebrew scholars. \"But the truth is, says Mr.\nEverett p. 94, that the original word, [translated by me \"shall come\nforth,\"] is familiarly used of the birth of a man, as \"Mizraim begat\nPathrusim, and Casluhim out of whom came Philistim,\"\" Gen. x.\n13, 14.  This is a very awkward quotation on the part of Mr.\nEverett, as it says nothing in favour of his views, but directly\nfavours mine: for Philistim is a word in the plural number, and is\nused in the Hebrew Bible, to express \"the Philistines;\" and the\nword translated \"come\"[fn33] is also in the plural number, see\nSimon's Hebrew Bible.  The passage therefore in Genesis x. 13.\n14. imports that the Philistines were derived or descended from\nMizraim.  \"Who the Hebrew scholars are, says Mr. Everett, who\nacknowledge this turn of the passage [in Micah] know not,\" p. 94\nof Mr. Everett's work.  If I were writing in Europe or America, I\nthink that I could point them out; but if my memory does not\ndeceive me, Grotius interprets the passage of the derivation of the\nMessiah from Bethlehem: and Mr. Everett will not deny that the\nmodern Christian Hebrew scholars of Germany, disallow that this\npassage has any reference to Jesus, and affirm that it is quoted in\nthe New Testament, Matthew ii. 5., only by way of allusion or\naccommodation.\n\nI had however, in order to show that this prophecy could not be\ninsisted on by the Christians, said by way of argument, that\nallowing \"that Bethlehem was to be the birth place of the Messiah,\nwhat then? will a man's being born in Bethlehem, be sufficient to\nmake him the Messiah foretold by the Hebrew prophets!\"\n\nThis Mr. Everett seizes hold on in the following Way, p. 95.  \"Now\nif we were willing to be consistent, and cling to our principles\nwherever they carry us, it would almost seem that this concession\nmight decide the controversy.  The Messiah is to be of Bethlehem.\nThis reduces to a little span, the number of those among whom he\ncan be found. Moreover, Bethlehem is now in ruins, to all moral\npurposes its identity is gone.[fn34]   It is the habitation of Turks, of\nArabs, of Christians, and if there be any Jews there, none will\npretend that the divisions of the tribes are preserved among them,\nso that the tribe of David, from whom the Messiah is to arise, is\nknown in Bethlehem, from the rest. Neither can it be argued that\nhereafter when the Jews are restored, Bethlehem will be\nrepeopled with Jews, the family of David be discriminated, and the\nprophecy admit of fulfillment, because Mr. English himself allows it\nto be the sense of prophecy, that the Messiah shall be born before\nthe restoration. It only remains therefore to look back, and to see,\nof all that have appeared in Bethlehem, which has the greatest\nclaim to this character.\"\n\nOn this reasoning I would observe, 1st, that my concession on\nwhich it is founded is merely gratuitous; as the words \"shall come\nforth\" signify merely derivation; 2nd, that Mr. Everett is mistaken in\nsupposing that Bethlehem is now in ruins. It is at present probably\nnearly as large and populous as it ever was. 3d, Mr. Everett is\nmistaken, in supposing that the family of David cannot be traced\namong the Jews. There are at this moment in the world, many\nfamilies allowed by their bretheren to be descended from David.\nShould any of the Jews go to Bethlehem at any time to come, and\nhave a male child born to him in that place, for aught that can be\nknown beforehand, that child may be the Messiah and the\nprophecy be fulfilled in Mr. Everett's sense of it; which I repeat\ncannot be insisted on, as \"come forth\" certainly may signify, and in\nthe case unluckily quoted by Mr. Everett, (Gen. x, 13. 14.)\ncertainly does import, derivation.[fn35]\n\nThe next passage, adduced by Mr. Everett, is the 10th v. of the ix.\nch of Zechariah, \"Rejoice greatly O! daughter of Zion, shout O!\ndaughter of Jerusalem: behold thy king cometh unto thee: he is\njust and saved, lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the\nfoal of an ass.\"\n\nMr. Everett, after allowing that the Hebrew reads \"saved\" or\n\"preserved\" instead of \"having salvation,\" as in the English\nversion, observes, that many ancient versions read as in the\nEnglish Bible. Whether the true reading be mine or his, is not of\nany consequence to the question to which this book relates. I\nmaintain that a man's riding upon an ass into Jerusalem, is not\nsufficient to prove him the Messiah.\n\nI also repeat that the event predicted, is spoken of by the prophet\nas contemporaneous with the restoration of the division, [fn37]\nand of course could not have been fulfilled eighteen hundred\nyears ago.\n\n\"Mr. Everett tries to shove out this objection, by taking for granted,\np. 98 of his work, that the chapter of Zechariah in which this\nprophecy is found, is a series of chronological predictions.  But I\nmust remind Mr. Everett that this pretention is inadmissible. None\nof the predictions of the prophets, except some in Daniel, are\narranged in chronological order; they were delivered by parcels,\nand at intervals, frequently of some years; and these parcels\ngenerally have no connexion with each other. Mr.. Everett's\nreasoning upon the assumption here contradicted, is therefore\ninadmissible.\n\nFinally, the German Biblical Scholars so frequently mentioned,\ndeny that this was a prediction of Jesus, and affirm that it is\nquoted by the Evangelists merely by way of accommodation.\n\nThe next passage adduced is Zechariah xii. 10., \"And I will pour\nupon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem,\nthe spirit of grace and supplications, and they shall look upon [or\ntowards] me[fn38] whom they have blasphemed, [or pierced,] and\nthey shall mourn for him as one mourneth for an only son.\"\n\nThe meaning of this prophecy is obscure. The word translated\n\"pierced\" in the English version, may also in the opinion of Grotius,\nand I add of Rosenmuller too, as quoted by Mr. Everett in the 104.\np. of his book, be best rendered \"blasphemed or reproached.\" It\nmay refer to the time when, according to the Old Testament, the\nhearts of the house of Israel shall be cleansed from sin, and they\nshall turn to God \"with their whole heart and with all their souls,\"\nas predicted by Moses.\n\nI conclude with observing, that this passage, quoted in the New\nTestament; John ch. xix. has long since ceased to be considered\nas a prophecy of Jesus by the German Critics, and is believed by\nthem, to have been adduced in the gospel merely by way of\nallusion. (See Rosenmuller's observations in his notes on the\npassage.)\n\nI am afraid that the reader has found these discussions rather\ntedious, and am therefore happy to be at liberty to proceed to the\nconsideration of the three famous prophecies of Jacob, Isaiah,\nand Daniel.\n\n\"The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a Law-giver from\nbetween his feet for ever; for Shilo shall come, and to him shall\nthe obedience of the peoples be .\"  Gen. xlix. 10. So I maintain the\npassage should be translated.\n\nOn this prediction I observed, (Grounds of Christianity Examined\np.40. as quoted by Mr. Everett.) \"That though this prophecy is\nallowed by the Jews to refer to their Messiah, yet it does not\ndefine, nor limit the time of his coming. For that it is perfectly\nevident to all who will look at the place in the Hebrew Bible, that it\nis pointed to read, not \"the sceptre shall not depart from Judah,\nnor a Lawgiver from between his feet until Shilo come;\" but \"the\nsceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a Lawgiver from between\nhis feet for ever; for Shilo shall come, and to him shall the\ngathering of the peoples be.\" So that the prophecy does not\nintimate that the Messiah should come before the sceptre be\ndeparted from Judah: but that it should not depart for ever, but\nshall be restored when Shilo comes.\"\n\nOn this Mr. Everett remarks, \"now the points, commonly so called,\nhave nothing to do with the division of a sentence into its\nmembers, or with what we call punctuation; but Mr. English\nintended to intimate, that according to the accents, the verse\nshould be divided as he proposes.\" (p. 110, of Mr. Everett's work.)\nIn return for this friendly attempt to set me right, I would beg of Mr.\nEverett to peruse the following extract from the celebrated Alting's\nTreatise on Hebrew punctuation, which he will probably look over\nwith blushing cheeks. \"Punctorum appellatione venit, quicquid in\nHebraea Scriptura occurrit praeter literas. Sunt vero punctorum\ngenera tria; unum eorum quae sonum moderantur; alterum\nillorum, quae tonum regunt, tertium mere criticorum est quae ad\ncrisin masoretharum solummodo pertinent.\"' p, 9. edit. Septima.\n\nI do not think it necessary, to enter with Mr. Everett into the\nintricate dispute about the Hebrew accents, since he represents\nthat they are of no authority in deciding the question between him\nand me, and because I think he will therefore not deny, that\ndisregarding their authority, the passage will bear the rendering I\nhave given it.\n\nI shall therefore proceed to establish the interpretation I have\ngiven of the passage in Genesis, 1st. by endeavouring to show,\nthat Mr. Everett's interpretation would convict the prophecy, of\nfalsehood; and 2dly. by showing that the interpretation I have\ngiven, is confirmed by the express declaration of God himself.\n\nThis prophecy was delivered by Jacob before there was any king\nin Judah. The sceptre did depart from Judah, and with a\nvengeance too, at the dethronement and captivity of Zedekiah,\nand the destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans: consequently,\nif the sceptre was not to depart from Judah till Shilo came, the\nMessiah ought to have appeared before the dethronement of\nZedekiah; as he certainly did not appear before that event, the\nprophecy, according to Mr. Everett's sensible interpretation, would\nbe falsified.\n\n2. The sceptre never has been restored to Judah since the\ndethronement of Zedekiah; because the tribe of Judah, since that\nperiod, have been in subjection to the Babylonians, the Persians,\nthe Syrians, the Romans, and all the world. Mr. Everett maintains\nthat the sceptre of Judah was in the hands of that tribe during the\ntime that it was held by the Romans[fn42] who were of the tribe of\nLevi and the Herods who were Idumaeans. This idea appears to\nme absurd, but I shall not give myself the trouble to oppose it by\nargument, as it can be set aside by the express declaration of\nGod, as reported by Ezekiel, ch. xxi. 26. Speaking of Zedekiah\nand his dethronement, the prophet represented the Deity, as\nsaying, \"thus saith the Lord God, remove the diadem, take off the\ncrown; this shall not be the same: exalt him that is low, and abase\nhim that is high. I will overturn, overturn, overturn it, (i. e. the\ncrown or sceptre of Judah,) and it shall be no more until he comes\nwhose right it is, and I will give it him.\"\n\nHere the Deity expressly declares, that from the dethronement of\nZedekiah; the crown of Judah should be no more till the coming of\nthe Messiah to whom he would give it. The Asmonaeans and the\nHerods cannot therefore be considered as having held it, as Mr.\nEverett supposes.[fn41]\n\nBut this is not all, the original Hebrew of this emphatic declaration\nhas a singular force, the idea it expresses is as follows, \"I will\nmake it (or \"place it,\" the crown of Judah, i. e. the Messiahship) an\noccasion of perversion, of perversion, of perversion, and it shall\nbe-no more till he come whose right it is, and I will give it him.\"\nViewed in this light, who will deny that this declaration has been\nmost strangely fulfilled? The Christians reproach the Jews with\n\"perverse and mad delusion\" in having successively believed a\nhundred: different impostors to have been the Messiah, while the\nJews in their turn say that the Christians have been as mad as\nthemselves, in believing that Jesus of Nazareth was this\npersonage.\n\nI suppose therefore that Mr. Everett, after coolly viewing what I\nhave stated with regard to this prophecy of the Shilo, will be\nsensible that he may as well discharge the unfortunate Rabbies\nhe has seized upon and lugged into court as reluctant witnesses\nof the truth of Christianity, as their further attendance can be no\nlonger necessary: and I would leave him to consider whether the\nliberal appellation of \"dogmatical blunderer,\" which he has\nbestowed upon me, p. 114 of his work, relative to my arguments\nupon this prophecy, may not better apply to another than\nmyself.[fn43]\n\nLet us now proceed to the consideration of the famous prophecy\nof Isaiah, which Mr. Everett styles, p. 144, the \"carinficina\nRabbinorum.\"[fn44]\n\nIn order to be enabled to give a fair interpretation of it, it is first of\nall necessary to give a fair translation of it from the original\nHebrew, which is what has not been done in the English version;\nforasmuch as there are therein not less than thirteen\nmistranslations.\n\nThe following, I believe, will be considered as a just representation\nof the original as it stands in the Hebrew Bible.\n\n\"Behold my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted, and\nextolled, and be very high. As many as were astonished at thee;\nhis visage was so marred more than any other man, and his form\nmore than the sons of man, (or Adam,) so shall he sprinkle many\nnations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him; for that which\nhad not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not\nheard shall they consider.[fn45]\n\n\"Who hath believed what we heard? (or what was reported to us)\nand to whom was the arm of Jehovah revealed? For he grew up\nbefore him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground. He\nhad no form nor comeliness; and when we saw him there was no\nbeauty that we should desire him, He was despised and the\noutcast of men; a man of sorrows and familiar with grief;[fn46] and\nwe hid as it were our faces from him, (or, as one that hid his face\nfrom us,) he was despised and esteemed not. Surely he hath\nborne our griefs and carried (away) our sorrows.[fn47] Yet did we\nesteem him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted. But he was\nwounded through our transgression, he was bruised through our\niniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and\nwith[fn48] his stripes we are healed. (\"healing is to us,\" Hebr.) All\nwe like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his\nown way; and Jehovah hath caused to light (or \"meet\") upon him\nthe iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet\nhe would not open his mouth; he was brought as a lamb to the\nslaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he\nwould not open his mouth. He was taken from prison and from\njudgment, and who would meditate [or consider sufficiently] his\ngeneration? [or who shall declare his generation;] For he was cut\noff out of the land of the living: through the transgression of my\npeople was he smitten: [\"smiting was to him,\" Hebr.] and he\nappointed his grave with the wicked, and with the rich[fn49] in his\ndeaths.[fn50] Although he hath done no violence, neither was any\ndeceit in his mouth, yet it pleased Jehovah to bruise him: he hath\nput him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin,\nhe shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days,[fn51] and the\npleasure of Jehovah shall prosper in his hand. He shall see [the\nfruit] of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his\nknowledge shall my righteous servant make many righteous, for\nhe shall bear [away] their iniquities.[fn52] Therefore will I divide\nhim a portion with the great: and he shall divide the spoil with the\nstrong, because he hath made naked his life unto death; and he\nwas numbered with the transgressors, and he bare the sin of\nmany, and made intercession for the transgressors.\" Is. from the\n13th. v. of the 52d. ch. to the end of the 53d.\n\nIt is an acknowledged principle of sound criticism, that the same\nexpressions in the same author, are to be-understood always, in\nthe same sense, unless the context makes it plainly evident that\nanother sense is intended. Let us, therefore, first of all, examine\nthe chapters of Isaiah preceding the extract, in order to\nunderstand who he means by \"God's servant.\"\n\nIn the 49th. of Isaiah, v 3. it is said, \"Thou art my servant, O Israel,\nin whom I will be glorified.\" In ch. xlviii. 20. \"The Lord hath\nredeemed his servant Jacob.\" In ch. xlv. 4. \"For Jacob my\nservant's sake, and Israel mine elect.\" In ch. xliv, 1. \"Yet hear now,\nO Jacob my servant, and Israel whom I have chosen: fear not O\nJacob, my servant.\" v. 2. \"Remember these O Jacob and Israel,\nfor thou art my servant. I have formed thee, thou art my servant O\nIsrael, thou shalt not be forgotten of me.\" v. 21.\n\n\"Ye are my witnesses saith the Lord, and my servant whom I have\nchosen.\" ch. xliii. 10. See also the whole of ch. xlii. \"Thou Israel art\nmy servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my\nfriend.\" ch. xli. 8.\n\nThere can be no doubt therefore, that by \"my servant,\" mentioned\nin the first part of the prophecy quoted from Isaiah, and by \"my\nrighteous servant,\" in the latter part of it, that \"God's servant\nIsrael\" must be understood to be meant, provided there be nothing\nin the context to make it necessary to resort to some other\ninterpretation. Mr. Everett says that there is something in the\ncontext, which forbids the application of this prophecy to \"God's\nservant Israel.\" Let us then examine the reasons on which this\nassertion is founded.\n\nHe says 1st, p. 136 of his work, that the subject of this prophecy is\nspoken of as \"passive and unresisting,\" and he exclaims, \"The\nJews passive and unresisting! They are the most obstinate and\nunyielding of the tribes of the earth, and have resisted the arm of\npower, and the lapse of time, which have crushed all other nations\ninto oblivion.\"\n\nThe prophecy speaks of their non-resistance to oppression, and\nMr. Everett tells us, to contradict this, that \"they have resisted the\narm of power, and the lapse of time, which have crushed all other\nnations into oblivion.\" This seems to me to be irrelevant.\n\n\"They afflicted and complained not! their complaints have been\nfiercer than their sufferings have been cruel.\" Is this true? Does\nMr. Everett really believe it to be true? Does not all the world know\nit to be false?[fn53]\n\n\"They have done no iniquity? When no iniquity? Not in the days of\nIsaiah their own prophet, who cries, \"Ah! sinful nation, people\nladen with iniquity, seed of evil doers.\" Not in the days of\nJosephus their own historian, who sets forth scenes of depravity\nwhich turn common wickedness into virtue, and declares \"that the\nearth would have swallowed them, if the Romans had not swept\nthem from its face?\" No iniquity in the ages since; throughout the\ncities of the dispersion, where they are proverbially dishonest, and\nprofessedly unfaithful.\" &c.. &c.\n\nNow all this eloquent invective can be set aside so far as it affects\nmy application of this prophecy by this simple remark; that this\nprophecy neither relates to the wicked Jews of the time of Isaiah,\nnor of Josephus, nor the ages since, but refers to \"God's servant\nIsrael\" i. e., not to the rebellious and reprobate of the Jewish\nnation, but to those of the house of Jacob, who have, who do, and\nwho shall adhere to God's law, and obey his commandments; for\nno others of them will God acknowledge as \"his servants.\"[fn54]\n\nI would also observe, that the stress which Mr. Everett lays upon\nthe phrase \"no iniquity,\" shows either great carelessness, or great\nignorance of the idiom of the Hebrew Scriptures; because every\nman, familiar with those writings, knows that this expression is one\nof those called Hebreisms, which must be understood in a\nrestrained sense. In proof of which, and a decisive one too, I\nwould refer him to the prophecy of Balaam, recorded, Num. ch.\nxxii. 21. where Balaam exclaims in his prophetic enthusiasm, \"He\n[i.e. God] hath not beheld iniquity in Jacob, neither hath he seen\nperverseness in Israel.\"\n\nNow I suppose that the 53rd. of Isaiah, is a representation of what\nmay be the reflections of the nations, who have despised and\npersecuted \"God's servant Israel,\" through the influence of the\nprejudices of their mistaken religion, but who had become\nsensible of their error by seeing the tremendous interference of\nGod himself in their behalf, predicted over and over again by the\nprophets as to happen. The natural consequence of this\nconviction in the minds of those nations, would be a revulsion of\nthe feelings to the opposite extreme. They would exaggerate the\nmerits, and extenuate the demerits of \"God's servant.\" They would\nreflect with astonishment and commiseration on their past\nsufferings. \"We considered them,\" they might exclaim, \"as a God-\nabandoned race, and devoted to wretchedness by him for having\ncrucified their king. But instead of being the victims of God's wrath,\nthey were wounded through our cruelty, they were bruised through\nour iniquitous treatment. It is we who have sinned more than they.\nWe having gone astray in our ignorance, being without the\nknowledge of God and his law. How passive and unresisting were\nthey!  They were oppressed, they were afflicted, and complained\nnot: when through false accusations and mistaken cruelty, they\nwere plundered and condemned to die, they went like a lamb to\nthe slaughter, and as a sheep before the shearer is dumb, so they\nopened not their mouth. They were taken from the dungeon to be\nslain; they were wantonly massacred, and every man was their\nfoe; and the cause of the sufferers who condescended to\nexamine? They had done no iniquity to merit this: for their\nadherence to their faith, which we charged upon them as a crime,\nwe now see to be approved of by their God, as an acceptable\ninstance of unexampled perseverance in the cause of truth.\"[fn55]\n\nMr. Everett proceeds, p. 145, \"If any thing needs be added, the\nfollowing observation is important, viz. that there is one passage\nso clearly inapplicable to the Jewish nation, and so totally\nincongruous with the rest of the interpretation, that Mr. English\npasses it over without even the attempt of an explanation. It is\nthis: in a part of the prophecy which he puts into the mouth of the\nGentiles we read, \"for [the Hebrew I must remind Mr. Everett\nreads \"by or through,\"] the transgressions of MY PEOPLE was he\nstricken,\" This Mr. English paraphrases \"for [it should have been\n\"by or through\"] the thoughtless crimes of my people he suffered.\nBut what the Gentiles could mean by \"MY PEOPLE\" he does not\nsay, and this difficulty is fatal to the whole interpretation.\"\"\n\nI will presently show Mr. Everett, that this formidable objection, so\nemphatically announced, is after all a mere man in buckram; and I\nam almost sorry that in doing this, I shall be obliged to expose one\nmore proof of Mr. Everett's having neglected the study of \"the\nbeggarly elements,\" in order to devote himself, without distraction,\nto the understanding of the delectable types and allegories of the\nNew Testament. Mr. Everett certainly is a scholar and a man of\ntalents, but he does not perfectly know, nor will [fn56] understand,\nthe contents of the Old Testament; and the above objection is a\nproof of it.\n\nHe maintains, that the expression \"my people,\" could not be used\nby a Gentile, and that therefore my whole interpretation of the\nprophecy in Isaiah, is fatally affected by his objection.  I request\nMr. Everett to have the goodness to turn to the book of Ruth ch i.\n16., where he will find this Gentile, \"this Moabitish damsel\" saying\nto her mother in-law \"thy people shall be my people.\" Will Mr.\nEverett look a little farther to the 1 Sam. ch. v. 10. in the Hebrew,\n(not in a translation,) where he will find the Gentile Philistines\nsaying, \"They have brought about the ark of the God of Israel to\nslay me and my people?\" (ac. to the Hebr.) again, v. 11. \"Send\naway the ark of the God of Israel, and let it go to his own place,\nthat it slay me not and my people.\" (ac. to the Hebr.)[fn57]\n\nMr. Everett, therefore, may understand from these examples, why\nI passed over this phrase \"without even the attempt of an\nexplanation;\" because, truly, I never dreamed, that this formidable\nobjection, would have been made: or that any man would write,\nupon the Jewish controversy, who did not first inform himself of\nthe contents and phraseology of the Hebrew Bible.\n\nHaving, as I believe, shewn that the 53d. chapter of Isiah can be\nunderstood of \"God's servant Israel,\" I will now attempt to shew\nthe reasons why I think that it cannot relate to Jesus of Nazareth.\n\n1st.  Of the subject of this prophecy it is said v. 9. \"and he\nappointed his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his\ndeaths,\" in the plural. Now of Jesus we read in the gospels the\ndirect contrary: for the gospels represent that his death was with\nthe wicked, and his grave with the rich.[fn58]\n\n2. The use of the word deaths, in the plural, appears to me to\nnecessitate the application of the prophecy to a people, not to an\nindividual. The same is evident distinctly from the Hebrew of v. 8.\nat the end of the verse, in the word \"lamoo.\"\n\n3. The subject of this prophecy is said to have been \"oppressed\",\ni. e. by pecuniary exactions: for that is the radical idea of the\nHebrew word, as is shown and asserted in the lexicons of the\nHebrew language.[fn59]  This is peculiarly true of the Jewish\nnation, but was not true at all with regard to Jesus.\n\nAnd to conclude, this prophecy is quoted repeatedly in the New\nTestament. Now, that none of the quotations in the New\nTestament from the Old can be maintained as prophecies fulfilled\nby Jesus, is the opinion of the learned Christians Michaelis,\nEichorn; Semler, Eckerman, Lessing, &c. as is allowed by Mr.\nEverett: of course the 53d ch. of Isaiah in their opinions cannot be\nadduced as a prophetic proof of Christianity: and Mr. Everett, in\nmaintaining the contrary, has to struggle not only against\nargument, but the strongest Christian authority that can be\nproduced on any question of Biblical Criticism.\n\nMr. Everett, in several passages of his book, has thought proper\nto charge me with errors; but in the course of his discussion of my\ninterpretation of the 53d. of Isaiah, has directly accused me of\nfalsehood and of fraud, p. 148. of his work.\n\nWith regard to many of these errors, the situation and\ncircumstances I am in at present, put it out of my power to defend\nmyself, because I cannot get the books he refers to in order to test\nhis statements;[fn60] but of the latter imputations, the work of Mr.\nEverett itself not only enables me to justify myself, but to fix those\ncharges upon him.\n\nHe says in the 148 page of his work, remarking upon my assertion\nin \"The Grounds of Christianity Examined.\"--\"In a word the literal\napplication of this prophecy [the 53d. of Isaiah] to Jesus is now\ngiven up by the most learned Hebrew scholars, who allow that the\nliteral sense of the original can never be understood of him,\"-\n\"Why does not Mr. English name these Hebrew scholars? Simply\nbecause his assertion is not true.\" Indeed!  Does not Mr. Everett\nhimself say in the 247 p. of his work, that Eichorn in a view of a\nwork of Dr. Ekerman says, that \"the principle of accommodation,\nwhich the better interpreters had already applied to many\nviolations [fn62] in the New Testament, is by this author extended\nto all.\" \"Though this opinion of Dr. Ekerman,\" says Mr. Everett,\nmust be allowed to savour a little of the extravagance of theory,\nEichorn adopts it. As the work alluded to, the \"Theological\nContributions\" has become a classical book with one class of the\nGerman divines, who are thought to excel in critical learning, there\nis no doubt that this doctrine is generally received among them.\nMICHAELIS we all know admits it; and Marsh is the only famous\ncritic of the present day who does not embrace it.\n\nNow the 53d. ch. of Isaiah is quoted in the New Testament,[fn63]\nof course, therefore, according to Mr. Everett's own\nrepresentations of the opinions of these learned critics, they must\ndeny that the prophecy of Isaiah has any reference to Jesus, and\nhold that it is quoted merely by way of accommodation. And if so\nhow has Mr. Everett dared to accuse me of falsehood in\nrepresenting, that \"the literal application of this prophecy to Jesus\nis now given up by the most learned Hebrew scholars, who allow\nthat the literal sense of the original can never be understood of\nhim\"?! There is undoubtedly a falsehood told in this affair, and a\nconscious suppression of truth, but it is not I who tell the first, or\nconceal the latter.\n\nMr. Everett then proceeds.  \"Priestley and Grotius are all he\nclaims, [the reader may see by the above that I might have\nclaimed more,] Priestley was a learned man, but he has no\npretentions as a Hebrew scholar, and though Mr. English quotes\nGrotius, he does it incorrectly.\" He declares that \"Grotius has\napplied it to Jeremiah, and says, that Jesus Christ has nothing to\ndo with it except in a secondary sense, but that the whole of it\nfrom beginning to end refers to Jeremiah.\" \"There are but few to\nwhom I need say\" continues Mr. Everett, \"that the words of Grotius\nin his commentary are, \"These marks have their first fulfillment in\nJeremiah, but a more especial, sublime, and often indeed more\nliteral fulfillment in Christ.\" Mr. Everett's work p. 148. I do not see\nhow this passage of Grotius contradicts my representation of his\nopinion. The passage from Grotius quoted by Mr. Everett\ndeclares, \"that these marks [i. e. the 53d. of Isaiah] have their first\nfulfillment in Jeremiah;\" of course they could not be fulfilled by any\nother except in a secondary sense, as I have asserted. As for the\n\"more especial, sublime, and often indeed more literal fulfillment in\nChrist,\" I have always supposed that this and similar expressions\nin other parts of Grotius' Commentary, were understood, by all\nwho were acquainted with Grotius' history and the times in which\nhe wrote, to be intended for a mere salvo, as a tub thrown out to\nthat great whale the vulgar; to contradict directly whose opinions\nwith regard to the prophecies, was in the time of Grotius very\ndangerous, as he himself, notwithstanding all his precaution and\ntruckling, seriously experienced.[fn64]\n\n\"Also, [Mr. Everett goes on to say,] in adducing the authority of\nPriestley for his interpretation without reference or qualification,\nMr. English gives cause to think, that he did not know, or knowing\nforbore to state, that Priestley pronounces it impossible, in one of\nhis works, to explain this prophecy of any but Jesus Christ. What\nHebrew scholars are to be named with Lowth and MICHAELIS,\nwho both assert the literal application to Christ, Mr. English may\none day learn, that asseverations like these whatever immediate\neffect they produce, will finally stand in the way of his character for\nveracity.\" p.149.\n\nThis has been to me the most irritating passage in Mr. Everett's\nbook, because it is a tissue of impudent ignorance or impudent\nfraud, and as such I will prove it.[fn65]\n\nI have always supposed, that in quoting the opinion of an author\nas authority, it is the fairest way to quote his last avowed opinions.\nNow the work of Priestley's which I refer to as applying the\nprophecy of Isaiah to the Jewish nation, as I do, is entitled\n\"Priestley's Notes on Scripture,\" and was published after arrival in\nAmerica, several years AFTER the work to which Mr. Everett.\nrefers, wherein Priestley, maintained that it was impossible to\nexplain this prophecy of any but Jesus Christ.\" Therefore this fact\n\"gives cause to think, that Mr. Everett did not know, or knowing\nforbore to state (which I believe in my conscience is the truth) this\ncircumstance\" which completely acquits me at least of a\nsuppressio veri.[fn66]\n\n\"What Hebrew scholars are to be named with Lowth and\nMichaelis!\" Several--among whom Eichorn stands pre-eminent.\nMoreover, how has it happened that \"the keen detector of\ndissonances\" has contradicted himself in quoting Michaelis? Here,\nbecause he chooses to cling to the 53d. of Isaiah as favouring his\ncause, he quotes the name of MICHAELIS as asserting \"its literal\napplication to Christ.\" In another place, (p. 247.) where it is\nnecessary to defend the New Testament from the charge of false\napplication of the prophecies of the Old Testament to Jesus, he\nquotes again the great name of MICHAELIS as the patron of the\nsystem of accommodation, which system maintains that the 53d.\nof Isaiah has no application to Christ at all! but is quoted by the\nwriters of the New Testament merely by way of allusion. Mr.\nEverett himself may live to learn, that such double dealing\nattempts to slander his opponent, and impose upon his readers,\n\"whatever immediate effect they may produce, will finally stand in\nthe way of his character for veracity,\" or at least for fairness and\ncandour.\n\nThese are not the only instances in which Mr. Everett has\ncalumniated me, and abused the good nature of his readers. For\nexample--\n\nI had maintained in my first work, that the gospel called of\nMatthew was a forgery, and not a translation from the ancient\nHebrew gospel of Matthew, and had supported my opinion by\nsaying, that learned Christians allowed that \"it had not the air of a\ntranslation.\" This Mr. Everett contradicts as follows: \"But Mr.\nEnglish is aware that MICHAELIS, the highest authority on these\nsubjects, pronounces that it is a translation, and maintains his\nproposition not less from the unanimous testimony of the ancients\nthan from internal evidence.\" p. 472, of Mr. Everett's work.\n\nI beg the reader after reading this to attend carefully to what is\nsaid by Mr. Everett in p. 464. \"Semler's opinion of the origin and\ncomposition of the three first gospels, was the same as that of Le\nClerc, MICHAELIS, Lessing, and Eichorn, and which has been\nillustrated and maintained by professor\" Marsh. This opinion is\nthat they were compiled from documents [not one document or\ngospel, but several] of our Lord's preaching and life, which had\nbeen committed to writing during his life, or immediately after, and\nwhich became after different additions, revisions and translations,\nthe BASIS of our present gospels.\" Here the reader sees that\nwhen it is necessary to oppose my statements, in one place Mr.\nEverett avers that Michaelis maintained that the Greek gospel\naccording to Matthew, was a translation of Matthew's Hebrew; in\nanother place, where it is also necessary to oppose me, he avers\nthat Michaelis believed that the gospel according to Matthew,\nMark, and Luke were compiled compositions, and of course none\nof them were translations from any one work. \"I would, says Mr.\nEverett, answer Mr. English fairly, or not at all.\" If this and the\nother instances quoted be specimens of Mr.  Everett's fairness,\nwhat would be his conduct upon the very impossible supposition\nthat he could be guilty of duplicity?\n\n2. Mr. Everett tells his readers, that the Jewish Rabbies \"are the\nmost contemptible critics that have appeared;\" that \"they are so\nsilly that he is almost ashamed to quote them;\" that they were in\nshort idiots. If so, of what value can their opinions be on\ncontroverted points, which must after all be settled by reason and\nscripture, and not by any bare human authority.[fn67]\nNevertheless Mr. Everett is continually calling upon his reader to\nbelieve his arguments and statements upon the authority of these\nsaid Rabbies. If I were one of his Christian readers, I should\nconsider myself insulted by such a procedure. It is almost\ntantamount to saying, \"'it is true, my arguments are built upon the\nauthority of fools, but yet they may serve to convince you.\"\n\n3. I had accused the writers of the New Testament in my first\npublication, of having blundered in applying passages of the Old\nTestament as prophecies of Jesus Christ. Mr. Everett justifies\nthem by maintaining in the 5th. chapter of his work, that it is true\nthat these quotations cannot be supported as prophecies, but that\nthey are excusable for the following reasons. The writers of the.\nNew Testament were Jews; the Jews of their times believed that\nevery text of Scripture had seventy-two faces, and that each one\nregarded the Messiah, and that the resurrection of the dead was\nalso taught in every chapter of Scripture, though we might not be\nable to perceive it, and that the writers of the New Testament had\nbeen brought up in these silly prejudices, and therefore argued on\nthese principles, i. e. that, notwithstanding their being inspired\nmen and full of the spirit of the Almighty, they continued in this\nrespect as silly as ever.\n\nNow if there be a pious and sincere Christian in the world, and\nshould have this hypothesis laid before him for his acceptance as\nthe best means of defending the writers of the New Testament,\nfrom the charge of fraud or blundering in their application of the\nprophecies, I venture to say that that pious and sincere Christian\nwould, without hesitation, believe the proposer of such an\nhypothesis to be ruining the cause he professed to defend. \"What!\nhe might say, are the quotations in the New Testament from the\nOld, indeed founded on folly, and alledged through stupidity?\nHave the writers of the New Testament, who are allowed to have\nbeen inspired by the Most High God with a perfect knowledge and\nunderstanding of the Christian religion, who are representing\ncontinually that Jesus Christ was foretold by the prophets, and\nthat their own minds were opened by the Holy Ghost to\nunderstand the Scriptures, have they indeed though continually\nquoting the Old Testament, after all never quoted for us even one\nof the predictions on which they say their religion is founded? and\nhave they spent all the time they devoted to writing for the\nsalvation of the souls of men, in fooling with the Old Testament in\nthe manner you aver? 'Tis false! 'Tis monstrous! Either your\nhypothesis is a fable, or Christianity, itself is like the dreams of the\nRabbies.\"[fn68]\n\nWhen I see such principles, and other like principles avowed in\nMr. Everett's work, I feel myself authorized to propose to him the\nfollowing questions, by which I hope he will not consider himself\nas put to the torture.\n\nWhat, Mr. Everett, were your motives for quitting, so abruptly and\nunexpectedly, the most respectable society who had done you the\nhonour to elect you their pastor, believing you to be the only man\nworthy to succeed the learned, eloquent and lamented\nBuckminster? This abandonment of your station took place after\nyou had engaged yourself in the examination of the question\nbetween me, Mr. Cary, and Mr. Channing. If you felt doubts of the\nvalidity of the Christian religion, and were therefore scrupulous\nabout going into your pulpit every Sunday to preach Christianity in\nthe name of the God of Truth, and therefore resigned your post,\nyour conduct thus far does you honour and not shame. But if, after\nthis, you have allowed yourself to be overcome by the solicitations\nof interested friends (who might have been anxious that you\nshould publish something, that would allay the suspicions and\nsilence the rumours your conduct had occasioned) to give to the\nworld your very singular book, you have acted a part unjust\ntowards me, and injurious to yourself, for you now see the\nconsequence. You are taken in the snare you had laid for me, and\nyour violent dealing has come down on your own head.\n\nI come now to the examination of the celebrated prophecy of the\nseventy weeks. This prophecy has always run [fn69] the crux\nCriticorum. It is unquestionably a very ambiguous one, since Mr.\nEverett himself informs us in a note, p. 167 of his work, that\n\"Calovius whose day has passed a century ago, in a dissertation\nupon the mysteries of the seventy weeks, numbers twenty-five\ndifferent Christian hypotheses,\" to which may be added at least\ntwo more, those of Michaelis and Blayney.\n\nIf so, I would ask what stress a reasonable man can lay upon a\nsimple [fn70] prophecy which is allowedly so ambiguous, as to\nhave led Christians, sincerely disposed to make a prophecy of\nJesus Christ out of this passage, to interpret it at least twenty-\nseven different ways?\n\nThere appears to me to be a mistranslation at the root of the\nprophecy, which vitiates and confounds all the systems of\ninterpretation; applied to it that I know of. I conceive that the\nprophecy should be translated thus.\n\n\"Seventy times seven [fn71] are determined upon thy people, and\nupon thy holy city, to finish transgression and to make an end of\nsins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in\neverlasting righteoussness, and to seal [up] the vision and\nprophecy, and to anoint the most holy things.\"\n\n\"Know therefore, and understand that from the going forth of the\ncommandment to restore, and to build Jerusalem, unto the\nanointed Prince, shall be seven weeks; and [in] [fn72] threescore\nand two weeks the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in\ntroublous times.\" [fn73]\n\n\"And after threescore and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut\noff, and have no successor; and the people of the Prince that shall\ncome, shall destroy the city, and the sanctuary: and the end\nthereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end desolations are\ndetermined.\"\n\n\"And he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week, and in\nthe midst of the [or, a] week he shall cause the sacrifice and the\noblation to cease; and for the overspreading of abominations he\nshall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that\ndetermined be poured upon the desolate.\" Dan., ch. ix. 24, 27.\n\nWhatever may be the true sigification of this prophecy, it is not, I\nconceive, favourable to the purpose to which Mr. Everett applies\nit, for the following reasons.  1. That in supposing what is\ncommonly translated \"seventy week's,\" to signify four hundred and\nninety years, the prophecy would be falsified; for certainly the\nexpiration of this period did not \"finish transgression,\" nor \"make\nan end of sins,\" nor \"make reconciliation for iniquity,\" nor \"bring in\neverlasting righteous,\" nor \"anoint the most holy things,\" i.e. as I\nunderstand it, the new and eternal temple and its altar, predicted\nby Ezekiel in the last chapters of his prophecies. On the contrary,\nthe Jews became more wicked than ever, and the temple then\nstanding was destroyed to its foundations.\n\n2. It follows from what is allowed by Mr. Everett himself, p. 159 of\nhis work, that from the going forth of the word to restore and build\nJerusalem, to the birth of Jesus Christ, was not seven weeks and\nsixty and two weeks, i. e. sixty-nine weeks, but EIGHTY-FOUR\nweeks, for he says there, that the duration of the second temple\nwas \"NINETY-FOUR weeks,\" i. e. six hundred and fifty-nine years.\nNow if my memory does not deceive me, Jerusalem was taken\nand the temple destroyed by Titus about the year seventy after the\nbirth of Christ, which is equal to the prophetic weeks; therefore\ntake ten weeks from the ninety-four weeks, (the time Mr. Everett\nstates to have elapsed from the building of the second temple, to\nits destruction) and there remains EIGHTY-FOUR weeks, and not\nSIXTY-NINE. Which circumstance, appears to me to vitiate\nentirely the interpretation of Mr. Everett, who supposes the\nannointed one,\" spoken of as to be cut off after the sixty-nine\nweeks, to be Jesus Christ.\n\nAs to who the \"annointed ones\" were, the first I think entirely refers\nto Cyrus, and the last who was to be \"cut off\" and have no\nsuccessor, may either mean the pious and good Onias mentioned\nin the book of Maccabees, who was the last I think of the\nlegitimate Jewish High Priests, [for after his time History testifies\nthat several, who had not the right of primogeniture as\ndescendants of Aaron, obtained the priesthood by force, by\nintrigue, and by bribery;] or the last Jewish High Priest, Joshua\n[fn74] who perished during the siege of Jerusalem, according to\nJosephus. At any rate the anointed one who was to be cut off,\ncannot mean Jesus of Nazareth; because this anointed one was\nto be cut off in that same week of seven years, in which the city\nwas destroyed, whereas Jesus was crucified forty years before\nthat event; a circumstance I insist which excludes any application\nof this prophecy to Jesus.\n\nThe claims set up for Jesus of Nazareth are moreover evidently\nrejected by Daniel's prophecy, even according to Mr. Everett's\ninterpretation, forasmuch as he did not appear at the expiration of\nsixty-nine weeks, but of EIGHTY-FOUR.\n\nAnd to conclude this discussion, I would observe that Daniel, ch.\niii, in his account of the image [seen in a vision by\nNebuchadnezzar] whose head was of gold, breast and arms of\nsilver, belly of brass, legs of iron, and feet and toes of iron and\nclay, is predicting the empires which have most influenced the fate\nof the Hebrew nation; i. e. the Babylonian, Persian, Grecian, and\nRoman, the last represented by \"the iron legs,\" which did indeed\nbestride the world; these \"iron legs\" are represented as\nterminating in feet and toes part of iron and part of clay, which\nhave no natural coherence; i. e. the Roman empire shall be\ndivided into several kingdoms, partly strong and partly weak: a\nprophecy remarkably fulfilled in the history and condition of the\nkingdoms of Europe. The prophet goes on to say in ch. ii, that in\nthe latter days of those kings or kingdoms, [which are yet\nsubsisting] \"the God of Heaven, would set up a kingdom which\nshould never be destroyed,\" that of the Messiah. Of course the\nkingdom of the Messiah was not to be--not only not till after the\ndestruction of the Roman empire--but not till the latter days of the\nkingdoms which grew up out of the ruins; whereas Jesus Christ\nwas born in the time of Augustus, i. e. when the Roman empire\nitself was in the height of its splendour and vigour. Mr. Everett in\np. 201, endeavours to escape the strong gripe of the prophet\nDaniel, by maintaining that these strong and weak parts, into\nwhich the Roman empire was to be divided, meant that it should\nbe divided into \"strong and weak institutions.\"  Now to turn this\nsensible interpretation head over heels, [fn75] it appears to me to\nbe only necessary to observe, that these strong and weak parts\ninto which the Roman empire was to be divided, were, according\nto the prophet, ch. ii. 4.3. of Daniel, to \"mingle themselves with the\nseed of men,\" i. e. make intermarriages; which, it appears to me to\nbe a thing that \"strong and weak institutions\" cannot do. This,\nhowever has remarkably, been the case among the royal families\nof Europe, who intermarry too with the avowed design of\ncementing union and promoting peace and harmony.\nNevertheless, agreeable to the prophet's prediction, they have not\n\"cleaved together, but on the contrary have been almost\nconstantly at war with each other.\n\n PEBBLE IV.\n\n\"The children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and\nwithout a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image,\nand without an ephod, and without teraphim; afterwards shall the\nchildren of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God, and David\ntheir king, and shall fear the Lord and his goodness in the latter\ndays.\" Hos. iii, 4, 5.\n\n\"I will set up one shepherd over them, even my servant David, he\nshall feed [or govern] them, and he shall be their shepherd: and I\nthe Lord will be their God, and my servant David, a prince among\nthem.\" Ezech, ch. xxxiv. 23.\n\n\"David my servant shall be king over them, and there shall be one\nshepherd,\"------\" my servant David shall be their Prince for ever.\"\nEzek. ch, xxxvii. 24, 25.\n\n\"They shall serve Jehovah their God, and David their king, whom I\nwill raise up unto [or for] them.\" Jer. xxx. 9.\n\n\"Incline your ear and come unto me: hear and your soul shall live;\nand I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure\nmercies of David. Behold I have given him for a witness, to the\npeoples, a leader and commander to the peoples.\" Is. Iv. 3, 4.\n\nFrom such passages I inferred, in my first publication, that the\nname of the true Messiah, was to be DAVID, and not Jesus. To\navoid the force of these passages Mr. Everett has recourse to\nallegory and analogy.\n\nJesus is prophecied of in these passages, says he, by the name\nof DAVID, because \"there was an analogy between these two\ndistinguished servants of God. David, from a low and humble\nestate, was raised to be the founder of the temporal glories of his\nkingdom; and Christ, not less humble in his origin, was the author\nof the spiritual distinction of Israel; David was the most illustrious\npolitical and Christ the most distinguished moral instrument of the\nLord. David was commanded to entrust to his successor the\nelection of the famous temple, which was the centre of the Jewish\nworship; and Christ has founded through the agency of his\napostles that CHURCH by which his religion has been preserved,\nand diffused in the world.\"\n\n\"To laugh, were want of dignity, or grace, \"And to be grave\nexceeds all power of face.\"\n\nI assure Mr. Everett, that the days of Type and FIGURE are gone\nby, and have been succeeded among Biblical Critics by a stricter\nstyle of reasoning, and are now considered as \"pious\nwhims.\"[fn76]\n\nIn the present advanced state of sacred Criticism even the\nbeautiful allegory in Paul's Epistle to the Gal. ch. iv. which makes\nHagar, Abraham's maid, nothing less than \"Mount Sinai in Arabia;\"\nand Sarah, Abraham's wife, to be the \"Jerusalem, that is above\nthe mother of us all!\" has come to be regarded as \"rather queer.\"\n\nI had also objected that the coming of the true Messiah, was\naccording to the Old Testament, to be preceded by the\nappearance of Elijah the prophet on earth; and that he had not\nappeared before the era of Jesus, nor ever since.\n\nIn answer to this, Mr. Everett endeavours to show 173. & seq.,\nthat a man named John the Baptist--a righteous person,--whose\nraiment was of camels hair,--and whose meat was locusts and\nwild honey, who lived in the age of Jesus of Nazareth, was Elijah,\nand had a right to be so considered--by a figure.\n\nTo this I answer, that the prophecy of Malachi does not say\n\"Behold I will send you one like Elijah, or \"an Elijah,\"---but it says\nexplicitly, and expressly, \"Behold, I will send you Elijah the\nProphet, before the coming of the great and terrible day of the\nLord; and he shall turn the hearts of the fathers to the children,\nand the hearts of the children to their fathers.\" Mal. iv. 5,6.\n\nNow who is \"Elijah the Prophet?\" undoubtedly the great prophet of\nIsrael, who called down fire from heaven--who raised the dead to\nlife--and who ascended alive to heaven in a chariot of fire; God by\nsuch a translation sufficiently intimating that he had in reserve for\nhim, some extraordinary commission. Moreover the coming of this\nElijah the prophet, was to be followed by. \"the great and terrible\nday of Jehovah,\" by which name the prophets call the personal\ndescent of Jehovah upon the earth, to take vengeance on the\nwicked, and to punish the oppressors and persecutors of his\npeople.[fn77] Was the appearing of John the Baptist followed by\nthis event? or has it yet occurred, though that man lived eighteen\nhundred years ago? His appearance, instead of being followed by\nthe interposition of God to avenge Israel of its enemies, was on\nthe contrary, followed by giving Israel into the hand of its enemies,\nwho, \"for the overspreading of abominations,\" made Jerusalem a\ndesolation, and delivered over its sinful population to the chains of\nslavery, and the bands of Death.\n\nElijah the Prophet is to turn the hearts of the fathers to the\nchildren, and the hearts of the children to the fathers.\"  Did John\nthe Baptist do this? On the contrary, the morals of his countrymen,\nin His age, instead of growing from bad to better, went on from\nbad to worse, till there was no remedy, and the Sword of God did\nhis work.\n\nIndeed, and indeed Mr. Everett you are wrong; And your\nsuperannuated allies, TYPE and FIGURE, whom I disdain to\ncombat, cannot aid you to defend what is indefensible.\n\n PEBBLE V.\n\nThe Law of the Pentateuch, is pronounced by the Old Testament\nto be intended for a permanent and eternal Code for the Jewish\nnation. Mr. Everett denies this. Let us see nevertheless, if it\ncannot be proved.\n\nThe promulgation of the ordinance imposing circumcision on the\ndescendants of Abraham, is in these words. \"And God said unto\nAbraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou and thy\nseed after thee in their generations. This is my covenant which ye\nshall keep, between me and you, and thy seed after thee; Every\nman child among you shall be circumcised.--He that is born in thy\nhouse, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be\ncircumcised; and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an\neverlasting covenant. And the uncircumcised man child whose\nflesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off\nfrom his people; he hath broken my covenant.\" Gen. ch. xvii. 9.--\n14.\n\nThe ordinance of the Passover is also declared to be everlasting,\n\"and this day [i. e. the feast of the Passover] shall be unto you for\na memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast unto the Lord throughout\nyour generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance forever.\"\nEx.ch.xii. 14. see also v. 15.--in v. 17. it is said \"ye shall observe\nthis day in your generations by an ordinance for ever.\"\n\nThe ordinance of the day of atonement, is declared to be a\nperpetual institution, \"It shall be a statute for ever unto you,\" Lev.\nch. xvi. 29. \"It shall be a Sabbath of rest unto you, and ye shall\nafflict your souls, by a statute for ever.\" v. 31. \"and this shall be an\neverlasting statute unto you.\" v. 34.\n\nThe feast of offering the first fruits of the year, is declared Lev. ch.\nxxiii. 14. \"to be a statute for ever throughout your generations, in\nall your dwellings.\"\n\nThe feast of the Pentecost, is also declared in the same ch. of\nLev. 21. to \"be a statute for ever, in all your dwellings throughout\nyour generations.\" See also v. 41.\n\nThe ordinance of the Sabbath is pronounced a perpetual\ninstitution, \"Verily my sabbath ye shall keep: for it is a sign\nbetween me and you, throughout your generations--Wherefore the\nchildren of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath\nthroughout their generations for a perpetual covenant: It is a sign\nbetween me and the children of Israel for ever.\"  Ex. xxxi. 13--17.\n\nAs it is clearly evident from such passages as the above, that the\nlaw of Moses was intended to be a perpetual rule for the Israelites\n\"throughout all their generations,\" as long as they should exist, Mr.\nEverett, in order to get rid of their force, has thought proper to\nannihilate the Jewish nation with a stroke of his pen. He maintains\np. 350. of his work, that no such nation exists as the Jewish\nnation! This unexpected stroke was to me a confounding one--not\non account of its force--but on account of its amazing effrontery.\n\nThe Jews not a nation! ask the histories of mankind; ask all writers\nwho give an account of the different nations and peoples into\nwhich the race of Adam is divided! and Mr. Everett will find that\nthey all consider the Jews as \"a distinct and peculiar people.\"\n\"But, says Mr. Everett, p. 350, if they are a nation, we can be told\nwhereabouts they dwell, and what cities they inhabit.\"\nUndoubtedly Mr. Everett can be told all this if he will take the\ntrouble to ask their chiefs; and if he does he will be surprised to\nlearn that the Jews, in cities and countries that can be named and\npointed out, amount probably to ten millions of people, governed\nby their own law, so far as relates to their religion and intercourse\nwith each other, and yet Mr. Everett maintains that the Jewish\nnation does not exist. [fn79]\n\nBut I have a solemn answer from immortal lips to give to Mr.\nEverett's assertion, which he may possibly, if he be a religious\nman, hearken to, and tremble.\n\n\"Thus saith Jehovah, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and\nthe ordinances of the moon and the stars for a light by night;\nwhich divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; JEHOVAH\nOF HOSTS is his name; if those ordinances depart from before\nme saith Jehovah, then the seed of Israel shall cease being A\nNATION before me FOR EVER.\n\nThus saith Jehovah, if heaven above can be measured, and the\nfoundations of the earth searched out beneath, I also will cast off\nall the seed of Israel, for all that they have done saith Jehovah.\"\nJer. ch. xxxi. 35, 36, 37.\n\nBut, says Mr. Everett, p. 352, \"above all, the Jews have no\nnational existence in respect of their religion; which is really the\nprincipal point to be urged. The tribe of Levi which was separated\nto the service of the temple, and the family of Aaron, exonerated\n[fn80] to the priesthood, and ordained to be \"a perpetual duration\"\nhave both been long extinct, At least have long since ceased to be\ntraced.\"\n\nThis is incorrect. The tribe of Levi is not extinct, neither has the\nfamily of Aaron ceased to be traced. Hundreds, perhaps\nthousands of Jews at present existing, are recognized by their\nbrethren as of the tribe of Levi, and the descendants of Aaron to\nthis day have the privilege of blessing the people in the\nSynagogues on solemn days, in a peculiar form which no other\nJews are allowed to employ.\n\nThis marvellous fact, that the descendants of David and Aaron\nshould yet be discriminated amidst the general confusion of the\ntribes, is an illustrious verification of the following promise of Him\nwhose word never fails, which I now oppose to the last rash\nassertion of his creature who has denied it.\n\n\"Thus saith Jehovah, David shall never want a man to sit upon the\nthrone of the house of Israel, neither shall the priests the Levites\nwant a man before me [fn81] to offer burnt offerings, and to kindle\nmeat offerings, and to do sacrifice continually.  Thus saith\nJehovah: if ye can break my covenant of the day, and my\ncovenant of the night, and that there should not be day and night\nin their season; then may also my covenant be broken with David\nmy servant, that he should not have a son to reign upon his\nthrone, and with the Levites the priests my ministers. As the host\nof heaven cannot be numbered neither the sand of the sea\nmeasured, so will I multiply the seed of David my servant, and the\nLevites the priests that minister unto me.\" \"Considerest thou. not\nwhat this people have spoken, saying, the two families which\nJehovah hath chosen, he hath even cast them off? Thus have\nthey despised my people that they should be no more A NATION\nbefore them. Thus saith Jehovah, If my covenant be not with day\nand night, and I have appointed, the ordinances of heaven and\nearth; then will I cast away the seed of Jacob, and David my\nservant, so that I will not take any of his seed to be rulers over the\nseed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, FOR I WILL CAUSE THEIR\nCAPTIVITY TO RETURN AND HAVE MERCY UPON THEM.\" Jer.\nxxxiii. 17--26.\n\nI presume that the CHRISTIAN CLERGYMAN who has\ncontradicted his BIBLE and his GOD, is ready to exclaim like\nhumbled Job; \"I have uttered what I understood not; things too\nwonderful for me which I knew not; wherefore I abhor myself, and\nrepent in dust and ashes.\" Job ch. xlii. See Appendix. H.\n\nShall I proceed to the consideration of some little arguments of Mr.\nEverett against the intended perpetuity of the Mosaic law derived\nfrom some expressions in the Psalms and the Prophets? Is it\npossible that Mr. Everett the scholar and the clergyman, is\nignorant, that according to the idiom of the Hebrew language all\nsuch passages are merely expressive that God lays no stress\nupon sacrifice, and burnt offering, if unsanctified by righteousness\nand good works: Mr. Everett has blindly recommended a passage\nto my serious attention, p. 358, which ought to have made him\nsensible of this.\n\n\"Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, the God of Israel, put your burnt\nofferings to your sacrifices, and eat the flesh thereof. For I spake\nnot unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day I brought\nthem out of Egypt concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. But\nthis thing commanded I them saying, obey my voice.\" Jer. ch. vii.\n23, 24. What! might a critic of the cast of Mr. Everett exclaim, did\nnot God indeed command the children of Israel, when he brought\nthem out of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices? are\nnot the books of Leviticus and Numbers filled with regulations\nconcerning them? Very true, might a rational scholar reply to him,\nbut this and several other expressions in the Psalms and Isaiah\nare Hebraeisms, i. e. peculiar idioms of the language, expressing\ncomparison not rejection; this passage in Jeremiah implying that\nwhen God brought the children of Israel out of Egypt, in giving his\nlaw to them he laid no stress upon burnt offerings and sacrifices,\nin comparison with moral duties.\n\nFinally, I would ask Mr. Everett, whether he believes it was the\nintention of David, of Isaiah, and Jeremiah, to declare to the Jews\nof their times that God would no more accept of burnt offerings\nand sacrifices! and that the ceremonial law was ipso facto\nabolished; because, if such passages do signify the abolishment\nof the Mosaic law, it must be considered as having been a dead\nletter ever since David, Isaiah., and Jeremiah uttered these\nexpressions.\n\nBut, says Mr. Everett, p. 357, \"the positive declaration of God,\nputs the matter [the repeal of the Mosaic law] beyond a doubt.\"\n\n\"Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new\ncovenant with the house of Israel; and with the house of Judah,\nnot according to the covenant that I made with their fathers, in the\nday that I took them by the hand, to lead them out of the land of\nEgypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was a husband\nunto them, saith the Lord: but this shall be my covenant that I will\nmake with the house of Israel, after those days, I will put my law in\ntheir inward parts, and write it in their hearts, and I will be their\nGod, and they shall be my people.\" Jer. xxxi. 31, &c.\n\nI would observe first, that Mr. Everett in applying this passage to\nthe purpose for which he has adduced it, has against him the\nopinions of all those Christian critics whom he allows to excel in\ncritical learning; viz. Michaelis, Ekerman, Lessing, Eichorn, &c.\nFor this passage is quoted to the same purpose in the Epistle to\nthe Hebrews, ch. viii. 8. and all the critics above mentioned\nmaintain, as Mr. Everett allows, that none of the passages of the\nOld Testament quoted in the New, can be supported as\nprophecies of the things to which they are applied, but hold that\nthey were quoted merely by way of accommodation or allusion.\n\n2.  I would observe, that this passage is one out of several more in\nthe prophets, which represent that after the general restoration of\nIsrael to their country, God will put a new spirit in them, and cause\nthem to obey his voice, (which was not done at the giving of the\nlaw, the Israelites being left to obey it or not; after being given to\nunderstand what should be the rewards of obedience and the\ncurses of disobedience,)' this very chapter of Jeremiah, from\nwhich this quotation is taken, expressly representing, that this new\ncovenant is to be made AFTER the Israelites are restored to their\nown land: which completely excludes the idea that this new\ncovenant can relate to a new religion, fabricated seventeen\nhundred years ago; and renders the solemnity with which Mr.\nEverett has introduced it, somewhat ridiculous.\n\nThis new covenant also, is not to put the old law out of\nremembrance, but is to \"write it on their hearts.\"  \"Behold, I will\ngather them out of all countries whither I have driven them in mine\nanger, and in my fury, and in great wrath; and I will bring them\nagain into this place, and I will cause them to dwell safely: and\nthey shall be my people, and I will be their God: and I will give\nthem one heart, and one way, that they may fear me for ever, for\nthe good of them and their children after them. And I will make an\neverlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from\nthem, to do them good; but I will put my fear into their hearts, that\nthey shall not depart from me. Yea, I will rejoice over them to do\nthem good, and I will plant them in this land with my whole heart\nand with my whole soul.\" Jer. xxxii. 37--41. [fn82]\n\nIn order to manifest that the prophecy of the new covenant,\nquoted from Jeremiah by Mr. Everett, had no reference to the\npromulgation of the new [fn83] law, I had said in my first\npublication, \"that though the prophet speaks of a \"new covenant\"\nhe says nothing of a new law. On which Mr. Everett labours\ngreatly to prove, See p. 357 &c. of his book, that the expression\n\"making a new covenant,\" must signify making a new law, and\ncannot signify reimposition of the old.\n\nThere is a history in the Bible which convicts this opinion of\nmistake, which I propose in my turn to Mr. Everett's serious\nattention.\n\n\"These are the words of the covenant, which the Lord commanded\nMoses to make with the children of Israel in the land of Moab,\nbeside the covenant which he made with them in Horeb. And\nMoses called unto all Israel, and said unto them; ye stand this day\nall of you before the Lord your God, your captains of your tribes,\nyour elders, and your officers, with all the men of Israel; your little\nones, your wives, and the stranger that is in thy camp, from the\nhewer of thy wood to the drawer of thy water; that thou shouldest\nenter into covenant with the Lord thy God, &c. Deut. ch. xxix.\n\nAnd what was the covenant? why, as the reader may find by\nperusing the rest of this piece of history in the Pentateuch, it was\nthe reimposition of the Law of Moses upon the new generation of\nIsraelites, who were children when their fathers came out of\nEgypt. So that Mr. Everett must see, that God's making a new\ncovenant, can be accompanied with a reimposition of the law,\nsince in the instance considered, he has actually done it once\nbefore.\n\nI have, however, another passage in reserve, which must compel\nMr. Everett to resign his unfounded opinions on this subject.\n\nMoses, the giver of the law, after predicting most exactly what\nshould befall the Jewish nation for disobedience to it, in the 28th\nchapter of Deuteronomy, proceeds in the 30th ch. to inform them,\nthat the time would come, when \"the Lord their God will turn their\ncaptivity and have compassion upon them, and will return and\ngather them from all the nations whither the Lord their God hath\nscattered them.\"\n\n\"If thy dispersion,[fn84] (says the lawgiver) shall be unto the\nutmost parts of heaven, from thence will the Lord thy God gather\nthee, and from thence will he fetch thee. And the Lord thy God will\nbring thee unto the land which thy fathers possessed, and thou\nshalt possess it; and he will do thee good and multiply thee above\nthy fathers, and the Lord thy God will circumcise thy heart, and the\nheart of thy seed, to love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and\nwith all thy soul, that thou mayest live. And the Lord thy God will\nput all these curses upon thine enemies, and on them that hate\nthee, and which persecuted thee. And thou shall return, and obey\nthe voice of the Lord,  AND DO ALL HIS COMMANDMENTS\nWHICH I COMMANDED ON THAT DAY.\"  Deut. ch. XXX. [fn85]\n\nIn accordance with this express prediction of Moses, that when\nthe Israelites should be gathered out of all countries into their own\nland, God would give them a heart and disposition to love the Lord\ntheir God, and to do all his commandments which Moses was then\ndelivering to them are the prophecies of Ezekiel; who in his last\nchapters, after giving a prophecy of the general return of the\ndescendants of Jacob to their own land, proceeds to predict the\ndivision of the country, between the Mediterranean and the\nEuphrates, among the restored tribes; and minutely describes the\nplan, parts, offices, and ceremonies, of a new and eternal temple\nto be raised upon the ancient site of that of Solomon, that is to be\nconsecrated by the re-establishment of the magnificent ritual of\nMoses, with augmented splendour.\n\nThat the prophecy of Moses, and those of Ezekiel, referred to,\nhave never yet been fulfilled, is undeniable; and that they will be\nfulfilled, will not be doubted by a Christian; and can hardly be\ndisbelieved by a Sceptic, who will take the trouble to compare the\nhistory of \"the eternal people,\"[fn86] with the predictions\nconcerning it which have been fulfilled to the letter.\n\nMr. Everett, in the 449 page of his work, speaks rather\ncontemptuously of the law of Moses. It is somewhat unusual to\nsee a descendant of savage wanderers of the woods, who painted\nthemselves blue in order to look handsome,[fn87] and whose\nposterity, and among them Mr. Everett himself, might so far as\nreligion and morals is concerned, but for the instruction originally\nderived from the law of Moses, be still in the same respectable\nstate, speaking lightly of a Book to which every nation on the\nGlobe, who have any rational ideas of God or futurity, are\nabsolutely indebted for that invaluable knowledge. The Jewish,\nChristian, and Mohammedan religions, by which so many of our\nunfortunate race have been brought to a knowledge of God, and\nmade candidates for an eternity of bliss, are all founded on, and\nderived from the Pentateuch. If that Book had never existed, those\nreligions could not have existed. All that part of mankind who have\nany claims to reason in their Religion, are therefore indebted to\nthis Jew Book for the benefit.\n\nNor is this all the wonder.  The sublime and fundamental Doctrine\nof the Pentateuch--One God--Eternal and Supreme---the Almighty\nCreator and tremendous Avenger--can be traced up to Abraham,\nthat wandering shepherd who at the command of God left his\ncountry and his father's house, to go to a foreign land., where he\nlived and died a stranger and a pilgrim.\n\nWhat ideas should we entertain of a man whose tent was\nfrequented by angels, and with whom the Supreme \"conversed\nface to face, as a man talketh with his friend!\" of a man who lived\nand died a shepherd, yet to whom it was predicted four thousand\nyears ago, by Him whose word never fails that \"his name should\nbe great, that it should be a blessing, and that in his seed should\nall the nations of the earth be blessed.\" Sceptic! has not this\nprophecy been fulfilled?  Is not the name of Abraham a theme of\nblessing to the Jew--the Christian--the Magian--and the\nMusselman?  Is not his name pronounced with reverence\nthroughout the four continents of the Globe. Has not the earth\nbeen blessed in his seed?  Is there a nation or people upon it, who\nhave any rational ideas of God or futurity, who have not derived\nthem from Moses, Jesus, or Mohammed? Are we not indebted to\nthese descendants of this wonderful man,[fn89] for the\nconsolations which support the soul under the trials of life, and for\nthe faith and hope that smooth the bed of death? assuredly--\nassuredly. The events of past ages have verified the divine origin\nof the prediction, and ages to come will still farther confirm it.\n\nMr. Everett objects to the law of Moses, its multiplied forms and\nceremonies; but these were mostly not obligatory upon the whole\nnation, but upon one tribe set apart to this duty, and who had\nnothing else to do.[fn90]\n\nThe influence of these rights [fn91] and ceremonies--and no\nreligion can perpetually exist without them, for after all the [fn92]\nman is the slave of his senses, and powerfully affected by the\nimpressions made upon them--cannot be doubted by one who\nattentively considers their amazing magnificence.\n\nA temple blazing with the most precious productions of the\nmine,[fn93] and inaccessible to all but the consecrated\ndescendants of one man, standing at the extremity of an immense\narea covered with variegated marble, and surrounded by\nmagnificent corridors and porticos; a gorgeous host of nearly forty\nthousand priests,[fn94]: to minister at the ever smoking altar, and\nto nourish the eternal fire; the golden ewer containing the\nhallowed blood of atonement, and the censer streaming [fn95]\nclouds of fragrance, in the hands of the trembling descendant of\nAaron approaching the inner sanctuary of the INVISIBLE AND\nALMIGHTY; three hundred sons of song, accompanied with\npsaltery and cymbal, and \"the harp with a solemn sound,\"\nresounding the attributes of HIM WHO IS, AND EVER SHALL\nBE;[fn96] and hundreds of thousands of worshippers prostrating\ntheir foreheads on the pavement in awe and extacy, as the temple\nshines forth with the Shechinah, streaming its rainbow glories into\nthe heart of heaven, and covering the earth with its effulgence,\nplainly showing that GOD IS THERE! This, all this Mr. Everett\npronounces, \"all calculated to occupy the attention of a simple and\nunfeeling [fn97] people.\" p. 344.[fn98] There is, not however, a\nphilosopher on earth that would [fn99] walk barefoot over its whole\ncircumference to witness such a sight.\n\nWith this terminates my reply to Mr. Everett. I leave it to his\nconsideration, whether he has fulfilled the magnificent promises\nheld out to the public in the splendid table of contents prefixed to\nhis book, from which it should seem as if I were actually crushed\ninto the dust; and I leave it to the consideration of my abused and\ndeluded countrymen, whether the heavy artillery of the law and\nthe prophets, which I have wheeled but from the Old Testament,\nhas not fairly blown the old board fences behind which a crazy\nsuperstition is ensconced, and which Mr. Everett has painted up to\nlook like real fortifications, and mounted with quaker guns, to\nsplinters and fragments.\n\n THE SLING.\n\nWHAT was the real history and character of Jesus Christ?\n\nMr. Everett had a right to consider my expressions, relative to this\nsubject contained in my first work, as \"far from being explicit;\" for\nin fact I hardly knew what to think of the unparalelled son of Mary.\nThat he was a pious and blameless man, I conceived that no man\nof good heart could doubt, while the supposition that he claimed to\nbe the Messiah, I believed and still believe to be incompatible with\nsuch a character as his.\n\nWith the reader's permission, I will now state what I conceive may\nhave been the real truth with regard to him.\n\nI believe that Jesus of Nazareth was certainly a righteous man,\nand probably one who wished to bring back his countrymen, to a\nrational observance of the law, and to abandon their traditions.\n\nHe appeared in an age when the religious part of the Jewish\nnation had made the law in many respects of none effect by those\ntraditions, and had rendered their religion a stumbling block to the\nGentiles, by reason of the puerile superstitions they had added to\nit: thus counteracting the express design, for which they had been\nset apart from other nations, viz. to bring them to the knowledge\nand acknowledgement of the unity and supremacy of God;) and\nviolating the command of Moses, \"ye shall not add unto the word\nwhich I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it; for\nthis is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the\nnations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say, surely this\ngreat nation is a wise and understanding people.\"  Deut. ch. iv.--\nand when the irreligious part of the nation, had become dreadfully\ncorrupt.\n\nThe Jewish people at that time were oppressed and despised; the\nprophets of the Old Testament had taught them to believe that at\na time when their oppressions should be at their height, their\nMessiah should appear. Of consequence the appearance of such\na man as Jesus Christ, at that time when they considered\nthemselves as crushed under the Roman yoke, possibly led them\nor some of them to believe that he might be their expected\ndeliverer. But the Jewish nation at that time were unworthy of such\na deliverance. They longed for their Messiah, not for\nrighteousness, but for vengeance sake; not to hail him as the\nbenefactor of the human race, but as the avenger of their wrongs\nupon all the world who had crushed and despised them.\n\nSuch a people were not the lawful candidates for the happiness of\nthe eternal kingdom; and they afterwards learned, by the event of\ntheir struggle with the Romans, that they must not expect\ndeliverance till they had become less unworthy of it.\n\nJesus, by preaching against the traditions of the elders, by not\nobserving the Sabbath day so rigidly as the Pharisees, by\ndenouncing them as hypocrites, tithers of mint anise and cummin,\nwashers of plates and platters, and neglecters of the weightier\nmatters of the law, justice, judgment, and mercy, as serpents, a\ngeneration of vipers, whited sepulchres, and what not, had\nenraged these superstitious fanatics to the last degree. But they\ncould not wreak their vengeance, because he was protected, by\nthe people whom the gospels represent as expecting with the\nmost anxious impatience, that he would announce himself as their\ndeliverer.[fn100] But when repeated importunity, accompanied by\nan attempt to seize upon him and by compulsion oblige him to\nhead them, terminated only in causing Jesus to escape and\nwithdraw himself from their wishes [fn101] the people were\ndisgusted, and abandoned him.\n\nThe Chief Priests and Pharisees took advantage of this\nabandonment, to seize him and deliver him to the Roman\ngovernor as a dangerous man, who either was willing to head the\npeople against the Romans, or who might be made the pretext of\nan insurrection, as the people had shown a disposition to\nrecognize him as the Messiah. [fn102] Such I believe to be as\nnear an approximation to the true history of Jesus Christ, as can\nbe made at this day.\n\nLet us now review the points I have endeavoured to establish in\nthis work.\n\n1. I have endeavoured to show that the miracles, supposed by Mr.\nEverett to have been wrought by Jesus in proof of his\nMessiahship, cannot be proved; because that the New Testament\nis not to be depended on as competent testimony for the real\nhistory and real doctrines of Jesus of Nazareth; and therefore, that\nthe question of his Messiahship must in all events be decided by\nan appeal to the Old Testament.\n\n2. It has been shown, that the prophecies of the Messiah\ncontained in the Old Testament, have not been fulfilled in Jesus;\nand that those prophecies which Mr. Everett regards as proofs of\nthe Christian religion, were also not fulfilled in Jesus.\n\n3. It has been shown that the law of Moses was intended for a\nperpetual law for the Jewish nation, \"through all their generations\nforever;\" and of course that it is, and must be perpetually\nobligatory upon them; and consequently whether JESUS BE THE\nMESSIAH, OR NOT, the Jews are bound to adhere to the law of\nMoses.[fn104]\n\n4. It has been shown, that [fn105] it is absolutely impossible to\nknow the real history of Jesus with certainty; the Jews and\nChristians ought for the future to consider his character, not as a\nsubject of dispute, nor an occasion of quarrel, much less as a\ncause of mutual aversion, but merely as a matter of speculation.\n\nShould these positions ever be recognised by the Jews and\nChristians as reasonable and true, let us consider what, may be\nthe consequence.\n\n1. The Christians become sensible, that the New Testament is not\nto be depended on, would cease to hate, to persecute, and to\nannoy the unfortunate Jews, on account of their rejecting its\ndoctrines.\n\n2. The Christians would themselves adhere to the Old Testament,\nas the rock and rule of faith and morals; and would worship with\nthe Jews the One Jehovah, without equal or companion, and obey\nthe moral law of the Old Testament, leaving the observance of its\nceremonial institutions to the nation for whom they were\nintended:[fn106] like the \"devout Gentiles\" in the time of Josephus\nand Christ.\n\n3. The Jews, seeing the Christians Unitarians as well as\nthemselves, would cease to regard the Christians as impious\nidolaters, and cruel enemies.\n\n4. Both parties would worship and serve God as brethren, and\nchildren of the same father; and await in faith and hope the\nappearance of the GREAT PERSONAGE, who is to make them\nand all the good part of mankind, perfectly happy.\n\nShould what I have written have any tendency to promote union\nand friendly feelings, between the parties to a dispute which has\nfor nearly eighteen hundred years occasioned such cruel\noppressions and bloody persecutions to the side which is in the\nright, I shall not have lived in vain; and though the cause in which I\nhave exerted myself has occasioned me much detriment and\ndistress,[fn107] and may possibly ultimately oblige me to die in a\nforeign land, without a friend to close my eyes; I comfort my heart\nwith the hope, that I may have done somewhat for the great cause\nof truth, justice, and humanity, and for the promotion of mutual\nregard and friendly feelings, among a very large portion of the\nhuman race.\n\nAPPENDIX.\n\nA\n\nFor instance, it is said in the 2d. ch. of the Gospel called of\nMathew, that Jesus, when brought out of Egypt by his parents,\n\"came and dwelt in the city called Nazereth: that it might be\nfulfilled which was spoken by the prophet. \"He shall be called a\nNazerene.\"\n\nNow there is no such passage as this throughout the Old\nTestament: the author of the Gospel called of Mathew must\ntherefore, it seems to me, have forged this supposed prophecy out\nof his own head, or must have mistaken the sense of some\npassage in the Old Testament: if he was capable of either, he was\nnot the honest and inspired Mathew, the Apostle of Jesus Christ.\nThere is a passage in the Old Testament, which might have led a\nGentile, ignorant of the Jewish Scriptures into this mistake, but\ncould not have misled a Jew. In the history of Sampson Judges\nxiii. 5. it is said, \"that he should be a Nazarite unto God from the\nwomb.\" But a Nazerite was one thing and a Nazarene another: the\nfirst was a man who had a peculiar vow upon him, described\nNumbers. 7. ch., but a Nazarene was a man belonging the city of\nNazereth in Palestine. The quotation is a proof with me, that the\nauthor of the Gospel ascribed to Matthew was a Gentile, of course\nnot Matthew who was a Jew, and incapable of making such a\nblunder.[fn108]\n\nAgain, in the Gospel called of Matthew ch. xxvii. a passage is\nquoted as a prophetic proof text from Jeremiah, says the author.\n\"Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet\nsaying, and they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him\nthat was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value; and\ngave them for the Potters field, as the Lord appointed me.\" There\nis no such passage as this in \"Jeremy the prophet,\" nor in any of\nthe Books of the Old Testament. But Jerom asserts, that it was\ntaken from an Apocryphal Book ascribed to Jeremiah; he says\nthat he saw the apocryphal book from whence this is taken.  See\nJerom's Commentary upon Matthew tom. iv. p. 1. p. 134, See also\nMarsh's Michaelis Vol. I. p. 490. as quoted by Mr. Everett.\n\nIt appears to me, that an honest man would not quote, as\nprophetical authority, a forged book ascribed to Jeremiah: and an\ninspired man as the Christians suppose Matthew to have been,\nstill less.\n\nIn short the quotations in the New testament from the Old,\nadduced as prophecies of Jesus and the Religion of the New\nTestament, are so very inapplicable to that purpose, that the most\ncelebrated of the Christian. Theologians of the present day, have\nfound themselves obliged to abandon all attempts to support them\nas prophecies fulfilled in the events to which they are applied.\nThey maintain, as will appear hereafter in the course of this work,\nthat not one of the passages, quoted in the New Testament from\nthe Old, was quoted as a prophecy, but merely by way of\naccommodation or allusion. If so, it may be replied, that it is very\nextraordinary, that the authors of the books of the New Testament\nwho are almost continually representing that Jesus was predicted\nby the prophets, should after all never have adduced one of those\npredictions, although they are perpetually quoting the Old\nTestament. But the truth of the matter probably is, that the writers\nof the New Testament, did firmly believe that the passages they\nhave quoted, were really predictions of the events and doctrines to\nwhich they refer them. This is clear from the Epistle to the\nHebrews for instance, it is a deliberate and formal defence of the\nDoctrines of Christianity, addressed to the Jews, or Jewish\nChristians, in which the author attempts to show from the Old\nTestament, allowed by the Jews as oracular, that the Pre-\nexistence, Divinity, Priesthood, and Atonement of Jesus Christ, as\nsupposed by the Christians, were predicted in the Old Testament,\nand proved by his citations.[fn109]\n\nWho is so blind as not to see, that this system of Defence is\nmerely one of the last resort, adopted in circumstances of distress\nfor want of a better?\n\nSure I am, that the believing part of the Christian Laity will never\nadopt this System, (though the unbelieving part probably gladly\nwill) but would be extremely shocked on being told by their Clergy,\nthat the passages quoted from the Old Testament by the writers of\nthe New, which they and their predecessors from the 2nd century\ndownwards have been accustomed to regard as veritable\npredictions of Jesus, and introduced too by such solemn prefaces\nas the following, \"all this was done that it might be fulfilled which\nwas spoken by the prophet, saying\" &c, or, \"in this was fulfilled\nthat which was spoken by the prophet saying\" &c--were not after\nall adduced as prophecies, but merely by way of allusion.[fn110]\n\n PASSAGES FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT REFERRING TO\nTHE MESSIAH AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF HIS KINGDOM.\n\n\"Shiloh shall come, and to him shall the obedience of the peoples\nbe.\" Ac. to the Hebr. Gen. xlix. 10.\n\n\"The adversaries of Jehovah shall be broken in pieces; out of\nHeaven shall He thunder upon them; Jehovah shall judge the\nends of the earth; and he shall give strength unto his king, and\nexalt the horn of his Messiah.\" I Sam. ch. il. 10.\n\n\"These be the last words of David. David the son of Jesse said,\nand the man who was exalted on high, the Messiah of the God of\nJacob, [See the Hebr.] and the sweet Psalmist of Israel. The Spirit\nof Jehovah spake by me, and his word was [fn111] in my tongue.\nThe God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me. He that\nruleth over mankind [or the human race. See the Hebr.] shall be\njust, ruling in the fear of God, And he shall be as the light of the\nmorning when the sun ariseth, even a morning without clouds; as\nthe tender grass springing out of the earth by clear shining after\nrain.--But the sons of Belial shall be all of them as thorns thrust\naway, because they cannot be taken with hands; but the man that\nshall touch them must be fenced with iron, and the staff of a\nspear; and they shall be utterly burned with fire in the same\nplace.\" 2. Sam. ch. xxiii, 1.--7.\n\n\" I have set my king upon my holy hill of Zion, I will declare the\ndecree, Jehovah hath said unto me. Thou art my son, this day\nhave I begotten thee; ask of me, and I shall give thee the nations\nfor thy inheritance, and the utmost parts of the earth for thy\npossession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron: thou shall\ndash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.\" Ps. 2. See also Ps. 21.\n\n\"He shall judge thy people with righteousness, and thy poor with\njudgment. The mountains shall bring peace to the people, and the\nlittle hills by righteousness. He shall judge the poor of the people,\nhe shall save the children of the needy, and shall break in pieces\nthe oppressor. They shall fear thee as long as the sun and moon\nendure throughout all generations. He shall come down like rain\nupon the mown grass: as showers that water the earth, [compare\n2. Sam. ch. xxi. [fn112] 3. 4.] In his days shall the righteous\nflourish; and abundance of peace as long as the moon endureth.\nHe shall have dominion also from sea to sea, and from the river\nunto the ends of the earth. [\" his dominions shall be from sea even\nto sea, and from the river even unto the ends of the earth.\" Zech.\nix: 10.] they that dwell in the wilderness shall bow before him, and\nhis enemies shall lick the dust, The kings of Tarshish and of the\nisles [i. e. of Europe and the west,] shall bring presents; the kings\nof Sheba and Seba shall offer gifts. All kings shall fall down before\nhim: all nations shall serve him. For he shall deliver the needy\nwhen he crieth; the poor also, and him that hath no helper. He\nshall spare the poor and needy, and shall save the souls of the\nneedy. He shall redeem their soul from deceit and violence: and\nprecious shall their blood be in his sight. And he shall live, and to\nhim shall be given of the gold of Sheba; prayer also shall be made\nfor him continually; and daily shall he be praised--His name shall\nendure for ever: his name shall be continued as long as the sun:\nand men shall be blessed in him: all nations shall call him blessed.\nBlessed be Jehovah God, the God of Israel, who only doeth\nwondrous things. And blessed be his glorious name for ever; and\nlet the whole earth be filled with his glory. Amen, and\nAmen.[fn113] Ps. 72.\n\n\"Thou speakest in vision of thy holy [or pious] one, and saidst, I\nhave laid help upon one that is mighty: I have exalted one chosen\nout of the people. I have found David my servant; with my holy oil\nhave I anointed him: with whom my hand shall be established:\nmine arm also shall strengthen him. The enemy shall not exact\nupon him: nor the sin of wickedness afflict him. And I will beat\ndown his foes before his face, and plague them that hate him. But\nmy faithfulness and my mercy shall be with him: and in my name\nshall his horn be exalted. I will set his hand also in the sea, and\nhis right hand In the rivers. He shall cry unto me thou art my\nfather, my God, and the rock of my salvation. Also I will make him\nmy first born, higher than the kings of the earth, My mercy will I\nkeep for him for evermore, and my covenant shall stand fast with\nhim. [\"although my house be not so with God: yet he hath made\nwith me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things and sure.\"\n2. Sam. ch. xxiii. 5.] His seed also will I make to endure forever,\nand his throne as the days of heaven.--My covenant will I not\nbreak,-nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. Once have I\nsworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David. His seed shall\nendure for ever, and HIS THRONE AS THE SUN BEFORE ME. It\nshall be established for ever as the moon, and as a faithful\nwitness in the heaven.\" Ps. 89.\n\n\"Jehovah said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right hand, until I\nmake thy enemies thy footstool. Jehovah shall send the rod of thy\npower out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.--\nJehovah at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of\nhis wrath. He shall judge among the nations; he shall fill the\nplaces with the dead bodies: he shall wound the heads over many\ncountries.\" Ps. 110.\n\n\"It shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of\nJehovah's house shall be established in the tops of the mountains,\nand shall be exalted above the hills; and all the nations shall flow\nunto it. And many peoples shall go and say, Come ye, and let us\ngo up to the mountain of Jehovah, to the house of the God of\nJacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his\npaths: for out of Zion shall go forth the Law, and the word of\nJehovah from Jerusalem. And he shall judge among the nations,\nand shall rebuke many peoples: and they shall beat their swords\ninto ploughshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks: nation\nshall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war\nany more.\" Is. ch. ii.\n\n\" Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the\nPrincipality shall be upon his shoulder; and the Wonderful\nCounsellor, The Mighty God, The everlasting Father shall call his\nname the Prince of Peace.[fn114] [See. the Heb.] Of the increase\nof his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the\nthrone of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it and to establish\nit with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever.\nThe zeal of Jehovah of Hosts will perform this.\"' Is. ix: 6, 7.\n\n\"There shall come forth a rod out of the stem (or stump, i. e. the\nroots of a tree cut down) of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of\nhis roots, and the spirit of Jehovah shall rest upon him, the spirit of\nwisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the\nspirit of knowledge and the fear of Jehovah, and shall make him of\nquick understanding in the fear of Jehovah; and he shall not judge\nafter the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his\nears: but with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove\nwith equity for the meek of the earth; and he shall smite the earth\nwith the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he\nslay the wicked. And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins,\nand faithfulness the girdle of his reins. The wolf also shall dwell\nwith the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid: and the\ncalf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child\nshall lead them. And the cow and the bear shall feed: their young\nones shall lie down together; and the lion shall eat straw like the\nox. [fn115] And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp,\nand the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrices den.\nThey shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the\nearth shall be full of the knowledge of Jehovah, as the waters\ncover the sea. And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse,\nwhich shall stand for an ensign of the peoples; to it shall the\nGentiles seek; and his seat shall be glory.\" [See the Hebr.] Is. ch.\nxi. \"And it shall come to pass in that day, that Jehovah shall set his\nhand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people\nwhich shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from\nPathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and\nfrom the islands of the sea. And he shall set up an ensign for the\nnations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather\ntogether the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the\nearth.\" Is. ch. xi.\n\n\"And he will destroy in this mountain the face of the covering cast\naver all the peoples, (i. e. their ignorance of God's dispensations)\nand the vail that is spread over all the nations. He will swallow up\ndeath in victory, (or to eternity), and Jehovah God will wipe away\ntears from off all faces: and the rebuke of his people shall he take\naway from off all the earth: for Jehovah hath spoken it, and it shall\nbe said in that day, Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him,\nand he will save us; thus saith [fn116] Jehovah; we have waited\nfor him, we will be glad, and rejoice in his salvation.\" Is. xxv. 7--9.\n\n\"The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them; and\nthe desert shall rejoice and blossom as the rose. It shall blossom\nabundantly and rejoice even with joy and singing: the glory of\nLebanon shall be given unto it, the excellency of Carmel and\nSharon, they shall see the glory of Jehovah, and the excellency of\nour God. Strengthen ye the weak hands, and confirm the feeble\nknees, Say to them that are of a fearful heart. Be strong, fear not,\nbehold your God will come with vengeance, even God with a\nrecompense, he will come and save you. Then the eyes of the\nblind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be\nunstopped. Then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the\ntongue of the dumb sing: for in the wilderness shall waters break\nout, and streams, in the desert. And the parched ground shall\nbecome a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water: in the\nhabitation of dragons where each lay, shall be grass, with reeds\nand rushes. And the ransomed of Jehovah shall return and come\nto Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads, and\nsorrow and sighing shall flee away.\" Is. xxxv.\n\n\"Comfort ye, comfort, ye my people, saith your God. Speak ye\ncomfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her, that her warfare is\naccomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned; for she hath received\nof Jehovah's hand, double for all her sins. The voice of him that\ncrieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of Jehovah, make\nstraight in the desert a highway for our God. Every valley shall be\nexalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and the\ncrooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain. And\nthe glory of Jehovah shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it\ntogether: for the mouth of Jehovah hath spoken it. The voice said,\nCry. And he said, What shall I cry? All flesh is grass, and all the\ngoodliness thereof is as the flower of the field. The grass\nwithereth, the flower fadeth; because the spirit of Jehovah bloweth\nupon it: surely the people is grass. The grass withereth, the flower\nfadeth; BUT THE WORD OF OUR GOD SHALL STAND FOR,\nEVER.\" Is. xl.\n\n\"My people shall know my name: therefore shall they know in that\nday, that I am He that doth speak; behold it is I. How beautiful\nupon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings,\nthat publisheth peace; that bringeth good tidings of good, that\npublisheth salvation, that saith unto Zion, Thy God reigneth! Thy\nwatchmen shall lift up the voice, with the voice together shall they\nsing; for they shall see eye to eye, when Jehovah shall bring again\nZion. Break forth into joy, sing together ye waste places of\nJerusalem; for Jehovah hath comforted his people, he hath\nredeemed Jerusalem, Jehovah hath made bare his holy arm in the\neyes of all nations; and all the ends of the earth shall see the\nsalvation of our God.\" Is. lii.\n\nG. G.\n\nThe good Christians of the United States, I do nut use the term in\nsarcasm, for they are good, speak in their books and sermons of\nthe Christian religion as if it were every where the same as in the\ngrand, free, and liberal republic. But the Fact is not so. An\nAmerican who reads the poems of Homer, or Ovid's\nMetamorphoses, laughs at the religion of the ancient Greeks and\nRomans as a ridiculous folly; but when he visits those countries in\nChristendom which are not Protestant, he will be inclined to regard\ntheir religion as a blasphemy against the Most High. Go where\nyou will in those countries, if you look into their churches, you\ninvariably nod \"a molten image, or picture, and a teacher of lies.\"\n[fn117]\n\nThe prophets of the Old Testament reproached the idolatrous\nJews, that \"according to the number of their cities were their\ngods.\" But in the countries I speak of, the number of gods is\naccording to the number of churches, and even houses; for every\nhouse contains an image or picture of some saint or other, who is\nconsidered as the tutelary guardian of the family.\n\nH\n\nMr. Everett observes upon this prophecy of Jeremiah p. 75. of his\nwork, \"as it is near two thousand years since David has failed of a\ntemporal prince up on his throne, and a temporal successor of\nLevites, and since it is declared that it shall NEVER fail of these,\nwe must suppose that a spiritual secession and a spiritual service\nwere intended: or else the solemn promise.-of God has been for\ntwo thousand years, without fulfillment.\"\n\n\"Ut semper!\"------\n\nSternhold and Hopklns had great qualms, When they did quaver\nDavid's Psalms; \"Which made their hearts full glad. But had the\nprophet back been sent, To hear them SING,--and you\nCOMMENT, They surely had run mad.\"\n\nI\n\nPASSAGES FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT PREDICTING THE\nRESTORATION OF THE DISPERSION.\n\n\"Behold the former things are come to pass, and new things do I\nDECLARE: BEFORE THEY SPRING FORTH I TELL you them.\"\n\n\"I will bring thy seed from the east, and gather thee from the west:\nI will say to the north, give up; and to the south keep not back:\nbring my sons from far, and my daughters from the ends of the\nearth. Every one that is called by my name: for I have created him\nfor my glory, I have formed him; yea I have made him. Is. xliii: 3, 6,\n7.\n\n\"Thus saith the Lord God, behold I will lift up my hand to the\nGentiles, and set up my standard to the peoples; and they shall\nbring thy sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried\nupon their shoulders. And kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and\ntheir queens thy nursing mothers; they shall bow down to thee\nwith their face toward the earth, and shall lick up the dust of thy\nfeet: and thou shalt know that I am Jehovah, for they shall not be\nashamed that wait for me. Shall the prey be taken from the\nmighty, or the lawful captive delivered. But thus saith Jehovah.\nEven the captives of the mighty shall be taken away, and the prey\nof the terrible shall be delivered: for I will contend with him that\ncontendeth with thee; and I will save thy children. And I will feed\nthem that oppress thee with their own flesh: and they shall be\ndrunken with their own blood, as with sweet wine: and all flesh\nshall know that I Jehovah am thy Saviour, and thy Redeemer, the\nMighty One of Jacob.\" Is. xlix.\n\n\" Jehovah shall comfort Zion, he will comfort all her waste places:\nand he will make her wilderness like Eden, and her desert like the\ngarden of Jehovah; joy and gladness shall be found therein;\nthanksgiving and the voice of melody. Hearken unto me my\npeople, and give ear unto me O, my nation: for a law shall\nproceed from me, and I will make my judgment to rest for alight of\nthe peoples. My righteousness, is near, my salvation is gone forth,\nand mine arms shall judge the peoples: the isles shall wait upon\nme, and on mine arm shall they lean.\"\n\n[See the Heb.] Is. li.\n\n\"Fear not, for thou shalt not be ashamed; neither be thou\nconfounded: for thou shalt not be put to shame: for thou shalt\nforget the shame of thy youth, [i. e. thy ancient Idolatry] and shalt\nnot remember the reproach of thy widowhoods [i. e. thy two\ndispersions] any more. For thy Maker is thy Husband, Jehovah of\nhosts is his name, and thy Redeemer the Holy one of Israel; the\nGod of the whole earth shall he be called. For Jehovah hath called\nthee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of\nyouth, when thou hadst been refused saith thy God. For a small\nmoment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather\nthee. In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment, but\nwith everlasting kindness will I have mercy upon thee, saith\nJehovah thy Redeemer. For this is as the waters of Noah unto me:\nfor as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go\nover the earth; so have I sworn that I will not be wroth with thee,\nnor rebuke thee. For the mountains shall depart, and the hills be\nremoved: but my kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall\nthe covenant of my peace be removed, saith Jehovah that hath\nmercy on thee. O thou afflicted, tossed with tempest, and not\ncomforted: behold I will lay thy stones with fair colours, and lay thy\nfoundations with sapphires, and I will make thy windows of agates,\nand thy gates of carbuncles, and all thy borders of pleasant\nstones, and thy children shall be taught of Jehovah, and great\nshall be the peace of thy children. In righteousness shalt thou be\nestablished: thou shalt be far from oppression: for thou shalt not\nfear, and from terror, for it shall not come near thee.\" Is. liv.\n\n\"Behold thou shalt call a nation that thou knowest not, and nations\nthat knew not thee shall run unto thee, because of Jehovah thy\nGod: and for the Holy one of Israel; for he hath glorified thee,\" Is.\nlv. 5.\n\n\"Behold the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness\nthe peoples; but Jehovah shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall\nbe seen upon thee. And the Gentiles shall come to thy light and\nkings to the brightness of thy rising. Lift up thine eyes round about\nand see; all they gather themselves together, they come to thee:\nthy sons shall come from far, and thy daughters shall be nursed at\nthy side. Then thou shalt see and flow together, and thine heart\nshall fear and be enlarged; because the abundance of the sea\nshall be converted unto thee, the forces [or wealth] of the Gentiles\nshall come unto thee. The multitude of camels shall cover thee;\nthe dromedaries of Midian and Ephah: all they from Sheba shall\ncome: they shall bring gold and incense: and they shall show forth\nthe praises of Jehovah. All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered\ntogether unto thee, the rams of Nebaioth [i. e. the chiefs of the\nArabs Nebaioth was the eldest son of Ishmael] shall minister unto\nthee: they shall come up with acceptance to mine altar,\n[doubtless, because they have been worshippers of one sole God\nof Abraham and the prophets since, the days of Mohammed] and I\nwill beautify the house of my glory. \"Who are these that fly as a\ncloud, and as the doves to their windows? Surely the isles shall\nwait for me, and the ships of Tarshish first, to bring thy sons from\nfar, their silver, and their gold with them; unto the name of\nJehovah thy God, and to the Holy One of Israel because He hath\nglorified thee. And the sons of strangers shall build up thy walls,\nand their kings shall minister unto thee, for in my wrath I smote\nthee, but in my favour have I had mercy on thee. Therefore thy\ngates shall be open continually; they shall not be shut day nor\nnight: that men may bring unto thee the forces of the Gentiles, and\nthat their kings may be brought. For the nation and kingdom that\nwill not serve thee shall perish; yea those nations shall be utterly\nwasted. The glory of Lebanon shall come unto thee, the fir-tree,\nthe pine-tree, and the box-tree together, to beautify the place of\nmy sanctuary: and I will make the place of my feet glorious. The\nsons also of them that afflicted thee shall come bending unto thee:\nand all they that despised thee shall bow themselves down at the\nsoles of thy feet; and they shall call thee the city of Jehovah, The\nZion of the Holy One of Israel. Whereas thou hast been forsaken,\nand hated, that no man went through thee, I will make thee an\neternal excellency, a joy of endless [ac. to the Heb.] generations.\nThou shalt suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast\nof kings: and thou shalt know that I Jehovah am thy Saviour and\nthy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob. For brass I will bring\ngold, and for iron I will bring silver; and for wood brass, and for\nstones iron: I will also make thy officers peace, and thine exactors\nrighteousness. Violence shall no more be heard in thy land,\nwasting nor destruction within thy borders: but thou shalt call thy\nwalls Salvation, and thy gates Praise. The sun shall be no more\nthy light by day: neither for brightness shall the moon give light\nunto thee: but Jehovah shall be unto thee an everlasting light, and\nthy God thy Glory. Thy sun shall no more go down; neither shall\nthy moon withdraw itself; for Jehovah shall be thy everlasting light,\nand the days of thy mourning shall be ended. Thy people also\nshall be all righteous: they shall inherit the land forever, the branch\nof my planting, the work of my hands, that I may be glorified.\"' Is\nch. Ix.\n\n\"Thou shalt be a crown of glory in the hand of Jehovah, and a\nroyal diadem in the hand of thy God. Thou shalt be no more\ntermed forsaken: neither shall thy laud any more be termed\ndesolate--For as a young man marrieth a virgin, so shall thy sons\nmarry thee: and, as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride so\nshall thy God rejoice over thee.\" Is. ch. Ixii.\n\n\"Rejoice ye with Jerusalem, and be glad with her all ye that love\nher: rejoice for joy with her all ye that mourn for her: that ye may\nsuck, and be satisfied with the breasts of her consolations: that ye\nmay milk and be delighted with the abundance of her glory. For\nthus saith Jehovah. Behold I will extend Peace to her like a river,\nand the glory of the Gentiles like an overflowing stream: then shall\nye suck, ye shall be borne upon her sides, and be dandled upon\nher knees. As one whom his mother comforted so will I comfort\nyou; and ye shall be comforted in Jerusalem.\" Is. Ixvi.\n\n\"Thus saith Jehovah, keep ye judgment, and do justice: for my\nsalvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed.\nBlessed is the man that doeth this, and the son of man that layeth\nhold of it, that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and keepeth\nhis hand from doing any evil. Neither let the son of the stranger\nwho hath joined himself unto Jehovah, speak, saying, Jehovah\nhath utterly separated me from his people--the sons of the\nstranger that join themselves to Jehovah, to serve him, and to love\nthe name of Jehovah, to be his servants, every one that keepeth\nthe Sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant:\neven them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful\nin my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices\nshall be accepted on mine altar; for mine house shall be called a\nhouse of prayer for all peoples. Jehovah God which gathereth the\noutcasts of Israel saith, yet will I gather others to him beside those\nthat are gathered to him.\" Is. ch. Ivi.\n\n\"Tell ye and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together:\nwho hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from\nthat time: Have not I Jehovah? and there is no God else beside\nme; a just God and a Saviour, there is none beside me. Look unto\nme, and be ye saved, all the ends of the Earth: for I am God and,\nthere is none else. I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of\nmy mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, that unto me:\nevery knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear. Surely, shall one\nsay, in Jehovah have I righteousness and strength: even to Him,\nshall men come: and all that are incensed against Him shall be\nashamed. In Jehovah shall all the seed of Israel be justified, and\nshall glory.\" [fn119] Is. xlv. 21. &c.\n\n ERRATA.\n\n(The manuscript of this book was written in little more than three\nweeks at Cairo, amidst the hurry and bustle of my preparations to\naccompany Ismael Pasha to the Upper Nile. It has been printed\nwithout my having had it in my power to correct any of the proofs.\nIn consequence of one or both of these circumstances the\nfollowing. Errata almost entirely literal have been committed. I\nbelieve however that the Scholar will not find any misstatement of\nfacts, nor the Logician any flaw in the arguments; the book lays\nbefore the Public. On these two points I feel quite secure in this\nrespect: I calmly and firmly lay my gage at the feet of all\nChristendom. Let him who dares to take it up, do it.)\n\n\n\n[fn1  for \"chooseth,\" read \"chusest.\"]\n\n[fn2 for \"possessions,\" read \"prepossessions\"]\n\n[fn3 for \"these,\" read \"their\"]\n\n[fn 4.  Mr. Everett appears willing to allow, as said before, the\nexistence of these contradictions in the narratives of the\nEvangelists, particularly in their accounts of the resurrection of\nJesus, [See p.456. of his work.] but maintains their credibility\nnevertheless, and in justification of this opinion, he quotes p. 457,\nthe contradictions of the historians of the execution of the Marquis\nof Argyle; a fact nevertheless not doubted. But the cases are by\nno means parallel; that a rebel should be decapitated is a fact of\nnotorious frequency in British history and very probable in itself,\nand as it is a fact without consequence, no man will be inclined to\ndoubt it, if it be affirmed by history, notwithstanding some\ncontradictions in the accounts of the circumstances of his\nexecution.\n\nBut I would ask Mr. Everett--if the same historians who report the\nexecution of the Marquis of Argyle; had also affirmed that three\ndays after he had his head cut off, he appeared again alive to his\nparticular friends with his head on, talking and dining with them;\nand that one of these historians represent this to have taken place\nat London--another at Edinburgh--and a third at Stirling, would Mr.\nEverett, or any man in his senses, hesitate to consider these\ncontradictions in the accounts of such a supernatural event as of\nno weight? Let us add to this another consideration.--Suppose\nthat the Marquis of Argyle was a man of irreproachable and\nadmirable character, and enthusiastically beloved by his friends,\nand that these friends believed in certain ancient prophecies\nwhich predicted that a Scotchman should arise, who should make\nScotland supreme over all the earth, and live himself for ever; and\nthat these friends believed the Marquis of Argyle to be the man:\nbut that disappointed in their expectations by seeing him suffer his\nhead to be cut off, they had their hopes revived by the appearance\nof this story of his having been seen alive by twelve of his most\nintimate friends, who were the heads of the party who had\nbelieved that the Marquis of Argyle would fulfill the prophecies\naforesaid, and not content with receiving this contradictory story\nwith avidity themselves, (which after all might have been invented\nas a salvo for his non-fulfillment or postponing the fulfillment of\nthese prophecies, by submitting to be decapitated) insisted that\nevery body else should believe it too, on pain of eternal\ndamnation!--Would not Mr. Everett be inclined to suspect that\nthese friends of the Marquis of Argyle were deluded men, and\npossibly noncompos mentis; and suppose that these friends of the\nMarquis of Argyle had told their party that he had been taken up to\nHeaven, for a time, but would return again into the World, before\nthat generation had passed away, and would then fulfill the\nprophecies aforesaid; and that this party, notwithstanding, that the\nMarquis of Argyle did not come again before that generation had\npassed away nor for eighteen hundred years afterwards, still\nretained their belief in the aforesaid circumstances, and still\ninsisted that everybody else should believe them too on pain of\neternal damnation; would not Mr. Everett consider these men as\ncertainly distracted? \"Mulata[fn5] nomine de te fabula narratur,\"\nMr. Everett.]\n\n[fn5 for \"mulata\" read \"mulatto\"]\n\n[fn6 Dr. Campbell in his notes to his translation of the Evangelists\nin loco. tries to prove that the Greek words in the Gospel of\nMatthew, which undoubtedly strictly and literally Signify \"in the\nevening of the Sabbath,\" or \"at the end of the Sabbath,\" may\nmean \"the Sabbath being ended,\"; which, if it could be\nestablished, would set aside the objection I have mentioned.]\n\n[fn7 for 24 read 36]\n\n[fn8 for 54 read 34]\n\n[fn9 Of lrenaeus and. Tertullian Mr. Everett remarks, that\n\"Tertullian was a very shrewd writer, [yes indeed, and of his\nfraudulent shrewdness Middleton gives some notable instances in\nhis true inquiry] and Irenaeus less fool than knave,\" p. 471. of Mr.\nEverett's work. I would observe to Mr. Everett, that this Irenaeus is\nthe first writer who mentions the four Gospels, and that the\nFathers of the Church who came after him in affirming the\ngenuineness of the four Gospels appeal to this Irenaeus this \"half\nfool, half knave,\" as the authority and voucher for their\nauthenticity; the evidence for their authenticity stops short with\nhim. Justin Martyr who flourished about the year 140 of the\nChristian Era, in his apology quotes, indeed, Memoirs of Jesus\nChrist which he says, were written by Apostles and Apostolick\nmen. But it is, acknowledged by Bishop Marsh in his notes to\nMichaelis Introduction, to the New Testament, that the quotations\nof Justin Martyr are so unlike the expressions in the received\nEvangelists to which they appear to refer, that one of two things\nmust be true; either that Justin does not quote our present\nGospels; or else, that they were in his time in a very different\nstate, than what they now are.\n\nPapias who wrote about 116 of the Christian Era says, that\nMatthew wrote a Gospel \"in Hebrew which every one interpreted\nas he was able,\" but says nothing of a Gospel of Matthew in\nGreek; and that the present Greek Gospel called of Matthew could\nnot be a translation from Matthew's Hebrew, appears from\nBishops Marsh's Dissertation on the origin of these[fn10] first\nGospels; where he proves that it is not a translation of one work,\nbut a compilation from several. The same is maintained by the\nGerman Theologians to be presently mentioned.\n\n[fn10 for \"these,\" \"the three\"]\n\n[fn11 These Sybiline oracles so often, and so confidently appealed\nto by the Fathers of the Church, are now universally allowed to\nhave been forged by the Christians themselves: of them Scaliger\nspeaks as follows.\n\n\"Quid pseudo--Sybilina oracula quae Christiani gentibus\nobjiciebant, quum tamen e Christianorum officina prodiissent in\nGentium autem Bibliothecis non reperirentur? Adeo verbum Dei\ninefficax esse censuerunt, ut regnum Christi sine mendaciis\npromoveri posse diffiderent? atque utinam illi firimi mentiri\ncoepissent,\" apud La Roche Mem. Lit. 7. 331. as quoted by Mr.\nEverett, p. 228. of his work.\n\nIf the reader will consult Toland's Amyntor, he will find appended\nto that work, a list of the names of I think about a hundred\nGospels, Epistles, and Revelations, forged by the Gentile\nChristians in the first centuries of the Christian Era. The\nCelebrated Semler, so distinguished for his knowledge in Biblical\ncriticism and ecclesiastical antiquities, has said, as Mr. Everett\nallows, p. 464 of his work, that the general Epistles of James,\nPeter, and John and Jude, and the book of Revelations, contained\nin the New Testament at present, must be also placed upon the\nlong list of pious frauds, fabricated in the first ages of Christianity.]\n\n[fn12 It is an allowed principle of liberal criticism, that when the\nexpressions of an author are capable of two senses, one of which\nwould make him contradict himself, and the other would leave him\nconsistent, it is but fair to suppose that he meant to be consistent,\nand therefore should be interpreted in the sense which would\nexclude self contradiction. How has the liberal Mr. Everett acted\non an occasion of this kind? I had said in my first work \"the Jewish\nChristians, the disciples of the twelve Apostles, NEVER received,\nbut rejected every individual book of the present New Testament.\"\n\nI had also maintained, that the Gospels were forged after the\nmiddle of the second century. Now any reasonable man would I\nbelieve understand me as using the expressions, \"Jewish\nChristians, the disciples of the twelve Apostles,\" in the same\nsense as when we speak of the followers of Plato, Whitfield, or\nWesley, by the name of Disciples of Plato, Whitfield, or Wesley,\nwithout confining the expression to signify their immediate\ndisciples; the insertion of the words, \"never received,\" also\nsuggests that this must have been my meaning. Nevertheless Mr.\nEverett, in order to bring me in contradiction with myself in order to\nserve a turn of his own, remarks upon my words, \"without\npresuming to decide upon the opinions of a writer, so keen in\ndetecting dissonances as Mr. English, I do presume to think, that if\nevery individual book, of the present New Testament, was\nrejected, by the disciples of the twelve Apostles, that they must\nhave been in being at the time they were rejected, and therefore\ncould not have been forged, a century after that period. I am not\nconscious of any wish to weaken the force of Mr. English's\narguments, by affecting to speak of them in contemptuous terms, I\nwould, as I have, answered them fairly, or not at all.\" p.445.]\n\n[fn13 If so, what becomes of all Mr. Everett's laboured argument\nupon Jesus' prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem contained in\np. 401 et seq. of his work; if it be true that the prophecy was\nwritten, after the events predicted took place!]\n\n[fn14 If this opinion be true, and Bishop Marsh may be considered\nas having almost demonstrated it to be so in his dissertation upon\nthe origin of the three first Gospels, it follows, that these Gospels\ncould not have been written by the Apostles, and immediate\nfollowers of Jesus Christ; for certainly, men personally and\nintimately acquainted with all his actions, and all his doctrines, (as\nwere his Apostles and all his immediate followers, and influenced\ntoo by the Holy Ghost, as they are all represented to have been in\nthe book of Acts, ch. iv. 31,) in setting about writing Memoirs of\nJesus, would write from their own complete, inspired and personal\nknowledge; and would not compile from \"books which had gone\nthrough various hands, and been variously altered and added to in\nthe passage.\" No! such a procedure would be that of men who\nhad no personal knowledge of the events they undertook to\nrecord; and who were therefore obliged to consult books for\ninformation.\n\nIn order to place in a fair light the absurdity of supposing the four\nGospels to have been written by the Apostles and first followers of\nJesus, I will suppose, a case. Suppose there should appear in the\nworld, four different Lives of Napoleon pretending to have been\nwritten by four of his aids de camp, who had constantly been near\nhis person, from the time that he commanded the troops in Paris\ntill his dethronement; and that one of them represented that the\nexpedition to Egypt took place when he was General of the troops\nin Paris, another that it took place when he was first Consul, and\nthe others that it took place when he was Emperor. Would any\nman believe, that ALL these books were written by aids de-camp\nof Napoleon, who had been constantly near his person from the\ntime that he commanded the troops of Paris till his\ndethronement?]\n\n[fn15  The New Testament, is I believe unparalleled among all the\nancient books that have come down to us for the number, and\nimportance of the corruptions, and alterations, it has undergone.\nWhat! can learned Christians tell us of several hundred thousands\nof various readings, in copies of a small book like the New\nTestament--that almost every, perhaps every verse has been\naltered, interpolated, or retrenched in some copy or other--and\nthen add in the same breath that the book is nevertheless to be\nreceived, as containing the uncorrupted doctrines of the founders\nof Christianity? If we did not know the inconsistency, and\nblindness of prejudice, one might be tempted to suspect that these\nlearned men were hardly sincere.\n\nWhat! is it to be insisted on that a book which Providence has\nevidently abandoned to carelessness, or to roguery, or to both,\nwas nevertheless intended by the Supreme, as a credible record\nof an ultimate, permanent and universal religion for all mankind!!--\nThe insane effrontery of such a supposition deserves to be hooted\nout of countenance.\n\nMr. Everett says, p. 243. of his work \"that not one of the books of\nthe New Testament, nor all of them together, were intended to be\na forensic defence of Christianity. On the contrary, the historical\nbooks are brief, and imperfect memoirs, which were not designed,\nnor supposed to contain all the faces, and which do not set forth,\nnor profess to set forth the evidences of the religion. The\nEpistolary parts are the counsels, instructions and affectionate\nsentiments which the occasions of the infant churches, drew from\ntheir founders. Now from these we expect, to collect the whole of\nChristianity, of its doctrines, its precepts, and its sanctions.\" Can\nMr. Everett confidently believe, that God Almighty, who\ndescended to the earth, to deliver a Code to one nation would\nhave left the world to collect as they could a complete, universal,\nand permanent code of religion and, morals from \"brief and\nimperfect,\" interpolated and corrupted memoirs, and a few\noccasional letters?]\n\n[fn16  Mr. Everett recommends to me to adopt as an appropriate\nmotto for the second edition of my first work, a passage from\nCelsus which speaks of the dispute, between the Jews and\nChristians as a \"quarrel about the shadow of an ass.\" p. 327. of\nMr. Everett's work.\n\nIs it so indeed! How then has it happened that Mr. Everett's\nCoreligionists have for fifteen hundred years persecuted,\ndespised, oppressed, trampled underfoot millions, plundered and\nmassacred hundreds of thousands, tortured, racked, and roasted\nalive thousands of the Jewish nation; and all in a quarrel about\n\"the shadow of an ass!\" O shame, where is thy blush. O meek\neye'd humanity, how hast thou been outraged and trampled on!\n\nFor my own part I do not consider it as a quarrel about \"the\nshadow of an ass,\" I rather think it has a much greater\nresemblance to a quarrel about an ass in the Lion's skin; in which\nquarrel the Christians have shown themselves to be every thing\nbut the Fox in the Fable upon that subject.]\n\n[fn17  Mr. Everett, also quotes my words in another place into the\n211 page of his work. \"The Jews had certainly good reason from\ntheir prophecies, to expect no Messiah but one who should set on\nthe Throne of David, and confer Liberty and happiness on them,\nand spread peace and happiness throughout the earth, and\ncommunicate the knowledge of God and virtue, and the love of\ntheir fellow men to every people.\"\n\nIs this a character \"whose laurel is to be watered by tears,\" the\nleaves of which is to \"grow green in an atmosphere filled with\nsighs and groans?\" I would ask Mr. Everett.]\n\n[fn18 Mr. Everett says page, 107. with great gravity, \"to hear the\nEvangelists charged in vulgar terms with misquoting and changing\nwords, by one, who could himself fall into the errors and the\nmisrepresentations we have just exposed, has moved me to a\nwarmth of language, which I did not think to have used. But, I beg\npardon: it is the New Testament which teaches us, that we\n\"beware lest we condemn ourselves, in what we judge another.\"\nAnd Mr. English has let us know that the New Testament morality\nis pernicious to society. Justly, most Justly, does Dr. Leland\nobserve, that \"it would be hard to produce any persons whatever,\nwho are chargeable with more unfair, and fraudulent management\nin their quotations, in curtailing, adding to, and altering the\npassages they cite, or taking them out of their connexion, and\nmaking them speak directly contrary to the sentiments of their\nauthors than the Deistical Writers!!\" They are indeed sad dogs, it\nmust be allowed, Mr. Everett.]\n\n[fn19 See Appendix B]\n\n[fn20 Mr. Everett considers the happy reign of the Messiah as\nhaving actually commenced with the era of Jesus Christ, and that\nwe are actually enjoying its blessings. Of course he must consider\nhis being whipped, and gibbetted by his own subjects, and leaving\nthe world in the hands of those holy men, Tiberius, Nero, Caligula,\nDomitian, and Heliogabalus, kingdom rising against kingdom, and\nnation against nation; (though the prophets declare that in the\nreign of the Messiah \"nation shall not lift up sword against nation,\nneither shall they learn war any more,\") famines, earthquakes, and\npestilences in divers places, (though the prophets declare that in\nthe reign of the Messiah, the earth shall become a Paradise, and\nthat God shall wipe all tears from off all faces, and sorrow and\nsighing shall flee away,) that horrid Jewish war in which perished\nmore than eleven hundred thousand of the Jewish nation, while\nthe rest were dispersed and enslaved, (though the prophets say,\nthat in the reign of the Messiah the Jews should enjoy the most\nperfect and endless happiness,) the theological quarrels, frauds,\nforgeries. Councils, and Excommunications, and an endless detail\nof Battle and Murder, the irruptions and devastations of the Goths\nHuns and Vandals, the rise and establishment of \"these venerable\ninstitutions,\" the Popedom and the Inquisition, the persecutions\nand wars excited by St. Dominic, the wars of Charlemagne, and\nthe Teutonic Knights upon the Germans, giving them no\nalternative but the Gospel or the Sword, the Crusades, the pious\nexploits of Cortez and Pizarro in America, the comfortable state of\nthings during the dark ages, the Massacre of St. Bartholomew,\nand the wars carried on by the Catholicks against the Protestants,\nand the wars since carried on by the Protestants and Catholicks,\nindiscriminately with each other, as among those \"blessed events,\nand happy changes,\" I use Mr. Everett's words, intended by \"the\nhighly figurative language,\" of the Old Testament prophets\npredictive of the reign of the Messiah! If the reader will pursue\nthose predictions contained in Appendix, B, or that beautiful\ncompend of them in Pope's \"Messiah\" he will I believe allow, that if\nit were possible for such things as the above mentioned, to be\nreally intended by those prophecies, they would be the greatest\nhoax, and the most flagrant and enormous verification of the old\nproverb \"parturiunt montes nascitur ridiculus mus,\" on record.\n\n[fn21  It is worth notice that when the term \"Saviour,\" is applied in\nthe Old Testament to men, it invariably signifies a temporal\ndeliverer, for instance, Judges iii. 9.15, in the Hebrew.]\n\n[fn22  The writers of the Old Testament frequently speak of the\nhead, hands, ears, eyes, and even nostrils of the Deity. Will Mr.\nEverett infer that because these expressions must be understood,\nfiguratively, that whenever the sacred writers speak of heads,\nhands, ears, eyes, and noses of men, that said heads, hands,\nears, eyes, and noses had no physical existence, but must be\ninterpreted figuratively? If so, I do not despair of seeing Mr.\nEverett publish a dissertation, crowded by numerous quotations\nfrom the Rabbies, in order to prove, that the history of David's\ncutting off the head of Goliath, was in all probability merely a\nfigurative account, in the oriental style, of the success of the\nprophet David in a controversy he had with a certain Philistine\nHeathen Priest of the God Dagon, (\"strange sea monster, upward\nman, and downward fish:\") who had written a book in order to\nprove against the Israelites) that their law was \"a dead letter,\" and\nthey themselves no \"nation.\"]\n\n[fn23  Paul in the first Epistle to the Thessalonians appears to say,\nas he affirms \"by the word of the Lord,\" that the second coming of\nJesus to do all this, should take place during the life time of the\ngeneration to whom he was writing, for he says 1 Thess. ch. iv,\n15, speaking of the Christians who had died before he wrote, \"this\nwe say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive\nand remain unto the coming of the Lord, shall not prevent them\nwhich are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from Heaven\nwith a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and the trump of\nGod; and the dead in Christ should rise first. Then we which are\nalive and remain, shall be caught up together with them in the\nclouds, to meet the Lord in the air, and so shall we ever be with\nthe Lord.\"\n\nThe Gospels represent Jesus as saying, that there were some of\nthat generation who should not taste of death till they saw him\ncome in the manner that Paul describes. For Mark, in the xiii. ch.\nof his Gospel, after representing Jesus as prophecying the\ndestruction of Jerusalem, says that his discourse at that time went\non as follows.\n\n\"But in those days after that tribulation, (i. e. after the siege and\ndestruction of Jerusalem) the sun shall be darkened, and the\nmoon shall not give her light. And, the stars of Heaven shall fall,\nand the powers that are in Heaven shall be shaken. \"And then\nshall they see the son of man coming in the clouds with great\npower and glory, and then shall he send his angels, and shall\ngather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost\npart the earth to the uttermost part of Heaven. Verily I say unto\nyou, that this generation shall not pass till all these things be done.\nHeaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass\naway.\" Mark, xiii. 24, &c.]\n\n[fn24  after \"was\" insert \"according to Mr. Everett,\"]\n\n[fn25  Mr. Everett has produced some authorities which make it\ndoubtful whether the genuine reading in this place was \"thy saints\nor thy pious ones,\" in the plural, or thy \"saint, or thy pious one;\" in\nthe singular. The matter is not worth disputing about, if it be made\nevident that the Psalm refers to David.]\n\n[fn26  Mr. Everett p. 87. of his work: in trying to prove that the\noriginal word signifies \"corruption,\" has unhappily produced a\npassage which not only proves nothing in his favour, but a great\ndeal in mine.  \"Therefore, says Daniel, I was left alone, and saw\nthis great vision, and there remained no strength in me, for my\ncomeliness was turned in me into corruption (\"the word here in the\noriginal is from the same root as that, in the 16 Psalm translated\nby me destruction?\") and I retained no strength.\" Dan. x. 8. Most\ncommentators on this passage, I believe, suppose that Daniel\nmeant to signify that he was petrified at the sight of the angel; and\nthat his physical faculties were suspended through terror. Does\nMr. Everett suppose, that the prophet meant to; signify that he\nwas actually putrified at the sight of Gabriel?]\n\n[fn27  for \"Acts 4. 45\" read \"Acts 4:25\"]\n\n[fn28  \"Let the high praises of God be in their mouth, and a two\nedged sword in their hand. To execute vengeance upon the\nnations, and punishments upon the peoples: To bind their kings\nwith chains, and their nobles with fetters of iron; to execute upon\nthem the judgment written; this honour have all his saints. Praise\nye Jehovah. Ps. cxlix. This passage alludes to the same doctrine:\nthere are many in the psalms and prophets of the same import. It\nis but justice however to the Hebrew prophets to add, that they\nhold the balance of justice between Jew and Gentile very fairly, in\nrepresenting that on account of the superior light vouchsafed to\nthe former, God would punish them \"double for all their sins;\" and\nthat before they shall be advanced to the eternal supremacy\npromised them, the most terrible trials and severities shall\nexterminate the wicked and worthless from the nation.]\n\n[fn29  Which is of the same family as the religion of Thibet. The\nChristians believe that God became incarnate in the infant Jesus.\nThe Thibetians and Chinese believe that God is incarnate in the\nperson of the Grand Lama. And each of them considers the other\nas \"ignorant and deluded idolaters.\"]\n\n[fn30  All the Christians throughout the world, except the\nProtestants who do not constitute more than a fifth of the Christian\nworld, kneel and pray before the crucifix, images, and pictures of\nChrist, the Virgin Mary, and the Saints. Their churches are\ncrowded with images and pictures, before which they burn lamps,\ntapers, and incense. The great toe of the right foot of an ancient\nbronze statue of Jupiter, christened St. Peter, in the magnificent\nChurch of St. Peter at Rome, is nearly worn off by the devout\nkisses and rubbings of the worshippers of that Saint, If the spirit of\nthe Unitarian Jew Peter, could animate that statue, I believe that\nthe foot of it would have long since kicked the teeth down the\nthroat of some of his worshippers. See Appendix, G. G.]\n\n[fn31  That Mary is \"the Mother of God!\" is the creed of all the\nChristian sects except the Protestants, and Nestorians.\n\nThe European and Asiatic Christian churches, except a precious\nhandful of Unitarians, appear to act upon the principles of the old\nSamaritans. So these nations feared Jehovah, and served their\ngraven images, both their children, and their children's children; as\ndid their Fathers, so do they unto this day.\" 2 Kings xvii 41.  Their\nreligion is as inconsistent and inconsequent as the conduct of\nNebuchadnezzar; who \"answered unto Daniel, and said, of a truth\nit is that your God is a God of Gods, and a Lord of Lords,\" Dan.\nch. ii. 47. And who, notwithstanding, set up an idol of gold, and\ncommanded all peoples, nations, and languages to fall down and\nworship the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king had set\nup: and threatened that whoso falleth not down; and worshippeth\nshould be cast into a burning fiery furnace.\" ch. iii, and who on\nanother occasion \"acknowledged and blessed the most high, and\npraised and honoured him that liveth forever and ever, whose\ndominion is an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom from\ngeneration to generation:\" ch. iv. and who notwithstanding\ndestroyed his Temple, and lodged its sacred vessels in the\ntreasure house of his idol. The service of the Christian churches\nnot Protestant resembles Bellshazzar's feast. They drink out of the\ngolden, and silver vessels, which they have \"taken out of the\nTemple of the house of God which was in Jerusalem,\" and praise\nthe Gods of gold, of silver, of brass, of wood, and of stone,[fn32]\nwhich see not, nor hear, nor know. And the result of the business,\nif the Old Testament predict the truth, will be, that the mysterious\nmenaces written by the figures of God, will be fulfilled in\nconfusion, wo, and destruction]\n\n[fn32  I allude to the crucifixes, images, and pictures of Christ, the\nVirgin Mary and the Saints, with which all Christian churches, not\nprotestant are filled.]\n\n[fn33  for \"come\" read \"came\"]\n\n[fn34  This is incorrect, Bethlehem is at present one of most\npopulous cities in Palestine.]\n\n[fn35  I request the reader to look at the Hebrew of Gen. x 14.\nwhich Mr. Everett must have neglected to do: as otherwise I\ncannot account for his having referred to a passage which directly\nestablishes my interpretation of the passage in Micah against his\nown.  I trust that this little circumstance will induce Mr. Everett to\nhave a fellow feeling for some errors which he says exists [fn36] in\nmy first publication.  He will find some further proofs adduced from\nhis book in the course of this work, of the truth of the old adage,\n\"humanium est errare.\"]\n\n[fn36  for \"exists\" read \"exist\"]\n\n[fn37  v. 10. of the ix. Ch. Of Zechariah, \"and I will cut off the\nchariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the\nbattlebow shall be cut off; [i.e. there shall be war no more]; and he\n[i.e. the Messiah,] shall speak peace unto the nations: and his\ndominion shall be from sea even to sea, and from the river even to\nthe ends of the earth.\"  Has this been yet fulfilled or have the\nnations called Christians, for the last 180 years, been more\npeaceable than others? on the contrary, is it not they who have\nperfectionated the arts of war and destruction!]\n\n[fn38 \"I render me,\" says Mr. Everett, \"because I cheerfully allow\"\nwith Eichorn and De Rossi in loco, that it is supported by most\nauthorities.\" Why then does Mr. Everett abuse and insult me, p.\n103, 104., for neglecting to notice the other reading he mentions,\nwhich he considers not to be the true one! If it be erroneous, what\nis it good for and if it be false, how has the inspired Evangelist\nquoted a false reading, (Gospel according to John ch. xix. 34.\n&c.,) in order to make out a prophecy?\n\nI had objected in my first publication that the assertion of Stephen,\nwhen filled with the Holy Ghost, that \"When Abraham went out of\nthe land of the Chaldees, he dwelt in Haran, from thence, after his\nfather was dead, God led him unto this land in which ye dwell.\"\nActs vii. 4., directly contradicts the chapter in Genesis, where the\nStory of Abraham's leaving Haran is related, for it is certain from\nthence, that Abraham left his father Zerah[fn39] in Haran alive\nwhen he departed, and that he did not die till many ' years\nafterwards.\"\n\nOn this Mr. Everett observes, \"The difficulty is this, that Zerah is\nsaid in Genesis ch. 11. to have been seventy years old when\nAbraham was born, and to have lived two hundred and five years.\nBut Abraham is also said to have left Haran when he was aged\nseventy-five years [Genesis xii. 14.]; at which time of course; his\nFather was one hundred and forty-five years old, and therefore\nmust have lived sixty years after his son Abraham left Haran. But\nStephen in the passage in question says, that Abraham left Haran\nafter his Father was dead. Now this direct contradiction is quite\ncleared up by the Samaritan copies of the Pentateuch, which give\nthe whole age of Zerah exactly 145 years: and confirm the\naccount of Stephen, that Abraham waited till the decease of his\nfather, and then immediately left Haran.  Had Mr. English no light\nupon this subject, but what he derived from his unlettered Rabbi,\nor even from the Commentators whose \"troubles\" he finds or\nfeigns, one could not blame him for passing over this fact in\nsilence.  But I remember well the time, when Mr. English\ncollected[fn40] the text of the Samaritan copy as it stands in\nKennicott's Bible, for the express purpose of ascertaining the\ndiversity of the Hebrew and Samaritan texts. To suppress now a\nreading from this copy, which entirely removes his objection,\nargues a deplorable forgetfulness, or a willful fraud; and it would\nbe a piece of affectation in me to speak of it in milder terms,\" p.\n340. of Mr. Everett's work.\n\nTo put this courteous language to the blush, it is only necessary to\nobserve, that the most distinguished Hebrew Critics [I think, if my\nmemory does not deceive me, I may name De Rossi, for\ninstance,] adhere to the reading of the Hebrew bible as the true\none, and have not suffered themselves to be swayed by the\nstrong Christian motives which have biassed Mr. Everett in this\ninstance. Stephen, who was a Jew, would also never have given\nthe preference to a reading-of the Pentateuch of the Samaritan's,\nwhich also abounds with blunders. The Gentile author of the Book\nof Acts probably fabricated the speech.]\n\n[fn39  for \"Zerah\" read \"Terah\"]\n\n[fn40  for \"collected\" read \"collated\"]\n\n[fn41 Mr. Everett, in. a note to p. 194 of his work, speaks of\nSalathiel and Zorobabel as succeeding to the \"throne of Judah\nafter the Babylonish captivity. Any one who will read the books of\nEzra and Nehemiah with attention, will be satisfied that this\nlanguage is quite ridiculous: forasmuch as that Salathiel was a\ncaptive slave at Babylon, and Zorobabel was but at best the\nGovernor of Judea for the King of Persia, and all the Jews under\nhis command were subject to the orders of Tabnai[fn42] and\nShether Boznia. \"Governors beyond the river\" for the Persian\nKing. See Ezra ch. ix. 8, 9. Neh. ch. vi. 6, 7. and ch. ix. 37. In this\nand in many other instances, Mr. Everett in order to gain his\ncause, has been obliged to forget the command recorded in \"the\nbeggarly elements,\" to have been given from Mount Sinai, \"thou\nshalt not speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest\njudgment.\" Exod. xxiii, 2. There are, however, cases in which\nlawyers allow that this precept may be dispensed with, particularly\nif the cause be of great importance: and more particularly still\nwhen the client pays well.]\n\n[fn42  for \"Romans\" read \"Asmonaeans\"  for \"Tabnai\" read\n\"Tatnai\"]\n\n[fn43 The Jewish Rabbies have been treated, by the Christian\ncontroversial writers, in the same manner as the foolish King of\nIsrael was treated, by the messengers of the defeated Benhadad.\n\"Now the men [the messengers of Benhadad] did diligently\nobserve whether any thing would come from him, and did hastily\ncatch at it.\" 1 Kings, ch. xx 33. The famous work of Dr. Allix,\nexposed by Nye, where Allix tries to show by quotations from\nJewish writings, that the ancient Jews were Trinitarians, is a\nnotable instance of this. Mr. Everett's work itself, enables me to\nlay before the reader one at least, which will verify my\nobservation.\n\nMr. Cary in his refutation of my first work, quoted with great\nsolemnity, one Rabbi Alshek as maintaining that the 53d. of Isaiah\nreferred to the Messiah. Every one of Mr. Cary's lay readers,\nundoubtedly have supposed that this was the truth, the whole\ntruth, and nothing but the truth. But it was not. The whole truth\nleaks out in Mr. Everett's work, in a note to p. 143, where Mr.\nEverett says, that this famous Rabbi \"having acknowledged that\nthe prophet had the Messiah in view [in the 53d. of Isaiah,], he\nafterwards applied the oracle to some other person, and finally to\nMoses!\" Now in the name of common sense I would, ask, of what\nvalue can the testimony and authority of a man be, who could be\ncapable of such contradictory nonsense as this.\n\nThe Jewish Rabbies, in general, have verified completely the\nprediction of the prophet. \"Jehovah said, Forasmuch as this\npeople draw near to me with their mouth, and with their lips do\nhonour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their\nfear toward me is taught by the precepts of men, [possibly alluding\nto the traditions of the elders,] therefore, behold I will proceed to\ndo a marvellous work among this people, even a marvellous work\nand a wonder; for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and\nthe understanding of their prudent men shall be hid,\" Is. ch. Xxix.\n13, 14.\n\nMr. Everett says, that it is notorious that the Rabbies the most\ncontemptible critics on the sacred writings that have appeared, p.\n49. and in another part of his work, says that they are so silly that\nhe is almost ashamed to quote them, 229. Notwithstanding all this,\nhe is continually justifying his own follies by appealing to theirs:\nsuch is Mr. Everett's respect for the understandings of his readers,\nthat he is continually hauling the poor Rabbies to the bar of the\npublic; he makes them \"hold up their culprit paws,\" and pinches\ntheir ears to make them say what he pleases. His pages are\ncrowded with their names; unutterable names; names which\nreduce \"arms! and George! and Brunswick!\" into tameness and\ninsignificance. If such means of defending Christianity are\nsuccessful, I shall no longer doubt that it was possible for the Devil\nAsmodus to have been corked up in a bottle by the hard words of\na conjurer.]\n\n[fn44  for \"carinficina,\" read \"carnificina\"]\n\n[fn45  Or \"soliloquize upon\" the original word in the Hebrew is\nused in this sense in Is. ch. xiv. 16]\n\n[fn46  \"Thou hast made us the offscouring and refuse in the midst\nof the peoples,\" says Jer. Lam. ch. iii. 45.]\n\n[fn47  The prophet here compares Israel to the scape goat, who\nhad the sins of the people-laid upon him, and was banished into\nthe wilderness.]\n\n[fn48  for \"with\" read \"through\"]\n\n[fn49 Or \"fierce oppressor.\" See Eichorn's Lex. In loc.]\n\n[fn50  \"In deaths often\" says Paul, meaning terrible dangers or\nsufferings.]\n\n[fn51  Mr. Everett in his zeal to catch me at a fault with regard to\nthis prophecy of Isaiah, has himself stumbled and fallen. I had\nmaintained in my first work, in reference to this passage, that of\nthe subject of this prophecy it is; said, \"He shall see his seed and\nshall prolong his days,\" and that therefore it could not relate to\nJesus who had no posterity. Mr. Everett in his remarks upon this\np. 147 of his work, spiritualises the word \"seed,\" and says it\nrelates to the church, and he exclaims against me as follows, p.\n147. \"What indolent carelessness it is to say that the word seed\nshall not be spiritualized here, when the very next verse says, he\nshall see the travail of his soul.\"  \"What poor mortals we are,\" says\nSir Hugh!  If Mr. Everett will look at the Hebrew, he will find that\nthe \"indolent carelessness\" he speaks of, was not mine but his; for\nthe Hebrew word translated travail, has no reference whatever to\nchildbearing, but signifies fearful toil, or painful distress. The\nEnglish word travail, in the time of the translators of the Bible had\nthis signification. They have employed it in this signification in the\npassages following: \"And Moses told his father-in-law all that the\nLord had done unto Pharoah and to the Egyptians for Israel's\nsake, and all the travail that had come upon them by the way.\" Ex.\nch. xviii. 8. Again, \"this sore travail hath God given to the sons of\nmen to be exercised therewith.\" Eccles. i. 13.  As Mr. Everett says,\np.114 of his work, \"It is good to be positive but better to be correct;\nand the reader I doubt not will agree with me, that such\ndogmatical blundering as this is prevent-. ed from being offensive\nonly as it is ludicrous.\"]\n\n[fn52 The prophet represents here, that Israel should be to the\nnations what Aaron was to the Jews. Aaron was considered as\nbearing away the sins of the Jews on the day of atonement. \"Ye\nshall be named the priests of Jehovah, and in men shall call you\nthe ministers of our God.\" Is. ch. lxi. 6.]\n\n[fn53  Have their complaints been \"fiercer\" than the flames of the\npiles of Madrid, Lisbon, Paris, Italy, Germany, and England, in\nwhich thousands of them have been burnt to ashes? For shame!\nMr. Everett. The recording angel may drop a tear upon what you\nhave written, not to blot it out, but in compassion for the miseries\nfor which you seem to think words of \"complaint\" are an\nequivalent.]\n\n[fn54  Mr. Everett, after having poured forth what is quoted above,\nvery consistently adds in a note to p. 137, \"I cheerfully agree with\none of the most active benefactors of the Jewish nation, who while\nhe acknowledges these facts, changes the blame of them to the\nChristians.\" Very true, and truly I do not know, what right one man\nhas to trample another into the mire, and then abuse him for being\ndirty. Mr. Everett remarks upon the same subject, p. 210, \"Bowed\ndown with universal scorn, they have been called secret and\nsullen; cut off from pity and charity, they have been thought selfish\nand unfeeling, and are summoned to believe on the Prince of\nPeace by ministers clothed with terror and death.\"  What an\nunconscious comment from the pen of a Christian on the words of\nthe prophet.  \"He was despised and the outcast of men, a man of\nsorrows, and familiar with suffering, and we hid as it were our\nfaces from him; he was despised and we esteemed him not.\"]\n\n[fn55 I have had the satisfaction to find, since my return to\nAmerica, that the distinguished Christian Hebraeist, Rosenmuller,\nin his notes on the Old Testament, maintains as I do, that the 53d.\nof Isaiah, refers not to Christ, but to the Hebrew nation, of which\nthe following extract from the work referred to may serve as proof,\n\"In tot. V. T. locis Messias tam variis modis describatur, tamen ne\nunicum quidem vestigium deprehenditur unde collegere jure\nposset existimasse veteres Haebreos Messiam quem expectabant\ntalia esse perpessurum quae ministrum divinum hac pericopa, [Is.\n53.] descriptum perpessum esse legimus. Ubicunque vel in\nPsalmis vel in prophaetarum libris de Messia agitur semper nobis\nproponitur imago potentissimi regis, felicissimi herois,\ngloriossissimi reipublicae statoris, coloribus ab imperii Davidici aut\nSalomonei flore, regumque orientalium pompa sumptis depicta.\"\nRosenmuller's notes on the 53d. of Isaiah.]\n\n[fn56 for \"will\" read \"well\"]\n\n[fn57  \"Thou hast put forth a riddle unto the children of my people.\"\nsays Sampson's Philistine wife to him, Judges ch. xiv. 16.]\n\n[fn58  I had made the same objection in my first publication. Mr.\nEverett, in his elaborate view of my arguments upon the 53d. of\nIsaiah, has not thought proper to notice this objection: possibly he\nthought it a trivial one.]\n\n[fn59  Buxtorf's remark upon the very word in Is. 53. ch. is\n\"arctatus, coarctatus, oppressus, oppressus tuit, propria\nexactiquibus.\" Buxtorf's Heb. Lex.  Mr. Everett p. 146 of his work\nsays, that Robertson declares that the radical idea of the word\nwhich Mr. English insists upon rendering \"he was oppressed by\npecuniary exactions\", to be \"fearful distress.\" To this I answer, that\nRobertson was a Christian and had a reason for saying so.]\n\n[fn60  The only works I have had to aid me in the composition of\nthis book, are Mr. Everett's work, a Hebrew Bible, [fn61] and\nLexicon, and the English Bible. I have not been able to procure\nany thing beyond this in Egypt, and think myself fortunate in\nhaving so much.]\n\n[fn61  before \"and\" insert \"Grammar\"]\n\n[fn62  for \"violations\" read \"quotations\"]\n\n[fn63  Gospel ac. to John. xii, 38. Rom. x. 16. Acts viii.,32, 33.]\n\n[fn64  That Grotius would sometimes prevaricate to serve a turn is\ncertain. There is an anecdote on record, contained in the notes to\nGibbon's account of Mohammed in his Roman History, which\nproves this. In Grotius' famous book on the truth of the Christian\nReligion, there is a story that Mohammed had a tame pidgeon\nwhich he taught to come and peck in his ear, in order to make his\nfollowers believe that the bird was the organ by whom he received\nrevelations from God. This story is not believed, nor was ever\nheard of among the Musselmen. On the publication of Grotius'\nbook, a friend learned in Oriental Literature, came to him and\nasked him for his authority for this story, Grotius frankly owned\nthat he had none, in other words that the story was a pious fraud\nin order to stigmatize Mohammedanism. \"This story\" Gibbon says,\n\"was accordingly left out of the Arabic version of Grotius' Book,\nintended to circulate among the-Musselmen, for fear that they\nshould laugh at such a piece of ignorance or effrontery: but it still\nmaintains an edifying place in those copies printed for the perusal\nof Christians.\"! I quote from memory.\n\nIt is really a pity that the Protestant Church, which like a Magdalen\nprofesses to repent other errors committed during her former\nconnection with \"the mother of abominations,\" should yet retain so\nmany of the bad habits contracted during their past intimacy.\nSome folks have even pretended to have observed, that\nnotwithstanding their old quarrel, they seem to have\nrecommenced a \"nodding acquaintance.\" I hope the report is\nuntrue.]\n\n[fn65 Mr. Everett will probably say, that he made these deadly\nstabs at my character upon the same principle that the New\nEngland Cobbler killed the Indian Hogan Mogan. \"Not out of\nmalice, but mere zeal Because he was an infidel.\"]\n\n[fn66 I have a right to believe so, for Mr. Everett quotes Priestley's\nnotes, p. 339 of his work. Dr. Priestley united in his character, the\nrare concurrence of a keen controversial writer, with great fairness\nand candour. He seems always to have been willingly disposed to\nresign an untenable opinion, when convinced by the arguments of\nhis opponent. His conduct in regard to the question between the\nJews and Christians, may be considered as a proof of this. He\nwrote letters to the Jews in defence of Christianity, which were\nreplied to by Levi. In this controversy Levi had evidently the better\nof Priestley.  Priestley seems to have been sensible of this, which\noccasioned him to examine the question more minutely. The result\nof his examination led him to avow, in a Dissertation in the\nTheological Repository published in England, I believe in the very\none which Mr. Everett refers to [Theol. Rep. vol. 5.] that the\nprophets clearly justify the Jews for expecting as their Messiah, a\nglorious monarch of the house and name of David, who should\nreign over them and all the human race; but he also maintained as\nI think in the same Dissertation, that Jesus Christ is nevertheless\npredicted by the 53d. of Isaiah. Several years afterwards, when\nPriestley resided in America, he published his notes on Scripture,\nwherein he abandons the Christian interpretation, of the 53d. of\nIsaiah, and applies it as I do to the Jewish nation.]\n\n[fn67  If all that Mr. Everett has said upon this subject were true, it\nwould amount after all only to an argument ad prejudicium, for the\nJews of past times, who believed the dreams of the Rabbies, but\nis of no weight whatever with those who reject them, as do all the\nBiblical critics of the present day.]\n\n[fn68  There occurs to me an instance of carelessness or\nsomething worse on the part of Mr. Everett in p. 342 of his work. I\nhad said in my first publication, that \"there is in the speech of\nJames, Arts xv. a quotation from Amos in which, to make it fit the\nsubject, (which after all it does not fit) is the substitution of the\nwords \"the remnant of men,\" for \"the remnant of Edom,\" as it is in\nthe original.\" On this Mr. Everett remarks with astonishing'\ncomposure, \"There are few of my readers to whom I need say,\nthat the same Hebrew word means 'men,' and 'Edom,' according'\nas it is pronounced, and St. James has as fair a right to pronounce\nit men,' as Mr. English has to pronounce it 'Edom.'\" The only way\nby which Mr. Everett can escape the charge of fraud in this affair,\nis by allowing that he did not take the trouble to look at the\npassage quoted from Amos, ix. 12. in the Hebrew Bible, from\nwhich it will appear that neither St. James, nor any other Saint,\nhas a right to read the passage \"the remnant of men\" (or Adam;)\nbecause the Hebrew word contains a letter (vau,) which the word\nAdam does not contain, and which limits its signification to Edom.\n\nI would observe by the. way, that the passage in Amos \"that they,\n(i. e. Israel,) may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the\nheathen (or nations) which are called by my name, appears to\ncontain an allusion to the Christians and Mohammedans, who are\nthe only nations besides the Jews who invoke, the name of\nJehovah, and profess faith in his prophets. There are not a few\npassages in the prophets, which have a significance at present,\nwhich they could not have had at the time the predictions were\nuttered.]\n\n[fn69  for \"sun\" read \"been\"]\n\n[fn70  for \"simple\" read \"single\"]\n\n[fn71  In the beginning of the 9th. ch. of Daniel, the prophet says;\n\"I Daniel, understood by books the number of years whereof the\nword of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would\naccomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem. And I\nset my face unto the Lord God, to seek by prayer and\nsupplications with fasting, sackcloth and ashes.\" It appears from\nhis prayer, that he supposed the Babylonish captivity of seventy\nyears, would terminate the chastisement of his nation. Upon which\nthe angel Gabriel was sent to \"give him skill and understanding,\"\nand to inform him, that their chastisement would not be terminated\nby the captivity of seventy years, but by one of \"seventy times\nseven,\" i. e. a long and undefined period. The words \"seven,\" and\n\"seventy,\" were frequently used by the Hebrews to signify an\nindefinite number, and \"seventy times seven\" is a Hebreism used\nto signify a great and indefinite number. Thus one of the disciples\nof Jesus is represented as asking him, \"Lord, how oft shall my\nbrother sin against me, and I forgive him; until seven times? Jesus\nsaith unto him, I say not unto thee, until seven times, but until\nseventy times seven.\" Mat. ch. xviii. 21, 22.]\n\n[fn72  In my first work I had alleged this prophecy of Daniel, and\nhad inserted this word \"in\" enclosed in a parenthesis, in order to\nsignify, that it was not in the original, but was suggested by it as\nnecessary to the sense of the original. This \"in,\" in a parenthesis,\nthe zealous Mr. Everett, who loves to find fault, pronounces to be\n\"an absolute interpolation,\" \"and a shameless one too.\" p. 157 of\nhis work.]\n\n[fn73  The reader will see that I suppose the original to make one\nperiod of seven weeks, and one of sixty-two. \"The English\ntranslation renders it \"seven weeks and threescore and two\nweeks,\" making one period of the two. This appears to me to be\ninadmissible: because if the prophet meant to signify but one\nperiod, he would, as I think, have said, according to the analogy of\nthe Hebrew language, not \"seven weeks, and threescore and two\nweeks,\" but \"nine weeks and threescore, weeks,\" In the Hebrew\nthe clauses of the seven weeks, and sixty and two weeks, are\nseparated by a character which frequently, in the Hebrew Bible,\nperforms the function of a full stop.]\n\n[fn74  delete \"Joshua]\n\n[fn75  read \"heels over head\"]\n\n[fn76  Mr. Everett appear; himself to have been somewhat\nembarrassed by the gravity he is obliged to maintain in holding\nforth this antithetical \"analogy.\" For he says, that he forbears \"to\npursue analogies like these, which though they abound in the\nwritings of the Old Testament, [I challenge him to point out a\nsingle such instance] and are familiar to all the nations of the East,\nhave long been succeeded among us by a stricter style of\nreasoning\" p. 178. They have indeed been long since exploded by\nthe Modern Biblical Critics: and I doubt not that if this curious\nanalogy should ever be subject to the notice of Eichorn or\nLessing, they would in their closets peruse it \"with a smile or a\nsigh.\"]\n\n[fn77  \"Who is this that cometh from Edom, with dyed garments\nfrom Bozrah? this that is glorious in his apparel, travelling in the\ngreatness of his strength?--I that speak in righteousness mighty to\nsave. Wherefore art thou red in thine apparel, and thy garments\nlike him that treadeth in the winefat--I have trodden the wine press\nalone; and of the peoples there vas none with me: for I trode them\nin mine anger, and trampled them in my fury, and Their blood\nsprinkled upon my garments, and I have stained all my raiment.\nFor the day of vengeance is in mine heart, and the year of my\nredeemed is come. And I looked, and there was none to help: and\nI wondered there was none to uphold, therefore mine own arm\nbrought salvation unto me; and my fury it upheld me, and I trode\ndown the peoples in mine anger, and made them drunk in my fury,\nand I brought down their strength to the earth.\" See Is. ch. lxiii. in\nthe Hebrew. This passage relates to the \"Great and Terrible Day\nof Jehovah.\" mentioned in Malachi. The Psalms of the Prophets\nabound with descriptions of [fn78] it both terrible and magnificent.\nSee for example Ezekiel xxxviii: & xv-xix chapters. Joel ch. iii. and\nZech. ch. xiv.]\n\n[fn78  for \"of\" read \"and\"]\n\n[fn79  The enumerations given by the Jews themselves are\nalways below the truth. They conceal the real amount for\nparticular reasons. In Spain and Portugal, where it is dangerous\nfor a man to be known to be a Jew, there are notwithstanding,\nmany thousands; probably one third of the population of Portugal\nis of Jewish descent. I have seen a Jew at Paris, who had resided\nseveral years in Spain, who has told me, that the number of his\nnation in Spain is great and unsuspected. I believe him, for Orobio\nand Acosta, both Jews of the Peninsula, affirm that Jews\ndisguised as Christians, were to be found not only among the\npopulace of the Peninsula, but among the nobles and bishops. In\nthose countries (Spain and Portugal,) where the Inquisition\nobliged every body to be educated as Christians, the fathers who\nwere secretly Jews, were accustomed, when their children came\nto the years of discretion, to inform them of their descent, and to\nengage them secretly to conform to the religion of their fathers. If\nthey found their conversion impracticable, these wretched parents\nwere accustomed to poison such children, to prevent their\ncommunicating the dangerous secret to the Inquisition, which\nwould occasion the whole family to be burned alive. See the\nBiography of Orobio and Acosta for some interesting information\nupon this subject.]\n\n[fn80  for \"exonerated\" read \"consecrated\"]\n\n[fn81  \"David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the\nhouse of Israel, neither shall the priests the Levites want a man\nbefore me,\" i. e. the house of David and the tribe of Levi shall\nnever be extinct, when called upon to fulfil the prophecies of the\nkingdom of the Messiah, and the re-establishment of the ritual of\nthe temple, David will not want a man to sit upon the throne of the\nhouse of Israel, neither will the priests the Levites want a man to\ndo sacrifice. And how was this to be secured, because says God,\n\"as the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of\nthe sea measured, so will I multiply the seed of David my servant,\nand the Levites the priests that minister unto me.\" That this is the\nsense of the phrase \"shall not want a. man,\" is evident from the\nemployment of the same expression by Jeremiah in xxxv. of his\nProphecies: \"Thus saith Jehovah of Hosts, the God of Israel:\nJonadab the son of Rechab shall not want a man to stand before\nme for ever, ch. xxxv. 19. i. e. not that a particular descendant of\nJonadab the son of Rechab should always be standing in the\npresence of the Lord for ever: but that he should never want a\nrepresentative, his posterity should never be cut off. It is a singular\nfact that the descendants of Jonadab the son of Rechab still exist\nin Arabia, preserving' the customs of their fathers; they are called\n\"Beni al Khaib,\" i. e. descendants of Heber. See Jud. ch. iv. 11.\n\nTo these considerations it may be added, that Jeremiah himself\npredicts the dethronement of the house of David, the destruction\nof the temple, and the captivity of the priests, and the whole\nJewish nation, and as it is an allowed principle of sound criticism\nthat if the expressions of a writer are capable of two significations,\none of which would make him contradict himself; and the other\nwould leave him consistent: it is but fair to suppose that he meant\nto be consistent, and should be interpreted in the sense which\nexcludes self contradiction.]\n\n[fn82  Ezekiel gives a. prophecy of the same events spoken of by\nJeremiah, and in these words. \"Thus saith Jehovah God; I will\neven gather you from the peoples, and assemble you out of the\ncountries where ye have been scattered; and I will give you the\nland of Israel. And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new\nspirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh,\nand will give them a heart of flesh, that they may walk in my\nstatutes, and keep mine ordinances, and do them; and they shall\nbe my people, and I will be their God.\" Ezek. x. xi. 17, 18, 19, 20.\nNow what is meant in the Old Testament by \"God's statutes, and\nGod's ordinances,\" is not the Mosaic law always signified by these\nexpressions? Again, Ezek. says, ch. xxxvi. 23, &c. \"I will sanctify\nmy great name, which was profaned among the nations, which ye\nhave profaned in the midst of them; and the nations shall know\nthat I am Jehovah, saith the Lord God, when I shall be sanctified\nin you before their eyes. For I will take you from among the\nnations, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into\nyour own land; then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye\nshall be clean; from all your filthiness and from all your idols will I\nrelease you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I\nput within you; and I will take away the stony heart out of your\nflesh, and will give you a heart of flesh, and I will put my spirit\nwithin you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall\nkeep my judgments and do them.\" See also Ezekiel, ch. xxxvii.\nfrom verse 20 to the end.]\n\n[fn83  for \"the\" read \"a\"]\n\n[fn84  Ac. to the Hebrew.]\n\n[fn85  In my first publication I had maintained, that Jesus Christ\nhad not taught the abolishment of the Law, and alleged in proof\nthe passages following. \"Think not I am come to destroy the law or\nthe Prophets; I am not come to destroy but to fulfil. For verily I say\nunto you. Till heaven and earth pass, one jot [i. e. the smallest\nletter of it] or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be\nfulfilled.\" (or consummated) Mat. v. 17. 18. \"It is easier for heaven\nand earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.\" Luke. xvi. 17.\nMr. Everett has a device by which he thinks he can evade the\ngripe of these passages: perhaps the following may satisfy him\nthat there is no way of escape. Luke reports, Acts xxi. 20. that\nJames the bishop of the mother church of Jerusalem, said to Paul,\n\"Thou seest brother, how many thousands of Jews there are\nwhich believe: [i. e. are Christians] and they are all zealous of the\nLaw.\" Now if Jesus Christ had taught the abolishment of the Law,\nit appears to me that, his followers would not have been zealous\nin adhering to it: as to do so would be giving the lie to their\nmaster's doctrine.]\n\n[fn86  So called, in Is. Ch. lxvi. 22.]\n\n[fn87 The ancient Britons were savages and painted themselves\nblue when wishing to appear in full dress. In truth it is hardly three\nhundred years since the bears of Europe have learned to walk up\non their hinder legs, and had \"a man's heart given unto them.\" And\nit is only about two hundred years since \"the wild boar out of the\nforest\" [fn88] has become a learned pig. It is not much more than\na hundred years since the people of Boston, have left off hanging\ntheir fellow creatures for being witches and Quakers.]\n\n[fn88  after \"forest\" insert \"of the North\"]\n\n[fn89  Mohammed was descended from Abraham through\nIshmael.]\n\n[fn90  The numerous regulations concerning defilement, and the\nritual of purification, contained in the Pentateuch, were very proper\nin reference to the immediate and personal presence of the\nDivinity among the Israelites, which therefore rendered the most\nperfect cleanliness a duty. These regulations were also adopted to\nthe peculiar circumstance of the Jewish nation, which, was\nseparated from all the rest of mankind and not obliged to go over\ntheir frontier to mingle with other people. But it is very true that\nsuch regulations are \"not calculated for us\" Gentiles; because men\nwho are obliged constantly to mingle with other men, cannot\nobserve them.]\n\n[fn91  for \"rights\" read \"rites\"]\n\n[fn92 delete \"the\"]\n\n[fn93  According to 1 Chron. ch. xxix, 3, &c. the gold employed in\nadorning the Temple, amounted to at least 8000 talents, and the\nsilver to 17000 talents. This vast mass of treasure was given by\nDavid and his princes: how much was added to it by Solomon is\nnot said.]\n\n[fn94 The number of the males of the tribe of Levi in the time of\nMoses, is said, Numbers, ch. xxvi. 62. to have been twenty three\nthousand. But in the reign of Solomon the number of males of the\ntribe of Levi from thirty years and upwards, was thirtyeight\nthousand. See 1 Chron. ch. xxiii, 3.]\n\n[fn95  for \"streaming\" read \"steaming\"]\n\n[fn96  The name of the Deity \"JEHOVAH,\" is a compound of two\nHebrew words, the first of which signifies \"HE IS,\" and the second\n\"HE SHALL BE.\" The word JEHOVAH expresses these two\nsublime ideas in three syllables.]\n\n[fn97  for \"unfeeling\" read \"unreflecting\"]\n\n[fn98  Mr. Everett represents me as supposing (because I\nmaintain that it is the sense of the prophets that the temple of\nJerusalem will oneday be the house of prayer for all mankind) that\nall nations must come and worship at the temple three times a\nyear as the Jews were required to do. See Mr. Everett's work, p.\n207.\n\nBut if Mr. Everett were more familiar with the Bible, he would learn\nthat the prophets represent that this visit to the future temple, from\nother nations than the Jews, will be required only once a year.\n\"And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the\nnations which came against Jerusalem, shall even go up from\nyear to year to worship the King Jehovah of Hosts, and to keep\nthe feast of Tabernacles.\" Zech. ch. xiv. 16.\n\nNow supposing that the Old Testament predicts the truth in\naffirming that the earth is to be restored to its primitive state, as it\nwas at the beginning, when God viewed every thing that he had\nmade, and behold it was very good.  If the earth is spontaneously\nto produce the delicious nourishment which we may suppose that\nAdam enjoyed, a journey once a year through an ever varied\nparadise to the temple of Jehovah, can surely be no toil. If a\nperson will look at the situation of Jerusalem on a map of the\nworld, he will be sensible, that no spot on earth is as eligible to be\nchosen for a common centre of worship for mankind as that city. It\nstands about sixty miles from the Mediterranean, which\ncommunicates with the Atlantic, and not many days Journey from\nthe Red Sea, which communicates with the Indian Ocean. And\nwhen the winds and waves shall cease to be dangerous, who\nwould not desire to visit as often as possible, the land which is\nsaid to be \"the glory of all lands,\" and illuminated by the ineffable\nsymbol of the immediate presence of the Lord of the Universe, at\nwhose effulgence \"the sun shall be ashamed, and the moon\nconfounded.\"\n\nNeither is it necessary to suppose, that I know of, that every man\nof the human race should be annually present; if some come from\nall nations, all nations may be said to come. See Appendix, I.]\n\n[fn99  after \"would\" insert \"not\"]\n\n[fn100  \"And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch. Then\ncame the Jews round about him, and said unto him, how long dost\nthou draw our souls asunder? If thou be the Messiah, tell us\nplainly.\" John x, 23, 24. See the original Greek.]\n\n[fn101  When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come,\nand take him by force, to make him a king, he departed again into\na mountain, himself alone.\" John vi. 15.]\n\n[fn102  It is remarkable that the gospels represent Jesus as\nrefusing to acknowledge himself to the Jews as the Messiah. The\ngospels say, that Jesus confided his Messiahship to the disciples\nas a secret, with express injunctions not to betray it. \"Then\ncharged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was\nthe Messiah.\" Mat. xvi. 20. See also Mark viii. 29. and Luke ix. 21.\nThis makes it possible that he never did claim that character, and\nthat the glory [fn103] in the gospels that he had told it as a secret\nto his disciples, was invented in order to furnish a reply to the\nJews, who might have told the first Christians, that Jesus had\nnever told them so, and of course never pretended to be\nconsidered as such, and that the Christians could not justly blame\nthem for rejecting pretensions which Jesus never made to them,\nto whom especially he ought to have plainly declared them if he\nwished them to be received. The truth of the matter appears to be,\nthat the notion of the Messiahship of Jesus, had originally no\nbetter foundation than the mistaken enthusiasm of his followers.]\n\n[fn103  for \"glory\" read \"story\"]\n\n[fn104  The case of the Jews and Christians is parallel to that of\n\"the prophet of Judah,\" and \"the prophet of Bethel.\" The Christians\nallow that God himself gave the law to the Jews, but they say to\nthe Jews that Jesus was ordered by God to repeal it.\n\n\"It was said unto me (says the prophet of Judah) by the word of\nJehovah, Thou shalt eat no bread, nor drink water there, (at\nBethel the chapel of the golden calf,) nor turn to go by the way\nthat thou camest. He (i. e. the prophet of Bethel) said unto him, I\nam a. prophet also as thou art; and an angel spake unto me by\nthe word of Jehovah, saying; Bring him back with thee into thine\nhouse, that he may eat bread, and drink water. But he lied unto\nhim. So he went back with him, and did eat bread in his house,\nand drink water.\"\n\n\"And. it came to pass, as they sat at the table, that the word of\nJehovah came unto the prophet that brought him back: and he\ncried unto the man of God that came from Judah, saying, Thus\nsaith. Jehovah, forasmuch as thou hast disobeyed the mouth of\nJehovah, and hast not kept the commandment which Jehovah thy\nGod commanded thee, but camest back, and hast eaten bread\nand drunk water in the place, of the which Jehovah did say unto\nthee, eat no bread, and drink no water, thy carcase shall not come\nunto the sepulchre of thy fathers.\" 1 Kings, ch. xiii.]\n\n[fn105  after \"that\" insert \"as\"]\n\n[fn106  1. If the Christians should do this, the fundamental articles\nof their creed, would be, to love the Lord their God with all their\nheart, and with all their mind, and soul, and strength, and to love\ntheir neighbours as themselves: for on these two commandments\nhang all the law and the prophets.\n\n2. If the Christians should do this, they would have precisely the\nsame Scriptures which the apostles and first Christians had, and\nwhich they considered as sufficient. Even Paul himself\npronounces, that the Old Testament was \"given by inspiration of\nGod, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for\ninstruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect,\nthoroughly furnished unto all good works.\" 2 Tim. ch. iii. 16.\n\n3. If the Christians should do this, all the endless and rancourous\ndisputes about the trinity, incarnation, atonement,\ntransubstantiation, worship of the Virgin Mary, the saints, their\nimages and relics, the supremacy of the Pope, et id genus omne,\nwould be quietly laid upon the shelf, and torment mankind no\nmore.\n\n4. The hundred sects into which Christians are divided, would\ncoalesce; for it is the New Testament which keeps them asunder.\nSo long as that book is believed to contain a Revelation from God,\nthere can be no peace. For pious and good men who believe that\nit is of divine authority, and who are zealously disposed to\ndiscover from its contents \"what is the mind of the spirit,\" must\nnecessarily be divided in their opinions; BECAUSE the New\nTestament is not only inconsistent with the Old, but is also\ninconsistent with itself too; and must therefore necessarily create\na diversity of opinions in those who reverence it as the word of\nGod. This is the grand secret, and everacting cause, which has\nmade scisms in the church.]\n\n[fn107  Mr. Everett, p. 427 of his work, alluding to my anticipations\nin one of my publications, in which I expressed myself as aware of\nwhat I should have to encounter, in consequence of my\nundertaking on behalf of the oppressed, and slandered Jews; says\nwith something like \"the charity of a monk, and the meekness of\nan inquisitor,\" that \"the affecting allusion he (Mr. English,) has\nmade to his prospects in the world, has many a time restrained\nme, when I ought to have used the language of indignation.\"\n\nIf a man had told me, that in consequence of my enterprise I\nshould encounter great misfortunes, I should have answered, I\nexpected, and was prepared to meet them. But if he had told me,\na native of the New World discovered a few centuries ago, that the\ntime would come when I should write upon this subject, in the very\nland, and almost on the very spot that gave birth to Moses and the\nPharoahs, I should have thought him amusing himself with a jest;\nnevertheless such is the fact. I write this book; on the banks of old\nNile, and in sight of the pyramids.]\n\n[fn108  I have read in a Magazine, of an itinerant Methodist\npreacher, not perfectly acquainted with the sublime arts of reading\nand writing, who, in a sermon of his in praise of Industry, alledged\nas a proof of God's aversion to idleness, that God commanded\nMoses, when he built the Tabernacle in the wilderness, to cover it\nwith \"BEGGAR'S SKINS.\" The English Translation says Ex. ch.\nxxvi 14. with BADGER'S SKINS.\"  Now I suppose that if such a\nquotation from the Old. Testament was found in a work whose title\npage represented it to have been written by Bishop Marsh, that\nthere is not a scholar, in. Christendom, who would not pronounce\nthe book to be a forgery.]\n\n[fn109  Mr. Everett says p. 243, of his work that \"not one of the\nbooks of the New Testament, nor all of them together, were\nintended to be a forensic defence of Christianity.\" The-Epistle to\nthe Hebrews, at least, convicts this opinion of mistake.\n\nHe says also p. 273., \"As to what Mr. English, after Collins,\nproceeds to say, that the authors of the books of the New\nTestament always argue absolutely from the quotations they cite\nas prophecies out of the books of the old Testament, it is so far\nfrom being correct, that it is highly notorious, that they do not\nargue from them at all.\" Mr. Everett must have felt very desperate\nto venture upon such an assertion in the face of the Epistle to the\nHebrews. Mr. Everett may succeed with some in facing down\nargument, but he is mistaken if he thinks, that\n\n\"Stubborn facts must still give place \"To his unpenetrable face,\n\"Which-makes its way through all affairs, &c. &c.\"']\n\n[fn110  Bishop Marsh does honour to his English honesty and\ncommon sense, in refusing to allow that such strong expressions\ncan signify a mere accommodation of a passage in the Old\nTestament. See his Notes to Michaelis' Introduction to the New\nTestament.]\n\n[fn111  For \"was\" read \"is\"]\n\n[fn112  For 21 read 23]\n\n[fn113   This Psalm is entitled in the English version \"a prayer for\nSolomon,\" It should have been translated \"a Psalm of Solomon.\"]\n\n[fn114  Mr. Everett says p. 51. that \"the Septuagint\ndiscountenances this rendering.\" What is that to me? I chose to\nabide by the original Hebrew, and not to follow a blundering,\ngarbled, and interpolated version, which frequently imposes a\nfalse sense upon the original, and not unfrequently no sense at all.\nmore Christiano.]\n\n[fn115  Mr. Everett, p. 52. considers this expression as a decisive\nproof that the prophecies of the Messiah's kingdom, must be\nunderstood figuratively. Is Mr. Everett so ignorant of his Bible as\nnot to know, that it represents that at the beginning animals did\nnot prey upon each other, and if it was so once, which Mr. Everett\nwill not deny, it may be so again. See Gen. ch. i. 30.]\n\n[fn116  for \"thus saith\" read \"this is\"]\n\n[fn117   The Greeks, Russians, and Copts will not worship\nimages, for that they say is flagrant idolatry; but they say there is\nno harm in praying before a picture. Their churches and houses\nare full of them. I have heard of a Greek bishop who employed a\nfamous Italian painter to make a picture of the bishop's patron,\nIsaiah [fn118]: when it was finished he refused to take it, and\nexpressed himself much shocked, by its appearance. The painter\nasked why?\n\n\"your picture, said the bishop is scandalous, the figure stands out\nfrom the canvass absolutely as if it were a statue; it would be\nidolatry in me to pray before such a picture.\"\n\n[fn118  for \"patron Isaiah\" read \"patron saint\"]\n\n[fn119   \"In the mountain of the height of Israel will I plant it: and it\nshall bring forth boughs and bear fruit, and be a glorious cedar\nand under it shall dwell all fowl of every wing; in the shadow (if the\nbranches thereof shall they dwell. And all the trees of the field\nshall know, that I Jehovah have brought down the high tree, have\nexalted the low tree, have dried up the green tree, and made the\ndry tree to flourish, I Jehovah have spoken it and I will do it.\"\nEzech. xvii. 23.]","title":"Five Pebbles from the Brook","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":41532}