Produced by Charles Klingman





FIVE PEBBLES

From

THE BROOK.

A Reply

TO

"A DEFENCE OF CHRISTIANITY"

WRITTEN BY

EDWARD EVERETT,

GREEK PROFESSOR OF HARVARD UNIVERSITY
IN ANSWER TO
"THE GROUNDS OF CHRISTIANITY EXAMINED
BY
COMPARING THE NEW TESTAMENT WITH THE OLD"

BY
GEORGE BETHUNE ENGLISH.

"Should a wise man utter vain knowledge, and fill his belly with the
east wind?"
"Should he reason with unprofitable talk? or with speeches
wherewith he can do no good?--Thou chooseth[fn1] the tongue of
the crafty. Thy own mouth condemneth thee, and not I: yea, thine
own lips testify against thee."
"Behold I will make thee a new sharp threshing instrument having
teeth."

PHILADELPHIA:

PRINTED FOR THE AUTHOR.

1824.

[PG Editor's Note: Many  printer's errors in this text
have been retained as found in the original--in particular
the will be found a large number of mismatched and
wrongspace quotation marks.]

ADVERTISEMENT.

WHEN I left America, I had no intention of giving Mr. Everett's
book a formal answer: but having learned since my arrival in the
Old World, that: the controversy in which I had engaged myself
had attracted some attention, and had been reviewed by a
distinguished member of a German university, my hopes of being
serviceable to the cause of truth and philanthrophy are revived,
and I have therefore determined to give a reply to Mr. Everett's
publication.

In this Work, as in my prior writings, I have taken for granted the
Divine Authority of the Old Testament, and I have argued upon the
principle that every book, claiming to be considered as a Divine
revelation and building itself upon the Old Testament as upon a
foundation, must agree with it, otherwise the superstructure
cannot stand. The New Testament, the Talmud, and the Koran are
all placed by their authors upon the Law and the Prophets, as an
edifice is upon its foundation; and if it be true that any or all of
them be found to be irreconcileable with the primitive Revelation
to which they all refer themselves, the question as to their Divine
Authority is decided against them, most obviously and completely.

This work was written in Egypt and forwarded to the U. States,
while I was preparing to accompany Ismael Pacha to the conquest
of Ethiopia; an expedition in which I expected to perish, and
therefore felt it to be my duty to leave behind me, something from
which my countrymen might learn what were my real sentiments
upon a most important and interesting subject; and as I hoped
would learn too, how grossly they had been deluded into building
their faith and hope upon a demonstrated error.

On my arrival from Egypt I found that the MS. had not been
published, and I was advised by several, of my friends to abandon
the struggle and to imitate their example; in submitting to the
despotism of popular opinion, which, they said, it was imprudent to
oppose. I was so far influenced by these representations--
extraordinary indeed in a country which  boasts that here freedom
of opinion and of speech is established by law--that I intended to
confine myself to sending the MS. to Mr. Everett; in the belief that
when he should have the weakness of his arguments in behalf of
what he defended and the injustice of his aspersions upon me,
fairly and evidently laid before him, that he would make me at
least a private apology. He chose to preserve a sullen silence,
probably believing that he is so securely seated in the saddle
which his brethren have girthed upon the back of "a strong ass"
that; there is no danger that the animal will give him a fall.

Not a little moved at this, I determined to do my myself justice, and
to publish the pages following.

This book is not the work of an Infidel. I am not an infidel; what I
have learned and seen in Europe, Asia and Africa, while it has
confirmed my reasons for rejecting the New Testament, has
rooted in my mind the conviction that the ancient Bible does
contain a revelation from the God of Nature, as firmly as my belief
in the first proposition of Euclid.

The whole analogy of Nature, while it is in many respects opposed
to the characteristics ascribed to the Divinity by the
metaphysicians, yet bears witness in my opinion, that this world
was made and is governed by just such a Being as the Jehovah of
the Old Testament; while the palpable fulfillment of predictions
contained in that book, and which is so strikingly manifest in the
Old World, leaves in my mind no doubt whatever, of the ultimate
fulfillment of all that it promises, and all that it threatens.

I cannot do better than to conclude these observations with the
manly declaration of the celebrated Christian orator Dr. Chalmers,
"We are ready, (says he,) to admit that as the object of the inquiry
is not the character, but the Truth of Christianity, the philosopher
should be careful to protect his mind from the delusions of its
charms.  He should separate the exercises of the understanding
from the tendencies of the fancy or of the heart. He should be
prepared to follow the light of evidence, though it should lead him
to conclusions the most painful and melancholy. He should train
his mind to all the hardihood of abstract and unfeeling intelligence.
He should give up every thing to the supremacy of argument and
he able to renounce without a sigh all the tenderest
possessions[fn 2] of infancy, the moment that TRUTH demands of
him the sacrifice." (Dr. Chalmers on the Evidence and Authority of
the Christian Religion. Ch. I.)

Finally, let the Reader remember, that "there is one thing in the
world more contemptible than the slave of a tyrant--it is the dupe
of a SOPHIST."

G. B. E.

PEBBLE I

And David "chose him five smooth stones out of the brook, and
put them in a shepherd's bag which he had, even in a scrip: and
his sling was in his hand: and he drew near to the Philistine."

Mr. Everett commences his work with the following remarks. "Was
Jesus Christ the person foretold by the prophets, as the Messiah
of the Jews?; one method, and a very obvious one, of examining
his claims to this character, is to compare his person, life, actions,
and doctrine, with the supposed predictions of them. But if it also
appear that this Jesus wrought such works, as evinced that he
enjoyed the supernatural assistance and cooperation of God, this
certainly is a fact of great importance. For we cannot say, that in
estimating the validity of our Lord's claims to the character of
Messiah, it is of no consequence whether, while he advanced
those claims, he wrought such works as proved his intimacy with
the God of truth. While he professed himself the Messiah, is it
indifferent whether he was showing himself to be as being beyond
delusion, and above imposture?--Let us make the case our own.
Suppose that we were witnesses of the miraculous works of a
personage of pretensions like our Lord's, should we think it
necessary or reasonable to resort to long courses of argument, or
indeed to any process of the understanding, except what was
requisite to establish the fact of the miracles? Should we, while he
was opening the eyes of the blind, and raising the dead from their
graves, feel it necessary to be deciphering prophecies, and
weighing these[fn 3] difficulties? Now we may transfer this case to
that of Christianity. The miracles of our Lord are either true or
false. The infidel if he maintain the latter must prove it; and if the
former can be made to appear, they are beyond all comparison
the most direct and convincing testimony that can be devised," p.
1, 2. of Mr. Everett's work.

To this statement I would reply--that I do not know what right Mr.
Everett has to call upon his opponent, to prove a negative. It was
his business to prove the affirmative of his question, and to show
that these miracles actually were performed, before he proceeded
to argue upon the strength of them. It is, I conceive, impossible to
demonstrate that miracles said to have been wrought 1800 years
ago, were not performed; but it is, I believe, quite possible to show
that there is no sufficient proof that they were. One of the reasons
given, in the 2d, ch. as I think, of the grounds of Christianity
examined, for throwing out of consideration the miracles recorded
in the New Testament in examining the question of the
Messiahship of Jesus, was, that the New Testament itself, was not
a sufficient proof that these miracles were actually wrought; and
this, with the reader's indulgence, I think I can plainly show.

Mr. Everett allows p. 450 of his work, what indeed he cannot deny,
that the four Gospels do sometimes contradict each other in their
narratives; and he refers with approbation, in a note to p. 458, to a
work of Lessing's, which he says, "ought to be read by every one
who is overfond of Harmonies." This work of Lessing's, if I
recollect right, maintains, that all hopes of harmonizing the
evangelists, of reconciling their contradictions, must be given up.
[See Lessings Sammliche, Schriften, ch. v. S. 150, as quoted by
Mr. Everett, p. 458.]

Now these contradictions, if they do exist, unquestionably argue
one of two things; either fraud, or want of accurate information in
their authors, as no man who wishes to be considered "compos
mentis" will deny, because, accurate information excludes the
possibility of contradiction in authors willing to tell the truth, and
much more in inspired authors, who must be incapable of writing
anything but the truth.

The Christian, therefore, must, it seems to me, on account of
these contradictions, allow one of two things; either, that the
evangelists were fraudulent men, or else that the Gospels were
not written by the Apostles and immediate followers of Jesus:
because want of accurate information, cannot be supposed of the
Apostles and immediate followers of Jesus; as having been
constantly with him, from the beginning, to the end of his
ministery, they must have been perfectly acquainted with his
actions and doctrines. Neither can lapse of memory be urged;
because the Gospels represent Jesus as saying, John ch. xvi. 26,
that they should have the aid of inspiration, which "should, bring
all things, to remembrance;" and in Acts ch. iv. 31, all the followers
of Jesus are represented as having actually received the effusion
of the Holy Ghost: of course want of accurate information, and
lapse or memory in them cannot be supposed.

The Christian, therefore, must allow, since contradictions do exist,
if he would avoid accusing the Apostles and disciples of Jesus of
fraud, that the Gospels were not written by the Apostles and first
followers of Jesus, but that they were written by men, who had no
accurate information about the events they record. It is therefore
plain, that the miracles recorded in the Gospels, are incapable of
proof. For what Christian in his senses can ask another man to
believe accounts of miracles, which accounts, he must at the
same time allow, were written by fraudulent men, or by men who
had no accurate information upon the subjects about which they
write.

The edge of this, as I think, smites right through the neck of Mr.
Everett's argument on which his work depends, and leaves his
book--"a gasping head---a quivering trunk." Sic transit gloria
mundi.

But in order to make Mr. Everett still farther Sensible how easily
his argument can be "overturned, overturned and overturned," I
will suppose a reasonable and reasoning man, desirous to verify
the claims of the books of the New Testament as containing a
Revelation from God, to set down to scrutinize with anxious
solicitude every argument of internal and external evidence, in
favour of their authenticity, and authority, in the hope of becoming
satisfied of the truth of their claims. But in the course of his
examination, such a man will assuredly find, that almost every
step in his inquiry, is an occasion of doubt and of difficulty.

Books containing Revelations from the Supreme, must be
consistent with themselves. But he will observe on a careful
perusal of the evangelists, that the contradictions, particularly in
the narratives of the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus, are
numerous; and that all the ingenuity of Christian writers, has been
exhausted in vain in the attempt to reconcile them; for example,
the Gospel called of Matthew says, ch. iii. 14, that John the
Baptist, knew Jesus when he came to him to be baptised, (which
was very probable on account of the relationship and intimacy
subsisting between Mary the mother of Jesus, and: Elizabeth the
mother of John, as mentioned in the Gospel called of Luke, ch. i.
18, it could hardly have been otherwise) but the author of the
Gospel called of John says, ch. i. 31, that John knew him not, until
he was designated by the descent of the Holy Ghost upon him.

Again, it is said in the Gospel called of John, ch. ii. 14. that Jesus,
on his first visit to Jerusalem after he had commenced his
preaching, cast the buyers and sellers out of the Temple, whereas
the Gospel called of Matthew, and also those called of Mark and
Luke, represent this to have been done by Jesus at his last visit to
Jerusalem. See Matt. ch. xxi. 12. Mark ch. xi. 15. Luke ch. xix. 45.

Again, the author of the Gospel called of John, represents the last
supper or Jesus with his Apostles, to have taken place (See ch.
xiii. 1. and ch. xviii. 28.) on the eve before the feast of the
passover, and that Jesus was crucified on the feast day itself,
while the authors of the other Gospels represent the first event to
have taken place, on the evening of the passover itself, and that
Jesus was crucified the day after. See Matt. Ch. xxvi. 18. Mark xiv.
12. Luke ch. xxii. 7. Now Matthew and John must, according to the
Gospels themselves, have been present with Jesus when he
drove the buyers and sellers out of the Temple, and at his last
supper, and when he was seized in the garden of Gethsemane;
they must therefore have known perfectly whether Jesus drove
the buyers; and sellers out of the Temple, at his first visit to
Jerusalem in their company; or at his last, and whether his last
supper, and his seizure in the garden of Gethsemane took place
on the eve before this passover their great national festival, or on
the evening of the passover itself. They could not forget the time
and place of events, so affecting and important as the last
mentioned, and when we add to these considerations, that the
Gospels represent Jesus as saying, (John ch. xiv.;26.) that they
should be inspired by the Holy Spirit, which "should bring all things
to remembrance," the supposition that the real Matthew and John
could contradict each other in this manner, becomes quite
inadmissable.

In the account of the resurrection of Jesus, the most important fact
of Christianity, we also find several contradictions; for instance,
the Gospel called of Matthew says, that the first appearance of
Jesus to his disciples after his resurrection, was in Galillee, (See
Matt. ch.xxxviii. 7,) while the other evangelists assert, that his first
appearance to them after that event was at Jerusalem. See Mark
ch. xvi., Luke ch. xxiv. John ch.xx. The Gospel called of John
says, that he afterwards appeared to them in Galilee: but
according to that of Luke, the disciples did not go to Galilee to
meet Jesus; for that Gospel says, that Jesus expressly ordered
his disciples to tarry at Jerusalem, where they should receive the
effusion of the Holy Ghost, and that after giving that order he was
taken up to Heaven. See Luke ch. xxiv. 49, 50, also, the first ch. of
Acts. [fn 4]

This greatly invalidates the credibility of these accounts; for as
much as that the historical testimony in attestation of supernatural
events, ought, because such events are out of the common
course of nature, to be strong and unexceptionable.

He will observe too that these writers, supposed to have been the
inspired followers of Jesus Christ, have applied many passages of
the Old Testament as prophecies of Jesus, when it is most
certain, (and is at the present day allowed by Christian Biblical
Critics of the highest standing) from examining those passages in
their context in the Old Testament, that they are not prophecies of
Jesus; and that some of the passages cited are in fact no
prophecies at all, but are merely historical. Nor is this all, these
authors have cited as prophecies and proof texts, passages which
do not exist in the Old Testament. From which it seems to follow
that they must have forged those passages, or quoted them from
some Apocryphal book; which they believed to be inspired. If they
were capable of the first, they were not the honest and inspired
followers and disciples of Jesus Christ; if they were capable of the
last, they were not Jews but Gentiles, ignorant that the Jews in the
time of Jesus, acknowledged no books as inspired scripture but
the books of the Old Testament. See Appendix, A.

A reasonable and reasoning man, such as I have supposed, may
ask himself if it be possible that men filled with the Holy Ghost,
and whose minds were supernaturally opened to understand the
scriptures, could make mistakes such as these.

Lastly, he will recollect, on discovering what is about to be stated,
that the Apostles and followers of Jesus Christ were Jews, and
consequently could not be ignorant of what was notorious to the
whole nation, for instance, that the Jewish Sabbath begins at
sunset on Friday evening, and ends at sunset on Saturday
evening. Nevertheless the author of the Gospel called of Matthew
makes ch. xxviii. 1. the Sabbath to end at dawn of day on Sunday
morning: while the author of that called of John apparently
reckons, ch. xx. 19. the evening of the first day of the week as a
part of the first day of the week; whereas it is in fact, according to
the law and customs of the Jews, who then and now reckon their
days from sunset to sunset, the beginning and a part of the
second day of the week. Such mistakes appear to me to indicate
that the writers of those Gospels were Gentiles not perfectly
acquainted with Jewish customs, and therefore not Matthew and
John.[fn 6]

There are other traces of ignorance of Jewish customs, to be
found in the Gospel called of Matthew, which betray the Gentilism
of the author of it. For instance, he says ch. xxvi. 24[fn7], that
Jesus told Peter, that "before the cock crew he should deny him
thrice;" the same is also found in Mark ch. xiv. 30. in Luke ch. xxii.
54[fn8], and in John ch. xiii. 38. Now it is asserted in the Mishna (i.
e the oral law of the Jews.) in the Bava Kama according to Mr.
Everett p. 448. of his work, that cocks were not permitted in
Jerusalem where Peter's denial took place; [probably because that
bird is constantly scratching up the ground with his feet, and was
thereby liable to turn up impurities, by touching which in passing
by, a Jew would be ceremonially defiled, and rendered incapable
of visiting the Temple to perform his devotions, till after the
evening of the day on which the defilement took place], therefore
all the four Gospels which all contain, this story, must have been
written by Gentiles ignorant of the custom which belies the story.

Some Christian writers have endeavoured to get rid of this
objection, by attempting to prove "that the crowing of the cock
here mentioned, does not mean actually the crowing of a cock, but
'the sound of a trumpet!'" while others, blushing at the hardihood
of their brethren, think it more prudent to maintain, that the author
of the Mishna was ignorant of Jewish customs, and that the
writers of the Gospels were perfectly acquainted with them; and
that therefore every good Christian was bound in conscience not
to regard the objection.

But the prohibition of cocks from entering the Holy city is so
perfectly of a piece with many other cautions against defilement
observed by the Jews, and is so perfectly in the taste of the times
of the Pharisees, "the careful washers of plates and platters,"--the
"tithers of mint, anise, and cummin," not to mention the reason
above expressed, which perhaps was, to say truth, according to
the regulations against defilement contained in the Pentateuch a
sufficient reason for excluding that bird from the city, where stood
the Temple, that the reader will probably believe that such a
custom might have existed.

Again, it is said Matt. xxvii. 62, that the Chief Priests and
Pharisees went to Pilate; demanded a guard; went to the
Sepulchre of Jesus, sealed the door, and set watch. Now Jesus is
said to have arisen on the day after this, on the first day of the
week, i.e. Sunday, of course the day before was Saturday of the
Jewish Sabbath. I maintain that the Chief Priests and Pharisees,
who objected to Jesus curing the sick and rubbing corn from the
ear, in order to satisfy his hunger on the Sabbath day; I maintain
that it is utterly incredible, that these men should have gone to
Pilate on public business, and transacted all this on their Sabbath.
For such an action would have come completely within the spirit,
and the letter of the Laws against breaking the Sabbath contained
in the-Pentateuch, which makes the penalty of such actions as are
here ascribed to the Chief Priests and rigorous Pharisees, nothing
less than stoning to death. I infer therefore, that the author of the
Gospel of Matthew was ignorant of this, and of course not a Jew,
and consequently not Matthew.

I would observe further, in connection with this subject, that Jesus
is represented, Matt. xxiii. 35, as saying, that upon the Jews of this
time should come "the blood of Zecharias the son of Barachias
whom ye slew between the Temple and the altar." Now, I believe
that it is recorded in Josephus' history, that the Jews slew this
Zecharias in the time of the Jewish war, about forty years after
Jesus is represented as saying, that they had killed him already.
Of course Jesus never could have said this, nor would a Jew
acquainted with the times, as Matthew must have been, have
been guilty of such an anachronism. The writer of that Gospel
must therefore, have been a Gentile, and not Matthew. The same
mistake is made by Luke xi. 51.

On turning his attention to the external evidence in favour of the
authenticity of the Gospels, the difficulties and objections
accumulate. He will find, that they are not mentioned by any writer
earlier than the latter half of the second century, after the birth of
Jesus. The first writers who name the four Gospels, were
Irenaeus, and Tertullian.[fn9] The competency of the testimony of
these Fathers of the church, as to the genuineness of these
books, is invalidated by the fact, (See Middleton's Free Enquiry)
that they admitted the principle of the lawfulness of pious frauds,
and from their having acted upon this principle, in having asserted
in their writings, as from their personal knowledge, things which
were certainly false; (See the work above referred to) while their
capability to distinguish the genuine writings of the Apostles, from
the numerous forgeries in their names that appeared about the
same time that the four Gospels begin to be mentioned, is
rendered suspicious by the fact, that they also give their sanction
as Divine Scriptures, to books notoriously apocryphal; for instance
the book of Enoch and the Sybilline Oracles.[fn11] The testimony
of the Fathers who succeeded them is liable to the same
objections, with this aggravation that its value diminishes more
and more, as the distance of the ages in which they flourished
increases, from that of Jesus Christ.

Thirdly, He will find that these Gospels were never received by the
Mother Church of Jerusalem and Judea, founded by the Apostles.
The Jewish Christians, the countrymen of Jesus, who one would
think had the best means of knowing the real history, and real
doctrines of Jesus and his Apostles, uniformly rejected not only
these Gospels, but all the other books of the New
Testament.[fn12] They were also rejected, by several sects of
Christians who flourished in the early ages of Christianity.

Fourthly, he will learn too that the Christians most distinguished
for their learning on this subject, for instance, Michaelis, Semler,
Lessing, Eichorn, and the erudite Bishop Marsh, do allow and
maintain in their works, that the Gospels according to Matthew,
Mark and Luke were compiled from accounts of the life and
doctrines of Jesus which became, after different additions,
revisions and translations, the BASIS of our present Gospels; from
such separate materials, which had gone through different hands,
and had acquired a variety of text and context, from the different
transcripts and translations in which they circulated, though for the
most part they were copied verbatim from one another, several
Gospels, among which were our three first Matthew Mark and
Luke, were composed AFTER [fn13] the destruction of Jerusalem,
and designated some by the names of the readers for whom they
were designed, and others by the names of their authors and
compilers. (See the life of Semler in Eichorn's Universal Library,
as quoted by Mr. E. p. 465. of his work.)

 These Gospels then, in the opinion of these learned Christians,
were originally compiled from anonymous writings, which had
gone through different hands and been variously altered, and
added to in the passage, before they became the BASIS,!! of our
present Gospels.[fn14]

Lastly, he will discover, that since their construction from such
nameless materials, they have been further altered and
interpolated. Celsus accuses the Christians of his time (the latter
part of the 2nd century) of "continually altering their Gospels;" and
the ancient Christian sects accuse each other of the same fact.
That these accusations were well founded, is evident from
Griesbach's edition of the Greek Testament, where besides the
notice of some hundred thousands of various readings, we find
not only single words, but whole phrases, and verses, and even
entire paragraphs rejected as corruptions and interpolations.
Neither have all these corruptions been accidental; for as much as
the strongest text in the New Testament, in support of the doctrine
of the Trinity and the Divinity of Jesus Christ, which is to be found
in the first Epistle, called of John ch. v. 7, "there are three that
bear witness in Heaven. The Father, the Word, and the Holy
Ghost and these three are one," has been struck out of the text by
Griesbach, himself a Trinitarian, as a pious fraud, and is now I
believe universally acknowledged as such by learned Christians.

There are also, two other passages which for ages have been
cited as proofs of the Divinity of Jesus (viz. "The Church of God
which he has redeemed with his own blood," Acts ch. xx. 28. and
"God was manifested in the flesh," in the first Epistle to Timothy,
ch. iii. 16.) which the same Critic has proved to have been altered
from their original reading to favour the same doctrine, and it is
impossible to say how many more frauds of a similar nature might
be detected, if the learned and candid Christians before-
mentioned were in possession of the primitive manuscripts of the
New Testament.[fn15]

All these enormities Mr. Everett, who has a light hand in writing
upon some subjects, comprizes with great tenderness in the
following expressions, "our copies of the New Testament by the
lapse of time, have suffered some literal alterations, which may
have fallen occasionally on the quoted texts (he is trying to justify
the writers of the New Testament, for quoting the Old Testament
otherwise than it is written) and thus made them to differ from the
reading of the Old Testament," p. 279.

I have supposed that a reasonable and reasoning man, desirous
to ascertain the truth of the religion of the Christians, and in the
hope of finding it well founded, in the course of his examination of
the testimony for the authenticity and authority of the books of the
New Testament, comes to the knowledge of all these
circumstances. If the reader be such a man, I would ask him, if he
can rationally rest his belief in the moral attributes of God and his
faith in a future life, upon a foundation composed of such
materials?

Mr. Everett observes "that as prophecy and miracle are equally
divine works, it is impossible that they should contradict each
other. They are equally the works of the God of truth, and
whatever contradiction there appears to be between them, must
be but apparent. If a person of whatever pretensions proposes to
work miracles in support of those pretensions, in which
nevertheless he is contradicted by express prophecy, one of these
things is certain--that the prophecy is a forged one--or that we
have mistaken the meaning of it--or that the miracles are not real,"
p. 3. of Mr. Everett's work.

Granted--upon this ground I think that Mr. Everett can fairly be
brought to issue. I presume that he will hardly persist in
maintaining that the Gospels are a sufficient proof of the miracles
they record, in the face of the objections to their authenticity and
authority already stated--and as neither he nor myself maintain
that the prophecies, with regard to the Messiah, contained in the
Old Testament were forged, it remains only to be considered,
whether he or I have mistaken the meaning of them. So that, as I
have repeatedly said in my former publications, the prophets, after
all, are the only criterion which can be appealed to certainly most
important to the great interests of humanity, were it only on this
account, that the dispute has occasioned the most unparalleled
degradation, misery, and oppression to one of the parties to
it.[fn16]

 PEBBLE II.

"The Messiah expected by the Jews," says Mr. Everett, at the
beginning of the second chapter of his book, "and which Mr.
English supposes to be predicted in the Old Testament, is 'a
temporal prince, and a conquering pacificator.' The Christians on
the other hand maintain, that the prophets foretold not a political,
but a religious institution, not a temporal prince, but a moral
teacher, and spiritual Saviour. Which of these opposite views of
the predicted character of the Messiah is correct, must be decided
of course by an appeal to particular predictions. But it is also a
matter of reason, and we have a right to argue upon the question
from the character of God, and the nature of man. Which of these
views the Jewish or the Christian doth most commend itself to the
sincere believer in the moral government of God, and the rational
and accountable nature of man?"

This statement, I cannot help considering as both artful and unfair.
That I have represented the Messiah as predicted to be "a
temporal Prince and a conquering pacificator," is true, but it is not
the whole truth; Mr. Everett would have it to be understood, that I
maintained that the Messiah was to be merely "a temporal Prince;"
whereas, those who will take the trouble to refer to the prior
chapters of "the grounds of Christianity examined," will find that I
have endeavoured to prove that the prophets predict, that he was
also to be "a just, beneficient, wise, and mighty monarch, under
whose government righteousness was to flourish, and mankind be
made happy:" and I believe that there is not a single passage from
the prophets quoted in Mr. Everett's 2d. chapter to prove his views
of the Messiah, that I have not also myself quoted to prove the
beneficent character of him I suppose to be predicted.

Mr. Everett unwarily betrays his own unfairness in the following
passage of his work, p. 63.---"Mr. English objects, that whereas
the first characteristic of the Messiah was, that he was to be the
Prince of Peace, in whose time righteousness was to flourish and
mankind be made happy," &c.[fn17]

How is it possible, I might ask Mr. Everett that I could have
maintained that the Messiah was to be merely "a temporal Prince,
and a conquering pacificator," when it is also true, as Mr. Everett
confesses, that I maintain that "the first characteristic of the
Messiah was that he was to be the Prince of Peace, in whose time
righteousness was to flourish and mankind be made happy?" I
confess, that I feel both contempt and indignation at such an artful
mis-representation of my opinions, in order to attack them with
more hopes of success, and as I do not profess to be a Christian, I
may be excused for expressing what in this case I certainly have a
right so feel.[fn18] The prophets, literally understood represent (as
Mr. Everett will not deny) that the Messiah is to be a mighty
Monarch, enthroned at Jerusalem under whose reign the Jews
should be restored to their country and converted from their sins
and errors, and established in the most perfect and endless
happiness; that he will put down all opposition to his authority, and
exterminate the wicked out of the earth, and unite the pious and
good of all the human race under his government, making them
participators of the eternal happiness of the favoured descendants
of Abraham, that all sin, sorrow, and error shall be no more, and
the earth become all Paradise.

"Far more bless'd than that of Eden, And far happier days." [fn19]

The difference between Mr. Everett's and my view of this
representation is, that I understand the prophets to mean that the
whole will be literally fulfilled; and Mr. Everett maintains that, that
part which accords with the Christian view of the Messiah is to be
literally understood, but that that part which is opposed to it must
be taken figuratively.

Who is so blind as not to perceive the motives for such an
incoherent system, of interpretation! The passages which
represent the Messiah as a Monarch reigning at Jerusalem, and
whose temporal authority should extend over all the earth, Mr.
Everett would interpret to signify, (by a figure) "a preacher of
righteousness, and a spiritual Saviour of the souls of men;"
because Jesus had no temporal authority whatever, and therefore
to understand them literally would exclude the claims set up for
him. The earth's being restored to a Paradisiacal state, and the
extinction of all sin, violence, and misery throughout its
circumference, Mr. Everett would interpret to signify, (by. a figure)
"the blessed events," which have occurred, and the "changes that
have taken place," since the promulgation of Christianity!! [fn20]

Mr. Everett, in support of his system of interpretation, shows us,
that the Supreme Being is frequently spoken of in the Old
Testament, as a King and as a victorious warrior; and therefore
infers, because such passages must be understood figuratively,
that the passages in the prophets which speak of the Messiah in
similar terms, must be also understood figuratively.

To this it seems to me to be a sufficient answer to observe, that
men who speak of the Deity, are obliged to employ human
language and human ideas; because:

"What can we reason but from what we know?" and therefore a
great part of such language will be necessarily figurative; but it by
no means follows from this, that the writers who are obliged to use
this figurative language when speaking of the Deity, intend to be
understood in the same sense when they apply the same
expressions to describe men and their actions. On the contrary, as
they were writing to men and for men, it is natural to presume, that
they meant to be understood in the way that such expressions are
universally understood by all men, when they relate to men and
their actions. Such a system, of interpretation as this of Mr.
Everett's, turns the Bible into a Babel of confusion: a man
proceeding upon this system, might with equal plausibility turn all
the good and prosperous kings of Israel and Judah into "Spiritual
Saviours."[fn21]

"What, says Mr. Everett, p. 63. would be thought of one, who after
making a collection of passages which ascribe these attributes of
royalty and conquest to God, such as Mr. English has made of
those which ascribe such attributes to the Messiah, should infer as
he does, that God is a just, beneficent; wise and mighty monarch
reigning on a throne in Jerusalem?"

To this I answer by asking in my turn, what should we think of one,
who after making a collection, of passages which ascribe these
attributes of royalty and conquest to God, as Mr. Everett has
done, should therefore think himself authorised to infer, that the
history of David the son of Jesse, contained in the Bible, (which,
as all the world knows, is an oriental book abounding in figurative
expressions) was not to be understood literally, but that it was
very possible that this supposed monarch of Israel, who is
represented as having "saved it from its enemies on every side,"
was after all, probably only a spiritual saviour of the souls of the
Israelites, by having distinguished himself as a prophet, a
preacher of righteousness, and a composer of Psalms!! [fn22]

As Mr. Everett says, I "cheerfully leave this part of the controversy,
with the answer to this question which every rational inquirer will
give;" p. 63.

Mr. Everett, however, in maintaining that the Messiah, was to be
merely a preacher of righteousness, a founder of a new religion,
and a. spiritual saviour of the souls of men, not only opposes dicta
of the prophets of the Old Testament, but is expressly
contradicted by the doctrine of the New, which maintains the same
ideas of the Messiah that the prophets teach and the Jews
believe; and this with the indulgence of the reader's patience I will
plainly show.

The angel is recorded, Luke, ch. i. 31, to have told Mary,
concerning Jesus whom the author of that Gospel supposes to
have been the Messiah, that "the Lord God shall give unto him the
throne of his father David: and he shall reign over the house of
Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there shall be no end." Now this
is precisely the doctrine, concerning the Messiah, believed by the
Jews from that time to the present; for we see that Luke
represents that the Messiah was not to be merely a spiritual
saviour of the souls of men, but was actually to set upon the
throne of David, and reign over the house of Jacob for ever; which
is precisely what the prophets teach and the Jews believe.

Again, in the same ch. 68, the writer of that Gospel represents
Zecharias, when filled with the Holy Ghost, as predicting
concerning Jesus as follows. "Blessed be the Lord God of Israel,
for he hath visited and redeemed his people, and hath raised up a
horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David: as he
spake by the mouth of his holy prophets which have been since
the world began: that we should be saved from our enemies, and
from the hand of all that hate us: to perform the mercy promised to
our Fathers, and to remember his holy covenant: the oath which
he swore to our father Abraham, that he would grant unto us, that
we being delivered from the hand of our enemies, might serve him
without fear in holiness and righteousness before him all the days
of our life."

Here we see again that in Luke's opinion the Messiah was not to
be merely "a spiritual saviour of the souls of men," but that he was
to "save Israel from their enemies and from the hand of all that
hated them," and this too is precisely what the prophets teach and
the Jews believe.

Again, from the first ch. of Acts 6. it is evident, that the primitive
Christians did not believe that the Messiah was to be merely a
spiritual saviour of the souls of men, but that he would perform for
Israel what was promised by the prophets. For the Apostles are
represented there as asking Jesus, previous to his ascension,
saying "Lord wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to
Israel?"

The way the writers of the New Testament, get over the objection
to the Messiahship of Jesus, founded on the nonfulfillment by him
of the splended visions of the prophets relative to the restoration
of the dispersion, the punishment of their oppressors, and the
diffusion of universal happiness to the tribes and of the world,
(which they represent as the consequence of the coming of the
Messiah) is, not by maintaining that the Messiah was to be merely
"a spiritual Saviour of the souls of men," but by affirming that
Jesus would shortly come again into the world to fulfill them. "The
Lord Jesus," says the writer of the second Epistle to the
Thessalonians ch. i. 7, "shall be revealed from Heaven with his
mighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that
know not God and obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the
presence of our Lord, and from the glory of his power: when he
shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired of all
them that believe."[fn23]

Again, in the xii. ch. of the Revelations, Jesus is apparently
spoken of as destined "to rule all nations with a rod of iron." And in
the ii. ch. Jesus is represented as saying, that "he that overcometh
and keepeth my words unto the end, to him will I give power over
the nations; and he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the
vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers even as I
received of my Father," v: 26, and lastly, not to be tedious, there is
a passage in the xix. ch. of Revelations, which proves decisively
against Mr. Everett, that the primitive Christians had even more
sanguinary ideas of the vengeance of the Messiah upon the
wicked of the earth, than are even entertained by the Jews. Jesus
is there, described thus, "I saw Heaven opened, and behold a
white horse; and he that set upon him was called Faithful and
True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war, and out
of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the
nations; and he shall rule them with a rod of iron, and he treadeth
the wine press of the fierceness of the wrath of Almighty God," v.
11, 15. Some idea of the slaughter meant by the writer of the
Revelations by "treading the wine press of the fierceness of the
wrath of Almighty God," may be understood from ch. xiv. 20,
where it is represented that the blood of men came out of this
wine press "by the space of a thousand and six hundred
furlongs!!"

I suppose that the reader is quite satisfied by what has been
adduced, that Mr. Everett's idea of the Messiah's being merely "a
spiritual saviour of the souls of men," is equally rejected by the Old
Testament and the New, and since Mr. Everett does not and
cannot pretend, that Jesus during the long space of 1800 years
has fulfilled the predictions relating to the Messiah in a literal
sense, which is the sense in which they must be fulfilled in order
to be made good, Mr. Everett is left without better proof of the
Messiahship of Jesus than bare opinion only, which attaineth not
to any certainty.

Mr. Everett supposes that a mere "Preacher of righteousness," is
capable of fulfilling all the predictions of the Messiah, which
represent him as putting an end to all wickedness and misery
throughout the World. How absurd!! there never was,[fn24] a
better or greater "Preacher of righteousness," than Jesus Christ
himself, and what did he effect among the people of his age? the
Gospels say, that they whipped him, and nailed him to a cross.
There has been since his time, for eighteen hundred years, I know
not how many millions of "preachers of righteousness," and what
have they effected? look at the history of the decline and fall of the
Roman Empire: look at the histories of mankind for the last 400
years. What scenes do they for the most part, present to the
shocked contemplation! are they not generally a complication of
folly, madness, and devilism, worthy of being recorded in triumph
by the evil one himself, in letters of blood and infernal fire?

What success have the "Preachers of righteousness," of the
present day? Do not these pious and good men, and pious and
good they generally speaking undoubtedly are, do they not feel
themselves obliged to tell you, that such is the depravity of human
nature, that "teaching and preaching are all in vain;" that they are
wearying themselves in "throwing pearls before swine," who
receive them with a grunt, and "trample them under their feet?"

Does not Mr. Everett himself tell us p. 80, that "it is too true that
the mighty passions, which agitate the public intercourse of the
world, are almost beyond the direct reach of moral means," i. e. of
the "Preachers of righteousness."

How then can he expect that a mere "Preacher of righteousness,"
is capable of subduing these "mighty passions," whose existence
is incompatible with peace and happiness, and fulfilling the
predictions relating to the Messiah? No, all history and experience
testify that no merely human power can put an end to them. It
must be done by the strong and armed hand of Heaven.

Then, and not till then, shall exiled "justice look down from
Heaven, and righteousness and peace shall kiss each other."
Then, and not till then, shall "the wicked cease from troubling;"
and the afflicted enjoy happiness.

"These be the last words of David. David the son of Jesse said,
and the man who was raised up on high, the Messiah of the God
of Jacob, (See the Heb.) and the sweet Psalmist of Israel; The
spirit of Jehovah spake by me, and his word is in my tongue. The
God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, he that ruleth
over mankind (see the Heb.) shall be just, ruling in the fear of
God: And he shall be as the light of the morning, when the sun
riseth, even a morning without clouds; as the tender grass
springing out of the earth by clear shining after rain.

But the sons of Belial shall be all of them as thorns thrust away,
because they cannot be taken with hands. But the man that shall
touch them must be fenced with iron, and the staff of a spear; and
they shall be utterly burned with fire in the same place." 2 Sam.
ch. xxiii.

PEBBLE III

Let us, however, follow Mr. Everett in the consideration of those
prophecies, which he says p. 83, "are really to be regarded as
proofs of the (Christian) religion."

It is not necessary for me to say any thing further, in defence of
the interpretation of the prophecy in Deut. xviii. 15, contained in
my first publication, where I consider it as referring to a
succession of inspired messengers from God to the Israelites;
because Mr. Everett allows, that "in granting that this interpretation
is correct, we should only follow the example of the most learned
and judicious Christian interpreters," p. 84.

I will pass therefore to the passage in the Psalm xvi. 10. "Thou wilt
not leave my soul in hell, (i. e. the place of the departed,) nor
suffer thy Saints (or thy pious ones[fn25]) to see destruction," as I
have translated it. Mr. Everett maintains that the word translated
by me in this place "destruction," sometimes means "corruption."
Granted, but Mr. Everett will not deny that the original word
sometimes signifies "destruction," and assuredly therefore I have
as good a right to translate it my way, as he has to interpret it to
signify "corruption."[fn26] I maintain, moreover, that I have a better
right in this place to translate it "destruction," than he has to render
it "corruption;" if the whole psalm manifestly relates to David, as is
I think evident from the context, whose body underwent the
natural decomposition occasioned by death; which therefore
necessitates the translation I have given if the psalm relates to
David which I think is evident.

"I have set the Lord always before me, because he is at my right
hand I shall not be moved. Therefore my heart is glad, and my
glory rejoiceth, my flesh shall also rest in hope: for thou wilt not
leave my soul in hell, nor suffer thy saints (or thy pious one) to see
destruction. Thou wilt show me the path of life, in thy presence is
fulness of joy, and at thy right hand there are pleasures for ever
more." Since therefore the psalm evidently relates to David, I do
not see how it is a prophecy of Jesus' rising from the dead on the
third day after his crucifixion, as it is said to have been applied to
prove, by Peter in the book of Acts ch. ii.

I would observe also, that the modern German Theological
scholars, who as Mr. Everett says (p. 247. of his work.) "are
supposed to excell in Critical learning," do allow and maintain, by
the confession of Mr. Everett himself p. 247 of his work, that this
passage in the psalms is not a prophecy of Jesus, no more than
any of the others adduced in the New Testament from the Old, but
that it is quoted merely by way of accommodation or allusion.

I presume therefore that Mr. Everett will cease to regard this
passage as one of "the prophecies," which are really to be
regarded as proofs of the Christian religion.

The next passage of the Old Testament, which Mr. Everett relies
on as a prophetical proof of the Christian religion, is the 2nd.
psalm; "why did the nations (according to the Heb.) rage, and the
peoples (ac. to the Heb.) imagine a vain thing. The kings of the
earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against
Jehovah, and against his Messiah saving, let us break their bands
asunder, and cast away their cords from us," &c. To the
application of this prophecy to Jesus, I objected in my first
publication, on account of these reasons, 1st. That "the nations,"
as it is in the original, did not assemble to crucify Jesus, as this
was done by a few soldiers. To this Mr. Everett replies, p. 90. of
his work, that "the Apostle (Peter in Acts ch. iv. 45,[fn27]) does not
say, they assembled to "crucify him," their joint opposition was not
limited to this single act, they were gathered together against him.
And it is certainly true, that Jesus was an object of the united
persecution of the nation of the Jews, by means of their bigotted
priests and furious multitudes, and of the Romans, by means of
their tributary sovereign, Herod, and their Proconsul Pilate." In
reply to this I would observe, that the words "nations," and
"peoples," in the original of the passage never signified the Jewish
nation, but are used in the Hebrew Bible to signify all other nations
but the Jews, or what is expressed by the word "Gentiles."

Now it is said in the psalm, that "the nations and peoples,"
(exclusive of the Jews for the reason above-mentioned) should
rage and that "the kings of the earth should stand up, and the
rulers (of the earth,) take counsel against Jehovah, and against
his Messiah." I do not see, therefore, how this passage could have
been fulfilled by the Romans, who were but one nation, by means
of their Proconsul Pilate and his soldiers: who (the Romans) were
so far too from being enraged against Jesus, that it is certain, that
all the Romans out of Jerusalem, did not even know what was
doing against him, and Pilate himself was so far from being
"enraged," and "taking counsel," against Jesus, that he befriended
him as far as he dared, and made great exertions to save his life.

Moreover, in the psalm, these "nations and peoples, and kings
and rulers," are represented as saving "let us break their bands in
sunder, and cast away their cords from us." This passage refers to
the Messiah and the Jewish nation taken together, whom the Old
Testament represents as to have "dominion over all peoples,
nations and languages," and that "the nation and people that will
not serve them shall perish, yea those nations shall be utterly
wasted." Is. lx. [fn28]

Therefore, these refractory nations and kings could not, and
actually never have said this of Jesus, who was but an individual,
to whom the expression "their bands and their cords," cannot
apply; and finally, since Mr. Everett maintains that Jesus was
"merely a spiritual saviour of the souls of men," I do not see how
he can consider him as a character pretending to impose "bands
and cords," upon any body.

2. I had also objected to the application of this prophecy to Jesus,
because "God has not set Jesus as his king upon the holy hill of
Sion, (as the psalm imports) nor given him the nations for his
inheritance, nor the uttermost parts of the earth for his
possession." To this Mr. Everett, p. 91, replies in the usual way,
i.e. after interpreting as much of the psalm, as he thinks he can
make accord with the history of Jesus, in a literal sense, he
interprets this passage of the Messiah's being enthroned on
Mount Sion, which he cannot make accord with it, in a figurative
one. The reader must judge whether this be fair or reasonable.

The latter part of the psalm, Mr. Everett contends, was fulfilled by
the rapid spread of Christianity, and he quotes, in proof of this,
some passages of the Fathers. To this I would reply, that those
passages of the Fathers are notorious exaggerations, and
convicted of falsehood by Middleton in his Free Inquiry.

And lastly, I would observe, that even those nations who have
embraced Christianity, can by no means be called the inheritance
or subjects of Jesus, since they have since the days of
Constantine and the Counsel of Nice renounced his doctrines, and
perverted his religion into "a fabulous, irrational and blasphemous
superstition,"[fn29] for as much as all of them, except a handful of
Unitarian Christians, are worshippers of three Divine Beings
united by an ineffable union; and by far the greater part of them
are adorers of idols, images, and pictures.[fn30] And if I may,
without offence, be allowed to express the sincere opinion of my
heart upon this subject, I would say, that it is my serious belief,
that if Jesus the son of Mary could return into the world, and learn,
that his professed followers had placed him between the
Cherubim, at the right hand of the Almighty, worshipping him as
"God equal to the Father," as, "God of God, very God of every
God:" and that by far the greater part had also placed Mary his
mother on the other side of the Deity, worshipping her as "the
mother of God!"[fn31] he would in my opinion renounce and
denounce them as impious heathens, and possibly believe that
they were possessed with devils.

The next passage which Mr. Everett quotes as a prophecy of
Jesus, is the 2d verse of the 5th chapter of Micah, "and thou
Bethlehem Ephratah, it is little to be among the thousands of
Judah; out of thee shall come forth unto me, him who is to be ruler
in Israel, whose goings forth have been of old, from the days of
ancient years:" [according to the Hebrew.] This I interpreted to
signify, not that the birth of the Messiah should be in Bethlehem,
but the descent of the Messiah should be derived from Bethlehem,
i.e. from Jesse the father of David; (and that therefore a future
Messiah who should be derived from this family, would fulfill the
prophecy;) and this interpretation, I represent as being known and
acknowledged by Hebrew scholars. "But the truth is, says Mr.
Everett p. 94, that the original word, [translated by me "shall come
forth,"] is familiarly used of the birth of a man, as "Mizraim begat
Pathrusim, and Casluhim out of whom came Philistim,"" Gen. x.
13, 14.  This is a very awkward quotation on the part of Mr.
Everett, as it says nothing in favour of his views, but directly
favours mine: for Philistim is a word in the plural number, and is
used in the Hebrew Bible, to express "the Philistines;" and the
word translated "come"[fn33] is also in the plural number, see
Simon's Hebrew Bible.  The passage therefore in Genesis x. 13.
14. imports that the Philistines were derived or descended from
Mizraim.  "Who the Hebrew scholars are, says Mr. Everett, who
acknowledge this turn of the passage [in Micah] know not," p. 94
of Mr. Everett's work.  If I were writing in Europe or America, I
think that I could point them out; but if my memory does not
deceive me, Grotius interprets the passage of the derivation of the
Messiah from Bethlehem: and Mr. Everett will not deny that the
modern Christian Hebrew scholars of Germany, disallow that this
passage has any reference to Jesus, and affirm that it is quoted in
the New Testament, Matthew ii. 5., only by way of allusion or
accommodation.

I had however, in order to show that this prophecy could not be
insisted on by the Christians, said by way of argument, that
allowing "that Bethlehem was to be the birth place of the Messiah,
what then? will a man's being born in Bethlehem, be sufficient to
make him the Messiah foretold by the Hebrew prophets!"

This Mr. Everett seizes hold on in the following Way, p. 95.  "Now
if we were willing to be consistent, and cling to our principles
wherever they carry us, it would almost seem that this concession
might decide the controversy.  The Messiah is to be of Bethlehem.
This reduces to a little span, the number of those among whom he
can be found. Moreover, Bethlehem is now in ruins, to all moral
purposes its identity is gone.[fn34]   It is the habitation of Turks, of
Arabs, of Christians, and if there be any Jews there, none will
pretend that the divisions of the tribes are preserved among them,
so that the tribe of David, from whom the Messiah is to arise, is
known in Bethlehem, from the rest. Neither can it be argued that
hereafter when the Jews are restored, Bethlehem will be
repeopled with Jews, the family of David be discriminated, and the
prophecy admit of fulfillment, because Mr. English himself allows it
to be the sense of prophecy, that the Messiah shall be born before
the restoration. It only remains therefore to look back, and to see,
of all that have appeared in Bethlehem, which has the greatest
claim to this character."

On this reasoning I would observe, 1st, that my concession on
which it is founded is merely gratuitous; as the words "shall come
forth" signify merely derivation; 2nd, that Mr. Everett is mistaken in
supposing that Bethlehem is now in ruins. It is at present probably
nearly as large and populous as it ever was. 3d, Mr. Everett is
mistaken, in supposing that the family of David cannot be traced
among the Jews. There are at this moment in the world, many
families allowed by their bretheren to be descended from David.
Should any of the Jews go to Bethlehem at any time to come, and
have a male child born to him in that place, for aught that can be
known beforehand, that child may be the Messiah and the
prophecy be fulfilled in Mr. Everett's sense of it; which I repeat
cannot be insisted on, as "come forth" certainly may signify, and in
the case unluckily quoted by Mr. Everett, (Gen. x, 13. 14.)
certainly does import, derivation.[fn35]

The next passage, adduced by Mr. Everett, is the 10th v. of the ix.
ch of Zechariah, "Rejoice greatly O! daughter of Zion, shout O!
daughter of Jerusalem: behold thy king cometh unto thee: he is
just and saved, lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the
foal of an ass."

Mr. Everett, after allowing that the Hebrew reads "saved" or
"preserved" instead of "having salvation," as in the English
version, observes, that many ancient versions read as in the
English Bible. Whether the true reading be mine or his, is not of
any consequence to the question to which this book relates. I
maintain that a man's riding upon an ass into Jerusalem, is not
sufficient to prove him the Messiah.

I also repeat that the event predicted, is spoken of by the prophet
as contemporaneous with the restoration of the division, [fn37]
and of course could not have been fulfilled eighteen hundred
years ago.

"Mr. Everett tries to shove out this objection, by taking for granted,
p. 98 of his work, that the chapter of Zechariah in which this
prophecy is found, is a series of chronological predictions.  But I
must remind Mr. Everett that this pretention is inadmissible. None
of the predictions of the prophets, except some in Daniel, are
arranged in chronological order; they were delivered by parcels,
and at intervals, frequently of some years; and these parcels
generally have no connexion with each other. Mr.. Everett's
reasoning upon the assumption here contradicted, is therefore
inadmissible.

Finally, the German Biblical Scholars so frequently mentioned,
deny that this was a prediction of Jesus, and affirm that it is
quoted by the Evangelists merely by way of accommodation.

The next passage adduced is Zechariah xii. 10., "And I will pour
upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem,
the spirit of grace and supplications, and they shall look upon [or
towards] me[fn38] whom they have blasphemed, [or pierced,] and
they shall mourn for him as one mourneth for an only son."

The meaning of this prophecy is obscure. The word translated
"pierced" in the English version, may also in the opinion of Grotius,
and I add of Rosenmuller too, as quoted by Mr. Everett in the 104.
p. of his book, be best rendered "blasphemed or reproached." It
may refer to the time when, according to the Old Testament, the
hearts of the house of Israel shall be cleansed from sin, and they
shall turn to God "with their whole heart and with all their souls,"
as predicted by Moses.

I conclude with observing, that this passage, quoted in the New
Testament; John ch. xix. has long since ceased to be considered
as a prophecy of Jesus by the German Critics, and is believed by
them, to have been adduced in the gospel merely by way of
allusion. (See Rosenmuller's observations in his notes on the
passage.)

I am afraid that the reader has found these discussions rather
tedious, and am therefore happy to be at liberty to proceed to the
consideration of the three famous prophecies of Jacob, Isaiah,
and Daniel.

"The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a Law-giver from
between his feet for ever; for Shilo shall come, and to him shall
the obedience of the peoples be ."  Gen. xlix. 10. So I maintain the
passage should be translated.

On this prediction I observed, (Grounds of Christianity Examined
p.40. as quoted by Mr. Everett.) "That though this prophecy is
allowed by the Jews to refer to their Messiah, yet it does not
define, nor limit the time of his coming. For that it is perfectly
evident to all who will look at the place in the Hebrew Bible, that it
is pointed to read, not "the sceptre shall not depart from Judah,
nor a Lawgiver from between his feet until Shilo come;" but "the
sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a Lawgiver from between
his feet for ever; for Shilo shall come, and to him shall the
gathering of the peoples be." So that the prophecy does not
intimate that the Messiah should come before the sceptre be
departed from Judah: but that it should not depart for ever, but
shall be restored when Shilo comes."

On this Mr. Everett remarks, "now the points, commonly so called,
have nothing to do with the division of a sentence into its
members, or with what we call punctuation; but Mr. English
intended to intimate, that according to the accents, the verse
should be divided as he proposes." (p. 110, of Mr. Everett's work.)
In return for this friendly attempt to set me right, I would beg of Mr.
Everett to peruse the following extract from the celebrated Alting's
Treatise on Hebrew punctuation, which he will probably look over
with blushing cheeks. "Punctorum appellatione venit, quicquid in
Hebraea Scriptura occurrit praeter literas. Sunt vero punctorum
genera tria; unum eorum quae sonum moderantur; alterum
illorum, quae tonum regunt, tertium mere criticorum est quae ad
crisin masoretharum solummodo pertinent."' p, 9. edit. Septima.

I do not think it necessary, to enter with Mr. Everett into the
intricate dispute about the Hebrew accents, since he represents
that they are of no authority in deciding the question between him
and me, and because I think he will therefore not deny, that
disregarding their authority, the passage will bear the rendering I
have given it.

I shall therefore proceed to establish the interpretation I have
given of the passage in Genesis, 1st. by endeavouring to show,
that Mr. Everett's interpretation would convict the prophecy, of
falsehood; and 2dly. by showing that the interpretation I have
given, is confirmed by the express declaration of God himself.

This prophecy was delivered by Jacob before there was any king
in Judah. The sceptre did depart from Judah, and with a
vengeance too, at the dethronement and captivity of Zedekiah,
and the destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans: consequently,
if the sceptre was not to depart from Judah till Shilo came, the
Messiah ought to have appeared before the dethronement of
Zedekiah; as he certainly did not appear before that event, the
prophecy, according to Mr. Everett's sensible interpretation, would
be falsified.

2. The sceptre never has been restored to Judah since the
dethronement of Zedekiah; because the tribe of Judah, since that
period, have been in subjection to the Babylonians, the Persians,
the Syrians, the Romans, and all the world. Mr. Everett maintains
that the sceptre of Judah was in the hands of that tribe during the
time that it was held by the Romans[fn42] who were of the tribe of
Levi and the Herods who were Idumaeans. This idea appears to
me absurd, but I shall not give myself the trouble to oppose it by
argument, as it can be set aside by the express declaration of
God, as reported by Ezekiel, ch. xxi. 26. Speaking of Zedekiah
and his dethronement, the prophet represented the Deity, as
saying, "thus saith the Lord God, remove the diadem, take off the
crown; this shall not be the same: exalt him that is low, and abase
him that is high. I will overturn, overturn, overturn it, (i. e. the
crown or sceptre of Judah,) and it shall be no more until he comes
whose right it is, and I will give it him."

Here the Deity expressly declares, that from the dethronement of
Zedekiah; the crown of Judah should be no more till the coming of
the Messiah to whom he would give it. The Asmonaeans and the
Herods cannot therefore be considered as having held it, as Mr.
Everett supposes.[fn41]

But this is not all, the original Hebrew of this emphatic declaration
has a singular force, the idea it expresses is as follows, "I will
make it (or "place it," the crown of Judah, i. e. the Messiahship) an
occasion of perversion, of perversion, of perversion, and it shall
be-no more till he come whose right it is, and I will give it him."
Viewed in this light, who will deny that this declaration has been
most strangely fulfilled? The Christians reproach the Jews with
"perverse and mad delusion" in having successively believed a
hundred: different impostors to have been the Messiah, while the
Jews in their turn say that the Christians have been as mad as
themselves, in believing that Jesus of Nazareth was this
personage.

I suppose therefore that Mr. Everett, after coolly viewing what I
have stated with regard to this prophecy of the Shilo, will be
sensible that he may as well discharge the unfortunate Rabbies
he has seized upon and lugged into court as reluctant witnesses
of the truth of Christianity, as their further attendance can be no
longer necessary: and I would leave him to consider whether the
liberal appellation of "dogmatical blunderer," which he has
bestowed upon me, p. 114 of his work, relative to my arguments
upon this prophecy, may not better apply to another than
myself.[fn43]

Let us now proceed to the consideration of the famous prophecy
of Isaiah, which Mr. Everett styles, p. 144, the "carinficina
Rabbinorum."[fn44]

In order to be enabled to give a fair interpretation of it, it is first of
all necessary to give a fair translation of it from the original
Hebrew, which is what has not been done in the English version;
forasmuch as there are therein not less than thirteen
mistranslations.

The following, I believe, will be considered as a just representation
of the original as it stands in the Hebrew Bible.

"Behold my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted, and
extolled, and be very high. As many as were astonished at thee;
his visage was so marred more than any other man, and his form
more than the sons of man, (or Adam,) so shall he sprinkle many
nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him; for that which
had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not
heard shall they consider.[fn45]

"Who hath believed what we heard? (or what was reported to us)
and to whom was the arm of Jehovah revealed? For he grew up
before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground. He
had no form nor comeliness; and when we saw him there was no
beauty that we should desire him, He was despised and the
outcast of men; a man of sorrows and familiar with grief;[fn46] and
we hid as it were our faces from him, (or, as one that hid his face
from us,) he was despised and esteemed not. Surely he hath
borne our griefs and carried (away) our sorrows.[fn47] Yet did we
esteem him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted. But he was
wounded through our transgression, he was bruised through our
iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and
with[fn48] his stripes we are healed. ("healing is to us," Hebr.) All
we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his
own way; and Jehovah hath caused to light (or "meet") upon him
the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet
he would not open his mouth; he was brought as a lamb to the
slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he
would not open his mouth. He was taken from prison and from
judgment, and who would meditate [or consider sufficiently] his
generation? [or who shall declare his generation;] For he was cut
off out of the land of the living: through the transgression of my
people was he smitten: ["smiting was to him," Hebr.] and he
appointed his grave with the wicked, and with the rich[fn49] in his
deaths.[fn50] Although he hath done no violence, neither was any
deceit in his mouth, yet it pleased Jehovah to bruise him: he hath
put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin,
he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days,[fn51] and the
pleasure of Jehovah shall prosper in his hand. He shall see [the
fruit] of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his
knowledge shall my righteous servant make many righteous, for
he shall bear [away] their iniquities.[fn52] Therefore will I divide
him a portion with the great: and he shall divide the spoil with the
strong, because he hath made naked his life unto death; and he
was numbered with the transgressors, and he bare the sin of
many, and made intercession for the transgressors." Is. from the
13th. v. of the 52d. ch. to the end of the 53d.

It is an acknowledged principle of sound criticism, that the same
expressions in the same author, are to be-understood always, in
the same sense, unless the context makes it plainly evident that
another sense is intended. Let us, therefore, first of all, examine
the chapters of Isaiah preceding the extract, in order to
understand who he means by "God's servant."

In the 49th. of Isaiah, v 3. it is said, "Thou art my servant, O Israel,
in whom I will be glorified." In ch. xlviii. 20. "The Lord hath
redeemed his servant Jacob." In ch. xlv. 4. "For Jacob my
servant's sake, and Israel mine elect." In ch. xliv, 1. "Yet hear now,
O Jacob my servant, and Israel whom I have chosen: fear not O
Jacob, my servant." v. 2. "Remember these O Jacob and Israel,
for thou art my servant. I have formed thee, thou art my servant O
Israel, thou shalt not be forgotten of me." v. 21.

"Ye are my witnesses saith the Lord, and my servant whom I have
chosen." ch. xliii. 10. See also the whole of ch. xlii. "Thou Israel art
my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my
friend." ch. xli. 8.

There can be no doubt therefore, that by "my servant," mentioned
in the first part of the prophecy quoted from Isaiah, and by "my
righteous servant," in the latter part of it, that "God's servant
Israel" must be understood to be meant, provided there be nothing
in the context to make it necessary to resort to some other
interpretation. Mr. Everett says that there is something in the
context, which forbids the application of this prophecy to "God's
servant Israel." Let us then examine the reasons on which this
assertion is founded.

He says 1st, p. 136 of his work, that the subject of this prophecy is
spoken of as "passive and unresisting," and he exclaims, "The
Jews passive and unresisting! They are the most obstinate and
unyielding of the tribes of the earth, and have resisted the arm of
power, and the lapse of time, which have crushed all other nations
into oblivion."

The prophecy speaks of their non-resistance to oppression, and
Mr. Everett tells us, to contradict this, that "they have resisted the
arm of power, and the lapse of time, which have crushed all other
nations into oblivion." This seems to me to be irrelevant.

"They afflicted and complained not! their complaints have been
fiercer than their sufferings have been cruel." Is this true? Does
Mr. Everett really believe it to be true? Does not all the world know
it to be false?[fn53]

"They have done no iniquity? When no iniquity? Not in the days of
Isaiah their own prophet, who cries, "Ah! sinful nation, people
laden with iniquity, seed of evil doers." Not in the days of
Josephus their own historian, who sets forth scenes of depravity
which turn common wickedness into virtue, and declares "that the
earth would have swallowed them, if the Romans had not swept
them from its face?" No iniquity in the ages since; throughout the
cities of the dispersion, where they are proverbially dishonest, and
professedly unfaithful." &c.. &c.

Now all this eloquent invective can be set aside so far as it affects
my application of this prophecy by this simple remark; that this
prophecy neither relates to the wicked Jews of the time of Isaiah,
nor of Josephus, nor the ages since, but refers to "God's servant
Israel" i. e., not to the rebellious and reprobate of the Jewish
nation, but to those of the house of Jacob, who have, who do, and
who shall adhere to God's law, and obey his commandments; for
no others of them will God acknowledge as "his servants."[fn54]

I would also observe, that the stress which Mr. Everett lays upon
the phrase "no iniquity," shows either great carelessness, or great
ignorance of the idiom of the Hebrew Scriptures; because every
man, familiar with those writings, knows that this expression is one
of those called Hebreisms, which must be understood in a
restrained sense. In proof of which, and a decisive one too, I
would refer him to the prophecy of Balaam, recorded, Num. ch.
xxii. 21. where Balaam exclaims in his prophetic enthusiasm, "He
[i.e. God] hath not beheld iniquity in Jacob, neither hath he seen
perverseness in Israel."

Now I suppose that the 53rd. of Isaiah, is a representation of what
may be the reflections of the nations, who have despised and
persecuted "God's servant Israel," through the influence of the
prejudices of their mistaken religion, but who had become
sensible of their error by seeing the tremendous interference of
God himself in their behalf, predicted over and over again by the
prophets as to happen. The natural consequence of this
conviction in the minds of those nations, would be a revulsion of
the feelings to the opposite extreme. They would exaggerate the
merits, and extenuate the demerits of "God's servant." They would
reflect with astonishment and commiseration on their past
sufferings. "We considered them," they might exclaim, "as a God-
abandoned race, and devoted to wretchedness by him for having
crucified their king. But instead of being the victims of God's wrath,
they were wounded through our cruelty, they were bruised through
our iniquitous treatment. It is we who have sinned more than they.
We having gone astray in our ignorance, being without the
knowledge of God and his law. How passive and unresisting were
they!  They were oppressed, they were afflicted, and complained
not: when through false accusations and mistaken cruelty, they
were plundered and condemned to die, they went like a lamb to
the slaughter, and as a sheep before the shearer is dumb, so they
opened not their mouth. They were taken from the dungeon to be
slain; they were wantonly massacred, and every man was their
foe; and the cause of the sufferers who condescended to
examine? They had done no iniquity to merit this: for their
adherence to their faith, which we charged upon them as a crime,
we now see to be approved of by their God, as an acceptable
instance of unexampled perseverance in the cause of truth."[fn55]

Mr. Everett proceeds, p. 145, "If any thing needs be added, the
following observation is important, viz. that there is one passage
so clearly inapplicable to the Jewish nation, and so totally
incongruous with the rest of the interpretation, that Mr. English
passes it over without even the attempt of an explanation. It is
this: in a part of the prophecy which he puts into the mouth of the
Gentiles we read, "for [the Hebrew I must remind Mr. Everett
reads "by or through,"] the transgressions of MY PEOPLE was he
stricken," This Mr. English paraphrases "for [it should have been
"by or through"] the thoughtless crimes of my people he suffered.
But what the Gentiles could mean by "MY PEOPLE" he does not
say, and this difficulty is fatal to the whole interpretation.""

I will presently show Mr. Everett, that this formidable objection, so
emphatically announced, is after all a mere man in buckram; and I
am almost sorry that in doing this, I shall be obliged to expose one
more proof of Mr. Everett's having neglected the study of "the
beggarly elements," in order to devote himself, without distraction,
to the understanding of the delectable types and allegories of the
New Testament. Mr. Everett certainly is a scholar and a man of
talents, but he does not perfectly know, nor will [fn56] understand,
the contents of the Old Testament; and the above objection is a
proof of it.

He maintains, that the expression "my people," could not be used
by a Gentile, and that therefore my whole interpretation of the
prophecy in Isaiah, is fatally affected by his objection.  I request
Mr. Everett to have the goodness to turn to the book of Ruth ch i.
16., where he will find this Gentile, "this Moabitish damsel" saying
to her mother in-law "thy people shall be my people." Will Mr.
Everett look a little farther to the 1 Sam. ch. v. 10. in the Hebrew,
(not in a translation,) where he will find the Gentile Philistines
saying, "They have brought about the ark of the God of Israel to
slay me and my people?" (ac. to the Hebr.) again, v. 11. "Send
away the ark of the God of Israel, and let it go to his own place,
that it slay me not and my people." (ac. to the Hebr.)[fn57]

Mr. Everett, therefore, may understand from these examples, why
I passed over this phrase "without even the attempt of an
explanation;" because, truly, I never dreamed, that this formidable
objection, would have been made: or that any man would write,
upon the Jewish controversy, who did not first inform himself of
the contents and phraseology of the Hebrew Bible.

Having, as I believe, shewn that the 53d. chapter of Isiah can be
understood of "God's servant Israel," I will now attempt to shew
the reasons why I think that it cannot relate to Jesus of Nazareth.

1st.  Of the subject of this prophecy it is said v. 9. "and he
appointed his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his
deaths," in the plural. Now of Jesus we read in the gospels the
direct contrary: for the gospels represent that his death was with
the wicked, and his grave with the rich.[fn58]

2. The use of the word deaths, in the plural, appears to me to
necessitate the application of the prophecy to a people, not to an
individual. The same is evident distinctly from the Hebrew of v. 8.
at the end of the verse, in the word "lamoo."

3. The subject of this prophecy is said to have been "oppressed",
i. e. by pecuniary exactions: for that is the radical idea of the
Hebrew word, as is shown and asserted in the lexicons of the
Hebrew language.[fn59]  This is peculiarly true of the Jewish
nation, but was not true at all with regard to Jesus.

And to conclude, this prophecy is quoted repeatedly in the New
Testament. Now, that none of the quotations in the New
Testament from the Old can be maintained as prophecies fulfilled
by Jesus, is the opinion of the learned Christians Michaelis,
Eichorn; Semler, Eckerman, Lessing, &c. as is allowed by Mr.
Everett: of course the 53d ch. of Isaiah in their opinions cannot be
adduced as a prophetic proof of Christianity: and Mr. Everett, in
maintaining the contrary, has to struggle not only against
argument, but the strongest Christian authority that can be
produced on any question of Biblical Criticism.

Mr. Everett, in several passages of his book, has thought proper
to charge me with errors; but in the course of his discussion of my
interpretation of the 53d. of Isaiah, has directly accused me of
falsehood and of fraud, p. 148. of his work.

With regard to many of these errors, the situation and
circumstances I am in at present, put it out of my power to defend
myself, because I cannot get the books he refers to in order to test
his statements;[fn60] but of the latter imputations, the work of Mr.
Everett itself not only enables me to justify myself, but to fix those
charges upon him.

He says in the 148 page of his work, remarking upon my assertion
in "The Grounds of Christianity Examined."--"In a word the literal
application of this prophecy [the 53d. of Isaiah] to Jesus is now
given up by the most learned Hebrew scholars, who allow that the
literal sense of the original can never be understood of him,"-
"Why does not Mr. English name these Hebrew scholars? Simply
because his assertion is not true." Indeed!  Does not Mr. Everett
himself say in the 247 p. of his work, that Eichorn in a view of a
work of Dr. Ekerman says, that "the principle of accommodation,
which the better interpreters had already applied to many
violations [fn62] in the New Testament, is by this author extended
to all." "Though this opinion of Dr. Ekerman," says Mr. Everett,
must be allowed to savour a little of the extravagance of theory,
Eichorn adopts it. As the work alluded to, the "Theological
Contributions" has become a classical book with one class of the
German divines, who are thought to excel in critical learning, there
is no doubt that this doctrine is generally received among them.
MICHAELIS we all know admits it; and Marsh is the only famous
critic of the present day who does not embrace it.

Now the 53d. ch. of Isaiah is quoted in the New Testament,[fn63]
of course, therefore, according to Mr. Everett's own
representations of the opinions of these learned critics, they must
deny that the prophecy of Isaiah has any reference to Jesus, and
hold that it is quoted merely by way of accommodation. And if so
how has Mr. Everett dared to accuse me of falsehood in
representing, that "the literal application of this prophecy to Jesus
is now given up by the most learned Hebrew scholars, who allow
that the literal sense of the original can never be understood of
him"?! There is undoubtedly a falsehood told in this affair, and a
conscious suppression of truth, but it is not I who tell the first, or
conceal the latter.

Mr. Everett then proceeds.  "Priestley and Grotius are all he
claims, [the reader may see by the above that I might have
claimed more,] Priestley was a learned man, but he has no
pretentions as a Hebrew scholar, and though Mr. English quotes
Grotius, he does it incorrectly." He declares that "Grotius has
applied it to Jeremiah, and says, that Jesus Christ has nothing to
do with it except in a secondary sense, but that the whole of it
from beginning to end refers to Jeremiah." "There are but few to
whom I need say" continues Mr. Everett, "that the words of Grotius
in his commentary are, "These marks have their first fulfillment in
Jeremiah, but a more especial, sublime, and often indeed more
literal fulfillment in Christ." Mr. Everett's work p. 148. I do not see
how this passage of Grotius contradicts my representation of his
opinion. The passage from Grotius quoted by Mr. Everett
declares, "that these marks [i. e. the 53d. of Isaiah] have their first
fulfillment in Jeremiah;" of course they could not be fulfilled by any
other except in a secondary sense, as I have asserted. As for the
"more especial, sublime, and often indeed more literal fulfillment in
Christ," I have always supposed that this and similar expressions
in other parts of Grotius' Commentary, were understood, by all
who were acquainted with Grotius' history and the times in which
he wrote, to be intended for a mere salvo, as a tub thrown out to
that great whale the vulgar; to contradict directly whose opinions
with regard to the prophecies, was in the time of Grotius very
dangerous, as he himself, notwithstanding all his precaution and
truckling, seriously experienced.[fn64]

"Also, [Mr. Everett goes on to say,] in adducing the authority of
Priestley for his interpretation without reference or qualification,
Mr. English gives cause to think, that he did not know, or knowing
forbore to state, that Priestley pronounces it impossible, in one of
his works, to explain this prophecy of any but Jesus Christ. What
Hebrew scholars are to be named with Lowth and MICHAELIS,
who both assert the literal application to Christ, Mr. English may
one day learn, that asseverations like these whatever immediate
effect they produce, will finally stand in the way of his character for
veracity." p.149.

This has been to me the most irritating passage in Mr. Everett's
book, because it is a tissue of impudent ignorance or impudent
fraud, and as such I will prove it.[fn65]

I have always supposed, that in quoting the opinion of an author
as authority, it is the fairest way to quote his last avowed opinions.
Now the work of Priestley's which I refer to as applying the
prophecy of Isaiah to the Jewish nation, as I do, is entitled
"Priestley's Notes on Scripture," and was published after arrival in
America, several years AFTER the work to which Mr. Everett.
refers, wherein Priestley, maintained that it was impossible to
explain this prophecy of any but Jesus Christ." Therefore this fact
"gives cause to think, that Mr. Everett did not know, or knowing
forbore to state (which I believe in my conscience is the truth) this
circumstance" which completely acquits me at least of a
suppressio veri.[fn66]

"What Hebrew scholars are to be named with Lowth and
Michaelis!" Several--among whom Eichorn stands pre-eminent.
Moreover, how has it happened that "the keen detector of
dissonances" has contradicted himself in quoting Michaelis? Here,
because he chooses to cling to the 53d. of Isaiah as favouring his
cause, he quotes the name of MICHAELIS as asserting "its literal
application to Christ." In another place, (p. 247.) where it is
necessary to defend the New Testament from the charge of false
application of the prophecies of the Old Testament to Jesus, he
quotes again the great name of MICHAELIS as the patron of the
system of accommodation, which system maintains that the 53d.
of Isaiah has no application to Christ at all! but is quoted by the
writers of the New Testament merely by way of allusion. Mr.
Everett himself may live to learn, that such double dealing
attempts to slander his opponent, and impose upon his readers,
"whatever immediate effect they may produce, will finally stand in
the way of his character for veracity," or at least for fairness and
candour.

These are not the only instances in which Mr. Everett has
calumniated me, and abused the good nature of his readers. For
example--

I had maintained in my first work, that the gospel called of
Matthew was a forgery, and not a translation from the ancient
Hebrew gospel of Matthew, and had supported my opinion by
saying, that learned Christians allowed that "it had not the air of a
translation." This Mr. Everett contradicts as follows: "But Mr.
English is aware that MICHAELIS, the highest authority on these
subjects, pronounces that it is a translation, and maintains his
proposition not less from the unanimous testimony of the ancients
than from internal evidence." p. 472, of Mr. Everett's work.

I beg the reader after reading this to attend carefully to what is
said by Mr. Everett in p. 464. "Semler's opinion of the origin and
composition of the three first gospels, was the same as that of Le
Clerc, MICHAELIS, Lessing, and Eichorn, and which has been
illustrated and maintained by professor" Marsh. This opinion is
that they were compiled from documents [not one document or
gospel, but several] of our Lord's preaching and life, which had
been committed to writing during his life, or immediately after, and
which became after different additions, revisions and translations,
the BASIS of our present gospels." Here the reader sees that
when it is necessary to oppose my statements, in one place Mr.
Everett avers that Michaelis maintained that the Greek gospel
according to Matthew, was a translation of Matthew's Hebrew; in
another place, where it is also necessary to oppose me, he avers
that Michaelis believed that the gospel according to Matthew,
Mark, and Luke were compiled compositions, and of course none
of them were translations from any one work. "I would, says Mr.
Everett, answer Mr. English fairly, or not at all." If this and the
other instances quoted be specimens of Mr.  Everett's fairness,
what would be his conduct upon the very impossible supposition
that he could be guilty of duplicity?

2. Mr. Everett tells his readers, that the Jewish Rabbies "are the
most contemptible critics that have appeared;" that "they are so
silly that he is almost ashamed to quote them;" that they were in
short idiots. If so, of what value can their opinions be on
controverted points, which must after all be settled by reason and
scripture, and not by any bare human authority.[fn67]
Nevertheless Mr. Everett is continually calling upon his reader to
believe his arguments and statements upon the authority of these
said Rabbies. If I were one of his Christian readers, I should
consider myself insulted by such a procedure. It is almost
tantamount to saying, "'it is true, my arguments are built upon the
authority of fools, but yet they may serve to convince you."

3. I had accused the writers of the New Testament in my first
publication, of having blundered in applying passages of the Old
Testament as prophecies of Jesus Christ. Mr. Everett justifies
them by maintaining in the 5th. chapter of his work, that it is true
that these quotations cannot be supported as prophecies, but that
they are excusable for the following reasons. The writers of the.
New Testament were Jews; the Jews of their times believed that
every text of Scripture had seventy-two faces, and that each one
regarded the Messiah, and that the resurrection of the dead was
also taught in every chapter of Scripture, though we might not be
able to perceive it, and that the writers of the New Testament had
been brought up in these silly prejudices, and therefore argued on
these principles, i. e. that, notwithstanding their being inspired
men and full of the spirit of the Almighty, they continued in this
respect as silly as ever.

Now if there be a pious and sincere Christian in the world, and
should have this hypothesis laid before him for his acceptance as
the best means of defending the writers of the New Testament,
from the charge of fraud or blundering in their application of the
prophecies, I venture to say that that pious and sincere Christian
would, without hesitation, believe the proposer of such an
hypothesis to be ruining the cause he professed to defend. "What!
he might say, are the quotations in the New Testament from the
Old, indeed founded on folly, and alledged through stupidity?
Have the writers of the New Testament, who are allowed to have
been inspired by the Most High God with a perfect knowledge and
understanding of the Christian religion, who are representing
continually that Jesus Christ was foretold by the prophets, and
that their own minds were opened by the Holy Ghost to
understand the Scriptures, have they indeed though continually
quoting the Old Testament, after all never quoted for us even one
of the predictions on which they say their religion is founded? and
have they spent all the time they devoted to writing for the
salvation of the souls of men, in fooling with the Old Testament in
the manner you aver? 'Tis false! 'Tis monstrous! Either your
hypothesis is a fable, or Christianity, itself is like the dreams of the
Rabbies."[fn68]

When I see such principles, and other like principles avowed in
Mr. Everett's work, I feel myself authorized to propose to him the
following questions, by which I hope he will not consider himself
as put to the torture.

What, Mr. Everett, were your motives for quitting, so abruptly and
unexpectedly, the most respectable society who had done you the
honour to elect you their pastor, believing you to be the only man
worthy to succeed the learned, eloquent and lamented
Buckminster? This abandonment of your station took place after
you had engaged yourself in the examination of the question
between me, Mr. Cary, and Mr. Channing. If you felt doubts of the
validity of the Christian religion, and were therefore scrupulous
about going into your pulpit every Sunday to preach Christianity in
the name of the God of Truth, and therefore resigned your post,
your conduct thus far does you honour and not shame. But if, after
this, you have allowed yourself to be overcome by the solicitations
of interested friends (who might have been anxious that you
should publish something, that would allay the suspicions and
silence the rumours your conduct had occasioned) to give to the
world your very singular book, you have acted a part unjust
towards me, and injurious to yourself, for you now see the
consequence. You are taken in the snare you had laid for me, and
your violent dealing has come down on your own head.

I come now to the examination of the celebrated prophecy of the
seventy weeks. This prophecy has always run [fn69] the crux
Criticorum. It is unquestionably a very ambiguous one, since Mr.
Everett himself informs us in a note, p. 167 of his work, that
"Calovius whose day has passed a century ago, in a dissertation
upon the mysteries of the seventy weeks, numbers twenty-five
different Christian hypotheses," to which may be added at least
two more, those of Michaelis and Blayney.

If so, I would ask what stress a reasonable man can lay upon a
simple [fn70] prophecy which is allowedly so ambiguous, as to
have led Christians, sincerely disposed to make a prophecy of
Jesus Christ out of this passage, to interpret it at least twenty-
seven different ways?

There appears to me to be a mistranslation at the root of the
prophecy, which vitiates and confounds all the systems of
interpretation; applied to it that I know of. I conceive that the
prophecy should be translated thus.

"Seventy times seven [fn71] are determined upon thy people, and
upon thy holy city, to finish transgression and to make an end of
sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in
everlasting righteoussness, and to seal [up] the vision and
prophecy, and to anoint the most holy things."

"Know therefore, and understand that from the going forth of the
commandment to restore, and to build Jerusalem, unto the
anointed Prince, shall be seven weeks; and [in] [fn72] threescore
and two weeks the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in
troublous times." [fn73]

"And after threescore and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut
off, and have no successor; and the people of the Prince that shall
come, shall destroy the city, and the sanctuary: and the end
thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end desolations are
determined."

"And he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week, and in
the midst of the [or, a] week he shall cause the sacrifice and the
oblation to cease; and for the overspreading of abominations he
shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that
determined be poured upon the desolate." Dan., ch. ix. 24, 27.

Whatever may be the true sigification of this prophecy, it is not, I
conceive, favourable to the purpose to which Mr. Everett applies
it, for the following reasons.  1. That in supposing what is
commonly translated "seventy week's," to signify four hundred and
ninety years, the prophecy would be falsified; for certainly the
expiration of this period did not "finish transgression," nor "make
an end of sins," nor "make reconciliation for iniquity," nor "bring in
everlasting righteous," nor "anoint the most holy things," i.e. as I
understand it, the new and eternal temple and its altar, predicted
by Ezekiel in the last chapters of his prophecies. On the contrary,
the Jews became more wicked than ever, and the temple then
standing was destroyed to its foundations.

2. It follows from what is allowed by Mr. Everett himself, p. 159 of
his work, that from the going forth of the word to restore and build
Jerusalem, to the birth of Jesus Christ, was not seven weeks and
sixty and two weeks, i. e. sixty-nine weeks, but EIGHTY-FOUR
weeks, for he says there, that the duration of the second temple
was "NINETY-FOUR weeks," i. e. six hundred and fifty-nine years.
Now if my memory does not deceive me, Jerusalem was taken
and the temple destroyed by Titus about the year seventy after the
birth of Christ, which is equal to the prophetic weeks; therefore
take ten weeks from the ninety-four weeks, (the time Mr. Everett
states to have elapsed from the building of the second temple, to
its destruction) and there remains EIGHTY-FOUR weeks, and not
SIXTY-NINE. Which circumstance, appears to me to vitiate
entirely the interpretation of Mr. Everett, who supposes the
annointed one," spoken of as to be cut off after the sixty-nine
weeks, to be Jesus Christ.

As to who the "annointed ones" were, the first I think entirely refers
to Cyrus, and the last who was to be "cut off" and have no
successor, may either mean the pious and good Onias mentioned
in the book of Maccabees, who was the last I think of the
legitimate Jewish High Priests, [for after his time History testifies
that several, who had not the right of primogeniture as
descendants of Aaron, obtained the priesthood by force, by
intrigue, and by bribery;] or the last Jewish High Priest, Joshua
[fn74] who perished during the siege of Jerusalem, according to
Josephus. At any rate the anointed one who was to be cut off,
cannot mean Jesus of Nazareth; because this anointed one was
to be cut off in that same week of seven years, in which the city
was destroyed, whereas Jesus was crucified forty years before
that event; a circumstance I insist which excludes any application
of this prophecy to Jesus.

The claims set up for Jesus of Nazareth are moreover evidently
rejected by Daniel's prophecy, even according to Mr. Everett's
interpretation, forasmuch as he did not appear at the expiration of
sixty-nine weeks, but of EIGHTY-FOUR.

And to conclude this discussion, I would observe that Daniel, ch.
iii, in his account of the image [seen in a vision by
Nebuchadnezzar] whose head was of gold, breast and arms of
silver, belly of brass, legs of iron, and feet and toes of iron and
clay, is predicting the empires which have most influenced the fate
of the Hebrew nation; i. e. the Babylonian, Persian, Grecian, and
Roman, the last represented by "the iron legs," which did indeed
bestride the world; these "iron legs" are represented as
terminating in feet and toes part of iron and part of clay, which
have no natural coherence; i. e. the Roman empire shall be
divided into several kingdoms, partly strong and partly weak: a
prophecy remarkably fulfilled in the history and condition of the
kingdoms of Europe. The prophet goes on to say in ch. ii, that in
the latter days of those kings or kingdoms, [which are yet
subsisting] "the God of Heaven, would set up a kingdom which
should never be destroyed," that of the Messiah. Of course the
kingdom of the Messiah was not to be--not only not till after the
destruction of the Roman empire--but not till the latter days of the
kingdoms which grew up out of the ruins; whereas Jesus Christ
was born in the time of Augustus, i. e. when the Roman empire
itself was in the height of its splendour and vigour. Mr. Everett in
p. 201, endeavours to escape the strong gripe of the prophet
Daniel, by maintaining that these strong and weak parts, into
which the Roman empire was to be divided, meant that it should
be divided into "strong and weak institutions."  Now to turn this
sensible interpretation head over heels, [fn75] it appears to me to
be only necessary to observe, that these strong and weak parts
into which the Roman empire was to be divided, were, according
to the prophet, ch. ii. 4.3. of Daniel, to "mingle themselves with the
seed of men," i. e. make intermarriages; which, it appears to me to
be a thing that "strong and weak institutions" cannot do. This,
however has remarkably, been the case among the royal families
of Europe, who intermarry too with the avowed design of
cementing union and promoting peace and harmony.
Nevertheless, agreeable to the prophet's prediction, they have not
"cleaved together, but on the contrary have been almost
constantly at war with each other.

 PEBBLE IV.

"The children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and
without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image,
and without an ephod, and without teraphim; afterwards shall the
children of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God, and David
their king, and shall fear the Lord and his goodness in the latter
days." Hos. iii, 4, 5.

"I will set up one shepherd over them, even my servant David, he
shall feed [or govern] them, and he shall be their shepherd: and I
the Lord will be their God, and my servant David, a prince among
them." Ezech, ch. xxxiv. 23.

"David my servant shall be king over them, and there shall be one
shepherd,"------" my servant David shall be their Prince for ever."
Ezek. ch, xxxvii. 24, 25.

"They shall serve Jehovah their God, and David their king, whom I
will raise up unto [or for] them." Jer. xxx. 9.

"Incline your ear and come unto me: hear and your soul shall live;
and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure
mercies of David. Behold I have given him for a witness, to the
peoples, a leader and commander to the peoples." Is. Iv. 3, 4.

From such passages I inferred, in my first publication, that the
name of the true Messiah, was to be DAVID, and not Jesus. To
avoid the force of these passages Mr. Everett has recourse to
allegory and analogy.

Jesus is prophecied of in these passages, says he, by the name
of DAVID, because "there was an analogy between these two
distinguished servants of God. David, from a low and humble
estate, was raised to be the founder of the temporal glories of his
kingdom; and Christ, not less humble in his origin, was the author
of the spiritual distinction of Israel; David was the most illustrious
political and Christ the most distinguished moral instrument of the
Lord. David was commanded to entrust to his successor the
election of the famous temple, which was the centre of the Jewish
worship; and Christ has founded through the agency of his
apostles that CHURCH by which his religion has been preserved,
and diffused in the world."

"To laugh, were want of dignity, or grace, "And to be grave
exceeds all power of face."

I assure Mr. Everett, that the days of Type and FIGURE are gone
by, and have been succeeded among Biblical Critics by a stricter
style of reasoning, and are now considered as "pious
whims."[fn76]

In the present advanced state of sacred Criticism even the
beautiful allegory in Paul's Epistle to the Gal. ch. iv. which makes
Hagar, Abraham's maid, nothing less than "Mount Sinai in Arabia;"
and Sarah, Abraham's wife, to be the "Jerusalem, that is above
the mother of us all!" has come to be regarded as "rather queer."

I had also objected that the coming of the true Messiah, was
according to the Old Testament, to be preceded by the
appearance of Elijah the prophet on earth; and that he had not
appeared before the era of Jesus, nor ever since.

In answer to this, Mr. Everett endeavours to show 173. & seq.,
that a man named John the Baptist--a righteous person,--whose
raiment was of camels hair,--and whose meat was locusts and
wild honey, who lived in the age of Jesus of Nazareth, was Elijah,
and had a right to be so considered--by a figure.

To this I answer, that the prophecy of Malachi does not say
"Behold I will send you one like Elijah, or "an Elijah,"---but it says
explicitly, and expressly, "Behold, I will send you Elijah the
Prophet, before the coming of the great and terrible day of the
Lord; and he shall turn the hearts of the fathers to the children,
and the hearts of the children to their fathers." Mal. iv. 5,6.

Now who is "Elijah the Prophet?" undoubtedly the great prophet of
Israel, who called down fire from heaven--who raised the dead to
life--and who ascended alive to heaven in a chariot of fire; God by
such a translation sufficiently intimating that he had in reserve for
him, some extraordinary commission. Moreover the coming of this
Elijah the prophet, was to be followed by. "the great and terrible
day of Jehovah," by which name the prophets call the personal
descent of Jehovah upon the earth, to take vengeance on the
wicked, and to punish the oppressors and persecutors of his
people.[fn77] Was the appearing of John the Baptist followed by
this event? or has it yet occurred, though that man lived eighteen
hundred years ago? His appearance, instead of being followed by
the interposition of God to avenge Israel of its enemies, was on
the contrary, followed by giving Israel into the hand of its enemies,
who, "for the overspreading of abominations," made Jerusalem a
desolation, and delivered over its sinful population to the chains of
slavery, and the bands of Death.

Elijah the Prophet is to turn the hearts of the fathers to the
children, and the hearts of the children to the fathers."  Did John
the Baptist do this? On the contrary, the morals of his countrymen,
in His age, instead of growing from bad to better, went on from
bad to worse, till there was no remedy, and the Sword of God did
his work.

Indeed, and indeed Mr. Everett you are wrong; And your
superannuated allies, TYPE and FIGURE, whom I disdain to
combat, cannot aid you to defend what is indefensible.

 PEBBLE V.

The Law of the Pentateuch, is pronounced by the Old Testament
to be intended for a permanent and eternal Code for the Jewish
nation. Mr. Everett denies this. Let us see nevertheless, if it
cannot be proved.

The promulgation of the ordinance imposing circumcision on the
descendants of Abraham, is in these words. "And God said unto
Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou and thy
seed after thee in their generations. This is my covenant which ye
shall keep, between me and you, and thy seed after thee; Every
man child among you shall be circumcised.--He that is born in thy
house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be
circumcised; and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an
everlasting covenant. And the uncircumcised man child whose
flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off
from his people; he hath broken my covenant." Gen. ch. xvii. 9.--
14.

The ordinance of the Passover is also declared to be everlasting,
"and this day [i. e. the feast of the Passover] shall be unto you for
a memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast unto the Lord throughout
your generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance forever."
Ex.ch.xii. 14. see also v. 15.--in v. 17. it is said "ye shall observe
this day in your generations by an ordinance for ever."

The ordinance of the day of atonement, is declared to be a
perpetual institution, "It shall be a statute for ever unto you," Lev.
ch. xvi. 29. "It shall be a Sabbath of rest unto you, and ye shall
afflict your souls, by a statute for ever." v. 31. "and this shall be an
everlasting statute unto you." v. 34.

The feast of offering the first fruits of the year, is declared Lev. ch.
xxiii. 14. "to be a statute for ever throughout your generations, in
all your dwellings."

The feast of the Pentecost, is also declared in the same ch. of
Lev. 21. to "be a statute for ever, in all your dwellings throughout
your generations." See also v. 41.

The ordinance of the Sabbath is pronounced a perpetual
institution, "Verily my sabbath ye shall keep: for it is a sign
between me and you, throughout your generations--Wherefore the
children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath
throughout their generations for a perpetual covenant: It is a sign
between me and the children of Israel for ever."  Ex. xxxi. 13--17.

As it is clearly evident from such passages as the above, that the
law of Moses was intended to be a perpetual rule for the Israelites
"throughout all their generations," as long as they should exist, Mr.
Everett, in order to get rid of their force, has thought proper to
annihilate the Jewish nation with a stroke of his pen. He maintains
p. 350. of his work, that no such nation exists as the Jewish
nation! This unexpected stroke was to me a confounding one--not
on account of its force--but on account of its amazing effrontery.

The Jews not a nation! ask the histories of mankind; ask all writers
who give an account of the different nations and peoples into
which the race of Adam is divided! and Mr. Everett will find that
they all consider the Jews as "a distinct and peculiar people."
"But, says Mr. Everett, p. 350, if they are a nation, we can be told
whereabouts they dwell, and what cities they inhabit."
Undoubtedly Mr. Everett can be told all this if he will take the
trouble to ask their chiefs; and if he does he will be surprised to
learn that the Jews, in cities and countries that can be named and
pointed out, amount probably to ten millions of people, governed
by their own law, so far as relates to their religion and intercourse
with each other, and yet Mr. Everett maintains that the Jewish
nation does not exist. [fn79]

But I have a solemn answer from immortal lips to give to Mr.
Everett's assertion, which he may possibly, if he be a religious
man, hearken to, and tremble.

"Thus saith Jehovah, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and
the ordinances of the moon and the stars for a light by night;
which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; JEHOVAH
OF HOSTS is his name; if those ordinances depart from before
me saith Jehovah, then the seed of Israel shall cease being A
NATION before me FOR EVER.

Thus saith Jehovah, if heaven above can be measured, and the
foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I also will cast off
all the seed of Israel, for all that they have done saith Jehovah."
Jer. ch. xxxi. 35, 36, 37.

But, says Mr. Everett, p. 352, "above all, the Jews have no
national existence in respect of their religion; which is really the
principal point to be urged. The tribe of Levi which was separated
to the service of the temple, and the family of Aaron, exonerated
[fn80] to the priesthood, and ordained to be "a perpetual duration"
have both been long extinct, At least have long since ceased to be
traced."

This is incorrect. The tribe of Levi is not extinct, neither has the
family of Aaron ceased to be traced. Hundreds, perhaps
thousands of Jews at present existing, are recognized by their
brethren as of the tribe of Levi, and the descendants of Aaron to
this day have the privilege of blessing the people in the
Synagogues on solemn days, in a peculiar form which no other
Jews are allowed to employ.

This marvellous fact, that the descendants of David and Aaron
should yet be discriminated amidst the general confusion of the
tribes, is an illustrious verification of the following promise of Him
whose word never fails, which I now oppose to the last rash
assertion of his creature who has denied it.

"Thus saith Jehovah, David shall never want a man to sit upon the
throne of the house of Israel, neither shall the priests the Levites
want a man before me [fn81] to offer burnt offerings, and to kindle
meat offerings, and to do sacrifice continually.  Thus saith
Jehovah: if ye can break my covenant of the day, and my
covenant of the night, and that there should not be day and night
in their season; then may also my covenant be broken with David
my servant, that he should not have a son to reign upon his
throne, and with the Levites the priests my ministers. As the host
of heaven cannot be numbered neither the sand of the sea
measured, so will I multiply the seed of David my servant, and the
Levites the priests that minister unto me." "Considerest thou. not
what this people have spoken, saying, the two families which
Jehovah hath chosen, he hath even cast them off? Thus have
they despised my people that they should be no more A NATION
before them. Thus saith Jehovah, If my covenant be not with day
and night, and I have appointed, the ordinances of heaven and
earth; then will I cast away the seed of Jacob, and David my
servant, so that I will not take any of his seed to be rulers over the
seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, FOR I WILL CAUSE THEIR
CAPTIVITY TO RETURN AND HAVE MERCY UPON THEM." Jer.
xxxiii. 17--26.

I presume that the CHRISTIAN CLERGYMAN who has
contradicted his BIBLE and his GOD, is ready to exclaim like
humbled Job; "I have uttered what I understood not; things too
wonderful for me which I knew not; wherefore I abhor myself, and
repent in dust and ashes." Job ch. xlii. See Appendix. H.

Shall I proceed to the consideration of some little arguments of Mr.
Everett against the intended perpetuity of the Mosaic law derived
from some expressions in the Psalms and the Prophets? Is it
possible that Mr. Everett the scholar and the clergyman, is
ignorant, that according to the idiom of the Hebrew language all
such passages are merely expressive that God lays no stress
upon sacrifice, and burnt offering, if unsanctified by righteousness
and good works: Mr. Everett has blindly recommended a passage
to my serious attention, p. 358, which ought to have made him
sensible of this.

"Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, the God of Israel, put your burnt
offerings to your sacrifices, and eat the flesh thereof. For I spake
not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day I brought
them out of Egypt concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. But
this thing commanded I them saying, obey my voice." Jer. ch. vii.
23, 24. What! might a critic of the cast of Mr. Everett exclaim, did
not God indeed command the children of Israel, when he brought
them out of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices? are
not the books of Leviticus and Numbers filled with regulations
concerning them? Very true, might a rational scholar reply to him,
but this and several other expressions in the Psalms and Isaiah
are Hebraeisms, i. e. peculiar idioms of the language, expressing
comparison not rejection; this passage in Jeremiah implying that
when God brought the children of Israel out of Egypt, in giving his
law to them he laid no stress upon burnt offerings and sacrifices,
in comparison with moral duties.

Finally, I would ask Mr. Everett, whether he believes it was the
intention of David, of Isaiah, and Jeremiah, to declare to the Jews
of their times that God would no more accept of burnt offerings
and sacrifices! and that the ceremonial law was ipso facto
abolished; because, if such passages do signify the abolishment
of the Mosaic law, it must be considered as having been a dead
letter ever since David, Isaiah., and Jeremiah uttered these
expressions.

But, says Mr. Everett, p. 357, "the positive declaration of God,
puts the matter [the repeal of the Mosaic law] beyond a doubt."

"Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new
covenant with the house of Israel; and with the house of Judah,
not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers, in the
day that I took them by the hand, to lead them out of the land of
Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was a husband
unto them, saith the Lord: but this shall be my covenant that I will
make with the house of Israel, after those days, I will put my law in
their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, and I will be their
God, and they shall be my people." Jer. xxxi. 31, &c.

I would observe first, that Mr. Everett in applying this passage to
the purpose for which he has adduced it, has against him the
opinions of all those Christian critics whom he allows to excel in
critical learning; viz. Michaelis, Ekerman, Lessing, Eichorn, &c.
For this passage is quoted to the same purpose in the Epistle to
the Hebrews, ch. viii. 8. and all the critics above mentioned
maintain, as Mr. Everett allows, that none of the passages of the
Old Testament quoted in the New, can be supported as
prophecies of the things to which they are applied, but hold that
they were quoted merely by way of accommodation or allusion.

2.  I would observe, that this passage is one out of several more in
the prophets, which represent that after the general restoration of
Israel to their country, God will put a new spirit in them, and cause
them to obey his voice, (which was not done at the giving of the
law, the Israelites being left to obey it or not; after being given to
understand what should be the rewards of obedience and the
curses of disobedience,)' this very chapter of Jeremiah, from
which this quotation is taken, expressly representing, that this new
covenant is to be made AFTER the Israelites are restored to their
own land: which completely excludes the idea that this new
covenant can relate to a new religion, fabricated seventeen
hundred years ago; and renders the solemnity with which Mr.
Everett has introduced it, somewhat ridiculous.

This new covenant also, is not to put the old law out of
remembrance, but is to "write it on their hearts."  "Behold, I will
gather them out of all countries whither I have driven them in mine
anger, and in my fury, and in great wrath; and I will bring them
again into this place, and I will cause them to dwell safely: and
they shall be my people, and I will be their God: and I will give
them one heart, and one way, that they may fear me for ever, for
the good of them and their children after them. And I will make an
everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from
them, to do them good; but I will put my fear into their hearts, that
they shall not depart from me. Yea, I will rejoice over them to do
them good, and I will plant them in this land with my whole heart
and with my whole soul." Jer. xxxii. 37--41. [fn82]

In order to manifest that the prophecy of the new covenant,
quoted from Jeremiah by Mr. Everett, had no reference to the
promulgation of the new [fn83] law, I had said in my first
publication, "that though the prophet speaks of a "new covenant"
he says nothing of a new law. On which Mr. Everett labours
greatly to prove, See p. 357 &c. of his book, that the expression
"making a new covenant," must signify making a new law, and
cannot signify reimposition of the old.

There is a history in the Bible which convicts this opinion of
mistake, which I propose in my turn to Mr. Everett's serious
attention.

"These are the words of the covenant, which the Lord commanded
Moses to make with the children of Israel in the land of Moab,
beside the covenant which he made with them in Horeb. And
Moses called unto all Israel, and said unto them; ye stand this day
all of you before the Lord your God, your captains of your tribes,
your elders, and your officers, with all the men of Israel; your little
ones, your wives, and the stranger that is in thy camp, from the
hewer of thy wood to the drawer of thy water; that thou shouldest
enter into covenant with the Lord thy God, &c. Deut. ch. xxix.

And what was the covenant? why, as the reader may find by
perusing the rest of this piece of history in the Pentateuch, it was
the reimposition of the Law of Moses upon the new generation of
Israelites, who were children when their fathers came out of
Egypt. So that Mr. Everett must see, that God's making a new
covenant, can be accompanied with a reimposition of the law,
since in the instance considered, he has actually done it once
before.

I have, however, another passage in reserve, which must compel
Mr. Everett to resign his unfounded opinions on this subject.

Moses, the giver of the law, after predicting most exactly what
should befall the Jewish nation for disobedience to it, in the 28th
chapter of Deuteronomy, proceeds in the 30th ch. to inform them,
that the time would come, when "the Lord their God will turn their
captivity and have compassion upon them, and will return and
gather them from all the nations whither the Lord their God hath
scattered them."

"If thy dispersion,[fn84] (says the lawgiver) shall be unto the
utmost parts of heaven, from thence will the Lord thy God gather
thee, and from thence will he fetch thee. And the Lord thy God will
bring thee unto the land which thy fathers possessed, and thou
shalt possess it; and he will do thee good and multiply thee above
thy fathers, and the Lord thy God will circumcise thy heart, and the
heart of thy seed, to love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and
with all thy soul, that thou mayest live. And the Lord thy God will
put all these curses upon thine enemies, and on them that hate
thee, and which persecuted thee. And thou shall return, and obey
the voice of the Lord,  AND DO ALL HIS COMMANDMENTS
WHICH I COMMANDED ON THAT DAY."  Deut. ch. XXX. [fn85]

In accordance with this express prediction of Moses, that when
the Israelites should be gathered out of all countries into their own
land, God would give them a heart and disposition to love the Lord
their God, and to do all his commandments which Moses was then
delivering to them are the prophecies of Ezekiel; who in his last
chapters, after giving a prophecy of the general return of the
descendants of Jacob to their own land, proceeds to predict the
division of the country, between the Mediterranean and the
Euphrates, among the restored tribes; and minutely describes the
plan, parts, offices, and ceremonies, of a new and eternal temple
to be raised upon the ancient site of that of Solomon, that is to be
consecrated by the re-establishment of the magnificent ritual of
Moses, with augmented splendour.

That the prophecy of Moses, and those of Ezekiel, referred to,
have never yet been fulfilled, is undeniable; and that they will be
fulfilled, will not be doubted by a Christian; and can hardly be
disbelieved by a Sceptic, who will take the trouble to compare the
history of "the eternal people,"[fn86] with the predictions
concerning it which have been fulfilled to the letter.

Mr. Everett, in the 449 page of his work, speaks rather
contemptuously of the law of Moses. It is somewhat unusual to
see a descendant of savage wanderers of the woods, who painted
themselves blue in order to look handsome,[fn87] and whose
posterity, and among them Mr. Everett himself, might so far as
religion and morals is concerned, but for the instruction originally
derived from the law of Moses, be still in the same respectable
state, speaking lightly of a Book to which every nation on the
Globe, who have any rational ideas of God or futurity, are
absolutely indebted for that invaluable knowledge. The Jewish,
Christian, and Mohammedan religions, by which so many of our
unfortunate race have been brought to a knowledge of God, and
made candidates for an eternity of bliss, are all founded on, and
derived from the Pentateuch. If that Book had never existed, those
religions could not have existed. All that part of mankind who have
any claims to reason in their Religion, are therefore indebted to
this Jew Book for the benefit.

Nor is this all the wonder.  The sublime and fundamental Doctrine
of the Pentateuch--One God--Eternal and Supreme---the Almighty
Creator and tremendous Avenger--can be traced up to Abraham,
that wandering shepherd who at the command of God left his
country and his father's house, to go to a foreign land., where he
lived and died a stranger and a pilgrim.

What ideas should we entertain of a man whose tent was
frequented by angels, and with whom the Supreme "conversed
face to face, as a man talketh with his friend!" of a man who lived
and died a shepherd, yet to whom it was predicted four thousand
years ago, by Him whose word never fails that "his name should
be great, that it should be a blessing, and that in his seed should
all the nations of the earth be blessed." Sceptic! has not this
prophecy been fulfilled?  Is not the name of Abraham a theme of
blessing to the Jew--the Christian--the Magian--and the
Musselman?  Is not his name pronounced with reverence
throughout the four continents of the Globe. Has not the earth
been blessed in his seed?  Is there a nation or people upon it, who
have any rational ideas of God or futurity, who have not derived
them from Moses, Jesus, or Mohammed? Are we not indebted to
these descendants of this wonderful man,[fn89] for the
consolations which support the soul under the trials of life, and for
the faith and hope that smooth the bed of death? assuredly--
assuredly. The events of past ages have verified the divine origin
of the prediction, and ages to come will still farther confirm it.

Mr. Everett objects to the law of Moses, its multiplied forms and
ceremonies; but these were mostly not obligatory upon the whole
nation, but upon one tribe set apart to this duty, and who had
nothing else to do.[fn90]

The influence of these rights [fn91] and ceremonies--and no
religion can perpetually exist without them, for after all the [fn92]
man is the slave of his senses, and powerfully affected by the
impressions made upon them--cannot be doubted by one who
attentively considers their amazing magnificence.

A temple blazing with the most precious productions of the
mine,[fn93] and inaccessible to all but the consecrated
descendants of one man, standing at the extremity of an immense
area covered with variegated marble, and surrounded by
magnificent corridors and porticos; a gorgeous host of nearly forty
thousand priests,[fn94]: to minister at the ever smoking altar, and
to nourish the eternal fire; the golden ewer containing the
hallowed blood of atonement, and the censer streaming [fn95]
clouds of fragrance, in the hands of the trembling descendant of
Aaron approaching the inner sanctuary of the INVISIBLE AND
ALMIGHTY; three hundred sons of song, accompanied with
psaltery and cymbal, and "the harp with a solemn sound,"
resounding the attributes of HIM WHO IS, AND EVER SHALL
BE;[fn96] and hundreds of thousands of worshippers prostrating
their foreheads on the pavement in awe and extacy, as the temple
shines forth with the Shechinah, streaming its rainbow glories into
the heart of heaven, and covering the earth with its effulgence,
plainly showing that GOD IS THERE! This, all this Mr. Everett
pronounces, "all calculated to occupy the attention of a simple and
unfeeling [fn97] people." p. 344.[fn98] There is, not however, a
philosopher on earth that would [fn99] walk barefoot over its whole
circumference to witness such a sight.

With this terminates my reply to Mr. Everett. I leave it to his
consideration, whether he has fulfilled the magnificent promises
held out to the public in the splendid table of contents prefixed to
his book, from which it should seem as if I were actually crushed
into the dust; and I leave it to the consideration of my abused and
deluded countrymen, whether the heavy artillery of the law and
the prophets, which I have wheeled but from the Old Testament,
has not fairly blown the old board fences behind which a crazy
superstition is ensconced, and which Mr. Everett has painted up to
look like real fortifications, and mounted with quaker guns, to
splinters and fragments.

 THE SLING.

WHAT was the real history and character of Jesus Christ?

Mr. Everett had a right to consider my expressions, relative to this
subject contained in my first work, as "far from being explicit;" for
in fact I hardly knew what to think of the unparalelled son of Mary.
That he was a pious and blameless man, I conceived that no man
of good heart could doubt, while the supposition that he claimed to
be the Messiah, I believed and still believe to be incompatible with
such a character as his.

With the reader's permission, I will now state what I conceive may
have been the real truth with regard to him.

I believe that Jesus of Nazareth was certainly a righteous man,
and probably one who wished to bring back his countrymen, to a
rational observance of the law, and to abandon their traditions.

He appeared in an age when the religious part of the Jewish
nation had made the law in many respects of none effect by those
traditions, and had rendered their religion a stumbling block to the
Gentiles, by reason of the puerile superstitions they had added to
it: thus counteracting the express design, for which they had been
set apart from other nations, viz. to bring them to the knowledge
and acknowledgement of the unity and supremacy of God;) and
violating the command of Moses, "ye shall not add unto the word
which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it; for
this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the
nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say, surely this
great nation is a wise and understanding people."  Deut. ch. iv.--
and when the irreligious part of the nation, had become dreadfully
corrupt.

The Jewish people at that time were oppressed and despised; the
prophets of the Old Testament had taught them to believe that at
a time when their oppressions should be at their height, their
Messiah should appear. Of consequence the appearance of such
a man as Jesus Christ, at that time when they considered
themselves as crushed under the Roman yoke, possibly led them
or some of them to believe that he might be their expected
deliverer. But the Jewish nation at that time were unworthy of such
a deliverance. They longed for their Messiah, not for
righteousness, but for vengeance sake; not to hail him as the
benefactor of the human race, but as the avenger of their wrongs
upon all the world who had crushed and despised them.

Such a people were not the lawful candidates for the happiness of
the eternal kingdom; and they afterwards learned, by the event of
their struggle with the Romans, that they must not expect
deliverance till they had become less unworthy of it.

Jesus, by preaching against the traditions of the elders, by not
observing the Sabbath day so rigidly as the Pharisees, by
denouncing them as hypocrites, tithers of mint anise and cummin,
washers of plates and platters, and neglecters of the weightier
matters of the law, justice, judgment, and mercy, as serpents, a
generation of vipers, whited sepulchres, and what not, had
enraged these superstitious fanatics to the last degree. But they
could not wreak their vengeance, because he was protected, by
the people whom the gospels represent as expecting with the
most anxious impatience, that he would announce himself as their
deliverer.[fn100] But when repeated importunity, accompanied by
an attempt to seize upon him and by compulsion oblige him to
head them, terminated only in causing Jesus to escape and
withdraw himself from their wishes [fn101] the people were
disgusted, and abandoned him.

The Chief Priests and Pharisees took advantage of this
abandonment, to seize him and deliver him to the Roman
governor as a dangerous man, who either was willing to head the
people against the Romans, or who might be made the pretext of
an insurrection, as the people had shown a disposition to
recognize him as the Messiah. [fn102] Such I believe to be as
near an approximation to the true history of Jesus Christ, as can
be made at this day.

Let us now review the points I have endeavoured to establish in
this work.

1. I have endeavoured to show that the miracles, supposed by Mr.
Everett to have been wrought by Jesus in proof of his
Messiahship, cannot be proved; because that the New Testament
is not to be depended on as competent testimony for the real
history and real doctrines of Jesus of Nazareth; and therefore, that
the question of his Messiahship must in all events be decided by
an appeal to the Old Testament.

2. It has been shown, that the prophecies of the Messiah
contained in the Old Testament, have not been fulfilled in Jesus;
and that those prophecies which Mr. Everett regards as proofs of
the Christian religion, were also not fulfilled in Jesus.

3. It has been shown that the law of Moses was intended for a
perpetual law for the Jewish nation, "through all their generations
forever;" and of course that it is, and must be perpetually
obligatory upon them; and consequently whether JESUS BE THE
MESSIAH, OR NOT, the Jews are bound to adhere to the law of
Moses.[fn104]

4. It has been shown, that [fn105] it is absolutely impossible to
know the real history of Jesus with certainty; the Jews and
Christians ought for the future to consider his character, not as a
subject of dispute, nor an occasion of quarrel, much less as a
cause of mutual aversion, but merely as a matter of speculation.

Should these positions ever be recognised by the Jews and
Christians as reasonable and true, let us consider what, may be
the consequence.

1. The Christians become sensible, that the New Testament is not
to be depended on, would cease to hate, to persecute, and to
annoy the unfortunate Jews, on account of their rejecting its
doctrines.

2. The Christians would themselves adhere to the Old Testament,
as the rock and rule of faith and morals; and would worship with
the Jews the One Jehovah, without equal or companion, and obey
the moral law of the Old Testament, leaving the observance of its
ceremonial institutions to the nation for whom they were
intended:[fn106] like the "devout Gentiles" in the time of Josephus
and Christ.

3. The Jews, seeing the Christians Unitarians as well as
themselves, would cease to regard the Christians as impious
idolaters, and cruel enemies.

4. Both parties would worship and serve God as brethren, and
children of the same father; and await in faith and hope the
appearance of the GREAT PERSONAGE, who is to make them
and all the good part of mankind, perfectly happy.

Should what I have written have any tendency to promote union
and friendly feelings, between the parties to a dispute which has
for nearly eighteen hundred years occasioned such cruel
oppressions and bloody persecutions to the side which is in the
right, I shall not have lived in vain; and though the cause in which I
have exerted myself has occasioned me much detriment and
distress,[fn107] and may possibly ultimately oblige me to die in a
foreign land, without a friend to close my eyes; I comfort my heart
with the hope, that I may have done somewhat for the great cause
of truth, justice, and humanity, and for the promotion of mutual
regard and friendly feelings, among a very large portion of the
human race.

APPENDIX.

A

For instance, it is said in the 2d. ch. of the Gospel called of
Mathew, that Jesus, when brought out of Egypt by his parents,
"came and dwelt in the city called Nazereth: that it might be
fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet. "He shall be called a
Nazerene."

Now there is no such passage as this throughout the Old
Testament: the author of the Gospel called of Mathew must
therefore, it seems to me, have forged this supposed prophecy out
of his own head, or must have mistaken the sense of some
passage in the Old Testament: if he was capable of either, he was
not the honest and inspired Mathew, the Apostle of Jesus Christ.
There is a passage in the Old Testament, which might have led a
Gentile, ignorant of the Jewish Scriptures into this mistake, but
could not have misled a Jew. In the history of Sampson Judges
xiii. 5. it is said, "that he should be a Nazarite unto God from the
womb." But a Nazerite was one thing and a Nazarene another: the
first was a man who had a peculiar vow upon him, described
Numbers. 7. ch., but a Nazarene was a man belonging the city of
Nazereth in Palestine. The quotation is a proof with me, that the
author of the Gospel ascribed to Matthew was a Gentile, of course
not Matthew who was a Jew, and incapable of making such a
blunder.[fn108]

Again, in the Gospel called of Matthew ch. xxvii. a passage is
quoted as a prophetic proof text from Jeremiah, says the author.
"Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet
saying, and they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him
that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value; and
gave them for the Potters field, as the Lord appointed me." There
is no such passage as this in "Jeremy the prophet," nor in any of
the Books of the Old Testament. But Jerom asserts, that it was
taken from an Apocryphal Book ascribed to Jeremiah; he says
that he saw the apocryphal book from whence this is taken.  See
Jerom's Commentary upon Matthew tom. iv. p. 1. p. 134, See also
Marsh's Michaelis Vol. I. p. 490. as quoted by Mr. Everett.

It appears to me, that an honest man would not quote, as
prophetical authority, a forged book ascribed to Jeremiah: and an
inspired man as the Christians suppose Matthew to have been,
still less.

In short the quotations in the New testament from the Old,
adduced as prophecies of Jesus and the Religion of the New
Testament, are so very inapplicable to that purpose, that the most
celebrated of the Christian. Theologians of the present day, have
found themselves obliged to abandon all attempts to support them
as prophecies fulfilled in the events to which they are applied.
They maintain, as will appear hereafter in the course of this work,
that not one of the passages, quoted in the New Testament from
the Old, was quoted as a prophecy, but merely by way of
accommodation or allusion. If so, it may be replied, that it is very
extraordinary, that the authors of the books of the New Testament
who are almost continually representing that Jesus was predicted
by the prophets, should after all never have adduced one of those
predictions, although they are perpetually quoting the Old
Testament. But the truth of the matter probably is, that the writers
of the New Testament, did firmly believe that the passages they
have quoted, were really predictions of the events and doctrines to
which they refer them. This is clear from the Epistle to the
Hebrews for instance, it is a deliberate and formal defence of the
Doctrines of Christianity, addressed to the Jews, or Jewish
Christians, in which the author attempts to show from the Old
Testament, allowed by the Jews as oracular, that the Pre-
existence, Divinity, Priesthood, and Atonement of Jesus Christ, as
supposed by the Christians, were predicted in the Old Testament,
and proved by his citations.[fn109]

Who is so blind as not to see, that this system of Defence is
merely one of the last resort, adopted in circumstances of distress
for want of a better?

Sure I am, that the believing part of the Christian Laity will never
adopt this System, (though the unbelieving part probably gladly
will) but would be extremely shocked on being told by their Clergy,
that the passages quoted from the Old Testament by the writers of
the New, which they and their predecessors from the 2nd century
downwards have been accustomed to regard as veritable
predictions of Jesus, and introduced too by such solemn prefaces
as the following, "all this was done that it might be fulfilled which
was spoken by the prophet, saying" &c, or, "in this was fulfilled
that which was spoken by the prophet saying" &c--were not after
all adduced as prophecies, but merely by way of allusion.[fn110]

 PASSAGES FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT REFERRING TO
THE MESSIAH AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF HIS KINGDOM.

"Shiloh shall come, and to him shall the obedience of the peoples
be." Ac. to the Hebr. Gen. xlix. 10.

"The adversaries of Jehovah shall be broken in pieces; out of
Heaven shall He thunder upon them; Jehovah shall judge the
ends of the earth; and he shall give strength unto his king, and
exalt the horn of his Messiah." I Sam. ch. il. 10.

"These be the last words of David. David the son of Jesse said,
and the man who was exalted on high, the Messiah of the God of
Jacob, [See the Hebr.] and the sweet Psalmist of Israel. The Spirit
of Jehovah spake by me, and his word was [fn111] in my tongue.
The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me. He that
ruleth over mankind [or the human race. See the Hebr.] shall be
just, ruling in the fear of God, And he shall be as the light of the
morning when the sun ariseth, even a morning without clouds; as
the tender grass springing out of the earth by clear shining after
rain.--But the sons of Belial shall be all of them as thorns thrust
away, because they cannot be taken with hands; but the man that
shall touch them must be fenced with iron, and the staff of a
spear; and they shall be utterly burned with fire in the same
place." 2. Sam. ch. xxiii, 1.--7.

" I have set my king upon my holy hill of Zion, I will declare the
decree, Jehovah hath said unto me. Thou art my son, this day
have I begotten thee; ask of me, and I shall give thee the nations
for thy inheritance, and the utmost parts of the earth for thy
possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron: thou shall
dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel." Ps. 2. See also Ps. 21.

"He shall judge thy people with righteousness, and thy poor with
judgment. The mountains shall bring peace to the people, and the
little hills by righteousness. He shall judge the poor of the people,
he shall save the children of the needy, and shall break in pieces
the oppressor. They shall fear thee as long as the sun and moon
endure throughout all generations. He shall come down like rain
upon the mown grass: as showers that water the earth, [compare
2. Sam. ch. xxi. [fn112] 3. 4.] In his days shall the righteous
flourish; and abundance of peace as long as the moon endureth.
He shall have dominion also from sea to sea, and from the river
unto the ends of the earth. [" his dominions shall be from sea even
to sea, and from the river even unto the ends of the earth." Zech.
ix: 10.] they that dwell in the wilderness shall bow before him, and
his enemies shall lick the dust, The kings of Tarshish and of the
isles [i. e. of Europe and the west,] shall bring presents; the kings
of Sheba and Seba shall offer gifts. All kings shall fall down before
him: all nations shall serve him. For he shall deliver the needy
when he crieth; the poor also, and him that hath no helper. He
shall spare the poor and needy, and shall save the souls of the
needy. He shall redeem their soul from deceit and violence: and
precious shall their blood be in his sight. And he shall live, and to
him shall be given of the gold of Sheba; prayer also shall be made
for him continually; and daily shall he be praised--His name shall
endure for ever: his name shall be continued as long as the sun:
and men shall be blessed in him: all nations shall call him blessed.
Blessed be Jehovah God, the God of Israel, who only doeth
wondrous things. And blessed be his glorious name for ever; and
let the whole earth be filled with his glory. Amen, and
Amen.[fn113] Ps. 72.

"Thou speakest in vision of thy holy [or pious] one, and saidst, I
have laid help upon one that is mighty: I have exalted one chosen
out of the people. I have found David my servant; with my holy oil
have I anointed him: with whom my hand shall be established:
mine arm also shall strengthen him. The enemy shall not exact
upon him: nor the sin of wickedness afflict him. And I will beat
down his foes before his face, and plague them that hate him. But
my faithfulness and my mercy shall be with him: and in my name
shall his horn be exalted. I will set his hand also in the sea, and
his right hand In the rivers. He shall cry unto me thou art my
father, my God, and the rock of my salvation. Also I will make him
my first born, higher than the kings of the earth, My mercy will I
keep for him for evermore, and my covenant shall stand fast with
him. ["although my house be not so with God: yet he hath made
with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things and sure."
2. Sam. ch. xxiii. 5.] His seed also will I make to endure forever,
and his throne as the days of heaven.--My covenant will I not
break,-nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. Once have I
sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David. His seed shall
endure for ever, and HIS THRONE AS THE SUN BEFORE ME. It
shall be established for ever as the moon, and as a faithful
witness in the heaven." Ps. 89.

"Jehovah said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right hand, until I
make thy enemies thy footstool. Jehovah shall send the rod of thy
power out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.--
Jehovah at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of
his wrath. He shall judge among the nations; he shall fill the
places with the dead bodies: he shall wound the heads over many
countries." Ps. 110.

"It shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of
Jehovah's house shall be established in the tops of the mountains,
and shall be exalted above the hills; and all the nations shall flow
unto it. And many peoples shall go and say, Come ye, and let us
go up to the mountain of Jehovah, to the house of the God of
Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his
paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the Law, and the word of
Jehovah from Jerusalem. And he shall judge among the nations,
and shall rebuke many peoples: and they shall beat their swords
into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks: nation
shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war
any more." Is. ch. ii.

" Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the
Principality shall be upon his shoulder; and the Wonderful
Counsellor, The Mighty God, The everlasting Father shall call his
name the Prince of Peace.[fn114] [See. the Heb.] Of the increase
of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the
throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it and to establish
it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever.
The zeal of Jehovah of Hosts will perform this."' Is. ix: 6, 7.

"There shall come forth a rod out of the stem (or stump, i. e. the
roots of a tree cut down) of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of
his roots, and the spirit of Jehovah shall rest upon him, the spirit of
wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the
spirit of knowledge and the fear of Jehovah, and shall make him of
quick understanding in the fear of Jehovah; and he shall not judge
after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his
ears: but with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove
with equity for the meek of the earth; and he shall smite the earth
with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he
slay the wicked. And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins,
and faithfulness the girdle of his reins. The wolf also shall dwell
with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid: and the
calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child
shall lead them. And the cow and the bear shall feed: their young
ones shall lie down together; and the lion shall eat straw like the
ox. [fn115] And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp,
and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrices den.
They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the
earth shall be full of the knowledge of Jehovah, as the waters
cover the sea. And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse,
which shall stand for an ensign of the peoples; to it shall the
Gentiles seek; and his seat shall be glory." [See the Hebr.] Is. ch.
xi. "And it shall come to pass in that day, that Jehovah shall set his
hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people
which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from
Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and
from the islands of the sea. And he shall set up an ensign for the
nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather
together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the
earth." Is. ch. xi.

"And he will destroy in this mountain the face of the covering cast
aver all the peoples, (i. e. their ignorance of God's dispensations)
and the vail that is spread over all the nations. He will swallow up
death in victory, (or to eternity), and Jehovah God will wipe away
tears from off all faces: and the rebuke of his people shall he take
away from off all the earth: for Jehovah hath spoken it, and it shall
be said in that day, Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him,
and he will save us; thus saith [fn116] Jehovah; we have waited
for him, we will be glad, and rejoice in his salvation." Is. xxv. 7--9.

"The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them; and
the desert shall rejoice and blossom as the rose. It shall blossom
abundantly and rejoice even with joy and singing: the glory of
Lebanon shall be given unto it, the excellency of Carmel and
Sharon, they shall see the glory of Jehovah, and the excellency of
our God. Strengthen ye the weak hands, and confirm the feeble
knees, Say to them that are of a fearful heart. Be strong, fear not,
behold your God will come with vengeance, even God with a
recompense, he will come and save you. Then the eyes of the
blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be
unstopped. Then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the
tongue of the dumb sing: for in the wilderness shall waters break
out, and streams, in the desert. And the parched ground shall
become a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water: in the
habitation of dragons where each lay, shall be grass, with reeds
and rushes. And the ransomed of Jehovah shall return and come
to Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads, and
sorrow and sighing shall flee away." Is. xxxv.

"Comfort ye, comfort, ye my people, saith your God. Speak ye
comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her, that her warfare is
accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned; for she hath received
of Jehovah's hand, double for all her sins. The voice of him that
crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of Jehovah, make
straight in the desert a highway for our God. Every valley shall be
exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and the
crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain. And
the glory of Jehovah shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it
together: for the mouth of Jehovah hath spoken it. The voice said,
Cry. And he said, What shall I cry? All flesh is grass, and all the
goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field. The grass
withereth, the flower fadeth; because the spirit of Jehovah bloweth
upon it: surely the people is grass. The grass withereth, the flower
fadeth; BUT THE WORD OF OUR GOD SHALL STAND FOR,
EVER." Is. xl.

"My people shall know my name: therefore shall they know in that
day, that I am He that doth speak; behold it is I. How beautiful
upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings,
that publisheth peace; that bringeth good tidings of good, that
publisheth salvation, that saith unto Zion, Thy God reigneth! Thy
watchmen shall lift up the voice, with the voice together shall they
sing; for they shall see eye to eye, when Jehovah shall bring again
Zion. Break forth into joy, sing together ye waste places of
Jerusalem; for Jehovah hath comforted his people, he hath
redeemed Jerusalem, Jehovah hath made bare his holy arm in the
eyes of all nations; and all the ends of the earth shall see the
salvation of our God." Is. lii.

G. G.

The good Christians of the United States, I do nut use the term in
sarcasm, for they are good, speak in their books and sermons of
the Christian religion as if it were every where the same as in the
grand, free, and liberal republic. But the Fact is not so. An
American who reads the poems of Homer, or Ovid's
Metamorphoses, laughs at the religion of the ancient Greeks and
Romans as a ridiculous folly; but when he visits those countries in
Christendom which are not Protestant, he will be inclined to regard
their religion as a blasphemy against the Most High. Go where
you will in those countries, if you look into their churches, you
invariably nod "a molten image, or picture, and a teacher of lies."
[fn117]

The prophets of the Old Testament reproached the idolatrous
Jews, that "according to the number of their cities were their
gods." But in the countries I speak of, the number of gods is
according to the number of churches, and even houses; for every
house contains an image or picture of some saint or other, who is
considered as the tutelary guardian of the family.

H

Mr. Everett observes upon this prophecy of Jeremiah p. 75. of his
work, "as it is near two thousand years since David has failed of a
temporal prince up on his throne, and a temporal successor of
Levites, and since it is declared that it shall NEVER fail of these,
we must suppose that a spiritual secession and a spiritual service
were intended: or else the solemn promise.-of God has been for
two thousand years, without fulfillment."

"Ut semper!"------

Sternhold and Hopklns had great qualms, When they did quaver
David's Psalms; "Which made their hearts full glad. But had the
prophet back been sent, To hear them SING,--and you
COMMENT, They surely had run mad."

I

PASSAGES FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT PREDICTING THE
RESTORATION OF THE DISPERSION.

"Behold the former things are come to pass, and new things do I
DECLARE: BEFORE THEY SPRING FORTH I TELL you them."

"I will bring thy seed from the east, and gather thee from the west:
I will say to the north, give up; and to the south keep not back:
bring my sons from far, and my daughters from the ends of the
earth. Every one that is called by my name: for I have created him
for my glory, I have formed him; yea I have made him. Is. xliii: 3, 6,
7.

"Thus saith the Lord God, behold I will lift up my hand to the
Gentiles, and set up my standard to the peoples; and they shall
bring thy sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried
upon their shoulders. And kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and
their queens thy nursing mothers; they shall bow down to thee
with their face toward the earth, and shall lick up the dust of thy
feet: and thou shalt know that I am Jehovah, for they shall not be
ashamed that wait for me. Shall the prey be taken from the
mighty, or the lawful captive delivered. But thus saith Jehovah.
Even the captives of the mighty shall be taken away, and the prey
of the terrible shall be delivered: for I will contend with him that
contendeth with thee; and I will save thy children. And I will feed
them that oppress thee with their own flesh: and they shall be
drunken with their own blood, as with sweet wine: and all flesh
shall know that I Jehovah am thy Saviour, and thy Redeemer, the
Mighty One of Jacob." Is. xlix.

" Jehovah shall comfort Zion, he will comfort all her waste places:
and he will make her wilderness like Eden, and her desert like the
garden of Jehovah; joy and gladness shall be found therein;
thanksgiving and the voice of melody. Hearken unto me my
people, and give ear unto me O, my nation: for a law shall
proceed from me, and I will make my judgment to rest for alight of
the peoples. My righteousness, is near, my salvation is gone forth,
and mine arms shall judge the peoples: the isles shall wait upon
me, and on mine arm shall they lean."

[See the Heb.] Is. li.

"Fear not, for thou shalt not be ashamed; neither be thou
confounded: for thou shalt not be put to shame: for thou shalt
forget the shame of thy youth, [i. e. thy ancient Idolatry] and shalt
not remember the reproach of thy widowhoods [i. e. thy two
dispersions] any more. For thy Maker is thy Husband, Jehovah of
hosts is his name, and thy Redeemer the Holy one of Israel; the
God of the whole earth shall he be called. For Jehovah hath called
thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of
youth, when thou hadst been refused saith thy God. For a small
moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather
thee. In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment, but
with everlasting kindness will I have mercy upon thee, saith
Jehovah thy Redeemer. For this is as the waters of Noah unto me:
for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go
over the earth; so have I sworn that I will not be wroth with thee,
nor rebuke thee. For the mountains shall depart, and the hills be
removed: but my kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall
the covenant of my peace be removed, saith Jehovah that hath
mercy on thee. O thou afflicted, tossed with tempest, and not
comforted: behold I will lay thy stones with fair colours, and lay thy
foundations with sapphires, and I will make thy windows of agates,
and thy gates of carbuncles, and all thy borders of pleasant
stones, and thy children shall be taught of Jehovah, and great
shall be the peace of thy children. In righteousness shalt thou be
established: thou shalt be far from oppression: for thou shalt not
fear, and from terror, for it shall not come near thee." Is. liv.

"Behold thou shalt call a nation that thou knowest not, and nations
that knew not thee shall run unto thee, because of Jehovah thy
God: and for the Holy one of Israel; for he hath glorified thee," Is.
lv. 5.

"Behold the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness
the peoples; but Jehovah shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall
be seen upon thee. And the Gentiles shall come to thy light and
kings to the brightness of thy rising. Lift up thine eyes round about
and see; all they gather themselves together, they come to thee:
thy sons shall come from far, and thy daughters shall be nursed at
thy side. Then thou shalt see and flow together, and thine heart
shall fear and be enlarged; because the abundance of the sea
shall be converted unto thee, the forces [or wealth] of the Gentiles
shall come unto thee. The multitude of camels shall cover thee;
the dromedaries of Midian and Ephah: all they from Sheba shall
come: they shall bring gold and incense: and they shall show forth
the praises of Jehovah. All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered
together unto thee, the rams of Nebaioth [i. e. the chiefs of the
Arabs Nebaioth was the eldest son of Ishmael] shall minister unto
thee: they shall come up with acceptance to mine altar,
[doubtless, because they have been worshippers of one sole God
of Abraham and the prophets since, the days of Mohammed] and I
will beautify the house of my glory. "Who are these that fly as a
cloud, and as the doves to their windows? Surely the isles shall
wait for me, and the ships of Tarshish first, to bring thy sons from
far, their silver, and their gold with them; unto the name of
Jehovah thy God, and to the Holy One of Israel because He hath
glorified thee. And the sons of strangers shall build up thy walls,
and their kings shall minister unto thee, for in my wrath I smote
thee, but in my favour have I had mercy on thee. Therefore thy
gates shall be open continually; they shall not be shut day nor
night: that men may bring unto thee the forces of the Gentiles, and
that their kings may be brought. For the nation and kingdom that
will not serve thee shall perish; yea those nations shall be utterly
wasted. The glory of Lebanon shall come unto thee, the fir-tree,
the pine-tree, and the box-tree together, to beautify the place of
my sanctuary: and I will make the place of my feet glorious. The
sons also of them that afflicted thee shall come bending unto thee:
and all they that despised thee shall bow themselves down at the
soles of thy feet; and they shall call thee the city of Jehovah, The
Zion of the Holy One of Israel. Whereas thou hast been forsaken,
and hated, that no man went through thee, I will make thee an
eternal excellency, a joy of endless [ac. to the Heb.] generations.
Thou shalt suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast
of kings: and thou shalt know that I Jehovah am thy Saviour and
thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob. For brass I will bring
gold, and for iron I will bring silver; and for wood brass, and for
stones iron: I will also make thy officers peace, and thine exactors
righteousness. Violence shall no more be heard in thy land,
wasting nor destruction within thy borders: but thou shalt call thy
walls Salvation, and thy gates Praise. The sun shall be no more
thy light by day: neither for brightness shall the moon give light
unto thee: but Jehovah shall be unto thee an everlasting light, and
thy God thy Glory. Thy sun shall no more go down; neither shall
thy moon withdraw itself; for Jehovah shall be thy everlasting light,
and the days of thy mourning shall be ended. Thy people also
shall be all righteous: they shall inherit the land forever, the branch
of my planting, the work of my hands, that I may be glorified."' Is
ch. Ix.

"Thou shalt be a crown of glory in the hand of Jehovah, and a
royal diadem in the hand of thy God. Thou shalt be no more
termed forsaken: neither shall thy laud any more be termed
desolate--For as a young man marrieth a virgin, so shall thy sons
marry thee: and, as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride so
shall thy God rejoice over thee." Is. ch. Ixii.

"Rejoice ye with Jerusalem, and be glad with her all ye that love
her: rejoice for joy with her all ye that mourn for her: that ye may
suck, and be satisfied with the breasts of her consolations: that ye
may milk and be delighted with the abundance of her glory. For
thus saith Jehovah. Behold I will extend Peace to her like a river,
and the glory of the Gentiles like an overflowing stream: then shall
ye suck, ye shall be borne upon her sides, and be dandled upon
her knees. As one whom his mother comforted so will I comfort
you; and ye shall be comforted in Jerusalem." Is. Ixvi.

"Thus saith Jehovah, keep ye judgment, and do justice: for my
salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed.
Blessed is the man that doeth this, and the son of man that layeth
hold of it, that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and keepeth
his hand from doing any evil. Neither let the son of the stranger
who hath joined himself unto Jehovah, speak, saying, Jehovah
hath utterly separated me from his people--the sons of the
stranger that join themselves to Jehovah, to serve him, and to love
the name of Jehovah, to be his servants, every one that keepeth
the Sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant:
even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful
in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices
shall be accepted on mine altar; for mine house shall be called a
house of prayer for all peoples. Jehovah God which gathereth the
outcasts of Israel saith, yet will I gather others to him beside those
that are gathered to him." Is. ch. Ivi.

"Tell ye and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together:
who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from
that time: Have not I Jehovah? and there is no God else beside
me; a just God and a Saviour, there is none beside me. Look unto
me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the Earth: for I am God and,
there is none else. I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of
my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, that unto me:
every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear. Surely, shall one
say, in Jehovah have I righteousness and strength: even to Him,
shall men come: and all that are incensed against Him shall be
ashamed. In Jehovah shall all the seed of Israel be justified, and
shall glory." [fn119] Is. xlv. 21. &c.

 ERRATA.

(The manuscript of this book was written in little more than three
weeks at Cairo, amidst the hurry and bustle of my preparations to
accompany Ismael Pasha to the Upper Nile. It has been printed
without my having had it in my power to correct any of the proofs.
In consequence of one or both of these circumstances the
following. Errata almost entirely literal have been committed. I
believe however that the Scholar will not find any misstatement of
facts, nor the Logician any flaw in the arguments; the book lays
before the Public. On these two points I feel quite secure in this
respect: I calmly and firmly lay my gage at the feet of all
Christendom. Let him who dares to take it up, do it.)



[fn1  for "chooseth," read "chusest."]

[fn2 for "possessions," read "prepossessions"]

[fn3 for "these," read "their"]

[fn 4.  Mr. Everett appears willing to allow, as said before, the
existence of these contradictions in the narratives of the
Evangelists, particularly in their accounts of the resurrection of
Jesus, [See p.456. of his work.] but maintains their credibility
nevertheless, and in justification of this opinion, he quotes p. 457,
the contradictions of the historians of the execution of the Marquis
of Argyle; a fact nevertheless not doubted. But the cases are by
no means parallel; that a rebel should be decapitated is a fact of
notorious frequency in British history and very probable in itself,
and as it is a fact without consequence, no man will be inclined to
doubt it, if it be affirmed by history, notwithstanding some
contradictions in the accounts of the circumstances of his
execution.

But I would ask Mr. Everett--if the same historians who report the
execution of the Marquis of Argyle; had also affirmed that three
days after he had his head cut off, he appeared again alive to his
particular friends with his head on, talking and dining with them;
and that one of these historians represent this to have taken place
at London--another at Edinburgh--and a third at Stirling, would Mr.
Everett, or any man in his senses, hesitate to consider these
contradictions in the accounts of such a supernatural event as of
no weight? Let us add to this another consideration.--Suppose
that the Marquis of Argyle was a man of irreproachable and
admirable character, and enthusiastically beloved by his friends,
and that these friends believed in certain ancient prophecies
which predicted that a Scotchman should arise, who should make
Scotland supreme over all the earth, and live himself for ever; and
that these friends believed the Marquis of Argyle to be the man:
but that disappointed in their expectations by seeing him suffer his
head to be cut off, they had their hopes revived by the appearance
of this story of his having been seen alive by twelve of his most
intimate friends, who were the heads of the party who had
believed that the Marquis of Argyle would fulfill the prophecies
aforesaid, and not content with receiving this contradictory story
with avidity themselves, (which after all might have been invented
as a salvo for his non-fulfillment or postponing the fulfillment of
these prophecies, by submitting to be decapitated) insisted that
every body else should believe it too, on pain of eternal
damnation!--Would not Mr. Everett be inclined to suspect that
these friends of the Marquis of Argyle were deluded men, and
possibly noncompos mentis; and suppose that these friends of the
Marquis of Argyle had told their party that he had been taken up to
Heaven, for a time, but would return again into the World, before
that generation had passed away, and would then fulfill the
prophecies aforesaid; and that this party, notwithstanding, that the
Marquis of Argyle did not come again before that generation had
passed away nor for eighteen hundred years afterwards, still
retained their belief in the aforesaid circumstances, and still
insisted that everybody else should believe them too on pain of
eternal damnation; would not Mr. Everett consider these men as
certainly distracted? "Mulata[fn5] nomine de te fabula narratur,"
Mr. Everett.]

[fn5 for "mulata" read "mulatto"]

[fn6 Dr. Campbell in his notes to his translation of the Evangelists
in loco. tries to prove that the Greek words in the Gospel of
Matthew, which undoubtedly strictly and literally Signify "in the
evening of the Sabbath," or "at the end of the Sabbath," may
mean "the Sabbath being ended,"; which, if it could be
established, would set aside the objection I have mentioned.]

[fn7 for 24 read 36]

[fn8 for 54 read 34]

[fn9 Of lrenaeus and. Tertullian Mr. Everett remarks, that
"Tertullian was a very shrewd writer, [yes indeed, and of his
fraudulent shrewdness Middleton gives some notable instances in
his true inquiry] and Irenaeus less fool than knave," p. 471. of Mr.
Everett's work. I would observe to Mr. Everett, that this Irenaeus is
the first writer who mentions the four Gospels, and that the
Fathers of the Church who came after him in affirming the
genuineness of the four Gospels appeal to this Irenaeus this "half
fool, half knave," as the authority and voucher for their
authenticity; the evidence for their authenticity stops short with
him. Justin Martyr who flourished about the year 140 of the
Christian Era, in his apology quotes, indeed, Memoirs of Jesus
Christ which he says, were written by Apostles and Apostolick
men. But it is, acknowledged by Bishop Marsh in his notes to
Michaelis Introduction, to the New Testament, that the quotations
of Justin Martyr are so unlike the expressions in the received
Evangelists to which they appear to refer, that one of two things
must be true; either that Justin does not quote our present
Gospels; or else, that they were in his time in a very different
state, than what they now are.

Papias who wrote about 116 of the Christian Era says, that
Matthew wrote a Gospel "in Hebrew which every one interpreted
as he was able," but says nothing of a Gospel of Matthew in
Greek; and that the present Greek Gospel called of Matthew could
not be a translation from Matthew's Hebrew, appears from
Bishops Marsh's Dissertation on the origin of these[fn10] first
Gospels; where he proves that it is not a translation of one work,
but a compilation from several. The same is maintained by the
German Theologians to be presently mentioned.

[fn10 for "these," "the three"]

[fn11 These Sybiline oracles so often, and so confidently appealed
to by the Fathers of the Church, are now universally allowed to
have been forged by the Christians themselves: of them Scaliger
speaks as follows.

"Quid pseudo--Sybilina oracula quae Christiani gentibus
objiciebant, quum tamen e Christianorum officina prodiissent in
Gentium autem Bibliothecis non reperirentur? Adeo verbum Dei
inefficax esse censuerunt, ut regnum Christi sine mendaciis
promoveri posse diffiderent? atque utinam illi firimi mentiri
coepissent," apud La Roche Mem. Lit. 7. 331. as quoted by Mr.
Everett, p. 228. of his work.

If the reader will consult Toland's Amyntor, he will find appended
to that work, a list of the names of I think about a hundred
Gospels, Epistles, and Revelations, forged by the Gentile
Christians in the first centuries of the Christian Era. The
Celebrated Semler, so distinguished for his knowledge in Biblical
criticism and ecclesiastical antiquities, has said, as Mr. Everett
allows, p. 464 of his work, that the general Epistles of James,
Peter, and John and Jude, and the book of Revelations, contained
in the New Testament at present, must be also placed upon the
long list of pious frauds, fabricated in the first ages of Christianity.]

[fn12 It is an allowed principle of liberal criticism, that when the
expressions of an author are capable of two senses, one of which
would make him contradict himself, and the other would leave him
consistent, it is but fair to suppose that he meant to be consistent,
and therefore should be interpreted in the sense which would
exclude self contradiction. How has the liberal Mr. Everett acted
on an occasion of this kind? I had said in my first work "the Jewish
Christians, the disciples of the twelve Apostles, NEVER received,
but rejected every individual book of the present New Testament."

I had also maintained, that the Gospels were forged after the
middle of the second century. Now any reasonable man would I
believe understand me as using the expressions, "Jewish
Christians, the disciples of the twelve Apostles," in the same
sense as when we speak of the followers of Plato, Whitfield, or
Wesley, by the name of Disciples of Plato, Whitfield, or Wesley,
without confining the expression to signify their immediate
disciples; the insertion of the words, "never received," also
suggests that this must have been my meaning. Nevertheless Mr.
Everett, in order to bring me in contradiction with myself in order to
serve a turn of his own, remarks upon my words, "without
presuming to decide upon the opinions of a writer, so keen in
detecting dissonances as Mr. English, I do presume to think, that if
every individual book, of the present New Testament, was
rejected, by the disciples of the twelve Apostles, that they must
have been in being at the time they were rejected, and therefore
could not have been forged, a century after that period. I am not
conscious of any wish to weaken the force of Mr. English's
arguments, by affecting to speak of them in contemptuous terms, I
would, as I have, answered them fairly, or not at all." p.445.]

[fn13 If so, what becomes of all Mr. Everett's laboured argument
upon Jesus' prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem contained in
p. 401 et seq. of his work; if it be true that the prophecy was
written, after the events predicted took place!]

[fn14 If this opinion be true, and Bishop Marsh may be considered
as having almost demonstrated it to be so in his dissertation upon
the origin of the three first Gospels, it follows, that these Gospels
could not have been written by the Apostles, and immediate
followers of Jesus Christ; for certainly, men personally and
intimately acquainted with all his actions, and all his doctrines, (as
were his Apostles and all his immediate followers, and influenced
too by the Holy Ghost, as they are all represented to have been in
the book of Acts, ch. iv. 31,) in setting about writing Memoirs of
Jesus, would write from their own complete, inspired and personal
knowledge; and would not compile from "books which had gone
through various hands, and been variously altered and added to in
the passage." No! such a procedure would be that of men who
had no personal knowledge of the events they undertook to
record; and who were therefore obliged to consult books for
information.

In order to place in a fair light the absurdity of supposing the four
Gospels to have been written by the Apostles and first followers of
Jesus, I will suppose, a case. Suppose there should appear in the
world, four different Lives of Napoleon pretending to have been
written by four of his aids de camp, who had constantly been near
his person, from the time that he commanded the troops in Paris
till his dethronement; and that one of them represented that the
expedition to Egypt took place when he was General of the troops
in Paris, another that it took place when he was first Consul, and
the others that it took place when he was Emperor. Would any
man believe, that ALL these books were written by aids de-camp
of Napoleon, who had been constantly near his person from the
time that he commanded the troops of Paris till his
dethronement?]

[fn15  The New Testament, is I believe unparalleled among all the
ancient books that have come down to us for the number, and
importance of the corruptions, and alterations, it has undergone.
What! can learned Christians tell us of several hundred thousands
of various readings, in copies of a small book like the New
Testament--that almost every, perhaps every verse has been
altered, interpolated, or retrenched in some copy or other--and
then add in the same breath that the book is nevertheless to be
received, as containing the uncorrupted doctrines of the founders
of Christianity? If we did not know the inconsistency, and
blindness of prejudice, one might be tempted to suspect that these
learned men were hardly sincere.

What! is it to be insisted on that a book which Providence has
evidently abandoned to carelessness, or to roguery, or to both,
was nevertheless intended by the Supreme, as a credible record
of an ultimate, permanent and universal religion for all mankind!!--
The insane effrontery of such a supposition deserves to be hooted
out of countenance.

Mr. Everett says, p. 243. of his work "that not one of the books of
the New Testament, nor all of them together, were intended to be
a forensic defence of Christianity. On the contrary, the historical
books are brief, and imperfect memoirs, which were not designed,
nor supposed to contain all the faces, and which do not set forth,
nor profess to set forth the evidences of the religion. The
Epistolary parts are the counsels, instructions and affectionate
sentiments which the occasions of the infant churches, drew from
their founders. Now from these we expect, to collect the whole of
Christianity, of its doctrines, its precepts, and its sanctions." Can
Mr. Everett confidently believe, that God Almighty, who
descended to the earth, to deliver a Code to one nation would
have left the world to collect as they could a complete, universal,
and permanent code of religion and, morals from "brief and
imperfect," interpolated and corrupted memoirs, and a few
occasional letters?]

[fn16  Mr. Everett recommends to me to adopt as an appropriate
motto for the second edition of my first work, a passage from
Celsus which speaks of the dispute, between the Jews and
Christians as a "quarrel about the shadow of an ass." p. 327. of
Mr. Everett's work.

Is it so indeed! How then has it happened that Mr. Everett's
Coreligionists have for fifteen hundred years persecuted,
despised, oppressed, trampled underfoot millions, plundered and
massacred hundreds of thousands, tortured, racked, and roasted
alive thousands of the Jewish nation; and all in a quarrel about
"the shadow of an ass!" O shame, where is thy blush. O meek
eye'd humanity, how hast thou been outraged and trampled on!

For my own part I do not consider it as a quarrel about "the
shadow of an ass," I rather think it has a much greater
resemblance to a quarrel about an ass in the Lion's skin; in which
quarrel the Christians have shown themselves to be every thing
but the Fox in the Fable upon that subject.]

[fn17  Mr. Everett, also quotes my words in another place into the
211 page of his work. "The Jews had certainly good reason from
their prophecies, to expect no Messiah but one who should set on
the Throne of David, and confer Liberty and happiness on them,
and spread peace and happiness throughout the earth, and
communicate the knowledge of God and virtue, and the love of
their fellow men to every people."

Is this a character "whose laurel is to be watered by tears," the
leaves of which is to "grow green in an atmosphere filled with
sighs and groans?" I would ask Mr. Everett.]

[fn18 Mr. Everett says page, 107. with great gravity, "to hear the
Evangelists charged in vulgar terms with misquoting and changing
words, by one, who could himself fall into the errors and the
misrepresentations we have just exposed, has moved me to a
warmth of language, which I did not think to have used. But, I beg
pardon: it is the New Testament which teaches us, that we
"beware lest we condemn ourselves, in what we judge another."
And Mr. English has let us know that the New Testament morality
is pernicious to society. Justly, most Justly, does Dr. Leland
observe, that "it would be hard to produce any persons whatever,
who are chargeable with more unfair, and fraudulent management
in their quotations, in curtailing, adding to, and altering the
passages they cite, or taking them out of their connexion, and
making them speak directly contrary to the sentiments of their
authors than the Deistical Writers!!" They are indeed sad dogs, it
must be allowed, Mr. Everett.]

[fn19 See Appendix B]

[fn20 Mr. Everett considers the happy reign of the Messiah as
having actually commenced with the era of Jesus Christ, and that
we are actually enjoying its blessings. Of course he must consider
his being whipped, and gibbetted by his own subjects, and leaving
the world in the hands of those holy men, Tiberius, Nero, Caligula,
Domitian, and Heliogabalus, kingdom rising against kingdom, and
nation against nation; (though the prophets declare that in the
reign of the Messiah "nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
neither shall they learn war any more,") famines, earthquakes, and
pestilences in divers places, (though the prophets declare that in
the reign of the Messiah, the earth shall become a Paradise, and
that God shall wipe all tears from off all faces, and sorrow and
sighing shall flee away,) that horrid Jewish war in which perished
more than eleven hundred thousand of the Jewish nation, while
the rest were dispersed and enslaved, (though the prophets say,
that in the reign of the Messiah the Jews should enjoy the most
perfect and endless happiness,) the theological quarrels, frauds,
forgeries. Councils, and Excommunications, and an endless detail
of Battle and Murder, the irruptions and devastations of the Goths
Huns and Vandals, the rise and establishment of "these venerable
institutions," the Popedom and the Inquisition, the persecutions
and wars excited by St. Dominic, the wars of Charlemagne, and
the Teutonic Knights upon the Germans, giving them no
alternative but the Gospel or the Sword, the Crusades, the pious
exploits of Cortez and Pizarro in America, the comfortable state of
things during the dark ages, the Massacre of St. Bartholomew,
and the wars carried on by the Catholicks against the Protestants,
and the wars since carried on by the Protestants and Catholicks,
indiscriminately with each other, as among those "blessed events,
and happy changes," I use Mr. Everett's words, intended by "the
highly figurative language," of the Old Testament prophets
predictive of the reign of the Messiah! If the reader will pursue
those predictions contained in Appendix, B, or that beautiful
compend of them in Pope's "Messiah" he will I believe allow, that if
it were possible for such things as the above mentioned, to be
really intended by those prophecies, they would be the greatest
hoax, and the most flagrant and enormous verification of the old
proverb "parturiunt montes nascitur ridiculus mus," on record.

[fn21  It is worth notice that when the term "Saviour," is applied in
the Old Testament to men, it invariably signifies a temporal
deliverer, for instance, Judges iii. 9.15, in the Hebrew.]

[fn22  The writers of the Old Testament frequently speak of the
head, hands, ears, eyes, and even nostrils of the Deity. Will Mr.
Everett infer that because these expressions must be understood,
figuratively, that whenever the sacred writers speak of heads,
hands, ears, eyes, and noses of men, that said heads, hands,
ears, eyes, and noses had no physical existence, but must be
interpreted figuratively? If so, I do not despair of seeing Mr.
Everett publish a dissertation, crowded by numerous quotations
from the Rabbies, in order to prove, that the history of David's
cutting off the head of Goliath, was in all probability merely a
figurative account, in the oriental style, of the success of the
prophet David in a controversy he had with a certain Philistine
Heathen Priest of the God Dagon, ("strange sea monster, upward
man, and downward fish:") who had written a book in order to
prove against the Israelites) that their law was "a dead letter," and
they themselves no "nation."]

[fn23  Paul in the first Epistle to the Thessalonians appears to say,
as he affirms "by the word of the Lord," that the second coming of
Jesus to do all this, should take place during the life time of the
generation to whom he was writing, for he says 1 Thess. ch. iv,
15, speaking of the Christians who had died before he wrote, "this
we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive
and remain unto the coming of the Lord, shall not prevent them
which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from Heaven
with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and the trump of
God; and the dead in Christ should rise first. Then we which are
alive and remain, shall be caught up together with them in the
clouds, to meet the Lord in the air, and so shall we ever be with
the Lord."

The Gospels represent Jesus as saying, that there were some of
that generation who should not taste of death till they saw him
come in the manner that Paul describes. For Mark, in the xiii. ch.
of his Gospel, after representing Jesus as prophecying the
destruction of Jerusalem, says that his discourse at that time went
on as follows.

"But in those days after that tribulation, (i. e. after the siege and
destruction of Jerusalem) the sun shall be darkened, and the
moon shall not give her light. And, the stars of Heaven shall fall,
and the powers that are in Heaven shall be shaken. "And then
shall they see the son of man coming in the clouds with great
power and glory, and then shall he send his angels, and shall
gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost
part the earth to the uttermost part of Heaven. Verily I say unto
you, that this generation shall not pass till all these things be done.
Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass
away." Mark, xiii. 24, &c.]

[fn24  after "was" insert "according to Mr. Everett,"]

[fn25  Mr. Everett has produced some authorities which make it
doubtful whether the genuine reading in this place was "thy saints
or thy pious ones," in the plural, or thy "saint, or thy pious one;" in
the singular. The matter is not worth disputing about, if it be made
evident that the Psalm refers to David.]

[fn26  Mr. Everett p. 87. of his work: in trying to prove that the
original word signifies "corruption," has unhappily produced a
passage which not only proves nothing in his favour, but a great
deal in mine.  "Therefore, says Daniel, I was left alone, and saw
this great vision, and there remained no strength in me, for my
comeliness was turned in me into corruption ("the word here in the
original is from the same root as that, in the 16 Psalm translated
by me destruction?") and I retained no strength." Dan. x. 8. Most
commentators on this passage, I believe, suppose that Daniel
meant to signify that he was petrified at the sight of the angel; and
that his physical faculties were suspended through terror. Does
Mr. Everett suppose, that the prophet meant to; signify that he
was actually putrified at the sight of Gabriel?]

[fn27  for "Acts 4. 45" read "Acts 4:25"]

[fn28  "Let the high praises of God be in their mouth, and a two
edged sword in their hand. To execute vengeance upon the
nations, and punishments upon the peoples: To bind their kings
with chains, and their nobles with fetters of iron; to execute upon
them the judgment written; this honour have all his saints. Praise
ye Jehovah. Ps. cxlix. This passage alludes to the same doctrine:
there are many in the psalms and prophets of the same import. It
is but justice however to the Hebrew prophets to add, that they
hold the balance of justice between Jew and Gentile very fairly, in
representing that on account of the superior light vouchsafed to
the former, God would punish them "double for all their sins;" and
that before they shall be advanced to the eternal supremacy
promised them, the most terrible trials and severities shall
exterminate the wicked and worthless from the nation.]

[fn29  Which is of the same family as the religion of Thibet. The
Christians believe that God became incarnate in the infant Jesus.
The Thibetians and Chinese believe that God is incarnate in the
person of the Grand Lama. And each of them considers the other
as "ignorant and deluded idolaters."]

[fn30  All the Christians throughout the world, except the
Protestants who do not constitute more than a fifth of the Christian
world, kneel and pray before the crucifix, images, and pictures of
Christ, the Virgin Mary, and the Saints. Their churches are
crowded with images and pictures, before which they burn lamps,
tapers, and incense. The great toe of the right foot of an ancient
bronze statue of Jupiter, christened St. Peter, in the magnificent
Church of St. Peter at Rome, is nearly worn off by the devout
kisses and rubbings of the worshippers of that Saint, If the spirit of
the Unitarian Jew Peter, could animate that statue, I believe that
the foot of it would have long since kicked the teeth down the
throat of some of his worshippers. See Appendix, G. G.]

[fn31  That Mary is "the Mother of God!" is the creed of all the
Christian sects except the Protestants, and Nestorians.

The European and Asiatic Christian churches, except a precious
handful of Unitarians, appear to act upon the principles of the old
Samaritans. So these nations feared Jehovah, and served their
graven images, both their children, and their children's children; as
did their Fathers, so do they unto this day." 2 Kings xvii 41.  Their
religion is as inconsistent and inconsequent as the conduct of
Nebuchadnezzar; who "answered unto Daniel, and said, of a truth
it is that your God is a God of Gods, and a Lord of Lords," Dan.
ch. ii. 47. And who, notwithstanding, set up an idol of gold, and
commanded all peoples, nations, and languages to fall down and
worship the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king had set
up: and threatened that whoso falleth not down; and worshippeth
should be cast into a burning fiery furnace." ch. iii, and who on
another occasion "acknowledged and blessed the most high, and
praised and honoured him that liveth forever and ever, whose
dominion is an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom from
generation to generation:" ch. iv. and who notwithstanding
destroyed his Temple, and lodged its sacred vessels in the
treasure house of his idol. The service of the Christian churches
not Protestant resembles Bellshazzar's feast. They drink out of the
golden, and silver vessels, which they have "taken out of the
Temple of the house of God which was in Jerusalem," and praise
the Gods of gold, of silver, of brass, of wood, and of stone,[fn32]
which see not, nor hear, nor know. And the result of the business,
if the Old Testament predict the truth, will be, that the mysterious
menaces written by the figures of God, will be fulfilled in
confusion, wo, and destruction]

[fn32  I allude to the crucifixes, images, and pictures of Christ, the
Virgin Mary and the Saints, with which all Christian churches, not
protestant are filled.]

[fn33  for "come" read "came"]

[fn34  This is incorrect, Bethlehem is at present one of most
populous cities in Palestine.]

[fn35  I request the reader to look at the Hebrew of Gen. x 14.
which Mr. Everett must have neglected to do: as otherwise I
cannot account for his having referred to a passage which directly
establishes my interpretation of the passage in Micah against his
own.  I trust that this little circumstance will induce Mr. Everett to
have a fellow feeling for some errors which he says exists [fn36] in
my first publication.  He will find some further proofs adduced from
his book in the course of this work, of the truth of the old adage,
"humanium est errare."]

[fn36  for "exists" read "exist"]

[fn37  v. 10. of the ix. Ch. Of Zechariah, "and I will cut off the
chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the
battlebow shall be cut off; [i.e. there shall be war no more]; and he
[i.e. the Messiah,] shall speak peace unto the nations: and his
dominion shall be from sea even to sea, and from the river even to
the ends of the earth."  Has this been yet fulfilled or have the
nations called Christians, for the last 180 years, been more
peaceable than others? on the contrary, is it not they who have
perfectionated the arts of war and destruction!]

[fn38 "I render me," says Mr. Everett, "because I cheerfully allow"
with Eichorn and De Rossi in loco, that it is supported by most
authorities." Why then does Mr. Everett abuse and insult me, p.
103, 104., for neglecting to notice the other reading he mentions,
which he considers not to be the true one! If it be erroneous, what
is it good for and if it be false, how has the inspired Evangelist
quoted a false reading, (Gospel according to John ch. xix. 34.
&c.,) in order to make out a prophecy?

I had objected in my first publication that the assertion of Stephen,
when filled with the Holy Ghost, that "When Abraham went out of
the land of the Chaldees, he dwelt in Haran, from thence, after his
father was dead, God led him unto this land in which ye dwell."
Acts vii. 4., directly contradicts the chapter in Genesis, where the
Story of Abraham's leaving Haran is related, for it is certain from
thence, that Abraham left his father Zerah[fn39] in Haran alive
when he departed, and that he did not die till many ' years
afterwards."

On this Mr. Everett observes, "The difficulty is this, that Zerah is
said in Genesis ch. 11. to have been seventy years old when
Abraham was born, and to have lived two hundred and five years.
But Abraham is also said to have left Haran when he was aged
seventy-five years [Genesis xii. 14.]; at which time of course; his
Father was one hundred and forty-five years old, and therefore
must have lived sixty years after his son Abraham left Haran. But
Stephen in the passage in question says, that Abraham left Haran
after his Father was dead. Now this direct contradiction is quite
cleared up by the Samaritan copies of the Pentateuch, which give
the whole age of Zerah exactly 145 years: and confirm the
account of Stephen, that Abraham waited till the decease of his
father, and then immediately left Haran.  Had Mr. English no light
upon this subject, but what he derived from his unlettered Rabbi,
or even from the Commentators whose "troubles" he finds or
feigns, one could not blame him for passing over this fact in
silence.  But I remember well the time, when Mr. English
collected[fn40] the text of the Samaritan copy as it stands in
Kennicott's Bible, for the express purpose of ascertaining the
diversity of the Hebrew and Samaritan texts. To suppress now a
reading from this copy, which entirely removes his objection,
argues a deplorable forgetfulness, or a willful fraud; and it would
be a piece of affectation in me to speak of it in milder terms," p.
340. of Mr. Everett's work.

To put this courteous language to the blush, it is only necessary to
observe, that the most distinguished Hebrew Critics [I think, if my
memory does not deceive me, I may name De Rossi, for
instance,] adhere to the reading of the Hebrew bible as the true
one, and have not suffered themselves to be swayed by the
strong Christian motives which have biassed Mr. Everett in this
instance. Stephen, who was a Jew, would also never have given
the preference to a reading-of the Pentateuch of the Samaritan's,
which also abounds with blunders. The Gentile author of the Book
of Acts probably fabricated the speech.]

[fn39  for "Zerah" read "Terah"]

[fn40  for "collected" read "collated"]

[fn41 Mr. Everett, in. a note to p. 194 of his work, speaks of
Salathiel and Zorobabel as succeeding to the "throne of Judah
after the Babylonish captivity. Any one who will read the books of
Ezra and Nehemiah with attention, will be satisfied that this
language is quite ridiculous: forasmuch as that Salathiel was a
captive slave at Babylon, and Zorobabel was but at best the
Governor of Judea for the King of Persia, and all the Jews under
his command were subject to the orders of Tabnai[fn42] and
Shether Boznia. "Governors beyond the river" for the Persian
King. See Ezra ch. ix. 8, 9. Neh. ch. vi. 6, 7. and ch. ix. 37. In this
and in many other instances, Mr. Everett in order to gain his
cause, has been obliged to forget the command recorded in "the
beggarly elements," to have been given from Mount Sinai, "thou
shalt not speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest
judgment." Exod. xxiii, 2. There are, however, cases in which
lawyers allow that this precept may be dispensed with, particularly
if the cause be of great importance: and more particularly still
when the client pays well.]

[fn42  for "Romans" read "Asmonaeans"  for "Tabnai" read
"Tatnai"]

[fn43 The Jewish Rabbies have been treated, by the Christian
controversial writers, in the same manner as the foolish King of
Israel was treated, by the messengers of the defeated Benhadad.
"Now the men [the messengers of Benhadad] did diligently
observe whether any thing would come from him, and did hastily
catch at it." 1 Kings, ch. xx 33. The famous work of Dr. Allix,
exposed by Nye, where Allix tries to show by quotations from
Jewish writings, that the ancient Jews were Trinitarians, is a
notable instance of this. Mr. Everett's work itself, enables me to
lay before the reader one at least, which will verify my
observation.

Mr. Cary in his refutation of my first work, quoted with great
solemnity, one Rabbi Alshek as maintaining that the 53d. of Isaiah
referred to the Messiah. Every one of Mr. Cary's lay readers,
undoubtedly have supposed that this was the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth. But it was not. The whole truth
leaks out in Mr. Everett's work, in a note to p. 143, where Mr.
Everett says, that this famous Rabbi "having acknowledged that
the prophet had the Messiah in view [in the 53d. of Isaiah,], he
afterwards applied the oracle to some other person, and finally to
Moses!" Now in the name of common sense I would, ask, of what
value can the testimony and authority of a man be, who could be
capable of such contradictory nonsense as this.

The Jewish Rabbies, in general, have verified completely the
prediction of the prophet. "Jehovah said, Forasmuch as this
people draw near to me with their mouth, and with their lips do
honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their
fear toward me is taught by the precepts of men, [possibly alluding
to the traditions of the elders,] therefore, behold I will proceed to
do a marvellous work among this people, even a marvellous work
and a wonder; for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and
the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid," Is. ch. Xxix.
13, 14.

Mr. Everett says, that it is notorious that the Rabbies the most
contemptible critics on the sacred writings that have appeared, p.
49. and in another part of his work, says that they are so silly that
he is almost ashamed to quote them, 229. Notwithstanding all this,
he is continually justifying his own follies by appealing to theirs:
such is Mr. Everett's respect for the understandings of his readers,
that he is continually hauling the poor Rabbies to the bar of the
public; he makes them "hold up their culprit paws," and pinches
their ears to make them say what he pleases. His pages are
crowded with their names; unutterable names; names which
reduce "arms! and George! and Brunswick!" into tameness and
insignificance. If such means of defending Christianity are
successful, I shall no longer doubt that it was possible for the Devil
Asmodus to have been corked up in a bottle by the hard words of
a conjurer.]

[fn44  for "carinficina," read "carnificina"]

[fn45  Or "soliloquize upon" the original word in the Hebrew is
used in this sense in Is. ch. xiv. 16]

[fn46  "Thou hast made us the offscouring and refuse in the midst
of the peoples," says Jer. Lam. ch. iii. 45.]

[fn47  The prophet here compares Israel to the scape goat, who
had the sins of the people-laid upon him, and was banished into
the wilderness.]

[fn48  for "with" read "through"]

[fn49 Or "fierce oppressor." See Eichorn's Lex. In loc.]

[fn50  "In deaths often" says Paul, meaning terrible dangers or
sufferings.]

[fn51  Mr. Everett in his zeal to catch me at a fault with regard to
this prophecy of Isaiah, has himself stumbled and fallen. I had
maintained in my first work, in reference to this passage, that of
the subject of this prophecy it is; said, "He shall see his seed and
shall prolong his days," and that therefore it could not relate to
Jesus who had no posterity. Mr. Everett in his remarks upon this
p. 147 of his work, spiritualises the word "seed," and says it
relates to the church, and he exclaims against me as follows, p.
147. "What indolent carelessness it is to say that the word seed
shall not be spiritualized here, when the very next verse says, he
shall see the travail of his soul."  "What poor mortals we are," says
Sir Hugh!  If Mr. Everett will look at the Hebrew, he will find that
the "indolent carelessness" he speaks of, was not mine but his; for
the Hebrew word translated travail, has no reference whatever to
childbearing, but signifies fearful toil, or painful distress. The
English word travail, in the time of the translators of the Bible had
this signification. They have employed it in this signification in the
passages following: "And Moses told his father-in-law all that the
Lord had done unto Pharoah and to the Egyptians for Israel's
sake, and all the travail that had come upon them by the way." Ex.
ch. xviii. 8. Again, "this sore travail hath God given to the sons of
men to be exercised therewith." Eccles. i. 13.  As Mr. Everett says,
p.114 of his work, "It is good to be positive but better to be correct;
and the reader I doubt not will agree with me, that such
dogmatical blundering as this is prevent-. ed from being offensive
only as it is ludicrous."]

[fn52 The prophet represents here, that Israel should be to the
nations what Aaron was to the Jews. Aaron was considered as
bearing away the sins of the Jews on the day of atonement. "Ye
shall be named the priests of Jehovah, and in men shall call you
the ministers of our God." Is. ch. lxi. 6.]

[fn53  Have their complaints been "fiercer" than the flames of the
piles of Madrid, Lisbon, Paris, Italy, Germany, and England, in
which thousands of them have been burnt to ashes? For shame!
Mr. Everett. The recording angel may drop a tear upon what you
have written, not to blot it out, but in compassion for the miseries
for which you seem to think words of "complaint" are an
equivalent.]

[fn54  Mr. Everett, after having poured forth what is quoted above,
very consistently adds in a note to p. 137, "I cheerfully agree with
one of the most active benefactors of the Jewish nation, who while
he acknowledges these facts, changes the blame of them to the
Christians." Very true, and truly I do not know, what right one man
has to trample another into the mire, and then abuse him for being
dirty. Mr. Everett remarks upon the same subject, p. 210, "Bowed
down with universal scorn, they have been called secret and
sullen; cut off from pity and charity, they have been thought selfish
and unfeeling, and are summoned to believe on the Prince of
Peace by ministers clothed with terror and death."  What an
unconscious comment from the pen of a Christian on the words of
the prophet.  "He was despised and the outcast of men, a man of
sorrows, and familiar with suffering, and we hid as it were our
faces from him; he was despised and we esteemed him not."]

[fn55 I have had the satisfaction to find, since my return to
America, that the distinguished Christian Hebraeist, Rosenmuller,
in his notes on the Old Testament, maintains as I do, that the 53d.
of Isaiah, refers not to Christ, but to the Hebrew nation, of which
the following extract from the work referred to may serve as proof,
"In tot. V. T. locis Messias tam variis modis describatur, tamen ne
unicum quidem vestigium deprehenditur unde collegere jure
posset existimasse veteres Haebreos Messiam quem expectabant
talia esse perpessurum quae ministrum divinum hac pericopa, [Is.
53.] descriptum perpessum esse legimus. Ubicunque vel in
Psalmis vel in prophaetarum libris de Messia agitur semper nobis
proponitur imago potentissimi regis, felicissimi herois,
gloriossissimi reipublicae statoris, coloribus ab imperii Davidici aut
Salomonei flore, regumque orientalium pompa sumptis depicta."
Rosenmuller's notes on the 53d. of Isaiah.]

[fn56 for "will" read "well"]

[fn57  "Thou hast put forth a riddle unto the children of my people."
says Sampson's Philistine wife to him, Judges ch. xiv. 16.]

[fn58  I had made the same objection in my first publication. Mr.
Everett, in his elaborate view of my arguments upon the 53d. of
Isaiah, has not thought proper to notice this objection: possibly he
thought it a trivial one.]

[fn59  Buxtorf's remark upon the very word in Is. 53. ch. is
"arctatus, coarctatus, oppressus, oppressus tuit, propria
exactiquibus." Buxtorf's Heb. Lex.  Mr. Everett p. 146 of his work
says, that Robertson declares that the radical idea of the word
which Mr. English insists upon rendering "he was oppressed by
pecuniary exactions", to be "fearful distress." To this I answer, that
Robertson was a Christian and had a reason for saying so.]

[fn60  The only works I have had to aid me in the composition of
this book, are Mr. Everett's work, a Hebrew Bible, [fn61] and
Lexicon, and the English Bible. I have not been able to procure
any thing beyond this in Egypt, and think myself fortunate in
having so much.]

[fn61  before "and" insert "Grammar"]

[fn62  for "violations" read "quotations"]

[fn63  Gospel ac. to John. xii, 38. Rom. x. 16. Acts viii.,32, 33.]

[fn64  That Grotius would sometimes prevaricate to serve a turn is
certain. There is an anecdote on record, contained in the notes to
Gibbon's account of Mohammed in his Roman History, which
proves this. In Grotius' famous book on the truth of the Christian
Religion, there is a story that Mohammed had a tame pidgeon
which he taught to come and peck in his ear, in order to make his
followers believe that the bird was the organ by whom he received
revelations from God. This story is not believed, nor was ever
heard of among the Musselmen. On the publication of Grotius'
book, a friend learned in Oriental Literature, came to him and
asked him for his authority for this story, Grotius frankly owned
that he had none, in other words that the story was a pious fraud
in order to stigmatize Mohammedanism. "This story" Gibbon says,
"was accordingly left out of the Arabic version of Grotius' Book,
intended to circulate among the-Musselmen, for fear that they
should laugh at such a piece of ignorance or effrontery: but it still
maintains an edifying place in those copies printed for the perusal
of Christians."! I quote from memory.

It is really a pity that the Protestant Church, which like a Magdalen
professes to repent other errors committed during her former
connection with "the mother of abominations," should yet retain so
many of the bad habits contracted during their past intimacy.
Some folks have even pretended to have observed, that
notwithstanding their old quarrel, they seem to have
recommenced a "nodding acquaintance." I hope the report is
untrue.]

[fn65 Mr. Everett will probably say, that he made these deadly
stabs at my character upon the same principle that the New
England Cobbler killed the Indian Hogan Mogan. "Not out of
malice, but mere zeal Because he was an infidel."]

[fn66 I have a right to believe so, for Mr. Everett quotes Priestley's
notes, p. 339 of his work. Dr. Priestley united in his character, the
rare concurrence of a keen controversial writer, with great fairness
and candour. He seems always to have been willingly disposed to
resign an untenable opinion, when convinced by the arguments of
his opponent. His conduct in regard to the question between the
Jews and Christians, may be considered as a proof of this. He
wrote letters to the Jews in defence of Christianity, which were
replied to by Levi. In this controversy Levi had evidently the better
of Priestley.  Priestley seems to have been sensible of this, which
occasioned him to examine the question more minutely. The result
of his examination led him to avow, in a Dissertation in the
Theological Repository published in England, I believe in the very
one which Mr. Everett refers to [Theol. Rep. vol. 5.] that the
prophets clearly justify the Jews for expecting as their Messiah, a
glorious monarch of the house and name of David, who should
reign over them and all the human race; but he also maintained as
I think in the same Dissertation, that Jesus Christ is nevertheless
predicted by the 53d. of Isaiah. Several years afterwards, when
Priestley resided in America, he published his notes on Scripture,
wherein he abandons the Christian interpretation, of the 53d. of
Isaiah, and applies it as I do to the Jewish nation.]

[fn67  If all that Mr. Everett has said upon this subject were true, it
would amount after all only to an argument ad prejudicium, for the
Jews of past times, who believed the dreams of the Rabbies, but
is of no weight whatever with those who reject them, as do all the
Biblical critics of the present day.]

[fn68  There occurs to me an instance of carelessness or
something worse on the part of Mr. Everett in p. 342 of his work. I
had said in my first publication, that "there is in the speech of
James, Arts xv. a quotation from Amos in which, to make it fit the
subject, (which after all it does not fit) is the substitution of the
words "the remnant of men," for "the remnant of Edom," as it is in
the original." On this Mr. Everett remarks with astonishing'
composure, "There are few of my readers to whom I need say,
that the same Hebrew word means 'men,' and 'Edom,' according'
as it is pronounced, and St. James has as fair a right to pronounce
it men,' as Mr. English has to pronounce it 'Edom.'" The only way
by which Mr. Everett can escape the charge of fraud in this affair,
is by allowing that he did not take the trouble to look at the
passage quoted from Amos, ix. 12. in the Hebrew Bible, from
which it will appear that neither St. James, nor any other Saint,
has a right to read the passage "the remnant of men" (or Adam;)
because the Hebrew word contains a letter (vau,) which the word
Adam does not contain, and which limits its signification to Edom.

I would observe by the. way, that the passage in Amos "that they,
(i. e. Israel,) may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the
heathen (or nations) which are called by my name, appears to
contain an allusion to the Christians and Mohammedans, who are
the only nations besides the Jews who invoke, the name of
Jehovah, and profess faith in his prophets. There are not a few
passages in the prophets, which have a significance at present,
which they could not have had at the time the predictions were
uttered.]

[fn69  for "sun" read "been"]

[fn70  for "simple" read "single"]

[fn71  In the beginning of the 9th. ch. of Daniel, the prophet says;
"I Daniel, understood by books the number of years whereof the
word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would
accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem. And I
set my face unto the Lord God, to seek by prayer and
supplications with fasting, sackcloth and ashes." It appears from
his prayer, that he supposed the Babylonish captivity of seventy
years, would terminate the chastisement of his nation. Upon which
the angel Gabriel was sent to "give him skill and understanding,"
and to inform him, that their chastisement would not be terminated
by the captivity of seventy years, but by one of "seventy times
seven," i. e. a long and undefined period. The words "seven," and
"seventy," were frequently used by the Hebrews to signify an
indefinite number, and "seventy times seven" is a Hebreism used
to signify a great and indefinite number. Thus one of the disciples
of Jesus is represented as asking him, "Lord, how oft shall my
brother sin against me, and I forgive him; until seven times? Jesus
saith unto him, I say not unto thee, until seven times, but until
seventy times seven." Mat. ch. xviii. 21, 22.]

[fn72  In my first work I had alleged this prophecy of Daniel, and
had inserted this word "in" enclosed in a parenthesis, in order to
signify, that it was not in the original, but was suggested by it as
necessary to the sense of the original. This "in," in a parenthesis,
the zealous Mr. Everett, who loves to find fault, pronounces to be
"an absolute interpolation," "and a shameless one too." p. 157 of
his work.]

[fn73  The reader will see that I suppose the original to make one
period of seven weeks, and one of sixty-two. "The English
translation renders it "seven weeks and threescore and two
weeks," making one period of the two. This appears to me to be
inadmissible: because if the prophet meant to signify but one
period, he would, as I think, have said, according to the analogy of
the Hebrew language, not "seven weeks, and threescore and two
weeks," but "nine weeks and threescore, weeks," In the Hebrew
the clauses of the seven weeks, and sixty and two weeks, are
separated by a character which frequently, in the Hebrew Bible,
performs the function of a full stop.]

[fn74  delete "Joshua]

[fn75  read "heels over head"]

[fn76  Mr. Everett appear; himself to have been somewhat
embarrassed by the gravity he is obliged to maintain in holding
forth this antithetical "analogy." For he says, that he forbears "to
pursue analogies like these, which though they abound in the
writings of the Old Testament, [I challenge him to point out a
single such instance] and are familiar to all the nations of the East,
have long been succeeded among us by a stricter style of
reasoning" p. 178. They have indeed been long since exploded by
the Modern Biblical Critics: and I doubt not that if this curious
analogy should ever be subject to the notice of Eichorn or
Lessing, they would in their closets peruse it "with a smile or a
sigh."]

[fn77  "Who is this that cometh from Edom, with dyed garments
from Bozrah? this that is glorious in his apparel, travelling in the
greatness of his strength?--I that speak in righteousness mighty to
save. Wherefore art thou red in thine apparel, and thy garments
like him that treadeth in the winefat--I have trodden the wine press
alone; and of the peoples there vas none with me: for I trode them
in mine anger, and trampled them in my fury, and Their blood
sprinkled upon my garments, and I have stained all my raiment.
For the day of vengeance is in mine heart, and the year of my
redeemed is come. And I looked, and there was none to help: and
I wondered there was none to uphold, therefore mine own arm
brought salvation unto me; and my fury it upheld me, and I trode
down the peoples in mine anger, and made them drunk in my fury,
and I brought down their strength to the earth." See Is. ch. lxiii. in
the Hebrew. This passage relates to the "Great and Terrible Day
of Jehovah." mentioned in Malachi. The Psalms of the Prophets
abound with descriptions of [fn78] it both terrible and magnificent.
See for example Ezekiel xxxviii: & xv-xix chapters. Joel ch. iii. and
Zech. ch. xiv.]

[fn78  for "of" read "and"]

[fn79  The enumerations given by the Jews themselves are
always below the truth. They conceal the real amount for
particular reasons. In Spain and Portugal, where it is dangerous
for a man to be known to be a Jew, there are notwithstanding,
many thousands; probably one third of the population of Portugal
is of Jewish descent. I have seen a Jew at Paris, who had resided
several years in Spain, who has told me, that the number of his
nation in Spain is great and unsuspected. I believe him, for Orobio
and Acosta, both Jews of the Peninsula, affirm that Jews
disguised as Christians, were to be found not only among the
populace of the Peninsula, but among the nobles and bishops. In
those countries (Spain and Portugal,) where the Inquisition
obliged every body to be educated as Christians, the fathers who
were secretly Jews, were accustomed, when their children came
to the years of discretion, to inform them of their descent, and to
engage them secretly to conform to the religion of their fathers. If
they found their conversion impracticable, these wretched parents
were accustomed to poison such children, to prevent their
communicating the dangerous secret to the Inquisition, which
would occasion the whole family to be burned alive. See the
Biography of Orobio and Acosta for some interesting information
upon this subject.]

[fn80  for "exonerated" read "consecrated"]

[fn81  "David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the
house of Israel, neither shall the priests the Levites want a man
before me," i. e. the house of David and the tribe of Levi shall
never be extinct, when called upon to fulfil the prophecies of the
kingdom of the Messiah, and the re-establishment of the ritual of
the temple, David will not want a man to sit upon the throne of the
house of Israel, neither will the priests the Levites want a man to
do sacrifice. And how was this to be secured, because says God,
"as the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of
the sea measured, so will I multiply the seed of David my servant,
and the Levites the priests that minister unto me." That this is the
sense of the phrase "shall not want a. man," is evident from the
employment of the same expression by Jeremiah in xxxv. of his
Prophecies: "Thus saith Jehovah of Hosts, the God of Israel:
Jonadab the son of Rechab shall not want a man to stand before
me for ever, ch. xxxv. 19. i. e. not that a particular descendant of
Jonadab the son of Rechab should always be standing in the
presence of the Lord for ever: but that he should never want a
representative, his posterity should never be cut off. It is a singular
fact that the descendants of Jonadab the son of Rechab still exist
in Arabia, preserving' the customs of their fathers; they are called
"Beni al Khaib," i. e. descendants of Heber. See Jud. ch. iv. 11.

To these considerations it may be added, that Jeremiah himself
predicts the dethronement of the house of David, the destruction
of the temple, and the captivity of the priests, and the whole
Jewish nation, and as it is an allowed principle of sound criticism
that if the expressions of a writer are capable of two significations,
one of which would make him contradict himself; and the other
would leave him consistent: it is but fair to suppose that he meant
to be consistent, and should be interpreted in the sense which
excludes self contradiction.]

[fn82  Ezekiel gives a. prophecy of the same events spoken of by
Jeremiah, and in these words. "Thus saith Jehovah God; I will
even gather you from the peoples, and assemble you out of the
countries where ye have been scattered; and I will give you the
land of Israel. And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new
spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh,
and will give them a heart of flesh, that they may walk in my
statutes, and keep mine ordinances, and do them; and they shall
be my people, and I will be their God." Ezek. x. xi. 17, 18, 19, 20.
Now what is meant in the Old Testament by "God's statutes, and
God's ordinances," is not the Mosaic law always signified by these
expressions? Again, Ezek. says, ch. xxxvi. 23, &c. "I will sanctify
my great name, which was profaned among the nations, which ye
have profaned in the midst of them; and the nations shall know
that I am Jehovah, saith the Lord God, when I shall be sanctified
in you before their eyes. For I will take you from among the
nations, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into
your own land; then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye
shall be clean; from all your filthiness and from all your idols will I
release you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I
put within you; and I will take away the stony heart out of your
flesh, and will give you a heart of flesh, and I will put my spirit
within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall
keep my judgments and do them." See also Ezekiel, ch. xxxvii.
from verse 20 to the end.]

[fn83  for "the" read "a"]

[fn84  Ac. to the Hebrew.]

[fn85  In my first publication I had maintained, that Jesus Christ
had not taught the abolishment of the Law, and alleged in proof
the passages following. "Think not I am come to destroy the law or
the Prophets; I am not come to destroy but to fulfil. For verily I say
unto you. Till heaven and earth pass, one jot [i. e. the smallest
letter of it] or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be
fulfilled." (or consummated) Mat. v. 17. 18. "It is easier for heaven
and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail." Luke. xvi. 17.
Mr. Everett has a device by which he thinks he can evade the
gripe of these passages: perhaps the following may satisfy him
that there is no way of escape. Luke reports, Acts xxi. 20. that
James the bishop of the mother church of Jerusalem, said to Paul,
"Thou seest brother, how many thousands of Jews there are
which believe: [i. e. are Christians] and they are all zealous of the
Law." Now if Jesus Christ had taught the abolishment of the Law,
it appears to me that, his followers would not have been zealous
in adhering to it: as to do so would be giving the lie to their
master's doctrine.]

[fn86  So called, in Is. Ch. lxvi. 22.]

[fn87 The ancient Britons were savages and painted themselves
blue when wishing to appear in full dress. In truth it is hardly three
hundred years since the bears of Europe have learned to walk up
on their hinder legs, and had "a man's heart given unto them." And
it is only about two hundred years since "the wild boar out of the
forest" [fn88] has become a learned pig. It is not much more than
a hundred years since the people of Boston, have left off hanging
their fellow creatures for being witches and Quakers.]

[fn88  after "forest" insert "of the North"]

[fn89  Mohammed was descended from Abraham through
Ishmael.]

[fn90  The numerous regulations concerning defilement, and the
ritual of purification, contained in the Pentateuch, were very proper
in reference to the immediate and personal presence of the
Divinity among the Israelites, which therefore rendered the most
perfect cleanliness a duty. These regulations were also adopted to
the peculiar circumstance of the Jewish nation, which, was
separated from all the rest of mankind and not obliged to go over
their frontier to mingle with other people. But it is very true that
such regulations are "not calculated for us" Gentiles; because men
who are obliged constantly to mingle with other men, cannot
observe them.]

[fn91  for "rights" read "rites"]

[fn92 delete "the"]

[fn93  According to 1 Chron. ch. xxix, 3, &c. the gold employed in
adorning the Temple, amounted to at least 8000 talents, and the
silver to 17000 talents. This vast mass of treasure was given by
David and his princes: how much was added to it by Solomon is
not said.]

[fn94 The number of the males of the tribe of Levi in the time of
Moses, is said, Numbers, ch. xxvi. 62. to have been twenty three
thousand. But in the reign of Solomon the number of males of the
tribe of Levi from thirty years and upwards, was thirtyeight
thousand. See 1 Chron. ch. xxiii, 3.]

[fn95  for "streaming" read "steaming"]

[fn96  The name of the Deity "JEHOVAH," is a compound of two
Hebrew words, the first of which signifies "HE IS," and the second
"HE SHALL BE." The word JEHOVAH expresses these two
sublime ideas in three syllables.]

[fn97  for "unfeeling" read "unreflecting"]

[fn98  Mr. Everett represents me as supposing (because I
maintain that it is the sense of the prophets that the temple of
Jerusalem will oneday be the house of prayer for all mankind) that
all nations must come and worship at the temple three times a
year as the Jews were required to do. See Mr. Everett's work, p.
207.

But if Mr. Everett were more familiar with the Bible, he would learn
that the prophets represent that this visit to the future temple, from
other nations than the Jews, will be required only once a year.
"And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the
nations which came against Jerusalem, shall even go up from
year to year to worship the King Jehovah of Hosts, and to keep
the feast of Tabernacles." Zech. ch. xiv. 16.

Now supposing that the Old Testament predicts the truth in
affirming that the earth is to be restored to its primitive state, as it
was at the beginning, when God viewed every thing that he had
made, and behold it was very good.  If the earth is spontaneously
to produce the delicious nourishment which we may suppose that
Adam enjoyed, a journey once a year through an ever varied
paradise to the temple of Jehovah, can surely be no toil. If a
person will look at the situation of Jerusalem on a map of the
world, he will be sensible, that no spot on earth is as eligible to be
chosen for a common centre of worship for mankind as that city. It
stands about sixty miles from the Mediterranean, which
communicates with the Atlantic, and not many days Journey from
the Red Sea, which communicates with the Indian Ocean. And
when the winds and waves shall cease to be dangerous, who
would not desire to visit as often as possible, the land which is
said to be "the glory of all lands," and illuminated by the ineffable
symbol of the immediate presence of the Lord of the Universe, at
whose effulgence "the sun shall be ashamed, and the moon
confounded."

Neither is it necessary to suppose, that I know of, that every man
of the human race should be annually present; if some come from
all nations, all nations may be said to come. See Appendix, I.]

[fn99  after "would" insert "not"]

[fn100  "And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch. Then
came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, how long dost
thou draw our souls asunder? If thou be the Messiah, tell us
plainly." John x, 23, 24. See the original Greek.]

[fn101  When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come,
and take him by force, to make him a king, he departed again into
a mountain, himself alone." John vi. 15.]

[fn102  It is remarkable that the gospels represent Jesus as
refusing to acknowledge himself to the Jews as the Messiah. The
gospels say, that Jesus confided his Messiahship to the disciples
as a secret, with express injunctions not to betray it. "Then
charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was
the Messiah." Mat. xvi. 20. See also Mark viii. 29. and Luke ix. 21.
This makes it possible that he never did claim that character, and
that the glory [fn103] in the gospels that he had told it as a secret
to his disciples, was invented in order to furnish a reply to the
Jews, who might have told the first Christians, that Jesus had
never told them so, and of course never pretended to be
considered as such, and that the Christians could not justly blame
them for rejecting pretensions which Jesus never made to them,
to whom especially he ought to have plainly declared them if he
wished them to be received. The truth of the matter appears to be,
that the notion of the Messiahship of Jesus, had originally no
better foundation than the mistaken enthusiasm of his followers.]

[fn103  for "glory" read "story"]

[fn104  The case of the Jews and Christians is parallel to that of
"the prophet of Judah," and "the prophet of Bethel." The Christians
allow that God himself gave the law to the Jews, but they say to
the Jews that Jesus was ordered by God to repeal it.

"It was said unto me (says the prophet of Judah) by the word of
Jehovah, Thou shalt eat no bread, nor drink water there, (at
Bethel the chapel of the golden calf,) nor turn to go by the way
that thou camest. He (i. e. the prophet of Bethel) said unto him, I
am a. prophet also as thou art; and an angel spake unto me by
the word of Jehovah, saying; Bring him back with thee into thine
house, that he may eat bread, and drink water. But he lied unto
him. So he went back with him, and did eat bread in his house,
and drink water."

"And. it came to pass, as they sat at the table, that the word of
Jehovah came unto the prophet that brought him back: and he
cried unto the man of God that came from Judah, saying, Thus
saith. Jehovah, forasmuch as thou hast disobeyed the mouth of
Jehovah, and hast not kept the commandment which Jehovah thy
God commanded thee, but camest back, and hast eaten bread
and drunk water in the place, of the which Jehovah did say unto
thee, eat no bread, and drink no water, thy carcase shall not come
unto the sepulchre of thy fathers." 1 Kings, ch. xiii.]

[fn105  after "that" insert "as"]

[fn106  1. If the Christians should do this, the fundamental articles
of their creed, would be, to love the Lord their God with all their
heart, and with all their mind, and soul, and strength, and to love
their neighbours as themselves: for on these two commandments
hang all the law and the prophets.

2. If the Christians should do this, they would have precisely the
same Scriptures which the apostles and first Christians had, and
which they considered as sufficient. Even Paul himself
pronounces, that the Old Testament was "given by inspiration of
God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for
instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect,
thoroughly furnished unto all good works." 2 Tim. ch. iii. 16.

3. If the Christians should do this, all the endless and rancourous
disputes about the trinity, incarnation, atonement,
transubstantiation, worship of the Virgin Mary, the saints, their
images and relics, the supremacy of the Pope, et id genus omne,
would be quietly laid upon the shelf, and torment mankind no
more.

4. The hundred sects into which Christians are divided, would
coalesce; for it is the New Testament which keeps them asunder.
So long as that book is believed to contain a Revelation from God,
there can be no peace. For pious and good men who believe that
it is of divine authority, and who are zealously disposed to
discover from its contents "what is the mind of the spirit," must
necessarily be divided in their opinions; BECAUSE the New
Testament is not only inconsistent with the Old, but is also
inconsistent with itself too; and must therefore necessarily create
a diversity of opinions in those who reverence it as the word of
God. This is the grand secret, and everacting cause, which has
made scisms in the church.]

[fn107  Mr. Everett, p. 427 of his work, alluding to my anticipations
in one of my publications, in which I expressed myself as aware of
what I should have to encounter, in consequence of my
undertaking on behalf of the oppressed, and slandered Jews; says
with something like "the charity of a monk, and the meekness of
an inquisitor," that "the affecting allusion he (Mr. English,) has
made to his prospects in the world, has many a time restrained
me, when I ought to have used the language of indignation."

If a man had told me, that in consequence of my enterprise I
should encounter great misfortunes, I should have answered, I
expected, and was prepared to meet them. But if he had told me,
a native of the New World discovered a few centuries ago, that the
time would come when I should write upon this subject, in the very
land, and almost on the very spot that gave birth to Moses and the
Pharoahs, I should have thought him amusing himself with a jest;
nevertheless such is the fact. I write this book; on the banks of old
Nile, and in sight of the pyramids.]

[fn108  I have read in a Magazine, of an itinerant Methodist
preacher, not perfectly acquainted with the sublime arts of reading
and writing, who, in a sermon of his in praise of Industry, alledged
as a proof of God's aversion to idleness, that God commanded
Moses, when he built the Tabernacle in the wilderness, to cover it
with "BEGGAR'S SKINS." The English Translation says Ex. ch.
xxvi 14. with BADGER'S SKINS."  Now I suppose that if such a
quotation from the Old. Testament was found in a work whose title
page represented it to have been written by Bishop Marsh, that
there is not a scholar, in. Christendom, who would not pronounce
the book to be a forgery.]

[fn109  Mr. Everett says p. 243, of his work that "not one of the
books of the New Testament, nor all of them together, were
intended to be a forensic defence of Christianity." The-Epistle to
the Hebrews, at least, convicts this opinion of mistake.

He says also p. 273., "As to what Mr. English, after Collins,
proceeds to say, that the authors of the books of the New
Testament always argue absolutely from the quotations they cite
as prophecies out of the books of the old Testament, it is so far
from being correct, that it is highly notorious, that they do not
argue from them at all." Mr. Everett must have felt very desperate
to venture upon such an assertion in the face of the Epistle to the
Hebrews. Mr. Everett may succeed with some in facing down
argument, but he is mistaken if he thinks, that

"Stubborn facts must still give place "To his unpenetrable face,
"Which-makes its way through all affairs, &c. &c."']

[fn110  Bishop Marsh does honour to his English honesty and
common sense, in refusing to allow that such strong expressions
can signify a mere accommodation of a passage in the Old
Testament. See his Notes to Michaelis' Introduction to the New
Testament.]

[fn111  For "was" read "is"]

[fn112  For 21 read 23]

[fn113   This Psalm is entitled in the English version "a prayer for
Solomon," It should have been translated "a Psalm of Solomon."]

[fn114  Mr. Everett says p. 51. that "the Septuagint
discountenances this rendering." What is that to me? I chose to
abide by the original Hebrew, and not to follow a blundering,
garbled, and interpolated version, which frequently imposes a
false sense upon the original, and not unfrequently no sense at all.
more Christiano.]

[fn115  Mr. Everett, p. 52. considers this expression as a decisive
proof that the prophecies of the Messiah's kingdom, must be
understood figuratively. Is Mr. Everett so ignorant of his Bible as
not to know, that it represents that at the beginning animals did
not prey upon each other, and if it was so once, which Mr. Everett
will not deny, it may be so again. See Gen. ch. i. 30.]

[fn116  for "thus saith" read "this is"]

[fn117   The Greeks, Russians, and Copts will not worship
images, for that they say is flagrant idolatry; but they say there is
no harm in praying before a picture. Their churches and houses
are full of them. I have heard of a Greek bishop who employed a
famous Italian painter to make a picture of the bishop's patron,
Isaiah [fn118]: when it was finished he refused to take it, and
expressed himself much shocked, by its appearance. The painter
asked why?

"your picture, said the bishop is scandalous, the figure stands out
from the canvass absolutely as if it were a statue; it would be
idolatry in me to pray before such a picture."

[fn118  for "patron Isaiah" read "patron saint"]

[fn119   "In the mountain of the height of Israel will I plant it: and it
shall bring forth boughs and bear fruit, and be a glorious cedar
and under it shall dwell all fowl of every wing; in the shadow (if the
branches thereof shall they dwell. And all the trees of the field
shall know, that I Jehovah have brought down the high tree, have
exalted the low tree, have dried up the green tree, and made the
dry tree to flourish, I Jehovah have spoken it and I will do it."
Ezech. xvii. 23.]