6 allow that one of the relaters must have been mistaken in regard to the order of time, and that, though he relates true events, he relates them from his own imperfectly informed mind, and not from divine inspiration. Again, the objectors ask, What credit is to be given to the veracity of writers,—and, especially, what becomes of their claim to divine inspiration,-when they misquote so grossly the books which they esteemed sacred, as to assign to one writer what is only to be found in the book of another? Thus Matthew, on occasion of the purchase of the potter's field with the refunded price of the treachery of Judas, says, "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 potter's field; as the Lord appointed me.'"* The only passage in the Old Testament which bears any similitude to this, is not in the book of JEREMIAH, but in that of ZECHARIAH. And the harmonizers of Scripture have seen no way of surmounting this difficulty, but by one of two equally dangerous admissions ;-either that Matthew was mistaken; or that the book of Jeremiah has come down to us in a very mutilated state. The only other example of deistical objections from alleged contradictions which I shall mention, is that drawn from the account of the two thieves who were crucified with Jesus, as given by Matthew and by Luke. After relating the cruel scoffs with which the Saviour was insulted by the Jews as he hung on the cross, Matthew says, "And the thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth" whereas Luke§ affirms that only one of them displayed this brutality, and that he was rebuked for it by the other; who, so far from mocking," said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy * Matt. xxvii. 9, 10. Ch. xi. 12, 13. Ch. xxvii. 42. § Ch. xxiii. 39 to 43. kingdom." This difference is accounted for variously by the commentators, some of whom say, that when Matthew speaks of thieves, in the plural, he only means one of them; whilst others suppose that they both, at first, joined in the scoffs, but that one of them afterwards repented. But the objectors treat these solutions as mere evasions; affirm that the passages are in direct opposition; and ask in triumph, which we are to receive as the pure Word of God. The second class of Objections-the imputed contradictions to science-chiefly regard the Mosaic account of the creation and the deluge. The account of the creation in the first chapter of Genesis, it is alleged, cannot possibly be true; because the science of geology, which within a few years past has received such great improvements, fully evinces that the whole globe of earth, with its innumerable tribes of inhabitants, vegetable, animal, and human, was not formed within the short space of six days, as there detailed. Besides, it is affirmed, that independently of geology, reason alone proves the inaccuracy of the statement : for light is said to have been produced on the first day ; whereas the sun, moon and stars were not created till the fourth day; and it is very certain, as we now often experience on a very cloudy night when the moon is below the horizon, that without sun, moon, and stars, there cannot be any light. It is likewise related, that all the vegetable creation was produced on the third day, thus before the formation of the sun; yet every rustic knows that without the heat of the sun there can be no vegetation. So also the history states, that, after Cain had killed his brother, he was terrified lest every one that met him should kill him, to prevent which a mark was set on him by God ;§—which evidently supposes, that at this time the earth had numerous inhabitants; although, according to the record, none * Ver. 3, 5. + Ver. 16, 19. + Ver. 11, 13. § Gen. iv. 14, 15. * were then living on it, beside Cain, but his father and mother, who would know him whether a special mark were set on him or not. With regard to the deluge, they affirm it to be improbable that any general deluge ever should have existed, after the globe was once brought into a state adapted for the support of a human population; and they raise great objections as to the possibility of providing room in the ark sufficient for the accommodation of the immense multitude to which the prescribed numbers of animals of all species must have amounted, and to contain, besides, an adequate stock of provision. According to the history, Noah with his companions, animal and human, remained in the ark a year and ten days :† and a long period must afterwards have elapsed before the devastated earth produced a sufficiency of new food for their support. This objection has been answered by calculations to prove the immense bulk of the ark, which, it has been shewn, must have been equal in magnitude to twenty first rate men of war, and to more than forty of the largest Indiamen; but this, while it is alleged to be still quite insufficient for the purposes required, has furnished the infidel with another objection, who contends, that no vessel of such magnitude could be made to cohere together. But the most serious class of Objections against the divinity of the Sacred Scriptures, is that which has recently been urged in such shameless terms, declaring the Bible, -which well-disposed minds have revered for ages as the code of all perfect morality,-to be the most immoral book in the world! Certainly, to ground this charge, as is in great part done, upon those passages in which criminal practices are mentioned for the express purpose of being condemned, and of warning mankind against the dreadful consequences which must overtake the perpetrators; or even to ground it upon the incidental mention, without comment, of the commission of great crimes ;-surely this evinces the accusation to have originated in nothing but deep malignity against the Bible, its Author, and its friends. But the charge deserves more attention when they support it by instances of criminal conduct in persons that are spoken of as peculiarly accepted by God. Thus they dwell much upon the case of Jacob, who, at the instigation of his mother Rebekah, defrauded his brother Esau of his father's blessing, by a most extraordinary deception practised upon Isaac, and supported, when the old man suspected it, by the strongest asseveration of a deliberate falsehood. By the example of the same patriarch, who had two wives and two concubines; and indeed of nearly all the Jewish worthies and kings, a sanction is given, they allege, to polygamy and concubinage; an opinion also which has not been confined to Deists, since Dr. Madan, a clergyman of the Church of England, published a well-known book with the design to prove, from the above examples, that polygamy and concubinage are allowable to Christians. But the objectors contend, that worse things are sanctioned even than these; for by the examples of Ehud and Jael, license is given to assassination. The former was one of the Judges, raised up, it is said, by the Lord, to deliver Israel when in subjection to the Moabites; and who, under the pretence of carrying a present to the king of Moab, obtained a private audience, and then sheathed a dagger in his bowels. Jael was the wife of Heber the Kenite; and when Sisera, the general of the army of Jabin king of Hazor, was defeated by Deborah and Barak, "he fled to the tent of Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite; for there was peace," it is expressly said, "between Jabin the king of Hazor, and the house of Heber the Kenite. And Jael went out to meet Sisera, and said unto him, Turn in my lord, turn in to me: fear not." And when she had thus invei * Gen. xxvii, 6 to 29. t Judges, iii. 15 to 22. gled him into her power, and had lulled him to sleep, she drove a nail through his temples :* for which act, it is said of her in the prophetic song of Deborah and Barak," Blessed above women shall Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite be; blessed shall she be above women in the tent." As for the scandals to which the conduct of David has given rise, who, though called the man after God's own heart,‡ was guilty both of murder and adultery ;§ these are too painful to dwell upon. Moved by such seeming incongruities, the Marcionites and Valentinians, with other early sects of Gnostic Christians, regarded the God of the Jews as an evil genius,-as "the prince of this world," whose power Jesus came to destroy and the modern Deists. charge Christians with blasphemy, for receiving the record of such transactions as the Word of God. The last class of Objections against the Sacred Scriptures, is drawn from what persons uninformed respecting their true nature, deem the insignificance of a large portion of their contents. What sort of ideas (they ask) must we form of the Divine Being, on the supposition that he is the Author of the Bible, when we find whole books filled with directions for the performance of ceremonies, which in themselves can be of no importance; when we see chapters taken up with precepts respecting what sort of food his servants should eat, and what sort of clothing they should wear.** What minute cares must we suppose to engage his breast, when we see him giving such exact instructions about the dimensions of the Tabernacle, and the size and form of all its vessels ! What useless services must we imagine him to be pleased with, when we find him commanding such a variety of sacrifices to be offered, and giving such precise orders respecting the manner in • Judges, iv. 17 to 21. + Ch. v. 24. See Leviticus throughout, and much of onomy. 1 Sam. xiii. 14: Acts, xiii. 22. |