These objectors have made a calculation as follows: "From the birth of David to the birth of Christ, is upwards of 1080 years, and as the life-time of Christ is not included, there are but 27 full generations. To find therefore the average age of each person mentioned in the first (Matthew's) list, at the time his first son was born, it is only necessary to divide 1080 by 27, which gives 40 years for each person. As the life-time of man was then but the same as now, it is an absurdity to suppose that 27 following generations should all be old batchelors before they married."

ANSWER.

I will expose the ignorance of these writers, by showing the absurdity of this calculation. For as Matthew gives the regal, and not the natural descent of Christ from David, and as the natural line of Solomon was extinct in Jechonias; there is no ground for their making a calculation of the descent of Christ by Solomon. Therefore the 27 generations in the regal order have nothing to do with dividing the 1080 years, to make each person 40 years old before he had his first son.

Luke (as observed) gives us the natural descent of Christ from David by Nathan; and as there are 42 generations from David to Christ in the list given by Luke, the number 42 becomes the proper divisor in the natural line, of 1080, the years from David to Christ, which gives 25 years,

the average age of each person when his first son was born. There is no absurdity here; the absurdity remains with these writers in affixing a wrong application to the genealogy given by Matthew, and omitting the obvious application of this given by Luke. From which it is demonstrably evident, that though the genealogy given by Matthew differs from that given by Luke, both as to person and time, yet they both speak the truth; Matthew noticing only the regal descent of Christ from David, and Luke the descent from David according to the flesh.

OBJECTION.

"From the inscription put upon the cross, it appears that not any two of these writers agree in reciting the same 'words

Matt. This is Jesus

Mark.

Luke. This is

the king of the Jews.

the king of the Jews. -the king of the Jews.

John. Jesus of Nazareth—the king of the Jews."

ANSWER.

Now so far are the apostles from disagreeing in this matter, that it appears they all are in perfect agreement. Matthew says, "They set up over his head his accusation:" what was this accusation? Was it, This is Jesus? No, for all Jerusalem knew it was Jesus. His accusation was, THE KING OF THE JEWS. Mark says, "His accusation was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS." Luke says, "And a superscription also was written over him, THE KING OF THE JEWS." And John says, " And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross:" what was this title? Was it Jesus of Nazareth? Common sense says no; Jesus of Nazareth could not be a title. He says, consistently with the other apostles, that the title was, THE KING OF THE JEWS.

Thus it is evident, that notwithstanding the apostles are called liars by these objectors, they perfectly agree; not even a single word is varied by any of them respecting his accusation and title; for they all say it was, THE KING OF THE JEWS. And if John, who wrote in Asia, sixty years after the crucifixion, saw the necessity of mentioning

his place of abode, in order to give the Asiatics an opportunity of ascertaining the truth of the things he was declaring; Matthew, Mark, and Luke, who wrote their books at a very early period after the crucifixion, did not see it. necessary to inform the inhabitants of Jerusalem, what they already knew, viz. that Jesus was of Nazareth.

OBJECTION.

These writers say, "At what time these four books began to appear, is altogether a matter of uncertainty; there is not the least shadow of evidence of who the persons were that wrote them; there was a lapse of more than 300 years intervening between the time that Christ is said to have lived, and the time the New Testament was formed into a book; and that we must see the exceeding uncertainty there is of its authenticity."

ANSWER.

The period here fixed on by these writers for forming the New Testament into a book, is about the year 360, when they say, "the council of Laodicea declared by vote that the four books ascribed to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, were genuine and authentic ;" observing, “As to the authenticity of these books, the vote stands in the place of it, for it can be traced no nigher." But the authenticity of the four gospels does not depend on this vote of the council; Athenagoras, who lived in the second century, and wrote an apology for the Christians about the year of Christ 167, introduces quotations from the gospels, saying, "if you ask what are the doctrines in which we are brought up? I answer; Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, pray for them that persecute you; that you may be the children of your Father which is in heaven." Polycarp was one of John's disciples, and Irenæus, who lived with Polycarp, expressly mentions the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Tertullian, who wrote about 40 years after the time of the apostle John, also says in his fourth book against Marcion, "We have our faith from the apostles John, and Matthew, and the apostolic Luke and Mark:"and he positively says, that in his time the ori

ginal copies of the four gospels were extant. "Let any one who would exercise his curiosity rather than the affair of his salvation, let him run over the apostolical churches, over which the seats of the apostles have now the rule in their respective places, in which the authentic books themselves are recited." Also Julian openly acknowledges that these books which were then read by the churches, were the books of the apostles. Justin was older than Irenæus, and in his dispute with Trypho the Jew, a great many of the facts related in the gospels, are recited by him, and which are not once denied by Trypho. So that it is evident the gospels we now have are the very same that Justin and Irenæus used, who received them from Polycarp, Clemens Romanus, and others, contemporary with the apostles. The books of the New Testament were well known, had been published by the apostles themselves, and read to the churches; so that there was no dispute about the genuineness or authenticity of them. Had the contrary been the case, Trypho would not have omitted so conclusive an argument, he would have shown that they were spurious. This being the true state of the matter before us, as may be seen in the writings of the above-mentioned fathers; it is certain that these books began to appear between two and three hundred years before objectors say they did, and that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, were acknowledged by their immediate successors to be the writers.

The wonderful propagation of the Christian religion at the beginning of the second century, which could not have been done if these books had not been then written, appears from the writings of Irenæus, Book 1. ch. 3. "For though there be different languages, the power of truth is the same; neither the churches founded in Germany, have any other belief, or any other tradition, nor yet those in Iberia, nor those among the Celtæ, nor those which are in the East; nor those in Egypt, nor those in Lybia, nor those that are established in the middle of the world. But like the sun which God created, and is one and the same throughout the world; so the light, the preaching of the truth, shines every where, and enlightens all men, who are willing to come to the knowledge of the truth."

Also Tertullian in his first book against the Jews, says, In whom else have all nations believed, but in Christ, who lately came? In whom have all these nations believed; Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, Armenia, Phrygia, Cappadocia; the inhabitants of Pontus, and Asia, and Pamphilia; they that dwell in Egypt, and they who live in the country of Africa beyond Cyrene; Romans and strangers, Jews and other nations in Jerusalem? The different sorts of people in Getulia; the many countries of the Moors; all the borders of Spain; the different nations of Gaul; and those places. of Britain, which the Romans could not come at, are subject to Christ. The Sarmata, and Dæci, and Germans, and Scythians, in all which places, the name of Christ, who lately came, reigns." Thus was the Christian religion so general, that it had spread over the greatest part of the world-long before the time of the Emperor Constantine. In Tertullian's second Apology for the Christians, he says, "We are but of yesterday, and have filled all places belonging to you; your cities, islands, castles, towns, councils; your very camps, tribes, companies, the palace, senate, and forum." From all which it is evident, that the religion of Christ could not have been propagated through all parts of the Roman empire, and have reached India, Britain, &c. before the time of Constantine, if the books of the New Testament had not been in existence. He who would disprove any writing which has been received for ages, is obliged to bring arguments that may destroy the authority of such a writing. This, says Grotius, the objectors have failed to do, because it is impossible to overturn the authorities of those ancient writers who give testimony to the existence of the books of the New Testament, so early as at the conclusion of the first, and the latter end of the second centuries, 200 years before the time of the council of Laodicea.

OBJECTION.

"There is an evident contradiction between the two apostles John and Matthew; John informs us that when Christ came to be baptized in the river Jordan, the Baptist