-06-Objections Answered

Objections Answered

We shall now proceed to reply to two or three objections which may be rashly opposed to the impregnable argument which the preceding account furnishes in defense of our religion. I. It may be alleged, that the prophecies, whose fulfillment has been demonstrated, were not written until after the events, to which they refer, were past. Assertion is not proof; and even a conjecture to this effect, in the face of the historic testimony, and general sentiment of seventeen ages, would be ridiculous. On the faith, then, of all antiquity, we affirm, that the books in the Scriptures, containing these predictions were written before the destruction of Jerusalem, and we confirm this assertion by particular proof. The book of St. Matthew, who died previously to that event, supposed to have been written about eight years after the ascension of our Savior, was published before the dispersion of the Apostles; for Eusebius says, that St. Bartholemew took a copy Of it with him to India; and the dispersion of the Apostles took place within twelve years after the ascension of our Lord. St. Mark must have written his book at the latest in the time of Nero, for he died in the eighth year of that emperor’s reign. The book by St. Luke was written before the Acts, as the first verses of that narrative prove; and the Acts were written before the death of Paul, for they carry down his history only to A.D. 63; whereas he was not crucified until the 12th of Nero, the very year before the Jewish war commenced. Of Luke’s death the time is uncertain. As to the Evangelist John, he both lived and wrote after the destruction of Jerusalem; "but then, as if purposely to prevent this very cavil, his book does not record the prophecies which foretold it! Learned men, indeed, differ with regard to the precise year in which the Evangelists Matthew, Mark, and Luke wrote their respective books; but they universally agree, that they were both written and published before the destruction of Jerusalem. As to the book by St. John, some are of opinion that it was written before, and some after that event. II. If it be objected, that, although the narratives might be written and published before the destruction of Jerusalem, yet that the predictions relating to that event may be subsequent interpolations; we reply, that this cannot but be considered as a preposterous supposition, because those predictions are not confined to the particular chapters to which we have referred, but are closely and inseparably interwoven with the general texture of the history -- because the character of the style is uniform -- because there is no allusion, in conformity to the practice of the sacred historians, to the fulfillment of these prophecies (particularly, Acts 11:28.) -- because such an attempt must have destroyed the cause it professed to serve, and lastly, because "no unbeliever of the primitive times, whether Jew or Gentile, when pressed, as both frequently were, by this prophecy, appear to have had recourse to the charge of forgery or interpolation." It may be added also, that, in modern times, no distinguished unbeliever (not even the arch infidels Voltaire and Gibbon) has had the temerity so much as to insinuate a charge of this nature. III. It may be alleged, that the accomplishment of our Lord’s predictions relative to the destruction of Jerusalem, ought not to be deemed supernatural, inasmuch as the distresses of all great cities, during a siege, are similar, and because it is probable that, sometime or other, such should be the fate of every city of this description; and that since the obstinacy of the Jews was great, and their fortifications strong, when war did come, Jerusalem was more likely to suffer under that form of it than any other. In answer to this objection, we remark, that it was not merely foretold that Jerusalem was to be destroyed, but that it was to be destroyed by the Romans: and so it was. But was this then a likely event? When our LORD delivered his predictions, Judea was already completely in their hands. Was it a probable thing that it should be desolated by its own masters? Or was it a natural thing that they should be indifferent to the revenue which was derived from a country so Populous and so fertile? Again, was it likely that this petty province should provoke the wrath and defy the power of the universal empire? Or was it to be supposed that the mistress of the world, irresistible to all nations, instead of controlling, should deem it worthy of her utterly to exterminate a state comparatively so insignificant? Or did it accord with the disposition or custom of the Romans, like Goth to demolish buildings famed for their antiquity and magnificence? Rather was it not to have been expected that they would preserve them, to maintain the renown and glory of their empire? Nevertheless, as we have seen, they did destroy them, and even the illustrious Temple of Jerusalem, the chief ornament of Asia, and the wonder of the world. But it was predicted that "thus it must be;" and therefore Titus himself with all his authority and exertions, could not preserve it. IV. If this prophecy be ascribed to political sagacity, we would ask, on the supposition of the infidel, how it happened that a Carpenter’s Son, living nearly the whole of his life in privacy, associating chiefly with the poor, without access to the councils of princes, or to the society of the great should possess a degree of political discernment to which no Statesman would deem less than folly to lay claim? Besides, how came he to predict the ruin of his own country, and at that very reason, too, when all his countrymen turned their eyes to a Deliverer, who should restore sovereignty, consolidate its power, and extend both its boundaries and its renown? And lastly, how came he even to conceive, much more cherish, such an idea, diametrically contrary as it was to all his stubborn and deep rooted prejudices as a Jew? Thus we perceive that the very objections which infidelity opposes to our argument, instead of invalidating tend only more fully to illustrate and confirm it.