Vermont telegraph. [volume] (Brandon [Vt.]) 1828-1843, 1840-02-12

itabllsh it, thenthe existence of such proof
us phenomenon which remains to be ac-
counted for, and must ever stand in the
way of positive infidelity Until we dis
! pose of it, we can carry our opposition to
the claims of our religion no farther than
to the length of an ambiguous and mid
way sceptieism. By adopting decisive
lnldellty. we reject testimony. which,
OF all others, has come down to US IN the
most perfect and unsnspicious form. We
lock up source of evidence, which is Of
ten repaired to in other questions of sci
ence and history. We cut off the author
lty of principles, which. if once exploded,
will not terminate in the solitary mischief
OF darkening and destroying our theology,
but will shed baleful uncertainty over
many OF the most interesting speculatlons
on which the human mind Can expatiate.
Even admitting, then, this single OBJ
lection in the subject of our Savior's tes-
ltimony, the whole length 10 which we
can legi,lmalely carry the objection is
scepticism, or that dilemma of the mind
into which it is trown by two contradicto-
ry Appearances. This is the unavoidable
result of admitting both terms in the alleg-
ed contradiction. Upon the strength Of
all the reasoning which has hitherto oc-
cupied us, we challenge the lnfdeI to dis
pose Of one term. which lies in the
strength of the historical evidence. But
10 different ways, we may dispose Of the
other which lies in the alleged falsthood
of our Savior's testimony. We may de-
ny the truth of the geological specula-
ton; nor is it necessary TO be an accom-
plished geologist, that we may be war
ranted to deny ii. We appeal to the spec
u'alions of the geologists themselves
They neutra'iZe one another, and leave
us in possession Of free ground for the
informalions of the Old Testament. Our
Eimao nations have been much RECALLED by
the brilllancy of their speculations, but
now cease 10 be impressed bv their evil
dence. But there are other ways of dis
posing Of the supposed faIseEood of our
Savior's testimony. Does he really as.
sert what has been called the Mosaical an
tlquity of the world2 1t is true that he
gives his distinct testimony to the divine
legation of Moses; but does Moses ever
say. that when God created the heavens
and the earth, be did more at the time al.
luded to than transform them out of pre-
viousl existing materials! Or does he
ever say, that there was not an intervaiso
many ages between the lirst act of crea
tinn, described in the first verse of the
book of Genesis, and said to have beer
performed at the beginning and those
more detailed operations, the account o
which commences at the second verse
land which are described to US as having
been performed in so many days? Or
finally, does he ever make US to under
stand. that the genealogies of man wen
) any farther than to fix the antiquity Q
| the species, and of consequence, that the,
left the antiquity Of the globe a free sub
lect tor the specuIations of philosophers
: We do rot pledge ourselves for tn
| truth of one or all Of these suggestions
, Nor is il necessary that we should 1t !
p enough that any OF them is infnite
more rational than the rejection Of Chris
iianily in the face OF its historical ev
!. dence This historical evidence remain
y ID all the obstinacy OF experimental an
T. wel-attested facts; and as there are s
i many ways of expuncing the other teri
!. in the alleged contradiction, we appeal |
every enlightened Reader, if it is at a
h candid or philosophical to suffer it t
v stand.