Necessity and advantages of re-examining the subject - - - - - - - - pages 9, 10. strongly stated, by Bishop Newton - - 11 cularly as Histories of the Controversy concern- the Messiah - - - - - - - - 13, 14. Heaven was at hand, founded on the Prophecy of Daniel - - - - - - - • 15, 16. very general, when Jesus appeared-proved by Dr. Sykes-Bishop Chandler-Dr. White, and ing the coming of the Messiah, different from Dr. Lardner - - - - - - 22 to 25. give the Jews just ideas of the nature of his Importance vely to the Sto the Jewn and the Importance of considering the Gospels as Histories of these facts - - - - - pages 25 to 28. of the Jews concerning the nature of the Mes- large - - - - - - - - - - - 29. not excusively to the Disciples. Dr. Camp- and Dr. Ellis, in his knowledge of divine things ture - - - - - - - - - - 34, &c. Jewish Nation - - - - - - - 39, 40. priety, as to the Jews - - - - - - 41. nounce the approach of the Messiah's King- sidered--a proof of the genuine authenticity of the History - - - - - - 43 to 53. the great difficulties the Disciples were to meet Jesus's Distinction between Primary and Secondary senses unwarrantable. · · · page 117, &c. Mr. Kett the Advocate of a double meaning of this Prophecy.-Double meanings injurious to Chris- tianity . . . . . . . . 121, 122. A remarkable quotation from Mr. Richards's Bampton Lectures, upon this subject 122. Dr. Benson, the strenuous Advocate for the Unity of sense of Scripture-thinks the discourse con- cerning the destruction of Jerusalem ends with verse 35. His opinion erroneous123, 124. Remarkable passage of Bishop Newton, upon the expression Of that day and hour--his incon- sistency upon this head . . . . 125, 126. Mr. Thomas's opinion, stated, and proved to be erroneous . . . . . . . . 126, &c. Mr. King's opinion, in his Morsels of Criticism, stated and considered . . . . . 128, 129. Collateral evidence of the true meaning of the xxivth of Matthew, and particularly of the ex- pression of that day and hour, &c. drawn from our Lord's Answer to the Question of the Pharisees-When the Kingdom of God should The Question of the Pharisees relates to the same subject with those of the Disciples, in Matthew xxiv. and the parallel chapters 132, 133, Comparison of Matthew xxiy. and Luke xvii. with Observations upon it. . . . . 133 to 139. New interpretations of Matthew xxv. proposed for Consideration . . i , 140, &c. The Tryal of Jesus considered, with reference to his coming in Clouds---meaning of that expression fully ascertained . . . . . . . 146, &c. Mr. Mr. Mede acknowledges that his Interpretation of the phrase, coming in the clouds of Heaven, is attended with a difficulty he cannot get over. :. Note . . . . . . . . . . page 150. The present Bishop of London interprets the phrase of the destruction of Jerusalem. 151. The Resurrection of Jesus revives the hopes, in the minds of his Disciples, of his erecting a temporal Kingdom , . . . . . . 153. Jesus's Answer to their Question, considered. : The Bishop of Landaff and Mr. Thomas appear · to have mistaken its meaning . , 154, 155. Change of language of the Disciples, after Jesus · had ascended into Heaven . . . . . 155. Remarks upon the evidences of the Resurrection, and upon the peculiarity of the situation of the Disciples upon the removal of Jesus, and of the extreme improbability of their succeeding, if his Religion had been an Imposture , 156 to 162. Quotations from Dr. Beattie and Mr. Maltby upon this subject . . . . . . . . 1ộo, &c. Summary of the Scripture Doctrine of the coming of Christ, so far as Christ himself was con cerned . . . . . . . . . . 162, &c. Mr. Henry Taylor's remarkable statement con- cerning the Controversy between Mr. Gibbon and his Adversaries . . . . . . . 165. Mr. Gibbon's Charge against the Apostles, as having predicted the Second coming of Christ in their own time, considered . . . 166 The Bishop of Landaff's Opinion, that their hay- · ing taught such a Doctrine does not affect their Character, as the Apostles of Christ, stated and The Writers, from whom it has been the Author's misfortune to differ, are many of them numbered among the Dead, and are therefore unable to defend themselves but there are Those still living whose Learning and Abilities are equally respectable, and who are equally competent to detect any Errors into which he may have inadvertently fallen. From them he neither asks, nor expects any other quarter than what a candid and ingenuous Opponent will always be ready to give : And he is confident they will not, unnecessarily, wound the feelings of one, who has been ardently solicitous to establish, on the most solid basis, the credit of the Christian Religion, from a firm conviction, if full justice is , done to it, that it is worthy of all Acceptation. The Author begs leave to add, that his first object having been to endeavor to understand the New Testament himself; if he hath succeeded in obtaining a more accurate knowledge of it, than those who have gone before him; it is not owing to superior advantages of situation; still less, to superior learning and abilities. Indeed he cannot help considering it as one considerable argument in favor of Christianity, that it requires, not so much, a superior depth of learning, as an attentive perusal of it as an History, and particularly, as an History of the great Controversy between Jesus and |