116 
Mr. R. W. Dibdin. — It seems to me that the gentleman who has just sat 
down has thoroughly understood the true state of this subject, and it has 
also struck me that the Eev. Prebendary Row has lost sight of what con- 
stitutes the real value of Papers of this description. The argument of 
the infidel is, that if he can show the so-called historical facts of the 
Bible not to be facts at all, but mere traditions which have no basis 
in truth, then, a fortiori, the supernatural element, which is also contained 
in the Scriptures, must likewise be a mere delusion. I certainly thought, from 
my recollection of the controversies on this subject, that the strong infidel 
argument in former times was that the historical facts were not facts at all ; 
but we now hear, and are very glad to hear, that the infidel party are prepared 
to give up this point, that they have altogether dropped their old line of 
argument and now admit the Biblical facts to be true history. (Hear, hear.) 
Perhaps it may not be too much to hope that having thus been shaken out 
of one position, they may ultimately be shaken out of the inner circle of 
their fortifications, — that having admitted the proofs furnished by men like 
Mr. Tomkins, who have devoted their lives and their great abilities to the 
task of showing the truth of the Scriptures, as proved from external sources, 
they will ere long come to see that the supernatural element in Scripture is 
also true. (Hear, hear.) 
Rev. J. Sharp. — As an old Indian missionary who has had great expe- 
rience in combating infidel views imported from England, and especially 
those of a gentleman who is now a distinguished member of Parliament 
(laughter), I should like to give my testimony to the great value I set on 
Mr. Tomkins’ paper. I once listened to a very interesting lecture, by a 
learned Hindu, on the New Testament, and I remember that one of his great 
points was that we had no authority for the life and doings of Christ except 
what we had obtained from his own disciples. One of the passages which 
he quoted in order to show this, was from a history of the Roman Empire, in 
which it was stated that the early Christian Emperors destroyed a great deal 
of the Pagan literature, and he said that if we only had that literature to appeal 
to, we should be able to judge as to what was true in the supposed history 
of Christ. Now, I think it self-evident that if we can only obtain from 
Egyptian philology and Egyptian monuments and papyri, or any evidence of 
that kind, proof altogether independent of the Old Testament, of the truth 
of the plain history contained in that book, then, as has just been said, we 
shall have a firm basis on which we may proceed to deal with the super- 
natural element. (Hear, hear.) We shall in that case have procured inde- 
pendent testimony against which no one will have a right to say it is only 
the evidence of persons who are interested in the case, and who are conse- 
quently prejudiced iu what they say in favour of it. (Hear, hear.) From 
this point of view, I value Mr. Tomkins’ paper very much, and I should like 
to say, further, with reference to it, that the results which have already been 
obtained from all the learning and investigation which he and others have 
bestowed on this subject might, with great advantage, be set forth in plain 
and simple language in a series of short papers to be circulated in India, in 
