351 
Dr. Irons. — That is clearly the meaning to be attached to the passage. 
Mr. Reddie refers to the time of Joseph, and not to any mention of Joseph 
by Herodotus. 
The Chairman. — I think, if Mr. Row takes the words as they stand, he 
will see that it was not intended to say that Joseph’s name appeared in 
Herodotus. It may have been a slip on the part of Mr. Reddie in not having 
used inverted commas. 
Rev. C. A. Row. — At any rate, I consider it was a mistake, and when 
we are discussing subjects of this sort we ought to be particularly accurate. 
However, I will leave the personal question, and will proceed to draw atten- 
tion to some quotations from Professor Huxley upon which some remarks 
have been made. I find it exceedingly difficult to derive any theological or 
scientific issue from the paper of Mr. Reddie. He does not state whether he 
thinks the world 6,000 years old or a few thousand years older ; but I sup- 
pose it may be taken as a general inference that he wishes to argue that it is 
only 6,000 years old. If he sets that up distinctly, I could beat him upon 
that issue by saying that there is nothing in the Bible directly or indirectly 
asserting anything of the kind. I wholly deny anything approaching to the 
chronology of the Bible as it has been stated. Take, for instance, the first 
chapter of St. Matthew. It is there stated in the genealogy given that 
between so and so and so and so there were fourteen generations. How is 
this made out 1 In one instance it is done by leaving out the names of no 
less than three kings — Ahaziah and his two successors. If this be the case 
in the genealogy given in the New Testament it is reasonable to ask why 
should not similar omissions be found in the Old Testament ? 
The Chairman. — They are. 
Rev. C. A. Row. — If the New Testament is, as I apprehend, written 
under a far higher inspiration than the Old— (Cries of “ No, no.”) How- 
ever, that is my opinion. I have written a work on the subject in which any 
one may see what my opinion is, and it is my decided opinion that the spirit 
of inspiration in Our Lord and the Apostles was higher than that which 
dwelt in any prophet whatever. We are raising false issues in this matter. 
I have brought with me a book with which I have no doubt my reverend 
friends are very well acquainted— namely Paley’s “Evidences of Christianity.” 
Archdeacon Paley there says : “ Undoubtedly, also, our Saviour recognizes 
the prophetic character of many of their ancient writers. So far, therefore, 
we are bound as Christians to go. But to make Christianity answerable with 
its life, for the circumstantial truth of each separate passage of the Old 
Testament, the genuineness of every book, the information, fidelity, and judg- 
ment of every writer in it, is to bring, I will not say great, but unnecessary 
difficulties, into the whole system.” This book is itself endorsed by the 
Church of England 
The Chairman. I must protest against that. A book may be a text-book 
without its being endorsed by the Church. I don’t think the fact of its being 
taken as a text-book pledges one to the perfect orthodoxy of every passage. 
Rev. C. A. Row. I have merely introduced this to show that the attempt 
