It was useless to urge, in private, such considerations as the following:--To reply to a volume of 433 pages, each of which contains a fallacy or a falsity,--while some pages are packed full of both,--is a serious undertaking.--Besides, the book _has been_ replied to already; for there is scarcely an objection urged within its pages which was not better urged, and effectually disposed of, in the last century. Nay, every good Review of "Essays and Reviews" has _answered_ the book: for what signify the details, if the fundamental lie has been detected, and unrelentingly exposed? The man who plants his heel on the serpent's head, and refuses to withdraw it, can afford to disregard the tortuous writhings of the long supple body.--Again. These attacks are seven. Must seven men _with_ "concert and comparison,"--with leisure and inclination too,--be procured to _demolish_ this flimsy compound of dogmatism and unbelief? to disperse these cloudy doubts, and to analyse and repel these many ambiguous statements?--Once more. A fool can assert, and in a moment, that 'There is no GOD.' But it requires a wise man to refute the lie; and his refutation will probably demand a volume.--I say, it was in vain to urge such considerations as these. "Why does no one _reply_ to these 'Essays and Reviews?'" was asked,--till, I apprehend, pens enough have been unsheathed to do the work effectually. It struck me, in the meantime, that I should be employing myself not unprofitably at such a juncture, if (laying aside all other work for a month or two) I were to attempt a short reply to the volume in question, myself; and to combine it with the publication of the Sermons I had already preached; and which I had the comfort of learning had not only been favourably received by some of those who heard them, but had attracted some slight notice outside the University also. Accordingly, with not a little reluctance, in the month of February I began. The _Destructive_ part of the argument, I determined to address to the younger members of my own College,--men with whom I live in daily intimacy, and on terms of private friendship; and whom, above all, I desired to protect against the influence of that "moral poison," (as the Bishop of Exeter describes it,) of which the world has lately heard so much. The _Constructive_ part of the argument, I resolved to complete as opportunities might offer, in my Sermons. One such opportunity presented itself early in Lent; of which I availed myself to establish some fundamental truths relative to the Interpretation of Holy Writ[10]. By favour of the Vice Chancellor, the promise of yet another preaching turn was obtained. It appeared best to avail myself of the opportunity to consider the chief objections which have been brought against the Bible from the _marvellous_ character of some of its contents[11]. An University Sermon preached exactly ten years ago, (on the Doctrine of Accommodation,) supplied an important link in the argument....