Thus the Book of Mormon, is an additional witness for Jesus, testifying as well as the New Testament, that he is both Lord and Christ. It also sustains the New Testament, that is, if it does not directly prove the authenticity of the various books composing it, it does prove the correctness of what is contained in them, by testifying that the same person who was crucified by the Jews is the Son of God, the Savior of the world, and that he taught the same doctrines, ordinances, and precepts, and organized his church on the Western hemisphere after the pattern of that described in the New Testament; and all this, I take it, is very strong proof of the correctness of what is recorded in the New Testament scriptures--it is, in fact, the testimony of a mighty and numerous people, speaking from the silence of past ages, bearing witness of the truth as contained in the Jewish scriptures; and, withal, is such an evidence of their authenticity, and, likewise of their integrity, in the main--speaking now of both the Old Testament and the New--and of the correctness of the matter they contain, that before this new witness for God unbelief must hide its head; atheism must stand rebuked; the scorner is reproved; they that watch for iniquity are cut off; the terrible ones are brought to naught; they that erred in spirit come to understanding; they that murmured learn doctrine; the meek increase their joy in the Lord and the poor among men rejoice.[D] [Footnote D: Isaiah xxix: 18-24.] I have been led thus far into an investigation of the authenticity of the Jewish scriptures touching, too, here and there, the question of the integrity and truthfulness of them, by a desire to fix in the mind of the reader the fact that our principal volume of scripture is worthy of all confidence so far as the question of authenticity is concerned. I am aware, however, that after treating of the question of authenticity, there still stands the question of credibility. After proving the authenticity of a book, I believe the further questions may be asked, and usually with great propriety--"Is it worthy of belief? Can it be believed? Is it credible?" To this rule I make one exception, and in the case in hand it is important. That exception is this: If it can be proven that God is the author of the book, or, what would be equivalent, if those who wrote it were inspired by his Holy Spirit, then if you prove such an authenticity as that, you prove at the same time the credibility of the book. For, let it be proven clearly that the book emanates from God directly or indirectly, then who could doubt its truth, its wisdom, or the events, however wonderful, it relates? Or who could question the mercy and justice of the acts of God as represented in that book or books that are the fruits of inspiration?