tion to us. ments to his belief of a revelation, he could not, we think, easily mention any other in kind than such as we find we possess. The actual various attestations of Christianity, external and internal— its august apparatus of prophecies and miraclesthe excellence of its constitution, in its laws, doctrines, and sanctions-its power in subduing the laboured opposition of the world—with the glory of its Founder illuminating his religion by the signs of a divine presence in his own person;— these furnish to us whatever our most deliberate mitted to us to choose the grounds of our belief. It now appeals to that judgment with an integrity of claim which we shall seek in vain to resist, without invalidating the most certain principles of all our knowledge." " visions. These topics, prominent as they are when separately taken, compose only one subject of connected and harmonizing proof. However deficient the ground and principle of reason in each of them may be, the effect of them is to be united, and it bears upon one and the same point in combining to make up that moral evidence by which it has pleased the Almighty to ascertain his last revelaAnd as each of these arguments, supposing the matter of them to be truly alleged, possesses some force in concluding upon the question at issue; so it may be observed of them-judgment could have suggested, had it been perwhich indeed is only a modification of the same remark—that they are all of a kind which it comes within the power of our common reason to apprehend; and they are satisfactory, because they are so intelligible, and answer entirely to the natural sense and judgment of our minds, independently 2. The value and importance of the accumuof the accidents of previous study, or of any lated and concurring evidence of revelation, as peculiar modes of thinking. Agreeably to the here stated, are too frequently lost sight of by design of the religion itself, they carry with them Christians as well as by unbelievers. The sepaa universality of application. Prophecy, verified ration of the essential branches of the combined in the accomplishment of its predictions, attests subject, is too apt, as this writer intimates, to the authentic inspiration by which it was given: limit our conception of the whole nature of it, for miracles-public, unequivocal miracles-exhibited, the time, at least, to the train of thought which it bring home to the very senses of men the inter- presents before us. The separation made seems vention of a divine power. Competently witnessed to have the effect of staking the fortune and issue and recorded, they transmit the conviction from of the whole cause upon the selected ground of age to age. Unexampled and perfect moral purity argument, narrowing the subject down to the of doctrine seems to be, in fact, what it pretends reduced compass within which we are busied in to be an emanation from the source of all recti- viewing it, and transferring the imperfection of tude and holiness. The life and character of the our details of thought to the substance of more Founder of Christianity have no prototype in the enlarged truth. It may be that the amount of examples of human virtue. The fitness of his the proof deducible from any one branch of the religion, in every part of it, to the exigencies of evidences of divine revelation, does not in itself the being to whom it is tendered, gives to it a exceed such a probability as any man may choose compendious practical authority which almost su- to admit; yet, when the several inducements to persedes the labour of deduction, by an intimacy one and the same conclusion of belief, arising out of use and relation, identifying the very nature of of the several branches of evidence, are drawn man, in his greatest needs, his best hopes, and his into each other, the joint amount of them, derived most rational desires, with the resources of the as they are from such different sources, is a coldispensation tendered to his acceptance. Such lection of moral proof which we cannot properly are the force and tenour of the evidences of Chris- describe as being less than that of a cogent and tianity, if, as we have said, the matter of them be conclusive demonstration. duly alleged; that is, if we have well attested miracles and prophecies, and the other arguments have a ground in fact. The defenders of revelation have vindicated these several arguments; and the obvious state of the case, after it has been examined, compels us, on the lowest assumption, to allow a considerable weight to each. But we speak now of the arguments in their kind, as distinguished from their degree. Their great simplicity and reasonableness are such, that if any person of a candid mind were to lay down, beforehand, what would be the most prevailing induce 3. It is obviously impossible, within the limits of a single chapter of such a work as this, to discuss these topics in detail: to do them the merest justice would require an ample volume. Referring our readers, therefore, to those works in which the evidences of revelation are professedly and formally treated of, we must be content simply to indicate the outlines of the accumulated argument, without attempting to fill it up, or to supply the necessary proofs and illustrations. Davison's Discourses on Prophecy, pp. 19-22. SECTION II. THE GENUINENESS OF THE BIBLICAL BOOKS. 1. THE first thing that suggests itself to the mind of an inquirer, relative to the evidences of revelation, concerns the genuineness of the books in which it purports to be made. If these books were not written by the persons who assume to have been their authors, or if they were not written at the times, and published at the places, at which they purport to have been written and published;-in other words, if they be spurious or supposititious productions, instead of genuine and, in every respect, veritable ones, it is clear that no reliance can be placed upon their contents, as no confidence can be reposed in their authors. On such supposition, they must have originated in unworthy motives, or their authors must have had some object in speaking untruth: in either case, they forfeit the character of honest and trustworthy men, and we are under no moral obligation to give credit to their declarations. It is, therefore, of the utmost importance to ascertain how the question pertaining to the genuineness of the biblical books stands, and to know upon what grounds we call upon persons to receive them as the genuine and accredited productions of the prophets, evangelists, and apostles.* 2. The questions, by what person, at what time, and in what circumstances any document has been written, are questions of fact which, like all similar questions, must be determined according to the nature and sufficiency of the evidence through which the knowledge of all facts of the same kind is originally acquired. It is not necessary to discuss here the question of historical testimony, or its admissibility in inquiries of this nature. No person will seriously dispute that it is the exclusive ground of our belief in numerous and momentous cases. Our knowledge of the various phenomena placed within the sphere of our perception is acquired either by consciousness or sensation; and for the existence of these things, we have evidence beyond which it is impossible to ascend-the evidence of an ultimate law of thought, when, if the objects of it are mental, we can refer them to the testimony of consciousness; or, if material, to the testimony of that sense by which they are naturally perceived. But how is such belief to be produced, when this direct evidence cannot be had; when, from distance, or length of time, we can have no consciousness of mental, and no perception of material phenomena? Are the boundaries of rational belief fixed by the limits within which these perceptions take place? To what a little portion of facts would our knowledge then have extended! But, no: it is at this line, beyond which our own direct perceptions cannot reach, that human testimony comes in, as a rational ground of belief, to extend the range of human knowledge. What we cannot know from our own perceptions, we may learn through the testimony of others, by whom it has been perceived; and here, again, we have reached another ultimate principle, beyond which, in the circumstances supposed, it is impossible to go for evidence; namely, when we refer any thing asserted to have been thought or done, to the unexceptionable testimony of the person or persons who had the original, direct, and appropriate perception of the fact.t 3. Now, this reasoning is immediately applicable to the genuineness of the books composing the Holy Scriptures, which, like any other fact, has its appropriate mode of perception, that must, at some time or other, have been directly exercised, and to which primary original evidence it must be referred before it can be rationally believed. But it is evident, that it will not be enough for the satisfaction of those who could not have this primary evidence, to refer the facts to testimony, of the source of which no account can be given. The testimony must not only have originally emanated from its proper source, namely, the authors or writers themselves, but the intervening links in the chain of testimony by which this is brought down to us must, in some way or other, be traced back, and hung to the consciousness of the minds whose thoughts the writings contain; and then the whole and each separate part must be subjected to the ordinary tests of valid evidence. If this be fairly done, and the result be satisfactory, no man can refuse his assent to the genuineness of such writings, and at the same time maintain his character as a rational being. 4. What, then, are these tests, and how are they to be applied, in examining the evidence for the genuineness of the Scriptures? The criteria by which human evidence must, in every important case, be tried, turn upon the invariable connexion which subsists between the intellectual *The author has borrowed much of what follows from a small work published some time since, for purposes similar to those in which the present work originated. These positions are amplified and illustrated in Cooks Inquiry into the Books of the New Testament. confine ourselves to a consideration of the books of the New Testament. If the divine character of these can be satisfactorily shown, that of the Old Testament will inevitably follow. In the and moral powers of man, joined with the circumstances in which he is placed, on the one hand; and, on the other, the conduct which he will follow when possessed of these powers, and placed in these circumstances. We cannot abso-latter Scriptures, the former are uniformly spoken lutely, and previously to all inquiry, trust to his depositions in any important matter of fact. Why? Because his knowledge and integrity are not free from defect. He may be wrong in his testimony, from not distinctly knowing the fact; or he may render his testimony false, by wilfully misrepresenting it. Here there is nothing so fixed, as to render all his depositions in themselves the proper object of implicit trust. But between accurate knowledge, strict integrity, and strong inducements to learn and state the truth, on the one hand; and, on the other, evidence correctly and fairly given, there is a 'fixed and invariable connexion. The one cannot be without of as "the oracles of God"-" the sure word of prophecy"-" the God-inspired writings," proceeding from holy men who were moved by the Holy Spirit, and, as such, entitled to implicit belief. Although, therefore, an investigation into the direct and immediate evidence for the genuineness, authenticity, and supreme authority of the Old Testament, cannot fail to be attended with much gratification and advantage, and to strengthen very materially the conviction produced by a more limited inquiry, it is by no means essential or indispensable, in order to justify our reception of all and every part of the sacred volume. 7. Let us now advert to the nature of that the other, for it would amount to a contradiction. external evidence of which we are possessed, We can inquire, then, into the knowledge, cha-attesting the genuineness of the books composing racter, and circumstances of the witness; for if this sacred volume. these be found unexceptionable, we may with certainty infer the truth of his deposition; and, by parity of reasoning, we may see that, if these SECTION III. BIBLICAL BOOKS. qualities entitle the deposition of one man to our EXTERNAL EVIDENCE OF THE GENUINENESS OF THE belief, we are not at liberty to withhold that belief from the deposition of another, possessed of the same qualifications. But besides this, we may examine the deposition itself; for there may be in it such decided marks of consistency and truth as will entitle us to infer, with equal certainty, the knowledge and integrity with which it has been made. In the one case, we reason from cause to effect; in the other, from effect to cause. Were there no such fixed connexion as is here supposed, or none which could be trusted, then there would be no test whatever for trying human testimony; and wherever we ourselves had no experience, we should be left, according as the original propensity to trust in it prevailed or decayed, to receive whatever is said with blind credulity, or to reject it with absolute unbelief. 5. Now this view of the question suggests the propriety of dividing the evidence for the genuineness of a book into two branches; namely, that derived from the testimony of unexceptionable witnesses, and that derived from the internal character of the book itself. This is amply sufficient to prove the genuine character of any writing whatever, and is applicable to the books of Scripture. 6. The limits necessarily assigned to this inquiry will only permit us, as we have said, to glance at the outlines of the argument; the details must be supplied by the researches and reflections of our readers. From the same necessity, we must also 1. THE New Testament contains twenty-seven books, purporting to have been written by certain persons, under specified circumstances, and at a particular period of time. These books are as follow:-(1) Five HISTORICAL BOOKS; namely, four Gospels, and the Acts of the Apostles, assigned respectively to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; the Acts being written by the author of the third Gospel. (2) Fourteen EPISTLES by PAUL, addressed to the following Christian societies and persons; one to that of Rome, two to that at Corinth, one to those in Galatia, one to that at Ephesus, one to that at Philippi, one to that at Colossæ, two to that at Thessalonica, one to the Hebrews, two to Timothy, one to Titus, and one to Philemon. (3) Seven EPISTLES by OTHER APOSTLES; namely, one by James, two by Peter, three by John, and one by Jude. (4) The APOCALYPSE, which forms a class of itself, of a prophetic character, and assuming to be written by John. 2. Now the mode of applying those tests of which mention has been made, to the genuineness of these books, is determined by the nature of the fact, and our vicinity to or distance from the time of the persons who could be the primary witnesses in the case. Those who lived in the days and had access to the presence of the apostles, could, upon the publication of their re puted works, apply directly to them, and obtain alone can we determine whether their assertions are to be trusted. The best ground on which we can believe the assertion of any witness is, our own personal acquaintance with his information and character; next to that, the same acquaintance with him on the part of one with whom we are acquainted; and so on, in a line to any extent, each immediately successive part vouching for the integrity of the preceding. But such a concatenation of testimony is not to be found in support of any ancient fact, and we supply the defect by considering the circumstances in which witnesses give their evidence, and inferring from their character, as previously suggested, the veracity of any particular assertion. 5. But with reference to the New Testament writings, we are not left entirely to this general inference, satisfactory as are the grounds upon which it rests; for after having ascended on it to a certain point in the evidence, we come to written testimony, still extant, by the very men, who not only lived in the days, but were themselves companions of the apostles. Such were Barnabas, the companion of Paul (Acts iv. 36); Clement, a fellow-labourer with that apostle (Phil. iv. 3); Hermas, one of the faithful brethren whom he greets in his epistle to the Romans (chap. xvi. 14); Ignatius, the friend and associate of the apostles; and Polycarp, the disciple of John. Now, the testimony of these writers, as they have given it, is next, in point of authority and value, to that of the original writers themselves, and it goes full to confirm their depositions. 6. It is impossible, within the space assigned to this inquiry, that we should follow the entire chain of this evidence, in a regular series. There is not a single work, out of all the scientific writings of the Greeks and Romans, the age and origin of which might be established by so many witnesses and writers, who lived near to the time, as the New Testament. For the purpose of 3. In many of these books, the declaration of their authorship comes prima facie from the writers themselves. So it is with the epistles to the Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessalonians, Timothy, Titus, and Philemon; with the epistles of Peter, James, Jude; with the Apocalypse, and even, perhaps, with the second and third epistles of John; in all of which the proper name of the ostensible writer, or an epithet by which he might easily be discriminated, is so incorporated with the work, that it must have come from the pen of the real author. Whether the authors of the gospels of John, and Luke, and of the book of Acts, be considered as indicated, the one as the beloved disciple of Jesus, the other as the correspondent of Theophilus, the declaration which we are consi-establishing this position, the writings of the dering, although not explicitly made in the works themselves, might have been made by the writers in the circles where their writings were first read; nor is there any other way of satisfactorily accounting for their early reception into a class of writings whose genuineness was so publicly proclaimed. At all events, the evidence for the genuineness of each book must, in so far, be estimated separately by itself, that no seeming defect in the evidence for one can take from the evidence of another. 4. Now the only point here to be determined is this, Were the persons who made these declarations well-informed and honest men? for then * oldest Fathers of the church have been examined with indefatigable research, and the passages collected which have reference to the New Testament, by Lardner, and others who followed in his laudable career. The result of this investigation has been to show that the books of the New Testament are quoted, or alluded to, as the genuine works of those persons whose names they bear, by a series of Christian writers, beginning with those already referred to, who were contem * Paley has availed himself with great judgment of Lardner's selection, in his "View of the Evidences of Christianity,” chap. ix., to which the reader is referred. porary with the apostles, and proceeding in close and regular succession from their time to the present. This medium of proof, as Paley remarks, is, of all others, the most unquestionable, the least liable to any practices of fraud, and is not diminished by the lapse of ages. Bishop Burnet, he adds, in the History of his Own Times, inserts various extracts from Lord Clarendon's History. One such insertion is a proof, that Lord Clarendon's History was extant at the time when Bishop Burnet wrote, that it had been read by Burnet, that it was received by him as the work of Lord Clarendon, and also regarded by him as an authentie account of the transactions which it relates; and it will be a proof of these points a thousand years hence, or as long as the books exist.* 7. Let so much of this argument as is applicable to the writings composing the New Testament-which have been quoted and referred to as above stated-be carefully attended to by the reader, and it can leave nothing to be desired in the establishment of their age and authorship. Their authenticity or truth is another matter, and is to be sustained by independent proofs. 8. But it should not be left unnoticed, that the species of proof at which we have been glancing, arises not only out of the direct and incidental testimony of persons friendly to the cause of Christianity, but from that also of its secret and avowed enemies, or such as seceded from the orthodox church, and were on no terms of good understanding with it. "The first ages of Christianity produced a multitude of sects, which were anxious to unite their philosophical and theurgical speculations with the doctrines of the gospel, and frequently lost themselves in strange admixtures of opinion-in beautiful, but much oftener in ridiculous, dreams. Yet even these sought to establish their assertions on the authority of the biblical books, and to prove them against those indulging different sentiments, especially against the dominant church. Their writings, indeed, are, for the most part, lost, and were destroyed on purpose, for which we have but little reason to thank piety. But the zeal of refuting them has occasionally preserved some fragments of their treatises, and their opponents have retained proofs which they adduced in support of their positions."+ Of these sects we may refer to the Cerinthians, the Ebonites, the Nicolaïtans, the Valentinians, the Marcionites, and the Basilidians, all of whom existed in the second century, and some of them * View of the Evidences. chap. ix., sect. 1. at the close of the first; and also to the Sabellians, the Novatians, the Donatists, the Manicheans, the Priscillianists, the Photinians, and the Arians, who flourished in the third and fourth centuries. Among the individuals of the classes we are referring to, and deserving especial notice, may be mentioned Tatian, Julius Cassian, Theodotus, Heracleon, and Isiodorus, who all lived in the second century, and seceded from the orthodox communities by whom they were opposed and refuted. Nor should we omit to refer to Celsus, the Epicurean philosopher, who attacked Christianity with great skill and vehemence towards the close of the second century; to Porphyry, one of the most severe and sensible adversaries of the Christian religion antiquity can produce, who flourished about the middle of the third century; or to the emperor and apostate Julian, whose mode of opposing the Christian system was as artful as it was determined and persevering, who flourished about a century later. These parties and persons knew too well the evidence by which the genuineness of the New Testament writings was supported, to think of denying or calling it in question; and their positive or implied testimony is of immense importance. They may, as Michaëlis remarks, have denied an apostle to be an infallible teacher, and therefore have banished his writings from the sacred canon; but they nowhere contend or insinuate that the apostle is not the author of the book or books which bear his name. 9. Another and equally satisfactory source of testimony to the genuineness of the Christian writings, are those very early translations which were made of them into other languages, the authors of which have ascribed the anonymous books of Scripture to the same writers as they are now attributed to, and have, of course, recognized the claims of the penmen of the acknowledged books. The earliest of these is the Peschito or literal Syriac Version, which is ascertained, upon undoubted evidence, to have been made, at the latest, towards the close of the second century, and is attributed, upon grounds of very high probability, to the close of the first or to the earlier part of the second century. All the Christian sects in Syria and the East make use of this Version, exclusively, and hold it in the highest estimation. Then there is the old Italic or ancient Latin Version, which was certainly made before the end of the second century, as it was then For a view of the nature and extent to which these sects and individuals have deposed to the genuineness of the books of the New Testament, the reader may refer to Hug's Introd., chap. i., pt. 1, sect. 7. S |