§ 12. Objections, drawn from real or apparent contradictions between the accounts of profane authors and those of the New Testament, particularly those of St. Luke.

Edward. Several of these particulars would appear to affect the "credibility" as well as the "authenticity" of the New Testament.

Mr. B. They do in the same manner that the testimonies for the canonical authority of the New Testament equally affect its genuineness.

Edward. Bishop Marsh has also written upon subject.

the same

Mr. B. He arranges the proofs of the authenticity under the general heads of external and internal evidence. In the first he begins with the end of the fourth century, and ascends from thence to the age which was next to that of the apostles, producing in order the testimonies of Jerome, Gregory of Nazianzum, Epiphanius, Athanasius, Eusebius, Origen, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, and Irenæus. He then again takes up the subject from the statement of Eusebius, and argues from the facts of the case with regard to the books which had been universally received, and those which had only partially been acknowledged, and confirms the authenticity of each by arguments applying specially to them. ly, he connects the results so obtained with the testimony of the apostolic fathers, and thus establishes his proof from external evidence.

Last

With regard to the internal evidence, he shows, first, its agreement and confirmation of the external evidence; then, advancing further, he proves, that in this particular it establishes the genuineness of the writings independently of external evidence, because the books could not have been written by any person who was not contemporary with the events described, which, with other important matter, is developed with singular felicity and address. Lastly,

37 How does Mr. B. say that some of these particulars affect the character of the New Testament scriptures?-38 How does Bishop Marsh arrange the proofs of its authenticity?-39 How did he proceed in the exhibition of these proofs?-40 How did he proceed with regard to the internal evidence?

from connecting the conclusions thus obtained with that proof already given by external aid, he deduces the important fact, "that the books of the New Testament must be the productions of the persons whose names they bear."

Maria. Will you give us some illustrations of the method of proof made use of in these works?

Mr. B. As you must be aware, that our time does not allow of many, I shall pass over the external testimony (strong as it is), since it would be only a repetition of quotations from the works of the fathers, and endeavour to give you, in preference, some idea of the force of the internal evidence.

Edward. But no internal evidence, I should think, could prove the genuineness of any works in any case; and in this we know nothing of the authors but from their own account.

Mr. B. We know, perhaps, as much of these authors, from the accounts of others, as we do of many writers, of the genuineness of whose works we entertain no doubt; but you must remember that the external evidence, as far as it goes, is altogether in favour of the genuineness of these records. Of that there is no question: it only remains to examine whether the internal evidence is such as to prove the external evidence false. Now we not only assert that it confirms the external evidence, but that it goes so far beyond it, that, had we had no external evidence at all, the internal evidence alone would have afforded the strongest grounds of presumption for the genuineness of these books.

First, then, with regard to the general appearance of the New Testament, every thing corroborates the Christian statement as to its origin, and nothing can be found to militate against it; an argument of such great weight, that it approaches very nearly to impossibility for such an agreement to subsist in a work of this nature, in the case of deception.

41 In the conclusion, what inference does he draw?-42 To what does Mr. B. now propose to proceed?-43 What does he say is the amount of the external evidence adduced?-44 How does he intend to use the internal evidence?-45 What is the general appearance of the New Testament?

Maria. I do not see why.

Mr. B. The New Testament is supposed to have been written by eight different authors, and consists of twentyseven different books, treating on a great number of the most important subjects, and involving such an immense number of facts and arguments, with so many modifications and combinations of them, that it seems wholly incredible that (on the supposition of their being spurious) no positive proof against them should be deducible from them. Now, these books have been more carefully examined, more canvassed, and more disputed upon, than any others which were ever produced; and yet all the attention which has yet been bestowed upon them, has been unequal to detect one passage sufficient to overthrow their genuineness.

Maria. This is certainly much in their favour, when the length of time (seventeen hundred years), and the various dispositions of those who have written upon the subject, are considered.

Mr. B. But to descend to particulars; the language is precisely such as it ought to be, in the supposition of its being genuine.

Maria. Might not this equally be the case if spurious? Mr. B. No: the language fixes almost to a certainty both the country and the time of the authors.

Maria. In what manner? It is only Greek, and they were Jews.

Mr. B. But it is a peculiar kind of Greek, such as Jews only could write; such as could only be written by Jews for a very limited period. "The first and principal of the internal marks of authenticity is the language of the New Testament, which is written in a style that must be striking, not only to every man accustomed to the Greek of the classic authors, but even to those who are acquainted only with the writings of the fathers. It is principally distinguished by the Hebraisms and Syri

46 By how many different persons was the New Testament written, and of what does it consist?-47 What attention has been paid to these books? -48 What is said of the language?-49 Might not the language be as it is, if the work were spurious?-50 Why not?-51. What does Michaelis say upon this subject?

asms with which these writings abound; a circumstance too often considered as a fault, which pious ignorance, even so late as the present century, has attempted to wipe away; not knowing that these very deviations from Grecian purity afford the strongest presumption in its favour. They show it to have been written by men of Hebrew origin, a production therefore of the first century; since, after the decease of Jewish converts to Christianity, we find hardly any instance of Jews who turned preachers of the Gospel; and the Christian fathers were, for the most part, totally ignorant of Hebrew."—Michaelis, vol. i. p. 45.

Edward. But might not this be an artful imitation, the effect of design?

Mr. B. We are not aware of the existence of any one able to have produced a spurious work couched in such language; and there is not the least appearance of design. Nor have these idioms the appearance of art and design, being exactly such as might be expected from persons who used a language, spoken indeed where they lived, but not the dialect of their country. And if the New Testament were a forgery of the second or third century, its author, the better to disguise his imposture, must have studied to imitate the style of writing which might have been expected from the apostles; a supposition totally incredible; for the lower order of Christians were too deficient in criticism to perceive these various shades, and possessed too little taste to execute the undertaking with success; while the learned fathers of the second and two following centuries exercised their talents in searching into the authenticity of the writings already received: and had the fathers of those ages bee inclined to impose, they were mostly devoid of the means since those who were ignorant of Hebrew and Syria would hardly introduce Hebraisms and Syriasms ir their writings. The Nazarines, on the contrary, w understood Hebrew, accepted only the Gospel of

52 Edward asks-if this might not have been an artful imitationis the reply of Mr. B.?-53 How do the idioms appear?-54 If the Testament were a forgery of the second or third century, what mus author have done?

Matthew, and must therefore remain innocent of the charge of having forged the rest of the sacred writings. The difficulty of imitating the Oriental style is felt only by those who are conversant with the eastern writers; and the modern novels, written even by men of taste and genius, under the title of 'Oriental Tales,' are as distant from the Asiatic mode of writing, as they differ from the European. And yet if the New Testament be a forgery, the Christians of the second and third century must be supposed capable of an imitation, which cannot be distinguished from an original. On the contrary, the language of the early fathers, though not always the purest classic Greek, has no resemblance to that of the New Testament, not excepting the works of the few who had a knowledge of the Hebrew, Origenes Epiphanius, or Justin Martyr, from whom, as a native of Palestine, it might, with some reason, be expected."

Maria. To what time does the language of the books of the New Testament appear to limit the date of its composition?.

Mr. B. The opinion of Michaelis is, that they must have been written before the year 120.

Edward. But this only proves in general that their origin must have been before that date, and that they were of Jewish extraction. It does not establish their being independent authors.

Mr. B. No: for this, we must examine the style of each. "But similar as these writings are to each other in Oriental idioms, they are equally distinct and characistic in the particular style of their respective authors. They cannot, then, have proceeded from the hands of a single impostor; and the supposition of their being an accidental collection of spurious writings from different authors, is attended nearly with the same difficulties as the former hypothesis. Whoever reads with attention the thirteen

i 55 What would have been the difficulty of imitating the Oriental style? -56 What must we suppose of the Christians of the second and third century, if the New Testament were a forgery?-57 What is said of the language of the early fathers?-58 What is the limit of the date of the composition of the New Testament?-59 How is the authorship of each book to be established?-60 Why could not these books have been produced by the same impostor?