that if every unfair tendency of the mind | should not be looked upon as nugatory when could be subjected to a rigorous computa- applied to the investigation of those facts tion, it would be found, that the combined which are connected with the truth and operation of them all has the effect of im- establishment of the Christian religion, that pressing a bias in a contrary direction. All every prepossession should be swept away, we wish for, is, that the arguments which are and room left for the understanding, to expaheld decisive in other historical questions, [tiate without fear, and without incumbrance.

On the Authenticity of the different Books of the New Testament.

THE argument for the truth of the differ- | tles, than in believing what he has never ent facts recorded in the gospel history, re-doubted-the history of Alexander, and the solves itself into four parts. In the first, it doctrine of Socrates. Could all the marks shall be our object to prove, that the differ- of veracity, and the list of subsequent testient pieces which make up the New Testa- monies, be exhibited to the eye of the readment, were written by the authors whose er in parallel columns, it would enable him, names they bear, and the age which is com- at one glance, to form a complete estimate. monly assigned to them. In the second, we We shall have occasion to call his attention shall exhibit the internal marks of truth and to this so often, that we may appear to many nonesty, which may be gathered from the of our readers to have expatiated upon our compositions themselves. In the third, we introductory principle to a degree that is shall press upon the reader the known situa- tiresome and unnecessary. We conceive, tion and history of the authors, as satisfy- however, that it is the best and most pering proofs of the veracity with which they spicuous way of putting the argument. delivered themselves. And, in the fourth, I. The different pieces which make up we shall lay before them the additional the New Testament, were written by the and subsequent testimonies, by which the authors whose names they bear, and at the narrative of the original writers is sup-time which is commonly assigned to them. ported.

In every point of the investigation, we shall meet with examples of the principle which we have already alluded to. We have said, that if two distinct inquiries be set on foot, where the object of the one is to settle some point of sacred history, and the object of the other is to settle some point of profane history, the mind acquiesces in a much smaller quantity of evidence in the latter case than it does in the former. If this be right, (and to a certain degree it undoubtedly is,) then it is incumbent on the defender of Christianity to bring forward a greater quantity of evidence than would be deemed sufficient in a question of common literature, and to demand the acquiescence of his reader upon the strength of this superior evidence. If it be not right beyond a certain degree-and if there be a tendency in the mind to carry it beyond that degree, then this tendency is founded upon a delusion, and it is well that the reader should be apprised of its existence, that he may protect himself from its influence. The superior quantity of evidence which we can bring forward, will, in this case, all go to augment the positive effect upon his convictions; and he will rejoice to perceive that he is far safer in believing what has been handed down to him of the history of Jesus Christ, and the doctrine of his apos

After the long slumber of the middle ages, the curiosity of the human mind was awakened, and felt its attention powerfully directed to those old writings, which have survived the waste of so many centuries. It were a curious speculation to ascertain the precise quantity of evidence which lay in the information of these old documents. And it may help us in our estimate, first to suppose, that in the researches of that period, there was only one composition found which professed to be a narrative of past times. A number of circumstances can be assigned, which might give a certain degree of probability to the information even of this solitary and unsupported document. There si, first, the general consideration, that the principle upon which a man feels himself induced to write a true history, is of more frequent and powerful operation, than the principle upon which a man feels himself induced to offer a false or a disguised representation of facts to the world. This affords a general probability on the side of the document in question being a true narrative; and there may be some particulars connected with the appearance of the performance itself, which might strengthen this probability. We may not be able to discover in the story itself any inducement which the man could have in publishing it, if it were mainly and substantially false

We might see an expression of honesty, | tives, all of them possessing the same claims which it is in the power of written lan- upon our belief. If it be improbable that guage, as well as of spoken language, to one should be written for the purpose of imconvey. We might see that there was no- posing a falsehood upon the world, it is still thing monstrous or improbable in the nar- more improbable that many should be writrative itself. And, without enumerating ten, all of them conspiring to the same perevery particular calculated to give it the verse and unnatural object. No one can mpression of truth, we may, in the pro- doubt, at least, that of the multitude of writgress of our inquiries, have ascertained, that ten testimonies which have come down to copies of this manuscript were to be found us, the true must greatly preponderate over in many places, and in different parts of the the false; and that the deceitful principle, world, proving, by the evidence of its dif- though it exists sometimes, could never opefusion, the general esteem in which it was rate to such an extent, as to carry any great held by the readers of past ages. This gives or general imposition in the face of all the us the testimony of these readers to the value documents which are before us. The supof the performance; and as we are suppos- position must be extended much farther than ing it is a history, and not a work of ima- we have yet carried it, before we reach the gination, it could only be valued on the prin- degree of evidence and of testimony, of which ciple of the information which was laid be-on many points of ancient history, we are at fore them being true. In this way a solitary document, transmitted to us from a remote antiquity, might gain credit in the world, though it had been lost sight of for many ages, and only brought to light by the revival of a literary spirit, which had lain dormant during a long period of history.

this moment in actual possession. Many documents have been collected, professing to be written at different times, and by men of different countries. In this way a great body of ancient literature has been formed, from which we can collect many points of evidence, too tedious to enumerate. Do we We can further suppose, that in the pro- find the express concurrence of several augress of these researches, another manu- thors to the same piece of history? Do we script was discovered, having the same cha- find, what is still more impressive, events racters, and possessing the same separate formally announced in one narrative, not and original marks of truth with the former. told over again, but implied and proceeded If they both touched upon the same period upon as true in another? Do we find the of history, and gave testimony to the same succession of history, through a series of events, it is plain that a stronger evidence ages, supported in a way that is natural and for the truth of these events would be afford- consistent? Do we find those compositions ed, than what it was in the power of either which profess a higher antiquity, appealed of the testimonies taken separately to sup- to by those which profess a lower? These, ply. The separate circumstances which and a number of other points, which meet gave a distinct credibility to each of the every scholar who betakes himself to the testimonies are added together, and give also actual investigation, give a most warm and much higher credibility to those points of in-living character of reality to the history of formation upon which they deliver a com- past times. There is a perversity of mind mon testimony. This is the case when the which may resist all this. There is no end testimonies carry in them the appearance of to the fancies of scepticism. We may plead being independent of one another. And even in vain the number of written testimonies, when the one is derived from the other, it their artless coincidence, and the perfect unstill affords an accession to the evidence; designedness of manner by which they often because the author of the subsequent testi- supply the circumstances that serve both to mony gives us the distinct assertion, that he guide and satisfy the inquirer, and to throw believed in the truth of the original testi-light and support upon one another. The mony. infidel will still have something behind The evidence may be strengthened still which he can entrench himself; and his last farther, by the accession of a third manu- supposition, monstrous and unnatural as it script, and a third testimony. All the separate circumstances which confer credibility upon any one document, even though it stands alone and unsupported by any other, combine themselves into a much stronger body of evidence, when we have obtained the concurrence of several. If, even in the case of a single narrative, a probability lies on the side of its being true, from the multitude and diffusion of copies, and from the air of truth and honesty discernible in the composition itself, the probability is heightened by the coincidence of several narra

'C

is, may be, that the whole of written history is a laborious fabrication, sustained for niany ages, and concurred in by many individuals, with no other purpose than to enjoy the anticipated blunders of the men of future times, whom they had combined with so much dexterity to bewilder and lead astray. If it were possible to summon up to the presence of the mind the whole mass of spoken testimony, it would be found, that what was false bore a very small proportion to what was true. For many obvious reasons, the proportion of the false to the true

P.

1

AUTHENTICITY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

19

which Clement gave to St. Paul's first Epistle to the Corinthians, than which nothing can be conceived more indisputable. Ignatius, writing to the church of Ephesus, takes notice of St. Paul's epistle to that church; and Polycarp, an immediate disciple of the apostles, makes the same express reference to St. Paul's epistle to the Philippians in a letter addressed to the people. In carrying our attention down from the apostolical fathers, we follow an uninterrupted series of testimonies to the authenticity of the canonical scriptures. They get more numerous and circumstantial as we proceed-a thing to be expected from the progress of Christianity, and the greater multitude of writers, who came forward in its defence and illustration.

of a hundred years betwixt the publication | Jesus Christ. Besides many references of of the original story and the publication of the second and third kind, we have also Celsus, is filled up by antecedent testimonies, other instances of the same kind of testimony which, in all fairness, should be counted more decisive of the point in question. They are the testimonies of Christian writers, and, in as far as a nearer opportunity of obtaining correct information is concerned, they should be held more valuable than the testimony of Celsus. These references are of three kinds:-First, In some cases, their reference to the books of the New Testament is made in the form of an express quotation, and the author particularly named. Secondly, In other cases, the quotation is made without reference to the particular author, and ushered in by the general words, "as it is written." And, Thirdly, There are innumerable allusions to the different parts of the New Testament, scattered over all the writings of the earlier fathers. In this last case there is no express citation; but we have the sentiment, the turn of expression, the very words of the New Testament, repeated so often, and by such a number of different writers, as to leave no doubt upon the mind that they were copied from one common original, which was at that period held in high reverence and estimation. In pursuing the train of references, we do not meet with a single chasm from the days of the original writers. Not to repeat what we have already made some allusion to, the testimonies of the original writers to one another, we proceed to assert, that some of the fathers whose writings have come down to us, were the companions of the apostles, and are even named in the books of the New Testament. St. Clement, bishop of Rome, is, with the concurrence of all ancient authors, the same whom Paul mentions in his epistle to the Philippians. In his epistle to the church of Corinth, which was written in the name of the whole church of Rome, he refers to the first epistle of Paul to the former church. "Take into your hands the epistle of the blessed Paul the apostle." He then makes a quotation, which is to be found in Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians Clement have done this to the C themselves, had no such epist existence? And is not this a testimony, not merely from

days of the apostles down to about 150 years after the publication of the pieces which In pursuing the series of writers from the make up the New Testament, we come to Tertullian, of whom Lardner says, there are perhaps more and longer quotations of the small volume of the New Testament in this one Christian author, than of "that all the works of Cicero, though of so uncommon excellence for thought and style, in the writers of all characters for several ages."

our investigation, to the suspicion which ad-
heres to every Christian testimony. We
We feel ourselves exposed, in this part of
have already made some attempts to ana-
lyse that suspicion into its ingredients, and
we conceive, that the circumstance of the
Christians being an interested party, is only
one, and not perhaps the principal of these
ingredients. At all events, this may be the
proper place for disposing of that one in-
gredient, and for offering a few general ob-
servations on the strength of the Christian
testimony.

there are two distinct objects of considera-
In estimating the value of any testimony,
tion; the person who gives the testimony,
and the
Addres
on th

to whom the testimony is
quite needless to enlarge
which, in the present in-
from both these consider-
uch each of them contri-
mn and solidity of the
far as the peo-
are concerned,
n their account
n some of them
the original wri-
te acquaintances,
the benefit of an
evidence, hing

the earli

es? Or fied, w

They would never have been so unwise as to commit in this way a cause, which had not a single circumstance to recommend it but its truth and its evidences.

The falsehood of the Christian testimony on this point, would carry along with it a concurrence of circumstances, each of which is the strangest and most unprecedented that ever was heard of. First, That men, who sustained in their writings all the characters of sincerity, and many of whom submitted to martyrdom, as the highest pledge of sincerity which can possibly be given, should have been capable of falsehood at all. Second, That this tendency to falsehood should have been exercised so unwisely as to appear in an assertion perfectly open to detection, and which could be so readily con

through their writings the same tone of | plainness and sincerity, which is allowed to stamp the character of authenticity on other productions; and, above all, when, upon the strength even of heathen testimony, we conclude that many of them, by their sufferings and death, gave the highest evidence that man can give, of his speaking under the influence of a real and honest conviction? In as far as the people who received the testimony are concerned, to what other circumstances can we ascribe their concurrence, than to the truth of that testimony? In what way was it possible to deceive them upon a point of general notoriety? The books of the New Testament are referred to by the ancient fathers, as writings generally known and respected by the Christians of that period. If they were ob-verted to the discredit of that religion, which scure writings, or had no existence at the time, how can we account for the credit and authority of those fathers who appealed to them, and had the effrontery to insult their fellow Christians by a falsehood so palpable, and so easily detected? Allow them to be capable of this treachery, we have still to explain, how the people came to be the dupes of so glaring an imposition; how they could be persuaded to give up every thing for a religion, whose teachers were so unprincipled as to deceive them, and so unwise as to commit theinselves upon ground where it was impossible to elude discovery. Could Clement have dared to refer the peoof Corinth to an Epistle said to be received by themselves, ard which had no existence? or could he have referred the Christians at large to writings which they never heard of. And it was not enough to maintain the semblance of truth with the people of their own party.

Where were the Jews all the time? and how was it possible to escape the correction of these keen and vigilant observers? We mistake the matter much, if we think that Christianity at that time was making its insidious way in silence and in secrecy, through a listless and unconcerned public. All history gives an opposite representation. The passions and curiosity of men were quite upon the alert. The popular enthusiasm had been excited on both sides of the question. It had drawn the attention of established authorities in different provinces of the empire, and the merits of the Christian cause had become a matter of frequent and formal discussion in courts of judicature. If, in these circumstances, the Christian writers had the hardihood to venture upon a falsehood, it would have been upon safer ground than what they actually adopted. They would never have hazarded to assert what was so open to contradiction, as the existence of books held in reverence among all the churches, and which nobody either in or out of these churches ever heard of.

it was the favourite ambition of their lives to promote and establish in the world Third, that this testimony could have gained the concurrence of the people to whom it was addressed, and that, with their eyes perfectly open to its falsehood, they should be ready to make the sacrifice of life, and of fortune in supporting it. Fourth, That this testimony should never have been contradicted by the Jews, and that they should have neglected so effectual an opportunity of disgracing a religion, the progress of which they contemplated with so much jealousy and alarm. Add to this, that it is not the testimony of one writer which we are making to pass through the ordeal of so many difficulties. It is the testimony of many writers, who lived at different times and in different countries, and who add the very singular circumstance of their entire agree. ment with one another, to the other circumstances equally unaccountable, which we have just now enumerated. The falsehood of their united testimony is not to be conceived. It is a supposition which we are warranted to condemn, upon the strength of any one of the above improbabilities taken separately. But the fair way of estimating their effect upon the argument, is to take them jointly, and in the language of the doctrine of chances, to take the product of all the improbabilities into one another. The argument which this product furnishes for the truth of the Christian testimony, has, in strength and conclusiveness, no parallel in the whole compass of ancient literature.

The testimony of Celsus is looked upon as peculiarly valuable, because it is disinterested. But if this consideration gives so much weight to the testimony of Celsus, why should so much doubt and suspicion annex to the testimony of Christian writers, several of whom, before his time, have given a fuller and more express testimony to the authenticity of the Gospels? In the persecutions they sustained; in the obvious tone of sincerity and honesty which runs