صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

persons situated as St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke, and St. John, are said to have been.

BEATRICE.

But might not the accounts of the authors have arisen from observation of these things?

MR. B.

They are not so stated, and it is very improbable that this should have been the case, since the Gospels were not at first in one volume, and did not therefore afford the means of the comparison which we now readily make; nor have we the least reason to believe that such careful observation of the style was ever made by those who have given the above statements; for the first Christians were too much occupied with things to attend much to words. The idea of proving the truth of Christianity from internal evidence, as we now do, could hardly then be said to exist; and it was not needed by those who possessed a much readier method, from their living so near the apostolic times.

EDWARD.

As the genuineness of the greater part of the New Testament appears quite certain, it perhaps is not very material to establish that of the books which at first were not universally received; but is there sufficient reason to believe these also are genuine?

MR. B.

Abundantly sufficient, though not to as great an extent as in the case of the rest. The Epistle to the Hebrews was for a time rejected by the Latin church, but was always received by the Greek, and is by Clement of Alexandria ascribed to St. Paul, who appeals also to Pantanus, his preceptor. It is also in the Syriac version; and thus we have in its favour the testimony of all those countries which were best situated for the determination of the truth. The Epistle of St. James being likewise in the Syriac version, must be received as his; that version of course having the greatest weight in a question of this kind, from its antiquity, and the situation of the Syrian Christians with respect to Judea. The Second Epistle of St. Peter, the Second and Third of St. John, and the Epistle of St. Jude, are not in the Syriac version, which may reasonably be accounted for, from its having been made before these epistles were known. The Second Epistle of St. Peter has such strong internal evidence of its genuineness, as proved by comparison with the First, which is undoubtedly genuine, that it must be received. The three other epistles are so very short, and their nature is such, that it is not at all surprising that they were for a time unnoticed, particularly the two former; but these so closely resemble the First Epistle of St. John, that there can be little doubt as to their genuineness; and the Epistle of St. Jude, when

known, was received as his, being quoted as such both by Clement of Alexandria and Origen. The book of Revelation is also quoted frequently by Clement of Alexandria and Origen, and likewise by Irenæus. It is also expressly ascribed to St. John by the latter (whose testimony is of the greatest weight with regard to it) as before seen, and by Justin Martyr at a still earlier period. The defence of Christianity may be maintained without depending upon any of these books; but there is no necessity to give up their authority, since the evidence for their genuineness is far greater than what would be deemed necessary to establish the credit of any common author.

CONVERSATION XI.

MR. B.

We are now arrived at that part of the evidences of Christianity to which the greatest interest is generally attached, and on which indeed the whole proof of Christianity seems to depend· the credibility of the New Testament. If the accounts of our Lord Jesus Christ be not true, however excellent Christianity may appear, and however singular may be the fact of its continuance to the present day, we can only regard it as the effect of a variety of concurring causes, which it may be interesting, but cannot be absolutely necessary to investigate; and here, therefore, we may terminate our inquiries. But if, on the other hand, the New Testament be credible as well as genuine, the truth of Christianity is established, and the remainder of our inquiries may be restricted to shewing how far this fact affects others connected with it, or is itself affected by them.

EDWARD.

Do you then consider the whole question as turning upon this one point?

MR. B.

I do. If Christ be not risen from the dead, all

probabilities in favour of Christianity must fail: if he is risen from the dead, they are unnecessary.

EDWARD.

Do you then consider all the internal evidence in behalf of Christianity, arising from its excellence, as useless?

MR. B.

By no means: it is of the greatest consequence; but the utmost which it can establish, independently of external evidence, is, that the religion is not (according to our notions) unworthy of God.

BEATRICE.

Has it not been denied by some, that the Gospel statements can be proved true by any means whatsoever ?

MR. B.

It has, from the circumstance of their relating miracles.

BEATRICE.

And what is the argument made use of? If it be valid, all further inquiry is needless.

MR. B.

It is this, that a miracle is contrary to our experience, and therefore no testimony, however strong, can establish it. The fallacy of the argument consists in the ambiguity of the word

« السابقةمتابعة »