Page images
PDF
EPUB

lars, which, it never could have occurred to them, would be likely to become the subject of doubt or debate. For we shall probably see in the course of this discussion, why such difficulties as those which are founded upon double, secondary, or allegorical senses, could never have found a place in their minds, and ought not therefore to be suffered to exercise any influence over our's, at all prejudicial to our holy religion.

:

If we are asked, why we give implicit credit to the declaration, that Jesus did expound all these things to his disciples? Our answer is not difficult. We believe him on the ground of the miracles which he wrought : the very ground upon which only he uniformly claimed to be believed and upon which the commentators generally rest the proof of his divinity. If again we are asked, what proof have we that the miracles were actually performed? Our answer is equally ready. The credibility of the historians of the Gospel: who profess to have been eye-witnesses of the facts which they relate who appear to have had no imaginable motive for publishing what they knew to be false: and who must have maintained its truth at the constant hazard of their

lives. If such men are not to be credited, even when they bear witness to the performance of miracles; there is an end to all reliance upon human testimony and universal scepticism is its necessary consequence.

But were their histories published at or about the time to which they have been referred: that is, one of them at least, within forty years after the events which they record had occurred: and are they now substantially what they were then? With respect to the last point it is only necessary to observe, that although the vigilance of collaters has detected very numerous various readings in the different manuscripts, none have been found to affect any material fact or doctrine; and the same observation may be applied to the different versions which have been made of them 1. With respect to the first point, we have the strongest evidence of which the nature of the case will admit. From the third century, when Eusebius wrote, there is no period at which the existence of the Gospels is not as

1

1 Hey's Lectures, book i. chapters 8 and 9; and Bishop Tomline's Elements, vol. i. p. 13.

certain as it is at present'. The difficulty (if any) is in tracing them from thence upwards to the time of their publication. Yet this we are enabled to do, (if not so fully as could be wished, yet still satisfactorily) by what remains of a chain of writers, extending to Barnabas', who was the companion of St. Paul.

It is true indeed, as Bishop Stillingfleet has remarked, that "antiquity is most defective in the time immediately after the Apostles "." And this has not escaped the notice also of one who seldom omits any thing to the prejudice of Christianity. "The historical monuments of the three first centuries of ecclesiastical antiquity (says Gibbon) are neither very numerous, nor very prolix. From the end of the acts of the Apostles, to the time when the first apology of Justin Martyr was presented, there intervened a dark and doubtful period of four score years What is intended to be insinuated here, I do not ex

[blocks in formation]

4

4 "

[ocr errors]

* Vindication of some passages in chapters xv. and xvi.

Miscellaneous Works, vol. ii. p. 597.

actly perceive. It cannot have been that the Gospels were forged at that time, because the difficulties involved in the supposition, of their having been forged at any time are infinitely greater, than any which can arise from the admission of their genuineness. For it cannot be disputed that the Christian religion commenced at that period; nor that it originated with Jesus and his Apostles. Now this event was not of an ordinary kind, nor of slight importance. It is not credible but that some account must have been given of it. Yet there is no trace of any other account having ever existed, than that of which we are in possession 1. Either, therefore, the authors of our present Gospels must have contrived not only to impose upon the world a fraudulent history of what were then very recent and very public transactions, and also to obliterate all memory, or records, (if there were any) of the real and genuine facts; or chance must have assisted them in this last respect, in a manner surpassing belief. But the supposition of their having intentionally destroyed any authentic memorials of our

1

'.

Paley's Evidences, vol. i. p. 115.

our Lord's life and doctrines, is utterly inconsistent with the character of their own narratives, which bear upon the face of them no marks of art or contrivance whatever; but are in every page of them conspicuous for qualities the very reverse of these. If then there remains no ground upon which the fidelity of the Evangelists as historians can be impeached, we must needs conclude that Jesus did (at the least) by the performance of miracles prove himself to have been divinely commissioned to reveal religious truth to mankind. Now this admission excludes all possibility of error being imputed to him. Whatever exposition therefore of the Scriptures of the Old Testament concerning himself he gave to his disciples, must have been infallibly true: whether we may be able at this time to ascertain what it was or not. He may have shewn their application to himself in a primary and literal sense, from Hebrew copies which no longer exist. And he must have been acquainted with the meaning of the original writings with a degree of accuracy, which none of their translators have probably ever possessed as the differences in their translations sufficiently evince. Or he may have

« PreviousContinue »