FOURTH. The Scriptures are a Revelation from God. I. The Authenticity of the Bible. II. Its Genuineness. III. Its Credibility. I. The Authenticity of the Bible. 1197 I will begin with the authenticity of the New Testament, for if this can be established it will render the proof of the authenticity of the Old Testament more easy and convincing. 1. Here as there is contemporaneous history, that is the best proof which the nature of the case admits, that the several books of the New Testament were written by the authors to whom they are ascribed. It will not be expected that in a mere skeleton, I should give quotations from history. In this skeleton form I can only say, that it is the universal testimony of contemporary historians both Christian and Infidel, that those books were written by the authors to whom they are ascribed. By contemporary historians, I mean those who wrote either at, or immediately subsequent to the time, in which these writings purport to have been written. It is certain from these historians, both infidel and christian, that the several books of the New Testament were then in existence, that they were the reputed writings of the authors whose names they bear, and that these men were universally understood to be their authors. 2. It is agreed by the best judges of the Greek language, that the New Testament must have been written by native Jews, at the very time when it purports to have been written. It is written in Hebraistic Greek. None but a Jew who had been brought up in Palestine could have written this dialect, nor could such Jews have written it, before about the time at which it purports to have been written; because, until about that time, the Jews who were natives of Palestine did not understand Greek. Nor could it have been written in Hebraistic Greek, by any generation subsequent to the Apostles, as after the destruction of Jerusalem the Hebraistic Greek ceased to be used. 3. Another consideration that goes to establish the authenticity of the books of the New Testament is, that they are writings of such a nature as would not have been unjustly claimed from ambitious motives by ambitious men. Nor would they have been claimed for ambitious men by their particular friends. 4. The absence of all counter testimony in relation to the authenticity of the New Testament is a strong, and it would seem, conclusive evidence in support of its authenticity, as it would seem utterly incredible that no evidence should exist that these books were written by other than their reputed authors, if that had been in fact the case. 5. Had it been possible the Jews, and jarring Christian sects, would have impeached the authenticity of these books; and the fact that they have not, and especially that the Jews have not, who were highly interested to do so, and who possessed every possible advantage for doing so, were the thing possible in itself, amounts to a demonstration that these books are authentic. 6. The authenticity of such of them as could be questioned, has been denied, and ample proof has been adduced to substantiate their authenticity. Particulars respecting the authenticity of each particular book belong more properly to the department of Biblical Literature. What has been said must suffice in respect to the authenticity of the New Testament as a whole. II. The Genuineness of the Bible. I will next establish the genuineness of the New Testament, after which it may be properly introduced in proof of the authenticity and genuineness of the Old Testament. The credibility of the two Testaments, will be discussed at the same time. The New Testament which we now have, does not claim to be the original document, but only purports to be a true copy of the original. That it is so, will appear: 1. From the fact, that the various jarring Christian sects which have existed from the time of their publication, would at once have detected any material addition to, subtraction from, or alteration of them. 2. The enemies of Christianity, especially the Jews, and infidels, have always been on the watch, and would have instantly detected any material alterations in those writings. 3. Among thirty thousand manuscript copies of the New Testament, not a single material alteration or omission can be found. 4. Any redundant book or passage would have created confusion. The Apocryphal books are an illustration of this. Those books contain doctrines and state facts, inconsistent with each other, with the rest of the Bible, and with other facts of which we have the most ample proof. This is as might be expected, were any books to set up the claim of a divine revelation, that were not so in fact. 5. The genuineness of the New Testament is established by the fact, that nearly every sentence of it is quoted by one and another of the early friends and enemies of Christianity. And from their quotations it is certain that the text was then just what it is now, as the words as they are found in our Testament exactly cor respond with those quotations. I will now examine the authenticity of the Old Testament. 1. Of the Pentateuch, or of the five books ascribed to Moses. Here I observe, that there is no cotemporaneous history, as these books were in existence long before any written history that has come down to us. Tradition, therefore, previous to all history, is the best evidence the nature of the case admits. And as this tradi tion is manifestly as ancient as the writings themselves, and universal among the Jews, and uniform, it amounts to the most convincing proof. For tradition uniformly ascribes the five books of the Pentateuch to Moses as their author... 2. The earliest Jewish writings which we have confirm this tradition. The Prophets are unvarying in their testimony, that Moses was the author of the Pentateuch. Christ also, and all the writers of the New Testament confirm this tradition, and bear an unvarying testimony to this truth.. 3. Josephus, and all Jewish historians, as far back as they go, bear their unequivocal testimony to the authenticity of the Pentateuch. 4. There is no counter testimony, either traditionary or historical; which is unaccountable, and it would seem impossible, if Moses were not the real author of these books. What has been adduced then is good proof, and sufficient to establish such a fact in a court of law. I will examine the authenticity of the other books of the Old Testament. 1. It is not pretended that the authors of every part of the Old Testament were certainly known. Nor is it to be expected, that writings of such very remote antiquity, and in a case in which there is little or no cotemporary history, should all be traced with exact certainty to their real authors. But that these books were all compiled, and of course received by inspired men, is a fact of which there is, to say the least, satisfactory evidence. There are two traditions among the Jews which are easily reconcilable with each other, that seem to set this subject in a satisfactory point of view. One tradition is that the books were compiled by Ezra; and the other tradition is, that they were compiled by Nehemiah. From all the circumstances of the case the probability is, that they were both concerned in their compilation, 2. All Jewish history, so far as I know, accords with these traditions. 3. Josephus mentions all the books of the Old Testament as canonical, and in the order in which they occur in our Bible. 4. Christ and his Apostles confirm their authenticity.. 5. The Jews have been and are interested to impeach the anthenticity of the books of the Old Testament, as they are appealed to by Christians to establish the Messiahship of Christ. The Jews certainly possessed the most ample opportunities and means of impeaching the authenticity of these books, if such a thing were possible, and in their controversy with Christians, they have been in the highest degree interested to do so; and the fact that they have not done so, amounts almost to a demonstration, that those books are really authentic. 14901 Let me now examine the GENUINENESS of the books of the Old Testament, D 1. The jarring sects among the Jews, who held various systems of philosophy, and of course gave a different interpretation of many passages of the sacred oracles, would naturally and certainly have detected any material alteration in them, had any such thing occurred, either by accident or design. 2. The Jews always used extreme caution in preserving their sacred writings from corruption or alteration. They numbered the lines, and words, and letters of every book, and kept such records, as would show the exact middle word or letter of every book. And to many such like devices did they have recourse, to prevent the possibility of alteration by any transcriber, either by accident or design. 3. The New Testament abundantly establishes the genuineness of the Old. Christ repeatedly rebuked the Jews, for their unwritten traditions, many of which were inconsistent with the letter and spirit of their sacred writings; but in no case did he complain of them for having adulterated the scriptures themselves, He uniformly speaks of the writings of the Old Testament as they existed in his day, as being genuine. The Apostles follow his example, and confirm abundantly the genuineness of the different books of the Old Testament. III. The Credibility of the Bible. I will now establish the credibility of both Testaments. This may be done by evidence both external and internal. 1. That the writers were competent witnesses, or so circumstanced as that nothing can be alledged as a reason why their testimony should not be received, is beyond dispute. 2. The credibility of the writers, or that they were men of good character, is not that I know of called in question. 3. The authenticity then of these books is presumptive evidence of their credibility. 4. Their genuineness is also presumptive evidence of their eredíbility, as it shows: (1.) The high and sacred regard in which they were held by those who possessed them, and who possessed the highest means of judging, whether they were or were not a revelation from God. (2.) Their genuineness is evidence of their credibility, inasmuch as it manifests a direct providence in preserving them from loss and interpolations. 5. Universal tradition anterior to history, of such events as might be expected to be thus preserved; e. g. the deluge, and the preservation of one family, in a vessel or ark. It is found to be true, that in every part of the world traditionary accounts of this event are preserved. 6. Geology confirms the Mosaic account of creation, when that account is rightly understood. 7. The credibilty of the scriptures is confirmed, by the advance of various sciences, and by those sciences too, which in the infancy of their existence threatened to develop facts, inconsistent with the credibility of the Bible. But the greater maturity of those sciences shows that they are all confirmatory of the truth of the sacred writings. 8. There are no opposing facts; i. e. there is no established fact of history or science, that militates against any fact or doctrine of the Bible. And that this should be so is wholly incredible, were not the Bible true. 9. History by both friends and enemies, as far back as it goes, confirms the credibility of the Bible. 10. It is said that the records of the Roman Empire confirm the principal facts in relation to the death and resurrection of Christ, and many other things recorded in the Bible. 11. The existence of the ordinances of both Testaments, is evidence that they must have been instituted at the time, and for the purposes at which and for which the Bible asserts them to have been instituted. Almost innumerable other external evidences might be adduced; but I pass to examine some of the internal evidences of their credibility. 1. Prophecy. The agreement of prophecy with the facts of history is admitted. But it is said that the prophecies were written after the facts occurred. To this I answer: (1.) That there is abundant proof to the contrary. (2.) Many of the most important prophecies are now fulfilling and to be fulfilled. These prophecies were written many hundred, and some of them many thousand years since, and cannot therefore, by any possibility, have been written after the occurrence of the facts which they predicted. (3.) Many of these prophecies were of such a nature as to render it utterly impossible for any one but God to foresee and foretell them. Prophecy, then, with its fulfillment, is conclusive evidence of the credibility of the Bible. 1 2 Miracles. The miracles recorded in the Bible are admitted as facts; but, by the enemies of revelation are ascribed to delusion, or to infernal agency. It is said that Roman Catholics and the heathen have recorded miracles, in attestation of the truths of their religion. I answer: (1.) These pretended miracles are all widely different, in kind and circumstances, from those recorded in the Bible. They are not well established by proof. They were not wrought under such circumstances as to render delusion and deception impossible. There is not one of them that can compare with the miracles of Christ and his Apostles, or with the fact of the resurrection of Christ from the dead. (2.) The gift of languages is another miracle, between which and the pretended miracles in support of other religions, there is no analogy. Miracles are nothing else than the seal of God to that. |