casm and objection against the healing doctrine of salvation? O, let the unbeliever remember that the guilt of rejecting revelation, is a crime from which, at least, the heathen, with all their vices, are free: for they have never contracted the peculiar guilt of spurning this immense benefit and all its accumulated proofs; nor have they ever rendered themselves, by habits of obdurate resistance to truth, incapable of appreciating the evidence, and welcoming the message of eternal mercy.

VOL. J.

F

66

LECTURE IV.

THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

2 THESS. III. 17.

The salutation of Paul with mine own hand, which is the token in every epistle: so I write.

WE proceed now to give some details of those direct Evidences of Christianity, by which its truth and infinite importance may be best imprinted on the youthful mind.

And here we, first, naturally ask, How do we know that the gospels and epistles were really composed by the apostles and disciples whose names they bear, and are deserving of credit as histories, so that a fact ought to be accounted true because it is found in them? Or, to speak the language of criticism, How do we know that the books of the New Testament are authentic and credible ?

I say, of the New Testament, for none who admit the authority of that part of the Holy Scripture, can doubt the truth of the other. The two, indeed, are so indissolubly connected, that a very few observations will serve to show the authenticity and credibility of the Old Testament, when the authority of the New has been once established.

At present, I confine myself to the question of authenticity. But before I enter on it, I pause for a

moment, because it may perhaps strike a young person as a difficult thing, to show that the books of the New Testament were really written and published by their respective authors in the first century. The distance of time may seem to him so immense, as to render any satisfactory evidence hopeless. How is it possible, he may ask, to prove that writings published seventeen or eighteen centuries since are genuine ? Besides, his inexperienced mind may perhaps be startled at the very proposal of bringing the sacred scriptures to a merely historical test, in common with any other ancient writings. The very sacredness of the subject, and the awe with which we have justly instructed him to regard the Bible, may lead him rather to shrink from such a proposal. He may think it more natural and satisfactory to go at once to the divine inspiration of the New Testament, without entering on the historical question of, what has been so often proved, its authenticity.

And, undoubtedly, this is the shortest, and in some respects, the easiest course. We should then only have to prove the inspiration of the scriptures from the impress of the divine hand which is upon them, from the numerous arguments employed by our Lord and his apostles in support of their mission, and from the divine effects which Christianity produces. This is what we incidentally do in almost every sermon, and in common cases it is sufficient.. But such a plan will not answer my present design, which is to lead the young, step by step, over the primary grounds of their faith, and thus to bring them to a full persuasion of the nature and obligation of the Christian religion.

Nor indeed need we fear the consideration, in their proper place, of any of those previous historical evidences which the goodness of God has furnished us with, as the first stepping-stones to our faith. It is

in this way we act every day in all those grammatical, geographical, and chronological inquiries, which are connected with the just interpretation of the language of the scriptures. Considered with a humble and teachable mind, and for their proper uses, they directly subserve the most practical purposes of revelation. It is thus that the Christian church, from the very days of the apostles, as we observed in our introductory discourse, has been accustomed to act as to the external evidences. At first, indeed, the au thenticity of the sacred books did not come into question. Even heathen and Jewish adversaries, during the early centuries, admitted and argued upon their authenticity. This is to us, at the distance of eighteen hundred years, a capital point-a point which places the whole Christian argument beyond dispute. Still, in each age, as it carried the church further from the origin of the religion, the authenticity required proof, and the series of testimony to this and other historical facts, demanded more care to collect and arrange. But this was always done with the utmost cheerfulness; for the purpose of passing on securely, as we design to do in the present course, to the proofs arising from the actual beneficial effects of Christianity on the hearts and lives of men.

Let us then consider how the question of the authenticity of the New Testament, difficult as it may seem at first, really stands.

The apostle Paul, in the words of my text, clearly refers to a test of authenticity, and calls on the first disciples to receive his letter on the footing of this test and none other-"The salutation of Paul with mine own hand, which is the token in every epistle, so I write." He adds a similar attestation to his Epistle to the Corinthians, "The salutation of me Paul with mine own hand." And so to that to the Colossians, "The salutation by the hand of me Paul,

Remember my bonds." Also in that to the Galatians, “Ye see how large a letter I have written to you with mine own hand."

We find also in the close of the Epistle to the Romans, the amanuensis or secretary of the apostle, distinguishing himself from the sacred author, "I Tertius, who wrote this epistle, salute you in the Lord."

The apostle also, on one occasion, expressly cautions his converts against receiving any unauthenticated writing in his name: "Now we beseech you, brethren, that ye be not soon shaken in mind, neither by spirit nor by word, nor by letter as from us."

The question of authenticity is, therefore, considered most important by the sacred writer himself, and admitted to be a separate question from the proof afforded by the divine contents of the writing, or the holy effects which it produced.

Then I conclude there must be a propriety, and even necessity, on fit occasions, of considering this first branch of the Christian argument, as well as the succeeding ones; and that till this first point is settled, nothing else can be considered in an orderly and legitimate manner.

I think we may also conclude, that if there be ordinary human means of ascertaining the authenticity of ancient writings, upon which men are constantly acting in their most important concerns, it is probable that the Almighty would leave the authenticity of the New Testament to rest upon the same grounds. For it appears a constant part of the Divine conduct not to interpose in an extraordinary way, when the ordinary course of his providence furnishes sufficient means of guidance; but rather to leave men to care and inquiry and diligence, accompanied with that humble temper of heart which will guard against pride and obstinacy, and lead them to use the divine