History of the College of St. John the Evangelist, Cambridge

was left unnoticed at the time. But a re-publication of these Lectures, after a professed revision, left me no other choice, than either to omit what had been censured, or to defend it. preferred the latter.'...

'Let me add a few observations on the fifth, sixth, and seventh Parts of the Lectures, which were delivered several years after the four first 5 Parts, and have not been re-printed. They relate to the Authenticity and Credibility of the Bible, and contain therefore the third Branch of Divinity according to the arrangement of the second Preliminary Lecture. As the proofs, which are there given of Authenticity and Credibility, are a series of propositions, in which nothing is assumed, 10 that had not previously been proved, the divine origin of Christianity becomes an easy and obvious deduction.....[Arguments from prophecy and from miracles]...The proofs therefore of authenticity and credibility bring the Evidences, as they are called, within a narrow compass. I have long since printed a summary statement of the principal evi- 15 dences of the divine origin of Christianity*: and if another edition of the Lectures on the Authenticity and Credibility of the Bible should ever be wanted, that summary statement may easily be annexed. I shall then have completed four out of the seven Branches originally proposed; and moreover the four which are most important. More 20 cannot now be expected from a writer, who has passed the age of threescore years and ten. Here then I will take a final leave of my readers, and subscribe myself their faithful servant,

HERBERT PETERBOROUGH.'

'Cambridge, March 25, 1828.'

The two additional lectures (pp. 466—511) contain 'xI. History of biblical interpretation during the four first centuries. XII. History of biblical interpretation from the fifth to the present century.' He strongly reprobates the allegorical and mystical interpretations of Philo and many of the Fathers, revived by Cocceius and his school; and 30 maintains the Protestant principle, that Scripture has one single sense, the grammatical. He shews that the Fathers' rule of faith is not, like Romish Tradition, distinct from Scripture. He has a strong prejudice against the middle ages; saying of Gregory the Great (p. 497), that he 'employed his authority, not for the promotion, but for the sup- 35 pression of learning.'

P. 511 Since the year 1800, the explanations of the Bible, which have been published abroad, are not generally such, as would commend themselves to an English Divine.'

A course of lectures... By Herbert Marsh, D.D., F.R.S. and F.A.S. 40 Lord bishop of Peterborough, and Margaret professor of Divinity. Part v. On the Authenticity of the New Testament. Cambridge.....1820. 8vo. pp. vi. and 94.

'Lecture XXIII: The third Branch of Divinity, according to the system adopted in these Lectures, relates to the Authenticity and 45

'It was printed for the use of the Candidates for Holy Orders in the Diocese of Peterborough: but it has not been published.'

ΙΟ

Credibility of the Bible. Definition of these terms. Reasons for making the two subjects, though distinct in themselves, to constitute only one branch of Divinity. Authenticity must be first considered. The Authenticity of the New Testament, the subject of the present, and three following Lectures. Influence of this inquiry of [? on] the Divine Origin of Christianity. Authenticity of the New Testament to be proved, both by external, and by internal evidence. The external evidence for the Authenticity of the New Testament to be examined before the internal. The several parts of which external evidence consists, usually arranged in chronological order. Difficulties attending this arrangement in regard to the New Testament: and the author's reasons for inverting the usual order. XXIV. Testimony of the principal Greek and Latin Fathers to the Authenticity of the New Testament, beginning with the end of the fourth century, and ascending to the age which was next to the Apostolic. The Fathers, whose testimony is here produced, are, Jerom, Gregory of Nazianzum, Epiphanius, Athanasius, Eusebius, Origen, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, and Irenæus. XXV. Result of the inquiries instituted in the preceding Lecture. Another view may be taken of the subject, in which it will appear, that we may obtain a result, which is still more decisive. This result is obtained by arguing from the statement of Eusebius, respecting those books of the New Testament, which had been universally received. The argument applied to the Epistles of St. Paul. The same argument applied to the four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, and the other books, which had been universally received. Of the books, which had not been universally received. Each of these books considered separately: and their authenticity confirmed by arguments specially applying to them. Of the Apostolic Fathers, and the proper mode of applying their testimony to the authenticity of the New Testament. Testimony of Papias. Remarks on Justin Martyr. Conclusion to be drawn from the external evidence in favour of the New Testament. XXVI. Of the internal evidence in favour of the New Testament. The first question to be asked is, whether internal evidence agrees with the external. Importance of this agreement; and of the evil consequences, which follow from their disagreement. Exact agreement between the external and internal evidence for the New Testament. Various degrees of internal evidence. It may not only be applied in confirmation of external evidence; but with respect to the New Testament it is of that description, which affords a proof of authenticity independently of external evidence. Illustration of this proof. Knowledge displayed in the historical books of the New Testament, respecting the several relations, which the Jews in the time of our Saviour bore, as well to each other as to foreign nations, is such, as no writer could have possessed, who was not contemporary with the events described. The agreement with dates, both of time and of place, and 'ndeed the general agreement with co-existent things and circumstances, is such, as cannot be found in any spurious production. Explanation of the difference between artificial and undesigned coincidences: and of the manner, in which coincidences of the latter kind operate as arguments for authenticity. Examples of such coincidence

from the Gospels, and the Acts of the Apostles. The authenticity of the Epistles of St. Paul may be established in a similar manner. Proof of authenticity, applicable to the New Testament in general, deduced from the peculiar Greek dialect, in which the several books are composed. Further proof from the style, the manner, and the 5 character of the several writers. All these internal marks of authenticity combined with the external evidence, are decisive in favour of the New Testament.'

P. 4: Instead...of employing the terms "genuineness" and "authenticity," I employ the terms authenticity" and "credibility;" 10 the former to denote, that a book was written by the author to whom it is ascribed, the latter to denote that the contents of the book are justly entitled to our assent.'

P. 6: 'We are concerned with a question, which is purely historical...To those, who question the fact, that the Epistles ascribed to St. 15 Paul were written by that Apostle, we must apply the same kind of reasoning, which we would apply to those, who might choose to doubt whether Cicero or Pliny were the authors of the Epistles ascribed to them.'

Much fruitless controversy might have been spared, if the following 20 plain truth had been remembered (pp. 14, 15): The most voluminous writers are commonly in possession of many books, which they never quote, because it is both unnecessary and unusual to quote a work, unless the subject, on which the author is writing, affords occasion for it. We cannot therefore conclude, that because a writer of the first 25 century has not quoted a particular book of the New Testament, the book was wholly unknown to him. Still less can we argue from his silence, that the book did not exist when he wrote.'

A course of lectures... Part VI. On the Credibility of the New Testament. Cambridge... 1822. 8vo. pp. VIII. and 95.

'Lecture XXVII. The inquiry into the Credibility of the New Testament, distinct from the inquiry into its Authenticity. Explanation of the term Authenticity: the use of it in these Lectures, and the reasons for so using it. Transition from Authenticity to Credibility apparently more easy in regard to the books of the New Testament, than in 35 regard to common books. Reasons why it is not so. The Credibility of the New Testament must be established independently of its Inspiration, because the proof of Inspiration depends on the proof of Credibility. Arguments for the Credibility of the New Testament reduced to two heads. We may argue from the character and situation of the 40 writers, or we may argue from the writings themselves. When we argue from the character of the writers to the Credibility of their writings, we argue on the supposition of the Integrity of the New Testament. Explanation of this term. Difference between a perfect text of the Greek Testament, and the Integrity of the Greek Testament. 45 Arguments for its Integrity drawn from à consideration of the obstacles to a general corruption of the Greek manuscripts. Additional obstacles opposed by the ancient versions, and the writings of the Greek Fathers.

ΙΟ

The general check, which was afforded by the joint opposition of manuscripts, fathers, and versions, must have preserved to us the New Testament in the same state upon the whole, which was given to it by the writers themselves. The conduct of the Greek Church, from which we have received our Greek manuscripts, an additional reason for believing that they have not been wilfully corrupted. The arguments for the Integrity of the Greek manuscripts would be entirely destroyed, if it were true that 1 John v. 7 existed originally in the Greek manuscripts, and was afterwards expunged. Necessary connexion therefore between the general Integrity of the New Testament, and the evidence relating to that passage. Summary statement of the evidence. History of the passage, from its origin in the Latin version to its introduction in a modern Greek manuscript, and thence to a printed edition. Result of this inquiry is, that the general principle by which we maintain the Integrity of the New Testament, is not affected. Application of this principle to the period, in which all other arguments would fail : and the inference thence deduced, that the Greek manuscripts, which have descended to the present age, are free from the corruptions, which have been ascribed to them. XXVIII. The Integrity of the New Testament having been proved, we may argue from the character of the writers to the Credibility of their writings. Mode of conducting that argument. Application of it to the Apostolic Historians, St. Matthew and St. John. They had no motive to deceive others, and could not be deceived themselves. St. Matthew wrote his Gospel under circumstances, which leave no other alternative, than either that the history is true, or that a fraud was committed which was morally impossible. Similar argument applicable to the Gospel of St. John. Credibility of the Gospels of St. Mark and St. Luke. Though not eyewitnesses to the facts recorded in their Gospels, like St. Matthew and St. John, they derived their information from those who were eyewitnesses. Whether the information was communicated to them, in writing, or only in verbal conversation. The former has been already shewn to be more probable: and, being more secure, than a communication by words, is more favourable to the Credibility of their Gospels. Their dependence on the Apostles for their information was equal in either case: and their independence, with respect to each other, is no more affected by the supposition of a written, than by the supposition of a verbal communication. The author's mode of explaining the verbal harmony of the three first Gospels does not impair, but secure the independence of St. Mark and St. Luke as historians, with reference to each other. Strange mistake, which has been generally made on this subject. The "Veracity of the Evangelists" does not depend on the mode in which they obtained their materials, but on the mode, in which they employed their materials. St. Mark and St. Luke employed their materials as faithfully, as they obtained their materials securely. Proof of this assertion. St. Mark and St. Luke encountered the same dangers with the Apostles, and therefore gave similar proofs of their sincerity. General inference to the Credibility of the four Gospels, as drawn from the arguments employed in this Section. XXIX. The Credibility of the facts recorded in the New Testament

estimated from a consideration of the facts themselves. Three different ways, in which those facts may be considered. We may compare the several parts of each single book: or we may compare one book with another: or we may compare the whole with other works of acknowledged credit. The Gospels, when examined singly, are found, to be 5 consistent in their several parts, and have so far the internal marks of truth. When the Gospels of St. Mark and St. Luke are compared with the Gospel of St. Matthew, they are found to corroborate each other. The matter which is common to the three first Gospels, forms of itself a Narrative of our Saviour's ministry, from His baptism to His IO death and resurrection. Hence arose the supposition, that such a Narrative once existed in a separate form. The supposition of such a Narrative accounts not for any verbal harmony: it accounts only for the harmony in the matter of the three first Gospels. The harmony in the arrangement of the common matter by St. Mark and St. Luke, 15 inexplicable on any other supposition, unless we abandon the notion, that St. Mark and St. Luke wrote independently of each other. A faithful adherence, on the part of St. Mark and St. Luke, to a written communication from the Apostles, an argument for the Credibility of their Gospels. Credibility of the facts which each of the three first 20 Gospels has peculiar to itself. Character of St. John's Gospel different from that of the other three: but his Gospel equally credible. The apparent contradictions in our four Gospels do not impair the veracity of the writers, or the credibility of their writings. Comparison of the Acts of the Apostles with the Epistles of St. Paul, and the inference 25 thence deduced that the history is true. Confirmation of the facts recorded in the New Testament, by a comparison with Josephus and Tacitus. The actions ascribed to our Saviour, shewn to be of that description, that the Apostles and Evangelists not only would not have recorded them, but could not have recorded them, if they had not been 30 true. XXX. Special inquiry into the Credibility of the Miracles recorded in the New Testament. Importance of this inquiry to the truth of Christianity. Definition of a miracle, as the term is used by Christ and His Apostles. Attempts of the Jews in the time of our Saviour to evade the inference from miracles by ascribing them to the 35 agency of evil spirits. Absurdity of such attempts, and insufficiency of the answers, which have been sometimes given. A real miracle can be performed only by the special interference of God Himself. The attempts of the Jews to account for the miracles of our Saviour, however absurd those attempts might be, establish the existence of the miracles. Ob- 40 jections of modern philosophers to the existence of miracles, on the ground that they are incapable of proof. that the notion of a miracle destroys itself. from experience as explained by Mr. Hume. be established by human testimony. Illustration of the argument by 45 an examination of the miracle performed in the restoration of Lazarus. The Miracles ascribed to the Apostles equally credible. Additional argument for the Credibility of the Miracles performed by St. Paul. Inference from the Credibility of facts to the Credibility of doctrines; whence it appears, that the doctrines recorded in the New Testament, 50 are doctrines, which came from God.'

Answer to the objection,
Answer to the argument
Proof that miracles may

« Previous Continue »

Books

History of the College of St. John the Evangelist, Cambridge, Volume 2