I. That in the age immediately posterior to that in which St. Paul lived, his letters were publicly read and acknowledged. kind, and more gross and palpable than that of sight; and our endeavours have been emwhich he reproves. For he begins the chap-ployed to collect the indications of truth and ter by stating the Second Epistle to the Co-authenticity, which appeared to exist in the rinthians and the First Epistle to Timothy to writings themselves, and to result from a combe nearly contemporary: to have been both | parison of their different parts. It is not howwritten during the apostle's second visit into ever necessary to continue this supposition Macedonia; and that a doubt subsisted con- longer. The testimony which other remains cerning the immediate priority of their dates: of contemporary, or the monuments of adjoin"Posterior ad eosdem Corinthios Epistola, et ing ages afford to the reception, notoriety, and Prior ad Timotheum certant de prioritate, et public estimation of a book, form, no doubt, sub judice lis est; utraque autem scripta est the first proof of its genuineness. And in no paulo postquam Paulus Epheso discessisset, books whatever is this proof more complete, adeoque dum Macedoniam peragraret, sed utra than in those at present under our consideratempore præcedat, non liquet." Now, in the tion. The inquiries of learned men, and, above first place, it is highly improbable that the two all, of the excellent Lardner, who never overepistles should have been written either nearly states a point of evidence, and whose fidelity together, or during the same journey through in citing his authorities has in no one instance Macedonia; for, in the Epistle to the Corin- been impeached, have established, concerning thians, Timothy appears to have been with St. these writings, the following propositions: Paul; in the epistle addressed to him, to have been left behind at Ephesus, and not only left behind, but directed to continue there, till St. Paul should return to that city. In the second place it is inconceivable, that a question should be proposed concerning the priority of date of the two epistles; for, when St. Paul, in his Epistle to Timothy, opens his address to him by saying, "as I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus when I went into Macedonia," no reader can doubt but that he here refers to the last interview which had passed between them; that he had not seen him since; whereas if the epistle be posterior to that to the Corinthians, yet written upon the same visit into Macedonia, this could not be true; for as Timothy was along with St. Paul when he wrote to the Corinthians, he must, upon this supposition, have passed over to St. Paul in Macedonia after he had been left by him at Ephesus, and must have returned to Ephesus again before the epistle was written What misled Ludovicus Capellus was simply this, that he had entirely overlooked Timothy's name in the superscription of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. Which oversight appears not only in the quotation which we have given, but from his telling us, as he does, that Timothy came from Ephesus to St. Paul at Corinth, whereas the superscription proves that Timothy was already with St. Paul when he wrote to the Corinthians from Macedonia.written at a time when probably some must CHAPTER XVI. THE CONCLUSION. Some of them are quoted or alluded to by almost every Christian writer that followed, by Clement of Rome, by Hermas, by Ignatius, by Polycarp, disciples or contemporaries of the apostles; by Justin Martyr, by the churches of Gaul, by Irenæus, by Athenagoras, by Theophilus, by Clement of Alexandria, by Hermias, by Tertullian, who occupied the succeeding age. Now when we find a book quoted or referred to by an ancient author, we are entitled to conclude, that it was read and received in the age and country in which that author lived. And this conclusion does not, in any degree, rest upon the judgment or character of the author making such reference. Proceeding by this rule, we have, concerning the First Epistle to the Corinthians in particular, within forty years after the epistle was written, evidence, not only of its being extant at Corinth, but of its being known and read at Rome. Clement, bishop of that city, writing to the church of Corinth, uses these words: Take into your hands the epistle of the blessed Paul the apostle. What did he at first write unto you in the beginning of the Gospel? Verily he did by the Spirit admonish you concerning himself, and Cephas, and Apollos, because that even then you did form parties." This was have been living at Corinth, who remembered St. Paul's ministry there and the receipt of the epistle. The testimony is still more valuable, as it shows that the epistles were preserved in the churches to which they were sent, and that they were spread and propagated from them to the rest of the Christian In the outset of this inquiry, the reader was community. Agreeably to which natural mode directed to consider the Acts of the Apostles and order of their publication, Tertullian, a and the thirteen epistles of St. Paul as certain century afterwards, for proof of the integrity ancient manuscripts lately discovered in the and genuineness of the apostolic writings, bids closet of some celebrated library. We have " any one, who is willing to exercise his curiadhered to this view of the subject. External evidence of every kind has been removed out * See Lardner, vol. xli. p. 22 osity profitably in the business of their salva- is said by Tertullian to have rejected three of tion, to visit the apostolical churches, in which their very authentic letters are recited, ipsæ authenticæ literæ eorum recitantur." Then he goes on: "Is Achaia near you? You have Corinth. If you are not far from Macedonia, you have Philippi, you have Thessalonica. If you can go to Asia, you have Ephesus; but if you are near to Italy, you have Rome*." I adduce this passage to show, that the distinct churches or Christian societies, to which St. Paul's epistles were sent, subsisted for some ages afterwards; that his several epistles were all along respectively read in those churches; that Christians at large received them from those churches, and appealed to those churches for their originality and authenticity. Nothing of the works of Marcion remains. Probably he was, after all, a rash, arbitrary, licentious critic (if he deserved indeed the name of critic,) and who offered no reason for his determination. What St. Jerome says of him intimates this, and is besides founded in good sense: Speaking of him and Basilides, "If they assigned any reasons," says he, "why they did not reckon these epistles," viz. the First and Second to Timothy, and the Epistle to Titus, the epistles which we now receive, viz. the two Epistles to Timothy and the Epistle to Titus. It appears to me not improbable, that Marcion might make some such distinction as this, that no apostolic epistle was to be admitted which was not read or attested by the church to which it was sent; for it is remarkable that, together with these epistles to private persons, he reject ed also the catholic epistles. Now the catholi epistles and the epistles to private persons agree in the circumstance of wanting this particulat species of attestation. Marcion, it seems, ac knowledged the epistle to Philemon, and is upbraided for his inconsistency in doing so by Tertullian*, who asks "why, when he receiv ed a letter written to a single person, he should Arguing in like manner from citations and refuse two to Timothy and one to Titus comallusions, we have, within the space of a hun-posed upon the affairs of the church ?" This dred and fifty years from the time that the first passage so far favours our account of Marcion's of St. Paul's epistles was written, proofs of al-objection, as it shows that the objection was most all of them being read, in Palestine, Syria, supposed by Tertullian to have been founded the countries of Asia Minor, in Egypt, in that in something which belonged to the nature of part of Africa which used the Latin tongue, in a private letter. Greece, Italy, and Gault. I do not mean sim. ply to assert, that within the space of a hundred and fifty years, St. Paul's epistles were read in those countries, for I believe that they were read and circulated from the beginning; but that proofs of their being so read occur within that period. And when it is considered now few of the primitive Christians wrote, and of what was written how much is lost, we are to account it extraordinary, or rather as a sure proof of the extensiveness of the reputation of" to be the apostle's, we would have endea these writings, and of the general respect in voured to have answered them, and perhaps which they were held, that so many testimon- might have satisfied the reader: but when they ies, and of such antiquity, are still extant. "In take upon them, by their own authority, to prothe remaining works of Irenæus, Clement of nounce one epistle to be Paul's and another not, Alexandria, and Tertullian, there are perhaps they can only be replied to in the same manmore and larger quotations of the small volume ner+." Let it be remembered, however, that of the New Testament, than of all the works Marcion received ten of these epistles. of Cicero, in the writings of all characters for authority, therefore, even if his credit had been several ages." We must add, that all the epis- better than it is, forms a very small exception tles of Paul come in for their full share of this to the uniformity of the evidence. Of Basi observation; and that all the thirteen epistles, lides we know still less than we do of Marcion. except that to Philemon, which is not quoted The same observation, however, belongs to him, by Irenæus or Clement, and which probably es- viz. that his objection, as far as appears from caped notice merely by its brevity, are severally this passage of St. Jerome, was confined to the cited, and expressly recognised as St. Paul's by three private epistles. Yet is this the only opieach of these Christian writers. The Ebion-nion which can be said to disturb the consent ites, an early though inconsiderable Christian of the first two centuries of the Christian æra : sect, rejected St. Paul and his epistles§; that for as to Tatian, who is reported by Jerome s, they rejected these epistles, not because they alone to have rejected some of St. Paul's episwere not, but because they were St. Paul's;tles, the extravagant or rather delirious notions and because, adhering to the obligation of the into which he fell, take away all weight and Jewish law, they chose to dispute his doctrine credit from his judgment.——If, indeed, Jeand authority. Their suffrage as to the gen-rome's account of this circumstance be correct; uineness of the epistles does not contradict that for it appears from much older writers than Je of other Christians. Marcion, an heretical rome, that Tatian owned and used many of writer in the former part of the second century, these epistles+. Lardner, vol. ii. p. 595. See Lardner's Recapitulation, vol. xii. p. 53. His II. They, who in those ages disputed about * Lardner, vol. xiv. p. 455. ↑ Ibid. vol xiv. p. 458 Ibid vol i, p. 313. so many other points, agreed in acknowledging, tion is thrown back upon internal marks of the Scriptures now before us. Contending sects spuriousness, or authenticity; and in these appealed to them in their controversies with the dispute is occupied. In which disputes it equal and unreserved submission. When they is to be observed, that the contested writings were urged by one side, however they might are commonly attacked by arguments drawn be interpreted or misinterpreted by the other, from some opposition which they betray to their authority was not questioned. “Reliqui “authentic history," to "true epistles," to omnes," says Irenæus, speaking of Marcion, the "real sentiments or circumstances of the "falso scientiæ nomine inflati, scripturas qui- author whom they personate";" which audem confitentur, interpretationes vero conver-thentic history, which true epistles, which real tunt*." sentiments themselves, are no other than anIII. When the genuineness of some other cient documents, whose early existence and writings which were in circulation, and even of reception can be proved, in the manner in a few which are now received into the canon, which the writings before us are traced up to was contested, these were never called into dis- the age of their reputed author, or to ages near pute. Whatever was the objection, or whether to his. A modern who sits down to compose in truth there ever was any real objection, to the the history of some ancient period, has no authenticity of the Second Epistle of Peter, the stronger evidence to appeal to for the most Second and Third of John, the Epistle of James, confident assertion, or the most undisputed or that of Jude, or to the book of the Revela- fact that he delivers, than writings, whose tion of St. John; the doubts that appeared to genuineness is proved by the same medium have been entertained concerning them, ex- through which we evince the authenticity of ceedingly strengthen the force of the testimony ours. Nor, whilst he can have recourse to such as to those writings about which there was no authorities as these, does he apprehend any doubt; because it snows, that the matter was uncertainty in his accounts, from the suspicion a subject, amongst the early Christians, of ex- of spuriousness or imposture in his materials. amination and discussion; and that where V. It cannot be shown that any forgeries, there was any room to doubt, they did doubt. properly so called†, that is, writings publishWhat Eusebius hath left upon the subjected under the name of the person who did not is directly to the purpose of this observation. compose them, made their appearance in the Eusebius, it is well known, divided the eccle- first century of the Christian era, in which siastical writings which were extant in his century these epistles undoubtedly existed time into three classes: the "avriinra, un- I shall set down under this proposition the contradicted," as he calls them in one chap-guarded words of Lardner himself: "There ter; or, " scriptures universally acknowledg- are no quotations of any books of them (spued," as he calls them in another: the "con-rious and apocryphal books) in the apostolical troverted, yet well known and approved by many ;" and the "spurious." What were the shades of difference in the books of the second, or of those in the third class; or what it was precisely that he meant by the term spurious, it is not necessary in this place to inquire. It is sufficient for us to find, that the thirteen epistles of St. Paul are placed by him in the first class without any sort of hesitation or doubt. It is farther also to be collected from the chapter in which this distinction is laid down, that the method made use of by Eusebius, and by the Christians of his time, viz. the close of the third century, in judging concerning the sacred authority of any books, was to inquire after and consider the testimony of those who lived near the age of the Apostles+." fathers, by whom I mean Barnabas, Clement of Rome, Hermas, Ignatius, and Polycarp, whose writings reach from the year of our Lord 70 to the year 108. I say this confidently, because I think it has been proved." Lardner, vol. xii. p. 158. Nor when they did appear were they much used by the primitive Christians. “Irenæus quotes not any of these books. He mentions some of them, but he never quotes them. The same may be said of Tertullian: he has mentioned a book called Acts of Paul and Thecla:' but it is only to condemn it. Clement of Alexandria and Origen have mentioned and quoted several such books, but never as authority, and sometimes with express marks of dislike. Eusebius quoted no such books in any of his works. He has mentioned them indeed, but how? Not by way of approbation, but to show that they were of little or no value; and that they never were received by the sounder part of Christians." Now, if with this, which is advanced after the most IV. That no ancient writing, which is attested as these epistles are, hath had its authenticity disproved, or is in fact questioned. The controversies which have been moved concerning suspected writings, as the epistles, for instance, of Phalaris, or the eighteen epistles of Cicero, begin by showing that this attesta-Tunstal and Middleton upon certain suspected epistles See the tracts written in the controversy between tion is wanting. That being proved, the ques- ascribed to Cicero, *Iren. advers. Hær. quoted by Lardner vol. xv p. 425. Lardner, vol. viii, p. 106. +I believe that there is a great deal of truth in Dr. Lardner's observation, that comparatively few of thos books which we call apocryphal were strictly and origi nally forgeries. See Lardner, vol. xii. p. 167. S though it be extant, and was first found in the Armenian language, it is not, by the Christians of that country, received into their Scriptures. I hope, after this, that there is no reader who will think there is any competition of credit, or of external proof, between these and the received Epistles; or rather, who will not acknowledge the evidence of au minute and diligent examination, we compare antiquity is entirely silent. It was unheard what the same cautious writer had before said of for sixteen centuries; and at this day, of our received Scriptures, "that in the works of three only of the above-mentioned fathers, there are more and larger quotations of the small volume of the New Testament, than of all the works of Cicero in the writers of all characters for several ages;" and if with the marks of obscurity or condemnation, which accompanied the mention of the several apocryphal Christian writings, when they hap-thenticity to be confirmed by the want of sucpened to be mentioned at all, we contrast what cess which attended imposture. Dr. Lardner's work completely and in detail makes out concerning the writings which we defend, and what, having so made out, he thought himseif authorised in his conclusion to assert, that these books were not only received from the beginning, but received with the greatest respect; have been publicly and solemnly read in the assemblies of Christians throughout the world, in every age from that time to this; early translated into the languages of divers countries and people; commentaries writ to explain and illustrate them; quoted by way of proof in all arguments of a religious nature; recommended to the perusal of unbelievers, as containing the authen-cult or imaginary, because it is incapable of tic account of the Christian doctrine; when we attend, I say, to this representation, we perceive in it not only full proof of the early notoriety of these books, but a clear and sensible line of discrimination, which separates these from the pretensions of any others. When we take into our hands the letters which the suffrage and consent of antiquity hath thus transmitted to us, the first thing that strikes our attention is the air of reality and business, as well as of seriousness and conviction, which pervades the whole. Let the sceptic read them. If he be not sensible of these qualities in them, the argument can have no weight with him. If he be; if he perceive in almost every page the language of a mind actuated by real occasions, and operating upon real circumstances, I would wish it to be observed, that the proof which arises from this perception is not to be deemed oc being drawn out in words, or of being conveyed to the apprehension of the reader in any other way, than by sending him to the books themselves. And here, in its proper place, comes in the argument which it has been the office of these The epistles of St. Paul stand particularly pages to unfold. St. Paul's Epistles are confree of any doubt or confusion that might a- nected with the history by their particulari. rise from this source. Until the conclusion ty, and by the numerous circumstances which of the fourth century, no intimation appears are found in them. When we descend to an of any attempt whatever being made to coun-examination and comparison of these circumterfeit these writings; and then it appears only stances, we not only observe the history and of a single and obscure instance. Jerome, who the epistles to be independent documents unflourished in the year 392, has this expres-known to, or at least unconsulted by, each sion: "Legunt quidam et ad Laodicenses; other, but we find the substance, and oftensed ab omnibus exploditur;" there is also an times very minute articles, of the history, reEpistle to the Laodiceans, but it is rejected by cognised in the epistles, by allusions and reevery body. Theodoret, who wrote in the ferences, which can neither be imputed to deyear 423, speaks of this epistle in the same sign, nor, without a foundation in truth, be terms. Beside these, I know not whether accounted for by accident; by hints and exany ancient writer mentions it. It was cer- pressions, and single words dropping as it were tainly unnoticed during the first three centu- fortuitously from the pen of the writer, or ries of the church; and when it came after-drawn forth, each by some occasion proper to wards to be mentioned, it was mentioned only to show, that, though such a writing did exist, it obtained no credit. It is probable that the forgery to which Jerome alludes, is the epistle which we now have under that ti- | tle. If so, as hath been already observed, it is nothing more than a collection of sentences from the genuine epistles; and was perhaps, at first, rather the exercise of some idle pen, than any serious attempt to impose a forgery upon the public. Of an Epistle to the Corinthians under St. Paul's name, which was brought into Europe in the present century, the place in which it occurs, but widely removed from any view to consistency or agreement. These, we know, are effects which reality naturally produces, but which, without reality at the bottom, can hardly be conceived to exist. When therefore, with a body of external evidence, which is relied upon, and which experience proves may safely be relied upon, in appreciating the credit of ancient writings, we combine characters of genuineness and origi nality which are not found, and which, in the nature and order of things, cannot be expected to be found in spurious compositions; whatever difficulties we may meet with in other topics of the Christian evidence, we can have II. Whereas it hath been insinuated, that little in yielding our assent to the following our Gospels may have been made up of reports conclusions: That there was such a person as and stories, which were current at the time, we St. Paul; that he lived in the age which we may observe that, with respect to the Epistles, ascribe to him; that he went about preach- this is impossible. A man cannot write the ing the religion of which Jesus Christ was the history of his own life from reports; nor, what founder; and that the letters which we now is the same thing, be led by reports to refer to read were actually written by him upon the passages and transactions in which he states subject, and in the course of that his minis- himself to have been immediately present and try. active. I do not allow that this insinuation is applied to the historical part of the New Tes tament with any colour of justice or probability; but I say, that to the Epistles it is not ap And if it be true that we are in possession of the very letters which St. Paul wrote, let us consider what confirmation they afford to the Christian history. In my opinion they plicable at all. substantiate the whole transaction. The great III. These letters prove that the converts object of modern research is to come at the to Christianity were not drawn from the barepistolary correspondence of the times. Amidst barous, the mean, or the ignorant set of men the obscurities, the silence, or the contradic- which the representations of infidelity would tions of history, if a letter can be found, we sometimes make them. We learn from letters regard it as the discovery of a land-mark; as the character not only of the writer, but, in that by which we can correct, adjust, or sup- some measure, of the persons to whom they ply the imperfections and uncertainties of other are written. To suppose that these letters accounts. One cause of the superior credit were addressed to a rude tribe, incapable of which is attributed to letters is this, that the thought or reflection, is just as reasonable as facts which they disclose generally come out to suppose Locke's Essay on the Human Unincidentally, and therefore without design to derstanding to have been written for the inmislead the public by false or exaggerated ac-struction of savages. Whatever may be thought counts. This reason may be applied to St. of these letters in other respects, either of dicPaul's epistles with as much justice as to any tion or argument, they are certainly removed letters whatever. Nothing could be farther as far as possible from the habits and comprefrom the intention of the writer than to record hension of a barbarous people. any part of his history. That his history was IV. St. Paul's history, I mean so much of in fact made public by these letters, and has it as may be collected from his letters, is so im by the same means been transmitted to future plicated with that of the other apostles, and ages, is a secondary and unthought-of effect. with the substance indeed of the Christian The sincerity therefore of the apostle's decla- history itself, that I apprehend it will be found rations cannot reasonably be disputed; at least impossible to admit St. Paul's story (I do not we are sure that it was not vitiated by any de- speak of the miraculous part of it) to be true, sire of setting himself off to the public at large and yet to reject the rest as fabulous. For inBut these letters form a part of the muniments stance, can any one believe that there was such of Christianity, as much to be valued for their a man as Paul, a preacher of Christianity in contents, as for their originality. A more in- the age which we assign to him, and not beestimable treasure the care of antiquity could lieve that there was also at the same time such not have sent down to us. Beside the proof a man as Peter and James, and other apostles, they afford of the general reality of St. Paul's who had been companions of Christ during history, of the knowledge which the author of his life, and who after his death published and the Acts of the Apostles had obtained of that avowed the same things concerning him which history, and the consequent probability that he Paul taught? Judea, and especially Jerusalem, was, what he professes himself to have been, a was the scene of Christ's ministry. The witcompanion of the apostle's; beside the support nesses of his miracles lived there. St. Paul, they lend to these important inferences, they by his own account, as well as that of his hismeet specifically some of the principal objec- torian, appears to have frequently visited that tions upon which the adversaries of Christian-city; to have carried on a communication with ity have thought proper to rely. In particu- the church there; to have associated with the lar they show,— I. That Christianity was not a story set on foot amidst the confusions which attended and immediately preceded the destruction of Jerusalem when many extravagant reports were circulated, when men's minds were broken by terror and distress, when amidst the tumults that surrounded them inquiry was impracticable. These letters show incontestably that the religion had fixed and established itself before this state of things took place. rulers and elders of that church, who were some of them apostles; to have acted, as occasions offered, in correspondence, and sometimes in conjunction with them. Can it, after this, be doubted, but that the religion and the general facts relating to it, which St. Paul appears by his letters to have delivered to the several churches which he established at a dis tance, were at the same time taught and published at Jerusalem itself, the place where the business was transacted; and taught and pube |