nice agreement between the character of Peter given in the writings of others, and exemplified in his own if the one had been a fiction, or the other spurious. It is the same Peter that speaks in the Gospel history, in the Acts of the Apostles, and in the Epistles which bear his name. The seal of his character, as graven by the Evangelists, exactly corresponds with the impression of his letters. This is an argument of the genuineness of his Epistles, and of the truth of the Christian religion.1

The other books of the New Testament furnish ample materials for pursuing this species of evidence from undesigned coincidences of different kinds. Dr. Paley 2, and Mr. Wakefield 3, have both produced some instances of it between the Gospels, to which we shall only add, in the last place, that the similitude or coincidence between the style of John's Gospel, and the first Epistle that bears his name, is so striking, that no reader, who is capable of discerning what is peculiar in an author's turn of thinking, can entertain the slightest doubt of their being the productions of one and the same writer. Writings so circumstanced prove themselves and one another to be genuine.

1 T. G. Taylor's Essay on the Conduct and Character of Peter. 2 Evid. of Christ. part ii. chap. 4.

Internal Evidences, pp. 207-210.

The following comparative table of passages, from the Gospel and first Epistle of Saint John, will (we think) prove the point above stated beyond the possibility of contradiction.

II. 8. I write to you a new commandment.

III. 11. This is the message which ye have heard from the beginning, that we should love one another.

II. 8. The darkness passeth away, and the light which is true, now shineth.

10. Abideth in the light, and there is no stumbling block to him.

II. 13. Young children, I write to you, because ye have known the Father.

14. Because ye have known him from the beginning.

II. 29. Every one who worketh righteousness, is begotten of God. See also iii. 9., v. 1.

III. 1. Behold how great love the Father hath bestowed on us, that we should be called the sons of God!

III. 2. We shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.

III. 8. He who worketh sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning.

III. 13. Do not wonder, my brethren, that the world hateth you.

IV. 9. By this the love of God was manifested, that God sent his Son, the only be

Gospel.

Ch. I. 1. In the beginning was the word. 14., And, e0eaσáμeda, we beheld his glory. 4. In him was life.

14. The word was made flesh. XIV. 23. If a man love me, he will keep my words, and my Father will love him.

XV. 4. Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bring forth fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine, no more can ye, except ye abide in me.

XIII. 34. A new commandment I give to you,

that ye love one another as I have loved you.

I. 5. The light shineth in darkness.
9. That was the true light.

XI. 10. If a man walk in the night, he stumbleth, because there is no light to him. XVII. 3. This is the eternal life, that they might know thee the only true God,

And Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.

III. 3. Except a man be begotten again. 5. Except a man be begotten of water and of the Spirit.

I. 12. To them he gave power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.

XVII. 24. Be with me where I am, that they may behold my glory.

VIII. 44. Ye are of your father the devil
He was a murderer from the beginning.

XV. 20. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you.

III. 16. God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever

The forgeries of these things, if forgeries they were, must (as Dr. Jortin has forcibly remarked) have equalled Father Hardouin's atheistical monks of the thirteenth century; who, according to his fantastical account, in an age of ignorance and barbarism, surpassed in abilities all the ancients and moderns; forged the Greek and Latin authors whom we call classical; and were not only great poets, but also great mathematicians, chronologers, geographers, astronomers, and critics, and capable of inserting in their proper places names and accounts of men, rivers, cities, and regions, eclipses of the sun and moon, Athenian archons, Attic months, Olympiads, and Roman consuls: all which happy inventions have been since confirmed by astronomical calculations and tables, voyages, inscriptions, Fasti Capitolini, fragments, manuscripts, and a diligent collation of authors with each other.'

Such are the evidences, both external and internal, direct and collateral, for the genuineness and authenticity of the New Testament; and when their number, variety, and the extraordinary nature of many of them are impartially considered, it is impossible not to come to this convincing conclusion, viz. that the books now extant in the New Testament are genuine and authentic, and are the same writings which were originally composed by the authors whose names they bear.

gotten, into the world, that we might live believeth on him might not perish, but have through him. everlasting life.

IV. 12. No man hath seen God at any time.

V. 13. These things I have written to you who believe on the name of the Son of God, that ye may know that ye have eternal life; and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

V. 14. If we ask anything according to his will, he heareth us.

V. 20. The Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.

I. 18. No man hath seen God at any time.

XX. 31. These things are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that believing ye might have life through his name.

XIV. 14. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

XVII. 2. Thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he might give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. 3. And this is eternal life, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. (Macknight on the Epistles, Pref. to 1 John, sect. ii.)

1 Remarks on Eccles. Hist. vol. i. pp. 28. et seq. Less's Authenticity of the New Testament, translated by Mr. Kingdon, pp. 1-26. Michaelis, vol. i. pp. 4-54. Simpson's Internal Evidences, pp. 160–165. Hales's Analysis of Chronology, vol. ii. book ii. pp. 687-692. Stosch, de Canone, p. 89. Pictet, Théologie Chrétienne, tome i. p. 83. Ernesti Interp. Nov. Test. pars iii. pp. 147. et seq. See also a very copious discussion of the Evidences for the Authenticity of the New Testament in Dr. Cook's Inquiry into the Books of the New Testament. Edinburgh, 1821. 8vo,

SECT. III.

ON THE UNCORRUPTED PRESERVATION OF THE BOOKS OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS.

ALTHOUGH the genuineness and authenticity of the Old and New Testaments have been thus clearly proved, yet it may perhaps be asked, whether those books have not long since been destroyed? And whether they have been transmitted to us entire and uncorrupted? To these inquiries we reply, that we have evidence, equally decisive and satisfactory with that which has demonstrated the genuineness and authenticity of the Old and New Testaments, to prove that they have descended to us entire and uncorrupted in any thing material; such evidence indeed as can be adduced for no other production of antiquity.

I. And, first, with regard to the Old Testament, although the Jews have been charged with corrupting it, yet this charge has never been substantiated, and, in fact, the thing itself is morally impossible. Generally speaking, the arguments which have demonstrated that the Pentateuch (or five books of Moses) is not, and could not be a forgery in the first instance, apply equally to prove that these books have not been wilfully and designedly corrupted. But, to be more particular, we may remark,

1. That there is no proof or vestige whatever of such pretended alteration.

The Jews have in every age regarded the Pentateuch as the genuine and uncorrupted work of one single person, and have equally respected every part of it. Indeed, if they had mutilated or corrupted these writings, they would doubtless have expunged from them every relation of facts and events, that militated against the honour and credit of their nation. Besides, when could such an alteration or corruption have been executed? It was not possible, shortly after the death of Moses, for the memory of the transactions recorded in the Pentateuch was too recent for any one to venture upon any corruption or alteration, which public notoriety would have contradicted. The Pentateuch, therefore, could not have been altered or corrupted so long as Joshua and that generation lived, who were zealous for the worship of the true God. (Josh. xxiv. 31.) From that time to the age of Samuel, the Israelites were under the direction of civil governors or judges, who braved every danger in defence of the form of government established in the sacred books.

Further, if they had wilfully corrupted the books of the Old Testament BEFORE the time of Christ and his apostles, the prophets who flourished from Samuel to Malachi, and who were neither slow nor timid in reproving the sins both of rulers and subjects, would not have passed over so heinous an offence in silence. After the separation of the ten tribes, at least, the books of Moses were kept in the kingdom of Israel; and the rivalry that continued to subsist between the kingdoms of Israel and Judah was an insuperable bar to any corruption or alteration; for it could not have been attempted in either kingdom without opposition and detection from the other, of which some notice must have been taken in their historical books. Besides, if the Old Testament had been corrupted in the time of Jesus Christ and his apostles, the Jews could not have passed without censure from them who rebuked their hypocrisy, incredulity, and wickedness with so much severity. If there had been any alteration or corruption, it must have been the work either of one or of many persons. It cannot be conceived that any one person could do it, without being exposed; nor that any one could have vanity enough to expect success in an attempt to alter facts in a book so universally read and so

much esteemed. The unity of design, the correspondence of sentiment, and the uniform reference to the same facts, which are observable throughout the Old Testament, forbid us to imagine that many were united in corrupting or altering any part of it. In a word, no man or number of men could make an attempt of this kind without being exposed. Nor is it rational to suppose, that any man or number of men could have capacity competent to effect such a design, who would not also have had the sense to observe the necessity of making it more agreeable to the natural tempers of mankind, in order that it might obtain credit in the world.

Again, if the Old Testament had been mutilated or corrupted AFTER the birth of Christ, out of malice to the Christians, and in order to deprive them of arguments and evidences for proving their religion, the Jews would unquestionably have expunged or falsified those memorable prophecies concerning Christ which were so irrefragably cited both by him and by his apostles. But no such obliteration or alteration has ever been made; on the contrary, those very passages have continued in their original purity, and are sometimes more express in the original Hebrew text than in the common translation.

2. In fact, neither before nor after the time of Christ, could the Jews corrupt or falsify the Hebrew Scriptures; for,

[i.] BEFORE that event, the regard which was paid to them by the Jews, especially to the law, would render any forgery or material change in their contents impossible.

The law having been the deed by which the land of Canaan was divided among the Israelites, it is improbable that this people, who possessed that land, would suffer it to be altered or falsified. The distinction of the twelve tribes, and their separate interests, made it more difficult to alter their law than that of other nations less jealous than the Jews. Further, at certain stated seasons, the law was publicly read before all the people of Israel'; and it was appointed to be kept in the ark, for a constant memorial against those who transgressed it. Their king was required to write him a copy of this law in a book, out of that which is before the priests the Levites, and to read therein all the days of his life; their priests also were commanded to teach the children of Israel all the statutes, which the Lord had spoken to them by the hand of Moses; and parents were charged not only to make it familiar to themselves, but also to teach it diligently to their children; besides which, a severe prohibition was annexed, against either making any addition to or diminution from the law. Now such precepts as these could not have been given by an impostor who was adding to it, and who would wish men to forget rather than enjoin them to remember it; for, as all the people were obliged to know and observe the law under severe penalties, they were in a manner the trustees and guardians of the law, as well as the priests and Levites. The people, who were to teach their children, must have had copies of it; the priests and Levites must have had copies of it; and the magistrates must have had copies of it, as being the law of the land. Further, after the people were divided into two kingdoms, both the people of Israel and those of Judah still retained the same book of the law; and the rivalry or enmity that subsisted between the two kingdoms, prevented either of them from altering or adding to the law. After the Israelites were carried captives into Assyria, other nations were placed in the cities of Samaria in their stead; and the Samaritans received the Pentateuch, either from the priest who was sent by order of the king of Assyria, to instruct them in the manner of the God of the land, or several years afterwards from the hands of Manasseh, the son of Joiada the high priest, who was expelled from Jerusalem by Nehemiah, for marrying the daughter of Sanballat, the governor of Samaria; and who was constituted by Sanballat the first high priest of the temple at Samaria. Now, by one or both of these means the Samaritans had the Pentateuch as well as the Jews; but with this difference, that the Samaritan Pentateuch was in the old Hebrew or Phenician characters, in which it remains to this day; whereas the Jewish copy was changed into Chaldee

1 Deut. xxxi. 9—13.; Josh. viii. 34, 35.; Neh. viii. 1—5.

3 Deut. xvii. 18, 19. 4 Levit. x. 11,

72 Kings xvii. 27.

Deut. vi. 7.

2 Deut. xxxi. 26. Deut. iv. 2. xii. 32.

Neh. xiii, 28. Josephus, Ant. Jud. lib. xi. c. 8. Bp. Newton's Works, vol. i. p. 23.

characters (in which it also remains to this day), which were fairer and clearer than the Hebrew, the Jews having learned the Chaldee language during their seventy years' abode at Babylon. The jealousy and hatred, which subsisted between the Jews and Samaritans, made it impracticable for either nation to corrupt or alter the text in any thing of consequence without certain discovery; and the general agreement between the Hebrew and Samaritan copies of the Pentateuch, which are now extant, is such, as plainly demonstrates that the copies were originally the same. Nor can any better evidence be desired, that the Jewish Bibles have not been corrupted or interpolated, than this very book of the Samaritans; which, after more than two thousand years' discord between the two nations, varies as little from the other as any classic author in less tract of time has disagreed from itself by the unavoidable slips and mistakes of so many transcribers.1

After the return of the Jews from the Babylonish captivity, the book of the law, and the prophets, were publicly read in their synagogues every Sabbath-day; which was an excellent method of securing their purity, as well as of enforcing the observation of the law. The Chaldee paraphrases and the translation of the Old Testament into Greek, which were afterwards made, were so many additional securities. To these facts we may add, that the reverence of the Jews for their sacred writings is another guarantee for their integrity; so great indeed was that reverence, that, according to the statements of Philo and Josephus, they would suffer any torments, and even death itself, rather than change a single point or iota of the Scriptures. A law was also enacted by them, which denounced him to be guilty of inexpiable sin, who should presume to make the slightest possible alteration in their sacred books. The Jewish doctors, fearing to add any thing to the law, passed their own notions as traditions or explanations of it; and both Jesus Christ and his apostles accused the Jews of entertaining a prejudiced regard for those traditions, but they never charged them with falsifying or corrupting the Scriptures themselves. On the contrary, Christ urged them to search the Scriptures; which he doubtless would have said with some caution if they had been falsified or corrupted; and he not only refers to the Scriptures in general, but appeals directly to the writings of Moses. It is also known, that during the time of Christ the Jews were divided into various sects and parties, each of whom watched over the others with the greatest jealousy, so as to render any attempt at such falsification or corruption utterly impracticable. Since, then, the Jews could not falsify or corrupt the Hebrew Scriptures before the advent of Christ,

[ii] So neither were these writings falsified or corrupted AFTER the birth of Christ.

For, since that event, the Old Testament has been held in high esteem both by Jews and Christians. The Jews also frequently suffered martyrdom for their Scriptures, which they would not have done, had they suspected them to have been corrupted or altered. Besides, the Jews and Christians were a mutual guard upon each other, which must have rendered any material corruption impossible, if it had been attempted; for if such an attempt had been made by the Jews, they would have been detected by the Christians. The accomplishment of such a design, indeed, would have been impracticable, from the moral impossibility of the Jews (who were dispersed in every country of the then known world) being able to collect all the then existing copies with the intention of corrupting or falsifying them. On the other hand, if any such attempt had been made by the Christians, it would assuredly have been detected by the Jews; nor could any such attempt have been made by any other man or body of men, without exposure both by Jews and Christians.

3. The admirable Agreement of all the ancient Paraphrases and Versions, and of the writings of Josephus, with the Old Testament as

1 Dr. Bentley's Remarks on Freethinking, part i. remark 27. (vol. v. p. 144. of Bp. Randolph's Enchiridion Theologicum, 8vo. Oxford, 1792.)

2 Acts xiii. 14, 15. 27.; Luke iv. 17-20.

Philo, apud Euseb. de Præp. Evang. lib. viii. c.
John v. 39.

The Old Testament has been translated into a

2.

Josephus contra Apion. lib. i. § 8. 5 John v. 46, 47.

great number of languages; but the