credibility of the Christian religion. As these arguments were addressed to Gentiles, the authors abstain from quoting Christian books by name; one of them giving this very reason for his reserve: but when they come to state, for the information of their readers, the outlines of Christ's history, it is apparent that they draw their accounts from our Gospels, and from no other sources; for these statements exhibit a summary of almost everything which is related of Christ's actions and miracles by the four Evangelists. Arnobius vindicates, without mentioning their names, the credit of these historians; observing, that they were eye-witnesses of the facts which they relate, and that their ignorance of the arts of composition was rather a confirmation of their testimony, than an objection to it. Lactantius also argues in defence of the religion, from the consistency, simplicity, disinterestedness, and sufferings of the Christian historians, meaning by that term our Evangelists. 3 XVII. We close the series of testimonies with that of Eusebius, bishop of Cæsarea, who flourished in the year 315, contemporary with, or posterior only by fifteen years to the two authors last cited. This voluminous writer, and Lardner, vol. viii. p. 33. most diligent collector of the writings of others, besides a variety of large works, composed a history of the affairs of Christianity from its origin to his own time. His testimony to the Scriptures is the testimony of a man much conversant in the works of Christian authors, written during the first three centuries of its era, and who had read many which are now lost. In a passage of his Evangelical Demonstration, Eusebius remarks, with great nicety, the delicacy of two of the Evangelists, in their manner of noticing any circumstance which regarded themselves and of Mark, as writing under Peter's direction, in the circumstances which regarded him. The illustration of this remark leads him to bring together long quotations from each of the Evangelists; and the whole passage is a proof, that Eusebius, and the Christians of those days, not only read the Gospels, but studied them with attention and exactness. In a passage of his Ecclesiastical History, he treats in form, and at large, of the occasions of writing the four Gospels, and of the order in which they were written. The title of the chapter is, "Of the Order of the Gospels;" and it begins thus: "Let us observe the writings of this Apostle John, which are not contradicted by any: and, first of all, must be mentioned, as acknowledged by all, the Gospel according to him, well known to all the Churches under heaven; and that it has been justly placed by the ancients the fourth in order, and after the other three, may be made evident in this manner. "4 Eusebius then proceeds to show that John wrote the last of the four, and that his Gospel was intended to supply the omissions of the others; especially in the part of our Lord's ministry, which took place before the imprisonment of John the Baptist. He observes, "that the Apostles of Christ were not studious of the ornaments of composition, nor indeed forward to write at all, being wholly occupied with their ministry." This learned author makes no use at all of Christian writings, forged with the names of Christ's Apostles, or their companions. We close this branch of our evidence here, because, after Eusebius, there is no room for any question upon the subject; the works of Christian writers being as full of texts of Scripture, and of references to Scripture, as the discourses of modern divines. Future testimonies to the books of Scripture could only prove that they never lost their character or authority. Hist. Eccles., 1. iii. c. 24. WHEN THE SECTION II. SCRIPTURES ARE QUOTED, OR ALLUDED TO, THEY ARE QUOTED WITH PECULIAR RESPECT, AS BOOKS SUI GENERIS; AS POSSESSING AN AUTHORITY WHICH BELONGED TO NO OTHER BOOKS, AND AS CONCLUSIVE IN ALL QUESTIONS AND CONTROVERSIES AMONG CHRISTIANS. BESIDES the general strain of reference and quotation, which uniformly and strongly indicates this distinction, the following may be regarded as specific testimonies : I. Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, the sixth in succession from the Apostles, and who flourished little more than a century after the books of the New Testament were written, having occasion to quote one of our Gospels, writes thus: "These things the Holy Scriptures teach us, and all who were moved by the Holy Spirit; among whom John says, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God." Again: "Concerning the righteousness which the law teaches, the like things are to be found in the Prophets and in the Gospels, because that 5 Lardner, Cred., part ii. vol. i. p. 492. all, being inspired, spoke by one and the same Spirit of God." No words can testify more strongly than these do, the high and peculiar respect in which these books were holden. II. A writer against Artemon, who may be supposed to come about one hundred and fiftyeight years after the publication of the Scripture, in a passage quoted by Eusebius, uses these expressions: "Possibly what they (our adversaries) say, might have been credited, if first of all the Divine Scriptures did not contradict them; and then the writings of certain brethren more ancient than the times of Victor." The brethren mentioned by name are Justin, Miltiades, Tatian, Clement, Irenæus, Melito, with a general appeal to many more not named. This passage proves, first, that there was at that time a collection called Divine Scriptures; secondly, that these Scriptures were esteemed of higher authority than the writings of the most early and celebrated Christians. III. In a piece ascribed to Hippolytus, who lived near the same time, the author professes, in giving his correspondent instruction in the things about which he inquires, "to draw out of the sacred fountain, and to set before him from Lardner, Cred., vol. iii. p. 488. ▾ Ibid., vol. iii. p. 40. |