ILLUSTRATIONS

OF THE TRUTH OF THE

CHRISTIAN RELIGION.

CHAPTER I.

ON THE INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF GENUINENESS AND AUTHENTICITY IN THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Brief statement of external evidence.-Particular enquiry into the proof arifing from internal marks.—1. Style and idiom. -2. Minuteness of detail.-3. Abfence of all party spirit. -4. Candour of the Writers, in relating their own failings. -5. Agreement of the facts, with the fuppofition of a miraculous interference.-6. Uniform prefervation of character.-7. Various proofs, arifing from a comparison of the genuine Scriptures with the Apocryphal Books.

'HE fame mode of reasoning, by which

THE

the compofitions of any profane author, are proved to be genuine and authentic*, may be applied to the writings of the Evan

gelifts

"It may be of ufe," fays Bishop Watson in his mafterly Apology for the Bible, "to ftate, diftinctly, the difference between the genuineness, and the authenticity of a book. A genuine book, is that which was written by the person whose

(2)

gelifts and Apoftles with additional force. No books whatsoever have been quoted fo frequently, or by fuch an uninterrupted series of fucceffive authors, fince their first appearance: nor are Manuscripts extant of the works of any other Writer, equal in number and in antiquity, to thofe of the different books of the New Teftament.

This argument cannot be contested without overthrowing the foundation of all historical testimony, without bringing into dispute the claim of every antient writer to the works which pafs under his name. Such a proof then ought to be decifive; and every addition to it may feem unneceffary. Yet as it is the property of truth, to admit the closest inspection without any diminution of it's beauty; and as every question of importance fhould be placed in the most varied lights under which it can be viewed, it may not be improper nor ufelefs to confider the internal proofs, which the canonical writings of the New Teftament afford to their own genuineness and authenticity.

IN

name it bears, as the author of it. An authentic book, is that which relates matters of fact, as they really happened." p. 33. See Michaelis, Chapter 2. particularly p. 24, &c. I refer of courfe to the edition by Marth, which is every way worthy of the original, and truly an honour to the Biblical Literature of this country,

In the first place, the ftyle and language of these books supply strong indications, that they were written about the time, and by the fort of men, to which they are ascribed. This argument will undoubtedly be convincing in proportion to the knowledge the reader has of the original languages, to which the writers were accustomed, thofe, in which they thought and wrote: but even they, who are not poffeffed of this information, may be fatisfied by the concurring teftimony of the beft judges upon this head.

THE style of these volumes is very different from that which is used by the native Greek authors; the claffical writers as they are

called.

• Any tolerable judge of the Greek language, who examines with attention a page of the New Teftament, cannot fail to remark certain peculiarities of expreffion; and if he refers to commentators of the most critical discernment and extenfive reading in the Oriental tongues, he will discover whence many of these peculiarities flow. That the air and form of thefe expreffions is derived from the religious fentiments and affociations of the Jews, and the revolutions which their language underwent prior to the deftruction of Jerufalem, he will be fatisfied, if he will peruse the conceffions of Salmafius in his elaborate treatise de Hellenifticâ, the learned difquifitions of Michaelis, part 1. capp. 4. and 5. and above all, the judicious remarks of Dr. Campbell, Differtation 1. part 1. Diff. II. p. 2. and preface to Matthew's Gospel.

Ernefti alfo has treated this fubject, with his ufual learning and judgement, in his Inftitutio Interpretis Novi Teftamenti, p. 1. fect. 2. c. 3. An edition of this invaluable little treatife has been published lately by Ammon, which I fhould be happy to see printed in England. A 2

It

called. Nor is the difference confined to fingle words, but it is apparent in the combination of phrafes, in the ftructure of periods, and in the want as well as redundance of fome, and in the mifapplication of other,

con

It may be here obferved, that the cleareft light is thrown upon the meaning of the Greek Teftament, not by those commentators and lexicographers, who have confined themfelves to the pure native Greek authors; but by those, who have combined the ftudy of Greek with a profound knowledge of the Oriental languages. Thus in investigating the precife import of any fingle word, recourfe fhould not be had to Stephens, or Damm, or even Budæus, so much as to Schwartz, Schoettgenius, and Schleufner. And of the profeffed commentators it may, I think, with truth be afferted, that Lightfoot and Schoettgenius, who have confined themselves almost entirely to the Rabbinical writings, throw more light upon the language and the allufions of the facred volumes, than almost all other commentators whatfoever.-Having examined their annotations upon the ten firft chapters of St. Matthew, with a view to determine in fome degree the quantity of affistance afforded to the readers of that Gofpel, I reckoned up more than one hundred paffages in which their labours have been materially useful.

Upon the fubject of the foregoing note, I would more particularly refer the reader to pp. 120.-123. and 142. of Salmafius, to pp. 111. 135. 139. 155. 179. of Michaelis, and to pp. 16.-22. of Dr. Campbell's firft vol. as well as to the explanations he has given of fome words of frequent occurrence in the New Teftament, in Differtations V. VI. VII. IX. A judicious account of the ftyle of the New Teftament may be alfo found in Father Simon's Critical Hiftory, part 2. c. 26.-28. The English reader may confult the inftances produced in Collyer's Sacred Interpreter, Vol. I. p. 75.-91. Dr. Jennings has alfo noticed many of thefe peculiarities in his Jewish Antiquities, Vol. 1. pp. 112.-121. which is rather remarkable, as he speaks with fo much complacency of the hypothefis of Pfochenius and Blackwall, the erroneoufnels of which is fo apparent, that it needed not the complete refutation it has received from Dr. Campbell.

connective particles*, upon

the proper

ufe of

which the purity and elegance of the Greek language greatly depends.

In the historical books, as well as in the Epiftles, but particularly in the former, traces are to be difcerned in every page, (I might almost say, in every fentence) of a manner of thinking and of expreffion, very confonant with the opinions and the practices of the inhabitants of Judæa. The vernacular language of the Jews, at the period to which these writings are ufually referred, has been termed by Jerome, and with fome propriety, Syro-Chaldaic +. It is not indeed entirely Chaldee, the language to which the Ifraelites were accustomed in their captivity; nor is it pure Syriac, the language of the inhabitants of the neighbouring country; but it is a mixture of both, with a strong tincture of

See the facts completely afcertained by Michaelis, pp. 123, 125. and the caufe inveftigated, p. 114.

Michaelis

+See Campbell, Vol. II. p. 16. and 20.-24. with geographical precifion fays, "The language spoken in common life by the Jews in Paleftine was that, which may very properly be called Aramæan, thofe of Jerufalem and Judæa fpeaking the Eaft-Aramaan or Chaldee, and those of Galilee the Weft-Aramæan or Syriac, two dialects that differed rather in pronunciation than in words." p. 135. Cùm Hebraicam dico (fays Salmafius) eam ipfam intelligo quæ tum fic vocabatur, quamvis Syriacum potiùs effet idioma ab antiquâ Hebraicâ multùm diverfum. Epift. Dedicat. p. 28.