Are the books of the New Testament genuine? Are they as worthy of our confidence as the books of a Cæsar, of a Cicero, of a Demosthenes, &c.? We believe they are; and we will present a few ideas in favor of the authenticity of the New Testament. We establish the authenticity of this book first, by the testimony of heathen writers, and second, by the testimony of ecclesiastical writers.
1. THE TESTIMONY OF HEATHEN WRITERS.
Tacitus, a distinguished historian of the first century, says: "Nero punished in the most cruel manner individuals . . . who were called Christians. Their name comes from Christ, who was put to death by Pontius Pilate, under the reign of Tiberias." Annales L. XV, Ch. xliv. From the French.
Pliny the younger, who was born in 61 or 62, says: "A great number of persons of every age . . . are, and will be, accused. And this contagious superstition has not only invaded the cities, but also the villages and the country." Livre X. He speaks of the Christian religion.
These testimonies prove the existence and extension of the Christian religion in the first century.
Celsus, who lived in the second century, and Porphyrus, who died in 270, wrote against the Christian religion. Porphyros quoted from the four gospels, and from the book of Acts; but he did not say anything to prove that the books of the New Testament were not written in the apostolic age, and that they did not belong to the authors whose names they bear, but accused Peter of having killed Ananias and Sapphira, &c. To the foregoing testimonies we might add that of Josephus, who spoke very highly of Jesus (see Josephus' Book of Antiquities); but we pass to notice
2. THE TESTIMONY OF ECCLESIASTICAL WRITERS.
Origen, a voluminous writer, who was born in Egypt in the second century, testifies that in his day the four gospels that he attributes to the authors whose names they bear, were admitted in the churches. He also speaks of the other books of the New Testament. Contra Celsum. i-vi.
In the beginning of the second century Polycarpus wrote, "When Paul was with you he taught you perfectly the word of truth; and during his absence he wrote you letters to which you must take heed if you would be edified in the faith." Letter to the Philadelphians, Ch. V. Letter to the Philippians, by Polycarpus.
Irenæus who died in 177. His writings, and especially his books against heresies, abound in testimonies in favor of the gospels and epistles. He says, "There are four gospels—no more, no less." Against Heresies, Book iii, Ch. ii.
Let this testimony be remembered by those who are as apt to mix up the apocryphal gospels with the gospels of the New Testament. Irenæus was well qualified to make this statement; for he had conversed with Polycarpus, who had been instructed by the apostles.
The proofs against the apocrypha of the New Testament are summed up as follows: They were not read in the churches, nor introduced in the volume of the New Testament, nor cited as authority by the adversaries, nor explained as being a part of revelation. They were unanimously rejected, and are full of ridiculous, frivolous and indecent details. They cannot be traced down to the authors whose names they bear. They relate as miracles things that are absurd and useless, and do not agree with history. See the gospel of the Infancy of Jesus, and the gospel of St. Thomas.
With these facts before us, we can understand why the apocryphal gospels and epistles were rejected by the translators of the Bible.
The number of witnesses who testify to the genuineness of the works and teachings of Christ.
There are eight witnesses: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, James and Jude. Now there is no fact in ancient history that has come to us with so many witnesses. The history of Socrates, which is considered as authentic, is related by Plato and Xenophon. Let none excuse themselves under the idea that the witnesses were ignorant and credulous. It was not necessary that they should be learned. They needed eyes, ears and common sense!—eyes to see the lame walk, the blind healed, the dead raised; ears to hear the dumb speak, the multitudes declare the power of the Nazarene; and common sense to relate what they saw and heard. But Luke and Paul were not ignorant. The former was a physician [Col. iv, 14]; the latter had been instructed at the foot of Gamaliel, who was noted for his learning and experience. Acts xxii, 3; v, 34. Let those who say that these witnesses were credulous, read the following texts: Matt. xiv, 31; xvi, 8. Let them also read the account of the resurrection, in Mark xvi.
It was not possible for these eight witnesses to deceive themselves, and they did not want to deceive others.
1. They could not deceive themselves. 1st. They lived with Jesus, and witnessed his works. It was not with Jesus as it was with Mahomet, who would seclude himself in his room, and pretend to receive communications from heaven. 2d. The things that they relate are plain facts, things that could be easily authenticated, that were often repeated, and with which they were connected (the miraculous draught of fishes, the transfiguration, Christ's walk on the water); or discourses on subjects with which they were familiar, such as the coming of Messiah, the law, &c.
2. They did not want to deceive others. 1st. Their conduct proves this. When an impostor intends to make the world receive as truth that which is false, he is very careful to surround himself with mysteries. This was the case with Mahomet. But our writers speak of facts known to all. They appeal to the public in support of the statements they make [Acts ii; xxii, 24; 1 Cor. xv, 6], and mention the places, times and persons. If they were impostors, we must admit they were taking a course that was calculated to expose themselves. 2d. The spirit that animates these authors proves it. They relate the most remarkable things connected with their Teacher without amplification or exaggeration. Thus, when they speak of the death of him whom they loved more than their own lives, they simply say, They crucified him. An impostor would not have neglected to exalt the virtues of the Master, or to expose the cruelty of the persecutors. 3d. The lot that awaited them proves it. In writing and propagating their books, they exposed themselves to the contempt of their enemies, to persecutions, to loss of fortune, to death. We can then, with safety, rely on their testimony. On this point the learned Pascal has said, "I readily believe witnesses who have sealed their testimony with their blood." Pensées xxviii.
The books of the New Testament have come to us without being essentially altered.
We prove this by the care and respect that the church manifested for these books. Such was the care and respect of Christians for their books, that the heathen would often say, "What are those books that Christians read and worship?" And during certain persecutions a few Christians gave up their Bibles; and they could not be admitted into the church again till after a long penance. History of the Bishop Tryphilus.
Jerome was reluctant to take upon himself the task of making a new translation of the Bible. He feared that he should be accused of having made some alterations in the Præfatio generalis in Evangelia—in the four perfect gospels.
Augustine speaks as follows on the manner in which Jerome's translation was received: "A bishop having read this new version in the church, some remarked that there was something in the prophet Jonas that was different from what they were accustomed to hear; whereupon a great tumult arose in the assembly. The bishop was accused of falsifying the text; and he had to retract as though he had committed a great error." Augustine's Letter, 71. This great care and veneration of Christians for their books is good evidence that the New Testament has been preserved without any essential alteration.30
At a very early age copies of the Bible were scattered in Europe, Asia and Africa. Every church had at least one copy of the Bible; for it was customary for Christians to read much out of the Bible in their assemblies. Now all can see that the Bible could not be changed to advantage without the universal consent of the church. But where do we find that the church ever consented to have the Bible altered? Again, will our opponents tell us when, where and by whom the sacred books were altered? This question has often been asked, but it has never been answered. It is much easier to express doubts in regard to the Bible, than it is to prove that the Bible is not authentic.
On the authenticity of the New Testament, the Companion to the Bible, published in London, says, that "all the books which convey to us the history of the events of the New Testament were written and immediately published, by persons living at the time of the things mentioned, and whose names they bear, is most fully proved. 1. By an unbroken series of Christian authors reaching from the days of the apostles, down to the present time. 2. By the concurrent and well-informed belief of all denominations of Christians. 3. By the unreserved acknowledgment of the most learned and intelligent enemies of christianity.
"That the books we possess under the titles of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, were written by persons whose names they bear, cannot be doubted by any well-informed and candid mind: because, from the time of their first publication, they have been uniformly attributed to them by all Christian writers. That all the facts related in these writings, and all the accounts given of our Saviour's actions and sayings are strictly true, we have the most substantial grounds for believing. Matthew and John were two of our Lord's apostles; his constant attendants throughout the whole of his ministry; eye-witnesses of the facts, and ear-witnesses of the discourses which they relate. Mark and Luke were not of the twelve apostles; but they were cotemporaries and associates with the apostles, and living in habits of friendship and intercourse with those who had been present at the transactions which they record. Many suppose that Luke was one of the seventy disciples who were ordained by our Lord to preach his gospel: and if so, his personal knowledge of Christ must have been almost equal to that of the twelve apostles. However, if not one of the seventy, he was the constant companion of Paul for many years; and well knew the things concerning which he wrote. In the beginning of his gospel, therefore, Luke declares his intimate acquaintance with the subject. 'Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, even as they delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were eye-witnesses and ministers of the word; it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the certainty of those things wherein thou hast been instructed.' Luke i, 1–4.
"Luke being also the author of the Acts of the Apostles, we have for the writers of these five books, men who had the most accurate knowledge of the things which they relate, either from their own personal observation, or by means of immediate communication with those who saw and heard everything recorded.
"As to the preservation of the sacred books down to our time, it is certain, that although the original copies may have been lost, the books of the New Testament have been preserved without any material alteration, much less corruption; and that they are, in all essential matters, the same as they came from the hands of their authors. In taking copies of these books by writing, from time to time, as the art of printing was then unknown, some letters, syllables, or even words, may have been omitted, or even changed in some manuscripts; but no important doctrine, precept, or passage, of history, has been designedly or fraudulently corrupted. This would have been impossible: because, as soon as the original writings were published, great numbers of copies were immediately taken, carried by the evangelical missionaries wherever they went, and sent to the different churches: they were soon translated into foreign languages, conveying into the most distant countries: they were constantly read in the Christian assemblies, diligently perused by many private Christians, some of whom had whole books by heart; they were quoted by numerous writers, and appealed to, as the inspired standard of doctrine, by various sects, who differed from each other, some on important points; and, consequently, they were jealously watchful against the least attempt, either to falsify or to alter the word of divine revelation.
"Who can imagine that God, who sent his Son to declare this doctrine, and his apostles, by the assistance of the Holy Ghost, to indite and speak it, and by so many miracles confirmed it to the world, should suffer any wicked persons to corrupt and alter any of those terms on which the happiness of mankind depends? It is absurd to say that God repented of his good will and kindness to mankind, in vouchsafing the gospel to them; or that he so far maligned the good of future generations, that he suffered wicked men to rob them of all the good intended to them by this declaration of his holy will.—Dr. Whitby.
"The manuscripts of the sacred books are found in every ancient library in all parts of the Christian world; and amount in number to several thousands. About five hundred have been actually examined and compared by learned men with extraordinary care. Many of them were evidently transcribed as early as the eighth, seventh, sixth, and even the fourth centuries. Thus we are carried up to very near the times of the apostles, and the promulgation of the inspired writings. The prodigious number of these manuscripts, the remote countries whence they have been collected, and the identity of their contents with the quotations which the fathers of different ages have made, demonstrate the authenticity of the New Testament. It has been indeed, asserted by learned men, that if the New Testament were lost, its contents might be wholly supplied by the quotations from it, which are found in the writings of the fathers of the first four centuries of the Christian church.”—Companion to the Bible, pp. 15–18.
We think that the ideas and testimonies we have presented thus far establish the authenticity of the New Testament. And it is evident that if the authenticity of the New Testament is established, we must admit that the Old Testament is authentic; for the New Testament confirms the Old. Christ is the Alpha and Omega of the Old and New Testaments. He came not to destroy, but to fulfill or ratify; and in him all those types and predictions of the Old Testament which relate to the Messiah have their fulfillment.
Now if the Bible is what it purports to be, should we not study it carefully and prayerfully, bind it to our hearts, cleave to its truths, follow its instructions, and obey its laws? When we present Bible truth to a certain class of individuals, we are often met with the declaration that "these things are true if the Bible is true." These same individuals see the inconsistencies of many who profess to receive the Bible and the Bible alone, and who are not willing to live up to plain duties which are prescribed in the word of God; and they are frequently heard saying, "How inconsistent professors are! If I professed to take the Bible as my rule of faith, I would certainly keep the seventh-day Sabbath, believe in the coming of the Lord," &c. There is a good degree of honesty in these individuals. They are willing at least to follow the dictates of sound reason in regard to the course that some pursue. But if we see that the Bible is an authentic book—a revelation from God to man, is it not as inconsistent and unreasonable to excuse ourselves for not obeying the Bible by saying, I would do this or that if the Bible were true, as it is to not obey plain Bible truths while we profess to receive the Bible as our rule of faith and practice?