34. In this way the principal facts recorded in the narrative of Luke are confirmed by the testimony of other and independent authors. Nor can I recommend to the reader a more instructive exercise on the subject of Christian evidence, than to compare the account of the leading facts of the Acts of the Apostles with the account of the same facts as given by the evangelists. He will derive much assistance in this investigation from Mr Briscoe's work on the Acts of the Apostles.

35. In concluding this inquiry into the genuineness and authenticity of the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, I may remark, that even though it had been impossible to ascertain the names of the persons by whom the different books of which the sacred volume consists were written, it might still have been traced, "through continuous unexceptionable evidence, that they had been written at the very time when the whole facts which they record are stated to have come to pass, and published among the persons most interested, and best qualified to judge of the truth of the record; and had it appeared, as it might have done, from such evidence, that then and ever after they had been received as works of perfect authority, upon what ground could respect to that authority have been now withdrawn? We should then have had the very evidence for the qualifications of the writers, which, as the case stands, we have for their names; nor does it appear that a doubt could have been attached to it in the one case more justly than in the other. Yet it is gratifying to think that the question concerning the authenticity of the books of the New Testament is not destitute of the additional security which the names of the individual writers may be thought to carry along with them,―men who were well qualified for their task, as the intimate companions, or immediate disciples, of Him whose actions and words they relate."*

* Cook's Inquiry, &c. p. 150.

CHAPTER V.

ON THE UNCORRUPT PRESERVATION AND INTEGRITY OF THE BOOKS OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS.

1. HAVING established by external and internal evidence the genuineness and authenticity of the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, it only remains that we subjoin a few remarks on their uncorrupt preservation and integrity.

2. How does it appear that they have undergone no material change since the time in which they were written? Have they been transmitted to us without alteration or mutilation? We must decide this question concerning the integrity of the books of Scripture by means and on principles similar to those by which we determine the uncorrupted state of the text of any other ancient writing that has reached our times. And as a literary work can be considered as authentic only as it remains unadulterated, it is necessary to show that the books of Scripture now exist as they were originally written.

3. The original autograph manuscripts, which are now lost, would have soon ended the inquiry, had they remained to the present day. In the absence of the original autographs, we must have recourse to the copies which have been taken from these autographs; Secondly, To quotations from the original, which, however valuable, are not fully equal to the original; and, Thirdly, To versions in which the substance of the original may be contained without any material change or mutilation.

4. First, with regard to the Old Testament, it could not be corrupted or falsified either before or after the coming of Christ. Before that event the regard which was paid by the Jews to the Scriptures rendered a mutilation of them impossible. The tenure by which the

Israelites held the land of Canaan, being founded on the law, gave them an interest in its pure preservation. The distribution of that people into twelve tribes,-the ordinance that rendered it imperative that the law should be read before all Israel at certain stated seasons ;-and that required the priests to teach the children of Israel all the statutes which the Lord had spoken to them by Moses, together with the commandment by which parents were enjoined to be familiar themselves with the law, and to teach it diligently to their children ;—all rendered it impossible that the book of the law should have been corrupted. When, at a subsequent period, the people were divided into two kingdoms, the rivalry and enmity subsisting between them would prevent either of them from altering the Sacred Writings or adding to them. The reverence of the Jews for their Sacred Writings, according to the statements of Philo and Josephus, was so great, that they would suffer any torments rather than allow the slightest alteration of the Scriptures. Accordingly, the prophets and our Lord, while they sharply reproved the Jews for their sins, never charged them with falsifying or corrupting the Scriptures. On the contrary, Christ commanded them to search the Scriptures, and appealed to the books of the Old Testament as bearing testimony concerning him.

5. But if these books could not be corrupted before the coming of Christ, neither could they be falsified or mutilated after that event. For, since that era, they became common to Jews and Christians, who would have detected in either any attempt to corrupt the Scriptures. Besides, the dispersion of the Jews over the world would have rendered such a design impracticable. If to these considerations we add the agreement of all the ancient paraphrases and versions, and the writings of Josephus, with the Old Testament, as it is now extant, together with the quotations which are made from it in the New Testament, and in other writings in all ages to the pre

sent time, we have sufficient evidence to assure us that the books of the Old Testament are now in our hands unadulterated.

6. There are upwards of eleven hundred manuscripts of the Old Testament extant, which, though not all entire, are all agreed. This fact is conclusive on the subject; for though the various readings, which have been discovered by learned men, amount to some thousands, yet these differences are of so little real moment, that they scarcely affect the meaning of any one important passage. But this great advantage has been derived from these learned researches,-they have proved the agreement of the copies of the ancient Scriptures, now extant, in their original language, with each other, and with our Bibles.

7. Secondly, We have evidence equally strong for the integrity and uncorruptness of the New Testament. There are many manuscripts in existence, which were written some time between 400 and 800 years after the authors' autographs, which have been found in different parts of the world, and which have descended to us through separate independent channels from their common original. In the most inaccurate of all the manuscripts which have been discovered and collected, there is evidently no great departure from the words of the original, and in all essential points there is an entire agreement with the text at present received. The various readings found by Griesbach and others, in collating the manuscripts of the New Testament, do not in the slightest degree affect, or render obscure or doubtful, any fact, or doctrine, or duty, as presented in our authorized version. Of the actual state of the case, in this respect, the reader may be better able to form an opinion, when he is assured, that could he compare the various manuscripts, he would be no more sensible of the difference between them, than he is of the difference between the several copies of the English Bible. The uniformity of the manuscripts is indeed remarkable, and shows the veneration in which the Scriptures have

:

been held and the various readings, in place of furnishing an argument against the integrity of the books of the New Testament, afford an additional and convincing proof of their uncorrupted preservation. Unless a standing miracle had been wrought, the mistakes that have been made in transcribing the sacred books are only such as might have been expected, and seem to be inseparable from the means employed for transmitting to future ages the Holy Scriptures.

8. But the uncorrupt preservation of the text of the 'New Testament is farther proved from its agreement with the quotations in the works of the Christian Fathers, and with the ancient translations which are now extant.

It

is sufficient to remark on this part of the subject, that the quotations from the New Testament in the writings of the Fathers are so numerous, that the whole of the sacred text might be compiled from them.

9. With regard to translations, I shall only mention the old Syriac version, which was made, if not in the first century, certainly in the second. It has been transmitted by a channel perfectly independent of, and unknown to, that by which our Greek Testament was received; nor was it known in Europe till the sixteenth century; and yet, when the two were compared, the one was almost an exact version of the other. The fact therefore is indubitable, that "we have this moment, in our hands, after the lapse of many ages, an intelligible record composed by the apostles or first disciples of Jesus Christ."

10. But though the integrity of the books now contained in the Scriptures be established, it is asked, Are all the books which were written by inspiration preserved? This question is curious rather than useful. On what ground do we suppose that any inspired writing has been lost? Is it the apparent admission of this in certain expressions in the Old and New Testament? "In the histories of the kings of Judah and Israel, several things are mentioned, which are not there explained, and are referred to