pleased; and one man might be deluded by the pretence of a revelation made to another, against an express revelation made to himself. And this, we may conclude, would often happen from what we experience every day: for if men can be perverted by the arts and insinuations of others, against their own reason and judgment, they might as well be prevailed upon to act against a revelation made to them; though revelations should be things as common and familiar among men as reason itself is. Immediate revelations, therefore, to every particular individual, would have been needless and superfluous; they would have been unsuitable to the majesty and honour of God: they would have been ineffectual to the ends for which they were designed; and would have afforded occasion for many more pretences to impostures than there are now in the world. 2. The only other way by which the divine will can be revealed to mankind, is that which the Scriptures affirm to have actually been employed; viz. the qualifying of certain persons to declare that will to others, by infallible signs and evidences that they are authorized and commissioned by God. What those evidences are, will be discussed in a subsequent page. It is, however, but reasonable to suppose, that divine revelations should be committed to writing, in order that they might be preserved for the benefit of mankind, and delivered down genuine and uncorrupted to posterity: for, trivance, to have a religion preserved in writing, there to be (1.) Oral Tradition is so uncertain and so insecure a written, it is better surely to have them written by inspired auguide, that if a revelation claiming to be divine be not trans-thors at first, than by others afterwards." mitted by writing, it cannot possibly be preserved in its purity, or serve mankind as a certain rule of faith and of life. (4.) Lastly, the importance of the matter, the variety of the subjects, and the design of the institutions, contained in In illustration of this remark, we may observe, that writing those books, which Jews and Christians account to be sais a more secure method of conveyance than tradition, being cred, are additional reasons why they should be committed neither so liable to involuntary mistakes, through weakness of to writing, "The matter is of no less importance than the memory or understanding, nor so subject to voluntary falsifica- whole will of God and the salvation of mankind, our duty tions, suppressions, or additions, either out of malice or design. here and our happiness hereafter; and if any thing deserves "It is also a method of conveyance more natural and human. to be written, do not these things [deserve to be recorded] It is nothing extraordinary for a book to be transmitted pure and in the most lasting characters? The subjects likewise are entire from generation to generation: but a traditionary doctrine, very various histories of times past and prophecies of things to come, orations and epistles, sublime points of faith and especially if it be of any considerable length, cannot really be preserved without a miracle, without the occasional interposi- plain rules of practice, hymns and prayers and thankstion of Almighty God to renew the memory of it at particular be remembered. The law was for a single nation; but the givings, all too excellent to be forgotten, but too many all to intervals, or his continual assistance and inspiration to keep it Gospel is for the whole world. For a single nation it was always alive and vigorous. It is likewise a method of convey-requisite that their laws should be written, or to what can ance more complete and uniform, presenting itself to all at once, they appeal, and by what can they regulate their practice? and to all alike, to be compared together; whereas a traditionary And if it was necessary for the law to be written, it was doctrine must be communicated by little and little, and without certainly much more necessary for the Gospel, which was doubt communicated differently at different times by different designed to be both of perpetual and universal obligation, a persons. It is, moreover, a method of conveyance more general religion for all ages and for all nations.” and diffusive. A man's writings reach further than his words; and surely we need not observe, that it is the practice of mankind, whenever they would publish any thing, to have it written or printed in a book." (2.) Further, experience shows that writing is a method of conveyance more lasting than tradition. It is an old and trite observation, that a word heard perishes, but a letter written remains. Jesus Christ is said to have performed many other miracles, and to have done many other memorable things, besides those which have been committed to writing; but, observe, how much more faithful record is than mere report; the few, comparatively speaking, which were written, are preserved and credited, while the many, which were not recorded in writing, have long since been utterly lost and forgotten. "Every thing, of any consequence, we desire to have in writing. By this, laws are promulgated; by this, arts and sciences are propagated; by this, titles and estates are secured. And what do we know of ancient history, but the little that cometh down to us in books and writings? Tradition passeth away like the morning cloud; but books may live as long as the sun and moon endureth." 994 (3.) To the preceding arguments for the usefulness and expediency of written revelation, arising from the uncertainty of oral tradition, and the greater security and advantages of writing, we may add, that it is certainly more fair and open, more free from suspicion of any fraud or con 1 Bp. Newton's Works, vol. iv. dissert. 2. pp. 19-23. 8vo. edit. The same line of argument, and nearly in similar terms, is stated and illustrated by Archbishop Tillotson, Works, vol. vi. pp. 233. et seq. London, 1820. 8vo. Vox audita perit, littera scripta manet. 3 John xx. 30. xxi. 25. Bp. Newton's Works, vol. iv. p. 24. The necessity of a divine revelation having been proved, and the probability that such a revelation would be given to mankind having been shown, it remains that we examine the pretensions of the Old and New Testaments to be that revelation. Among the numerous attacks which have been ble is that which is directed against the authenticity of the made on the truth of Christianity, one of the most formidaScriptures. It has been asserted, that we derive a set of rules and opinions from a series of books, which were not written by the authors to whom we ascribe them; and that the volume to which we give the title of divine, and which is the basis of our faith and manners, is a forgery of later ages. It is therefore of importance to ascertain, first, the books contained in the Bible, considered simply as compogenuineness, authenticity, and incorruptness of the several sitions: the credibility of their respective authors will next be investigated; and their claims to be received as divinely inspired will then be examined. In discussing these momentous topics, it would, perhaps, be the shorter way, to prove first, the genuineness, authenticity, incorruptness, and inspiration of the New Testament: for, if its claims to be received as a divinely inspired book be admitted, no reasonable doubt can be entertained of the divine inspiration, &c. of the Old Testament; because the writers of the New Testament incessantly appeal to it, and make ample quotations from it. As, however, the modern impugners of revelation have directed their arguments chiefly against the Old Testament, in order that, by impeaching its credi- | the latter, being founded on and perfective of the former, bility, they may with greater probability of success undermine and invalidate the dispensation revealed in the New Testament, we shall commence with the Old Testament; because if that be true (the dispensation it contains being introductory to that contained in the New Testament) the must of necessity be true also. By adopting this arrange ment, it is possible that some few arguments may be repeated; but the importance of the subjects discussed will (it is hoped) be deemed a satisfactory apology for such unavoidable re petitions. CHAPTER II. ON THE GENUINENESS AND AUTHENTICITY OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS. ON THE GENUINENESS AND AUTHENTICITY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 1. The Hebrew Scriptures why termed the Old Testament.-II. Great importance of the question, whether the Books contained in the Old Testament are genuine or spurious.-Genuineness and Authenticity defined.—III. Genuineness of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament.-1. EXTERNAL PROOFS of the Genuineness of the Old Testament.—(1.) The Manner in which these Books have been transmitted to us. (2.) The Paucity of Books extant when they were written. (3.) The Testimony of the Jews. (4.) A particular Tribe was set apart to preserve these Writings. (5.) Quotations of them by ancient Jews. (6.) The evidence of ancient Versions.—2. INTERNAL EVIDENCE.-(1.) Language, style, and manner of writing. (2.) Circumstantiality of the Narratives contained in the Old Testament.—IV. Proofs of the genuineness and authenticity of the Pentateuch in particular.-1. From the language in which it is written.-2. From the nature of the Mosaic law.-3. From the united historical testimony of Jews and Gentiles.-4. From the contents of the Pentateuch. -V. Objections to the authenticity of the Pentateuch considered and refuted. I. THE HEBREW Scriptures why TERMED THE OLD TES TAMENT. The books, which the Hebrews, Israelites, or Jews have long venerated as divine, are usually called "THE OLD TESTAMENT, ," in order to distinguish them from those sacred books, which contain the doctrines, precepts, and promises of the Christian religion, and which are distinguished by the appellation of "THE NEW TESTAMENT." The appellation of "TESTAMENT" is derived from 2 Cor. iii. 6. 14.; in which place the words and ʼn Kan sidan are by the old Latin translators rendered antiquum testamentum and novum testamentum, old and new testament, instead of antiquum fœdus and novum fœdus, the old and new covenant; for although the Greek word dan signifies both testament and covenant, yet it uniformly corresponds with the Hebrew word Berith, which constantly signifies a covenant.2 The term "old covenant," used by St. Paul in 2 Cor. iii. 14., does not denote the entire collection of writings which we term the Bible, but those ancient institutions, promises, threatenings, and, in short, the whole of the Mosaic dispensation, related in the Pentateuch, and in the writings of the prophets; and which in process of time were, by a metonymy, transferred to the books themselves. Thus we find mention made of the book of the covenant in Exodus (xxiv. 7.), and in the apocryphal book of Maccabees (1 Macc. i. 57.) and after the example of the Apostle, the same mode of desig nating the sacred writings obtained among the first Christians, from whom it has been transmitted to modern times.3 II. GREAT IMPORTANCE OF THE QUESTION, WHETHER THE BOOKS CONTAINED IN THE OLD TESTAMENT ARE GENUINE OR SPURIOUS, If the books contained in the Old Testament were not written by those authors to whom they are ascribed, or nearly in those ages to which they are supposed to belong, but, on the contrary, were written by authors who lived at a much later period that is, if they were supposititious or spurious, the history which is related in them would by no means be worthy of the great credit that is given to it; the design which pervades these books would have been an imposi1 Besides the authorities above cited, the author has been largely indebted for the materials of this Chapter to the Collection of Boyle Lectures, in 3 vols. folio, (London, 1739); particularly to the Lectures of Bishops Williams and Leng, and of Dr. Samuel Clarke; to Dr. Leland's "Advantage and Necessity of the Christian Revelation shown from the State of Religion in the ancient Heathen World," 3d edition, in 2 vols. 8vo. (Glasgow and London, 1819); and to the same author's masterly "View of the Deistical Writers." The reader, who may not be able to consult these valuable works, will find a well written "Comparative View of Natural and Revealed Religion," in the second volume of "Christian Essays," by the Rev. S. C. Wilks. London, 1817, 8vo. Jerome, Comment. in Malachi, ii. 2. Op. tom. iii. p. 1816, Dr. Lardner has collected several passages from early Christian writers who thus metonymically use the word "Testament." Works, 8vo. vol. vi. p. 9. 4to. vol. iii. p. 140. tion upon a later age, and the accomplishment of that design in the New Testament would be altogether an extraordinary and singular occurrence; the miracles therein recorded to have been anciently performed would have been the invention of a later age, or natural events would have been metamorphosed into miracles; the prophecies, asserted to be contained in those books, would have been invented after the historical facts which are narrated in them; and, lastly, Jesus Christ and his apostles would have approved and recommended the works of impostors. Hence it is evident of what GREAT IMPORTANCE the question is, whether these books are GENUINE, that is, whether they were written by the persons whose names they bear, and (especially if the authors be unknown) about that time which is assigned to them, or at which they profess to have been written; and also, whether they are AUTHENTIC; that is, whether they relate matters of fact as they really happened, and in consequence possess authority. For, a book may be genuine that is not authentic; a book may be authentic that is not genuine; and many are both genuine and authentic, which are not inspired. The first epistle of Clement, Bishop of Rome, is genuine, having been written by the author whose name it bears; but it possesses no authority on which we can found any doctrines. "The history of Sir Charles Grandison is genuine, being indeed written by Richardson, the author whose name it bears; but it is not authentic, being a mere effort of that ingenious writer's invention in the production of fictions. Again, the Account of Lord Anson's Voyages is an authentic book, the information being supplied by Lord Anson himself to the author; but it is not genuine, for the real author was Benjamin Robbins, the mathematician, and not Walters, whose name is appended to it. Hayley's Memoirs of the Life of Cowper are both genuine and authentic; they were written by Mr. Hayley, and the information they contain was deduced from the best authority."4 But the poems, which bear the name of Rowley, are neither genuine nor authentic, not having been written by him, nor by any one who lived in the fifteenth century, but being wholly the productions of the unhappy youth Chatterton, who lived three hundred years afterwards. III. GENUINENESS OF THE CANONICAL BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. The word CANON (from the Greek KANON) signifies not only a catalogue or list, but also a law or rule. This term has been appropriated ever since the fourth century to the catalogue of writings which are admitted by Jews and Christians as a divine rule of faith and manners.5 In what age and by what author any book is written is a Dr. O. Gregory's Letters on the Evidences, &c. of the Christian Religion, vol. i. p. 84. 2d edit. 6 Suiceri Thesaurus, tom. il. p. 40. voce Kavwv. question of fact, which can only be answered by historical | if detected, would have been infamy and death. The love proofs. These historical proofs are, of wealth could not produce such a forgery, for no wealth was to be gained by it." 1. Unexceptionable witnesses, who possessed both the means of knowing, and who were also willing to communicate the truth; and, 2. Certain marks which may be discerned in the subject-matter, diction, genius, and style of the books, and which show that they were written by the authors to whom they are ascribed, or about the age to which they are referred. The former are termed external arguments, and the latter, internal; and as these two species of testimony are universally admitted to be sufficient for proving the genuineness of the writings of Thucydides, Plutarch, or Livy, or of any other ancient profane authors, no further testimony ought to be required in the present question. 1. EXTERNAL PROOFS OF THE GENUINENESS AND AUTHENTICITY OF THE CANONICAL BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. (1.) As those who were coeval with each Hebrew writer, and transcribed the book which they received from his own hands, and also delivered their copies to others to be transcribed, certainly knew by whom and at what time such book was published; and as these, having a certain knowledge of the author and of the age in which he lived, delivered such book to their immediate descendants, and these again to their posterity, and so from one generation to another through all succeeding ages, all these persons jointly testify that such book is the genuine production of the author whose name it bears, and of the age in which he lived. (2.) The books, thus transmitted from one generation to another (especially in that very remote age when the first books of the Old Testament were written), could not but remain, both more easily, as well as more certainly, uncorrupted, and be propagated with fidelity, because at that time there were but few books, and also because the tradition relative to their origin was most easily recollected. And as this tradition (which was not communicated in the schools to their pupils by learned men, whose various conjectures sometimes obscure truth, but in private houses by fathers to their children), was approved, many of the authors therefore did not subscribe to their works, either their names, or the age in which they lived; but, where any of them did annex their names to their writings, nothing further was requisite than faithfully to transcribe such notification,-a task which could be performed with the utmost facility. (3.) In fact there was no motive to induce the Hebrews to corrupt this very simple tradition: on the contrary, as these books were held in the highest reverence and estimation by much the greater part of that people, they had the most powerful motives for transmitting the origin of these documents faithfully to their posterity. If, indeed, the Hebrew nation had been disposed to betray the trust confided to them, a motive would not have been wanting to them for propagating falsehoods respecting their books, because these contain such repeated-we may almost add, such incessant reproofs and censures of them, as an unteachable, intractable, and headstrong people, as place their character in an unfavourable point of view. But, notwithstanding, if that people testify that these books are genuine, they become witnesses against themselves, and consequently their testimony is unexceptionable. This argument also tends to exclude the hypothesis, that the histories have been inserted in a later age. (4.) The true knowledge of the origin of these books could not be easily corrupted or lost, because a particular tribe among the Hebrews was set apart from the rest, and consecrated, among other things, for the express purpose of watching over the preservation of these historical documents; and further, there were never wanting men, belonging to the other tribes, both at that time and also during the Babylonian captivity-(for instance, those who in more ancient times were the governors of the Hebrew republic, and were called, first, judges, and afterwards prophets)-by whom these books were held in the highest reverence, because they were themselves descended from that very age, and from these very authors. Although the names of some of these authors, and also the age in which they lived, are lost in oblivion, yet as the Jews confess their ignorance, such confession is an evidence that they would not have testified it, if they had not received it as certain from their ancestors. In the mean time, the age at least of these anonymous books has not so entirely been neglected, but that we have the clearest evidence that not one of them was written later than the fifth century before the Christian æra. (5.) The Old Testament, according to our Bibles, comprises thirty-nine books, viz. the Pentateuch, or five books of Moses, called Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, the books of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, 1 and 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Solomon, the Prophecies of Isaiah, Jeremiah, with his Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. But, among the ancient Jews, they formed only twenty-two books, according to the letters of their_alphabet, which were twenty-two in number; reckoning Judges and Ruth, Ezra and Nehemiah, Jeremiah and his Lamentations, and the twelve minor prophets (so called from the comparative brevity of their compositions), respectively as one book. It is not necessary here to enter into a minute inquiry concerning the authors of these books: but we may state generally, that the Pentateuch consists of the writings of Moses, collected by Samuel, with a very few additions; that the books of Joshua and Judges, together with that of Ruth and the first part of the book of Samuel, were collected by the same prophet; that the latter part of the first book of Samuel, and the whole of the second book, were written by the prophets who succeeded Samuel, probably Nathan and Gad; that the books of Kings and Chronicles are extracts from the records of succeeding prophets concerning their own times, and also from the public genealogical tables made by Ezra; that the books of Ezra and Nehemiah are collections of similar records, some written by Ezra and Nehemiah, and some by their predecessors; that the book of Esther was written by some eminent Jew, who lived in or near the times of the transactions therein recorded, most probably by Ezra, though some think Mordecai to have been its author; the book of Job, by a Jew, most probably Moses; the Psalms, by David, Asaph, and other pious persons; the books of Proverbs, the Canticles, and Ecclesiastes, by Solomon; and the prophetical books, by the prophets whose names they bear. Let us now consider the evidence of testimony for the authenticity of the books of the Old Testament. As the Jews were a more ancient people than the Greeks or Romans, and were for many ages totally unconnected with them, it is not to be expected that we should derive much evidence from the historians of those nations: it is to the Jews principally that we must look for information. The uniform belief, indeed, of all Christians, from the very commencement of Christianity to the present time, has considered the books above enumerated to have constituted the whole of the Old Testament: and the catalogues of them, which were formed by the author of the synopsis attributed to Athanasius, by 2 Ency. Brit. vol. xvii. p. 107. art. Scripture, 3d edit. In illustration of this remark, we may observe that the character of the Jews is a strong proof that they have not forged the Old Testament. Were a person brought before a court of justice on a suspicion of forgery, and yet no presumptive or positive evidence of his guilt could be produced, it would be allowed by all that he ought to be acquitted. But, if the forgery alleged were inconsistent with the character of the accused; if it tended to expose to disgrace his general principles and conduct; or, if we were assured that he considered forgery as an impious and abominable crime, it would require very strong testimony to establish his guilt. This case corresponds exactly with the situation of the Jews. If a Jew had forged any book of the Old Testament, he must have been impelled to so bold and dangerous an enterprise bius's Hist. Eccl. lib. vi. c. 25. by some very powerful motive. It could not be national pride, for there is scarcely one of these books which does not severely censure the national manners. It could not be the love of fame, for that passion would have taught him to flatter and extol the national character; and the punishment, ■ Compare Deut. xxxii. 7, 8. and Psal. Lxxviii. 3-7 3 Josephus contr. Apion. lib. i. $8. Origen's Philocalia, cited in EuseThis subject is discussed infra, vol. ii. in the critical prefaces to each book. The Emperor Julian, inveterate as was his enmity to Christianity, has borne explicit and important testimony to the authenticity and integrity of the Old Testament. 103-108. Lug. Bat. 1827. 8vo. See Herwerden, de Juliano Imperatore, pp. 100, 101. Athanasii Opera, tom. ii. pp. 126-204. Dr. Lardner has given the most material extracts from this synopsis, respecting the canon of Scripture. Works, 8vo. vol. iv. pp. 290, 291.; 4to. vol. ii. p. 404. Epiphanius,' and Jerome (towards the close of the fourth above accounted for, he says, in his treatise against Apion," "We have not thousands of books, discordant, and contradicting each other; but we have only twenty-two, which comprehend the history of all former ages, and are justly regarded as divine. Five of them proceed from Moses; they include as well the Laws, as an account of the creation of man, extending to the time of his (Moses's) death. This period comprehends nearly three thousand years. From the death of Moses to that of Artaxerxes, who was king of Persia after Xerxes, the Prophets, who succeeded Moses, committed to writing, in thirteen books, what was done in their days. The remaining four books contain Hymns to God (the Psalms) and instructions of life for man." The threefold division of the Old Testament into the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, mentioned by Josephus, was expressly recognised before his time by JESUS CHRIST, as well as by the subsequent writers of the New Testament.12 We have therefore sufficient evidence that the Old Testament existed at that time; and if it be only allowed that Jesus Christ was a person of a virtuous and irreproachable characPhilo, it is true, in none of his writings, gives an express ter, it must be acknowledged that we draw a fair conclusion, notice of the canon of the Old Testament; but in very nume- when we assert that the Scriptures were not corrupted in his rous scattered passages he has indicated his own opinion, time: for, when he accused the Pharisees of making the law and probably also the opinion of his contemporaries concern- of no effect by their traditions, and when he enjoined his ing the merit and importance of each of the books which hearers to search the Scriptures, he could not have failed to formed part of that canon. M. Hornemann, who carefully mention the corruptions or forgeries of Scripture, if any had read and examined all Philo's works, for the sole purpose of existed in that age. About fifty years before the time of ascertaining his opinion on the canon of the Old Testament, Christ were written the Targums of Onkelos on the Pentadivides the books of the Old Testament, according to Philo's teuch, and of Jonathan Ben-Uzziel on the Prophets (accordexpressions, into three classes, viz. Books cited with the ex-ing to the Jewish classification of the books of the Old Tespress remark that they are of divine origin: in this class are found the Pentateuch, the book of Joshua, the first book of Samuel, Ezra, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Hosea, Zechariah, the Psalms, and the Proverbs. 2. Books of which Philo makes only casual mention, without any notice of their divine origin: this class contains the book of Judges, Job, the first book of Kings, and several detached Psalms. 3. Books not mentioned by Philo, viz. Nehemiah, Ruth, Esther, the two books of Chronicles, Daniel, the Lamentations of Jeremiah, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon. To the books, to which Philo expressly ascribes a divine origin, we must probably add the second book of Samuel and the two books of Kings, these three books forming only one with the first book of Samuel, which Philo calls divine. Of the twelve minor prophets, he cites only two as inspired: and it is certain that the twelve formed only one book. As he never quotes the apocryphal books, we may therefore place all the books of the Old Testament, which he expressly quotes, into one class, viz. that of the books which he accounted sacred; and this class, according to the preceding observations, is composed of the five books of Moses, Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, Ezra, Isaiah, Jeremiah, the twelve minor prophets, the Psalms, Proverbs, and Job. The other books may have formed part of the canon of the Egyptian Jews. Ruth was an appendix to the book of Judges; Nehemiah to the second part of Ezra; and the Lamentations of Jeremiah might be joined to his prophecies. But the silence of Philo concerning any book proves nothing against its canonical authority, if it be not contradicted or overturned by other positive proofs." We now proceed to a testimony, which, though concise, is more important than any of the preceding, the testimony of JOSEPHUS, who was himself a Jewish priest, and also contemporary with the apostles. Following the enumeration 1 Hæres, xxix. Op. tom. i. pp. 122, et seq. 2 In his Prologus Galeatus and Epist. ad Paulinum. Op. tom. ii. p. 529., and in Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. lib. vi. c. 25. Apud Eusebium, Hist. Eccl. lib. vi. c. 26. The Targums here alluded to are those called the Jerusalem Targum, and the Targum of the Pseudo-Jonathan, on the Pentateuch: that on the Cetubim, or Holy writings (comprising the books of Psalms, Proverbs, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, Chronicles, the Song of Solomon, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, and Esther), the Targum on the Megilloth (comprising the five last-mentioned books), three on the book of Esther, and one on the books of Chronicles. See an account of these Targums, infra, part i. chap. iii. sect. iii. De Vita Mosis, lib. ii. The passages of Philo here referred to, and also the other testimonies above cited, are given at full length (with some additional evidences from Christian writers) by Schmidius, in his elaborate Historia Antiqua et Vindicatio Canonis Sacri Veteris et Novi Testamenti, pp. 129-189. 8vo. Lipsia. 1775. C. F. Hornemann, Observationes ad Illustrationem Doctrinæ de Canone Veteris Testamenti ex Philone. Hauniæ, 1778, 8vo. Melanges de Religion, &c. tom. ix. pp. 188-191. Nismes, 1824. 8vo. Of the writings and character of Josephus, a particular account will be found in part ii. of this volume. "Josephus was born about the year 37 of the Christian era: and therefore, though much younger than the apostles, must still have been contemporary with many of them, especially with St. Paul, St. Peter, and St. John."-Bp. Marsh's Comparative View of the Churches of England and Rome, p. 107. tament); which are evidence of the genuineness of those books at that time. We have, however, unquestionable testimony of the genuineness of the Old Testament, in the fact, that its canon was fixed some centuries before the birth of Jesus Christ. Jesus the son of Sirach, author of the book of Ecclesiasticus, makes evident references to the prophecies of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, and mentions these prophets by name; he speaks also of the twelve minor prophets. It likewise appears from the prologue to that book, that the law and the prophets, and other ancient books, were extant at the same period. The book of Ecclesiasticus, according to the best chronologers, was written in the Syro-Chaldaic dialect, about A. M. 3772, that is, two hundred and thirty-two years before the Christian æra, and was translated by the grandson of Jesus into Greek, for the use of the Alexandrían Jews. The prologue was added by the translator, but this circumstance does not diminish the evidence for the antiquity of the Old Testament: for he informs us, that the Law and the Prophets, and the other books of their fathers, were studied by his grandfather; a sufficient proof that they were extant in his time. (6.) Fifty years, indeed, before the age of the author of Ecclesiasticus, or two hundred and eighty-two years before the Christian æra, the Greek version of the Old Testament, usually called the Septuagint, was executed at Alexandria, the books of which are the same as in our Bibles: whence it is evident that we still have those identical books, which the most ancient Jews attested to be genuine,-a benefit this which has not happened to any ancient profane books whatever. Indeed, as no authentic books of a more ancient date, except those of the Old Testament, are extant, it is impossible to ascend higher in search of testimony. The evidence, indeed, which we have adduced, is not merely that of the more modern Jews:-it is also that of the most ancient, as is manifest from this circumstance, that the latter of these books always recognise others as known to be more ancient, and almost every where cite them by name: whence it is evident that those ancient authors long since received testimony from their ancestors, that those more ancient books were the genuine works of the authors whose names they bear. dence of the genuineness of the Old Testament unquestionaStrong-we may add indisputable-as this external evibly is, 10 Lib. i. § 8. tom. ii, p. 441. ed. Havercamp. 11 On the canon of Jewish Scripture according to the testimonies of Philo and Josephus, see further, Bp. Marsh's Divinity Lect., part vii. Lectures xxxiii. and xxxiv. pp. 17-50. 12 Among very many passages that might be adduced, see Matt. xi. 13. and xxii. 40. Luke xvi. 16. xx. 42. xxiv. 25. 44. Acts i. 20. iii. 22. vii. 35-37. xxvi. 22. and xxviii. 23. Rom. x. 5. 2 Cor. iii. 7-15. 2 Tim. iii. 14—17. Heb. vii. 14. and x. 28. An inspection of the chapter on the Quotations from the Old Testament in the New (see infra, parti. chap. iv.) will furnish abundant proofs that the Jewish canon, in the time of Jesus Christ and his apostles, contained the same books which now constitute our Old Testa ment. 2. THE INTERNAL EVIDENCE ARISING FROM THE CONSIDE- | building of the tower of Babel, the confusion of tongues, the disRATION OF THe Language, Style, Manner oF WRITING, AND persion of mankind, or the division of the earth amongst the posALSO FROM THE CIRCUMSTANTIALITY OF THE NARRATIVES terity of Shem, Ham, and Japhet, the generations of the postCONTAINED IN THE BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT, is an diluvian patriarchs, with the gradual shortening of human life equally decisive and incontestable argument for their genu- after the flood, the sojournings of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, ineness, and also to show that they were not and could not with many particulars of the state of Canaan and the neighbourbe invented by one impostor, or by several contemporary im- ing countries in their times, the destruction of Sodom and Gopostors, or by several successive impostors. morrah, the state of the land of Edom, both before and after Esau's time, and the descent of Jacob into Egypt, with the state of Egypt before Moses's time.-In fine, we have in this book the infancy and youth of the human race, together with the gradual and successive progress of civilization and society, delineated with singular minuteness and accuracy. (1.) The Language, Style, and Manner of Writing, used in the books of the Old Testament, are internal arguments of their genuineness; and prove not only that they must have been written by different persons, but also enable us with precision to ascertain a time, at or before which they must have been composed. In the book of Exodus are recorded the plagues of Egypt, the The Hebrew language, in which the Old Testament was writ-institution of the passover, the passage through the Red Sea, ten, being the language of an ancient people, that had little intercourse with their neighbours, and whose neighbours also spoke a language which had great affinity with their own, would not change so rapidly as modern languages have done, since nations have been variously intermingled, and since arts, sciences, and commerce have been so greatly extended. Yet, since no language continues stationary, there must necessarily be some changes in the period of time that elapsed between Moses and Malachi. If, therefore, on comparing the different parts of the Hebrew Bible, the character and style of the language are found to differ3 (which critical Hebrew scholars have proved to be the case), we have strong internal criteria that the different books of the Old Testament were composed at different and distant periods; and consequently a considerable argument may thence be deduced in favour of their genuineness. Further, the books of the Old Testament have too considerable a diversity of style to be the work either of one Jew (for a Jew he must have been on account of the language), or of any set of contemporary Jews. If, therefore, they be all forgeries, there must have been a succession of impostors in different ages, who have concurred to impose upon posterity, which is inconceivable. To suppose part to be forged, and part to be genuine, is very harsh; neither would this supposition, if admitted, be satisfactory. with the destruction of Pharaoh and his host there, the miracle of manna, the victory over the Amalekites, the solemn delivery of the law from Mount Sinai, many particular laws both moral and ceremonial, the worship of the golden calf, and a very minute description of the tabernacle, priests' garments, ark, &c.—In Leviticus we have a collection of ceremonial laws, with all their particularities, and an account of the deaths of Nadab and Abihu.-The book of Numbers contains the first and second numberings of the several tribes, with their genealogies, the peculiar offices of the three several families of the Levites, many ceremonial laws, the journeyings and encampments of the people in the wilderness during forty years, with the relation of some remarkable events which happened in this period; as the searching of the land, the rebellion of Korah, the victories over Arad, Sihon, and Og, with the division of the kingdoms of the two last among the Gadites, Reubenites, and Manassites, the history of Balak and Balaam, and the victory over the Midianites; all of which are described with the several particularities of time, place, and persons.-The book of Deuteronomy contains a recapitulation of many things comprised in the three last books, with the second delivery of the law, chiefly the moral one, by Moses, upon the borders of Canaan, just before his death. In the book of Joshua, we have the passage over Jordan, the Again, the Hebrew language ceased to be spoken as a living conquest of the land of Canaan in detail, and the division of it language soon after the Babylonish captivity; but it would be among the tribes, including a minute geographical description.— difficult or impossible to forge any thing in it, after it was be- The book of Judges recites a great variety of public transactions, come a dead language. All the books of the Old Testament with the private origin of some. In all, the names of times, must, therefore, be nearly as ancient as the Babylonish captivity; places, and persons, both among the Israelites, and the neighand since they could not all be written in the same age, some bouring nations, are noted with particularity and simplicity.must be considerably more ancient, which would bring us back In the book of Ruth is a very particular account of the geneagain to a succession of conspiring impostors. Lastly, the sim-alogy of David, with several incidental circumstances.-The plicity of style and unaffected manner of writing, which pervade books of Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, conall the books of the Old Testament (with the exception of such tain the transactions of the kings before the captivity, and goparts as are poetical and prophetical), are a very strong evidence vernors afterwards, all delivered in the same circumstantial of their genuineness, even exclusively of the suitableness of this manner. And here the particular account of the regulations, circumstance to the times of the supposed authors. Not one of sacred and civil, established by David, and of the building of the these criteria is applicable to the books which in some editions are temple by Solomon, the genealogies given in the beginning of attached to the Old Testament under the title of the Apocrypha: the first book of Chronicles, and the lists of the persons who refor they never were extant in Hebrew, neither are they quoted turned, sealed, &c. after the captivity, in the books of Ezra and in the New Testament, or by the Jewish writers, Philo and Jose- Nehemiah, deserve especial notice, in the light in which we are phus; on the contrary, they contain many things which are fabu- now considering things.-The book of Esther contains a like lous, false, and contradictory to the canonical Scriptures.1 account of a very remarkable event, with the institution of a festival in memory of it. (2.) The very great number of particular Circumstances of Time, Place, Persons, &c. mentioned in the books of the Old Testament, is another argument both of their genuineness and authenticity. The book of Psalms mentions many historical facts in an incidental way; and this, with the books of Job, Proverbs, Eccle siastes, and Canticles, alludes to the manners and customs of anpar-historical relations; and in the other parts the indirect mention cient times in various ways. In the Prophecies there are some of facts, times, places, and persons, is interwoven with the predictions in the most copious and circumstantial manner. A statement of the principal heads, under which these ticular circumstances may be classed, will enable the reader fully to apprehend the force of this internal evidence. There are, then, mentioned in the book of Genesis, the rivers of Paradise, the generations of the antediluvian patriarchs, the deluge with its circumstances, the place where the ark rested, the For this view of the internal evidence of the genuineness of the Old Testament, the author is chiefly indebted to the observations of the From the preceding statements, we may observe, FIRST, that, in fact, we do not ever find that forged or false accounts of things superabound thus in particularities. There is always some truth always seem to bear some proportion to one another. Thus where there are considerable particularities related, and they there is a great want of the particulars of time, place, and perfound and ingenious philosopher David Hartley (on Man, vol. ii. pp. 97101.), and of the learned and accurate professor Jahn (Introductio in Li; sons in Manetho's account of the Egyptian dynasties, Ctesias's bros Sacros Veteris Fœderis, pp. 18-28.) The departure of the Israelites from Egypt, under the direction of Mo- of the Assyrian kings, and those which the technical chronoloses, took place in the year of the world 2513, or before Christ 1491. Mala-gers have given of the ancient kingdoms of Greece; and agreechi delivered his predictions under Nehemiah's second government of Judea, between the years 436 and 420 before the Christian æra. The interval ably thereto, these accounts have much fiction and falsehood, of time, therefore, that elapsed between them is between 1071 and 1055 with some truth: whereas Thucydides's history of the Peloponyears; or, if we reckon from the death of Moses (A. M. 2555) B. C. 1451, it is nesian war, and Cæsar's of the war in Gaul, in both which the from 1015 to 1031 years. An account of the various changes in the Hebrew language is given, particulars of time, place, and persons are mentioned, are universally esteemed true, to a great degree of exactness.-SECONDLY, a forger, or a relater of falsehoods, would be careful not to mention so great a number of particulars, since this would to be put infra, Part I. Chap. I. Sect. I. § II. The arguments against the genuineness of the apocryphal books, which are here necessarily touched with brevity, will be found discussed at length infra, in the Appendix to this Volume, No. I. Sect. I. |