ritual and traditions as binding upon all Christian disciples, as if they were only proselytes to the Jewish faith; and of those who were seeking to combine Greek philosophy with Christianity, and thus of leading the people astray. The Pastoral Epistles were primarily intended to define the duties of the pastors or bishops, and of the other office-bearers of the church, though the second letter to Timothy is largely occupied with exhortations to Christian firmness and endurance, in the violent persecutions under which the church was then suffering, at the hands of the cruel Roman Emperor Nero.

The Epistle to the Hebrews, addressed to the Jewish Christians, and other Jews in and out of Palestine, probably shortly before the destruction of Jerusalem, is a most masterly argument to prove that the old or Jewish dispensation, with its ceremonial law, its sacrifices and traditions, was completed, fulfilled and closed in the coming of Christ, whom all these sacrifices typified; and that the new or Christian dispensation, with its one Great Sacrifice and its universal scope, had taken its place; and that henceforth there was to be no more sacrifice of animals, and no more of the temple worship, as an atonement for sin. The doubts in regard to its authorship have not prevented its being regarded in all quarters as divinely inspired, and the internal evidence is conclusive on this point.

Of the seven General Epistles, that of James is intended to impress upon the early church the necessity of practical godliness, good works, to illustrate and adorn the Christian profession; a very important point, since many of the converts, both from Judaism and heathenism, had been inclined to the belief that, professing faith in Christ, they were freed from the restraints of the moral as well as of the ceremonial law. This dangerous idea that Christianity had no necessary connection with morality, and that a professing Christian may, without reproach, lie, steal, commit adultery, or break any other of the commandments-has been too prevalent in all branches of the church in all ages, and shows the absolute necessity of James' warnings. James was the chief pastor of the church at Jerusalem for many years.

The two Epistles of Peter are characteristic of that fervid and earnest apostle; full of exhortations to sound doctrine and holy living, strong denunciations of heretical and false teachers, and with many references to the second coming of our Lord.

The three Epistles of John, "the beloved disciple," are also characteristic of his ardent and loving nature. One of them is addressed to the churches generally the other two, which are very brief, to individual Christians,

:

The General Epistle of Jude, supposed to have been a younger brother of our Lord, is very brief, and consists mainly of warnings to the churches against false teachers, and denunciations of them, even more vigorous than those of Peter, while it closes with a beautiful and touching benediction.

Of these seven general epistles, two, the first of John and the first of Peter, were at once received by all the churches as genuine and inspired; two more, the second and third of John, were so received as soon as they became widely known; concerning the remaining three, viz., the Epistle of James, Second of Peter, and the Epistle of Jude, there was more or less dispute; the objection to James being a supposed difference between his teachings and those of Paul; but eventually it was heartily received by all the churches. To the Second Epistle of Peter, it was objected that it differed greatly in style from the first epistle; that the second chapter was substantially like most of the Epistle of Jude, and that its references to Paul were not like Peter. But these objections, on closer examination, mostly disappeared; and the general tone of the epistle was so full of the gospel spirit that it finally, after long controversy, came to be universally received, and was sanctioned as a part of the New Testament by the great councils of the church.

The objections against the Epistle of Jude were its brevity, its alleged reference to apocryphal books, and its repetition of the ideas of the second chapter of 2 Peter. The usual and undoubtedly the true explanation, of this similarity is this: Jude wrote his epistle before the Second Epistle of Peter was written, and it was sent to Alexandria, where the Christian churches were strong, but where also these false teachers were numerous. Peter and Jude were at this time in Babylon or its vicinity, and being in frequent intercourse with each other, the Epistle of Jude was read to Peter, and pleased him, and Jude, being considerably the younger, was employed by Peter as his amanuensis or writer; this Second Epistle of Peter being addressed to the churches in Asia and Asia Minor, Peter desired Jude to communicate these warnings to those churches also in his name. The reference to the prophecy of Enoch could not have been to the apocryphal book of Enoch, for that was not then written. By the voice of the churches as expressed in the several councils, after the most rigid examination, all these epistles were finally received as inspired books.

There are also several epistles which circulated largely among the early churches, most of them, probably, written by good men, though not all by those whose names they bear, and all designed apparently for the edification of the churches. These are: The First Epistle of Clement of Rome to the

Corinthians; the so-called Epistle of Barnabas; the Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians, and also to the Romans and to Polycarp; the Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, and the Shepherd of Hermas. Of these the Epistle of Barnabas, the Shepherd of Hermas, and the Epistle of Ignatius, were probably written in the second century, though, perhaps, neither of them by those whose names they bear. The First Epistle of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians is probably genuine, and the earliest of these apocryphal epistles. That of Polycarp is also genuine, but is hardly earlier than A. D. 140. But while the good intention of all these epistles may be admitted, they were so far below the epistles of the New Testament in their tone and character, so lacking in force and spirit, and most of them so wanting in sound doctrine, that they were never, by any considerable number of persons, regarded as inspired. There are still other epistles which have been preserved in an incomplete state, but these are of less value than those we have mentioned.

There were, then, no other epistles, as we have already shown; there were no other gospels, or records like the Acts of the Apostles, which in the judgment of the early Christian fathers, or the early churches, had any claims to be regarded as divinely inspired, and necessary or "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." God in his providence so ordered that the examination of these books by the fathers and the early churches should be very searching and thorough, and their decision and that of the councils in regard to them was nearly unanimous.

But that there might be no doubt on the subject, since the invention of the art of printing, and particularly within the last two centuries and a half, the whole questions of the authenticity and inspiration of the books of the New Testament, have been gone over anew by hundreds of the most eminent Biblical scholars, with a zeal and carefulness to which no other books have ever been subjected, and the result has been to confirm them all, and their readers, in the conviction that in the New Testament, as we have it, there are all the books that have come down to our times which were truly inspired of God; that all of these were so inspired, and that the other books of the first two centuries after Christ, which professed to divine inspiration, were none of them entitled to be so regarded.

One book more remains to be considered, The Revelation of Saint John the Divine, or, as it is often called, the Apocalypse. That this book was written by John, the son of Zebedee, the apostle and evangelist, and that it

was divinely inspired, was the full conviction of all the early fathers and of the early churches. The attempt of Dionysius, the Bishop of Alexandria, in A. D. 255, to maintain that it was written by another John, and that its inspiration was doubtful, was solely caused by his vexation at the millennial theory, which was then advocated by some other bishops, and for which they quoted John's authority in the Revelation. The book was rejected by several heretical sects, who also repudiated all the epistles except those of Paul; while it was received by others, who rejected all the New Testament except this book and the four gospels.

Its authenticity and inspiration have been admitted by all the councils, and by all the Biblical critics of modern times. Its contents are, as the apostle himself says (i. 19), The things which he saw-the glorified Christ standing in the midst of his churches; the things which were the condition of the seven churches; and the things which should be hereafter-the progress of Christianity, the judgments to come upon the nations, the final struggle with the powers of evil, the first resurrection, the final judgment, and the glory of the heavenly city and of the redeemed. The style of the book is lofty and glowing; some of its descriptions are among the grandest efforts of human composition, and through it all there runs the fire of a divine inspiration. No one who reads it can doubt that it was written under the influence of the Divine Spirit.

Of course, there have been several attempts to imitate this wonderful book; there are apocalypses of Moses, of Paul, of Ezra, of Peter and of John; spurious books of such utter worthlessness, that it seems a waste ever to have published them. No church, no apostolic father, and no critic of modern times, ever thought of claiming that any of these were inspired.

Thus, then, we have passed in review the books comprising this later portion of the divine will or Testament. We have shown that it describes the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ as the Saviour and Redeemer, the Messiah or Anointed; his rejection by his own nation, the Jews; his sufferings in the garden; his crucifixion, resurrection and ascension; the coming and outpouring of the Holy Spirit; the offer of salvation to the Gentiles and its acceptance; the formation, organization, and growth of the Christian church: its doctrines, ordinances and practice: its persecutions and its present and future triumphs, till the heavenly inheritance shall be bestowed upon the church of the redeemed, and they enter the city of God to be kings and priests forever. What earthly inheritance is to be for a moment compared with this? Yet this glorious heritage belongs to every true believer in Jesus.

GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW.

THIS, the opening book of the New Testament, the Genesis of the later revelation, corresponds, in many poin with the first book of the Old Testament. It was originally written in Hebrew, or rather Aramaic, a corrupt dialect of Hebrew, spoken at that time by Syrian Jews, and was afterward translated into Greek. As the purpose of Genesis was, to show how, to a particular family, race, and tribe, the great Redeemer was to be sent, and how, through all the earlier ages, the promise made in the Garden was to be amplified and extended, so in the Gospel according to Matthew, we have the history of the coming of the Messiah, the King of Israel, to His own chosen people; of their final and conclusive rejection of Him as their King; and of the extension of His dominion, and the offers of salvation to all nations. It is the beginning of a new and more glorious era; and yet, more than any other book of the New Testament, except, perhaps, the Epistle to the Hebrews, it connects itself with the Old Testament, in its application of prophecies, in its genealogies, its references to Jewish laws and customs, and in its constant use of Old Testament forms of expression concerning the Messiah. It contains more of the discourses or sermons of Christ, more of His miracles, and a larger number of His parables, than either of the other gospels; and it presents all in a systematic order, not chronological, but with the distinct purpose of showing their relations to each other, and to the general object of the gospel. It has twenty-eight chapters, and is particularly full on those points on which the other gospels touch but lightly. It was probably written, primarily, for the Jewish disciples, perhaps within six or eight years after the ascension of Christ, and, at all events, several years earlier than either of the other gospels.

The Birth and Infancy of Jesus Christ.

MATTHEW I., II.

HIS opening book of the New Testament introduces us into a new era and a new condition of things. When this book was written, nearly four hundred and fifty years had passed since Malachi, the last of the Old Testament prophets, had completed his prophecies; the Jews had been governed by their high-priests, under the authority of foreign monarchs; had been oppressed, persecuted, and slain, and many of them compelled, under fear of death, to deny the God who had preserved and kept them; then they had been for nearly one hundred and fifty years under the government of prince-priests, who, at first, were wise, and patriotic, and good, but after three or four generations had become corrupt and vile; and they were now ruled by a very wicked king, Herod, who was himself a vassal of the Romans. In these four hundred and fifty years they had become fanatical in their observance of the traditions of the elders or rabbis, insisting on the minutest obedience to them, while