\
V
University of California.
OF
^&:
INTERNAL EVIDENCE!
' AMERICAN
UNITARIAN
ASSOCIATION
^os TON
OP THE
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS.
PART I.
REMAKES ON CHRISTIANITY AND THE GOSPELS.
WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO
STRAUSS'S "LIFE OF JESUS."
PART II.
PORTIONS OF AN UNFINISHED WORK.
BY ANDREWS NORTON.
BOSTON:
LITTLE, BROWN, AND COMPANY.
1856.
Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1855, by
CHARLES ELIOT NORTON,
in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts.
CAMBRIDGE:
BTEKEOTTPED AND FEINTED BY METCALF AND COMPANY.
EDITORIAL NOTE.
THE work which forms the First Part of this
volume was mostly written in the years 1847 and
1848, and, after its completion, was laid aside for
future revision. In 1849 a severe attack of illness
left the strength of its author so diminished, that,
for a considerable period, his pursuits were inter-
rupted, and when he again became able to work
he devoted himself, in the near prospect of the
end of life, to more important labors than that of
revising what he had written. At the time of
his death, in 1853, the work was in the state in
which it now appears; but the manuscript bore
many notes in pencil upon passages which it had
been in the mind of the author to alter or enlarge.
It was his wish, however, that the work should
be published; for whatever changes or additions
he might have made would have been only for
the purpose of enforcing, with still greater dis-
j v EDITORIAL NOTE.
tinctness and earnestness, the sentiments and the
convictions already expressed.
The Second Part of the volume consists of what,
at the time of its composition, many years ago, was
intended to form a portion of a general treatise on
the internal evidences of the genuineness of the
Gospels. This work was never finished.
The Appendix consists of one of the Lectures
delivered by the author as Dexter Lecturer in
Harvard University. It has been printed here as
having a close relation to the subject of the
volume.
It may be remarked, that many of the internal
proofs of the genuineness of the Gospels are
pointed out and illustrated in the Notes accom-
panying the author's Translation of the Gospels.
The few editorial notes are inclosed in brack-
ets. Whatever is so inclosed is editorial, except
where the brackets are used in the course of
quotations.
CAMBRIDGE, February, 1855.
CONTENTS.
PART I.
REMARKS ON CHRISTIANITY AND THE GOSPELS, WITH
PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO STRAUSS'S "LIFE OF JE-
SUS" 1
INTRODUCTION 3
Mode of pursuing the inquiry concerning the internal evi-
dence of the genuineness of the Gospels, pp. 3-5. Par-
ticular notice to be taken of the late attacks of the infidel
theologians of Germany on the credibility of the Gospels,
pp. 5-7. Strauss's " Life of Jesus," pp. 8, 9. Impractica-
bility of separating the internal evidences of the genuineness
of the Gospels from those of their authenticity, pp. 10, 11,
A main design of the present work is to remove errors
which obscure these evidences, p. 12. An essential error
of this kind is the doctrine that the Gospels are infallible
books, written by divine inspiration, p. 13. Remarks on
this doctrine, pp. 13-17.
CHAPTER I.
GENERAL REMARKS ON STRAUSS'S THEORY OF THE ORIGIN
OF CHRISTIANITY 18
Essentially coincident with speculations advanced by Volney,
pp. 18-20. General view of his theory, pp. 20-31. It
supposes, that some among the Jews converted their imagi-
nations of an expected Messiah into fictions concerning
Jesus, which were afterwards embodied in the Gospels, pp.
20, 21 ; that these fictions or mytlii were not generally
VI CONTENTS.
intentional falsehoods, the Apostles and their associates not
being responsible for them, pp. 21-27 ; and that most of
them became current before the destruction of Jerusalem,
p. 27. Explanation of their rapid growth and recep-
tion among the Jews, pp. 28-31. Remarks on this
theory, pp. 31-45. The innocent impostors who prop-
agated these mythi concerning Jesus must have been
everywhere contradicted by those acquainted with his
history, pp. 31-33. Impossible that they should have
succeeded in imposing them on the whole Christian world
as the original accounts of the Apostles and their asso-
ciates, pp. 34, 35. Another part of their task con-
sisted in identifying the history of Jesus with the Jewish
anticipations concerning the Messiah, p. 36. No attempt
could be more hopeless or more foolish, pp. 37-39. The
communication of Christianity to the Gentile world not ex-
plained by Strauss, p. 39. Necessary inferences from his
theory on this point contrary to indisputable facts, pp. 40,
41. Character and facilities of those by whom, according
to his theory, Christianity must be supposed to have been
established in the heathen world, pp. 42-44. Impossible
that such agents should have succeeded under such circum-
stances, pp. 44, 45. Concluding remarks, p. 46.
CHAPTER H.
REMAKES ON OTHER THEORIES 47
General remarks, pp. 47, 48. Account of the infidel theory
prevalent in Germany previously to that of Strauss, p. 49.
Concerning these theories some preliminary considera-
tions to be attended to, p. 49. Extraordinary phenomena
to be accounted for by him who reasons against the divine
origin of our religion, whatever period he may assign for
the commencement of its authentic history, pp. 50-62.
The existence of Christianity and its results in the last
quarter of the second century, pp. 50 - 52. (The character
of our religion such as to compel the reverence of those who
deny its divine origin, pp. 52-54.) The conception of
Jesus presented in the Gospels, and the view given in them
CONTENTS. Vll
of his character and his ministry, pp. 54-62. How are
these phenomena to be accounted for by unbelievers?
The theories of modern infidel writers may be resolved into
one, pp. 62-64.
CHAPTER III.
EXAMINATION OF STRAUSS'S Two FUNDAMENTAL PRINCI-
PLES OF CRITICISM 65
Strauss's work mainly occupied by an attack on the credibility
and genuineness of the Gospels, p. 65. Statement of two
principles of criticism laid down by him as tests to determine
that an account is not to be believed, p. 66. Remarks on
the first of these principles, the impossibility of a miracle,
pp. 66, 67. Remarks on the second of these principles,
that an account which lays claim to historical value must not
contradict other accounts, pp. 67-70. Illustration of the
character of Strauss's criticism on the Gospels by applying
his process to the accounts of the assassination of Caesar, pp.
70-82. Such criticism inapplicable to human testimony,
p. 82. Want of complete agreement between narratives of
the same event not inconsistent with their essential truth,
pp. 82, 83. The discrepances among the Gospels of such a
character as to confirm their authenticity, but disprove their
inspiration, pp. 84, 85. Used by Strauss, however, in the
attempt to disprove their authenticity and genuineness con-
sidered as the proper works of human authors, p. 85. This
use not new, p. 85. Example from Paine's " Age of Rea-
son," pp. 85, 86. First part of Strauss's work occupied with
a prolix discussion of the difficulties in the first two chapters
of Matthew and the first two chapters of Luke, p. 87. Re-
marks on his argument, pp. 87-93. Neither the supposed
errors of the Evangelists in these chapters, nor the incon-
sistencies between the two narratives, discredit the fact -of
the miraculous birth of our Lord, pp. 93 - 95. But the only
question to be settled is,. Do, or do not, the Gospels present
such appearances as to make it evident, or to create a pre-
sumption, that their writers were not well informed and
trustworthy witnesses respecting the events of the public
VUl CONTENTS.
ministry of Jesus ? p. 95. Not to be confounded with the
question, whether the narratives in the Gospels are free
from error, p. 96. The conclusion arrived at by Strauss
that the Gospels are not genuine invalidates his arguments
against the truth of Christianity, pp. 96, 97. Supposing
the truth of our religion, if the Gospels were not written till
the second century, it would be altogether unreasonable to
expect that they would be exposed to fewer objections than
he has urged against them, pp. 97, 98. To prove the gen-
uineness of the Gospels is to prove the truth of Christianity,
but to disprove their genuineness is no step toward dis-
proving its truth, pp. 98-100. Influence of the work of
Strauss, pp. 100, 101. Its characteristic tone, p. 102.
CHAPTER IV.
ON SOME IMPORTANT CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS 103
The Gospels as literary compositions, pp. 103-115. They are
among the most imperfect of histories, pp. 103 - 105. They
imply that the great outlines of the ministry of Jesus, and
many circumstances connected with his history, were already
known to their readers, pp. 105, 106. Their accounts of
our Lord's appearances after his resurrection an example of
the manner in which they assume the existence of knowl-
edge on the part of their readers beyond what they furnish,
pp. 106-108. True character of the Gospels, and purpose
for which they were written, pp. 109, 110. Want of skill
in the Evangelists as literary artists, pp. 110, 111. The
Gospels in construction and style correspond to the charac-
ter and circumstances of their authors, p. 111. The char-
acter of the Gospels exposes them to the attacks of minute
criticism, p. 111. Difficulties disappear in proportion to
the justness of our conceptions and the extent of our knowl-
edge of the circumstances of their composition, p. 112.
Two classes of difficulties, pp. 112, 113. The defects of
the Gospels as literary compositions afford striking evidence
of their authenticity, pp. 113 115. General ignorance
concerning the true character of the Gospels, and conse-
quent incorrect conceptions of Christianity, pp. 115-120.
CONTENTS. x
Neglected state in which the Gospels have been left for
popular use, p. 115. Faults of the Common Version, p.
116. Other obstacles to obtaining correct notions of their
character, p. 117. Want of information concerning the
Gospels has involved the whole subject of our religion in
obscurity, pp. 118, 119. Ground for encouragement in the
gradual advance in religious knowledge, pp. 119, 120. Re-
marks on the outburst of the revolutions of 1848, pp. 121 -
123. Such changes in themselves afford no certainty of
improvement, p. 123. To Christianity better understood
we must look for all essential improvement in the character
and condition of men, pp. 123 - 125.
CHAPTER V.
ON WHAT ESSENTIALLY CONSTITUTES THE VALUE OF CHRIS-
TIANITY AND OF THE GOSPELS 126
The essential value of Christianity consists in its being a mirac-
ulous revelation of God, p. 126. If such a revelation has
been made, the truths of religion rest on the witness of God
himself, p. 127. And it is only through such a revelation
that these truths can be known, p. 127. Illustration of the
latter proposition, pp. 127-143. What can human reason
alone effect toward establishing the facts on which religion
is founded? It may assure us that there is an infinite
cause of all finite things, p. 128 ; that the Infinite Being
is intelligent and benevolent, pp. 128, 129 ; and that this
Being is unchangeable, p. 129. But before this conception
of God Reason stands confounded, p. 130. In contemplat-
ing the relations of God to finite beings, difficulties present
themselves which she cannot solve, pp. 130-134. These
difficulties resolve themselves into the question, What are
the relations of the Infinite Spirit to each one of us individ-
ually ? pp. 134-136. The answer to this question given
by the supernatural manifestation of God through Christ,
p. 136. Objections brought against the idea of such a rev-
elation, pp. 136, 137. These objections founded on erro-
neous conceptions, p. 137. Astonishing as the fact of such
a revelation is, there is nothing in the belief of it to offend
X CONTENTS.
our reason, pp. 137-139. Our misapprehensions arise from
the narrowness of our conceptions, pp. 139, 140. Truths
made known to us by Christianity, p. 140. Its inestimable
value as a miraculous revelation, pp. 141, 142. Plainness
of its evidences, p. 142. It still leaves us in great igno-
rance, p. 143. But it has taught us all that is necessary to
know as the foundation of the highest virtue and the most
glorious hopes, p. 143. The Gospels are the history and
permanent evidences of this miraculous revelation, pp. 143,
144. Their character, pp. 144, 145. The union of hu-
man error and imperfection with their great essential char-
acteristics renders them a standing miracle in evidence of
the truth of Christianity, p. 146.
CHAPTER VI.
STRAUSS'S PROPOSED SUBSTITUTE FOR CHRISTIANITY.
KEMARKS ON MODERN GERMAN PHILOSOPHY . . .147
The Concluding Dissertation of Strauss's book full of instruc-
tion, p. 147. Extract from it concerning the results of his
inquiry, pp. 147, 148. He proposes "to re-establish dog-
matically that which has been destroyed critically," p. 148.
Obscurity of this language, and absurdity of the meaning
which appears to be intended, pp. 148, 149. Further ex-
tracts from Strauss, relating to his proffered substitute for
Christianity, pp. 149-151. He " perceives the substance
of the Christian religion to be identical with the deepest
philosophical truth"; that is, with the atheistic philosophy
of Hegel, pp. 151, 152. Extracts from Strauss relating to
this philosophy, pp. 153, 154. "The key of the whole
Christology," pp. 155-157. The Concluding Dissertation
of Strauss's work affords materials for forming an estimate of
the speculations of modern German philosophers (so called)
in theology and metaphysics, p. 157. Character of these
speculations, pp. 158, 159. The school of writers to which
Strauss belongs not distinguished by its peculiar doctrines,
but by its mysticism and abuse of language, pp. 160, 161.
Its antiquity and extensive prevalence, pp. 161-163.
Its high pretensions, pp. 163-165. Its mischievous influ-
ence, pp. 165-168.
CONTENTS. Xi
CHAPTER VII.
CONCLUDING REMARKS .169
Efficiency of such works as that of Strauss in the production
of evil, liable to be underrated, p. 169. Importance of cor-
rect opinions, p. 170. The improvement of our race de-
pends on the prevalence of truth, p. 170. How those
truths upon which our characters should be formed are to
be established, pp. 171, 172. Remarks on the position of
America in regard to the attainment and promulgation of
truth, pp. 172 188. Peculiar advantages in this country,
p. 172. Discouraging circumstances, p. 173. Neglect of
the higher departments of thought and learning, p. 173.
For example, of the sciences of political government and
political economy, p. 1 74. Evils of ignorance in these
departments of knowledge exhibited in the condition of
France and Germany, pp. 175-17 7. Neglect of the studies
which discipline the intellect so that it may be correctly ex-
ercised, p. 177. Neglect of the sciences of religion and
morals, pp. 178, 179. The study of theology essentially
connected with almost all the other important branches of
knowledge, pp. 179, 180. Tendency of our times to dis-
connect the truths of religion from the discussion of those
subjects which concern the present well-being of men, p.
181. Much to be learned and taught in the sciences of
religion and morals, pp. 182 184. No proper provision in
our literary institutions for the prosecution of the most im-
portant studies, pp. 184, 185. The great want in our
country is that of a body of men qualified to give instruc-
tion on these subjects, p. 186. The influence of the great
truths of religion and morals determines the fate of society,
p. 187. Responsibility of Americans as the advanced
guard of the civilized world, pp. 187, 188.
CONTENTS.
PART II.
ON THE INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE GENUINENESS OF
THE GOSPELS ; BEING PORTIONS OF AN UNFINISHED
WORK . 189
CHAPTER I.
THE CONSISTENCY OF THE NARRATIVE IN THE GOSPELS
WITH ITSELF, AND WITH ALL OUR KNOWLEDGE BEARING
ON THE SUBJECT 191
The internal evidences of the genuineness of the Gospels not
to be separated from those of their authenticity, pp. 191,
192. Among the most important proofs of both is the con-
sistency of the narrative in the Gospels with itself, and with
all other known facts having a bearing upon it. State-
ment of this argument, pp. 192-196. This consistency
discovers itself throughout the Gospels, p. 193. Is not the
work of study or artifice, pp. 193, 194. Appears more
clearly, in proportion to the extent and accuracy of our
knowledge, pp. 194-1915. The same argument presented
under another form, pp. 196-201. The Gospels contain
much that requires explanation, p. 196. This explanation
to be sought from a great variety of sources, p. 197. The
narratives in the Gospels accord with all that we can learn
or reasonably infer respecting the subjects to which they re-
late, p. 197. If the Gospels were not true, such agreement
could not exist, pp. 198, 199. Consideration of what is
implied in the hypothesis that they are narratives of fic-
titious events, p. 200. The character of the Gospels, then,
establishes the truth of the testimony to their genuineness,
p. 201. The preceding argument a cumulative one, p. 201.
Examples of its application, pp. 202-218. Explana-
tion of a portion of the eighteenth chapter of the Gospel
of Matthew, for the purpose of pointing out its intrinsic
marks of truth, pp. 202 - 212. Similar explanation of the
narrative concerning the young man who came to Christ
CONTENTS. Xlll
addressing him, " Good teacher, what good thing shall I do
to have eternal life ? " pp. 212 - 218. Conclusion, p. 218.
CHAPTER II.
OBJECTIONS AGAINST THE CONSISTENCY OP THE NARRA-
TIVE CONSIDERED 219
It may be said that the effect produced by the ministry of
Christ upon the Jewish nation was inconsistent with what
we might reasonably expect, supposing his history to be
true ; that such miracles as are ascribed to him must have
produced conviction, pp. 219, 220. Consideration of this
objection, pp. 220-230. An error to suppose that men
will always believe and act as it is in the highest degree
reasonable that they should believe and act, pp. 220, 221.
Circumstances to be considered which produced in the
minds of the Jews a false estimate of the weight of the evi-
dence for the divinity of our Saviour's mission, p. 221.
They regarded his miracles as performed through the agen-
cy of evil spirits, pp. 221 - 223. The holiness of his char-
acter and of his teachings did not deter them from this
opinion, but was in itself a cause of their hatred against him,
p. 224. The religious pride of the Jews, and their expec-
tations concerning a Messiah, p. 224. Christ appeared to
humble their pride and prostrate their hopes, pp. 225, 226.
Feelings of bitter hostility with which they naturally re-
garded him, as a moral and religious reformer, opposing
their strongest prejudices, pp. 226 229. An ignorant
and superstitious people not likely to be particularly af-
fected by miracles, pp. 229, 230. From the preceding
considerations it appears that the result of Christ's ministry
was such as we might reasonably expect, p. 230. These
statements may be viewed under a different aspect,
p. 230. Striking correspondence in the Gospels with the
representations that have been given, p. 231. The reality
of Christ's miracles appears to have been unquestioned,
pp. 231-233. This is not the case, however, concerning
the miracle of his resurrection, p. 233. This exception
such as to confirm the argument derived from the fact
b
XIV CONTENTS.
just mentioned, pp. 233, 234. This fact corresponds to
the supposition of the truth of the Gospels, but does not
correspond to any other supposition that can be made,
pp. 234 - 238. Summary of the argument on this point,
p. 238. The history contained in the Gospels may be
divided into two parts : one, containing narratives of mirac-
ulous events ; the other, accounts of the discourses of our
Saviour, of his actions not miraculous, and of the dis-
positions, words, and actions of others, p. 238. Between
these two portions there is a perfect correspondence, pp.
239, 240. Such is the consistency of these different por-
tions, that the whole narrative must be true, or the whole
must be false, p. 241. No one will contend that it is
merely fictitious, p. 241. Supposition of those who deny
the truth of the Gospel history, p. 241. But to any suppo-
sition which denies the truth of the miracles, the consistency
of the history presents a conclusive objection, pp. 242 - 244.
CHAPTER III.
THE CHARACTER OF CHRIST AS IT APPEARS IN THE GOS-
PELS 245
SECTION I.
His Teaching . . .245
The perfect exhibition of moral excellence in the teachings
and actions of Christ a proof of the genuineness of the writ-
ings in which it appears, p. 245. Statement of the argu-
ment, pp. 245 - 248. The Gospels contain just conceptions
of a perfect system of religion as taught by a divine teacher,
pp. 245, 246. Their writers derived these conceptions
either from reality or from their own imaginations, p. 246.
They could not have derived them from imagination, p.
247. Circumstances under which Christ appeared, pp. 248,
249. The great characteristics of his preaching, pp. 249-
258. His teachings concerning God, pp. 249 - 252. Con-
cerning immortality, pp. 252 255. Concerning the moral
responsibility of men as immortal beings, pp. 255-257.
These doctrines constitute his religion, p. 257. To have a
CONTENTS. XV
just conception of the force of the argument to be derived
from them, they should be compared with those which phi-
losophy had attained before, p. 258. No heathen teacher
of a higher rank than Socrates, p. 258. His imperfect
conception of the great truths of religion, pp. 258 - 260.
Comparison of the Memorabilia of Xenophon with the Gos-
pels, pp. 261, 262. Characteristics of the moral principles
inculcated by Christ, pp. 262 - 266. The morality which
he taught the most pure and comprehensive, p. 262. As
yet but imperfectly comprehended, p. 263. Nature and
extent of its requirements, pp. 263 - 266. How is it to be
explained that such a system is found in the Gospels ? p. 266.
SECTION II.
His Personal Character 267
The personal character which in the Gospels is ascribed to
Jesus Christ is most striking and original, p. 267. How he
is there represented, pp. 267-269. Truth of the concep-
tion contained in the Gospels of the character which the
miracles of a messenger from God ought to have, p. 269.
Character of Christ's discourses in reference to the gaining
of followers and disciples, pp. 270-272. The representa-
tion of these discourses such that it must have been drawn
from reality, pp. 273, 274. But little in the Gospels con-
cerning the private character of Christ till the closing scenes
of his life, p. 274. In relation to this subject there are
some passages which require explanation, p. 275. The
reply of Jesus to his mother at the marriage feast at
Cana, pp. 275-279. His treatment of the Syro-Phoe-
nician woman who besought him to cure her daughter, pp.
279 - 281. The miraculous cure of the Gadarene dsemom-
acs, pp. 281-283. These passages are among the striking
proofs which the Gospels everywhere furnish, of the fact that
their writers had no purpose of deceiving by the display of an
imaginary character, pp. 283, 284. The Evangelists seem
never to have formed an abstract conception of what the
character of Christ really was, p. 284. Defective style and
inartificial construction of their histories, and evident ab-
XVI CONTENTS.
sence in them of all aim at effect, pp. 284, 285. When
we find, therefore, that from their entire narratives there
results a most wonderful, original, and consistent exhibition
of character, it is impossible to ascribe this to any other
cause than that they drew from reality, p. 285. The rec-
ords of our religion show that their writers had no ability
to deceive, and thus carry with them independent evidence
of their own authenticity, pp. 286, 287. One other pas-
sage besides those already noticed presents a difficulty,
that relating to the cry of our Saviour on the cross, p. 287.
Explanation of this passage, pp. 287-292.
APPENDIX.
ON THE ADAPTATION OF THE DISCOURSES OF CHRIST TO
THE CHARACTER AND CONDITION OF THE JEWS, AND
TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH HE WAS PLACED . 295
General remarks, pp. 295, 296. In the tune of our Saviour
the notions of the Jews concerning religion were very im-
perfect and erroneous, p. 296. Their conceptions of God,
pp. 296, 297. Of the future life, pp. 297, 298. Of
moral and religious excellence, p. 298. Their political con-
dition at the time of our Saviour's ministry, pp. 298, 299.
Their expectations concerning the Messiah, pp. 299, 300.
Preaching of John the Baptist, pp. 301, 302. Conception
that may be formed of the appearance of Christ, pp. 302,
303. Commencement of his ministry in Galilee, p. 303.
The Sermon on the Mount, pp. 304-308. Spirit of the
Beatitudes contrasted with the feelings and expectations of
the Jews, pp. 305-308. Character of the remainder of
this discourse, when viewed in connection with the moral
and intellectual state of those to whom it was addressed, pp.
308, 309. The whole affords decisive evidence that Jesus
Christ was what he claimed to be, a teacher commissioned
and instructed by God, p. 309.
PART I.
REMARKS
ON
CHRISTIANITY AND THE GOSPELS,
WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO
STRAUSS'S "LIFE OF JESUS.'
INTRODUCTION.
IT has been my intention, after completing what
I had to say respecting the historical evidence of
the genuineness of the Gospels, to present a view
of the collateral, or of what, by giving an allow-
able, though somewhat extended, meaning to the
term, may be called the internal evidence of their
genuineness. It may seem at first thought as if
this might be sufficiently done by a direct state-
ment of the topics which compose that evidence,
without adverting to the objections, founded on
the contents of the Gospels, and originating, as I
conceive, in erroneous conceptions of their charac-
ter, with which their genuineness and authenticity
have been assailed. But such is not the fact.
It may be true, I believe it to be true, that,
without bringing into notice the false conceptions
of believers, or the objections of unbelievers, an
argument may be framed for the authenticity of
4 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
the Gospels, derived from the internal evidence
afforded by them, which to an intelligent man may
appear conclusive, as admitting of no direct reply.
Yet to an intelligent man it may be far from being
satisfactory. In all cases of moral reasoning where
any doubt may exist, in all cases where there is a
division of opinion, and men who have professedly
examined the question at issue have arrived at op-
posite conclusions, we desire to view the subject
in all its aspects, and are unwilling definitely to
settle our judgment till we have heard both sides.
Even the very circumstance that an argument ap-
pears to us decisive may increase our desire to
know how it has been evaded, or what other rea-
soning has been opposed to it. Respecting any
important subject, we wish not merely to attain a
conviction of the truth, but also to comprehend
the bearing of the truth on the whole system of
opinions having relation to it, either as directly
contradicting it, on the one hand, or, on the other,
as disguising it and keeping it out of sight by
misrepresentations and false substitutes. We do
not care to have the sun admitted to us through
an opening into a darkened room. We desire to
see the objects exhibited by it in broad daylight.
In treating of the historical evidence for the
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 5
genuineness of the Gospels, I have endeavored to
bring distinctly into view what has been asserted
or suggested in opposition to it. This it was easy
to do in the course of the discussion, without any
preliminary argument. But in regard to the sub-
ject before us the case is different. In treating
the historical evidence there can be no essential
disagreement, among men capable of discussing
the subject, concerning the principles of reasoning
to be applied to it. The only controversy must
be about facts. But he who opposes the credit of
the Gospels on the ground of their intrinsic char-
acter may proceed throughout on false principles
and untenable theories. He is then not to be met
in the course of the discussion by particular con-
futations of particular objections, but by a previ-
ous general confutation of the whole tenor of his
reasoning. And this becomes necessary in order
to attain a clear and satisfactory comprehension of
the subject.
THESE considerations have led me to take par-
ticular notice of the late attacks of the infidel the-
ologians of Germany on the credibility of the
Gospels. Such a mode of pursuing the inquiry is
particularly demanded at the present day, for the
i*
6 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
writings of those theologians have obtained a wide
notoriety, and have affected the minds of numbers
by whom they are read, and of numbers by whom
they are not read. Through the operation of this
cause, and of others of a more general nature, whose
working lies deeper, Christianity has with very
many ceased to be regarded as a subject of rational
and manly investigation. The truth is a sad one,
but it is the truth, that a very great portion even
of intelligent men pass it by, perhaps with a cer-
tain air of respect, but as if it were a matter about
which they have no particular concern ; as if it
were not their business to determine for themselves
what is true and what is false concerning it. They
appear to look on the whole subject as one to be
left to divines and priests and the Church. Gross
ignorance and gross misconceptions of Christianity
consequently prevail. Objections, cavils, and sup-
posed difficulties, which would at once vanish in
clear day, assume a portentous appearance amid
the darkness, or the perplexity of false lights.
Explanation, thorough explanation, a readiness to
view the subject on every side and in all its impor-
tant relations, a total indisposition to fall back for
support on authority or traditionary opinions or
vulgar prejudices, and a freedom from all those
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 7
motives of fear or interest which may bias the mind
to countenance the errors of any party, are espe-
cial requisites at the present day in a defender and
expositor of Christianity. He should be
" veritatem quserere pertinax,
sollicitus parum
Utcunque stet commune vulgi
Arbitrium et popularis error."
The character of our age is such that we are
particularly called upon to consider the opinions
of those by whom Christianity is rejected, and
by whom, as we shall hereafter see, all religion is
rejected, and to examine the foundations of their
system of unbelief.
The number of modern German theologians who
have more or less formally attacked the credibility
of the Gospels is great. But it may not be very
difficult to give a general view sufficiently com-
prehensive and satisfactory of the modes of reason-
ing which they have pursued, and of the objections
which they have brought forward. The theolo-
gians of Germany are much in the habit of writ-
ing in chorus, if I may so express myself, and of
repeating each other with inconsiderable varia-
tions. No other among those who have contro-
verted the truth of our religion has become by
8 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
many degrees so conspicuous as Strauss, of whose
principal work, " The Life of Jesus," it is my in-
tention to take particular notice. He may fairly
be regarded as a representative of the class. The
pre-eminence in notoriety which that work has at-
tained above the similar productions of his coun-
trymen, its wide circulation in the original and in
translations, and the number of those who have
viewed it, either with fear or with favor, as a for-
midable attack on Christianity, give it a clear title
to particular attention. But besides this, it con-
tains a copious collection from various modern
authors, the countrymen of Strauss, of what has
been regarded as most forcible in their objections
to the credibility of the Gospels ; and the collec-
tion is connected throughout with a theory con-
cerning the origin of Christianity, not, indeed,
original with the author, but which is more fully
developed by him than by any one of his prede-
cessors.
But, though I thus profess my intention of tak-
ing especial notice of the work of Strauss, yet no
reader needs to apprehend that his attention will
be diverted from the great topics before us to the
consideration of the errors, misapprehensions, and
incapacity of a particular writer. A reasoner with
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 9
the sole purpose of establishing the truth will not
take advantage of any want of ability in his oppo-
nent. He may incidentally point it out as illus-
trating the character and qualifications of those by
whom what he believes to be the truth is assailed ;
but he will not dwell on the mistakes or folly of
any writer whom he may think it worth while to
controvert, as if these aiforded evidence that the
propositions maintained by that writer must be
false. One advantage, however, and it is some-
times a great advantage, he who is maintaining the
truth may derive from the work of an opponent.
To arguments the most decisive, other representa-
tions may be opposed. A writer may be fully
aware that, however conclusive his reasoning may
be to his own mind, there are other minds differ-
ently constituted and informed that entertain, dif-
ferent views. These views, it is true, he may pre-
sent in his own language. He may put words
into the mouth of a supposed objector. But in
doing so there is danger that he may seem to be
trifling with his readers, to be making another
say what no intelligent man would say. But if
he produce what has actually been said, and what
many have thought to be forcibly said, he is re-
lieved at once from the suspicion of contending
with a man of straw fabricated by himself.
10 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
IN treating of the evidence which the Gospels
themselves afford of their genuineness and of their
authenticity, it is not worth while to attempt to
make an artificial separation between those argu-
ments which bear more directly on the one sub-
ject, and those which relate more particularly to
the other. They run into each other and are inti
mately blended together ; and the ultimate pur-
pose of both is the same.
If the Gospels be authentic, that is, if their
contents be true, they are genuine works of their
supposed authors ; for, if true, they were written by
early and well-informed disciples of Christ ; and
it would be idle to ascribe them to any other dis-
ciples of Christ than those to whom the Christian
world has assigned them from the beginning. On
the other hand, if their genuineness be proved,
their truth is established ; for it would be folly to
suppose that disciples of Jesus, in the midst of un-
believers and enemies, whom it was evidently their
purpose to impress with the noblest truths and
sentiments of religion and morality, put forth pre-
tended histories of their master full of marvellous
fables, and obtained reception for these fables,
though they and their contemporaries knew them
to be false. In dealing with the historical evi-
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 11
dence for the genuineness of the Gospels, we may
prove that they were written by those to whom
they have been ascribed, without, at the same time,
bringing any direct proof of their credibility, though
the step from one conclusion to the other is, as we
have just seen, unavoidable. But, in arguing from
their contents to prove their genuineness, it is not
practicable, and if it were practicable it would
not be desirable, to separate the arguments for
their genuineness from those which establish the
great truth that they contain the authentic history
of a miraculous revelation of God.
The evidence for this truth, as we might expect
in regard to a fact so momentous, presents itself
on every side. It is constantly opening before us
as we pursue new paths of investigation. It may
be hidden from view by the interposition of false
notions of Christianity and of the Gospels. Con-
ceptions so erroneous may exist concerning our re-
ligion and the books containing its history, that
the internal evidences of its truth may not apply
to the false representations given of the one or the
other. There may be no coherence between them.
But God, in manifesting himself to the world
through Christ, has not left us without abundant
witness that he has so manifested himself. The
12 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
evidences which Christianity affords of its mirac-
ulous origin, the proofs which the "new creation,"
as it is called by St. Paul, gives of its author, are
in number and variety like those which the natu-
ral creation affords of the power, wisdom, and
goodness of God. Both may be clouded over by
human errors. Both require the exercise of our
reason, that we may discern them in their extent
and clearness. Both may be disregarded. But
they exist.
WHAT may properly be called the internal evi-
dences of the truth of our religion, or, in other
words, of the truth of the history contained in the
Gospels, are so numerous, so diverse in their char-
acter, and appear from so many different points of
view, that the subject is not to be exhausted by
any one writer or in any one treatise. In explain-
ing the historical evidence for the genuineness of
the Gospels, I have been naturally led to point
out some of the more important internal proofs of
their authenticity. In the present work I shall
bring forward others. But a main design of this
work is to remove the errors and objections which
may counteract the proper influence of these proofs,
and tHus to leave the mind open to their reception,
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 13
from whatever source they may be derived, or in
whatever form they may present themselves.
IN pursuing this design, we must begin with
entirely setting aside one essential misapprehen-
sion concerning the intrinsic character of the Gos-
pels. The traditionary doctrine has been, that they
are not, properly speaking, the works of their re-
puted authors, but works written by the inspira-
tion of God, or under his immediate suggestion
and superintendence. On the one hand, this doc-
trine is an insuperable obstacle to all just appre-
ciation of that vast amount of evidence for their
truth which the Gospels carry with them when
properly regarded and understood; and, on the
other, it is from this doctrine that the objections
with which their genuineness and authenticity
have been assailed derive their chief strength.
It having been assumed that they are infallible
books, free from the imperfections and mistakes
that belong to the works of merely human narra-
tors, and especially to those of writers so uned-
ucated as the Evangelists, when such imperfec-
tions and mistakes have been discovered in them,
the unbeliever has thought himself to have found
an argument against the reality of God's revela-
14 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
tion by Christ, while in fact he had found only an
argument against a false doctrine.
* It is true, that in a book not expressly intended
for the confutation of merely popular errors, in
a work of reasoning addressed to intelligent men,
who may be supposed to be so far interested in its
subjects as to have exercised some serious thought
upon them, and to have made themselves in some
degree acquainted with the facts necessary to be
attended to in order to form a correct judgment
concerning them, it may seem incongruous and
out of place to enter into a confutation of this
doctrine as applied to the Gospels. But the as-
sumption that it is necessary for a defender of their
trustworthiness to defend their infallibility has
afforded the main opportunity for the most plausi-
ble attacks which have been made on their credit ;
while, at the same time, many Christians have
* [The preceding "Introduction" was left unfinished by the author.
The following fragment found among his papers, relating to the topic
with which it breaks off, was apparently to have been used as a por-
tion of the intended conclusion. It is therefore here printed, but it
should be understood that it did not receive the author's final re-
vision.]
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 15
joined with the adversaries of our religion in in-
sisting on the truth of this assumption, and in re-
garding the doctrine that the Gospels are properly
to be referred to God as their author, and are con-
sequently free from error, as essential to Christian-
ity, and the main point to be defended in a con-
troversy concerning its truth. The objections to
it all which it is worth while to urge, since, if
these are not considered as decisive, all others
must be unavailing may be stated in a few
words. It supposes a miracle of which no proof
can be afforded through the evidence of ocular
witnesses. It is a miracle the first step in the
proof of which is wanting; for the first step in
proving . such a miracle is to show that the sup-
posed subject of it claims to write by the author-
ity and under the guidance of God; and the Evan-
gelists put forward no such pretension. There
can, it would seem, be no rational ground for as-
cribing inspiration to a writer who himself does
not claim to be inspired. But though the Evan-
gelists do not claim it for themselves, it may be
said that they are affirmed to have been inspired
by an authority that cannot be questioned; for
St. Paul says, " All Scripture is given by inspira-
tion of God." (2 Timothy iii. 16.) This passage
16 INTEENAL EVIDENCES OF THE
is the main argument for the supposition ; and it
affords a very striking example of the manner in
which a few misunderstood but easily remembered
words are often detached from the Bible and em-
ployed in support of irrational doctrines, in oppo-
sition to all else that may be learned from it, and
to the plainest dictates of common sense. In re-
gard to those words, it is unnecessary to urge the
considerations, that, before an argument in proof
of a miracle can be founded upon them, it must
be proved that St. Paul was inspired to write
them ; and that it must be further proved that the
Gospels were in existence when he wrote them,
which is very doubtful ; or even the consideration,
that, were they in existence, he could not have
had them in mind, since it is clear from the con-
text that he referred only to the books of the Old
Testament. The words have their whole force,
great as it has been upon the minds of English
readers, only from the improper use of the word
"inspiration" in our common English version, and
the consequent false meaning which has been put
upon them. Their true meaning may be thus
expressed : " The spirit of God is breathed into
every book " ; that is, of the Old Testament ; and
the only purpose of the Apostle was to assert gen-
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 17
erally, what no Christian will deny, that a relig-
ious spirit pervades the books of the Old Testa-
ment. Hence they are, and were especially to the
early converts to our faith, " profitable," &c. I
say especially to the early converts, because at the
time when St. Paul wrote there was no collection
of the books of the New Testament, there was no
Christian literature, and certainly nothing in
heathen literature, supposing them to have had
any familiarity with it, which could supply the
place of the books of the Old Testament as a
source of religious instruction and religious feel-
ings.
But the Gospels themselves afford evidence the
most decisive of the question whether they bear
the stamp of God's infallibility, or the impress of
human minds.
UNIVERSITY
18 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
CHAPTER I.
GENEEAL EEMAEKS ON STEAUSS'S THEOEY OF ' THE OEIGIN
OF CHEISTIANITY.
SINCE the first edition of my work on the Gen-
uineness : of > the Gospels , appeared, an English
translation of Strauss's ". Life of Jesus " has been
published. It i is: remarkable, Considering the gen-
eral coincidence between the subject of his work
and my own, that, with the exception of a few in-
cidental observations, I have hitherto found no
occasion, nor : even '- any suitable opportunity, to
take notice of -it. ' It contains nothing which in-
validates the statement of facts' from which I have
reasoned, or touches upon the arguments which I
have drawn from those facts.
The theory of Strauss respecting the origin of
Christianity, which I have formerly very briefly
explained,* is essentially coincident with specula-
tions advanced by Volney in a once famous book,
* Evidences of the Genuineness of the Gospels, 2d Ed., Vol. IH.
p. lix. Compare Vol. I. pp. 118 - 120.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 19
" The Ruins." He says : " Conformably to the
calculations received by the Jews, nearly six thou-
sand years had passed since the imagined creation
of the world." That time had been fixed for a
renovation of the world by a great deliverer of
whom there was a general expectation throughout
Asia. " This coincidence produced a fermentation
in men's minds. Nothing was thought of but an
approaching end. Men interrogated the hiero-
phants and their mystic books, which assigned
various periods for it. They expected the Re-
storer. In consequence of talking about him,
some one said that he had seen him ; or we may
suppose that some enthusiast believed himself
to be that personage, and collected partisans.
These partisans, deprived of their chief by an inci-
dent, true without doubt, but which passed in ob-
scurity, gave occasion, by the stories which they
told, to a rumor which was gradually organized
into history. On this foundation, all the circum-
stances of the mythological traditions were very
soon arranged, and the result was an authentic
and complete system, which it was not permitted
to doubt."*
* " Or, dans les calculs admis par les Juifs, on commen9ait a comp-
20 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
Conformably to what has been before said,
Strauss supposes that there was among the Jews
ter prs de six mille ans depuis la creation (fictive) du monde. Cette
coincidence produisit de la fermentation dans les esprits. On ne
s'occupa plus que d'une fin prochaine ; on interrogea les hierophantes
et leur livres mystiques, qui en assignment divers termes ; on attendit
le riparateur ; a force d'en parler, quelqu'un dit 1'avoir vu, ou menu;
un individu exalte crut 1'etre et se fit des partisans, lesquels, prives
de leur chef par un incident vrai sans doute, mais passe* obscurement,
donnerent lieu, par leurs recits, a une rumeur graduellement orga
nisee en histoire : sur ce premier canevas etabli, toutes les circonstances
des traditions mythologiques vinrent bientot se placer, et il en re"sulta
un systeme authentique et complet, dont il ne fut plus permis de dou-
ter." Les Euines, (Bruxelles, 1830,) p. 224.
This theory of Volney is immediately followed in his work by
another irreconcilable with it, borrowed from his contemporary, Du-
puis, the author of the " Origine de tous les Cultes." According to the
latter theory, Christ is an allegorical personage, and Christianity is an
allegory representing certain celestial phenomena. In this allegory
Christ is the sun. Yolney (pp. 227, 290) derives the name Christ
from the Hebrew word D1TJ, Jieres or cheres, which signifies the sun,
and the name Jesus from Yes, "which is formed by the union of three
letters, the numerical value of which is 608, one of the solar periods."
It would be hard to find in the book of Volney himself anything
more astonishing than the marvellous absurdity of these etymologies.
Certainly it would be very difficult to find anything like them in the
works of a writer having a reputation for common learning and com-
mon honesty. It deserves notice, that when their absurdity was com-
mented on by Dr. Priestley, though Volney replied to his work, he
did not undertake to make any defence on this topic. See Priestley's
" Observations on the Increase of Infidelity," (1797,) p. 118, seqq. ;
and his " Letters to Mr. Volney," (1797,) p. 23.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 21
an eager expectation of their Messiah. Jesus, at
least during a part of his ministry, regarded him-
self as the Messiah, as " the greatest and last of
the prophetic race." He was consequently so re-
garded by his followers. The expectation which
the Jews entertained of their Messiah was definite,
and " characterized by many important particu-
lars." They had formed many imaginations con-
cerning him connected with allegorical and typical
misinterpretations of the Old Testament; and, after
the appearance of Jesus, there were some among
the Jews who converted their imaginations of what
the Messiah was to be into fictions of what Jesus
had been, and embodied those fictions in a history
of his ministry.
I have said, " some among the Jews." This
mode of expression is not adopted by Strauss him-
self, but it is necessarily implied ; for the follow-
ers of Jesus were a small minority of the Jewish
nation. The Jewish people generally rejected
him, as not their Messiah, and their leaders perse-
cuted and crucified him as a religious impostor
and blasphemer. Nor, according to Strauss, were
the supposed fictions concerning him propagated
by his immediate disciples, who had witnessed his
deeds .and listened to his words, his Apostles and
22 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
their associates ; nor, consequently, by those who
knew and held the truth concerning him as taught
by them. To affirm that they were propagated by
the Apostles and their associates would be to
maintain what the most reckless infidelity has
shrunk from directly asserting, namely, that the
received history of Jesus is a collection of 'enor-
mous falsehoods, fabricated by his immediate dis-
ciples, and preached by them with ineffable effron-
tery in - the very face of those who' knew them' to
be false. From this simple solution of the origin
of our religion, the " mythical ',' theory of Strauss
essentially differs; for, though: he does not define
the sense in which he, uses the term " my thus" it is
fundamental in his theory that my thi, and partic-
ularly the mythi or fables concerning Jesus, are
not generally intentional falsehoods. It is 'this
characteristic alone which distinguishes it ' from
the more : obvious and bald solution of the origin
of Christianity which has been adverted to.
Thus -he quotes, as , essentially expressing his
own opinions concerning- the origin and nature of
the mythi in .- the - history of Christ, what is said
by Otfried Miiller concerning the origin and na-
ture of the- mythi or mythological fables of the
ancient Heathens. The words in parentheses in
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 23
the following extract are inserted by Strauss to
accommodate the language of Miiller to his pur-
pose.
Mtiller contends that the mythological fables of
the ancients were not the fictions of one individual
or of many, for the purpose of deception. "It is
impossible," he says, "to prove that such a caste of
deceivers existed in ancient Greece (or Palestine) ;
on the contrary, this skilful system of deception,
be it gross or refined, selfish or philanthropic, if
we are not misled by the impression we have re-
ceived from the earliest productions of the Gre-
cian (or Christian) mind, is little suited to the
noble simplicity of those times. Hence an inven-
tor of the mythus, in the proper sense of the word,
is inconceivable. This reasoning brings us to the
conclusion, that the idea of a deliberate and in-
tentional fabrication, in which the author clothes
that which he knows to be false in the appearance
of truth, must be entirely set aside as insufficient
to account for the origin of the mythus." *
The following passage may further illustrate
the fundamental idea of Strauss, that the mythi
or fables contained in the Gospels were not fic-
* Strauss's Life of Jesus, (English Translation,) Vol. I. p. 76.
24 INTEKNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
tions invented by adherents of Jesus for the pur-
pose of deception.
" Perhaps it may be admitted that there is a
possibility of unconscious fiction, even when an
individual author is assigned to it, provided that
the mythical consists only in the filling up and
adorning some historical event with imaginary
circumstances ; but that where the whole story is
invented, and not any historical nucleus is to
be found, this unconscious fiction is impossible.
Whatever view may be taken of the heathen my-
thology, it is easy to show, with regard to the New
Testament, that there was the greatest antecedent
probability of this very kind of fiction having
arisen respecting Jesus, without any fraudulent in-
tention." *
But if the Gospels were composed by the au-
thors to whom they are ascribed, by Apostles and
by those who knew the truth respecting the his-
tory of Jesus from the communications of the
Apostles, that is, if the positions maintained in
" The Evidences of the Genuineness of the Gos-
pels " be correct, the " mythical " theory falls
at once to the ground. We are compelled to
* Strauss, I. 80.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 25
recur to the supposition of intentional falsehood
on the broadest scale, if those who knew the truth
respecting Jesus were the authors of the fables
concerning him. Accordingly, Strauss says: "The
most ancient testimonies tell us, firstly, that an
Apostle, or some other person who had been ac-
quainted with an Apostle, wrote a Gospel history ;
but not whether it was identical with that which
afterwards came to be circulated in the Church
under his name ; secondly, that writings similar to
our Gospels were in existence ; but not that they
were ascribed with certainty to any one individual
Apostle or companion of an Apostle. Such is the
uncertainty of these accounts, which after all do
not reach further back than the third or fourth
decade of the second century. According to all
the rules of probability, the Apostles were all dead
before the close of the first century ; not except-
ing John, who is said to have lived till A. D. 100;
concerning whose age and death, however, many
fables were early invented. What an ample scope
for attributing to the Apostles manuscripts they
never wrote ! " *
Thus, according to Strauss, " the external testi-
* Strauss, I. 62.
3
26 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
mony respecting the composition of our Gospels
is far from forcing upon us the conclusion, that
they proceeded from eyewitnesses or well-informed
contemporaries'" ; * and the internal grounds of
evidence determine that such was not their origin.
The following passage may throw further light
on the conceptions of Strauss respecting the essen-
tial position of his theory, namely, that the Apos-
tles and their associates, the first followers of our
Lord and the witnesses of his ministry, are not re-
sponsible for the fables contained in the Gospels.
"In the first place," he says, "the fact that
many such compilations" (as the Gospels) "of nar-
ratives concerning the life of Jesus were already
in general circulation during the lifetime of the
Apostles, and more especially that any one of our
Gospels was known to an Apostle and acknowl-
edged by him, can never be proved. With respect
to isolated anecdotes, it is only necessary to form
an accurate conception of Palestine, and of the
real position of the eyewitnesses referred to, in
order to understand that the origination of legends,
even at so early a period, is by no means incom-
prehensible. Who informs us that they must ne-
* Strauss, I. 65.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 27
cessarily have taken root in that particular district
of Palestine where Jesus tarried longest, and where
his actual history was well known 1 And with
respect to eyewitnesses, if by these we are to un-
derstand the Apostles, it is to ascribe to them ab-
solute ubiquity, to represent them as present here
and there, weeding out all the unhistorical legends
concerning Jesus, in whatever places they had
chanced to spring up and flourish." *
According to Strauss, however, the greater part
of those fictions concerning Jesus which are em-
bodied in the Gospels, became connected with his
history during the period of about thirty years
which intervened between his death and the de-
struction of Jerusalem,t that is, during the period
throughout which many of his Apostles and their
associates, the first preachers of our religion,
and the great body of those instructed by them,
were living. These fictions did not proceed from,
nor were they countenanced by them, nor were
they received as true by those who relied on their
authority. How, notwithstanding, they obtained
such currency as almost immediately to obscure
and obliterate his true history, is to be thus ex-
plained.
* Strauss, I. 63, 64. f Ibid., I 84.
I
28 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
The age, it is true, was "an historical age "
(by which term Strauss, I suppose, must be un-
derstood as meaning an age in which facts would
be recorded, and mythological fables would not
find ready currency) ; but " the pure historic idea
was never developed among the Hebrews." " In-
deed, no just notion of the true nature of history
is possible, without a perception of the inviolabil-
ity of the chain of finite causes, and of the impos-
sibility of miracles. This perception, which is
wanting to so many minds of our own day, was
still more deficient in Palestine, and indeed through-
out the Roman empire. And to a mind still open
to the reception of the marvellous, if it be once
carried away by the tide of religious enthusiasm,
all things will appear credible; and should this en-
thusiasm lay hold of a yet wider circle, it will
awaken a new creative vigor, even in a decayed
people. To account for such an enthusiasm, it is
by no means necessary to presuppose the Gospel
miracles as the existing cause. This may be found
in the known religious dearth of that period, a
dearth so great that the cravings of the mind after
some religious belief excited a relish for the most
extravagant forms of worship ; secondly, in the
deep religious satisfaction which was afforded by
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 29
the belief in the resurrection of the deceased Mes-
siah, and by the essential principles of the doctrine
of Jesus." *
The theory of Strauss necessarily supposes, that
Jesus was a very conspicuous individual, who acted
strongly on the minds of men. Before this theory
can be received, it becomes requisite to explain
the very rapid growth of those most extraordinary
fictions concerning him, which sprung up and
flourished while very many of his contemporaries
were still living ; especially as by a great majority
of those contemporaries, his enemies, they would
be at once indignantly spurned and trampled
under foot, as being what they were, monstrous
falsehoods ; while by another portion, the first ad-
herents of Jesus, and the original witnesses of his
ministry, their growth, to say the least, was not
fostered, they did not rest on their testimony.
Strauss has shown himself sensible that an expla-
nation of this phenomenon is requisite ; and the
solution which he gives of the sudden develop-
ment of such an array of fables concerning Jesus
may be found in the following passage. It may
be readily understood, if we bear in mind what has
* Strauss, I. 64, 65.
3*
30 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
been before stated, that according to his theory
the Jews had entertained many imaginations con-
cerning their expected Messiah ; and that the pro-
cess in forming the history of Jesus which has
come down to us consisted in converting these
imaginations of what was to be into fables con-
cerning Jesus.
He says : "A frequently raised objection re-
mains, the objection, namely, that the space
of about thirty years, from the death of Jesus to
the destruction of Jerusalem, during which the
greater part of the narratives must have been
formed, or even the interval extending to the
beginning of the second century, the most distant
period which can be allowed for the origin of even
the latest of these Gospel narratives, and for the
written composition of our Gospels, is much too
short to admit of the rise of so rich a collection of
mythi. But, as we have shown, the greater part
of these mythi did not arise during that period,
for their first foundation was laid in the legends
of the Old Testament, before and after the Baby-
lonish exile; and the transference of these legends,
with suitable modifications, to the expected Mes-
siah, was made in the course of the centuries which
elapsed between that exile and the time of Jesus.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 31
So that, for the period between the formation of
the first Christian community and the writing of
the Gospels, there remains to be effected only the
transference of Messianic legends, almost all ready
formed, to Jesus, with some alterations to adapt
them to Christian opinions, and to the individual
character and circumstances of Jesus : only a very
small proportion of mythi having to be formed
entirely new."
This is the only explanation he affords.
IT appears, then, according to Strauss, that some
time during the thirty or forty years after the death
of our Lord, the small body of his followers among
the Jews was divided into two parties of very dif-
ferent characters. One was composed of his per-
sonal friends and followers, the Apostles and their
associates, who knew his true history and doc-
trines, and who did not propagate those falsehoods
concerning him on which the religion of Chris-
tians is founded. The other was composed of per-
sons who did propagate those falsehoods. These
had their origin, as Strauss suggests, in districts
of Palestine where Jesus did not tarry long, and-
* Strauss, I. 84, 85.
32 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
where his actual history was not well known ;
and it would, he says, be ascribing absolute ubiqui-
ty to the Apostles to suppose them to have been
capable of being present here and there to weed
out all the unhistorical legends concerning him in
whatever places they had chanced to spring up
and flourish.* Those who propagated these fic-
tions concerning him had no intention of deceiv-
ing. They were unconscious of falsehood ; they
believed that what they related had actually taken
place.t They had had so little acquaintance with
Jesus, or with the eyewitnesses of his ministry,
that they did not know that all which they affirmed
concerning him was untrue. On the contrary,
they were persuaded that it was true.
But though, as Strauss suggests, their fictions
may not originally " have taken root in that par-
ticular district of Palestine where Jesus tarried
longest," t yet, in order to make converts to the
belief of them, it was necessary that they should
be preached in parts of Palestine where our Lord
had been well known, and where there could be
no ignorance respecting the essential facts in his
ministry. Here, on the one hand, they would be
* See the quotation from Strauss given before, p. 27.
f See before, p. 22, seqq. J See before, p. 27.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 33
indignantly and vehemently contradicted by the
great body of the unbelieving Jews, and, on the
other, they would be denied and discountenanced
by the true followers of Christ. The innocent im-
postors, who, in their ignorance, propagated uncon-
sciously such enormous falsehoods concerning him,
must have been surprised to find all those ac-
quainted with the facts in his history, whether
friends or enemies, utterly confounded, to say the
least, by their marvellous stories. One might
think that their own confidence would have been
shaken by the direct and authoritative evidence
which they must have encountered, on every side,
of the falsehood of their narrations. It might
seem, moreover, that it would be impossible under
such circumstances to procure converts to the be-
lief of them. But such was not the case. Their
own confidence was not shaken ; they persisted in
promulgating their stories, and they triumphed
signally. They are the true authors of Christian-
ity. It is to them that we are indebted for the
Gospels. Their fictions have supplanted the real
history of Christ, the original testimony of eye-
witnesses, and have become the foundation of
Christian faith. Nor is this all. Keeping them-
selves out of view, they have had complete sue-
34 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
cess in putting their stories before the world as
resting on the authority of the Apostles and their
associates, in making them responsible for the
marvellous tales. The whole Christian world has
believed that these stories proceeded from Apos-
tles and their associates. But it was not so. They
proceeded from another party among the followers
of Christ, a party that does not appear in history,
the existence of which is irreconcilable with all
remaining records and memorials of the times
when it is supposed to have nourished, utterly
irreconcilable with all probability, and which,
therefore, was unknown to the world before its
discovery by Strauss.
It is to be borne in mind that the distinguish-
ing characteristic of the theory of Strauss, the
" mythical " theory of the origin of Christianity,
consists in the supposition that the mythi or fic-
tions in the history of Jesus were not intentional
fabrications for the purpose of deception, but that
they sprung up, as it were, spontaneously ; those
among whom they originated and by whom they
were propagated being unconscious of falsehood.
If intentional fictions, it is conceded that they are
not mythi. This, at least, is the general view to
be taken of them. The history of Jesus now ex-
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 35
tant, which is little more than a mass of fictions,
attributing to him throughout a supernatural char-
acter and divine authority, could not have pro-
ceeded from those who were personally conversant
with him, and knew the real events of his life.
This fact is fully recognized by Strauss, though
not clearly apprehended by him in its necessary
relations. His reader should keep it in mind.
We must not suffer ourselves to vacillate between
two theories wholly inconsistent with each other.
The Apostles and their associates were, or were
not, the most shameless of impostors. According
to Strauss, they were not impostors. It follows that
the history of our Lord which the Christian world
has received was not derived from them, though it
grew to its present form principally while the
most, or many, of them were living. It proceeded,
therefore, from other individuals, the true origina-
tors of Christianity, anonymous individuals, of
whom history has preserved no record, and who
must have taught under the circumstances which
have been described.*
* "Narrationes in Evangeliis traditas, quas rerum vere gestarum
esse persuadere nrihi non potueram, mythorum in modum, qui inter
antiquas gentes inveniuntur, aut in ore populi a minutis initiis coa-
luisse et eundo crevisse, aut a singulis, sed qui vere ita evenisse super-
36 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
WE may next observe, that, however difficult
was the task of these teachers of our present re-
ligion in persuading the contemporaries and coun
trymen of an 'individual so conspicuous as our
Lord must have been to give credit to a history
of him full of marvels that were utterly devoid of
truth, yet this was not the sole, nor the greatest,
difficulty which they are supposed to have over-
come.
Their teaching consisted, as we are informed by
Strauss, in identifying the history of Jesus with
the anticipations of the Jews concerning their ex-
pected Messiah. The mythi respecting this imagi-
nary personage were ready made for their use,
and they had only to turn them into historical fic-
tions and accommodate them to Jesus.
stitiose in animum induxerant, fictas esse existlmaveram. Quod ut
sufficit explicandis plerisque eorum, quae dubitationem moventia tribus
prioribus Evangeliis continentur : ita quart! Evangelii auctorem ad
tuendas et illustrandas sententias suas baud raro meras fabulas scien-
tem confinxisse, a Baurio, theologo Tubingensi doctisslmo, nuper ita
demonstratum est, ut critici me judicii rigori religiosius quam verius
temperasse intelligam. Dumque prima a Christo secula accuratius
perscrutantur, partes partiumque certamina, quibus nova ecclesia
commovebatur, in apricum proferunt, narrationum baud paucarum,
quas fabulas esse ego bene quidem perspexeram, sed unde ortsB essent
demonstrare non valueram, veram in illis primsB ecclesise motibus
originem detegere theologis Tubingensibus contigit." Strauss, Vol.
I. p. vii.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 37
But every one knows what were the popular
expectations of the Jews respecting their coming
Messiah. Of him, David, the greatest of their
kings, the founder of their monarchy, was in their
view the especial type ; though in all by which
the favor of God had distinguished David, the
Messiah was to be far more highly distinguished.
He, too, was to be a monarch, the restorer of the
kingdom of Israel, a warrior, a conqueror, the de-
liverer and exalter of his people. Establishing
the seat of his empire at Jerusalem, he was 'to
found a kingdom extending over the world and
enduring to the consummation of all things, over
which he was to rule without a successor. This
was the outline of their expectations, which, doubt-
less, before the coming of our Lord, was filled up,
as it has been since, with many particular imagi-
nations, corresponding to its general character.
But, according to Strauss, it was the purpose of
those who propagated the fabulous history of Je-
sus to evince that he was the Messiah through the
correspondence of its fictions with the previous
expectations of the Jews concerning the Messiah.
This history actually shows one striking point of
resemblance, in representing Jesus as the last great
messenger of God to the Jewish nation, endued
38 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
with miraculous powers. But the whole repre-
sentation of the purpose and effects of his mission,
of his personal character, of his humble condition
in this world, of his determined repression of all
hope of worldly aggrandizement for himself, his
followers, or his countrymen, of his annunciation
to his immediate disciples, that they must submit
to poverty and suffering, and prepare themselves
for the last outrage of persecution, together with
the account of the apparent triumph of his ene-
mies and of his cruel death, this representa-
tion, if it were a fiction, might seem to have been
devised in direct opposition to the expectations of
the Jews respecting their Messiah.
But it may be said, that the facts to which I
have referred were so notorious, that no other ac-
count could be given by the honest impostors,
who, unconscious of falsehood, propagated the
stories of his miracles. Certainly these facts were
so notorious, that no other account could be given
but that which we have received. But such being
the case, it follows, that no attempt could be more
hopeless or more foolish, than an attempt to per-
suade the Jews that the life and the death, the
character, acts, and teachings of Jesus, correspond-
ed to their previous expectations of the Messiah.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 39
So far, indeed, from their finding any such corre-
spondence, we know that, during his ministry and
after his death, he was rejected by a very great
majority of the nation, as disappointing all their
hopes from a Messiah, and exasperating their
strongest prejudices.
I have elsewhere spoken of the theory of Strauss
as an outrage upon common sense. If the pre-
ceding account of it be correct, and no one, I trust,
will pretend that it is not, the language which I
have used cannot be objected to. But, as may
abundantly appear from the evidence afforded by
Strauss's work alone, he has many speculatists
among his own countrymen to keep him in coun-
tenance.
BUT we have as yet viewed this theory only un-
der one aspect; namely, in its relation to the Jew-
ish nation. We will consider it in some other
very important relations, in which the author has
not presented it, and in regard to which he has,
of course, given no explanations.
Christianity had its origin among the Jews, but
it is not through them that it has been transmitted
to us. From them it was communicated to the
Gentiles, the Heathens, our predecessors, from
40 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
whom we have received it. ' But between the
Heathen world and the Jewish people there had
been previously a wide separation. This separa-
tion continued between the Jewish Christians gen-
erally and the Gentile Christians. With the ex-
ception of the Gospel of Matthew, the former did
not use the Gospels received by the latter, Gos-
pels which attained universal authority among the
Gentile Christians. These books were received by
them, I do not here say, as authentic histories of
Jesus, but as authentic histories of a miraculous
revelation from the true God, a God before un-
known to the generality among them, the God
whom St. Paul announced as such even at Athens.
From whom, then, did the Heathens receive
their knowledge of Christianity and of the Gos-
pels ] The theory of Strauss admits but of one
answer. According to this theory, they must have
received it, not from the main body of the Jewish
Christians, but from those few mistaken men among
them who, having little or no acquaintance with
Jesus, propagated, unconscious of falsehood, those
mythi concerning him with which the Gospels are
filled, and who thus established in the world not
merely a fabulous history of him, the professed
Messiah, of whom they knew nothing correctly,
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 41
but likewise a new religion, embracing the no-
blest principles of action, founded upon faith in one
whose real history they had obliterated or ren-
dered doubtful, and whose character they had es-
sentially misrepresented. This is the only answer
which the theory of Strauss admits. But the only
answer admitted by authentic history and indis-
putable facts is, that the Heathens were instructed
in Christianity by the immediate followers and
companions of our Lord and by their associates,
by those who were perfectly aware -whether their
teaching was or was not true ; that they received
our religion from Barnabas and Paul and Luke,
from Peter and Mark, from the Apostle John, who
resided so long among them, and from others asso-
ciated with these early teachers. Above all, no
degree of folly, I think, certainly none to which a
rational person can be required to give heed, will
lead any one to pretend expressly that there is any
evidence, or any ground whatever for imagining,
that the Gospel was preached to the Heathen
world in two different forms ; in one form by half-
crazy fanatics, who filled the history of our Lord
with stories of fictitious miracles, and in another
by his immediate followers and friends, who told
the truth concerning him, whatever that was.
42 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
But turning from unquestionable truths, we will
enter the region of mere hypothesis. We will
clear the ground, as far as possible, of those facts
that stand in our way. The Epistles of St. Paul
we will regard as forgeries, and the whole history
of the propagation of Christianity which may be
gathered from the New Testament as a fabrica-
tion. We may thus find room for those conclu-
sions that necessarily result from the theory of
Strauss concerning the establishment of Christian-
ity in the heathen world.
Though it is implied by him, that we have no
evidence of the reception of our present Gospels
before the last half of the second century, yet it
is acknowledged, or rather maintained, by him, as
well as by the other infidel theologians of Ger-
many, that histories of the same essential charac-
ter existed at a much earlier period. It is not
pretended that any history of our Lord essen-
tially at variance with the Gospels, any history in
which he was not represented as a teacher from
God, whose mission was attested by miraculous
displays of God's power, was ever known to the
Gentile Christians.
These Christians, therefore, received their in-
struction in Christianity from the fanatical and
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 43
ignorant portion of Christ's disciples. Every one
knows what these teachers effected. Let us con-
sider their means and the obstacles which they
had to encounter.
They were men very deficient in good sense.
They had taken 110 pains to inform themselves
correctly concerning the character, acts, and teach-
ing of him whose disciples they professed to be,
and whom they were so zealous in exhorting oth-
ers to obey. They had, on the contrary, fallen
into the grossest mistakes concerning them. God
did not " bear them witness with signs and won-
ders and divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy
Spirit." The pretence that he did so is merely
one of the fables which are put forward through-
out the New Testament. It was not only mor-
ally, but physically, impossible that they should
produce any miraculous evidence of the truth of
their fictions. Nor were they distinguished for
eloquence or ability of any sort, since, though
they effected such an astonishing work, history
has not even preserved their names, but has falsely
substituted for them those of other individuals,
Apostles of Christ and the associates of Apos-
tles.
Such were the character and the facilities for
44 INTEKNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
accomplishing their purpose, possessed by these
zealous missionaries of falsehood. What obsta-
cles, then, had they to encounter 1
According to Strauss, their main purpose in
their mythical history of Christ, which we now
find in the Gospels, was to evince that a Messiah
(named Jesus) had appeared among the Jews.
This was the story which they propagated in the
heathen world.
But the heathen world would have regarded
only with indifference or ridicule such a story
from such preachers, a story, that a Messiah
had appeared among the Jews, a people towards
whom the prevalent feelings of the Heathens had
been those of dislike and contempt ; and in whose
supposed good or ill fortune in the advent of their
Messiah, it must have been very hard to persuade
them that they had any concern. Admitting,
however, that it were possible to excite their at-
tention to the subject, with what ineffable scorn
must they have regarded the sort of evidence laid
before them ! How would they have listened to
proofs founded on a pretended correspondence be-
tween a body of incredible fictions and certain
passages of a book called the Old Testament,
a book for which they had no respect, which very
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 45
many of them probably had never heard of, and
which it may be safely presumed no one of them
had read, which passages were represented to
them as expressing typically or mystically what
the Jews had expected concerning the Messiah ?
With how much patience would they have lis-
tened to these Jewish proselyting missionaries
who had come among them, when these missiona-
ries themselves told them, that the person whom
they called on them to receive as the Jewish Mes-
siah had been rejected by his own nation as an
impostor and blasphemer, and had, in consequence
of his pretensions, suffered a public execution as
ignominious as it was cruel 1 What must they
have thought of this Jewish Messiah, the deliv-
erer of his people, when he was preached to them
after the destruction of Jerusalem, and the dis-
persion and ruin of the Jewish nation I Is it pos-
sible, an intelligent reader may ask, that any one
can have been so bewildered and confounded by
irreligion and mysticism, as to imagine that the
most astonishing moral revolution in the history
of mankind, the establishment of Christianity in
the heathen world, was effected by such agents
under such circumstances ?
46 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
IT is not my intention to proceed at length
in such an examination of the theory of Strauss.
Were it worth while to exhaust the subject, it is
one which could not easily be exhausted. As truth
finds continual confirmation flowing in upon every
side, in proportion as the views of those who ex-
amine it are more comprehensive and correct, so
error is continually encountered by new objec-
tions, in proportion as it is distinctly contem-
plated, and its necessary relations clearly un-
derstood. I shall therefore confine myself to a
very few of the more important aspects of that
theory.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 47
CHAPTER II.
REMAKES ON OTHER THEORIES.
IF the Gospels be genuine, if the essential facts
which I have stated in " The Evidences of the
Genuineness of the Gospels " be not erroneously
stated, which no one, I believe, will pretend, and
if the reasoning upon them be not fallacious, of
which every one may judge for himself, the theory
of Strauss is wholly excluded ; there is no ground
on which it can stand. It becomes evident that
it is only one of those many theories which hang
in the cloudy region of German speculation,
oijT6 yfjs ovre ovpavov aTTTo/jieva, unconnected with
anything on earth or in heaven. If the Gospels
were written by Apostles and by those who re-
ceived their accounts immediately from Apostles,
the mythical theory of their having proceeded
from men who innocently and unconsciously origi-
nated and propagated marvellous stories respect-
ing our Lord must vanish at once into air. Noth-
ing remains for the disbeliever in the historical
48 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
facts concerning the origin of our religion, but to
fall back on the forlorn hypothesis, that the his-
tory of Jesus is throughout fictitious, and that,
of all intentional falsifiers, the Apostles were the
most shameless and the most successful, shame-
less and successful in so marvellous a manner,
that no account whatever can be given of it.
If, then, the views which have been taken of
the theory of Strauss be correct, nothing can be
added, which will exhibit more clearly its inco-
herent and dreamlike character, or its utter insuffi-
ciency to explain either the origin of Christianity,
or any one essential fact connected with the origin
of Christianity. I pass over, therefore, many
other considerations respecting it, which to my
own mind seem equally decisive as to its charac-
ter, and will only make a few remarks on this in
common with other theories to account for the
establishment of Christianity which have been ad-
vanced by such as refuse to admit its miraculous
origin. Those theories are very few. To object,
not to explain, has been the common work of un-
believers.
PREVIOUSLY to the theory of Strauss, that which
was prevalent in Germany supposed, that the facts
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 49
recorded in the Gospels, with the exception of
those of a miraculous character, were in the main
historically true, and that, in regard to the ac-
counts of miracles which they contain, those like-
wise were founded on certain facts which actually
took place, but facts in the common course of
nature, to which a miraculous character was given
only through the misapprehension of those by
whom they were witnessed. But it did not at-
tempt to explain how Christianity was established
in the world through this misapprehension of some
ignorant Jews, whose folly was regarded with
contempt and indignation by a very great majority
of their countrymen. This theory has passed, or
is rapidly passing, into a matter of history, and
there it will stand, as a melancholy proof of the
intellectual and religious state of men in a large
portion of civilized Europe during the latter part
of the last and the beginning of the present
century.
In regard to these two theories, and the spec-
ulations, generally, of infidel writers respecting
the origin of Christianity, there are some prelim-
inary considerations which are essential to form-
ing a correct judgment on the subject, but which
have been greatly neglected or kept out of view.
50 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
Let him who is reasoning against the divine origin
of our religion fix any period he may choose for
the commencement of its authentic history, still
at this period phenomena present themselves of a
character altogether wonderful and unparalleled.
We may take, for example, the last quarter of
the second century, and regard as fabulous all the
previous history of Christianity. What, then, is
to be found at this period I
We find the miraculous history of Jesus, the
history of a Jew who was represented to have
been commissioned by the God of the Jews to
instruct and command all men in his name, we
find this history, as it is recorded in the four Gos-
pels, received with an immovable conviction of
its truth, by a great number of heathen converts.
They were steady in affirming that this history,
and the books in which it is contained, had been
received by them from those who had made known
to them the new religion, from Apostles of
Christ and their associates. From whom, indeed,
could they have received the history of Christ's min-
istry, the truth of which they believed so firmly,
except from those by whom Christ had been made
known to them, and on whose teaching their faith
in him rested ? Of the strength of their belief
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 51
they gave sure proof by the marvellous change
which it wrought in their hearts and lives, by the
wide separation which it produced between them
and the heathen world, by their readiness to
submit to all the deprivations and evils which
it brought upon them; and even when they
shrunk from torture and death, it was not that
their belief was shaken, but that their courage
failed. Here is one group of remarkable phe-
nomena to be accounted for. Let us look at
another.
In an age which has afforded pictures of the
darkest and most revolting depravity prevailing
throughout the heathen world, in the midst of
such men as had furnished materials for the his-
tories of Tacitus and Suetonius, histories from
which so much more may be inferred by a Chris-
tian reader than is told by the heathen writers,
at a period when pagan ignorance and superstition
had become inflamed into persecuting bigotry, we
find Christianity in existence and extending its
power, in opposition to the strong antipathy and
resistance of the evil by which it was surrounded.
To use the words of a Christian then living, Ter-
tullian, it was " converting men to the worship of
the true God, causing them to reject error, and
52 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
forming them to righteousness, chastity, patience,
mercy, innocence." If there be any truth in any
religion, if there be a God who cares for men, if
men are immortal beings, if there be any respon-
sibility for our actions beyond this life, if that
doctrine be not false which teaches us to regard
ourselves as spiritual beings, and not as perishing
animals, if there be anything ennobling or con-
solatory beyond what atheism may afford, what-
ever can give value to religion is found in Chris-
tianity. And Christianity was existing in the
second century. How is this fact to be account-
ed for?
Such is the character of our religion, that those
who have denied its divine origin have generally,
in modern times, been disposed to pay it a show
of reverence, and, while rejecting its history and
its authority, to belie its name and assume it for
their infidel theories. Even Strauss gives us to
understand, that "he is filled with veneration for
every religion, and especially for the substance of
the sublimest of all religions, the Christian, which
he perceives to be identical with the deepest phil-
osophical truth " ; * that is, with the atheistic phi-
* Vol. m. p. 397.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 53
losophy of Hegel. Whatever inconsistency or
folly there may be in this assertion, I do not sup-
pose that it is to he regarded as ironical mockery.
His fellow-laborer, Baur, as I have formerly re-
marked, insists on the intimate connection be-
tween the atheistic philosophy of Hegel and
Christianity, so that the former transfers to itself
the entire substance of the latter.* No one will
so misunderstand me as to suppose that I quote
these passages as deserving consideration, regarded
as the testimonies of the individual writers to the
value of Christianity; for the Hegelian philosophy
of these writers has not even any false semblance
of Christianity, though it might ally itself with
the religion of the Tartars, which teaches the in-
carnation of the divinities in human bodies, that
is, in the Lamas ; I only quote them to show
that Christianity, however grossly it may have
been misunderstood and perverted, however the
study of its character and its evidences may have
been and is neglected, has yet, with the progress
of morals and intelligence, taken so strong a hold
on all which is excellent in the minds and hearts
of men, that its enemies, while assailing it, are
* See Evidences of the Genuineness of the Gospels, II. 45, 46.
54 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
obliged, in order to secure followers, to inscribe
its name on their banners.
BUT not only was Christianity in existence in
the second century ; there is another astonishing
phenomenon to be accounted for. It is the con-
ception of its Founder presented in the Gospels,
the view given in them of his character and his
ministry. It is a conception to which human his-
tory or human experience offers no parallel or
resemblance, one apparently surpassing the
power of any human genius to have formed
from such materials as the heathen world could
furnish him, from any comprehension of relig-
ious truth he might derive from it, or from any
knowledge or imagination it might afford or sug-
gest of the moral nature and capacities of man.
Yet this portraiture of an individual in all its
supernatural grandeur is found in works which,
considered merely as literary compositions, are
rude, imperfect, fragmentary, in the works of
men whom it would be folly to speak of as in-
spired by human genius, and to whom, if we re-
gard them as fanatical or false or foolish, we
can ascribe no comprehensive and correct no-
tions of moral truth, and no sustained elevation
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 55
of moral sentiment. It is found in the produc-
tions of Jews who evidently had no superiority
over many of their countrymen through their
natural gifts, or through the advantages of such
an education as Galilee or Judaea could furnish ;
but whose writings, on the contrary, make it ap-
parent that they had no command of appropriate
expression in any language, and especially in the
foreign language of the Greeks. What is to be
said respecting this wonderful combination of in-
congruous facts 1
The character of Jesus, as it appears in the
Gospels, is not that of a truly wise and good
man, placed in such circumstances as may occur
in the course of God's ordinary providence, ex-
posed to severe trials in an irreligious age, yet
unbroken and unshaken by evil, thoroughly pen-
etrated and supported by a sense of his own im-
mortality and of his relation to God, and devoting
all the powers which nature has given him to the
service of his fellow-men. No human genius has
ever exhibited, by a series of actions and words,
an imaginary delineation of such an individual.
Nor is this the character which is presented to us
with so much distinctness in the Gospels ; but
one which it must have been far more difficult
56 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
to portray before its actual appearance on earth.
Even should we connect with the conception just
presented the further trait, that the individual
supposed is, from the impulse of his own mind, a
great moral and religious reformer, strenuously
laboring to raise others to the same elevation with
himself, we should not embrace in it the distinc-
tive characteristics by which Jesus Christ was
separated from all other men. How, then, is he
represented in the Gospels ?
In the Gospels, in these rude works of unlet-
tered Jews, we find an account of the actions and
words of one who is represented as having been
the immediate minister of God, associated with
him as no other finite being within our knowl-
edge ever was, speaking to mankind in his name,
and certified to men as his representative by ex-
traordinary manifestations of God's power, alto-
gether different from that divine energy on which
the regular course of the physical universe de-
pends. To this fundamental conception the ac-
count given of him fully corresponds. He satis-
fies the highest imaginations that we can form of
such a teacher. He lives only for God and for
man. All selfish purposes and passions and fears
are put aside by him. He does not falter in his
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 57
course, through any human weakness. The boldest
assumptions of authority and of the most intimate
connection with God, are so accordant with the
whole representation of him, that we read them
without a thought of their utter and shocking
incongruity supposing him not to be the delegate
and representative of God. " No one knows the
Father but the Son, and he to whom it is the will
of the Son to reveal him." " He who has seen
me has seen the Father." " The words which I
speak are not mine, but the Father's who sent me."
"I and my Father are one," or, as we might
express it, " are the same." "I am the resurrec-
tion and eternal life." " It is the will of Him
who sent me, that every one who puts his trust
in the Son should have eternal life." "Who-
ever obeys my teaching will never see death."
" All power is given me in heaven and on earth."
The power of the Omnipotent will support that
cause for which he has sent me, the cause of truth
and righteousness.
These declarations are uttered with the perfect
calmness of un doubting superiority. Whether the
conception set before us be real or fictitious, there
can be no doubt about the truth of the words,
" Never did man speak like this man."
58 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
This, then, is the presentation of a character of
inappreciable grandeur. But there is another
aspect under which Jesus appears in the Gospels,
wholly contrary to all vulgar notions of grandeur.
In this aspect there is nothing answering to any
previous imaginations which most of us, probahly
all of us, might form concerning the appearance
in this world of a messenger from God. He
who claimed to speak in the name of God was a
poor Jew of Galilee. His connections were all in
the humbler classes of society. He was uneducat-
ed. " Whence," asked the Jews, " has this man
his learning, having never been instructed ? " He
was regarded with scorn as well as with fear by
the powerful and rich among his countrymen. He
was scourged by the order of a Roman governor.
He was exposed to the insults of Roman soldiers.
He suffered, by a public execution, that terrible
death of agony and infamy, which was ordinarily
inflicted only on the most odious criminals, or
the most despised captives and unpitied slaves.
Thus is the delegate of God, he who was entitled
to be called the Son of God, brought before our
eyes in the Gospels. Were we to form a previous
conception of the coming of a messenger from God
to men, we might imagine him an angel descend-
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 59
ing in glory from the visible heavens, or a Messiah
coming no one knew whence, a monarch, perhaps,
ruling with unresisted wisdom and benevolence,
and establishing throughout his kingdom the laws
of God, or a prophet, impressing all around him
with supernatural awe, and listened to only to be
obeyed. Certainly we should free our conception
from all that might seem degrading in the eyes of
men, and embody in it all that we might think
likely to command admiration and homage.
But when we turn from our imaginations to the
realities presented in the Gospels, we perceive that
in their exhibition of the office, character, and life
of Jesus, the parts which separately viewed may
seem so discordant blend themselves into one har-
monious whole. The dark cloud is a part of the
magnificent spectacle as essential as the flood of
glory which pours over it. The Saviour of men
came to teach us that all worldly distinctions are as
nothing, compared with those which concern our
spiritual nature and our immortal being ; and
how could he have taught this, if he had not him-
self trodden them under foot I He came to teach
that men are estimated by God very differently from
the manner in which they had estimated and do
still ordinarily estimate each other ; that, in the
60 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
burning light of eternal truth and justice, all that
is accidental to character, all that imposes on hu-
man weakness, disappears ; and nothing remains as
an object of Gtod's approbation but essential, inde-
structible virtue. He came to teach us the vanity
of all merely human glory, and this lesson he
could not have given, if he had been invested with
the splendors of earth, or with more magnificent
splendors from heaven, that he might overpower
the imaginations of men. He came to teach us
not by words alone, but by embodying his teach-
ing in his life, that no sufferings should cause us
to turn aside from duty. He came to form men by
the most effectual, the only effectual means, by
his own example, to the practice of the hardest
and the highest virtues, those virtues which can
be called into action only by severe trials. How
could this have been done by such a messenger
from God as we might, in our folly, imagine as
suitable to the grandeur of the mission'? He
could, indeed, have proclaimed to us, that, when
duty requires it, we must submit to any depriva-
tion, to pain and death, and even be ready to bear
our cross to the place of our execution. But what
would have been the effect of such a declaration
compared with that of the words of Jesus : " Let
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 61
him who would be my follower renounce himself,
and come after me, bearing his cross " ? He came
to bring hope to a world full of suffering, in which
he heard all around him the wailing of wretched-
ness, as it may everywhere be heard at the present
day by him whose ears the spirit of the religion
of Jesus has opened to its cry. He came to men,
as they were and as they are, sinning, sorrow-
ing, insecure in all that they love on earth, often
oppressed with gloom, often tried by severe afflic-
tions, worn perhaps by disease and pain, seeing
others perishing by the last extremities of misery
and famine, and all fellow-travellers to death ;
he came to us whose real life, at its best, is often
so different from its show to the world ; and he
came to bring strength and consolation. Not be-
fore the throne of a monarch, nor in the presence
of an angel, could we look for sympathy. It is
when standing before the cross, while contem-
plating the death of the chosen of God, that we
recognize one bound to us by a common nature,
by community of suffering and by mutual sym-
pathies, Jesus the strengthener, and Jesus the
fellow-sufferer.
Looking back from the cross of Jesus on his
preceding ministry, what is the image of him which
62 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
we receive from the Gospels'? If it have been
truly impressed on our hearts, we turn away un-
satisfied from the highest efforts of painting to
embody in his' lineaments the expression of his
character. Poetry can add nothing to our concep-
tions. It may render them more distinct and
vivid, but it will affect us only in proportion as we
believe it conformed to reality. It is to the per-
ception of essential reality that we owe the thrilling
sense of moral interest and grandeur produced by
the image it has called up of
"that calm, sorrowful, prophetic eye
With its dark depths of grief, love, majesty ;
And the pale glory of the brow, a shrine
Where Power sat veiled, yet shedding softly round
What told that He could be but for a time uncrowned."
SUCH as we have seen is the representation of
the office, life, and character of Jesus contained in
the Gospels. We have been reasoning, it will be
remembered, on the supposition that all the early
history of our religion before its establishment
among the Gentiles is essentially fabulous. But
the existence of this conception of Jesus in the
midst of the pagan world remains to be accounted
for. A solution, likewise, is to be given of the
other phenomena of which we have taken so rapid
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 63
a view. What explanation does infidelity afford 1 ?
The subject early exercised the minds of unbe-
lievers. During the last two or three centuries
strong efforts have been made to disprove the
miraculous origin of Christianity ; and of late the
work has been laboriously carried on by many
writers, some calling themselves Christians, and
others not assuming that name. What, then, are
the last results ? What is the theory now most
approved by such writers concerning the origin
and establishment of Christianity 1
The theories which have been advanced may be
resolved into one. It is this, that the origin
and establishment of our religion, with all the
phenomena to which our attention has just been
directed, are the result of the efforts of certain
Jews, who, if not fraudulent fanatics, grossly mis-
conceived, in some way or other, the character of
him whose history and office they pretended to
make known ; that, by means which are not ex-
plained, they imposed their fabulous stories, not
only on some of their own countrymen, but also
on the Heathens, while at the same time they pre-
sented to them the highest conceptions ever formed
of religion and duty ; and that these stories, after
having been somewhat changed by tradition, finally
64 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
coalesced into the four Gospels. Whatever may
be the first thoughts that such a solution suggests
to a philosopher, one of his last reflections may
probably be on the vast difference which it has
pleased God to ordain among men in their intel-
lectual capacity and their moral perceptions and
feelings.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 65
CHAPTER III.
EXAMINATION OF STRAUSS' S TWO FUNDAMENTAL PRINCI-
PLES OF CRITICISM.
FROM these general considerations we return
to our immediate task, a notice of the work of
Strauss. His general theory concerning the origin
and establishment of Christianity is such as we
have seen. The main body of his work is occu-
pied in supporting this theory by an attack on the
credibility and genuineness of the Gospels.
" The sole purpose of the whole work that fol-
lows," he says, in his Introduction, " is to examine
the Gospels in detail in order to determine on inter-
nal grounds the credibility of their relations, and in
connection with this the probability or improba-
bility that the Gospels are the work of eye-
witnesses, or, generally, of well-informed writers." *
In this examination the two principles which he
lays down as tests, either of which is sufficient to
* Leben Jesu, I. 64 ; Engl. Translation, I. 57.
66 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
determine that " an account is not historical," that
is, that it is not to be believed, are these :
First. " An account is not historical, when it is
irreconcilable with the known and universal laws
which govern the course of events." *
Second. " An account which lays claim to any
historical value must not be inconsistent with
itself, nor contradict other accounts." t
With respect to the first of these principles,
"the impossibility of a miracle," a conclusion
which, according to Strauss, has been established
" by a series of the most laborious researches, con-
tinued for centuries," it must rest on the truth of
one of two assertions.
He who affirms it must either maintain that
there is no power capable of producing other effects
than those which men witness in the regular course
of nature ; or he must maintain that, if any being
possesses such power, we may be fully assured that
he will never exercise it.
But if there is a being who may properly be
* Leben Jesu, 1. 100 ; Engl. Translation, I. 87.
f As this is so extraordinary a proposition, it seems right to give
the original : " Mit sich selbst und mit anderen Berichten darf eine
Relation nicht in Widerspruch stehen, wenn sie geschichtliche Geltung
ansprechen will." Leben Jesu, 1. 101 ; Engl. Translation, I. 89.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 67
called God, the presumption and folly of either
proposition preclude any argument respecting it
such as might be addressed to an intelligent man.
If the existence of such a being as men have
conceived of under the name of God be denied,
the question respecting the historical evidences of
Christianity is shut out, and the only question re-
maining a question to be first settled is about
the truth of atheism.
If the proposition be fully established, that a
miracle is impossible, it is a futile labor to fill
many pages with criticisms intended to show that
the narratives of the pretended miracles found in
the Gospels are incoherent and contradictory to
one another. But it is the application of Strauss's
second principle to the criticism of the Gospels
which alone will interest an English reader, except
so far as he may be curious to know the last prod-
ucts of German speculation concerning religion,
and the last accepted theory of infidelity.
This fundamental principle is enunciated by him
with his customary indefiniteness and incorrectness,
and the consequent absence of any tenable mean-
ing.
"An account," he says, "which lays claim to
any historical value, must not contradict other
68 INTEENAL EVIDENCES OF THE
accounts." It is only after two or three pages,
that he incidentally recognizes the truth, that,
" when two narratives mutually exclude each other,
one only is thereby proved to be unhistorical." *
But this is not the only great oversight in the
position taken by Strauss. He speaks of one nar-
rative as contradicting another, in a sense wholly
indefinite. In what respects must two narratives
contradict each other, that the credit of one or both
may be invalidated'? Certainly in the essential
points of the narration. If they agree in these, no
further agreement is ordinarily to be expected.
Absolute freedom from error is not a common
attribute of the most credible history, and it would
be a marvel if it were found in four different rela-
tions of the same series of transactions. Two
professedly independent histories of the same events
would present, I do not say a very suspicious
character, but a character wholly unexampled, if
they agreed together throughout, if no real or
apparent discrepances were to be found between
them. And in proportion as any important fact
is confirmed by a greater number of witnesses, so
may we expect to find more discrepances and
* Vol. I. p. 92, Engl. Translation.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 69
contradictions in the accounts of particular cir-
cumstances attending it. But, conformably to the
vagueness of his general proposition, Strauss,
throughout his criticism on the Gospels, neglects
the distinction between essential contradictions and
unimportant differences, and deals with the latter
as if they were of the same class with the former.
Thus, after laying down his rule, he proceeds
immediately to illustrate it in the following man-
ner:
" The most decided case falling under this rule,
amounting to a positive contradiction, is when one
account affirms what another denies. Thus, one
Gospel [that of Matthew] represents the first ap-
pearance of Jesus in Galilee as subsequent to the
imprisonment of John the Baptist, whilst another
Gospel [that of John] remarks, long after Jesus
had preached both in Galilee and in Judaea, that
' John was not yet cast into prison.' " *
I believe that this statement of Strauss is erro-
neous. But it is not here necessary to discuss this
subject. Supposing it not to be erroneous, what
will follow ] It will follow that one or the other
Evangelist had been misinformed as to the time of
* Vol. I. p. 89.
70 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
John's imprisonment, or that, writing after an
interval of probably more than thirty years, his
recollection of it was incorrect. It would not fol-
low that John' was not imprisoned ; nor would
any doubt be cast on the essential facts which the
two Evangelists relate concerning him. Nor would
it follow that either of them was disqualified, by
his mistake about the precise time of John's im-
prisonment, from being a trustworthy witness of
what he had seen and heard as a companion of
Jesus during his ministry.
THE character of Strauss's criticism on the Gos-
pels, and of his reasoning upon them generally,
admits of being illustrated by applying it to the
accounts given by different heathen authors of
almost any remarkable event which they have re-
lated in common. But it is difficult to give such
an illustration ; because, on any subject of profane
history, there is danger that even a subdued copy
of his manner may have an air of burlesque un-
suitable to a grave discussion. Where the subject
offers nothing to pervert the action of common
sense, the absurdity of the conclusion to be arrived
at by his mode of reasoning presents itself too
glaringly at the very commencement of the argu-
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 71
ment. Nor would it be tolerable to give at length
an imitation of his prolixity, and his discussion
of immaterial and irrelevant topics. But, not-
withstanding these hindrances, we may, with the
omission of many particular circumstances and in a
simple and imperfect form, apply his process, tak-
ing for a subject the assassination of Caesar. The
purpose, it is to be conceived, is to show that the
narratives of this event are entitled to no historical
credit, but, on the contrary, are to be regarded as
different forms of a " mythus." The account of it
occupies less than twenty lines in the copy of
Suetonius lying before me.
Suetonius relates, that when Caesar had seated
himself in the theatre of Pompey where the Sen-
ate was assembled, the conspirators stood round
him. Cimber Tullius, as he says, had agreed to
take the lead. Accordingly, he immediately ap-
proached Caesar, as if to make some request. Thus
the story appears to have originally stood ; but in
the process of tradition men were not content with
so simple a statement. An imaginary subject was
invented for this request, which in fact was never
purposed, namely, the recall of his brother from
exile. Appian represents the request to have been
actually made ; and Plutarch, proceeding still fur-
72 INTEENAL EVIDENCES OF THE
ther, says that the other conspirators actually
joined in it. But no reason -can be supposed why
they should have thought it necessary to go through
this preliminary to their bloody act. In contradic-
tion to all these accounts, Dion Cassius says that
" one of the conspirators," (this indefinite expres-
sion, as we shall see, deserves to be remarked,)
" when it was time, came to him as if to acknowl-
edge a favor." The account of Dion, taken alone,
is unobjectionable, except on one ground ; namely,
that it does not appear how any one could signify
by his looks alone that he had the purpose of
acknowledging a favor ; especially how this could
be done by a conspirator agitated by such feelings
as must naturally have accompanied the intention
to perpetrate the murder of a person like Csesar,
whose presence struck awe into all around him.
If these contradictions and improbabilities cast
suspicion on the story, this suspicion is heightened
by the want of agreement among its different
relators as to the name of the person who is said
to have come near to Csesar. Dion, as we have
seen, does not venture to give any name. Sueto-
nius calls him Cimber Tullius, a strange appella-
tion, as no other example has been produced of
Cimber used as a preenomen. Seneca, writing
v EE3:
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 73
about half a century before Suetonius, calls him
Tillius, or perhaps Tullius, Cimber; thus chan-
ging Cimber into an agnomen. Plutarch, in his
Life of Caesar, calls him Metillius Cimber ; but in
his Life of Brutus, Tullius Cimber. And, finally,
Appian gives him the name of Atilius Cimber. It
is easy to understand that the name of an individ-
ual so conspicuous that the conspirators, men of
noble rank, had assigned to him the lead in the
attack on Caesar, would not have been so con-
founded and lost.
In respect to the question whether the story is
to be regarded as of any historical validity or not,
the passage of Seneca, in his eighty-seventh Epis-
tle, which has been already alluded to, is of great
importance. He is discussing the question whether
a secret may be intrusted to a man intemperate in
the use of wine. He says : " That assassination
of C. Caesar, I mean him who, after subduing
Pompey, ruled the Commonwealth, was intrusted
to Tillius Cimber as well as to C. Cassius. Cassius
through his whole life drank only water. Tillius
Cimber was excessive in the use of wine, and a
brawler." We have no means of ascertaining the
precise date of this Epistle. But Seneca died
A. D. 65, and Caesar was assassinated, according
74 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
to the common account, B. C. 45. Seneca was a
philosopher, and wrote for intelligent readers.
But we find, that within a century, or perhaps a
little more, after the supposed assassination of
Csesar, Seneca, in speaking of it, was obliged to
explain whom he meant by C. Csesar. " I mean
him," he says, " who, after subduing Pompey, ruled
the Commonwealth." When so little was known
in the time of Seneca of the history of the Ceesar
who was reported to have been assassinated in the
midst of the assembled Senate, that intelligent
readers could need such a specification of his per-
son, it is clear that little or no reliance can be
placed on the accounts of later writers than Seneca,
(as are all the historians who tell the story,) con-
cerning the manner of his death.
There is, moreover, a striking inconsistency be-
tween this passage of Seneca and what is asserted
by the subsequent narrators of the event. Accord-
ing to them, Cassius, and Brutus incited by Cassius,
were leaders in the conspiracy. Their accounts
are fairly represented in the famous play of Shake-
speare on this subject. Cassius, more than any
one else, appears as the author of the plot. But
Seneca, putting him on a level with Tillius Cimber,
whom he represents as a drunkard and a brawler,
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 75
says that the secret of the conspiracy was intrusted
to him, tarn creditum est Tillio Cimbro quam C.
Cassio. No one can think that, if he had regarded
Cassius as the author of the conspiracy, or even
as a principal conspirator, he would have spoken
of the secret of the conspiracy as having been
intrusted to him.
But it is time to return to the detail of the sup
posed assassination. Suetonius says, that Cimber
Tullius, upon Caesar's repulsing him by a gesture,
laid hold of Caesar's robe on both shoulders. He
indicates no purpose in his doing so; but this
purpose was supplied by tradition in two opposite
forms, as I shall now proceed to show.
Suetonius does not represent Tullius as pulling
off Caesar's toga, or robe. This circumstance is
added by Plutarch, who says, that he pulled it off
from his neck, aVo rov rpaxfaov, or, as he ex-
presses it in another place, " he pulled it off with
both hands from his shoulders." The account of
Dion agrees essentially with that of Plutarch. But
Appian says, that, dragging his (Caesar's) garment,
he drew it upon his neck, TO el^a Trepio-Traa-as eTrl
TOV rpa^r]\ov el\Ke* Was the idea in Appian's
* I do not understand (I here speak in my own person, not that of
Strauss) how Schweighaeuser, in his edition of Appian (III 776),
76 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
mind, that by dragging Caesar's garment round him
the free use of his arms would be prevented 1 ?
And did Plutarch and Dion, on the other hand,
conceive that by pulling it off he would be more
exposed to the blows of the conspirators, their
weapons being less likely to be impeded by its
folds'?
Whatever may be imagined respecting this action
of Tullius Cimber, as we may call him, there is
another account common to Suetonius, Plutarch,
Appian, and Dion, which cannot be reconciled with
historical probability. According to them all,
Caesar, when dying, covered his face and the lower
part of his body with his robe, that he might fall
in a decent manner. The same robe which had
either been pulled away from him, or dragged
round him, so as to confine his arms ! Suetonius
thus describes this circumstance: "toga caput
obvolvit : simul sinistra manu sinum ad ima crura
deduxit, quo honestius caderet, etiam inferiore cor-
poris parte velata." But how could Caesar, when
dying under twenty-three wounds, (for there is a
suspicious agreement among Suetonius, Plutarch,
and Appian in mentioning this precise number,)
could suppose that these words were to be rendered, Cimbrum togam
Ccesaris prehensam deorsum traxisse, ut collum nudaretur.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 77
have retained strength enough to recover his robe
from the conspirators, or, (if we receive the account
of Appian,) to have unwound it from his body,
so that he might dispose it in a more becoming
manner? If he had had the strength remain-
ing to do so, what probability is there, that the
conspirators would have stood quietly round while
he was performing the acts reported I Their fero-
cious attack on him, as we shall see by and by, was
continued till life was extinct, so as to leave him
no possibility of thus attending to decorum.
The discrepances among the different accounts
of the transaction are so great, as to compel us,
even while noticing only the most important, to
retrace our steps, and to resume the narrative at a
period preceding the supposed death of Caesar.
Suetonius says, that the signal having been given
by Cimber's laying hold of the robe of Caesar, Cas-
sius wounded him in front a little below the throat.
But Plutarch agrees with Suetonius neither as to
the name of the person who gave the first wound,
nor the position in which he was standing, nor the
nature of the wound. The wound, he says, was
given by Casca, who was standing behind Caesar,
and who wounded him, he in one place says,
" in the neck," and in another, " in the shoulder " ;
7*
78 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
while Appian, differing from both, says, that Casca
reached over Caesar's head, and, aiming at his throat,
missed, and wounded him in the breast. All cer-
tain history disappears in the confusion of these
contradictory accounts.
We will now pass in review the different words
reported to have been uttered during the attack on
Csesar, by him and by others. Suetonius relates,
that, when Cimber laid hold of his robe, he ex-
claimed, " That is violence," Ista quidem vis est
Plutarch, Appian, and Dion say nothing of this
exclamation. Appian relates, that Cimber called
out, in Greek, to the other conspirators, " Friends !
why do you delay] " Tl ppaSvvere, w $i\oi ; But,
again, nothing is said of this by the other narra-
tors. The account of Plutarch is also peculiar to
himself. He says that Caesar, when struck by
Casca, turned round upon him and laid hold of
his sword, crying out in Latin, " Villain ! what do
you mean 1 " and that Casca at the same instant
called to his brother in Greek, saying, " Brother,
help ! " Each historian has his own separate story ;
and how is this to be accounted for except by sup-
posing that they are all equally destitute of any
historical basis, and are the products of an ever-
varying tradition 1
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 79
The story of Plutarch is expressly contradicted
by Suetonius, who says, that Csesar, after receiving
the first blow, " uttered only a single groan, but did
not speak " ; he died uno modo ad primum ictum
gemitu sine wee edito. Tradition, however, had
burdened itself with another story of words uttered
by Caesar, which, though it is expressly rejected by
Suetonius and Dion, and not mentioned by Plu-
tarch and Appian, has yet become classical in
modern times. " He did not speak," says Sueto-
nius, " though some have related that, when M.
Brutus assaulted him, he said to him, ' And are
you one of them 1 you, my son I ' : The question
has even been discussed by modern critics, for what
reason Caesar called Brutus his son. But though
the story has become classical, we perceive in it, as
it is now commonly told or alluded to, a new in-
fluence of tradition in changing its form since it
was first reported. The supposititious words as-
cribed to Caesar are given by Suetonius in Greek,
to the effect of the rendering above. But the
words now put into Caesar's mouth are commonly
in Latin : Et tu Brute ! mi fill ! " And you too,
Brutus ! my son ! "
No accounts can be more contradictory to each
other than those of Suetonius and Appian concern-
80 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
ing the behavior of Caesar during the attack on him.
The essential trait of that of Suetonius, namely,
the silence of Caesar, has already been brought to
notice. Suetonius says, that, when he received his
first wound from Cassius (not Casca, it is to be
remembered), "he seized his arm and pierced it
with his writing-style, and endeavored to spring
forward, but was hindered by another wound.
Then, perceiving that he was aimed at on every
side with drawn daggers, he covered his head with
his robe, and with his left hand drew it down to
his feet, that he might fall in a more decorous
manner, even the lower part of his body being
covered. And thus he was pierced with three-and-
twenty wounds, uttering only a single groan at
the first blow, but no words." With this compare
the account of Appian, who relates, that, on receiv-
ing the first wound from Casca (not Cassius), he
seized his arm, and, springing down from his seat,
dragged Casca with much violence ; and that, while
struggling with him, he was wounded by four
others of the conspirators, and turned upon each of
them, " raging and roaring like a wild beast," o-vv
OPJTJ Kai jSorj) KaOdirep Bripiov, till at last he fell by
the statue of Pompey. What narrative entitled to
any historical credit could be constructed out of
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 81
these two accounts'? Plutarch's relation rather
corresponds with that of Appian in the more im-
portant parts of the detail. Dion's agrees essen-
tially with that of Suetonius.
Caesar fell, says Appian, by the statue of Pom-
pey. Of this Suetonius and Dion knew nothing.
It is plainly a traditional embellishment of the
story, which was greedily received by the romance
of after times. The purpose of it was to represent
Pompey, though dead, as triumphing over his once
victorious rival. His statue was probably con-
ceived of as informed by his spirit, for Plutarch
relates that Cassius, though inclined to the doc-
trines of Epicurus, was said, before the commence-
ment of the attack on Caesar, to have turned his
eyes to the statue of Pompey, and silently invoked
his aid ; and, though it is hard to understand how
any one could become acquainted with the silent
prayer of Cassius, yet the supposed indwelling of
the spirit of Pompey in his statue agrees with the
superstition of the age. The feeling which gave
rise to this embellishment is fully discovered in the
narrative of Plutarch. He says, Caesar, " either
by chance, or being pushed thither by the con-
spirators, fell at the pedestal of Pompey's statue,
which was covered with his blood ; so that Pompey
82 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
seemed to preside over the vengeance inflicted on
his enemy, who was lying at his feet in his last
agonies, pierced with many wounds."
HERE we will stop in our illustration, not of
Strauss's manner of writing, for no illustration
of this could be given in any reasonable number of
pages, but of the intrinsic character of his crit-
icism. My purpose has been to make it evident
that this sort of criticism is inapplicable to human
testimony, to profane history equally as to the
Gospels ; and that its results have no tendency to
invalidate the essential truth of any narratives
subjected to it. I speak of that spurious criticism,
which, setting aside all the knowledge respecting
the fallibility and inaccuracy of human testimony
that experience is continually teaching us, repre-
sents it as an objection to the essential truth of an
account found in the narratives of different writers,
that these narratives do not agree with each other
in all their parts, that "they are more or less in-
crusted with errors of various kinds, and that none
of them is without flaws. Truth is not dug from
the mine of history as one entire and perfect chry-
solite, any more than it is so found in the every-day
relations of common life. Different original ac-
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 83
counts of the same series of events, when they agree
in the main facts, but are inconsistent in minor
particulars, confirm each other; since they show
that the narrators give independent testimony, and
had each separate sources of information, while,
on the contrary, were it possible to find different
accounts professedly original, perfectly agreeing
in all their details, this would be a phenomenon
hitherto so unknown, as either to justify the sus-
picion of collusion in the writers, or to lead at
once to the inference, that we had, in fact, but the
testimony of one witness, whom the others had
copied
Were there a prepossession against the truth of
the history of Caesar, did this subject concern the
religious character and moral responsibility of
men, a work composed after the manner of Strauss,
with the design of proving that history to be fabu-
lous, would, I doubt not, find as many admirers as
there have been of Strauss's own work on the
Gospels, who would look upon it, with equal
justice, as a learned and elaborate piece of reason-
ing. Certainly one speaks very far within bounds
in saying, that the accounts of the ministry, death,
and resurrection of Christ, given in the four Gos-
pels, which Strauss has subjected to his microscopic
84 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
criticism,* present no such, contradictions and im-
probabilities as exist, not merely in the accounts
of the assassination of Csesar, as given by the four
historians whom I have quoted, but throughout
the ancient narratives and notices of his life.
In the first volume of " The Evidences of the
Genuineness of the Gospels," in an Additional
Note " On the Origin of the Correspondences
among the First Three Gospels," I have pointed
out discrepances and inconsistencies among the
Gospels, the number of which bears a large pro-
portion to the number of all those which Strauss
has remarked upon in his three volumes. But it
did not enter my mind, nor, I will venture to
assert, has it entered the mind of any one of my
readers, that I could be considered as undermining
the authenticity of the Gospels. On the contrary,
I believed that I was establishing their authen-
ticity by showing that the discrepances among
* In remarking on the criticism of Strauss, one is reminded of the
lines of Pope :
" The critic eye, that microscope of wit,
Sees hairs and pores, examines bit by bit :
How parts relate to parts, or they to whole,
The body's harmony, the beaming soul,
Are things which Kuster, Burman, Wasse, shall see
When man's whole frame is obvious to a flea."
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 85
them were of such a character, that, when con-
sidered in connection with their essential agree-
ment, it was evident that the writers of those books
must either have been Apostles, or have derived
their information from Apostles. The discrepances
among the Gospels have, from the time of Origen,
been familiar to Christians, and made subjects of
discussion by them. They have been urged, and
correctly urged, to disprove the theological doc-
trine of the divine authorship of the Gospels, or,
in other words, the doctrine of their inspiration.
The novelty of Strauss's work consists in the use
which he has made of them to disprove the gen-
uineness and authenticity of the Gospels, consid-
ered as the proper works of human authors ;
not, indeed, in the assumption of the principle on
which he has proceeded, but in his indefatigable
prolixity in the application of it. Neither the
principle nor the application of it is in itself new.
For example, one of the most notorious, and not
of the least able, of infidel writers thus reasons :
" Not any two of these writers [the Evangelists]
agree in reciting exactly in the same words [the
italics are his own] the written inscription, short
as it is, which they tell us was put over Christ
when he was crucified; and, besides this, Mark
8
86 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
says he was crucified at the third hour (nine in
the morning), and John says it was at the sixth
hour (twelve at noon).
" The inscription is thus stated in those books :
Matthew, ' This is Jesus, the King of the Jews.'
Mark, ' The King of the Jews.'
Luke, ' This is the King of the Jews.'
John, ' Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.'
" We may infer from these circumstances, trivial
as they are, that those writers, whoever they were,
and in whatever time they lived, were not present
at the scene." *
The inference obviously intended, because it is
the only inference that may even seem to be to the
purpose, is, that the Evangelists are not credible
writers. It has never been maintained that any
one of them, except John, was present at the scene.
But the inference actually required to invalidate
the authenticity of the Gospels is one which no
man of sense could think of drawing ; namely, that
Jesus was not crucified either at the third, or the
sixth, or any other hour, and consequently that no
inscription whatever was put upon his cross, this
fact being further evinced by the contradictory
accounts given of that pretended writing.
* Paine's Age of Reason, Part II.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 87
IN a few pages of an Additional Note to the
first volume of " The Evidences of the Genuineness
of the Gospels," * I have endeavored to show that
the first two chapters of our present Gospel of
Matthew were not the work of that Evangelist.
It is with a discussion of the difficulties in these
two chapters and in the first two chapters of Luke,
that Strauss commences his critical examination
of the Gospels. This discussion fills about two
hundred pages. He assumes, without argument,
that the first two chapters ascribed to Matthew
were originally a part of the Gospel which bears
his name. Through these pages, and through a
hundred more of like character, as relating to
events of which the Apostles had not personal
knowledge,! he prepares his readers for the ex-
amination of those narratives concerning the public
ministry of Jesus, in which alone, as we believe, is
preserved the original testimony of the Apostles,
affirming on their own authority the truth of what
they related.
The whole argument of Strauss in the first two
hundred pages to which I have referred, admits
* Additional Note A, Section V. i.
f Namely, the " Relations between Jesus and John the Baptist,'*
and the " Baptism and Temptation of Jesus."
88 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
of being placed in a proper light in a few sen-
tences.
We will admit that the reasoning is fallacious
which I have formerly used to prove that the first
two chapters of Matthew's Gospel are not gen-
uine. We will assume that the narrative con-
tained in them proceeded from the original author
of the Gospel, whoever he was. I have formerly
not conceded, but maintained, that this narrative
contradicts that of Luke ; and that circumstances
are related in it which are in themselves incredi-
ble. Nothing further can be asked by one who
denies the authenticity of the Gospels, unless, with
Strauss, he deny also the possibility of a miracle,
a denial by which all discussion about the truth
of any particular account of a miracle is fore-
closed.
Yet this denial is, as we have seen, very early
put forward by Strauss as a fundamental position
of his work, and is continually reappearing
throughout the course of it as a main element of
his criticism on the Gospels. If, however, the
principle be settled, that a miracle is impossible,
there can be no greater waste of time than to argue
at length from other considerations against the
truth of the narratives of the Evangelists. Some
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 89
general solution of the existence and reception of
such a mass of fables as they have related is rea-
sonably to be expected, but prolix discussions of
these fables, considered individually, may well be
dispensed with. One might as profitably spend
his time in a minute critical examination of the
mythological stories concerning the birth, labors,
and death of Hercules, with the purpose of prov-
ing the narratives concerning him to be false, by
an exhibition of their inconsistencies and improb-
abilities. These remarks are applicable not merely
to the portion of Strauss's work immediately be-
fore us, but to his whole attack on the authenticity
of the Gospels. As a groundwork for any argu-
ment or explanation on this subject, we must
assume the possibility of their authenticity, that
is, the possibility of a miracle, or, in other words,
the possibility that we do not know that God can-
not act except conformably to what we call the
laws of nature, and the possibility that we are not
so acquainted with the counsels of t his infinite
wisdom and goodness, as to be assured of all which
it has been his will to effect.
Having, therefore, as regards the narrative in
the first two chapters ascribed to Matthew, con-
ceded everything except the prejudged conclu-
8*
90 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
sion, that all the narratives of miraculous events
contained in the Gospels are necessarily false, a
conclusion which Strauss assumes before entering
into his particular arguments against their truth,
and constantly interweaves with his reasoning,
we will now consider what follows from our ad-
missions.
I have formerly maintained it to be highly
probable, that Matthew, as an Apostle, must have
been aware of the errors of the narrative contained
in these first two chapters.* If, as I have sup-
posed, the historical evidence concerning these
chapters leads us to doubt their genuineness, then
the argument that their contents are not such as
we might expect from an Apostle, may be of de-
cisive weight. But we now assume that these
chapters were originally a part of the Gospel as-
cribed to Matthew, and this argument alone is, as
I am about to show, of no weight to invalidate the
historical evidence that has been adduced to prove
that this Gospel was his work.
In the supposed case that the two chapters are
genuine, the following considerations at once pre-
sent themselves. We know nothing of the per-
* Evidences of the Genuineness of the Gospels, Vol. I. p. Iviii, seqq.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 91
sonal history of Matthew after the death of our
Lord. We do not know how long he remained in
the society of the other Apostles, or how much he
was separated from them. If he remained in their
society, we have no reason to think that the facts
respecting the birth of our Lord were a common
topic of conversation among them. However im-
probable, therefore, it may be, that as an Apostle
he would be very incorrectly informed respecting
these facts, yet this is an improbability which
cannot be opposed to the proof that the Gospel
ascribed to him was his work ; and we are now
arguing on the supposition that the two chapters
were originally a part of it.
It appears, then, on this supposition, that
Matthew adopted and embodied in his Gospel a
false narration of circumstances connected with the
birth and infancy of our Lord. What follows from
this I We had no reason before to suppose that he
was well qualified as an historical critic to decide
on the truth or falsehood of a narrative. He was
originally of a class looked upon by his country-
men as degraded, a Jewish tax-gatherer in the ser-
vice of the Roman government. With his Gospel
before us, we cannot suppose him to have had any
literary culture; and we have no authentic account
92 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
of his having in any way distinguished himself,
except by its composition, after becoming an Apos-
tle. He had no personal knowledge concerning
the supposed events narrated in the first two
chapters, and was writing about sixty years after
their occurrence. Under these circumstances, he
adopted an erroneous narrative of those events.
He adopted, I say, this narrative ; for no one can
believe that, sixty years after the birth of Jesus,
the Evangelist wrote from his own imagination a
fabulous account of circumstances attending and
following that event, an account which, having
never before been heard of, would be regarded by
his readers with equal astonishment and incredu-
lity. The narrative must have been reported and
believed previously to his incorporating it in his
Gospel.
But if it was believed by others, what is there
in the fact that it was believed by Matthew which
may change, in any considerable degree, our opin-
ion of him as a writer 1 Or, rather, to state the
only question really at issue, What is there in
this fact to invalidate in any degree his testimony
to what he relates as of his own knowledge, the
miracles and the teaching of our Lord I Nothing
whatever. On the contrary, the striking difference
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 93
between the first two chapters and that portion of
the Gospel which relates to the public ministry
of Jesus is alone sufficient to create a strong
presumption, that, in the one case, we have an
erroneous tradition, and, in the other, authentic
testimony. It is not necessary to our argument,
but it should be remembered, that the events to
which the Evangelist testifies in his own person
are confirmed by the irresistible evidence of phe-
nomena which could not have existed without
those events as their cause.
Reasoning of a similar kind may be applied to
the case of Luke ; and every reader can make for
himself the necessary modifications in so applying
it. The main point to be attended to is, that the
errors of either Evangelist (on the supposition that
the errors of the first two chapters are to be as-
cribed to Matthew) do not disqualify him from
being a reliable witness to the truth of the mira-
cles of Jesus.
Nor do either those errors, or the inconsisten-
cies between the two narratives, discredit the main
fact which lies at the foundation of both, the
miraculous birth of our Lord. So far from this,
the only plausible solution of the existence of two
such discordant narratives, at so early a period, is,
94 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
that the main fact is true. Supposing the whole
story of the miraculous birth of our Lord to be
a fiction, this fiction must have had a primitive
form. The principal fact must have been related
with some detail of circumstances represented as
having been connected with it. The primitive fic-
tion, if it obtained currency, may have been added
to or altered in the process of tradition. But,
if we assume that the original story respecting
the birth of our Lord was a fable, derived, as it
must have been, from the invention of some indi-
vidual, and put into circulation by him, it is hardly
credible that another individual, equally without
any basis of truth on which to rest, should have de-
vised another fable irreconcilable with the former.
On the other hand, it might be expected before-
hand, that such an event as the miraculous birth
of our Lord, the facts concerning which were
known to so few individuals, should, in the lapse
of time, be enveloped in many fabulous circum-
stances. The narratives of no events are so likely
to be altered, in passing through the mouths of
different reporters, as those of miraculous events ;
and the fact that the accounts of the miracles of
Jesus, as related in the Gospels, are so free from
any traces of having been adulterated by tradition,
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 95
is one of the strongest internal proofs of the gen-
uineness and authenticity of those books.
IN examining the Gospels, after the manner of
Strauss, for the purpose of discovering whether
they afford internal evidence destructive of their
credibility, we must keep distinctly in mind the
only question to be settled. Putting out of view
the notion of the impossibility of a miracle, (which,
as I have said, precludes all argument on the sub-
ject,) the only question to be settled is this : Do,
or do not, the Gospels present such appearances as
to make it evident, or to create a presumption,
that their writers were not well-informed and
trustworthy witnesses respecting the events of the
public ministry of Jesus ?
When this question is distinctly apprehended,
the discussion is greatly contracted. It will re-
late only to their genuineness, not to their essen-
tial authenticity. It appears that, without further
examination, a very large portion of such criti-
cisms as are found in works like that of Strauss
may at once be laid out of consideration, as having
no bearing upon it. But this question has been
confounded with another altogether different,
whether the narratives contained in the Gospels
96 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
are free from error. The affirmative of this ques-
tion is not to be maintained. But no intelligent
and well-informed man will suppose that the ex-
istence of such errors and inconsistencies as may
be found in those narratives tends to invalidate
the essential authenticity of the Gospels, their
authenticity in the only sense in which we use the
term concerning any history, the general truth of
which is undoubted.
WE pass to another consideration. If the
Gospels are the works of eyewitnesses or of well-
informed contemporaries, the mythical theory of
Strauss, as he himself recognizes, is wholly ex-
cluded ; and so, likewise, is every other theory
which denies the miraculous origin of our religion,
excepting that theory, if such a theory may be
considered as existing, which refers its origin to
what may be called the pseudo-miracle of the suc-
cess of pure falsehood. It is, therefore, the main
immediate object of Strauss's work to prove that
the Gospels are not genuine, by showing that they
contain accounts which could not have proceeded
from well-informed narrators.
But in respect to the ultimate purpose of Strauss,
namely, to disprove the truth of our religion, the
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 97
conclusion arrived at by him, that the Gospels are
not genuine, at once deprives his criticisms on
those books of any weight, and invalidates all his
arguments against Christianity, except, indeed, that
argument which consists in the denial of the pos-
sibility of a miracle. His reasoning is self-destruc-
tive.
Let us admit that the Gospels are not genuine,
that they are productions of the second century,
founded on previous imperfect, written narratives,
or on oral traditions, or on both. This, I think, it
has been formerly shown, could not have been the
fact ; * but we will now reason on the supposition
that it was so. Upon this supposition, then, that
they are productions of the second century, what
character might we expect them to have consist-
ently with the truth of Christianity, that is, con-
sistently with the truth of the essential facts
concerning the miraculous office, the character,
acts, teaching, death, and resurrection of Christ?
Let an objector, who does not assume that a mira-
cle is impossible, magnify at his will the discre-
pances among them, or what he regards as the
intrinsic improbabilities in their accounts of par-
* See Evidences of the Genuineness of the Gospels, I. 168, seqq.
98 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
ticular events, yet no one, acquainted with the
nature of human testimony, especially with what
must be its nature in relation to facts so marvel-
lous and unparalleled, when passing through a se-
ries of reporters, will imagine that there could
be fewer discrepances and improbabilities than
exist in the narratives of the life of Jesus, if these
narratives were written in the second century, on
however firm a basis they might rest of essential
truth. Establish the position that the Gospels
were not written by those to whom they have been
ascribed, and the whole body of criticisms upon
them, such as are brought forward by writers like
Strauss, becomes utterly irrelevant and futile as
regards the truth of Christianity. Supposing the
truth of our religion, if the histories of Jesus which
we now possess were not written till the second
century, it would be altogether unreasonable to
expect that they would be exposed to fewer objec-
tions than Strauss has urged against them.
If we prove the genuineness of the Gospels, we
prove the truth of Christianity ; but, on the other
hand, to disprove the genuineness of the Gospels,
were that possible, would not be to advance a step
toward disproving its truth. It is evident, how-
ever, that the mistake has commonly been com-
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 99
mitted by unbelievers of supposing that such
would be the case, and that this error has been
acquiesced in by many believers. But in order to
disprove the truth, or, in other words, the miracu-
lous origin, of our religion, it is necessary to show
that all those facts in the history of the world
which imply its miraculous origin as their cause
never existed, or that some other sufficient solu-
tion may be given of their existence.
The case may be thus stated. If the Gospels
are, as we believe, the works of Apostles and of
companions of Apostles, the question of the essen-
tial truth of their narratives is decided. If they
are, as Strauss and many other German theologians
have contended, the compilations of anonymous in-
dividuals in the second century, full of errors, as,
in that case, we might reasonably expect, then
neither their late compilation nor the existence of
those errors can invalidate the decisive evidences
of the miraculous origin of our religion still to be
derived from them, and to be derived from other
sources beside that particular one which we now
believe to exist, namely, the testimony of trust-
worthy witnesses of the ministry of our Lord, given
either by themselves or by those to whpm they had
directly communicated their knowledge, under cir-
100 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
cumstances which preclude the notion of essential
error or of intentional deception as an incredible
absurdity. And it is to be observed, that among
the phenomena which, on this supposition, would
evince the miraculous origin of Christianity, would
be the compilation of such histories of Christ in
the second century. If the Gospels had not ap-
peared till this time, they would undoubtedly be
far less correct narratives than they are ; they
would have been full of traditionary fables. But it
may well be doubted, whether the evidence of the
truth of our religion would be weakened. The
existence of such a representation of the character
and ministry of Christ in the Gentile world, found
in the second century, in certain books, to be as-
cribed to anonymous Jewish writers, would be, to
say the least, as difficult to account for, on any
other supposition than that of its essential truth,
as the existence of such a representation in the
Gospels considered as genuine.
THE work of Strauss has obtained celebrity, and
produced an effect, probably much disproportioned
to the number of its readers ; for, in the present
state of theological literature and inquiry, it cannot
be supposed that the readers of so long a work of
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 101
such a character have been numerous, at least out
of Germany. But it has furnished a pretence for
infidelity, by being a very long, and what has been
reputed an elaborate and learned, work in its de-
fence ; and the very circumstance that its actual
contents were little known has undoubtedly mag-
nified the notion of their importance. The direct
effect which it may have produced on some minds
by the views which it presents, is to be ascribed to
various causes. The fact that there are errors in
the Gospels is confounded throughout with the,
conclusion that the writers are not credible wit-
nesses. The doctrine of the impossibility of a
miracle is constantly kept in view, to determine all
questions against the truth of the Gospels. The
opinions of the Rationalists (so called) of the
school of Paulus, who resolve all miracles into
erroneous accounts of natural events, are produced
in detail by the author in his criticisms on many
passages, and are triumphantly confuted ; and so,
too, are opinions which he ascribes to some de-
fenders of Christianity among his countrymen:
and this may give an impression of his power of
reasoning that will unduly affect th.e judgment of
certain readers. His untiring prolixity may weary
others into a belief that there is some force in what
102 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
he says. But perhaps the main direct effect pro-
duced by his work has resulted from its treating
all those facts in which our happiness and virtue
are most interested, those facts which address
themselves to our noblest sympathies and senti-
ments, which, even if they were divested of reality,
would remain the most glorious of imaginations,
from its treating those facts in the driest manner,
on the narrowest basis of thought, and with a heart-
less disregard of the associations connected with
them in the mind of a religious man, and of the
bearing of the discussion on the essential interests
of humanity. This is the characteristic tone of
his book ; and it may be difficult for one who
undertakes the task of reading it through to
escape the infection of it. There is danger that
his feelings may be so degraded, his views so con-
tracted, and, I may add, his reasoning powers so
confused, as to leave his mind in a proper state
for the reception of German mysticism and infi-
delity. If one were to submit to hear the char-
acter and conduct of his most intimate friend
canvassed and questioned at great length, in the
manner in which Strauss discusses the history of
our Lord, he might find it difficult to feel for him
the same confidence and respect as before.
GENUINENESS OE THE GOSPELS. 103
CHAPTER IV.
ON SOME IMPOETANT CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPELS.
BEFORE leaving the subject of the criticism of
the Gospels, we will advert to some general facts
concerning them, which should be kept in mind
by him who would read them intelligently.
I have repeatedly had occasion to speak of, or
to refer to, their character. As literary composi-
tions they are among the most imperfect of his-
tories. Either individually or collectively, they
present only a brief narrative of some of the
most striking events in our Lord's ministry, and
these told by the writers, with the exception of
John, for the most part nakedly and in few words.
John's narratives of particular events form an ex-
ception to this remark ; but the incompleteness of
his history, taken as" a whole, is even more remark-
able than that of the other Gospels. No skill is
shown by anyone of the Evangelists in connecting
his relations together, so as to form a proper con-
104 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
tinuous history, however brief. No explanations
are given, except a few which are parenthetical
and unimportant. With the exception of some
passages in John's Gospel, there is no comment
on anything told which discovers the writer's feel-
ings or state of mind. It is with astonishment
that we recognize the fact, when our attention is
directed to it, that a writer wholly uninterested in
the events related could not have recorded them
more dryly than do the first three Evangelists ;
that the whole effect on our minds of what is told
is due to its intrinsic character. I may turn aside
for a moment to observe, that, among the over-
whelming evidences of the genuineness and authen-
ticity of the Gospels, this is one among the many
of those which we may speak of as the most deci-
sive. Such works could not have been written
with the purpose of deception ; but the notion
of intentional deception in their writers is now, I
suppose, universally regarded as foolish and obso-
lete. It is equally clear that they could not have
been written by weak-minded and fanatical indi-
viduals, whose imaginations** had been strongly
excited by some extraordinary delusion. No writ-
ings can present a stronger contrast than do the
Gospels to what might be expected from fanatics.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 105
As I have said, the Gospels are not proper his-
tories. They are very far from being such works
as might furnish an intelligible and satisfactory
account of the ministry of Jesus, of its character
and purpose, to one previously unacquainted with
the essential facts concerning it.
Let us imagine them to be put without explana-
tion into the hands of a very intelligent heathen
contemporary of their authors, but one as imper-
fectly informed as were the generality of Heathens
of the condition and history of the Jewish nation,
and having only those imperfect notions and that
hesitating belief of the great truths of religion
which appear even in the writings of Cicero. Sup-
posing him to read them through with attention,
what ideas of their meaning and bearing would he
have been able to form, corresponding to those of
an enlightened Christian 1 The conceptions of the
character and purpose of the ministry of Christ,
entertained by different Christians of the present
day, are very unlike one another ; and if our own
be correct, they must be the result of much thought
and reasoning, and derived in part directly and in
part by clear inference from many other sources of
information beside the Gospels, especially from
the history of the Apostles given by Luke, and the
106 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
Epistles of St. Paul. I do not say that every
intelligent and rational Christian must for himself
have gone through the process requisite to acquire
the knowledge necessary in order to understand
the Gospels'; but if he have not done so, he must
be indebted for it to the labors of others.
The Gospels imply throughout, that the great
outlines of the ministry of Jesus, together with the
condition and character of the Jews among whom
he appeared, and the more striking immediate
results of what he did and taught, were already
known to their readers. They suppose, in like man-
ner, their readers to be already acquainted with
many circumstances attending particular events
and discourses of our Lord, which circumstances
are not brought into view in their narratives. A
knowledge of circumstances which the Evangelists
do not directly state is, as I have said, the main
key to the understanding of the character and
bearing of what they relate, the great source of
illustration for the Gospels.
I will give a single example of the manner in
which the Evangelists relied on the previous
knowledge of their readers, or rather, as one may
sayj of their unconscious assumption of the exist-
ence of such knowledge. The example is, perhaps,
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 107
the more striking, because there is no process, such
as exists in so many other cases, by which we can
now recover the information not given by them,
and apply it to the completion or illustration of
their narratives.
There are at least seven different appearances
of our Lord after his resurrection related in the
Gospels. Two others, occurring before his ascen-
sion, are mentioned by St. Paul. And Luke, in
the beginning of the Acts of the Apostles, says that,
" after he suffered, he gave many certain proofs to
his Apostles that he was living, being seen by them
during the course of forty days, and teaching the
things concerning the kingdom of God."
Yet, in relation to this subject, the Gospels
afford no answer to questions which at once arise
in our minds. What was our Lord's mode of life
during the interval between his resurrection and
his ascension ] Whither did he retire when he sep-
arated from his disciples I These, indeed, are ques-
tions which the Evangelists might not have been
able to answer. But there are others, in respect
to which, had they anticipated the curiosity of
readers of after-times, they would have been able
to satisfy it. After his several appearances to his
disciples, in what manner did he leave them 1 ?
108 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
Why did none of them attempt to follow him ]
At least, in regard to the circumstances attending
his departure after his various interviews with
them, they co,uld have given us satisfactory infor-
mation. But, with the exception of the fact, that
at his last interview he was separated from them
by his ascension, there is nothing in their nar-
ratives which throws any light on the subject.
What follows from all this] It follows, that,
in the narratives of the Evangelists concerning the
appearances of our Lord, we have not all that was
originally told. The circumstances which the
Apostles and other immediate disciples of our
Lord could not but know, but which are not re-
lated in the Gospels, must have been matters of
curiosity and interest to their early converts ; and
it would be idle to suppose that they withheld
that information concerning them which they were
able to give.
It may here be observed, that the supposition
that the accounts of the appearances given by the
Evangelists are not true, is altogether set a'side by
the unfinished form in which they appear. No
fabricated stories, whether the product of inten-
tional deception, or qf a self-deluding imagination
working on traditional stories, would have been
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 109
left in such a state of unsatisfactory incomplete-
ness.
But if the Gospels are not regular histories,
if the Evangelists assumed that their readers
already possessed a knowledge of the main facts
respecting our Lord's ministry, and even of partic-
ular circumstances in his history, what, then, is
their character] For what purpose were they
written 1 The answer I conceive to be this. Such
a series of events as constituted and accompanied
the ministry of Jesus could not have taken place
without giving rise to a great number of re-
ports, false as well as true. Its true history was
given by the Apostles and their associates, but
their converts had heard, or were exposed to hear,
much that was not true, falsehoods proceeding
from the enemies of Jesus, and misstatements and
fables having their origin among his ill-informed
followers. In this state of things it became neces-
sary from these numerous relations to separate, to
collect together, and to authenticate by the highest
authority, a portion at least of those more impor-
tant facts which determined that his ministry was
from God, and afforded the most striking illustra-
tions of its character. This was done by the
Evangelists. Every one of them, I believe, might
10
110 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
have explained his purpose in language corre-
sponding to that used by Luke (i. 4) : "I have writ-
ten, .... that you may know the truth concerning
the relations > which you have heard " ; * or might
have adopted the words of John (xx. 30, 31):
" Many other miracles, indeed, did Jesus perform
before his disciples, which have not been written
in this book; but these have been written, that
you may believe Jesus to be the Messiah, the Son
of God ; and that, believing, you may have life
through him."
THUS, as I conceive, it is to the circumstances
under which the Gospels were written, and which
led to their composition, that they owe, in part,
their imperfect and fragmentary character; but
this is due in great part, also, to the want of skill
in the Evangelists as literary artists.
In regard to the criticism of the Gospels, it is
constantly to be kept in mind, that this want of
literary skill in their authors appears not merely
in the construction of their histories, but equally
in their use of language. Their vocabulary was
* Such I conceive to be the meaning of the original. See Evi-
dences of the Genuineness of the Gospels, Vol. I. pp. clxxi, clxxii,
note.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. Ill
very limited, and hence the action of their minds
was constrained. They had no command and
choice of expression, and, at the same time, were
called upon to communicate ideas, sentiments, and
modes of thought, with which the generality of their
contemporaries had been wholly unacquainted.
The difficulty they found in writing caused them
to narrate briefly and imperfectly, omitting con-
necting thoughts and explanatory circumstances ;
and their want of familiarity with the use of lan-
guage not unfrequently led them to employ forms
of speech which are evidently not the precise logi-
cal expression of the meaning intended.
THE Gospels, then, in their construction and in
their style, correspond throughout to the character
and circumstances of the writers to whom they are
ascribed. They bear with them indelible proofs
of their genuineness.
BUT it is obvious that books of the character
described must be very open to the attacks of
minute criticism, and exposed to many cavils in
which there is no weight. A story when told by
one imperfectly skilled in the art of narration often
suggests objections, and presents seeming improb-
112 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
abilities, which may be easily removed by expla-
nation. Every one must have observed how, in
such a case, what at first appeared obscure or
doubtful is at once cleared up by the answers to a
few questions ; or how even the statement of a
single circumstance, with which we were before
unacquainted, may throw light on all that per-
plexed us. But as we cannot interrogate the
Evangelists, we must, as regards them, answer
our questions ourselves ; and our answers are to
be derived, as I have before explained, from a
wide range of knowledge and of thought.
In proportion as we have more just concep-
tions of the character and condition of the Evan-
gelists, and are better acquainted with the state of
things under which they wrote, so will difficulties
and obscurities disappear, and their writings become
clear to us. In proportion as one is deficient in
this requisite knowledge, or in the comprehension
and judgment necessary to make use of it, or in
the disposition to apply it, so will he be able to
raise cavils and objections.
If the Gospels be of such a character as I have
described, they must present many difficulties. 1
do not here mean by that word passages affording
any well-founded objection to their authenticity,
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 113
but passages requiring to be explained for the gen-
erality of readers. In all ancient classical histories,
and in the other writings which have come down
to us from Greece and Rome, there are many such
difficulties. The explanation of them has given
occasion to that vast body of direct and indirect
commentaries on these writings, which includes all
those books which treat of the Greek and Roman
antiquities, language, literature, and philosophy.
But beside the difficulties in the Gospels, of the
nature just represented, there are, as in all other
histories, errors, misapprehensions of the meaning
of language, and mistakes in regard to facts. But
as difficulties of the former class are, from the char-
acter of the Gospels, more likely to occur in them
than in most ancient histories, so, on the other hand,
we believe that important difficulties of the latter
class, or, in other words, important errors concern-
ing the history of our Lord's public ministry, are
less likely to- occur, because, in relation to the facts
of this history, we believe the Evangelists to have
been well-informed and thoroughly honest relators.
THE character of the Gospels, such as it has
been represented, is one mode in which it has
pleased God to preserve to us, in the very books
10*
114 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
themselves, evidence of their authenticity. It ap-
pears, that, in order to understand them, we must
be acquainted with many facts which they do not
state; that we must bring to bear on their ex-
planation many considerations which they do not
expressly present. Parallel with what the Evan-
gelists relate, there existed a state of things which
they do not bring into view. Results not narrated
by them must have been consequent on what they
do narrate. Circumstances which they have not
placed before us must have given occasion to much
that was said and done by our Lord, and must have
affected, throughout, the course of his ministry.
Of the histories which they have written, there is
an unwritten counterpart. Between the two there
is such correspondence, that, in order to understand
what is written, we must make a study of the
unwritten. This correspondence becomes more
striking in proportion to the correctness and clear-
ness of our apprehension of that state of things
which was coexistent with the events recorded in
the Gospels. The relations between what is told
and what is not told become more apparent. All
the knowledge which we can bring to bear on the
history of Jesus as given by the Evangelists, goes
to confirm its essential truth. The case would be
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 115
the very reverse, if this history were false. Then,
in prosecuting our inquiries, instead of continually
discovering new proofs of its authenticity, we
should continually discover new proofs of its false-
hood. Nothing but truth could bear the test
which we have it in our power to apply. Such is
the character of the Gospels, such is their defi-
ciency of information, their imperfection and in-
completeness, that they are necessarily complicated
with a great body of circumstantial evidence of
the most unsuspicious kind. Thus, what we might
consider as their defects, what are their defects
when regarded merely as literary compositions,
contribute greatly to enhance their value.
BUT this, one may say, is not the view of the
Gospels commonly given. It is not. It is incon-
sistent with the view of their character presented
by any established church, or by any writer hold-
ing the traditionary opinions concerning them,
whether more or less distinctly. It is altogether
inconsistent with the neglected state in which the
Gospels have been left for popular use, for
the use of all who are not theological scholars.
Through this neglect, we who speak the English
language now read them in a translation in which
116 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
their meaning is often mistaken, and often, when not
absolutely misunderstood, improperly expressed,
in which the great simplicity of the Evan-
gelists (one of the most decisive marks of their
truth) is disguised by a stiff and solemn style, as
much as the Evangelists themselves would have
been disguised, if, putting off the dress of their
times, they had clothed themselves in the vest-
ments of a modern priest ; in a translation of
which the phraseology is in part antiquated, and
in part such as w r as equally improper in former
days as at present, and which, in aiming at a
verbal rendering, retains what are mere idioms
of the original language, without force or propri-
ety in our own. Even the mechanical aid to a
right understanding of the Gospels to be derived
from a proper division of their contents in print-
ing, so as to separate from one another those
portions which relate to different topics or different
occasions, is not afforded in the copies published
by authority. On the contrary, the divisions made
are such as not to guide, but to mislead, the un-
learned and inattentive reader. Were all this
reformed, a veil would be removed which now
obscures and distorts their meaning.
The same causes whatever they are which
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 117
have operated to deprive the great majority of the
Christian community in every country of that
means of understanding the Gospels which would
be afforded by a translation corresponding to the
original as nearly as the difference of languages
permits, have presented an equal obstacle to com-
municating to the generality of readers correct
notions of their character, and of the manner in
which they ought to be regarded. The action of
these causes has kept back from popular use a
knowledge of the true character of the Gospels,
and of that great variety of facts and considerations
by which they are illustrated and their truth con-
firmed. It is true, that, from the vast number of
works which directly or indirectly relate to the
Gospels, a great amount of important information,
and very many explanations and suggestions, are
to be derived by the theological student. But the
most important of these works require so much
preparatory knowledge in order that they may be
used at all, or used with advantage, many of them
have so repulsive a character, and most of them
are founded on such false conceptions of Christian-
ity and of the Gospels, that, as regards the gen-
erality of Christians, all inquiry is discouraged, or,
if pursued, there is danger of its becoming un-
profitable, if not worse than unprofitable.
118 INTEENAL EVIDENCES OF THE
The general want of that information concern-
ing the Gospels which ought to be the common
property of Christians, has caused the whole sub-
ject of our religion to be involved in obscurity,
perplexity, and error. This ignorance has not
been confined to the laity, who have commonly
been regarded as excused from any study of the
character or the evidences of their professed or
nominal faith, but has likewise extended over
a very large portion of those who have assumed
to be teachers of Christianity. The faith of the
generality of men has rested on traditionary au-
thority. Beside the influence of this authority,
the weight of the external evidences of Christian-
ity, the essential principles of its morality, based
on the immortal nature of man, and the intrinsic
character of the Gospels, which cannot be wholly
obscured, have undoubtedly made many men Chris-
tians, but often with a wavering faith, and with
very imperfect or very erroneous conceptions of
Christianity. But, on the other hand, the neglect,
or the inability, or the unwillingness, to communi-
cate that knowledge to the great body of Christians
which would place the history of our religion in
clear day, but would at the same time place in as
broad a light the superstitions and false doctrines
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 119
that have been represented as essential to Chris-
tianity, has left the misunderstood Gospels exposed
defenceless to the attacks of unbelievers. If those
truths concerning them which may be clearly es-
tablished were generally known and recognized,
works like that of Strauss could hardly be pro-
duced. If produced, they w r ould fall at once to
their proper level. They would be classed with
such writings as those of one of his countrymen
(Professor Samuel Simon Witte), who, in the last
quarter of the eighteenth century, maintained that
the Pyramids and the rums of Persepolis, Palmyra,
and Baalbec were natural productions, the result
of volcanic agency.
It is by the prevailing ignorance of which I have
spoken, and by the inveterate errors which have
come down to us from ages more ignorant than
our own, and the consequent outbreak of modern
extravagances occasioned by the free action of
men's minds having been so long constrained, that
he who would explain the character, and make
evident the divine origin of Christianity, is prin-
cipally embarrassed. Undoubtedly, among those,
throughout the small body of theological scholars,
who have given their thoughts to the study of our
faith, there has been a great advance in religious
120 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
knowledge, and consequently in correct concep-
tions of Christianity, since the beginning of the last
century. In going back from century to century,
to an era preceding the Protestant Reformation, we
find the same gradual change for the better. This
is ground for encouragement, and for the hope of a
brighter period. Were it not for this retrospect of
the past, the view before us and around us would
be gloomy. When we see the vast power of prej-
udice opposed to the truth, the sacred authority
with which antiquated errors are invested, the
obstinacy with which the dead formulae of barbar-
ous creeds, the leavings of mortality and decay,
are still set forth, like the relics of a Catholic saint,
as having power to give health and life, and the
strong influence acting on the love of wealth and
rank which determines or affects the professed
belief of a great number of men, even of the pub-
lic teachers of religion, in the Christian world ;
when we look at the state of things existing in
the established church of one of the most enlight-
ened Christian nations, a nation so intimately
connected with our own, we might well feel dis-
couraged, were it not for
" the deep voice from the past,
Which tells us these things cannot last."
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 121
I LEAVE the preceding paragraph as it was
originally written. But since it was written, the
news has burst upon us of that almost simultane-
ous development of moral force that has been for
a long time accumulating, which is now rapidly
and irrevocably changing the aspect of Europe.
It has become evident, that, throughout the more
enlightened portion of the Old World, traditionary
institutions and obsolete creeds, unsuited to the
present age, must fall. The prejudices on which
they have rested are decayed, and have grown too
weak for their support. They must fall, if not
before the reason, yet before the passions and the
altered feelings, of those on whom they have been
imposed ; and the same abuses and errors cannot
be restored. The struggle which has commenced,
sudden as may seem its first outbreak, has been
preparing through many years by the progress of
men's thoughts and convictions. It may be obsti-
nate and long, many mistakes may be committed,
much folly, much wickedness, and much suffering
may accompany it; but, whatever doubts there
may be of its final result as regards the happiness
of our race, there is no doubt that it will sweep
away many evils by which civilized Europe has
been afflicted, and into which a new vitality can-
11
122 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
not hereafter be infused. This struggle is not the
commencement of a series of events corresponding
to those which the last sixty years have witnessed.
Men are starting anew from a more advanced state
of intellectual and moral culture. Their physical
condition has also been improved. The wants and
sufferings of the less favored portion of our race
have been gaining more and more attention from
those to whom the power to alleviate them has
been afforded by the providence of God manifest-
ed in the necessary order of things which he has
established in this world and by which men are
bound together. The ferocious passions of the
many have not been maddened as they had been
sixty years ago by direct and open oppression,
habitual injury and contempt ; nor has the intel-
lect of the more enlightened been insulted and
exasperated through the imposition of absurd
creeds, and the maintenance of intolerable abuses,
under the name of religion. We cannot doubt
that the aged survivors of the next half-century
will have witnessed changes as great and as start-
ling as those which have stamped their character
on the period through which we have just passed,
but changes of another kind. Men will not again
run the same cycle. There seems to be no ground
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 123
for fear or for hope, should any be disposed to en-
tertain such hope, that a new reaction will take
place strong enough to carry men back to the
same causes of evil from which they are now
struggling to free themselves.
But this anticipation of coming changes affords
in itself alone no augury of good. The restlessness
and the convulsions of nations are in themselves
no more favorable indications of improvement than
the tossings and spasmodic motions of a man in a
fever are symptoms of returning health. It is
with nations as with the individuals of whom they
are composed. It is only through means which
may raise the moral and intellectual character of
men, that their permanent good may be effected.
It can be effected only through the influence of
those principles of action which control our self-
ishness, and call forth our social affections ;
only through a better knowledge and a deeper
feeling of the truths which concern our relations
to our fellow-men as founded on our relations to
God and to immortality, and which lead us by
the highest motives to the performance of our
duties.
When, accordingly, we reflect, I do not say on
the passions, but on the motives to action, which
124 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
govern the majority of men ; on the virtual irre-
ligion which is prevalent even under the profession
of religion ; on the merely outward and ceremoni-
ous respect for some established form of national
worship; on the wild speculations which appear
in the writings of so many, who, from their po-
litical station or their great intellectual powers,
control directly or indirectly the minds of their
fellow-men; on the infidelity and atheism, made
only the more offensive by pretending to use the
language of religion, which have found favor in
our age as the highest philosophy ; on the general
absence of a recognition of the influence of men's
opinions and religious belief in determining their
character and conduct, and, in consequence of this,
the general insensibility to the value of truth and
to the mischief of error on the most important
topics of thought, or, in other words, the common
indifference as to what is essentially true or essen-
tially false concerning Christianity ; when we
consider these things, we may perceive that other
influences, very unlike those which are now agitat-
ing the surface of society, influences working far
deeper in the nature of man, are required to pro-
duce any great and permanent good for our race.
We may hope, we may believe, that the pres-
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 125
ent state of things is preparing the way for the
more unobstructed action of these influences at
some distant period. Christianity, though mis-
understood and misrepresented, neglected and ca-
lumniated, has been the great civilizer of the
world ; and it is to Christianity better understood
than it has been, that we must continue to look
for all essential improvement in the character and
condition of individuals, and consequently of na-
tions.
11*
126 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
CHAPTER V.
ON WHAT ESSENTIALLY CONSTITUTES THE VALUE OF CHRIS-
TIANITY AND OF THE GOSPELS.
I HAVE spoken in the last Chapter of some of
the characteristics of the Gospels. One requisite
necessary to complete our view of their character
one requisite the most important remains to be
mentioned. We must have a correct apprehension
of what essentially constitutes their value ; and to
this end we must have a correct apprehension of
what essentially constitutes the value of Chris-
tianity.
The Gospels are the history of a miraculous
communication from God to men. If this history
be true, it relates to an event of inconceivable in-
terest and importance. The Infinite Being has
suspended the ordinary operations of his power to
manifest himself more immediately to the dwellers
on earth. The essential value of Christianity con-
sists in its being such a revelation of Him. When
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 127
we inquire respecting the truth of Christianity, the
only question at issue is, whether it be a fact, that
God, through Christ, miraculously revealed him-
self to men. Let us consider why this fact is so
important.
One answer is obvious. If God has thus re-
vealed his existence and his purposes towards us,
the truths of religion rest on an immovable basis,
the witness of God himself. This needs no
illustration. But there is another answer, which
has been less considered. It is only through such
a supernatural manifestation of God that these
truths can be known. This admits of explana-
tion.
In proof of the proposition just stated, we need
not appeal to the ignorance, the errors, the uncer-
tainty, and the very limited conceptions of the
wisest of heathen philosophers. We will put
aside the whole of that decisive evidence to be de-
rived from our knowledge of the condition of men
unenlightened by Christianity. We may consider
the proposition in the abstract, not referring to
what experience has determined concerning it, but
regarding directly the actual powers of the human
mind, and what in the nature of things must be
true.
128 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
What can human reason alone, when strongest
and most unembarrassed in its action, effect toward
establishing the facts on which religion is founded 1
Our reason may assure us of the truth that there
is an infinite cause of all finite things. All expe-
rience teaches us that every thing finite, all motion,
all organized life, all changes, must have a cause
for their existence. We have no experience, and
therefore we have no belief, that a body of what
we call matter can come into existence uncreated.
The weight of this universal experience is so deci-
sive, that the conviction derived from it has been
commonly regarded as an innate law of the mind.
But the truth that finite things cannot exist with-
out a cause, leads us directly to the conclusion
that there is an Infinite Being, who is the cause of
all finite things, the Creator of the Universe.
What indications, then, do our very brief expe-
rience, and our most imperfect knowledge of the
objects around us, and of the state of things in
which we are existing, afford us of the character
of the Cause of all things ] The phenomena we
are able to observe, the series of what we call
causes and effects, may satisfy our reason of his
intelligence and benevolence. Our conclusion in
regard to the moral character of God is confirmed
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 129
by the fact, that we neither know, nor can conceive
of, any cause of moral evil except the selfish desires
of finite beings. These indeed have been ascribed
to the Deity in those false systems of theology
which represent him as having created the uni-
verse for his own glory. But we are not speaking
of what superstition has taught, but of what our
reason, unassisted by revelation, may be conceived
of as capable of teaching.
The Infinite Being, then, is intelligent and be-
nevolent. But we can imagine no limitation to
the essential attributes of such a being. We
conceive, therefore, that his intelligence and be-
nevolence are infinite, in the whole extent of the
meaning of that term which we are able to com-
prehend.
Furthermore. This Being we can conceive of
only as unchangeable. The Source of all power
can be affected by no power from without. No
new motive of action derived from temporal and
finite things can influence Him who is the Author
of all things temporal and finite, and to whose in-
finite intelligence they have ever been present.
Thus we have arrived at a conception, of the
truth of which I believe that it is possible for our
reason alone to give us assurance. But I here
130 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
use the word " possible " to denote merely that
which may be supposed without supposing what
in the nature of things is an absurdity. There is
no evidence > that such a conception of God has
been entertained by the wisest of men unenlight-
ened by Christianity, though it is not to be
questioned that a few such men have made some
approach towards it.
To this conclusion, then, our reason may have
attained. But before this conclusion she stands
utterly confounded. She has arrived at a concep-
tion which she cannot comprehend. Putting aside
all our imperfect and contradictory notions of in-
finity and eternity,* and of an Unchangeable Being
whose successive volitions cause all changes, no-
tions which she has no power to reconcile, other
questions at once present themselves which she
cannot answer, difficulties which she cannot
solve. She has risen into an immeasurable ex-
panse of light, in which all sensible things melt
away into mere manifestations of the Infinite
Spirit ; but it is an expanse of light by which she
is overwhelmed and bewildered. No power of
* See Evidences of the Genuineness of the Gospels, Vol. n. p.
cxcvii, seq.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 131
distinct vision remains. No countenance mani-
fests itself to her from the unfathomable glory.
No articulate voice issues forth. The light is
mute.
In contemplating the relations of God to finite
beings, our reason, when untaught and unguided
by God himself, utterly fails us. In attempt-
ing to explore this subject, she proceeds stum-
bling, uncertain, disheartened, meeting on every
side with barriers which she cannot pass. God
is infinitely benevolent. Why, then, one may
ask, am I a suffering being in a world full of
suffering, where moral and physical evils often
present themselves in forms so appalling 1 God
is infinitely benevolent. Of this we are assured.
But numberless beings are but just beginning to
exist. Numberless inferior animals around us
have been formed with but very limited capacities
of happiness, if happiness it may be called. There
are to our perceptions immeasurable voids in the
universe, containing no created life. Why have
not all time and space been filled with happy
beings ] God is an agent. This is certain. His
power is in continual action, forming, sustaining,
and moving all things. But we can conceive of
no action of any conscious being without a motive.
132 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
And we can conceive of no motive which does
not consist in the purpose of improving one's
condition through the gratification of some unsat-
isfied desire. ' And no such motive can be ascribed
to the Infinite Being. God is the source of all
power ; he has formed our natures ; he has formed
and disposed all things that act upon them. How
is it, that I am not merely a passive instrument in
his hands ? How is it, that there is inseparably
connected with my nature a conviction that I can
act for myself, that I can choose good and avoid
evil, and that the consequent sense of responsibil-
ity becomes a source of unhappiness and misery,
when I feel that I have chosen ill ? In what re-
spect does the uncontrollable power of God differ
from an inexorable Fate, consigning, if not myself,
yet many of my fellow-creatures, to sin and misery 1
Certainly the difference is not to be established
through such expedients as are resorted to by those
who maintain that this uncontrollable power, the
ultimate cause of all finite things, is indeed incon-
sistent with the moral power of man to choose
between good and evil. But how are these things
to be explained and reconciled ?
These difficulties, more or less clearly perceived,
have in all times, and more particularly in our
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 133
own, spread the darkness of atheism over what has
been called philosophy ; for, at the present day,
the belief that no such doctrine as atheism exists
can be held only by a very ill-informed and very
innocent person. I have stated these difficulties
that the subject may be fully apprehended; so
that he who thus apprehends it may not be taken
unawares, when he finds them put forth by others,
or when they rise spontaneously before his own
mind. I have stated them for another purpose,
that we may fully recognize what ought to be recog-
nized as a fundamental principle by all who under-
take to speculate on the highest truths, the truths
of religion, that man's reason is very limited.
All that by its unassisted exercise we know or can
know concerning the condition of God's creatures
in this world, or his relations to his creatures gen-
erally or to the universe, bears a far less propor-
tion to what, in our present state, we cannot thus
know, than do the objects which we may discern
by the light of a taper in a narrow room to what
we may behold when the midnight sky opens
above us, with its numberless worlds of light
spreading through the immeasurable and unimag-
inable distance. With this just, and consequently
most humble, view of our native powers, we shall
12
134 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
form a proper estimate of those pretended systems
of the highest philosophy, which, rejecting all that
God has revealed to us, and renouncing even the
clearest deductions of our own reason concerning
his being and perfections, have been in reality in-
coherent and unintelligible dreams of human folly.
But all the difficulties and questions which I
have spoken of, or to which I have alluded, resolve
themselves into one great question of the deepest
interest to us all. What are the relations of the
Infinite Spirit to each one of us individually 1 ? Is
it possible that they can be of such a character,
that, in the imperfect language to the use of which
we are compelled, in speaking of God, by our in-
adequate conceptions, we may call them personal
relations I Happiness flows forth from Him ; nor
can we reasonably ascribe any other purpose than
the production of happiness to the Author of all
things. But is my happiness as an individual his
care, the care of that Being on whom I am wholly
dependent 1 I have been but just introduced by
him among his works. If God regards me with
benevolence, and his benevolence is infinite, why
was not my being commensurate with his own ]
And why am I, in this my short life here, exposed
to so much suffering'?
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 135
We speak of the love of God for his creatures.
But I have no experience of love except that of
one finite being for another. My natural powers
enable me to form no conception of any other. I
love because there exist in the objects of my love
qualities with which I can sympathize and the
contemplation of which gives me pleasure, or from
the gratification afforded by the exercise of the
amiable and benevolent affections, by the perform-
ance of those acts to which they lead, and by the
reciprocal love which they produce. I love be-
cause I find my happiness in the happiness of
others, and in their feelings of kindness towards
me. But I can attribute no such motives to the
Infinite Being. The affections which bind men
together cannot be ascribed to him.
I am suffering in a world full of suffering. My
imagination, or, if one will, my reason, may put be-
fore me the conception of another world in which
suffering does not exist. I may not object, that
for me to attain to it I must pass through a fear-
ful change ; but what assurance can reason alone
give me, that I am to exist in that better world ?
She may teach me that God regards the sum of
happiness in the universe ; but it is my individ-
ual happiness about which I inquire. If another
136 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
being is to take my place in that world ; or if, ac-
cording to a doctrine received by many, utterly
unintelligible in itself, but which they suppose
themselves to understand, my spirit, distinct from
my consciousness, is to animate another being,
this will not lessen the sum of happiness in the
universe ; but what does that doctrine concern
me ] Where am I to learn that God cares for me
as an individual 1
From one source only, from the testimony of
God himself. The answer to that question is
given by his supernatural manifestation of himself
through Christ. Through him he has addressed
men, individual men, as his creatures, as his care,
as acting and suffering here under his continual
providence, in preparation for an immortal exist-
ence.
But in supposing such a revelation, you present,
an unbeliever may say, ideas which I cannot com-
prehend. You bring together in a supposed con-
nection, which is impossible, the infinite and the
finite. You blend with the history of human
events, of the deeds of men, what you would have
regarded as immediate acts of God. You teach
that infinite perfection and power were in union
with human imperfection and weakness, for the
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 137
purpose of accomplishing what you call a divine
work. You represent God as dissatisfied with
what he had ordained, and interrupting the estab-
lished course of things in order to amend it. You
would have us believe that the Unchangeable Be-
ing did so change as to interpose at a particular
time in this world of ours, and operate in a man-
ner altogether different from his usual laws of
action. My imagination is confounded, and my
reason revolts.
I have in what precedes, and elsewhere,* taken
notice of the erroneous conceptions on which such
language may be founded. But there is a most
important truth involved in it. God's miraculous
revelation of himself through Christ of which
it has been a fashion with many in our times to
speak so foolishly and so flippantly, not professing
absolutely to disbelieve it, but only to regard it
as a matter of indifference whether God has so
revealed himself or not is in truth the most
astonishing fact of which we can conceive, and
one of incomparably greater interest to us than
any other of which we may assure ourselves. Our
imagination may well be overwhelmed by it, but
* See Evidences of the Genuineness of the Gospels, Vol. II. p.
cxcviii, note.
12*
138 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
there is nothing in the belief of it to offend our
reason.
Our reason does not hesitate to admit the belief
of the all-controlling, unintermitted agency of God
throughout the universe, in all that surrounds us
and in ourselves. It assents at once to the truth,
that the Infinite Being is everywhere in the most
intimate connection with finite things ; all finite
things being but manifestations of His power, and
preserved in existence by Him. Reason embraces,
as if it were a deduction of her own, the truth
taught by Christianity, that the perfect, all-pervad-
ing Spirit of God is continually working in the
midst of human imperfection, and (to use the only
language which our most limited apprehensions
afford) in union with it, for the production of
good. To one who acknowledges the existence
and agency of God, the fact is evident and admits
of no dispute, however impossible we may find it
to reconcile the conceptions which it brings to-
gether, that the Unchangeable is at every moment
operating to produce changes in his works, im-
measurably exceeding in number and variety any
limit to which our imagination can extend. As
regards the supernatural manifestation of God to
bring about a new state of things, to accomplish
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 139
one of those innumerable changes, reason finds no
difficulty in believing that Infinite Power may act
without the intervention of those phenomena which
we call natural causes. She perceives that the
existence of these causes is from him, and that
precedent to their existence he must have so
acted, that the work of creation is a miracle.
The fact does not seem to have been generally
recognized, but the only difficulty which presents
itself to our reason in relation to this subject is
of an opposite kind. It is in answering the ques-
tion, why the Ultimate Cause of all things has
ordinarily interposed a chain of finite causes, so
called, between his power and will, and the effects
which it is his purpose to produce.
Our misapprehensions, and incredulity and im-
perfect belief, concerning God's manifestation of
himself through Jesus Christ, arise from our nar-
row conceptions. We are of the earth, earthy.
We find it hard to raise our apprehensions above
it. We are in continual danger of thinking and
feeling as if we had been here always, and were to
remain here for ever. We affect to be philosophers,
and to speculate on the constitution of a universe
into which we have but just been introduced ; but
our unaided speculations are drawn downwards
140 INTEKNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
toward the earth, and, for the most part, only carry
us into the region of its smoke and exhalations.
The objects immediately about us, of which we
have known nothing but for a few years, and from
which we are so soon to be separated, may press
upon us, and engross us, and close round us, and
shut out from our view all the marvels and glories
of the infinite unknown. We are' surrounded
by an immeasurable expanse of created things,
throughout which the power of God is ever oper-
ating ; but in our littleness we find it hard to com-
prehend that God may have manifested himself to
men in a mode different from any of which we had
had experience.
THE revelation of God has broken through the
barrier of clouds that environs us, and has opened
to us the light of day beyond. It makes known
to us that we have far more important relations
than those which belong only to our present exist-
enc e 5 imperishable relations with God, and his
yet unknown works. It raises us into another
sphere of being. It blends earth with heaven,
connects the finite, powerless sufferer with the
all-powerful Source of infinite good, our lives that
have but just commenced with eternity, and our
world with the universe.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 141
The fact alone that the Infinite Spirit has mi-
raculously revealed himself to men answers that
question in which we have so deep an interest,
What are our individual relations to God I It is
in its being a miraculous revelation, that the essen-
tial, the inestimable value of Christianity consists.
An articulate voice has been uttered from the
ineffable glory that fills all space. God, in thus
speaking, has made known to us that he cares
(we can use no other word) for men as individual
beings, and the whole purpose of his communi-
cation concerns us as immortal beings. He has
taught us, that he does sustain relations to us, the
nature of which we may inadequately express by
calling them personal relations. He has through
Christ spoken to us, to borrow the language of
Scripture, as man to man. For our sakes his ordi-
nary operations in producing the phenomena of
nature have been suspended, and his power has
been manifested in new modes of action; thus
giving us assurance that the communication we
have received is from the Source of all power. It
is through this manifestation of God by Christ, and
through this alone, that we are able to rest in the
conviction, that He who supports all things in be-
ing may be contemplated by us as our individual
Friend and Father, that all our concerns are his
142 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
care, and that our relations of entire dependence
on his infinite goodness are to continue for ever.
If we may trust the decisions of our reason
grounded on -proofs which she can clearly compre-
hend, concerning subjects which lie within her
sphere, such a supernatural manifestation has
been made. The fact, I think, has not been suffi-
ciently attended to, that our faith in the essential
truths of religion, if derived from Christianity, rests
on a very different basis from what it could do if
derived from any other source. It requires for
its support no experience, no knowledge, and no
capacities, above the ordinary faculties and at-
tainments of human nature. Christianity has so
taught us, that all the reasoning necessary to a
conviction of the truths which it has revealed lies,
as I have elsewhere observed, entirely within the
compass of our powers, and belongs to our familiar
methods of investigation. The proofs which estab-
lish the fact that the Gospels were written by those
to whom they are ascribed, the proofs that attest
the reality of all those other facts which necessa-
rily imply a divine interposition, are of the same
nature as the proofs on which we rely as to any
other historical fact, or any natural phenomenon
about which we have no distrust, They are equal-
ly level to our comprehension.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 143
The manifestation through Christ of the Infinite
Being, and of his purposes toward us, still leaves
us, without doubt, in great ignorance. We are still
surrounded by difficulties which we cannot solve,
and questions press upon us which we cannot
answer. But it has taught us all that it is neces-
sary for us to know as the foundation of the
highest virtue and the most glorious hopes. All
correct conceptions of religion, of the moral nature,
the relations, and the duties of man, all which
constitutes the highest philosophy, that philosophy
which concerns the noblest objects of thought and
the most important interests of man, must rest
on those realities which the revelation of God has
discovered to us, and of which we can in no other
way have assurance. All speculations concerning
religion in which God's miraculous revelation of
himself through Christ is not recognized, may be
compared to the speculations of one who should
form a theory concerning the probable motions of
the heavenly bodies, without adverting to the fact,
that the laws to which those motions are conformed
have been demonstrated.
THE Gospels are the history of this miraculous
revelation of God to man. But they are not its
history alone. They are permanent evidences of
H4 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
the fact, that such a revelation has been made.
This evidence appears in the very constitution of
those books, in their actually possessing the
characteristics which have been insisted upon by
unbelievers (like Strauss) as a main ground for
disputing their credibility, and which many be-
lievers have most unwisely been disposed to dis-
guise or deny. It appears in what to human
apprehension may, at first view, seem their mar-
vellous incongruities.
The Gospels are rude works of certain Jews,
men belonging to a despised race, themselves very
unskilled in writing, having no literary or philo-
sophical culture, and not distinguished by any
uncommon natural powers of mind. They are
stamped with the character of the nation and the
age in which they were written. But whatever
they may discover of human incapacity or imper-
fection appears in intimate union with conceptions,
which I do not say that the minds of their unin-
structed writers could not have attained, but which
no human mind could have attained without being
supernaturally enlightened by God, conceptions,
of religion and duty, of all that is most sublime in
character, views of God and man, of life and im-
mortality, far transcending all which mere human
philosophy has reached. Considered only as liter-
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 145
ary compositions, the Gospels are precisely such
works as we might expect from their authors, a
fisherman of Galilee, a tax-gatherer of Galilee, and
two other Jews, their associates. Yet in these
works, when we pass through their outward form
to their contents, and contemplate the accounts
which their authors give of their Master, we find
the exhibition of a character to which there is
elsewhere no parallel and no approach in history
or fiction; for these accounts form a consistent
representation of one singled out from the rest of
men to sustain peculiar relations to God and to
the world, and thoroughly fulfilling these relations.
It is impossible that this character should have
been an invention of those in whose narratives it
appears.
" God," says St. Paul, " has chosen the foolish
things of the world to put wise men to shame."
"My discourses and my preaching," he tells the
Corinthians, "were not in persuasive words of
wisdom, but were accompanied by the manifestation
of God's spirit and power." The first preachers
of Christ were intrusted with that treasure of truth
which he revealed. " But we have this treasure,"
says the Apostle, " in earthen vessels ; so that our
exceeding strength is from God, and not of our-
selves." In these passages, and often elsewhere,
13
146 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
he refers to the inability of the first preachers of
Christ to have originated his religion, or to estab-
lish it in the world through any natural powers or
human wisdom which they possessed. Weak in-
struments indeed they were. To the apprehensions
of many, it may seem incongruous that God should
employ such ministers ; but this wonderful con-
trast between their human insufficiency and what
they taught and what they accomplished, estab-
lishes the truth of the Apostle's declaration, that
their sufficiency was from God. "We are not able
of ourselves," he says, " to make account of any-
thing as our own work, but our ability is from
God."
Conformably to this, the union of human error
and imperfection in the Gospels with their great
essential characteristics, renders those books a
standing miracle in evidence of the truth of Chris-
tianity. I use these words not loosely, not in the
way of declamation, nor in any metaphorical sense,
but in their literal meaning. The Gospels bear
with them a supernatural character ; for they pre-
sent most striking and apparently contradictory
phenomena, which cannot be accounted for by what
we call natural causes ; and thus they are in them-
selves a permanent miracle, an evidence to men of
all ages.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 147
CHAPTER VI.
STRAUSS'S PROPOSED SUBSTITUTE FOR CHRISTIANITY. RE-
MARKS ON MODERN GERMAN PHILOSOPHY.
THOUGH it is something like passing from clear
air and bright sunshine into a chilling and pesti-
lential congregation of vapors, yet we will return
once more to the speculations of Strauss. The
purpose in view is sufficiently important to justify
our doing so. The " Concluding Dissertation " of
his book is full of instruction, but instruction of a
wholly different kind from what the writer pro-
posed to impart.
In this Dissertation he gives his readers to un-
derstand, that, in his own opinion, he has accom-
plished a great work. He begins by saying:
" The results of the inquiry which we have now
brought to a close, have apparently annihilated
the greatest and most valuable part of that which
the Christian has been wont to believe concerning
his Saviour Jesus, have uprooted all the animating
motives which he has gathered from his faith, and
withered all his consolations. The boundless store
148 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
of truth and life which for eighteen centuries has
been the aliment of humanity, seems irretrievably
dissipated; the most sublime levelled with the
dust, God divested of his grace, man of his dignity,
and the tie between heaven and earth broken.
Piety turns away with horror from so fearful an
act of desecration, and strong in the impregnable
self-evidence of its faith, pronounces that, let an
audacious criticism attempt what it will, all which
the scriptures declare, and the church believes of
Christ, will still subsist as eternal truth, nor needs
one iota of it to be renounced. Thus at the con-
clusion of the criticism of the history of Jesus,
there presents itself this problem : to re-establish
dogmatically that which has been destroyed criti-
ically."*
The larger part of the paragraph which I have
quoted is plain in its meaning; and no comment
can be required on this cold-blooded bravado of
infidelity. The greater part of the paragraph is,
as I have said, intelligible ; but this is not true of
the last sentence : " Thus, at the conclusion of
the criticism of the history of Jesus, there presents
itself this problem: to re-establish dogmatically
that which has been destroyed critically."
* Vol. HI. p. 396.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 149
It is with these words as with other similar
aggregates of words which form the staple of what
passes for original thought in the works of many
German speculatists. No intelligible purpose can
be assigned to them, except by considering what
meaning, or rather what pretence of meaning, the
connection requires in order to keep up a seeming
continuity of thought. Proceeding by this rule,
we must understand Strauss as saying, that by a
critical examination the history of Jesus has been
shown to be false, and that the problem remains
to re-establish this history as true under the form
of a system of doctrines ; or, in other words, to
convert the historical fictions concerning Jesus
into propositions which, as doctrines of religion,
may be received as true. The problem proposed
is, to discover some method by which essential
falsehood may be changed into essential truth,
which truth, it is implied, may form a satisfactory
substitute for the falsehood.
But the darkness becomes more gross as we
proceed ; and we grope in vain for any tangible
meaning. A little after the passage just quoted,
the following occurs :
" Hitherto our criticism [has] had for its object
what Christianity is, as it appears in the history
13*
150 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
of Jesus given in the evangelical records. Now
this history having been called in question by our
doubts, it reflects itself upon itself [throws itself
back upon itself], and seeks an asylum in the soul
of the believer, where, however, it exists not as
simple history, but as a history reflected upon
itself, that is, as a creed and dogma." *
From such passages nothing can be gathered,
but that Strauss had a notion that some substitute
was to be provided for the belief of a Christian,
which might replace all that he had destroyed,
* " Bisher war Gegenstand der Kritik der christliche Inhalt, wie er
in den evangelischen Urkunden als Geschichte Jesu vorliegt : nun
dieser durch den Zweifel in Anspruch genommen ist, reflectirt er
sich in sich, sucht eine Freistatte im Innern der Glaubigen, wo er aber
nicht als blosse Geschichte, sondern als in sich reflectirte Geschichte,
d. h. als Bekenntniss und Dogma, vorhanden ist." Leben Jesu,
( 144,) H. 665.
I give my own rendering above, because Strauss's English trans-
lator appears to me to have failed, here as elsewhere, I do not say in
giving the sense of the original, for it would be hard to bring it as a
charge against him, that he has not done what was impossible, but in
giving English words which fairly represent the German. He renders
thus : " Hitherto our criticism had for its object the data of Chris-
tianity, as historically presented in the evangelical records ; now these
data having been called in question in their historical form, assume
that of a mental product, and find a refuge in the soul of the believer;
where they exist, not as a simple history, but a reflected history, that
is, a confession of faith, a received dogma." Vol. HI. p. 398.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 151
and that this substitute was in some way to be
connected with the history of Christ, " reflected
upon itself."
In regard, however, to the work of re-establish-
ing what he had destroyed, Strauss says :
" The critic seems to require no such re-estab-
lishment, since he is able to endure the annihila-
tion resulting from his own labors. Hence it
might be supposed that the critic, when he seeks
to rescue the dogma from the flames which his
criticism has kindled, acts falsely in relation to his
own point of view, since, to satisfy the believer, he
treats what is valueless for himself as if he esteemed
it to be a jewel."
" But," he adds, " in proportion as he is distin-
guished from the naturalistic theologian and the
free-thinker, in proportion as his criticism is
conceived in the spirit of the nineteenth century,
he is filled with veneration for every religion, and
especially for the substance of the sublimest of all
religions, the Christian, which he perceives to be
identical with the deepest philosophical truth;
and hence, after having in the course of his criti-
cism exhibited only the differences between his
conviction and the historical belief of the Chris-
tian, he will feel urged to place that identity in a
152 INTEKNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
just light " ; * that is, as appears from what fol-
lows, the identity of the substance of Christianity
with the atheistic philosophy of Hegel.
In what follows the introductory matter from
which I have quoted, Strauss goes over various
schemes of religion, apparently with the purpose
of finding some substitute for the common belief
of Christians in the truth of the history of Christ.
He first treats at length of what he calls " the
Christology of the Orthodox System." But there
was no reason for introducing this scheme, nor any
propriety in doing so, since, whatever may be its
character in other respects, it supposes for its
foundation the belief of the history of Christ as
given in the Gospels, and cannot, therefore, -be
proffered as a substitute for belief. He then passes
to what is properly to his purpose, the exposition
of various schemes of infidelity which havje pre-
vailed among his countrymen, that of the earlier
Rationalists, and then those of Schleiermacher,
Kant, De Wette, and others, all of which he rejects
as unsatisfactory, and finally comes down to the
latest product of German philosophy, the He-
gelian theory, as modified by himself. This may
be explained as follows*.
* Vol. HI. p. 397.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 153
Schelling laid down the proposition, that " the
incarnation of God is an incarnation from eter-
nity." " By the incarnate Son of God," says
Strauss, " he understood the finite itself as it
attains consciousness in man, and, in its distinc-
tion from the infinite, with which it is yet one,
appears as a suffering God, subjected to the rela-
tions of time."*
" In the latest philosophy," says Strauss, " this
idea is thus further developed. If God be pro-
nounced tp be spirit, then, since man also is spirit,
it follows at once that they are not in themselves
[essentially] different. Furthermore, since it is
essential to spirit in its distinction from itself to
remain identical with itself, to possess itself in an-
other than itself, it is implied in our recognition of
God as spirit, that he does not remain fixed as a
barren infinite without and above finite things,
but enters into them, producing the finite, nature
and the human spirit, only as a renunciation of
* Vol. HE. pp. 432, 433. I give my own rendering. The original
of the last sentence is as follows : " Verstand der letztere [Schelling]
unter dem menschgewordenen Sohn Gottes das Endliche selbst, wie
es im Menschen zum Bewusstsein kommt, und in seinem Unterschiede
von dem Unendlichen, mit dem es doch Eins ist, als ein leidender,
und den Verhaltnissen der Zeit unterworfener Gott erscheint."
Leben Jesu, ( 150,) H 704.
154 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
himself, from which, on the other hand, he is ever
returning into unity with himself. Simply as finite
spirit confined to its finiteness, man has not truth
[has no true,' real existence]; and as little has God
reality simply as infinite spirit, secluding itself in
its infinity. The infinite is real spirit only when
it develops itself into finite spirits ; as the finite
spirit is true only when it merges itself in the in-
finite. Thus the true and real being of spirit is
neither God by himself, nor man by himself, but
the God-man [the union of God and man] ; neither
its infinity alone, nor its finiteness alone, but the
motion of influx and reflux between both, which
on the divine side is revelation ; on the human,
religion." *
The next paragraph begins with supposing the
truth of the proposition, that " God and man are
in themselves one'' (" Sind Gott und Mensch an
sich Ems," u. s. w.)
As some key to what it was the purpose of the
writer to have regarded as the meaning of the
* Here again the rendering is my own. Strauss's English transla-
tor, Vol. HI. p. 433, seems either not to have fully comprehended the
philosophy and reasoning of his author, or not to have been disposed
to present it unveiled to English readers. The original passage
stands in Strauss, 150, Vol. H. pp. 704, 705.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 155
words I have quoted, it is to be understood that,
according to the philosophy of Hegel, the sub-
stratum of all things is infinite, unconscious spirit,
which assumes consciousness of its own existence
in finite, human spirits, into which it develops
itself. On these doctrines of Schelling and Hegel
is founded Strauss's proposed substitute for Chris-
tianity. It is an allegory, in which he represents
the true doctrines of philosophy, of the highest
German philosophy, as shadowed forth symbol-
ically in what he regards as the orthodox system of
the Church concerning the character and office of
Christ. He thus exhibits it.
" The key of the whole Christology is this, that
the subject of those predicates which the Church
ascribes to Christ is not to be regarded as an indi-
vidual, but as an Idea ; as a real Idea, however,
not as, according to Kant, an imaginary one.
Considered as existing in an individual, in a God-
man, the attributes and offices which the doctrine
of the Church ascribes to Christ are inconsistent
with each other ; in the Idea of the species, they
agree together. Humanity is the union of the
two natures; it is God become man; the infinite
spirit renouncing its infinity and becoming finite,
and the finite spirit becoming conscious of its in-
156 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
finity. It is the child of the visible mother and
the invisible father ; of spirit and of nature. It is
the worker of miracles ; inasmuch as, in the prog-
ress of man's history, the spirit is continually
obtaining more full mastery over nature, both in
man and around him; nature becoming subjected
to its activity as a powerless material. Humanity
is the sinless ; inasmuch as the process of its de-
velopment is blameless ; pollution cleaves only to
the individual, but in the species, and in its his-
tory, is thrown off. It is Humanity that dies, and
rises from the dead, and ascends to heaven ; inas-
much as, through the negation of its naturality
[what in its composition belongs to nature], it
is continually attaining a higher spiritual life,
and by throwing off its finiteness, as a personal,
national spirit, a spirit of this world, its unity
with the infinite spirit of heaven is brought out.
Through faith in this Christ, particularly in his
death and x resurrection, is man justified before
God ; that is, through the quickening of the Idea
of Humanity within him the individual becomes a
partaker of the divinely human life of the spe-
cies ; conformably to the fact, that the negation
of naturality and sensuality (SinnlichJceit) which
is but the negation of a negation, seeing that they
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 157
are but the negation of the spiritual is the only
way for men to attain the true spiritual life.
"This alone is the absolute purport of the
Christology. That this appears connected with
the person and history of an individual, belongs
merely to its historical form." *
I HAVE said that the Concluding Dissertation of
Strauss is full of instruction. It is rare to meet
with an equal number of pages from which so
much may be learned, or which afford information
of so thorough a character. Every one whose
attention has been drawn to the strange and mul-
tifarious doctrines that have obtained currency in
our day, has heard of the speculations of German
philosophers (so called) in theology and meta-
physics, and knows something of their pretensions
and of the boasts of their admirers. The Conclud-
ing Dissertation of Strauss affords abundant mate-
rials for forming a judgment of the character and
results of those speculations, which all our further
knowledge of them may serve to confirm. In this
case, if in any, the old proverb holds true, that it
* Leben Jesu, ( 151,) II. 709-711 ; English Translation, HI. 437,
438. I have formerly had occasion to quote and remark on this pas-
sage. See " Tracts concerning Christianity," p. 360, seqq.
14
158 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
is not necessary to drain the ocean to learn that its
waters are salt. The materials for forming a judg-
ment of this philosophy are not furnished by an
opposer of it, by an adherent of common sense,
nor by a neophyte giving his crude, mistaken im-
aginations of what he has imperfectly learned, but
by one initiated in its mysteries, who is liable to
no suspicion of intending to expose them to re-
proach or derision.
How then must such passages as I have quoted
be regarded, I do not say by a religious man, or by
an enlightened philosopher, but by a man of com-
mon clearness of intellect, accustomed to expect
some meaning in language, and some coherence of
ideas ? How would such writers as Strauss, and
the other speculatists among his countrymen to
whom he is allied, have been looked upon by the
English thinkers of former times (from whom it
must be confessed that in the general tone of our
literature we have somewhat degenerated), by
such men as Locke, and those who followed him,
by Berkeley and Butler ] What scope might these
theorists, " all-seeing in their mists," have afforded
for the penetrating and destructive satire of Pope !
With what zest would Swift have given them a
place among his philosophers of Laputa! How
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 159
would Burke (who taught that " where there is no
sound reason, there is no real virtue ") have poured
out upon them the tempest of his scorn with its
vivid lightnings ! if we may suppose the atten-
tion of men like Pope and Swift and Burke to
have been fixed on such a class of writers. They
dwell in a chaos of ideas which has no analogy
to the world in which men think and reason
and endue their purposes with intelligible words.
There is no community between the two regions.
The inhabitants of one have no sentiments or lan-
guage in common with those of the other. The
opposition between them is like that which the
ancient Persians imagined between the empire of
light and the empire of darkness.
Such being the character of these speculations,
it is natural that they should be put forward with
great pretension, and that those who receive them
should congratulate each other on their intellectual
superiority. For there is but an alternative. The
case admits of no qualified judgment. These spec-
ulations are either, as their admirers contend,
revelations of transcendent wisdom, or they are
something of a wholly different character.
THE school of writers to which such speculatists
160 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
as Strauss belong is not, in its modern devel-
opment among his countrymen, to be character-
ized by its peculiar doctrines; for, so far as its
doctrines haVe assumed a determinate shape, there
has been little accordance among those of different
parties into which it has been divided, except in
their common irreligious and debasing tendency.
But it is characterized by a use of language, which,
considered either in itself, or in its connection with
what is elsewhere propounded, or in its relations
to unquestionable truths and to the common con-
ceptions of men, presents no intelligible ideas. It
is a school which existed long before its recent
appearance in Germany. It is of great antiquity,
it has spread very widely, and occupied vast re-
gions in the domain of opinion, always presenting
the same essential characteristics. It may be called
" the School of the Mystics," in the widest sense of
that term, or " the School of the Incomprehensi-
ble"; or perhaps no other name can be found for
it more appropriate than one which has already
become attached to the modern branch of it, and
which may be extended to the whole, " the Tran-
scendental School." Quintilian has preserved the
story of a teacher of composition who inculcated
on his pupils the excellence of obscurity. He con
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 161
densed his instructions to them into one Greek
word, SKOTUTOV, Darken. Quintilian, being a Latin,
and the Latins in general, not affecting that style,
evidently regarded the direction as something ridic-
ulous. He does not advert to the fact, that it had
been a fundamental rule of writing with many of
the Greek philosophers, which probably originated
in an incapacity not to darken. I have elsewhere
had occasion to show that obscurity was regarded
from an early period as a distinguishing excellence
of style, and the appropriate badge of the profound-
est philosophy.*
The spirit of this school, the disposition to ob-
scure and distort what is false, or trivial, or un-
meaning, so that it may appear some revelation of
wisdom before unknown, to make doctrines out of
unformed imaginations, and to throw all knowledge
into confusion by the abuse of language, appears
in much that remains or is known of the ancient
philosophers before the time of Cicero. After his
time this widely-spread school embraced the whole
body of the later Platonists, and the allied sects of
the Gnostics and the Jewish Cabbalists. It has
not been confined to Europe, but has enveloped in
* See Evidences of the Genuineness of the Gospels, Vol. TTT. pp.
86-91.
14*
162 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
its darkness the philosophy and theology of India
and Persia. Its spirit has possessed that long
series of Christian writers on dogmatic theology
(so called) who have been zealous in maintaining
as essential to our religion doctrines before which
they summon reason to humble herself in sacred
horror. It was the spirit of the schoolmen of the
Middle Ages, to whom and to their successors
Locke, in treating of the nature of language and
the characteristics of this style of writing, had par-
ticular reference. It showed itself equally in their
contemporaries, the alchemists and the astrologers,
whose pretensions were as monstrous, and whose
language was as barbarous, as any of the present
day. Before its recent great outbreak in Germany,
it had manifested itself often in modern times by
smaller exhibitions which had prepared for its
fuller display. It had characterized the specula-
tions of Spinoza and the pantheists ; for no doc-
trine can involve absurdities more monstrous than
pantheism, or consequently bring together more un-
intelligible combinations of words. It is through
fellowship in the same great school, that the doc-
trine of Spinoza has had so marked an influence
on German literature, and that such admiration
has been expressed for him by modern transcen-
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 163
dental philosophers, for his penetration, his
cogent reasoning, and even, as if in mockery of
common sense, for his highly devotional spirit.*
To a philosopher of this school it may appear a
strange doctrine, that so humble a matter as the
right use of words can have anything to do with
his speculations. In his view, these speculations
penetrate the uttermost regions of thought; and
the language in which they are put forth is not to
* I speak only of the larger and more distinguished bodies of which
this school has been composed ; but perhaps, even in such an enumer-
ation, Jacob Boehme and his followers ought not to be passed over
without notice ; for he was one of the most famous of mystics, and was
called in his day "the Teutonic philosopher," a name the appro-
priateness of which has been confirmed by the recent phenomena
of German philosophy, and by his having been recognized by some of
its most famous teachers as one of its forerunners and progenitors.
His works were translated into English by William Law (better
known as the author of " A Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life ").
But those to whom the English language is their mother tongue are
in general but poor recipients of mysticism, and in this department of
thought English literature has produced of late but one conspicuous
name ; I say but one conspicuous name, for the great work of Cole-
ridge, which was to reconcile and supersede all other philosophy, had
never, I conceive, what logicians call a potential being. The idea of
it, in the semi-Platonic sense of the word idea, never existed in his
own mind. But Coleridge was a man whose natural powers, had he
been true to himself, might have enabled him to become something
very different from a mystagogue of German metaphysics.
164 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
be understood through an acquaintance with the
ordinary signification of terms. Its meaning is to
be perceived by a peculiar sense, by a power of
inward vision which derives no aid from extraneous
knowledge. He promulgates great truths, which
are not to be understood, but to be felt. His con-
ceptions are debased by being brought down to
what is intelligible. He announces propositions,
which to common men seem mere absurdities, as
when, to take one among ten thousand, Hegel
announces that " mere being and mere nothing are
the same."* It is amid the darkness of language
which has no vulgar meaning, that the higher
subjects of thought are to be shown surrounded
by a phosphoric glimmer. But the unintelligible
words that are used are words of magic by which
* " Das reine Seyn und das reine Nichts 1st dasselbe."
" Peut-etre," says Madame de Stael in her eulogy of Kant, " Peut-
etre toutefois n'auroit-il creuse si profondement dans la science de
1'entendement humain, s'il avoit mis plus d'importance aux expressions
dont il se servoit pour 1'expliquer."
This is the same sort of language as if one were to say of a math-
ematician, that perhaps his investigations would not have been so pro-
found, if he had attended more to the significance of the symbols
used by him.
She adds : " Dans ses trait6s de metaphysique, il prend des mots
comme des chiffres, et leur donne la valeur qu'il veut sans s'embar-
rasser de celle qu'ils tiennent de 1'usage."
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 165
the sun is darkened at mid-day ; and through the
obscurity which envelops all things, shapes pre-
sent themselves like those which ^fEneas saw
" Vestibulum ante ipsum, primisque in faucibus Orel,"
before the vestibule, and where opened the jaws of
Hell, horrible phantoms which he was about
to assail with human arms, if his guide had not
admonished him that they were but shadows.
" Et, ni docta comes tenues sine corpore vitas
Admoneat volitare cava sub imagine formse,
Irruat, et frustra ferro diverberet umbras."
If all this were mere folly, it would be compar-
atively a matter of little concern. But we have
seen that it is not mere folly. It is rare that
folly is not mischievous. Its effects are very often
disastrous. Speculative folly and practical folly
commonly go together. The preachers of false
doctrines, the opposers of truth, the utterers of
what wise men regard as nonsense, have wrought,
directly or indirectly, most of the moral evil that
exists in the civilized world. Men with the ex-
ception of those whose conduct is determined by cir-
cumstances and by impulses obeyed without reflec-
tion, and of those whose reason is violently borne
down by their passions pretend to be governed
166 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
by their opinions, on the ground that their opinions
are conformed to the truth. There is no greater
evil-doer than he who, in the restlessness and
recklessness of his vanity, furnishes them with
pretences for any belief or disbelief that may either
loosen their sense of the obligations of religion
and morality, or may pervert and misguide it.
False speculations, and the practical theories which
have resulted from them, I refer to speculations
old as well as new, are among the chief sources
of those awful calamities with which Europe is
now afflicted. The wild doctrines of Communism
and Socialism, the dreams and the absurdities of
such men as St. Simon, Robert Owen, and Fourier,
have caused the streets of Paris to run with blood.
It is the conflict, not between right and wrong,
not between truth and falsehood, but between new
errors and old prejudices, the one tending to evil
not less than the other, which is now unsettling
the foundations of Christian and civilized society
throughout a great portion of Europe. All the
party watchwords by which the ferocious passions
and the viler propensities of men are excited, or by
which their ignorance and folly are imposed upon,
acquire their power for evil from the abuse of lan-
guage. They are general terms, such as liberty,
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 167
fraternity, equality, capable of being understood
in very different senses and applications, and
therefore of being easily perverted, which are cast
abroad among the multitude, to be interpreted ac-
cording to the passions, the folly, the caprice, or
the madness of those who may adopt them as
their cry.
It is by its debasing and destroying the moral
and religious sentiments of men, that we discern
the worst effect of that school of pretended phi-
losophy which deals with imaginations instead
of truths, with unformed thought, assumptions
equally arbitrary and absurd, and a vague, barbar-
ous, false vocabulary. It has wrought this effect,
not only by the doctrines it has directly taught, but
also by spreading confusion through men's ideas
and language, and thus confounding their reason,
so that the supremacy of truth in their minds and
hearts cannot be established. It has infected the
whole body of literature connected with it, deprav-
ing the taste of its writers and its admirers ; for
taste is not a distinct faculty of the mind ; it is in
each individual an expression of his whole charac-
ter, of his likings and dislikings, of the quickness
or obtuseness of his intellectual perceptions, and of
the purity or depravation of his moral sentiments.
168 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
Thus it appears in the corrupt forms which so
much of the literature of Continental Europe has
assumed, with its bold lessons of vice and irreligion.
Its effects in deadening the love of truth and dis-
ordering the powers of reasoning have been made
apparent in the departments of philology, antiqui-
ties, and history. Nay, its influence has been felt
where it might least be expected, for it has carried
its reckless assertions and its unintelligible jargon
even into the physical sciences.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 169
NIVERSITY
CHAPTER VII.
CONCLUDING EEMAEKS.
WE have thus taken a view of the work of
Strauss, and of that philosophy, falsely so called,
with which this and many similar works have been
connected. The importance of such works, and of
the speculations on which they are grounded,
their efficiency in the production of evil, is liable
to be greatly underrated. Putting aside the brute
influence of the passions, the other causes which
affect the condition of society and the character of
individuals are often but little attended to; and
their character and workings may not be readily
discerned and appreciated. The moral atmosphere
may be filled with pestilential miasmata, the pres-
ence of which may not be obvious to our grosser
senses. Religion, morals, the love of truth, the
principles on which rests the well-being of man,
may be gradually undermined ; the evil may be
15
170 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
working on, from day to day, in secret, almost un-
marked, or other props wholly ineffectual may be
resorted to for temporary security ; but the ruin
must follow.
So far as men are not driven blindly onward by
their unreasoning passions, they are governed by
their opinions. The opinions of an individual are
but another name for the whole body of principles
from which he professes to act, so far as he pro-
fesses to act reasonably. It is, therefore, a matter
of essential concern to us, that our opinions should
be correct. But the opinions of a great majority
of men are determined, the opinions of all men are
influenced more or less powerfully, by a regard to
the representations and reasonings, true or false,
or by a mere regard to the determinations, of those
who are, or those who are esteemed to be, distin-
guished by their intellectual superiority. It is,
then, of the utmost importance to us, that our
guides should be trustworthy. Our hope for the
regeneration and improvement of our race must be
in the prevalence of truth, of Christian truth,
of truth concerning our nature, intellectual and
moral, our condition in this world, our means of
self-improvement, our relations to our fellow-men,
and our connection with all those realities beyond
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 171
the sphere of the senses, from which Christianity
has withdrawn the veil. "I was born for this
end," said he whom God sent to the world to save
the world, "I was horn for this end, and for
this end have I come to the world, to bear testi-
mony to the Truth. Every one who loves the
Truth obeys my voice."
Those great truths which essentially concern all
that men do and feel are the principles on which
our characters should be formed. They are the
most important objects of our intellect, because
they relate to the most important objects of our
existence. They do not spontaneously develop
themselves. In order to establish those truths
among men and give them their due supremacy,
intellectual discipline is necessary, a wide knowl-
edge of facts, the acquisition of clear ideas, the
habit of using language correctly, and the power
and the art of reasoning. When a knowledge of
them is thus attained, if it be distinctly put before
men, it may be widely communicated ; for these
truths have a natural affinity with all that is
excellent in our nature. The deductions of the
most profound and enlightened philosophy corre-
spond with and confirm the dictates of plain good
sense. It is with the highest exertions of intel-
172 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
lect as with the noblest productions of what is
popularly called genius. The results are compre-
hended and felt by millions with whom they could
not have originated ; and this community of com-
prehension and feeling may bring us into close
association with the master minds of the world.
Inferior as may be our creative or reasoning
powers, we become conscious of an essential equal-
ity with them when we can enter into their con-
ceptions, sympathize in their sentiments, and follow
them in their reasoning.
IN this country we have peculiar advantages for
the attainment and promulgation of truth. There
doubtless exist here mistakes and prejudices in
abundance. But we have not to encounter those
prejudices existing elsewhere, which have become
rigid and unyielding through age, and which de-
rive vitality and vigor from being incorporated
with the love of power, rank, and wealth, in priv-
ileged classes, whose distinctions depend on them
for support. We have our share of that clear-
sightedness and good sense by which those who
inherit the English tongue and English literature
are distinguished as a general characteristic, and
which may prevent us from being easily, or, at
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 173
least, from being long, imposed upon by false pre-
tences. But, on the other hand, there are discour-
aging circumstances. There is a want among us
of a proper appreciation of the importance of intel-
lectual discipline, of that discipline through which
men are formed to reason rightly on subjects that
concern their highest interests, but which are not
immediately connected with their ordinary busi-
ness. We cultivate successfully the physical and
exact sciences, and especially those through which
the arts of life are promoted. We are distinguished
by our skill in their application, by the number
and ingenuity of our mechanical inventions. But
these are not the studies on which the essential
well-being of man depends. Their cultivation
alone can do nothing to save a nation from moral
degeneracy and ruin. Nowhere in Europe have
they flourished more than in that country which,
having long suffered from accumulating causes of
misery, irreligion, and vice, has, since the latter
part of the last century, been restlessly and vio-
lently changing its forms of government, and
remodelling the constitution of society, without
finding a remedy for its evils. There are other
departments of thought and learning of far higher
importance, because truth and error, knowledge
15*
174 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
and ignorance, concerning the subjects which they
embrace, are of far more interest to human happi-
ness.
I will refer, for example, to two sciences, which
relate less immediately to the formation of individ-
ual character, but rather concern the present well-
being of masses of men, the science of political
government, and the science of political economy.
There is, as I believe, no literary institution in
our country in which they are so taught as to fur-
nish those resorting to it for instruction with such
knowledge, such principles, and such habits of
reasoning, as to prepare them for those duties to
which they may be called as public men. Nor
are these institutions centres from which may
spread through the great body of our people those
correct notions concerning the principles of public
policy which it is important should exist, when,
as with us, the course of public policy is ultimately
determined by the great body of the people. Our
colleges and universities do not afford the encour-
agement necessary to form in connection with them
a body of men fitted to be the teachers and guides
of the community in these departments of learning.
They have not sufficient means, if they have any,
for the support of professorships, which such men
might be ambitious of holding.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 175
Of the evils of ignorance in these departments
of knowledge, the Old World is presenting appall-
ing examples. We see in France that principles
of government, the truth of which has been forced
on the conviction of every intelligent American
through his experience of the workings of our re-
publican institutions, are unknown or disregarded.
As the next of those disastrous experiments on
the happiness of society of which that nation has
tried so many, it appears that all the powers of
government are, for as long a time as such a con-
stitution may last, to be concentred in one large
Convention, which will be as unrestrained and as
uncontrollable in its exercise of them as the fierce
democracy of Athens, or as that Convention of the
Reign of Terror, of which the dreadful memory
might seem to have died away in the country over
which it tyrannized, if it were not for the exculpa-
tory eulogies which are uttered on the disinterest-
edness, patriotism, and energy of some of its most
atrocious members. In the very formation of any
central power which is alone to exercise through-
out the country all the functions of the govern-
ment, in the cry of " The Republic, one and
indivisible" we Americans perceive another fun-
damental mistake. Republican institutions, re-
176 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
publican even only in form and name, cannot
exist for the happiness of a large community, they
cannot exist at all for any long time, without a
distribution of powers to bodies subordinate to
the general government, each independent in its
own sphere, each taking charge of its own partic-
ular concerns, and each ready to check all en-
croachments of the central power. With what a
burst of indignation and repulsion would a prefect
be received who should be sent from a convention
at Washington to govern my native State of Mas-
sachusetts! or how in any town or city of this
State would an officer be welcomed who should be
despatched from a body of delegates in Boston to
take on himself the management of its affairs'?
The present condition of France affords no hope
of the speedy restoration of internal quiet and the
formation of a well-ordered community. So long
as the supreme, undivided power resides nominally
in a national assembly convened in Paris, it seems
clear that the main element in the actual govern-
ment of the country will be the mob of Paris, or
the army by which it is controlled, the general
who commands the latter, or the demagogues who
rule the former.
When we turn from France to Germany, the
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 177
prospect is not less gloomy. There the structure
of society seems to be falling to pieces, without
either power or skill for its reconstruction. The
false philosophy that has prevailed in that country
has destroyed in a great degree men's ability to
reason, and substituted visionary theories and blind
fanaticism in its place. It has not only unsettled
all just notions of the political relations of men,
but, through its irreligious and demoralizing char-
acter, has done very much to destroy those princi-
ples on which all right conceptions of our duties
to our fellow-men, and all right feelings toward
them, must be founded.
THE establishment of truth in those departments
of science which concern the present well-being of
men as members of civil society must be the result
of the correct exercise of intellect. In order,
therefore, to cultivate those departments of science
successfully, other studies are requisite. They are
those which inform and discipline the intellect, so
that it may be correctly exercised. They are those
that instruct us in the constitution of the mind,
its powers, and the manner in which they are to be
employed, that make known to us the causes of
our intellectual errors and misjudgments, and teach
178 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
the art of thinking clearly and of reasoning justly,
and consequently, what is implied in this, the art
of properly using words, the embodiments and the
instruments of thought. These are studies which
have of late been generally neglected. The philos-
ophy which has flourished in Germany requires no
qualification of this remark ; on the contrary, the
reception of that philosophy there and elsewhere
proves its correctness.
The intellectual discipline of which I speak is
equally necessary for the establishment of the truth
in those higher departments of knowledge which
essentially concern all that is most important in our
being, our relations to God and to eternity, and
our fundamental relations to our fellow-men. The
study of these subjects, of the sciences of religion
and morals, and of the vast body of facts connect-
ed with them, has shared with us the neglect into
which it has fallen elsewhere. There is no strong
prevailing sense of the importance of teaching men
to think and reason aright concerning them ; no
operative conviction of the importance of estab-
lishing the truth concerning them. It would seem
to be thought that the solution of those great
problems, the true or the false solution of which
affects the whole of character and conduct, the
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 179
well-being of men equally in this world and in the
next, has been determined by traditionary author-
ity, or may be left to men's consciousness, so called,
their natural instincts, their intuitions, or to a sort
of special inspiration, vouchsafed to those who do
not interfere with it by any action of their own
minds ; so that the inquiry after truths and prin-
ciples is only an unprofitable speculation. The
times have altered since the most eminent theolo-
gians and moralists of their respective ages were
the men most distinguished for their intellectual
powers and acquisitions, such men as Grotius and
Locke and Le Clerc. They have altered since the
days of the heathen philosophers, of such men
as Socrates and Plato and Cicero, by whom, very
imperfect as were their conceptions, theology, the
science of things divine, was regarded, as it is, as
the highest philosophy.
The study of theology, embracing as its funda-
mental requisite the study of Christianity, is essen-
tially connected with almost all the other impor-
tant branches of knowledge. It is- connected with
the natural sciences ; for their highest value con-
sists in making known to us the works of God.
It stands in yet another, very different, relation to
them, through the fact that the progress of knowl-
180 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
edge in some of these sciences has brought them
into conflict with false doctrines which have been
zealously represented as fundamental in Christian
faith. On the other hand, the study of religion is
intimately connected with the whole of metaphys-
ical science, the science of mind, which in its wid-
est extent embraces all our knowledge of man's
nature, except of his corporeal part, and all our
knowledge of Him who formed man in his own
likeness. It requires the study of the languages
which introduce us to an acquaintance with the
Old World as it existed before Christianity, and
which thus form the connecting link between
ancient and modern civilization. It is blended
throughout with the history of opinions, that is,
with the history of the human mind and character;
for in the formation of the most important opinions,
religion, true or false, has been the main agent,
and false opinions have reacted powerfully on re-
ligion. It has other connections, which, had they
not been so neglected, it might seem unnecessary
to point out. If religion be true, if Christian-
ity be a revelation from God, then the study of
religion, of Christianity, and of morals, which
ought to be based on Christianity, should enter
as the most essential element into all those inqui-
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 181
ries that concern the social and political relations
of men.
But the tendency of our times is to disconnect
the truths of religion, and the more high and
comprehensive principles of morality, from the
discussion of those subjects of politics and political
economy which concern immediately the present
well-being of men. I will take a single example
from that theory concerning the causes of want,
misery, and vice which teaches, in effect, that the
more fortunate portion of men, having no direct
means of rendering effectual aid to the suffering,
have no important duties to perform towards
them, except the duty of providing them with
clergymen and schoolmasters, of whose proffered
instruction the terrible pressure of want must ren-
der them unapt recipients, and especially the du-
ty of exhorting them to put a stop to the increase
of population. Compare the practical deductions
from this theory with the spirit which pervades
the precepts of our Saviour, and especially with
his most solemn words, not their verbal mean-
ing, for in that no man of sense can take refuge
from their true purport, but with the spirit of
those words : " Then will they also answer, Lord,
when did we see thee hungry, or thirsty, or a stran-
16
182 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
ger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not
minister to thee ] Then he will answer them, I tell
you in truth, In not doing so to one of the hum-
blest of these, you did not do so to me." And ob-
serve further, that no attempt is made to reconcile
the deductions from the theory in question with
the precepts of Christ.
There is very much to be learned and to be
taught in the science of religion, and the twin
science of morals. As regards religion, the present
anarchy of opinion is obviously such, that this re-
mark requires no confirmation. It follows as a
corollary from this state of unsettled opinion con-
cerning religion, that the true principles of moral
action have not been established, and are not gen-
erally understood. This again may be asserted
without hazard, as it is made evident by the want
of agreement concerning them. The development
and application of the supposed principles of moral
science are a matter of still greater uncertainty,
and contrariety of opinion. How differently are
the same qualities and actions estimated by differ-
ent men ! With what opposite sentiments are the
same characters regarded ! I mean, of course,
when the facts which determine the character are
equally well known. How unlike would be the
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 183
judgment of a "Hero-worshipper" concerning them
to that of a Christian philosopher ! What admira-
tion is given to the union of atrocious wickedness
with great intellectual energy! What toleration
is shown for those whose vices assume the garb of
pleasure, in whose baskets of flowers asps lie hid,
and who purchase their indulgences through the
degradation and misery of others and of themselves !
What contrary decisions are pronounced in cases
which may seem to present a conflict of duties !
How zealously do those who see but one side of
such questions often contend that right is to be
done without regard to consequences ; as if, when
a doubt may arise, there were other modes of deter-
mining what is right and wrong beside a regard to
the good or evil consequences of conduct ! How
differently do different men judge of the lawfulness
of subscribing to the Articles and conforming to the
Liturgy of the Church of England, by those who
have no faith in many of its doctrines according to
the obvious meaning of the words in which they
are expressed ! doctrines which, thus understood,
no intelligent man at the present day, who has
made them a subject of conscientious thought, can
persuade himself that he believes, however he may
persuade himself that he is justified in giving his
184 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
aid to the Church to impose them on the commu-
nity as doctrines taught by God. What diversity
of judgment exists concerning the lawfulness or
unlawfulness of many modes of action, especially
those involved in the internal and external policy
of nations ! What declamation may be heard about
human rights from teachers without any correct
notion, often without any notion at all, of what
constitutes a right ! What talk about conscience
as an infallible guide, as the voice of God in our
hearts, with the reservation that this infallible
guide must be well instructed by us ! How little
are our obligations to our fellow-men understood,
the perpetual control which they should have over
our conduct, the extent of Christian charity, and
the necessary modifications of its exercise ! How
few men think much on these subjects, or regulate
their conduct by a regard to the highest, that is,
Christian principles !
There is, as I have said, no proper provision
made in our literary institutions for the prosecu-
tion of those studies on which the development of
the intellect and character mainly depends. They
do not afford to the generality of young men who
resort to them for instruction facilities and in-
ducements adapted to lead them to attend to
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 185
those studies with interest and success. Such
young men, after completing their course of edu-
cation, often pass into the world without the
knowledge and the habits of reasoning that might
enable them to form correct opinions, and without
a strong feeling, which there has been nothing to
produce, of the importance of truth and of the evil
of error. As regards the most important of sub-
jects, religion, so far as any proper discipline of
mind is concerned, they are left very much to derive
their opinions opinions often assented to rather
than embraced from accident, from traditional
influences, or from the far worse influences that
may act upon them in the world. It may be said,
that instruction in all that relates to the study of
religion is given to those preparing for the clerical
profession in schools expressly intended for this
purpose. It is most earnestly to be wished that
these schools, collectively, formed a more important
exception to the remarks which have been made
respecting our institutions of learning, and were of
more avail for their professed end. But what is far
more desirable is, that intellectual men, through-
out the community, should comprehend that the
duty of understanding the religion which they pro-
fess is not a duty confined to a particular order.
16*
186 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
The great want in our country is the want of a
body of men whose minds have been so informed
and so disciplined as to qualify them to be trust-
worthy assistants and teachers of others in those
branches of knowledge which concern the present
well-being and the unchangeable, eternal interests
of our race, a body of men so enlightened, that
for very shame, if this were all, they could not
wilfully countenance essential error, and who might
be ever ready to throw the weight of their influence
into the scale of public opinion to counteract it.
How such a body of men is to be formed among
us is a question which cannot here be treated.
Various suggestions of improvement in the consti-
tution of our seats of learning, and in the condi-
tion of our clergy, might be offered and discussed.
But we have been led, though by a natural and
connected train of thought and feeling, to a sub-
ject foreign from the main purpose of this work ;
and this is not the place to enter into its details.
THE publication and the extended reception of
such books as that of Strauss, and there have
been very many of a like character, and the
popularity of that literature of infidelity and vice,
that " literature of despair," as it was called by one
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 187
who had contributed much to its formation, which
has been connected with such speculations, are
among the worst indications of the character of
our age. But even in the productions of scholars
and of men of genius, who are far from recklessly
offending against religion and morals, we too often
miss a correct tone of sentiment, an open, high-
minded, manly recognition of those truths which
lie at the foundation of all virtue and happiness.
Yet only in proportion as they are recognized can
civilized society, where it is now thrown into such
terrible confusion, be happily reorganized; and
where its elements are not yet broken up, its pres-
ervation must depend on the continuance, and its
improvement on the increase, of their influence.
We, in these United States, share in the same
common nature with the inhabitants of those
States which are spread over the more southern
portion of our continent ; and nothing has saved
us from the same anarchy and despotism, the same
internal commotions and wars, with all their at-
tendant depravation and misery, but a clearer
perception and a deeper sense of the truths of
religion and morals.
Vous etes I'avenir du monde, were words ad-
dressed by Madame de Stael to an American, a
188 GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS.
short time before her death. Her words were
true. Through the providence of God, and the
circumstances in which he has placed us, we have
become the advanced guard of the civilized world.
Our position is not to be viewed by us with any
foolish spirit of vainglory, but with a strong feel-
ing of our great responsibilities, our great defi-
ciencies, and our manifold dangers. One truth it
should impress upon us most deeply, that we are
not to look to the prevailing sentiments, habits,
and moral estimates of the Old World as guides
for our opinions or conduct, but only to those
eternal principles of right and wrong, which the
Lawgiver of the Universe has sanctioned. We
are acting acting for good or evil not for our-
selves, nor for our posterity, alone. Over a great
part of the civilized world the heavens are covered
with thick clouds. But there is light still shining
in the West. May it not be overcast. May it be
the augury of a better day for mankind.
PART II.
ON THE
INTERNAL EVIDENCES
OP THE
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS;
BEING
PORTIONS OF AN UNFINISHED WOKE.
CHAPTER I.
THE CONSISTENCY OF THE NARRATIVE IN THE GOSPELS
WITH ITSELF, AND WITH ALL OUR KNOWLEDGE BEARING
ON THE SUBJECT.
THE ultimate purpose in proving the genuine-
ness of the Gospels is to establish their authen-
ticity. If genuine, they are the works of Apos-
tles, who themselves witnessed the actions and
heard the discourses of Christ ; or of men who
during a great part of their lives were conver-
sant with Apostles, and derived from them the
information which they have given us. By es-
tablishing their genuineness, the discussion of
their authenticity or truth is reduced within
narrow limits, and may easily be decided. These
two subjects, however, though intimately con-
nected, are in their own nature distinct, and
admit of separate proof. But there are in the
Gospels many intrinsic evidences of authenticity,
which, at the same time, are evidences of genuine-
ness. The peculiar character of these histories is
192 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
such as to show that they proceeded from the
pens or from the lips of those who witnessed
what is related. In regard to this internal evi-
dence, therefore, the two subjects require to be
treated in connection.
Among those proofs, then, equally of authen-
ticity and of genuineness, which are found in the
Gospels, one of the most important may be thus
stated. In the narratives of the Evangelists, the
existence of many facts which are not expressly
mentioned is implied. In order to understand
fully what is told, and to perceive its bearing
and application, we must take into view very
much that is not told. There is to be found in
almost every part of the Gospels a latent refer-
ence to some existing state of things which is not
described. But when we attend to the character
of those facts with which different portions of the
narrative are thus connected, we find that they
are all probable or certain ; that we have distinct
evidence of them from other sources ; or that,
supposing the truth of what is related in the
Gospels, and viewing this in connection with all
our other knowledge on the subject in question,
they are such as must or might have existed.
The inferences from these histories, though many
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 193
and various, are all consistent with the histories
themselves, and with whatever we can learn from
other sources. In tracing out the necessary or
probable bearing of those actions and discourses
which are recorded, or in assigning their prob-
able occasions or consequences, we detect no
inconsistency with the history itself, and find no
contradiction of known facts ; but, on the con-
trary, we are continually perceiving new marks of
probability and truth. This coincidence between
what is told and what is implied, this correspond-
ence between the actions and discourses related
and that state of things and series of events to
which they refer as existing contemporaneously
and running parallel with them, does not appear
here and there only, but discovers itself through-
out the Gospels.
But this consistency of the narrative with itself,
both in what is told and in what may be inferred
from it, and its consistency with all other known
facts having a bearing upon it, is evidently not
the work of study or artifice. It is not worth
while to inquire whether it could in any case be
produced by such means; because there is no
dispute that the whole character of the Gospels is
opposed to such a supposition. They are very
17
194 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
inartificial compositions. If, moreover, the coin-
cidences of which we speak had been factitious,
and intended to give an air of probability to the
narrative, they would not have been left so latent
and obscure as they often are. The writer would
have taken care that they should be noticed by
the reader. On the contrary, those to which we
particularly refer are obviously undesigned. If,
then, the appearances which have been described
really exist, they can be accounted for only by
the truth of the history. It is impossible that a
fiction pretending to the character of true history,
especially a fiction relating to such events as are
recorded in the Gospels, should be so consistent
with itself, with probability, and with known facts,
in such a number and variety of latent coinci-
dences.
What has been said may be further illustrated
by the following remarks. In the Gospels, Christ
appears as a divine messenger endued with mirac-
ulous powers. "We learn that the great purpose
of his ministry was the moral and religious refor-
mation of mankind; and accounts are given of
what he said and did to effect this purpose. But
we find in these books only some very general and
imperfect notices of the moral and intellectual
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 195
character, the external state, the manners, usages,
opinions, prejudices, and passions of those who
were the immediate subjects of his ministry. Re-
specting these topics, however, we can gain much
knowledge from a variety of sources, either by di-
rect information or by probable inferences. Now,
in proportion as our knowledge becomes more ac-
curate and extensive, we perceive in a more clear
and striking manner the reference and adaptation
of what Christ is represented to have said and done
to the character and circumstances of those whom
he addressed, as well as its consistency with the
character and purpose ascribed to Christ him-
self. But, further, the claims of such an extra-
ordinary teacher, assuming to be a messenger from
God himself, his miracles, and his discourses, must,
admitting the representation given of them in the
Gospels, have produced, in their operation upon
those around him, consequences of a very remark-
able character, different from and opposite to each
other. Such a preacher could not have acted
upon the mass of the Jewish nation, or upon those
individuals with whom he was more nearly con-
nected, without causing very marked and extra-
ordinary phenomena as the result of his minis-
try. But here, again, the different effects of our
196 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
Saviour's ministry are but very partially described
in the Gospels; and an explanation of these ef-
fects by a reference to the different circumstances
of his hearers, or to their different states of mind,
is scarcely, if at all, attempted. What is not told,
however, is often unconsciously implied ; and what
is implied is always what we might expect, or what
we can account for as necessary or probable. In
proportion, likewise, as we attain a more just and
comprehensive view of the effects of his preaching,
we perceive the occasion of many facts, and the im-
mediate purpose of many discourses, which are not
stated in the narrative, and of which, therefore, we
may have had before no right conception. These
coincidences are so numerous, and at the same
time so obviously unstudied, as to give to the
whole history the most decisive marks of truth,
those which cannot be imitated.
The argument which it has been my purpose to
state, if just, is important ; and it is one not often,
if at all, adverted to. I may, therefore, be excused
for presenting it under a still different form.
There is, then, in the Gospels, a great deal that
requires explanation. The narrative is often im-
perfect. We do not at once perceive the meaning,
relation, and purpose of much, which, we are told,
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 197
was said or done by Christ or by others. We can-
not, without examination and thought, refer the ac-
tions and discourses recorded to that state of mind
in the speaker, or to that existing state of things,
by which they were occasioned. In order to un-
derstand different portions of these books, we are
obliged to take into consideration many circum-
stances not expressly recorded, or not recorded in
connection with the portion to be explained. In
the careful study of these writings, therefore, we
bring together a great variety of facts, which, cor-
responding with different parts of the narrative,
serve to explain what the writers themselves have
left unexplained. We regard these in connection
with the general view which they have given us
of the character of Christ and the purpose of his
ministry. We thus obtain something like a full
and correct conception of that state of things and
series of events, not expressly related, which must
have accompanied the ministry of Christ, suppos-
ing the truth of what is actually related concern-
ing it. But of this state of things and series
of events only a very partial account is given in
the Gospels. The narratives in these writings,
however, accord with all that we can learn or rea-
sonably infer respecting the subject. But there is
17*
198 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
something more to be said. The narratives in the
Gospels require, for their explanation, to be con-
sidered in connection with all our knowledge con-
cerning the subjects to which they relate. They
are but fragments of the great history of the times ;
and we must complete the tablet, as far as we can,
in order to perceive their proper place and connec-
tion. Now such a consistency between fiction or
error, on the one hand, and truth and probability,
on the other, that the latter should be required to
explain the former, may fairly be regarded as im-
possible. If the Gospels were not true, we could
not succeed in explaining them by attempting to
do so in the manner described ; that is, by proceed-
ing throughout on the false supposition of their
being true. In such a case, our facts and infer-
ences, instead of continually affording new illus-
tration, would be continually presenting new con-
tradictions, inconsistencies, and difficulties. This
argument applies with peculiar force to the Gos-
pels, with far greater force than to any other
writings whatever; because the Gospels contain
accounts of events so extraordinary, and which
must have had such important bearings and rela-
tions ; and because they are composed so inartifi-
cially, the narratives contained in them are so
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 199
often imperfect, facts are so nakedly recorded,
with so little explanation and so few circumstances,
and the relation of different portions to each
other, or to what is not stated in the books them-
selves, is so rarely pointed out. From the nature
of the facts related, they are subjected to the
strongest test of credibility, and at the same time,
from the mode of their relation, there is a con-
stant demand for explanation. We are continu-
ally obliged to bring what is before us into com-
parison with what we know from other sources,
or with what we may reasonably or consistently
suppose to be true.
It appears, therefore, that the writers of the
Gospels had, generally speaking, a very just and
lively conception of that most extraordinary state
of things, and of those numerous facts and cir-
cumstances, which must or which might have
existed if their history be true, but which cer-
tainly did not exist if it be a fiction. Supposing
the truth of the Gospels, the justness of this con-
ception is easily accounted for. It was the result
of personal knowledge and experience. Their
writers were themselves familiar with the facts
relating to the history of Christ, or derived their
knowledge from those who were so. But, sup-
200 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
posing the Gospels to be narratives not of real,
but of fictitious events, then it could have been
only by a most vigorous and most singular effort
of imagination, that the writers of them thus
brought before their minds all' the bearings of
different portions of these narratives upon a state
of things not described, and the numerous partic-
ulars and important consequences involved in the
supposed truth of the wonderful events which they
relate. These writers must, at the same time, have
exercised an unaccountable forbearance in leaving
the connections and bearings of their narratives so
obscure, and in not pointing out or intimating to
their readers what might appear to explain or con-
firm their relations in so striking a manner. The
extraordinary faculties supposed, and this extraor-
dinary use of them, must likewise have been found,
not in one only, but in four contemporary individ-
uals. But it is useless to multiply objections to
an hypothesis so improbable as to give an air of
trifling to the arguments brought against it. I
will, therefore, only add, that it would imply a fact
opposite to the evident and undisputed character
of these histories ; that is, it would imply that they
were works of consummate skill and artifice.
The appearances in the Gospels, if they are
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 201
such as have been stated, admit of no other ex-
planation, than that the narratives rest on the
authority of those who were witnesses of what is
related, and were themselves concerned in the
transactions recorded. It follows, therefore, that
these histories were committed to writing either
by some of the immediate disciples of Christ, or by
persons who derived, generally speaking, correct
and particular information from such disciples.
But if this conclusion be admitted, no important
doubt can remain that they are the works of those
particular individuals to whom they have always
been ascribed. Their character establishes the
truth of the testimony to their genuineness.
THE argument which I have endeavored to
state is of the kind technically called cumulative.
Its strength does not appear in any individual
case, but in the number and accumulation of in-
stances which may be adduced. Its whole force
is to be perceived only by a careful and judicious
study of the Gospels. In proportion as they are
better understood, the latent marks of truth which
run through every part of them will become more
apparent and irresistible. All I shall now attempt
will be to give a very few examples of its applica-
202 INTEENAL EVIDENCES OF THE
tion, in order to afford some illustration of its na-
ture.
In the eighteenth chapter of the Gospel of
St. Matthew, we find a narrative which may be
thus rendered.
" That day the disciples came to Jesus, saying,
Who then is to be greatest in the kingdom of
Heaven ? And Jesus called a child to him, and
placed him in the midst of them, and said, I
tell you in truth, Unless you are changed and
become as children, you will not enter the king-
dom of Heaven. He, then, who shall become
humble, and be like this child, will be the greatest
in the kingdom of Heaven. And he who gives
a kind reception to one such child for my sake,
gives a kind reception to me. But should any
one cause the humblest believer in me to fall
away from me, it would be better for him that he
should have a millstone hung round his neck,
and be swallowed up in the depths of the sea.
Woe for the world on account of the hindrances
to my reception! Such hindrances must exist;
but woe for him through whom they exist !
" If your hand or your foot would cause you to
fall away from me, cut it off and cast it from you.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 203
It is better for you to enter into life having but one
foot or one hand, than, having two hands or two
feet, to be cast into the eternal fire. And if your
eye be causing you to fall away, pluck it out and
cast it from you. It is better for you to enter
into life having but one eye, than, having two
eyes, to be cast into the fire of hell.
" See that you despise not any one of the hum-
blest of my disciples ; for I tell you, that their
angels in heaven continually behold the face of my
Father in heaven. The Son of Man has come to
save the lost. What think you ] If a man have
a hundred sheep, and one of them has gone astray,
will he not leave the ninety-nine upon the moun-
tains, and go and seek that which has gone
astray 1 And if he find it, truly I say to you,
he rejoices more over it than over the ninety-nine
which had not strayed. Even so it is not the
will of your Father in heaven that one of the
humblest of these should be lost.
" If your brother sin against you, go alone to
him and show him his fault. If he listen to you,
you have gained your brother. But if he do not
listen to you, go to him yet again with one or two
others, that everything may be settled by the
words of two or three witnesses. And if he dis-
-
204: INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
regard them, tell the matter to the assembly of
brethren; and if he disregard the assembly, let
him be to you as a heathen and a tax-gatherer.
" Truly I say to you, Whatever you forbid on
earth will be forbidden in heaven, and whatever
you permit on earth will be permitted in heav-
en. Again, I say to you, If two of you agree on
earth concerning everything which they ask, their
prayers will be granted by my Father in heaven.
For where two or three have met together in my
service, there am I in the midst of them.
" Then Peter came to him and said, Master, if
my brother sin against me, how often shall I
forgive him 1 ? till seven times'? Jesus answered
him, I say not, Till seven times ; but, Till seventy
times seven."
I will now endeavor to explain this narrative,
for the purpose of pointing out its intrinsic marks
of truth. It has reference to a . state of things
nowhere described by the Evangelist, but which
was the natural result of facts related by him, or
known to us from other sources. The narrative
forms a counterpart to this state of things. It
bears its impression and implies its existence.
But this coincidence is clearly undesigned by the
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 205
writer. It is not to be ascribed to his skill and
artifice. It therefore affords evidence at once of
the truth of the narrative itself, and of the actual
existence of that state of things which we sup-
pose it to imply. Of this we will now give some
account.
It was, as is well known, the general expecta-
tion of the Jews, that their Messiah would be a
temporal prince, ruling over the world. At the
period to which this narrative relates, the Apos-
tles shared in the common error and expectation
of their countrymen. Their prejudices and pas-
sions clung to this false conception. A little be-
fore this time our Saviour had expressly assented
to the declaration of Peter affirming him to be the
Messiah. His Apostles, therefore, regarding him
as sustaining this character, looked forward with
undefined hopes to his assuming the power and
splendor of the greatest of earthly monarchs.
But they had been invited by Christ to connect
themselves with him ; they had joined him while
he was yet in comparative obscurity and his
claims were not generally acknowledged, and
they had been distinguished by his peculiar
regard. For themselves, therefore, they naturally
expected that they should be hereafter among his
18
206 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
favorites and chief officers. With these feelings,
they had begun to contend with each other about
their future comparative rank in the kingdom
of the Messiah. Jealousies had sprung up ; mu-
tual offence had been taken ; and they were be-
coming at enmity with each other. Even at a
subsequent period, the other disciples, we are
told, were moved with indignation at James and
John for the ambitious views which they still
cherished, notwithstanding our Saviour's present
reproof. But all their hopes of worldly ambition
were unfounded; and the whole state of mind
described was at variance with the character re-
quired in the disciples and ministers of him whose
kingdom was not of this world.
Our Saviour, therefore, addressing his Apostles,
begins with an inculcation of humility, and of the
necessity of a total change in their feelings and
purposes. Without this, they could not even be
members of his kingdom. The bearing of what
immediately follows may not be perceived without
some further remarks.
Peter, James, and John appear to have been
eminent among the Apostles for their personal
character. They were, on different occasions,
particularly distinguished by Christ. John was
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 207
known as the disciple whom he loved. He had
declared that Peter was a rock on which he would
build his Church. He had selected the three to
witness his transfiguration; and upon this occa-
sion, they were separated with their Master during
a day and a night from the rest of the Apostles,
for a purpose which remained unknown to the
latter for a considerable period. They evidently
had founded peculiar expectations upon the dis-
tinction which they had enjoyed. They appear to
have assumed an air of superiority, to which the
other disciples were unwilling to submit, and
which led to altercation and mutual ill-will. They
probably felt and expressed a degree of contempt
for the rude and slow conceptions and uninformed
minds of some of their associates ; perhaps even for
their unambitious views, and for a state of feeling
and character more conformed to the spirit of our
religion than their own. There was probably a
rivalship among the three we have mentioned ;
between Peter, on the one side, and James and
John, on the other. It may be presumed, likewise,
that the rest of the Apostles shared in the feelings
described, according to the notions which they re-
spectively entertained of their claims to the favor
of their Master. But this assumption of superior-
208 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
ity, these rivalships and dissensions, would tend to
alienate many of the disciples, especially those
treated as inferiors. They would be offended and
driven away from Christ. Our Saviour, therefore,
proceeds to speak of the interest which he felt in
all his followers. He who should show kindness
to any one of them, though he were but as a child,
on account of his relation to Christ, might be re-
garded as showing kindness to Christ himself.
He insists in the strongest terms upon the guilt
of causing any one of his disciples to be offended
with him, or to fall away. There would be sin in
apostasy ; there would be sin in giving occasion to
apostasy. Through either act, one would forfeit
the privileges and blessings of a Christian. But
there was danger of both ; and our Saviour, there-
fore, speaks of the evil and ruin of such sin. It
was to be avoided at any sacrifice, by giving up
the strongest feelings and passions, by cutting off
a limb or plucking out an eye. He then warns
those whom he is addressing, not to despise one
of the humblest of his disciples. They were all
objects of the care of God. The purpose of
his own mission was to seek and save the lost.
He had come to rescue men from error, sin, and
misery. The deliverance of a single individual,
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 209
however humble, was most earnestly to be desired
and promoted. God might be regarded as holding
the same relation to his disciples, as a shepherd
to his flock ; not willing that any should be lost.
He then teaches them how to compose those dif-
ferences which had arisen. The party injured
was to seek reconciliation, and endeavor to lead
his brother to better feelings. If unsuccessful, he
was still to repeat his efforts, taking with him
others who might use their influence to the same
end. He was finally to call upon the whole body
of disciples to interpose their persuasions and
authority ; and he who should persevere in ill-will,
in opposition to all these means, was no longer to
be considered as a brother.
The words which follow are not particularly
connected with these directions, but generally with
the whole discourse. Our Saviour, having at-
tempted to repress all improper pride and ambi-
tion in his disciples, teaches them their real dig-
nity and authority as ministers of his religion.
As such they were ministers of God to declare
what He forbade and what He commanded. The
precepts and directions given by them as announ-
cing his will would be ratified in heaven. The
jealousies and dissensions among the Apostles
18*
210 INTEENAL EVIDENCES OF THE
appear to have arisen in part from what our Sav-
iour had formerly said to Peter : " What you
shall forbid on earth will be forbidden in heaven,
and what you shall permit on earth will be per-
mitted in heaven." * In the present discourse, in
order to do away any claim of superiority which
Peter might have founded on this address, and to
prevent it from being a ground of dissension,
Christ repeats the same words, and extends the
declaration to all his Apostles. He then speaks
further of their interest with God as ministers of
his religion. But he connects this with a new
recommendation of concord and unity. As min-
isters of his religion, they were to be united in
their purposes, wishes, and prayers ; and they
might then be secure of God's peculiar assistance
and favor. What they should supplicate in com-
mon, as servants of Christ, with such feelings as
he required, would be granted by God. It would
be as if Christ himself were praying with them.
When we understand the occasion and bearing
of the discourse, we perceive, at once, the coinci-
dence in what is related of Peter. "Then Peter
came to him and said, Master, if my brother sin
* Matthew xvi. 19.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 211
against me, how often shall I forgive him ? " Pe-
ter, it is probable, had been particularly exasper-
ated in the controversy concerning pre-eminence;
and nothing, in his consequent state of feeling,
could be more natural than this question. But
this coincidence, like all the others which have
been pointed out, is left without being in any way
indicated by the Evangelist.
It will be perceived that, in explaining this pas-
sage, we go upon the assumption, that the char-
acter and office of Christ were such as they are
described in the Gospels. We are obliged to
suppose that his Apostles had become convinced
that he was the Messiah, the most extraordinary
messenger from God to men of whom the Jews
had an imagination. We next take into view
what we learn from other sources was the concep-
tion which the Jews had formed of the character
and office of the Messiah. We infer that this
conception was entertained by the Apostles. We
then consider what was the natural effect of their
belief upon their minds, in the circumstances in
which the history represents them to have been
placed. And we bring to bear upon the present
passage inferences from facts elsewhere recorded,
the connection of which is not pointed out by the
212 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
historian. Pursuing this method, we perceive that
the narrative is consistent with all that is else-
where expressly told; and with all that may be
inferred from what is told, when viewed in con-
nection with our other knowledge. This consist-
ency extends itself to those relations which are
not brought into view by the writer. It is clearly
unstudied. But in this passage we have merely
a specimen of the sort of illustration which the
Gospels throughout admit and require, and of
the results which follow from its application.
WE will proceed to another example, the story
of the young man who came to Christ addressing
him : " Good teacher, what good thing shall I do
to have eternal life 1 " * The false notions which
the Jews entertained of religion and its obligations
were similar to those which have very commonly
prevailed. They did not regard it as the sole
governing principle of the affections and conduct ;
but rather as enjoining a distinct and peculiar set
of observances, a regard to which, though consist-
ent with great moral depravity, was looked upon
as constituting the religious character. According
* Matthew xix. 16.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 213
to them, religion consisted in keeping their Law
and their traditions. But of the extent and force
of the moral requisitions of the Law they had
but a very imperfect conception; and to keep
the Law was with them but little more than to
observe its ceremonies according to the glosses
and with the additions of their Rabbins. The
case was with them as it has since been with
large bodies of Christians. Kites and arbitrary
observances had in their minds taken the place
of moral duties. The young man who came
to Christ, though he may have had some better
and higher notions, appears to have possessed
in a great degree the common character of his
countrymen, and especially of the leading men
among them, to whose number he belonged. Re-
garding our Saviour as a new and extraordinary
teacher, he appears to have thought that he
might enjoin upon him some new and peculiar
observance as a means of obtaining God's favor ;
something not commanded in the Law, and which
others had not practised.
To the address of the young man our Saviour
replied: "Why do you call me good? None
is good except God alone. But if you would
enter into life, keep the commandments." The
214 INTEKNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
object of the first part of our Saviour's answer
was to refer the young man from himself as a
teacher, to Qod ; to give him to understand that
no precepts were of any authority except as they
proceeded from God ; that there was no other good
teacher to whom he was to look for directions by
which eternal life might be obtained. According-
ly, the purport of what he adds is this: If you
would enter into life, obey the commandments of
God. The subsequent question of the young man
implies, conformably to what has been said, that
he was seeking for some peculiar, and, if I may
so say, some compendious mode of obtaining fu-
ture blessedness ; for he asks which of the com-
mandments he should keep, as if there were no
obligation to obey them all. Our Saviour, then,
in opposition to the common error of the age,
directs him to the moral precepts of the Law,
mentioning particularly a few of these, as speci-
mens and representatives of the whole. The
young man, with a confidence which discovered
too high an opinion of himself and too narrow
conceptions of his duty, replied, "All these
precepts have I kept from my youth; in what
am I still wanting ? " Our Saviour's preceding
answer was not intended as a full reply. There
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 215
was, now that he had come as a messenger from
God, an occasion and a call for high virtues and
great sacrifices, such as had not previously been
demanded. Men were summoned to become his
disciples, and his disciples were to take up the
cross and follow him ; to give themselves up to
his cause ; to lay aside all regard to their worldly
interests ; and to expose themselves as marks for
persecution. Our Saviour proposed to the young
man no easier and no harder terms than he pro-
posed to all his followers. The excellence, he
tells him, of which you are ambitious, is to be
obtained by devoting yourself to my service, by
becoming my follower; but to this end it is
necessary to divest yourself of all care for merely
earthly concerns. The direction at first sight
may seem to be severe, and to have imposed an
unnecessary trial; and it is left unexplained by
the Evangelist. But when we bring into view
the existing state of things, we find it to be such
as this state of things demanded ; and we perceive
its consistency with what was uniformly required
by Christ of his disciples.
The young man went away sorrowful, and our
Saviour turned to his disciples to remark, in the
strong, figurative language of the East, upon the
216 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
moral impossibility that those of the class to which
he belonged should give up wealth, ease, pleasures,
and honors, to become his disciples. But their
thoughts still dwelt upon an earthly kingdom ;
and could this hold out no rewards to tempt men
to become his followers 1 Was the whole course
of his disciples through life to be one of privation,
labor, and suffering ] " Who then," they ask,
" can be saved "? " That is, How are you to col-
lect followers'? How is your kingdom to be es-
tablished ? It is to this indirect meaning of
the question, I conceive, that the reply of Christ
is directed. Men would be saved, his religion
would be established, not by human means, but
by displays of the power of God.
Peter then, with feelings similar to those which
have been before described, brings forward the
claims of the Apostles : " Lo ! we have left all
to become your followers. What then will be
our reward?" Our Saviour answers him in
strong, metaphorical language, borrowing the
figure which he uses from the thoughts which
possessed their minds. " And Jesus said to them,
I tell you in truth, that you, my followers, in the
regeneration, when the Son of Man shall sit on
the throne of his glory, shall also sit on twelve
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 217
thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."* It
was thus that he not unfrequently adopted the
language in which his hearers might express
their ideas, and conformed it to the expression of
his own ; in this manner facilitating the reception
of the latter by their minds. The expectations of
his Apostles would not be literally gratified, but
they would be gratified in a much higher sense.
When men should be regenerated by his religion,
when his spiritual kingdom should be established,
they, his Apostles, would be regarded as next
to him in authority and dignity. For all their
sacrifices, he proceeds to say, they should receive
a hundred fold, and should inherit eternal life.
But the parable which follows, of the laborers
in a vineyard, is intended to correct any false
hopes, improper confidence, or undue estimation
of themselves, which these promises might other-
wise have excited in the Apostles. They might
naturally think that the mere circumstance of
their early adherence to our Saviour, their being
his first, or among his first, followers, would
* It having been in ancient times common in the East for kings
to act as judges, the whole exercise of regal authority was sometimes
denoted by the word judging, as it is metaphorically in the present
passage. " The twelve tribes of Israel " is a figurative expression
for the whole people of God.
19
218 INTEENAL EVIDENCES OF THE
entitle them to peculiar rewards. This might
reasonably be expected by the followers of an
earthly leader. But the object of this parable
was to teach them that the future recompense of
men would not be affected by their becoming his
followers early or late, if they became such as
soon as invited. It would depend only on their
moral excellence. In this respect many of those
who became converts at a later period might be
superior to others who earlier professed themselves
his disciples. The last might be first, and the
first last.
IN explaining the passages which we have gone
over, we are obliged to suppose much that is
nowhere expressly stated by the Evangelist. But
what we suppose, follows from what he has re-
lated, when we view his history in connection
with our knowledge derived from other sources.
It is of this remarkable, unobtruded, apparently
unstudied consistency, that he who denies the
truth of the history is called upon to furnish some
other solution.*
* [For further illustration of the passages remarked upon in this
chapter, see the author's Notes on the Gospels.]
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 219
CHAPTER II.
OBJECTIONS AGAINST THE CONSISTENCY OF THE NAKEATIVE
CONSIDERED.
WE have been endeavoring to prove the truth
of the Gospel history from the consistency of its
different parts with each other, with the whole,
and with all our knowledge bearing upon the
subject in numberless dependences and relations.
This consistency, when viewed in connection with
the inartificial style of narration, gives the his-
tory an air of truth which human skill and ge-
nius seem scarcely more capable of counterfeiting,
than they are of counterfeiting one of the liv-
ing productions of nature. But it may be said
that there is an important point in which the
argument fails, and may be turned against us. It
may be urged that the effect produced by the
ministry of Christ upon the great body of the
Jewish nation was wholly inconsistent with what
we might reasonably expect, supposing his history
to be true. Though performing the most astonish-
220 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
ing miracles in attestation of his divine authority,
he was unable to subdue the incredulity of his
countrymen. - It is impossible, it may be said, that
men's minds should not have yielded to such
proofs as he is related to have given.
Certainly, if the Gospel history be true, Jesus
Christ did give the most unquestionable proofs of
his divine mission. But it is an error to suppose
that men will always believe and act as it is in
the highest degree reasonable that they should
believe and act. Our passions and prejudices
have power to trample the strongest evidence un-
der foot. The Pharisees and the common people
whose leaders they were, refused to acknowledge
the divine authority of our Saviour. One, at first
thought, may be ready to say that nothing can be
imagined more unreasonable. Yet no form which
their opinions concerning Christ might assume,
could involve so gross an absurdity as the doc-
trine of transubstantiation. In whatever they
might believe, there was, to say the least, no
greater dereliction of reason, than in the belief
of this article of faith. They persecuted Christ
and his followers in defence of their opinions ;
but those who have held that doctrine have perse-
cuted as madly in its support. They may appear to
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 221
have rushed upon destruction, struggling against
evidence which should have produced conviction.
It is an awful and revolting phenomenon. But it
is one which has been exhibited since their times.
The voice of reason and religion and conscience
has been often distinctly uttered to men with-
out being heard and obeyed. The truth is, that
when we suppose an extraordinary difficulty in
the case of the unbelieving Jews, we regard noth-
ing but the abstract force of the evidence for the
divinity of our Saviour's mission, supposing it to
be such as is represented in the Gospels. We
do not consider those circumstances which may
have produced in their minds a very false esti-
mate of the weight of this evidence; nor take, in to
view the strength of those prejudices, passions,
and vices, that whole constitution of character, by
which it was resisted.
If it be proved that Christ performed real mira-
cles, no reasonable man, at the present day, will
doubt that he was a messenger from God. But
in the time of Christ, this conclusion did not
necessarily follow in the mind of a Jew. That
the power of performing miracles, that is, of pro-
ducing effects which cannot be referred to the
laws of nature, must in all cases, when viewed
19*
222 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
alone, be sufficient evidence that he in whom it
resides has received some commission from God, is
a proposition which, perhaps, admits of satisfactory
proof. This proof, however, is derived from va-
rious and complex considerations ; and the truth
of the proposition, whether in this abstract form it
may be established or not, was certainly not gen-
erally admitted by the Jews contemporary with
Christ. They were an ignorant and superstitious
people. The prevalent belief in the reality of false
miracles existed among them equally as among the
Heathens. Some narratives in their Scriptures
might easily be understood as proving the doc-
trine, that the power of performing miracles was
not confined to the messengers of God, or to those
on whom he looked 'with favor. They believed in
the agency of evil spirits as interfering with the
course of nature and inflicting diseases of body
and mind. There were persons among them who
were regarded as able to cure such diseases by
casting out daemons. They believed in magic, and
consequently had no doubt that miracles might
be effected through means and agents condemned
by God, and which exposed those who employed
them to his displeasure. But, holding such false
opinions, they were fully prepared to resist the
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 223
conviction which the miracles of our Saviour must
have produced in men more intelligent and better
informed. They were familiar with the imagina-
tion and belief of false miracles, and were therefore
less likely to be affected by real miracles. Believ-
ing such effects to be often produced without the
interposition of God, by bad agents, they were fur-
nished with what they deemed a sufficient account
of the miracles of Christ, though his divine au-
thority were denied. His enemies held the same
opinion concerning them, which many Christians
have held respecting the pretended miracles of
Paganism. They regarded them as performed
through the assistance of evil spirits. In addition
to what has been said, it may be well to recollect,
though it is not a consideration of primary im-
portance, that the principal scene of Christ's min-
istry was in Galilee and the neighboring country,
and that it was here that most of his miracles
were performed; while, on the other hand, the
stronghold of his enemies was at Jerusalem,
where his character, preaching, and actions were
less known.
But the majority of the Jews were not likely
to be deterred from their opinion respecting the
miraculous powers of Christ, either by the holi-
224 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
ness of his character, or by the conformity of his
doctrines and precepts to our highest conceptions
of God. In .order to perceive and feel the display
of divine excellence which was manifested in his
life and religion, no inconsiderable degree of purity
and elevation of mind is required. Moral corrup-
tion must shrink from it with aversion and pain.
Instead, therefore, of commanding the respect of
his countrymen, it was one cause of their offence
with him and their hatred against him. But there
were other powerful causes in operation.
The Jews were oppressed by the Roman power,
and despised and exasperated by their oppressors.
Insulated among nations, not less by mutual feel-
ings of hostility than by other causes, they gloried
in their peculiar relation to God. They were his
people, and the rest of men were their enemies
and his enemies. Their pride was their consola-
tion and their hope; and the more they were
humbled, the more obstinate and deep-rooted it
became. It drew strength from all their national
and all their religious sentiments. The hour was
coming, as they thought, when God would inter-
pose for his chosen people, and destroy their
oppressors. The times of the Messiah would be
a period of deliverance and vengeance and glory.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 225
This expectation was an article of religious faith,
and the cherished object of their strongest pas-
sions. But when Christ appeared, it was to pros-
trate those hopes, and humble that pride which
oppression and suffering had only confirmed. No
distinguishing favor of God to the Jewish people
was manifested through him. He came to teach
them, that they were not, as they believed, a holy
people, but sinners and aliens from God ; and that
it was only by a renovation of character that they
could obtain his favor. He came, not to exalt
them in triumph over their enemies, but to place
the rest of men on an equality with them, to do
away the distinctions in which they had gloried,
and to make known the impartial goodness of
God. He came, not to gratify their passions, but
to require them to relinquish those passions. No
shock or discouragement, however, could at once
subdue those strong hopes which his appearance
had called forth. Though unsatisfied, there were
still some of their number who were ready, with, or
even without, his consent, " to make him king."
But he repelled from him those who came with
such feelings. He turned into hostility the pas-
sions which he refused to gratify. At the same
time, the place of his birth, the condition of his
226 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
family, his mode of life, the character of his few
followers, the hopes which he held out to them,
were all foreign from what they had expected in
their great Deliverer. Was it strange, then, that
they refused to acknowledge him as the Messiah,
who corresponded to none of their conceptions of
the Messiah, and who, instead of accomplishing,
had come to destroy, the hopes of his nation 1
But this was not all. Jesus Christ was, in the
highest sense of the words, a moral and religious
reformer, the most open and uncompromising, ex-
posed to all the hatred which may ever attach to
this character. The Jewish religion had become
grossly corrupt. It was, as other forms of super-
stition have been, little more than a religion of
substitutions for holiness and virtue ; not leading
men to goodness, but furnishing them with some
other imaginary means of obtaining the favor of
God. Now when, in any case, a reformer exhibits
the true character of such substitutions, and pre-
sents to view the real requirements of religion, the
natural effect will be, that those who have founded
their pride upon the former will regard him as
profanely endeavoring to destroy men's reverence
for what is sabred. He will be viewed by them
as an enemy to religion ; for he is an enemy to
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 227
what they have thought religion. They will re-
gard him with deep-felt hostility ; for he is destroy-
ing the support of their self-satisfaction, and of
their estimation among men. Their worst pas-
sions will be arrayed by their bigotry in the dis-
guise of religious zeal. This was eminently true
as regards the Jews. With what feelings must
the Pharisees have heard a teacher, who, assum-
ing the most decisive tone of authority, announced
to them that they were hypocrites and sinners,
deceiving themselves and their followers ? How
must they have listened to one who called upon
them to acquire that holiness which they had no
doubt of already possessing, through the hard way
of humility, repentance, and entire change of char-
acter 1 How many of them could be expected to
become the disciples of such a teacher 1 ? And
what must have been the bitterness and exaspera-
tion of those who did not ! In what state of mind
were they to estimate fairly the evidence of his
divine mission ] Their strongest passions were ex-
asperated ; their most deep-rooted prejudices were
assailed ; and the whole force of these was turned
against him. Even their wavering apprehensions,
if any such were felt, that his claims might be well-
founded, only served to increase their alarm and
228 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
agitation, and, consequently, to give new strength
to the feelings which they had not power to sub-
due. The s,tate of mind which existed in the
Pharisees must have been common in some de-
gree to most of the Jews. The system of doc-
trines and duties taught by Christ was at variance
with the inveterate errors of his countrymen. The
alternative was, whether, becoming as children,
they should surrender these errors, having im-
plicit faith in Christ as teaching by the authority
of God ; or whether they should cling to and de-
fend them, regarding him as an impious innova-
tor. The latter was the character which many of
the Jews ascribed to Christ. The fact is evident
from his own discourses. It accounts for the fre-
quency and force with which he insisted on his
connection with God as His messenger and repre-
sentative ; and for the variety of forms in which
he presented this truth. It is clear that his ene-
mies were under such a strong delusion, as to
imagine themselves defending against him the
cause of God and of God's people. Their feel-
ings of hostility broke out repeatedly with partic-
ular violence, when, by an intentional disregard of
those ceremonies which they thought of high im-
portance, particularly a superstitious observance
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 229
of the Sabbath, he showed of how little account
he esteemed them. An enemy of their faith, a
despiser of their traditions, one who made no ac-
count of that scrupulousness of conscience which
paid tithes even of mint and cumin, but who
denounced as hypocrites those holy men whose
authority had been most respected; a teacher
who taught not as those who had made the Law
their study ; a contemner of religious ceremonies ;
a breaker of the Sabbath; a companion of tax-
gatherers and sinners ; a pretended Messiah who
came not to deliver God's chosen people, but as
a prophet of evil, denouncing the destruction even
of Jerusalem and the temple, it was thus that a
bigoted Jew must have regarded Christ ; and what
strength of evidence could prove to him that such
a one was a messenger from God 1 " He casts out
the daemons through the prince of the daemons."
This was not a mere timid solution of the difficulty
which his miracles presented; it was the strong
expression of the feelings which possessed those
by whom it was uttered.
It is a gross error to suppose that miracles are
particularly adapted to aifect the minds of a rude
and superstitious people. They will produce their
most powerful impression upon the most enlight-
20
230 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
ened, upon those who have the most correct con-
ceptions of the power and character of God, the
most extensive acquaintance with the causes of
natural phenomena, who are most free from cre-
dulity, and who, in consequence, are not familiar-
ized to the imagination and belief of false miracles.
To such, a real miracle must be an astonishing
and almost appalling event, commanding attention,
and affording ground for the strongest conviction.
By the ignorant and superstitious it may be re-
garded as merely belonging to a class of phenom-
ena of not very unfrequent occurrence.
WHEN, therefore, we attend to the character,
opinions, and state of mind of those whom Christ
addressed, we perceive that the result of his min-
istry was such as we might reasonably expect to
find it. I do not urge this coincidence as any
evidence of the truth of his history ; for, whether
the rest of the history be true or false, there could
be but one statement respecting a fact, in its na-
ture so notorious. My purpose has hitherto been
merely to remove an objection.
BUT the statements which have been made for
this purpose may be viewed under a different as-
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 231
pect. There is, running through the Gospels, a
striking correspondence with the representations
which have been given. It is nowhere implied
in these books, that any doubt was entertained of
the reality of Christ's miracles. There is not a sin-
gle expression which betrays any apprehension or
thought of their truth being denied. There is no
attempt to establish it by arguments, by the refu-
tation of objections, or by any detail of circum-
stances having a bearing upon this point. The
facts are told nakedly, as equally indisputable and
undisputed. But this is not all. There are re-
peated implications, apparently indirect and un-
studied, that the reality of Christ's miracles was
universally acknowledged, equally by those who
did not recognize them as evidences of his divine
mission and by those who did. There are, at the
same time, repeated exhibitions of the workings
of those passions and prejudices which have been
supposed. Such, for instance, is the case in the
account which the Pharisees are represented to
have given of the manner in which Christ's mir-
acles were performed, taken in connection with
the subsequent remarks of Christ upon what they
said.* The whole narrative implies that there was
* Compare Matthew ix. 34 ; xii. 24, seqq.
232 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
no controversy about the facts themselves. That
the words ascribed to the Pharisees were not
falsely ascribed to them is further confirmed, it
may be observed, by an incidental allusion to them,
made by Christ : " If they have called the master
of the house Beelzebub, how much more will they
so call those of his household ! " * A like indirect
acknowledgment of the reality of his miracles, and
the operation of a like state of mind, appear in
what was said by his fellow-townsmen of Nazareth
while refusing to acknowledge his divine authori-
ty : " Whence has this man such wisdom, and these
mighty powers 1 Is he not the son of the carpen-
ter V' t Similar remarks may be made respecting
the request of the Pharisees that he would give
"a sign FROM HEAVEN." They would not have
asked a- sign from heaven of one whom they re-
garded as a mere impostor, not possessed of any
extraordinary powers. If they could have exposed
any deception in his miracles performed on earth,
they would not have sought to put him to a new
trial. The implication is that these miracles were
unsatisfactory ; and that it was necessary for him
to give some more decisive proof of his divine
mission, by a sign coming evidently from Him
* Matthew x. 25. | Matthew xiii. 54, 55.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 233
whom they conceived of as dwelling in the heav-
ens. I give these passages merely as examples.
A similar character appears more or less distinctly
in many others.*
The remark that the miracles of Christ appear
from the Gospels to have been unquestioned, is
true of what may be more strictly called his mira-
cles. But it is not true of the fact of his resur-
rection. Respecting this, St. Matthew relates that
there was a story in circulation that his disciples
came by night and stole his body away while the
guards slept.t The effect of this single exception
is to confirm the argument derived from the gen-
eral characteristic of the Gospels before mentioned.
Here we are told by the Evangelist, that the most
important miracle which he records was treated
as an imposture. We may fairly conclude, there-
fore, that with the same honesty, or the same
indifference, or the same incapacity for deception,
he would, in some way, have given us information
of the fact, if the truth of the other miracles re-
corded by him had been called in question. What
he here expressly states confirms most strongly the
* Some of these are mentioned by Paley. (Evidences, Part UL
ch. iv.)
f Matthew xxviii. 1 2, seqq.
20*
234 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
correctness of those accounts which imply that their
truth was not disputed. But in what manner does
he mention this particular story of the unbeliev-
ing Jews "? He merely states it, without any at-
tempt at refutation, without even a formal denial
of it, without a single remark respecting it. He
could not have treated it with more indifference,
or with more appearance of regarding it as des-
titute equally of plausibility and of truth, and
wholly unlikely to obtain credit. If the story
had been urged with any confidence, if it had
been in fact believed by those who brought it for-
ward, it could hardly have been passed over with
such slight.
It appears then, that, with the exception just
mentioned, the writers of the Gospels nowhere
imply that any doubt was professed or entertained
of the reality of the miracles which they relate ;
but, on the contrary, that the enemies of Christ
admitted the fact of his supernatural powers.
Now this is a remarkable characteristic of these
histories, which corresponds to the supposition of
their truth, but does not correspond to any other
supposition that can be made. If we suppose
the histories to be false, and that Christ did not
perform miracles, there are but three suppositions
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 235
of which the case admits : one, That he falsely pre-
tended to have this power ; another, That though
he himself did not pretend to this power, yet his
disciples believed him to possess it, and to have,
in fact, performed many miracles ; and the third,
That though Christ neither pretended to this
power, nor was believed by his disciples to pos-
sess it, yet miracles were falsely attributed to him
after his death. The second supposition may ap-
pear too improbable to be stated; nor should I
have thought of bringing it forward, if it had not
actually been maintained. We may say, gener-
ally, that the pretence that Christ performed mir-
acles was either made during his lifetime by
himself or by his disciples; or, not being then
urged, was brought forward after his death. In
either case, if it had admitted of dispute or denial,
there can be no doubt that it would have been
disputed and denied. If there had been room
even for any cavil or objection, it would have
been made. If his miracles had been false, the
personal enemies of Christ, or, subsequently to his
time, the enemies of the rising sect, would have
seized at once upon this decisive ground of attack.
It would have been the universal objection of the
opposers of Christianity. It is unnecessary to my
236 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
present purpose to observe, that the objection must
have been triumphant, and that it is impossible
that such a , series of bold and gross fictions as
would have existed in the Gospels could have
stood their ground, at once against the truth and
against violent opposition. I only say, that these
relations would have been met on every side with
doubts, and strong controversy, and positive denial.
The opposers of Christianity did not think them-
selves destitute of arguments against it ; and they
urged them strenuously and confidently. What
they were, we learn not merely from the Gospels,
but equally from the Epistles and from other
sources. The first preachers of our religion were
continually called upon to meet and answer them.
There is, however, no indication that the reality
of the miracles was disputed. But if this could
have been denied, here would have been the tug
and strain of the controversy. Upon his miracles
the Founder of our religion is represented as hav-
ing rested his claims : " If I had not done among
them such works as no other ever did, they would
not be thus guilty." The first and the last objec-
tion to his claims, therefore, would have been, that
such works were not performed by him. But if a
controversy of the kind we have supposed had
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 237
really existed, we should have found, I do not say
traces, but abundant and decisive proofs of it in
the Gospels, as well as in other writings of early
Christians. It would have been impossible that
such a series of extraordinary narratives, relating
to a subject of such deep interest, should have
been presented naked to the attacks of unbelievers
and enemies, without an attempt to support their
authority, or to invalidate the statements of those
who denied their truth, and even without any ref-
erence to those opposite accounts which must have
been notorious to all who cared about the facts
in question. The writers of these histories were
treading upon ground where they were exposed
to continual attack, and must have been constantly
in armor. On the contrary, they proceed with
the most unaffected air of security. Not only
are there no traces in their books of any contro-
versy respecting the reality of Christ's miracles,
but there runs throughout these writings an im-
plication that no doubt of their reality was en-
tertained. Now this could not be consummate
artifice, though it might tend to deceive readers
at the distance of eighteen centuries ; but it must
have been consummate folly, for it could deceive
no readers at the time when the books appeared.
238 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
It is a folly, however, of which no writers placed
in such circumstances as were the Evangelists can
be supposed guilty. The characteristic of which
we have been speaking implies, therefore, the truth
of their history ; and it admits of explanation on
no other hypothesis. It is a mark of authenticity
which cannot be artificial, but which runs, like
the natural veins of an agate, through the very
structure of their writings.
The argument may be thus simply stated. If
the reality of Christ's miracles could have been
controverted, this would have been the main con-
troversy between Christians and their opponents.
If such a controversy had existed, we should have
found proofs of it in the writings of the early
Christians, and especially in the Gospels. But no
such proofs are to be found; on the contrary, we
perceive decisive implications that the reality of
his miracles was not denied. It follows, that no
such controversy existed. The reality of his mira-
cles was not, because it could not be, denied ; and
the narrative of them is therefore true.
THE history contained in the Gospels may be
divided into two parts : one, containing narratives
of miraculous events ; and the other, accounts of
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 239
the discourses of our Saviour, of his actions not
miraculous, and of the dispositions, words, and
actions of others, his friends, his enemies, and
the common multitude. Now between these two
portions into which the history may be divided,
there is a perfect correspondence. That our Sav-
iour was a divine messenger endued with miracu-
lous powers is brought into view with almost as
much distinctness in one portion of the narrative
as in the other. This fact appears in his always
demanding to be believed and obeyed simply upon
his own authority, as speaking in the name of
God; in his appeals to his miracles as the proof
on which his claims rested; in his forcibly pre-
senting to the minds of his disciples the suffer-
ings to be endured by them in this life, and giving
nothing but his own promise for the rewards to
be expected by them after death; in the distant
and submissive respect with which they regarded
him; in the very extraordinary effects produced
by his ministry ; in the strong disposition of the
Jews to believe him to be their Messiah, notwith-
standing the opposition between his life and ac-
tions and their previous conceptions ; in the other
opinions entertained concerning him, " some say-
ing that he was John the Baptist ; others, Elijah ;
240 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
and others, Jeremiah, or one of the Prophets " ; in
the multitudes that attended him, amounting at one
time, and that in a desert place, to five thousand
men, besides women and children, an assembly
of Galileean Jews, which could not have been drawn
together to hear a mere philosopher expounding a
refined system of religion and morals; in those
indirect acknowledgments of the truth of his mir-
acles to which we have just adverted; and, gen-
erally, in the correspondence of his whole charac-
ter, and of all his actions, doctrines, and precepts,
to the conception of a supernatural messenger from
God, a subject to be explained more fully here-
after. Nor is this all ; the fact of his being en-
dued with miraculous powers is clearly implied in
various particular passages of the Gospels, not to
be referred to any of the heads just mentioned.
Allowing the truth of this fact, the whole history
is consistent and probable. But if the accounts of
Christ's miracles be false, then the remainder of
the history must, generally speaking, be false also.
It consists of narratives of actions and discourses,
which, upon this supposition, become absurd, im-
probable, or necessarily untrue. It cannot, there-
fore, be said that the accounts of the miracles are
false, but that the rest of the history is true.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 241
There is such a consistency and intimate corre-
spondence between the different portions of the
narrative, that the whole, generally speaking, must
be false, or the whole must be true.
No reasonable man, however, will contend that
the history is merely fictitious, that there was no
groundwork of facts for the narrative in the Gos-
pels, and that no such person as Christ existed.
What seems to be regarded as the most plausible
supposition, by those who deny the truth of the
Gospel history, is this: That a very enlightened
philosopher made his appearance in Galilee, whose
purpose was to reform the religion and morals of
the Jews, and perhaps of the rest of the world;
but that his character and claims have been ex-
travagantly misrepresented, and that the narrative
of his life has been interpolated with strange fa-
bles. But to this or any other supposition which
denies the truth of the miracles, the consistency
of the history presents a conclusive objection. If
the general representation given by the Evange-
lists of the character, office, and miracles of Christ
had been false, it would have been impossible for
such writers as they were to imagine a probable
story of a series of events such as must have fol-
lowed upon the supposition of its truth ; a story
21
242 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
consistent not merely with itself, but with all that
we can learn respecting the history and circum-
stances of the times to which it refers. If their
narratives had not been true, they must have
presented a very different aspect from what they
now bear, They would have been full of incon-
gruities, inconsistencies in the representation of
character, and latent and obvious contradictions
both of known facts and of statements contained
in the narratives themselves.
According to the supposition which we are con-
sidering, Jesus Christ was not the Jewish Messiah,
nor did he claim to be; he was not a messenger
from God, in any proper sense of those words, nor
did he assume that character; he had not the
power of performing miracles, nor did he pretend
to this power. Yet we have a consistent story,
corresponding to a directly opposite conception of
his character. This story, then, must be a work
of invention, a product of human art and genius.
But there could not well have been a more diffi-
cult subject for invention. Allowing it, however,
to be one capable of execution, it is clear that
neither of the four Evangelists possessed the in-
tellectual powers and habits necessary for this
extraordinary task. A groundwork of real facts,
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 243
instead of assisting them in their fiction, would
only have embarrassed the subject, and rendered
it more difficult and unmanageable. These facts
would have been continually forcing themselves
into notice, and obstructing the. free exercise of
invention. There would have been evident at
first sight a strange mixture of heterogeneous ma-
terials in their narrative. We may say, therefore,
that, supposing the Evangelists to have set out
with the original conception of a divine messen-
ger endued with miraculous powers, and placed in
such circumstances as those in which Christ is rep-
resented to have been, it must have been a work of
most extraordinary genius to imagine a thoroughly
consistent and probable account of his ministry ;
and the necessity of conforming this account to a
series of real facts, and of distorting natural events
with their consequences into supernatural events
with their appropriate consequences, would only
have aggravated the difficulty. But such a con-
sistent and probable story we do possess in each of
the Gospels ; and the only alternative seems to be,
that it is either true, or that it is, what no one
^
will believe, a most uncommon production of skill
and genius on the part of the respective authors
of these works. To suppose such a consistent
244 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
narrative to be formed by collecting traditions,
fables, and exaggerated stories, invented and prop-
agated by many individuals deceiving and deceived,
is like imagining a fine historical picture to be
composed by putting together figures and designs,
the work of different unskilful artists, each follow-
ing his own fancy.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 245
CHAPTER III.
THE CHARACTER OF CHRIST AS IT APPEARS IN THE
GOSPELS.
SECTION I.
His Teaching.
THE perfect exhibition of moral excellence in
the teaching and actions of Christ has been often
urged as an intrinsic proof of the divinity of his
mission. I am about to apply this consideration
in a somewhat different manner, and to use it as a
proof of the genuineness of the writings in which
his character appears, and which profess to afford
a record of what he taught.
The argument is this. The Gospels contain an
exhibition of character, real or imaginary, incom-
parably more wonderful than is to be found in any
other writings. It is the character of a messenger
from God, assuming in his name the highest au-
thority, constantly exercising supernatural powers,
and appearing among men for the purpose of
21*
246 INTEKNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
making them acquainted with God, with their
own immortal nature, with their duty, and with
those ennobling and awful sanctions by which it
is enforced. He is represented as discovering to
men a perfect system of religion. He always ap-
pears, whether teaching, or acting, or suffering, as
displaying the highest excellence. His character
is everywhere consistent with itself and with the
supernatural dignity of his office, though he is rep-
resented as passing through scenes the most try-
ing and humiliating. We have, then, in these
writings, a just conception of a perfect system of
religion, as taught by a divine teacher, assuming
the highest authority and exercising the most ex-
traordinary powers, and displaying throughout a
character in which we discover nothing but what
is excellent and sublime.
But the writers of the Gospels derived those
conceptions which we find in their works, either
from reality, or from their own imaginations. If
we allow the former part of .this alternative, the
fact that the writings are genuine may, as we shall
see hereafter, be rendered in the highest degree
probable, though, at the same time, the question
of their genuineness becomes comparatively unim-
portant. But if it be contended that these writers
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 247
did not draw from reality, but from imagination,
that they are not simple historians, but that their
narratives are fiction, the answer to this suppo-
sition is, that the conceptions of moral excellence
and sublimity which we find displayed and em-
bodied in their writings would imply a transcend-
ent genius and force of mind, to which there is
no parallel, which it is impossible should have
existed in four anonymous, unknown authors, and
which are irreconcilable with the actual want of
extraordinary talents, and of skill in composition,
that is discovered in their works. These con-
ceptions likewise would imply a correctness of
moral principle, and a purity and sublimity of
moral feeling, which could not exist in union
with intentional falsehood. The argument, there-
fore, is briefly this : That the religion and morality
of the Gospels, as exhibited in the doctrines, pre-
cepts, and life of Christ, are such as could not have
been conceived and represented by the writers of
the Gospels, if they had not had a living archetype
before them ; and that, without such an archetype,
the power of conceiving and representing what
we find in the Gospels, if it ever existed in
any human being, would necessarily imply that
that extraordinary being had a character which
248 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
entitled him to perfect confidence. It was wholly
out of the power of the writers of the Gospels
to deceive us as they must have done, suppos-
ing their representations false ; and the very ex-
istence of such a power, in any case, would in
itself imply the absence of all will to deceive.
The intrinsic character of these writings, there-
fore, affords positive evidence of their authenticity
as to all essential facts, and consequently, as we
shall see, strong evidence of their genuineness.
LET us consider more particularly what we find
in the Gospels. According to these histories, at a
period when what we now regard as true religion
had no existence upon earth, when only some rude
and very imperfect notions of morality found their
way to the multitude, and when, in consequence,
the mass of men were extremely debased, ignorant,
and vicious, there appeared a teacher who took
upon himself the reformation of mankind. He
appeared among the Jews, a nation who were far
from sharing in the common intellectual improve-
ment of their heathen neighbors ; who probably,
with some exceptions, were as depraved as the
rest of the world; and whose religion, originally
derived from God, had become full of error and
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 249
corruption. He was a young man, born in the
lower class of the people, and brought up in Gali-
lee. I mention this latter circumstance, because
Galilee had a sort of provincial relation to Judaea ;
and the proper Jews regarded the Galilseans as
inferior to themselves. He had not been educated
even in the common learning of his nation. Yet,
amid the ignorance and depravity with which he
was surrounded, he developed a system of religion
and morals blended together and exhibited in their
proper relations, nothing like which had ever been
made known before, and which, since it has been
made known, human reason has been wholly un-
able to improve.
WHAT, then, were the great characteristics of
the preaching of Christ, the fundamental princi-
ples which were continually appearing in his dis-
courses ] I answer, that he spoke of God, of
eternity, and of our relations to our fellow-
creatures.
He spoke of God. His countrymen had been
accustomed to regard the Almighty as the partial
God of their nation, and the severe judge and
enemy of the rest of the world. Their language
was : " Among all the multitudes of people, thou,
250 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
O Lord, hast gotten thee one people." " Thou
madest the world for our sakes. As for the other
people who also come of Adam, thou hast said that
they are nothing."* He taught, that " God had so
loved THE WORLD as to give his only Son, that
every one" (whether Jew or Gentile) " believing in
him should not perish, but have eternal life." He
presented to view a conception of God, accommo-
dated to the weakness of our nature, but which
may exhaust the strength of the human intellect
in its contemplation. He taught his hearers to
regard Him as our Father in heaven, caring for
us with more than parental care. " If you, then,
though evil, give your children what is good, how
much more will your Father in heaven give what
is good to those who ask him ! " He spoke of that
invisible energy of God which is ever in action,
which clothes the flowers of the field in beauty, and
without which a sparrow falls not to the ground.
He taught his disciples to trust in Him as a Being
whose providence nothing escapes, by whom even
the hairs of their heads were numbered. In his
preaching, our intimate relation to God was con-
tinually recognized and insisted upon. He repre-
* 2Esdrasv. 27; vi. 55, 56.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 251
sented Him as the moral governor of mankind, with
all knowledge and all power to effect His purposes.
" He sees what is done in secret, and will reward
openly." His will must be the rule of our con-
duct. " Not every one who says to me, Master,
Master, will enter the kingdom of Heaven ; but
he who does the will of my Father in heaven."
We are familiar with these words, and they may
not at first affect us with all their force. But let
us examine them, and we shall find that we can
form no higher and juster conception of the man-
ner in which a messenger from God to men ought
to express himself. They enforce in the strongest
terms the necessity of moral virtue as the one thing
required to obtain the favor of God, and at the
same time convey in the most unaffected manner
an impression of the exalted and peculiar dignity
of the speaker, and of his complete freedom from
all selfish purposes.
Jesus Christ taught that obedience to God
should be a principle of moral conduct maintain-
ing supreme authority in the mind, and annihilat-
ing, as it were, every consideration which might
come in competition with it, whatever its power to
allure or to terrify, the love of life and its enjoy-
ments, the dread of suffering and of death ; and
252 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
he enforced this requirement in a manner the most
solemn and impressive. " I say to you, my friends,
Fear not those who kill the body, and after this
can do nothing more; but I will instruct you
whom to fear: fear Him who has power, after
taking away life, to cast into hell ; yea$ I say to
you, fear Him."
This, then, is one distinguishing characteristic
of the preaching of Jesus Christ, as it is repre
sented by the Evangelists. He continually insists
upon a regard to God and his moral government,
as the fundamental principle of conduct. Upon
this principle all our moral affections and habits
are to be founded. The first doctrine of religion,
as taught by Christ, is, that God is to be loved
with the whole heart and mind. The whole moral
nature of man is to be under the government of
those affections and principles which result from
just conceptions of the Deity, and of our relation
to him. If you would detach this truth from the
other instructions of Jesus, you must break to
pieces and destroy the whole fabric of his religion,
leaving nothing but disconnected fragments.
BUT the being who is thus intimately related to
God, how is he to regard himself, and how long
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 253
is this relation to continue "? It will continue for
ever ; he is to regard himself as immortal. We
listen to the preaching of Jesus Christ, and the
arch of heaven which closed over us, and limited
our view to a few objects of this world, rolls away ;
all that before surrounded us contracts to a span,
and an unlimited prospect is disclosed of scenes
the most solemn and splendid, on which we are
just about to enter. He continually addresses
man as a being of unmeasured powers, who may,
nay, who must, indulge in the most glorious expec-
tations, who must act habitually under a conscious-
ness of his immortality. Look upon the world in
which Jesus Christ appeared. It was filled with
men sensual, ignorant, debased by their supersti-
tions, driven about at the mercy of every passion,
unconscious of their nature, engrossed by the
objects of this life, scarcely thinking of anything
better, and lifting their eyes to contemplate the
future only to see death always presenting itself
as the termination of all those prospects and pur-
suits in which they were most strongly interested.
To men such as these, he announced that they
were beings of an incomparably higher order than
they had imagined themselves ; and that their true
interests were of a kind of which they had hardly
254 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
formed a conception. In his preaching, death
almost disappeared from view as something un-
worthy of regard. " He who puts his trust in me
HAS eternal life." " He has passed from death to
life." "Whoever obeys my teaching will never
see death."
A short time before his crucifixion, this most
extraordinary teacher is represented as having
been present with the sisters of a friend whom
he loved, and whom they had just laid in the
grave. There was everything in their expressions
of simple and warm affection, of deep reverence,
and of entire trust in his kindness though he had
seemed to neglect them, to affect the feelings of
one who knew and felt that they who thus loved
him were soon to be filled with distress and agony
by the horrors of his death, and that to himself all
human sympathy would soon only be a new source
of pain. He was deeply affected. The whole
story is told with perfect nature, and the most
touching simplicity. On this occasion, just before
presenting himself at that tomb from which he
was to recall the dead, he is represented as declar-
ing, " I am the resurrection and eternal life. He
who has faith in me, though he die, will live ; and
whoever lives and has faith in me will never die."
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 255
It may be said, that these words were never
uttered; it may be said, that the character of
Christ as displayed in the Gospels is a fiction,
and that there is little satisfactory ground for
expecting any other existence than the present.
Let us allow all this for a moment, and consider
what follows. If this be so, then the whole nar-
rative, the ascribing to this supposed personage
the declaration which I have quoted, under such
circumstances, is a conception the most affecting
and sublime that ever entered the human mind.
It blends together and concentrates in a single
sentence the annunciation of a doctrine of the
most absorbing interest, and a claim of undefined
and overwhelming superiority ; and the expression
is at once the most striking and unaffected. We
may search long in all poetry and eloquence before
we shall discover a parallel to this transcendent
burst of genius. It implies an energy of imagina-
tion and feeling, which I know not where we
shall find displayed except in the Gospels them-
selves.
BUT Jesus Christ did not inculcate the doctrine
of immortality merely as a subject of delightful
contemplation. He did not teach, as did some of
256 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
the wisest of the ancient philosophers, that, should
we exist hereafter, we should certainly exist to be
happy. He did not teach anything analogous to
what was the prevailing doctrine in his own na-
tion, that all the descendants of Israel were, as
such, secure of the favor of God. He always ex-
hibited the doctrine of immortality in connection
with that of the moral government of God ; and
thus laid an immovable foundation for the highest
and most unworldly virtue. This, then, is another
characteristic of his preaching. In addressing men
as moral agents, he always addresses them as im-
mortal beings. There is in this respect a perfect
consistency in his preaching. He never forgets
himself so as to speak as if he were addressing
mere creatures of this world. The virtue which
he required is not the sort of prudential morality
which may be learned from the experience of life,
but virtue springing from a sense of our relations
to God and to eternity. Nothing can be more
admirable, and, if we are indeed immortal, nothing
can be more reasonable, than the calm, decided,
and, if I may so speak, peremptory manner in
which he required that the strongest fears and
hopes of the present life should give way without
resistance to those which regard eternity. "Let
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 257
him who would be my follower renounce himself,
and come after me, bearing his cross. For he who
would save his life, will lose it ; and he who may
lose his life for my sake, will secure it. What
advantage would it be to a man, to gain the whole
world with the loss of his life ] " " BLESSED will
you be when men shall revile you, and persecute
you, and speak all evil against you, falsely, for
my sake. REJOICE AND EXULT ; for your reward
in heaven will be great."
IT is to be remembered, that the doctrines of
which I have spoken are not truths occasionally
adverted to by Jesus Christ, as something not
essential to his main purpose. They constitute
his religion. They are the doctrines which he
came to teach. They are the doctrines to which
everything else in his preaching is related, and on
which everything depends. He came to reform
men, to reconcile them to God, to establish the
reign of Heaven ; and these purposes were to be
effected by making known to them the true char-
acter of God, their relations to Him, and their
own nature and destination. These doctrines are
the great light which rose upon the nations that
were in darkness. He discovered God to men>
22*
258 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
and made known to them that they were im-
mortal.
IN order to have a just conception of the force of
the argument to be derived from these sublime doc-
trines, we ought to compare them with those which
philosophy had attained before. There is no hea-
then teacher who in wisdom and virtue claims a
higher rank than Socrates, none between whom
and Jesus Christ a parallel may be instituted more
fairly. His life forms an era in the history of
human improvement. In the record of his dis-
courses and instructions preserved by Xenophon,
we find much correct, and some false morality ; the
whole founded, however, not on very comprehen-
sive principles, but on a wise observation of human
nature and human life as they lay before him.
There are many excellent rules of prudence, and
some high and generous sentiments. There are
views of the character of the gods, which would be
imperfectly true if applied to the one God ; but
there is nothing in this work of his very intelli-
gent disciple, which affords an intimation that
Socrates was not a polytheist. From the writings
of Plato, it may be inferred that his master or
himself had a conception of one Supreme Being ;
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 259
but amid the obscurity and the extravagant imagi-
nations of that Dialogue in which this conception
is particularly developed, it is impossible to dis-
cern any definite representation of the Divinity
corresponding to what is so clearly presented in
the Gospels. The morality of Socrates, as far as
it appears in the Memorabilia of Xenophon, is
based on the relations of man in the present life,
and not at all upon the relations of man to eter-
nity. It is true that in the writings of Plato, and
especially in that beautiful Dialogue which con-
tains the discourse of Socrates on the day of his
death, he is represented as believing and teaching
the immortality of the soul. In that Dialogue
there is a passage which stands out a brightly
illuminated point above the common level of hea-
then philosophy. It is a distinct and eloquent
recognition of the sanctions of the future life as
considerations of the highest importance to govern
our conduct in the present. It might have been
written by a Christian ; but in the writings of a
Christian it would be passed over without particu-
lar notice. That Socrates should afterward speak
doubtfully of the doctrines which he had main-
tained, is not, perhaps, strange. But it is with
strong feelings of surprise and disappointment
260 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
that we become convinced that the immortality
which he taught was an immortality without con-
tinued consciousness ; an immortality of the soul,
but not of the individual; an immortality in which
the spiritual part was to pass through successive
changes, losing at each transition the memory of
its former state.* After this, it is not matter of
much wonder, that the whole should appear to
have been father a delightful poetic vision, than a
sober and practical speculation. Nor is it surpris-
ing to find, when Plato is with difficulty, and, it
may be thought, without success, endeavoring to
prove that a man should retain his integrity, to
whatever evils it may expose him, that he makes
no reference to the future life ; that he does not
think of saying, with Jesus Christ, " For your re-
ward in heaven will be great."
The speculations of Plato seem often rather a
play of the imagination than an exercise of the
understanding, and have often probably but a re-
mote relation to the practical philosophy of his
master. In his Dialogues, Socrates is introduced,
like the other speakers, as a dramatic personage.
* [The passage of Plato here referred to (Phaedo, cc. 129, 130, p.
107, C.) is quoted, with remarks, in the Evidences of the Genuineness
of the Gospels, Vol. IH. pp. 111-113, note.]
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 261
Of the real discourses of that philosopher, those
discourses which took such strong hold on the
minds of men, we have, I conceive, a fair specimen
in the Memorabilia, perhaps the most remarkable
book which has come down to us from heathen
antiquity. In its form and purpose it bears no
inconsiderable resemblance to the Gospels. In
the latter, however, we have the doctrines and
instructions of Christ recorded by four unlettered
men ; while in the former we have those of Socra-
tes preserved by a philosopher, writing with Attic
elegance. We may, then, institute a comparison
between them. The Memorabilia contains many
correct views of the relations of man to man, some
notices of the supposed goodness and wisdom of
imagined superior powers, and just directions for
attaining our true dignity and happiness, men be-
ing regarded only as beings of this world, but
still as moral and intellectual beings. Turn now
to the Gospels, and consider the doctrines which
are there displayed. Forget, as far as you can, all
those conceptions with which you have been famil-
iar from childhood, and which you have received
directly or indirectly from these very works. Come
to their study in the state of mind which you may
suppose to have been that of an enlightened Hea-
262 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
then who should in any way have become con-
vinced of their truth ; and thus lay yourself open,
as far as you are able, to a full impression of the
overpowering sublimity of the truths which they
contain. In reading the work of Xenophon, our
state of mind may resemble that of one passing
through a pleasant and well-cultivated country,
who sees everywhere proofs of convenience and
comfort and human ingenuity. In the study of
the Gospels, if we do indeed fully comprehend
and feel the doctrines which were taught by
Christ, our emotions will be like those of a trav-
eller placed where the eternal objects of nature
rise around him in their grandeur and awfulness,
from whose view the works of man with all their
littleness have disappeared, and upon whom the
feeling comes that he is alone with God.
LET us now consider what there is characteristic
in the moral principles which Jesus Christ is rep-
resented by the Evangelists as having inculcated,
and which all the doctrines and sanctions of his
religion are intended to support and enforce. The
morality which he taught is the most pure and
comprehensive. It was taught to a world lying in
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 263
ignorance and wickedness ; and it coincides with
the last results of the most enlightened philoso-
phy. It was taught eighteen hundred years ago ;
yet so extensive are its requirements, that they
are still but imperfectly comprehended by many
of Christ's disciples. I do not say that they are
imperfectly obeyed, this would be universally
true, but that there are many by whom they are
but partially understood. This is not because
they are expressed obscurely, or because they
breathe any spirit of fanaticism, or require any
course of conduct opposed to nature and reason.
It is because there are many who do not under-
stand their own nature, their true interest, and
their relations to their fellow-creatures.
We render to every man his due ; we violate
no man's rights ; there is no one who can com-
plain that we have injured him; we have broken
no one of the commandments. All this is very
well ; and we fancy, perhaps, that we have fulfilled
our obligations. But if this be the whole of our
goodness, we are yet very far from the virtue re-
quired by Jesus Christ. We do no evil; we are
required to exert ourselves habitually to do good.
There is a demand upon us for the most disinter-
ested and the most active benevolence. He who
264: INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
would be a disciple of Christ must acquire the
virtue of Christian charity. He must blend and
lose his individual interests in those of his fam-
ily, his friends, his country, and mankind. It is
the business of a Christian to render services to
his fellow-men. "Let him who would be great
among you minister to you, and let him who would
be chief among you be your servant." What min
istry and what services are required appears from
the example proposed for imitation in the words
which follow: "Even as the Son of Man came
not to be served, but to serve, and to give his life
to ransom many." " Do good and lend, hoping
for nothing in return." " Do to others whatever
you would that they should do to you." " I was
hungry, and you gave me food ; thirsty, and you
gave me drink ; a stranger, and you received me
into your houses; naked, and you clothed me;
sick, and you took care of me ; in prison, and you
came to me In doing so to one of the hum-
blest of these my brothers, you did so to me."
But what are the limits of this charity, as it was
inculcated by Jesus Christ I It has none. It
must form itself upon the model of the infinite
goodness of the common Father. It must tri-
umph over inveterate prejudices and bitter hostil-
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 265
ity ; the Samaritan is the neighbor of the Jew.
It must forget insult and persecution and cruelty ;
and when the occasion of rendering good for evil
has come, it must regard an enemy merely as
an erring and unhappy fellow-creature, for whose
benefit and improvement it is our duty to labor.
"You have heard that it was said, Thou shalt
love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy. But I
say to you, Love your enemies, bless them who
curse you, do good to those who hate you, and
pray for those who harass and persecute you ; that
you maybe children of your Father in heaven;
for he causes his sun to rise on the bad and on the
good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the
unrighteous." The production of happiness is the
only ultimate end of the operations of God ; and
if we would secure his favor, and attain the perfec-
tion of our nature, we must be fellow-workers
with God.
One can scarcely avoid feeling some reluctance
to state the extent of these requirements, when he
looks around, and sees how imperfectly they have
been obeyed; how imperfectly they are obeyed;
how many seem scarcely to have a notion of their
existence, and how many there are who look with
a sort of compassionate or contemptuous superior-
266 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
ity upon all conduct which cannot be resolved into
prudent selfishness, satisfied with their own sa-
gacity, proud of their success, and regarding " the
wisdom which is from above " only as the notion
of men weak, enthusiastic, and ignorant of the
world.
Compare the precepts of Jesus Christ with the
moral principles, and, if you are willing to go still
further, with the moral practice of the age in
which they were delivered ; compare his code of
duty with the conceptions which men have derived
from their natural sentiments operated upon by
the circumstances common to us all ; and it will be
perceived that it is indeed a wonderful system of
morals. It coincides, as I have said, with the last
results of enlightened philosophy; but it is be-
cause philosophy has been enlightened and guided
by these very precepts inculcated in the Gospels.
How does it happen, for this, it must be recol-
lected, is the question before us,, how does it
happen that these precepts are found in the Gos-
pels ^ How was it that the writers of these books
formed a conception of such a teacher as they
have described'?
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 267
CHAPTER III.
THE CHARACTER OF CHRIST AS IT APPEARS IN THE GOSPELS.
(CONTINUED.)
SECTION II.
His Personal Character.
IN the conception of a divine teacher, much
more is required than that his doctrines and in-
structions should be worthy of God ; and, conform-
ably to this remark, the personal character which
in the Gospels is ascribed to Jesus Christ is most
striking and original. At the same time, there is
such an air of truth in these writings, that, what-
ever may be any one's doubts or opinions, he can
hardly read them attentively without a strong feel-
ing that he is reading a narrative of real events,
and without conceiving of the character of Christ
as one which actually existed. He is represented
as not only destitute of all advantages of rank or
station, but, still more, as placed in circumstances
268 INTEKNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
which might expose him to contempt and derision ;
yet he constantly appears as maintaining an im-
measurable superiority over all other men, by the
moral force and dignity of his character. Every-
thing in his words and actions is just to the origi-
nal conception. He makes claim to the highest
authority, calmly, without effort or exaggeration.
He announces himself as connected with God in
a manner in which no other human being ever
was ; but he is able to support himself on the ele-
vation which he assumes. There is no taint of
human weakness, of vanity or arrogance, in his
declarations or actions. On the contrary, he re-
gards nothing as humiliating, but what in truth is
so. He converses with tax-gatherers and sinners,
because his office was to call sinners to reforma-
tion. He is content to be surrounded with a com-
pany of poor, ignorant Apostles; but they had,
or might be formed to have, the moral qualities
required in the future ministers of his religion.
He travels about in poverty, having no habitation
of his own " where to lay his head." He does it,
because it was required by the nature of those
duties which he had to perform ; and especially in
order that, by the example of his own poverty, he
might destroy in the most effectual manner all
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 269
worldly expectations in those who were disposed
to join him. He washes the feet of his disciples.
There may be abundant ostentation in pretended
humility, but there is none here; his object was
to give his disciples a lesson which it is evident
they needed. In all his actions there is a com-
posed, unaffected dignity ; a steady regard to the
high purposes of his mission; a perfect corre-
spondence between his conduct and his claims.
This character is particularly discovered in the
exercise of his supernatural powers. He performs
the most astonishing miracles, but there is noth-
ing of theatrical display. " He was loved by the
Father, and the Father had shown him how to do
what he himself does." He appears like one of
whom this declaration is true ; like one too highly
favored by God to be affected by the admiration
and astonishment of men.
I WILL not here repeat what I have had occa-
sion to remark before on the distinctive character
of his miracles ; but it is proper to observe, that
if we suppose no miracles to have been performed,
and the narratives of them to be consequently a
work of imagination, then the difficult question
arises, how it happened that the writers of the Gos-
23
270 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
pels conceived with such truth the character which
the miracles of a messenger from God ought to
have, when all other narrators of fictitious miracles
have failed so glaringly in every similar attempt.
BUT in the wonderful history contained in the
Gospels there are other traits as striking as
those which I have mentioned. Consider, for in-
stance, the whole character of Christ's discourses
in reference to that object, which, from the nature
of the case, he must have had first in view, the
gaining of followers and disciples. He uses no
arts of seduction. He takes no advantage of the
prejudices or passions of those about him. In so
far as they were mischievous and evil, he makes no
compromise with them. He meets and opposes
the darling hopes, the cherished selfishness, and
the inveterate and consecrated errors of his coun-
trymen, with a tone of authority the most direct
and absolute. He speaks to his hearers, in the
plainest language, of the hypocrisy and of the
vices of those whom they had been accustomed to
reverence for their reputed sanctity, and to regard
as leaders and examples. He admits but one
claim, and demands but one requisite, to his favor,
a sincere purpose of obedience to God. He repels
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 271
from him those who come with any worldly views.
There can be nothing more decisive than the lan-
guage in which he annihilates all earthly expecta-
tions, and presents to his disciples a distinct image
of the life of suffering and danger on which they
were about to enter. " They will revile you, they
will persecute you ; they will speak all evil against
you, falsely, for my sake " ; " they will scourge you
in their synagogues"; "brother will deliver up
brother to death, and the father his child. ....
You will be hated by all men for my sake."
" He who kills you will think that he is offering
a sacrifice to God."
What shall we say to the conception of a
teacher, who is represented as making such pre-
dictions to his disciples 1 Is it drawn from real-
ity ? or are we indebted to the genius of certain
unknown writers for this extraordinary delinea-
tion'?
Let us attend to another example of his mode
of addressing those who came to him : " Let him
who would be my follower renounce himself, and
come after me, bearing his cross." The Common
Version, in rendering "deny himself," expresses
nothing like the force of the original, which im-
plies a total putting off of all selfish affections.
272 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
We are familiar with the figure of " taking up the
cross," and the figurative meaning of these words
is, for the most part, the only one which presents
itself to our minds. "We can hardly feel the im-
pression which it must have made upon those to
whom the horrible torture of crucifixion, as in-
flicted upon the most wretched outcasts of society,
was not an uncommon spectacle. He who was to
suffer this dreadful death was compelled to bear
his cross to the place of execution. It is to this
that Christ alludes. No form of words could rep-
resent to his followers with more fearful distinct-
ness, that they were to prepare themselves for
torture and death.
If it be allowed that these predictions and
declarations were really uttered by Jesus Christ,
it must be admitted, I think, that he could have
gained no proselytes to a life of severe privation
and suffering, few converts to the endurance of
insults, stripes, and rancorous persecution, except
by the most satisfactory evidence that he had
something to promise as a compensation, or, in
other words, by the clearest and most irresisti-
ble proofs of his divine mission and authority.
But if it be admitted that he gave such proofs, we
arrive at once at the conclusion which we wish to
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 273
reach ; for there will then be no reason to doubt,
that the whole representation of him given in
the Gospels is drawn from reality. If it be said,
on the other hand, that these words were not
uttered by Christ, but were put into his mouth by
the writers of these histories, still it must be con-
ceded that they correspond with admirable truth
to the original conception of him as a messenger
from God. He appears as he ought ; clearly an-
nouncing to his disciples what they must prepare
themselves to suffer; furnishing them, indeed,
with the strongest motives to endurance, but
motives which touched upon nothing earthly;
and preparing them for that hard warfare, in
which they were to be the victims, against the
vices and passions of men, against obstinate super-
stition and malignant bigotry. It is to be recol-
lected, likewise, that he speaks, with this severe
calmness, of suffering which pressed equally upon
himself and upon his disciples. It was for his sake
that they would be hated. The conception of him
is perfectly just, and in such a case as the present,
this is saying very much ; but it is not saying all
that we ought. It exhibits a simple and awful
composure of mind, compared with which all the
poetical representations of Roman stoicism appear
274 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
like mere displays for the theatre. The conception
of Jesus Christ calling all men to come to him,
and at the same time thus distinctly forewarning
them of the earthly fate which awaited equally his
followers and himself, if it be not derived from
reality, implies a boldness and originality of imagi-
nation of which there is no other example.
IT is as a messenger of God, that Jesus Christ
is exhibited in the Gospels ; and his conduct and
discourses during the time of his ministry princi-
pally have relation to his office. He seldom
appears as acting in the common relations of
man to man, or under circumstances very anal-
ogous to those in which other men may be placed.
Comparatively speaking, we see but little of his
private character (to use these words in their
strictest sense) till the closing scenes of his life,
when it breaks forth with unspeakable splendor.
Wherever it elsewhere appears, it corresponds to
that moral perfection which he manifested in the
execution of his peculiar office. In relation to
this subject, as well as to others of which I have
spoken, there are passages which, as they stand in
the Common Version, require explanation, though,
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 275
even if left unexplained, they may not essentially
affect our conclusions. But, in regard to the char-
acter of Christ, I will here notice one or two
concerning which I think the most difficulty may
be felt.
AT the marriage feast at Cana, when the mother
of Jesus informs him that the wine is spent, there
seems something harsh in his reply: "Woman,
what have you to do with me I * My hour has
not yet come." But it may be observed, in the
first place, that the forms of courtesy, being arbi-
trary, vary at different times, and in different
countries ; and that to address one by the appel-
lation of Woman was not considered disrespectful
by the ancients.t By the words, " What have you
to do with mel" our Saviour undoubtedly intended
to repress all interference of his mother with the
exercise of his miraculous powers. Our concep-
tions of her are principally formed from the beau-
tiful fictions of poetry and painting, in which
" holiest Mary bends
In virgin beauty o'er her blessed babe."
* Or, " why do you trouble me ? " It is thus that the words should
be rendered, not, as in the Common Version, " What have I to do with
thee?"
f [See John xix. 26.]
276 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
There is, indeed, no reason to doubt the real excel-
lence of her character; but there is as little doubt,
that she entertained the common belief of her
countrymen respecting a Messiah who was to be
the greatest of princes, far more glorious than his
ancestor David. With this belief, trusting that
her son was the Messiah, it was scarcely possible
that she should not entertain hopes and feelings
very inconsistent with what was really to be his
fate and her own. The mother of the prince of
Israel and of the world must have looked forward
to something very different from a life of obscurity
and suffering. Moreover, it was not in human na-
ture that she should not have had some disposition
to exert over her son the authority and influence
of a mother. But, in the exercise of his office as
the minister of God, it was impossible for him to
yield to any human direction. The narrative we
are considering implies that she wished him, on
the occasion recorded, to make some display of his
supernatural powers, or, at least, in some way to
manifest himself as the Messiah; and it implies
also that she had previously urged him to do so.
Without the last supposition, we cannot account
for our Saviour's putting the sense which he obvi-
ously did upon the very slight intimation of his
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 277
mother ; nor for her subsequent direction to the
servants soon after the discouragement she had
received. It was to repress those feelings and
dispositions of his mother which I have just de-
scribed, feelings and dispositions which could only
serve to aggravate her future sufferings, that our
Saviour made the answer recorded. It was repel-
ling, but it was intended to save her some of the
anguish of disappointment; and the nature of his
office rendered it necessary to repress all interfer-
ence on her part. He was compelled to separate
himself in some degree from her, both for her own
sake, and because his duties were such as did not
admit of his receiving her counsel, or being affected
by her influence. He had, probably, announced
to her before, that his ministry would be exercised
in poverty and suffering, and terminated in a short
time by a cruel death ; and she, like his disciples
at a subsequent period, had been unable to con-
form her mind to the comprehension and belief of
what was so utterly foreign to all her previous
conceptions respecting the Messiah. It is to his
last sufferings that he alludes in the words, " My
hour has not yet come.' M His purpose in these
* The reasons for understanding these words in the sense above as-
signed are, first, that the expression is elsewhere in St. John's Gospel
24
278 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
words I conceive to have been to bring forcibly
home to the mind of his mother what he had be-
fore declared to her respecting the intimate con-
nection between his office and his death ; and the
brief interval which was to intervene between his
assuming the former, and his submitting to the
latter. Their force is this: "Why do you urge
me to manifest myself as the Messiah 1 The hour
for my last sufferings has not yet come."
Having, however, repressed the interference of
his mother, it seems to have been partly in com-
pliance with her wishes that he performed a mir-
acle on this occasion. The miracle itself has been
objected to, as giving encouragement to intemper-
ance. This charge, however, it must, I think, be
allowed, is very inconsistent with the whole char-
acter and life of Christ. It is not likely that there
was any excess at an entertainment where the wine
was deficient through the poverty of the host, as
appears to have been the case in the present in-
used in this sense, as in ch. vii. 30 (and so viii. 20), "No one laid
hands on him, for his hour had not yet come " ; xiii. 1, "But Jesus
knew that the hour had come for him to pass from this world to the
Father"; xvii. 1, "Father, the hour has come": and, secondly,
because this sense suits with the connection and .circumstances of the
case, which no other that has been proposed seems to me to do.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 279
stance. When the master of the feast says, " Men
commonly produce their good wine first, and, when
the guests have drunk freely,* then that which is
poorer," he merely mentions a common custom,
from which nothing can be inferred respecting the
temperance of the guests on the present occasion,
or indeed on any other to which his remark might
apply, except that it seems a rule rather adapted to
check than to promote excess. Intoxication is not
a vice to which inhabitants of a warm climate are
disposed. The wine used at this time was probably
drunk with the meal, rather than subsequent to
it ; and we must not transfer to the feast of a poor
family in Galilee notions derived from the luxu-
rious entertainments of ancient or modern times.
Especially we must recollect, that an evident mir-
acle was the least likely of all events to promote
thoughtless and improper indulgence.
OUR Saviour's treatment of the Syro-Phcenician
woman who besought him to cure her daughter,
also requires some explanation.! It is to be recol-
* Thus the word in the original is to be understood, in the connec-
tion in which it stands. In its primary, etymological sense, it means
nothing more than " to drink wine," being derived from pedv, "wine."
f See Matthew xv. 21-29 ; Mark vii. 24-31.
280 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
lected, that his disciples at this time shared in the
common narrow prejudices of the Jews in respect
to other nations. They would have been dissatis-
fied, their feelings would have revolted, if their
Master, the Jewish Messiah, had at once performed
a miracle for the benefit of a Heathen. By his
delay, by suffering her to importune him without
an answer, their natural feelings of humanity were
left to operate in her favor. They themselves at
last take her part, and ask him to " send her away
satisfied " ; for their words may express this mean-
ing ; and that this was in fact their meaning ap-
pears from the reply of Christ. By what he fur-
ther said, he gave her an opportunity of showing
herself, not merely an object of compassion, but of
approbation. He thus afforded her a new source
of gratification, and the incident at the same time
tended still further to enlarge the feelings of his
disciples. The interest which they took in her
case, and the praise of her which their Master ex-
pressed, must have served to break down their
illiberal prejudices. It is be observed, likewise,
that the words of Christ have a different effect in
the original from what they have as rendered in
the Common Version, " It is not meet to take
the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs." The
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 281
last word, in the original, is a diminutive, one
of that class of diminutives which is commonly
used in expressions of familiarity or endearment.
It properly denotes those little dogs which were
kept as playthings. It is evident whj
air is given to the whole
stance. (ftllTIVE RSIT7,
^^v
THE miraculous cure of the Ga<
niacs was accompanied by the destruction of a
herd of swine ; which was of course a considera-
ble loss to the owner.* The miracle forms in this
respect an exception to the common, purely benefi-
cent character of the miracles ascribed to Christ.
I am inclined to think that there was some evi-
dent, specific reason for the infliction of this loss,
which does not appear in the narrative. The flesh
of swine was a food prohibited by the Jewish Law,
and if the owner*, as seems most probable, was a
Jew, he manifested in keeping them a disregard
to the precepts of his religion. We are not
obliged, however, to have recourse to any expla-
nation of this sort. It is only necessary to recur to
general principles. A miracle is, properly speak-
* See Matthew viii. 28-34 ; Mark v. 1-20 ; Luke viii. 26-39.
24*
282 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
ing, an act of God. The human agent to whom
we may refer it is merely an ostensible agent, and is
to be regarded solely as the minister of God. But
of the acts of God we must judge upon very differ-
ent principles from those which we apply to the
acts of men. When, in the common course of his
providence, he deprives us of our possessions, we
believe that he does it in infinite wisdom and
goodness. It is equally consistent with his wis-
dom and goodness, that he should do the same by
a miracle. The circumstance that the act is mi-
raculous does not in any degree affect its character
in other respects. In the exercise of perfect recti-
tude and benevolence, God may do, and is contin-
ually doing, what it would be most unjust and
injurious for one human being to do to another.
*N"ow it is not the act of a human being, but the
act of God, which we are considering. It was not
Christ, but God, who inflicted this loss ; and, viewed
in this light, all inquiry respecting the particular
cause why it was inflicted, and all discussion of its
reason or justice in reference to the owner, are as
much out of place as they would be concerning a
fire, or a shipwreck, or an earthquake. But, put-
ting the question respecting the loss of the owner
out of view, there is a reason which may be as-
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 283
signed for the destruction of the animals. It
served at once to render the reality of the mira-
cle evident and indisputable, and to give it greater
notoriety. It does not appear that Christ was at
any subsequent period in the country of the Gad-
arenes ; his present visit was very short, and it
was desirable, therefore, to produce at once a strong
impression, and to excite general attention to his
ministry. The miracle was of a nature particularly
adapted to effect these purposes. That these pur-
poses were intended may appear from the direc-
tion of Christ to the person whom he had cured,
whom he would not suffer to accompany him ; but
whom, contrary to his usual practice, he directed
to return, and to publish what great things had
been done for him.
WITH one exception, which I shall notice im-
mediately, I have now mentioned all those pas-
sages concerning which I have at any time felt
the most difficulty myself. But these passages are
to be viewed under another aspect than that in
which we have hitherto regarded them. They
serve essentially to strengthen our present argu-
ment. They are among those striking and deci-
sive proofs, which the Gospels everywhere furnish,
284 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
of the fact that their writers had no purpose of
deceiving by the display of an imaginary character.
It is evident that they had no powers and no
habits of mind which would lead them to attempt,
or which would enable them, if they did attempt,
to produce an effect upon the minds of men by a
correct and striking exhibition of beautiful imagi-
nations and ideas of their own, well disposed and
fitted to each other. But it is, perhaps, even more
evident that they had no purpose of this sort ; for,
with this purpose, they would never have inserted
narratives like those on which we have been com-
menting, which present at first view such difficul-
ties, and are so liable to objection. They could
have had no motive for inserting them but the
truth. So far from accommodating their narrative
to any abstract conception of what a divine teacher
ought to be, they seem never to have formed an
abstract conception of wiiat the character of Christ
really was. They give no summary view of it ; they
do not attempt to generalize their observations in
a single instance. They afford us no knowledge
of it except by their very brief accounts of what
he did and what he said, and of what was done
and said by others in relation to him. In these
accounts their style is inartificial and defective.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 285
They write like uneducated men, to whom com-
position is an unusual and difficult effort, and
who, on account of the labor of writing, express
themselves but imperfectly, omit all that is not
essential, and leave much unexplained that re-
quires explanation. Acquainted with all the par-
ticular circumstances of each event which they
relate, they seem never to have placed themselves
in the situation of readers to whom these circum-
stances might not be known, nor to have consid-
ered how the narrative might appear to them, or
what difficulties and objections might arise in their
minds. There are the most evident marks of the
absence of all contrivance and all aim at effect.
They give no explanations, except a very few quite
unimportant. They scarcely make any comments,
or point out anything to the observation of the
reader. No composition was ever more inartifi-
cially put together than their histories. They
seem never to have had a thought of making one
thing so bear upon and illustrate another as to
produce a harmonious whole. When we find,
therefore, that from their entire narratives, viewed
either separately or together, there results a most
wonderful, original, and consistent exhibition of
character, it is impossible to ascribe this to any
other cause than that they drew from reality.
286 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
There is, without doubt, an air of perfect sim-
plicity and truth, which gives a charm to these
writings, in the absence of all the common excel-
lences of composition. But the character which
belongs to them is not, perhaps, that which we
might at first view expect or desire. We may be
tempted to wish that the life and doctrines of
Jesus Christ had been described and explained by
such writers as Xenophon and Plato. But the
wise providence of God has ordered it otherwise ;
and has so ordered it, that the records of our relig-
ion carry with them independent evidence of their
own authenticity. We are compelled to believe
that what the Evangelists have told us is true, be-
cause their very writings afford satisfactory proof
that they had no ability to conceive and describe
what they have told us, if it had not been true.
The genius of Xenophon might have enabled him
to imagine and delineate the character which he
has ascribed to Socrates ; and there is nothing in
the discourses of his master which transcends the
powers of the disciple. In believing his account,
therefore, w r e have to rely upon his veracity, for
which we think we have sufficient evidence, and
which we find confirmed by some collateral testi-
mony. But as regards the writers of the Gospels,
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 287
we have not only other and much stronger proof
of their veracity, but we have, still further, proof
of their entire inability to have conceived and
exhibited the character and discourses of Christ
by any effort of their own power. They must
be simple historians, because the splendid fiction
which we have otherwise to suppose, if it lies
within the possible limits of human genius, was
very far removed from the sphere of their minds.
I HAVE referred to one other passage beside
those which I have noticed, as seeming to me to
present a difficulty. It is the cry of our Saviour
on the cross, which is rendered in the Common
Version, " My God, my God, why hast thou for-
saken me 1 " * These w r ords may appear, at first
sight, to be a mere exclamation, forced from him
by the extremity of torture, and having something
of the character of impatience and complaint. If
this were so, all that could be said would be, that
his strength failed for a moment under the most
excruciating sufferings. But I am, for various rea-
sons, persuaded that the words uttered by Christ
are not to be so considered. In the first place,
* Matthew xxvii. 46 ; Mark xv. 34.
288 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
such an expression is inconsistent with his char-
acter as it always appears elsewhere, and particu-
larly with those striking proofs of fortitude and
self-possession which he really exhibited during
his last sufferings. In the next place, it seems to
me repugnant to the strongest principles of human
nature, that he should have uttered these words in
the sense supposed. His cross was surrounded by
enemies, reviling and insulting him, and taunting
him with being abandoned by God. Supposing
his self-command not to have been entirely broken
down, it must have been abhorrent to every feeling
and to every motive which might act upon his
mind for him to heighten their triumph and to
harden them in their guilt, by proclaiming with a
loud voice a sense of his being forsaken by God.
But, in the last place, I think the words admit of
a very different explanation, suited to his character
and to the circumstances in which they were ut-
tered. We may first observe, then, that the word
"forsaken," which stands in the Common Version
and in all the other principal English translations
into which I-have looked, does not correspond to
the original word. It has an associated, secon-
dary meaning, which that word, as I conceive, is
not intended to express. " To forsake " a person
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 289
means, not simply to leave him, but to leave him
through indifference or dislike, or from the opera-
tion of some selfish feeling, as fear of common
danger; but the term in the original has not
necessarily this meaning. The words of Christ,
therefore, should be rendered without convey-
ing this associated idea: "My God! my God!
why hast thou left me?" These are the first
words of the twenty-second Psalm ; and we must
here recollect several circumstances which may
not at once occur to the mind. First, David was
regarded by the Jews with the highest veneration.
He was considered as a type of the Messiah ; and
many of his Psalms were viewed by them as appli-
cable to himself, indeed, in their primary sense,
but, in their secondary and higher sense, as pro-
phetic of the Messiah. Secondly, the Jews were
so familiar with their Scriptures, and especially
with the Psalms, that the quotation of a small
portion of a passage was sufficient to remind
them of the remainder. The first verse of a
Psalm would bring the whole to their recollec-
tion. Thirdly, they were strongly disposed to
consider temporal prosperity and affliction as
proofs of the favor and of the displeasure of God.
The very circumstance that Christ was suffering
25
290 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
so ignominious and cruel a death was, in their
state of feeling towards him, sufficient proof to
them that he- was an object of God's wrath. Even
the faith of most of his disciples was, there is no
doubt, prostrated, at least for a season, by thus
seeing their Messiah expiring in torture amid the
triumph of his enemies. A crucified Messiah!
There was no conception at which a Jew would
have revolted with greater horror.
This being the state of mind of those by whom
his cross was surrounded, our Saviour called out
with a loud voice, " My God ! my God ! why hast
thou left me ? " What would be the natural effect
of this exclamation upon the multitude ? It at
once brought to their minds the whole Psalm,
many parts of which were so strikingly applicable
to the sufferer before them. They would under-
stand him as applying these passages to himself.
Yet this Psalm they believed to have been written
by David, and that monarch was the type of the
Messiah. Was it so certain, then, that he who
could adopt and apply to himself the words of Da-
vid was an object of God's displeasure] Was it
certain that he was not the Messiah ? Why did
his sufferings, any more than the sufferings of
David, prove him to be an outcast from God?
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 291
But the words themselves are the language of
strong habitual trust in the favor of God. This
feeling is expressed in the repetition of the address,
" My God, my God." Imagine a sinner, a male-
factor, such as the Jews believed our Saviour to
be, thus addressing the Almighty, and you cannot
but be struck with the entire inconsistency of
the address with such a character. "Why hast
thou left me?" That is, Why hast thou left me
to suffer? The form of expostulation is to be
referred to the bold and passionate style of the
East, and the simple meaning is nothing more
than what we should express in colder language
by saying, " It is through thy appointment, O God,
that I suffer." In using the words which he did,
our Saviour adopted the language of David for
the purpose of bringing the whole Psalm from
which he quoted to the minds of those who heard
him. In this Psalm there are strong expressions
of confidence in God, and the words themselves,
which he uttered so that all around him might
hear, were meant, not to express a sense of his
being forsaken, but to convey to them the senti-
ment of his habitual trust in God, and his knowl-
edge that his sufferings were by God's appointment.
Such, I believe, would be the natural effect of his
292 GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS.
words ; what I have stated being their true sense.
An address to God like that made by Christ
would be wholly incongruous in the mouth of a
person who did not feel that he was habitually an
object of God's peculiar care and favor. The very
form of expostulation marks its character in this
respect more strongly. The words were uttered
by Christ, like his prayer on another occasion, "for
the sake of the people who stood by, that they
might believe that God had sent him." Just be-
fore expiring he thus professed, for the last time,
what he had in his ministry such frequent occa-
sion to profess, his confidence in God, and his
reference of all his actions and sufferings to Him.
APPENDIX.
APPENDIX.
ON THE ADAPTATION OF THE DISCOURSES OF CHRIST
TO THE CHARACTER AND CONDITION OF THE JEWS,
AND TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH HE WAS
PLACED.
A CONSIDERATION of the character and condition
of the people to whom our Lord was sent, and of
the circumstances in which he was placed, is neces-
sary to the formation of correct views respecting
the design and the excellence of his discourses as
a teacher of religion and morality. His teachings
will excite much stronger admiration when we
consider them in these relations, than when we
regard them merely in the abstract, as general
commendations or precepts of virtue and piety.
In the former case, we shall perceive not merely
their intrinsic excellence, but also their excellence
of, propriety and adaptation. We shall perceive
why some virtues were particularly selected and
296 INTEENAL EVIDENCES OF THE
insisted upon ; and the character, the feelings, and
the purposes of our Saviour will appear in bolder
relief and more striking colors, when contrasted
with those of the persons whom he was addressing.
I propose, therefore, to give a sketch of the char-
acter and condition of the Jewish people at the
time when our Saviour commenced his ministry,
and to illustrate what I have been saying by
pointing out the reference which he had to their
feelings and expectations in those declarations,
commonly called the Beatitudes, with which he
began his public instructions.
THE Jews had been separated by God from the
rest of mankind, and had received a religion from
him, the foundation of which was a knowledge of
his existence, his unity, and his supremacy. They
had not been made acquainted with a future state
of retribution by direct and express revelation. In
the time of our Saviour their notions of religion
were very imperfect and erroneous. This was the
case even in respect to the character of God, though
they were especially proud of the distinction of be-
ing the only people to whom God was known. The
representations of him by the Jewish Rabbis, and
their stories concerning him, as they have come
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 297
down to us, are extremely low and unworthy.
Many of them are such as could never have been
tolerated by men who had any just conceptions of
the Almighty. In respect to his power and domin-
ion, they considered him as the God of the world ;
but in all other respects they seem to have viewed
him as their national god. They appear, gener-
ally speaking, to have had no belief that his care
and goodness extended beyond themselves, and
that his favor toward men was regulated only by
a consideration of their moral desert. They seem
never to have conceived of him as the common
Father of mankind. Scarcely anything in Chris-
tianity appears to have given them more offence,
than its being a revelation of his impartial good-
ness, its representing the Gentiles as equally
with themselves the objects of his care, and equally
capable with themselves of obtaining his favor.
As to the doctrine of a future life, it was re-
jected, as is well known, by the Sadducees, a sect
which comprehended the principal part of the
more opulent and noble among the Jews. The
Pharisees, however, who were the leaders of the
common people in their religious opinions, be-
lieved in a future state of retribution, on which
men were to enter immediately after death. It is
298 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
not easy to ascertain their precise opinions respect-
ing this subject ; but there is no doubt that they
were essentially different from those of an enlight-
ened Christian. They probably believed in the
doctrine of transmigration.
The notions of the majority of the Jews concern-
ing moral and religious excellence were extremely
incorrect. What they were appears from the
character of the Pharisees ; for the Pharisees were
commonly regarded as their most holy men. The
nation in general, in the time of our Saviour, was
infected with the universal corruption of the age.
Their wickedness, at a somewhat later period, is
described in the very strongest language by their
own historian, Josephus. In the times, however,
which immediately preceded the coming of our
Saviour, I believe that a large proportion of all
the virtue and religion which existed in the world
was to be found in Judaea. Certainly there was
then quite as much at Jerusalem as could have
been discovered at Rome under the reign of Tibe-
rius.
In regard to the political condition of the Jews
in the time of our Saviour's ministry, they were
subject to the power of the Romans ; Judsea had
been converted into a Roman province, and its in-
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 299
habitants were compelled to pay tribute. They en-
dured, in common with the other nations subject to
Rome, the misery of one of those provincial govern-
ments, which, for the most part, were active and
vigilant in nothing but oppression and rapacity.
There were, however, peculiar aggravations of the
hardship of their condition. They regarded them-
selves as the sole favorites of Heaven, and as a peo-
ple far superior to the rest of mankind, whom they
spoke of as " dogs " and " sinners," and hated with
a religious hatred. The hatred which they felt to-
ward other nations was returned with a full meas-
ure of contempt and aversion. We scarcely find a
mention of them in any heathen author which is
not accompanied with some expression of these
feelings. In being subject to heathen masters,
therefore, they were exposed to peculiar sufferings
from insults offered to their religion, and from ridi-
cule cast upon their pretensions. Such servitude
they felt not merely as oppression, but as pollu-
tion; and, in respect to the Roman government,
they hung upon the brink of rebellion, ready to
receive an impulse from any hand.
They were, however, anxiously expecting a de-
liverer of no common character. Oppressed and
afflicted, they were looking forward to the coming
300 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
of their Messiah, as the termination of their suffer-
ings, and the commencement of glory and triumph.
He was to be the dispenser of those high blessings
which God had so long delayed ; he was the hope
of " all who were expecting deliverance in Jerusa-
lem"; he was " to save his people," and " to restore
the kingdom to Israel " ; and his coming was to be
attended with the most wonderful prodigies, and
the most extraordinary revolutions. The kingdom
which the great body of the Jews expected, " the
kingdom of God," " the kingdom of Heaven," " the
kingdom of the Messiah," was not such a kingdom
as we Christians understand to be expressed by
those words. It was a temporal kingdom, to be
founded on conquest. Their Messiah was to be a
prince and a warrior, not merely to deliver them
from subjection to the Romans, but to make them
masters of the world. He was to come " with gar-
ments rolled in blood," " to tread the wine-press
alone, to tread the nations in his anger, and to
trample them in his fury." The descendant of
David was to darken the glory of his ancestors
with the new splendor which he would cast
around their throne. He was to establish his
residence at Jerusalem, and that city was to be
the metropolis of the world.
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 301
IT was among this people, thus oppressed and
afflicted, and thus anxiously waiting for a deliv-
erer, that John the Baptist appeared to announce
that the kingdom of Heaven was at hand. The
expected time was at last arriving. He performed
no miracles to confirm his declaration ; and yet it
is not wonderful that multitudes flocked to him,
whose numbers are thus expressed by the Evan-
gelist, in the style of Eastern hyperbole : " Then
went out to him Jerusalem and all Judsea and all
the country about the Jordan." The people were
not surprised, perhaps, at his preaching of reforma-
tion, for they might think that some change and
reformation of character were necessary to prepare
them for the reception of their Messiah. But the
teachers of the Law and the Pharisees felt, without
doubt, no less wonder than exasperation at the
language of severe rebuke in which he addressed
them. His preaching must have roused the peo-
ple, and tended to produce in them a disposition
to commence resistance to the tyranny which they
hoped soon to overturn. The exciting character
of the preaching of John, and the fear of popular
commotions in consequence of it, were probably
among the principal causes, as they are stated to
have been by Josephus, of his being cast into
2G
302 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
prison by Herod Antipas, and of his being put to
death. It is not unlikely that the immediate oc-
casion of his death according to the account of the
Evangelists was only a concerted artifice, by which
Herod meant to screen himself from some of the
odium of the action, and to assume the appearance
of doing it reluctantly.
Before his death, however, the Baptist had ful-
filled his office, and pointed out the founder of the
kingdom which he had announced. This was a
young man of Galilee, a provincial part of Judaea,
a citizen of Nazareth, a town proverbially de-
spised, the reputed son of a carpenter. We may
conceive of him as appearing in the simple dress
of a Jewish peasant, the same, probably, as is still
worn in that part of the East where he was born.
We may represent him to ourselves with that ex-
pression of countenance, and that air and manner,
which must have been produced by the conscious-
ness that he came into the world as the chosen mes-
senger of God, under his immediate and sensible
direction, with but a single purpose to accomplish,
and that purpose high, solemn, and important be-
yond all example. He must have had an habitual
seriousness and intentness of mind, and perhaps
something of melancholy in his appearance, for
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 303
there was always distinctly in his view a short life
of toil and suffering and opposition, to be termi-
nated by a death the most cruel and ignominious.
He must have had an air of abstraction and disen-
gagement from the world, the appearance of a
being who had come here only on some purpose
of mercy. For he was separated and set apart
from mankind, he was in a great measure cut off
from human sympathy and support, by the sublime
peculiarity of his office, by his moral and intellect-
ual superiority, and by the absence of personal
interest in the common pursuits of men. In his
expressions of benevolence and friendship, there
must have been that gentleness and mildness
which are produced by freedom from all vulgar
feelings and selfish affections, something of the
compassion of a superior intelligence mingling
with the kindness of a friend, a manner of
which perhaps we may see a resemblance in the
best of men, when their minds are softened by sor-
row and raised above the world by religion.
He commenced his ministry in Galilee, without
at first declaring its full purpose, because this ac-
corded so little with the expectations of the Jews
that it could not have been at once made known,
without exciting passions by which his ministry
304 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
would have been immediately interrupted. He
only announced, as John the Baptist had done,
that the kingdom of Heaven was at hand, and
performed miracles in proof of his being the min-
ister of God, without expressly declaring himself
to be the Messiah. "And great multitudes fol-
lowed him from Galilee and Decapolis and Jeru
salem and Judsea, and from the country beyond
the Jordan." Having collected a few who joined
themselves to him in a particular manner as his
disciples, he ascended a mountain, or " the moun-
tain," as it is expressed by the Evangelist, that
is, either Mount Tabor, or some other well-known
mountain near Capernaum, to deliver instruc-
tion to his followers. "And when he had sat
down," the usual posture in which the Jewish
doctors taught, his disciples placed themselves
near him, and the multitude by which he was
attended gathered round.
If, then, there had been in all this multitude one
man of high intellectual views and moral feelings,
one man among these Jews such as Plato was
among the Heathens, who had just notions of
the impartial goodness of God and of. the charac-
ter to be expected in the Messiah, and who had
been led to believe that Jesus was indeed this last
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 305
and greatest messenger from God, with what deep
and anxious expectation must he have listened to
the discourse now about to he delivered. " If he
flatter the prejudices of this people," such an ob-
server might have said to himself, "if he add
excitement to their passions, if he urge them on
to those objects which they now have full in view,
if he propose himself as their leader, he is not the
Messiah, he is not a messenger from GocJ; his
miracles are concerted frauds, or they are perhaps
the work of evil daemons." He would not have
listened long, however, before all doubt and anxi-
ety would have vanished from his mind. To this
multitude of Jews, the obstinacy of whose pride
no humiliations could subdue ; who gloried in their
knowledge of God, and regarded themselves as a
holy people, the objects of his peculiar favor ; who
thanked God that they were not as other men, but
that they were "Abraham's children," "Jews by
birth, and not sinners of the Gentiles " ; to this
multitude the first address of Jesus Christ was,
" Blessed are they who feel their spiritual wants,
for theirs is the kingdom of Heaven." They to
whom he was speaking were full of the expecta-
tion of the highest temporal glory and prosperity
about to flow in upon their nation, and were gen-
26*
306 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
erally in the habit of regarding such prosperity as
a pledge of the favor of God; but the enjoyment
of this was not to be the lot of his disciples ; and
he proceeds, " Blessed are the mourners, for they
will be comforted." The Jews were full of deep
resentments and angry passions ; their hopes were
fixed upon a Messiah who should be a warlike
prince, who should inspire his followers with a
martial spirit and heroic courage, and lead them
under his banner to inflict vengeance upon their en-
emies and to subdue the world ; and their Messiah
had come at last to declare, " Blessed are the mild,
for they will inherit the land." In those whose
minds had been already affected by the preaching
of John the Baptist and of our Saviour, boundless
desires of worldly pleasures had been excited, and
had been made eager by what seemed the near
prospect of their gratification. It was not with
such desires, however, that the kingdom of Heaven
was to be entered. " Blessed are they who hunger
and thirst for righteousness, for they will be satis-
fied." The Jews confined their humane feelings
to those of their own nation, and were looking
for their own glory to be accomplished amid the
punishment and misery of the rest of mankind.
" Blessed," says our Saviour, " are the compassion-
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 307
ate, for they will receive compassion." They
made merit to consist principally in the strict
observance of ceremonies ordained by their Law
or by their traditions, in the practice of austeri-
ties, in legal purity, and in frequent ablutions;
and the Pharisees taught that there was no guilt
in desires, or even intentions, but in actions only.
It was a very different morality that was taught
by Jesus, a morality which flattered none of their
prejudices or passions: "Blessed are the pure
in heart, for they will see God." They were
ready to engage in rebellion, and were looking
for wars of desolation and conquest. Jesus said
to them, " Blessed are the peacemakers, for they
will be sons of God." They did not perhaps
suppose that the commencement of the reign of
the Messiah would be free from difficulty and toil
and suffering, either to himself or to his followers ;
but they expected a full recompense upon earth.
Nothing could be further from their thoughts
than that his followers should spend their lives
as preachers of a new religion, enduring continual
persecution and suffering, and looking for their
reward only beyond the grave; or that their Mes-
siah should begin his ministry with the declara-
tion, " Blessed are they who are persecuted for
308 INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF THE
righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of
Heaven. Blessed will you be when men shall
revile you, and persecute you, and speak all evil
against you, falsely, for my sake."
THE remainder of the discourse of our Saviour,
like the part we have been considering, ought to
be viewed in connection with the moral and intel-
lectual state of those to whom it was addressed.
When it is viewed in such a connection, we shall
see at once that he by whom it was delivered was
not an impostor, promoting and taking advantage
of the prevalent notions respecting the Messiah
and his kingdom, nor a fanatic borne away by
the popular enthusiasm. He appears throughout
patiently endeavoring to correct the errors of the
multitude, to enlighten their understandings, to
rectify their passions, to change the whole charac-
ter of their feelings and motives. And who is this
extraordinary teacher whose mind is of so much
higher an order than the minds of all those by
whom he is surrounded ? If he be a mere human
teacher, speaking from himself alone, he is noth-
ing more than a peasant of Galilee, the son of a
carpenter. But, though in the midst of men gross,
sensual, uninformed, unprincipled, his morality is
GENUINENESS OF THE GOSPELS. 309
the most pure, correct, and sublime ; his views of
duty are the most rational and comprehensive; not
only does he transcend, beyond all comparison, the
rulers and teachers of his own nation, but it is the
highest praise of the best philosophers of ancient
times, of Socrates and of Cicero, that their notions
of religion and duty have some imperfect resem-
blance to those of Jesus of Nazareth. Let us
examine his discourse. We shall discover no
selfish purpose or object. He by whom it was
delivered certainly had no design to take advan-
tage of the passions and prejudices of his hearers
in order to pass himself off for their Messiah.
It is all in direct opposition to those passions and
prejudices. Its object cannot be mistaken. It is
not to make them subservient to any purpose of
his own ; it is only to make them wise and virtu-
ous and holy. It is not to gain followers to him-
self; it is only to lead them back to their duty and
to God. Is there any solution that will account
for the appearance of a teacher so extraordinary in
an obscure part of Judaea I There is one, and but
one. He was what he claimed to be. He was a
teacher commissioned and instructed by God.
THE END.
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY
BERKELEY
Return to desk from which borrowed.
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below.
23May52SB
10FebS4MO
JS*2
IN STACKS
OCT
M
6
3R
^C
^8 1983
B 1981
BY
LD 21-95m-ll,'50(2877slG).176
YC I i
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY
