MANUAL
OF THE
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY,
FOR CLASSES AND PRIVATE READING.
BY
STEPHEN G. BULFINCH, D. D.
BOSTON:
W I LL IA 11l V. S PE  NCE A,
203 WASHINGTON STREET.
1866. 
Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1866, by
STEPHEN G. BULFINCI-I,
In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of MIassachusetts.
Stereotyped at the Boston Stereotype Foundry,
No. 4 Spring Lane. 
TO
ANDREW P. PEABODY, D.D., LL.D.,
PI'LUMMER PROFESSOR OF CHRISTIAN MORALS
IN HARVARD UNIVERSITY,
PARATIONE HAS Ei    NCOURAGED,
PREPARATIO.,NE HAS ENCOURAGED,
IS D EDICA TED,
IN TOKEN OF RESPECT AND FRIENDSIP,
BY TIIE AUTHOR.
CAMBRIDGE, MAY, 1866.
--'~,1-   -   40i.l  
PREFACE.
of the Gospels. For some further remarks upon this
branch of his subject, the author would refer to his articles on the Tuibingen school, in the Monthly Religious
Magazine for January, February, and May of the
present  year.  HIe  is  under  obligation  to  several
gentlemen who have furnished facilities for his work,
and  especially to  President  Hopkins,  of Williams
Colleg,e, for permission to make use of his valuable
"Lowell Lectures." From these he has derived important aid, particularly in the part entitled "The
Christian System."
I v 
PREFACE.
IT has been thought that, at the present time, when
many reject altogether the claims of Christianity, and
many who love and reverence it have very indefinite
ideas regarding the authority with which it comes to
us, a brief statement of the leading evidences of
its divine origin might be acceptable and useful, not
only to the private inquirer, but as a manual for
public seminaries,  and  advanced  classes  in  Sunday
schools. In preparing this little work, the evidences
have been carefully reexamined, in the light of recent
investigations in natural science and in theology. The
book will be found to contain a brief examination of
the principal theories that have been advanced, in
Germany and elsewhere, for the explanation of the
New Testament miracles, and of the doubts which
have been suggested with regard to the authenticity
(v) 
CONTENTS.
INTRODUCTORY.
PAGE
~. 3
SECTION 1. Revelation................
"    2. Miracle.............
THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM.
SECTION 3. Christianity at First View.....
4. Comparison with other Religions, continued..
5. Christianity in Harmony with Nature.....
"  6. Christianity adapted to Man.........
"  7. The Morality of Christianity........
~ SuE6,                THE AUTHOR OF CHRISTIANITY.
/  (SECTION 8. CharacterofJesus........
9. Position, Claims,and Success of Jesus.....
"    10. Death and Resurrection of Jesus......
INSTITUTIONS OF CHRISTIANITY.
SECTION 11. Proof from Institutions...............   33
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD,
I. EXTERNAL EVIDENCE.
SECTION 12. Third and Fourth Centuries.......
"    13. First and Second Centuries........
"   14. Heretical Writers...........
15. Jewish and Heathen Writers.  Versions.  Coins.             4
(vii)
. 8
.10
.13
.15
.17
.. 22
.. 25
.. 29
. 38
. 41
. 45
. 49 
CONTENTS.
II. INTERNAL EVIDENCE.
PAGE
. 53
. 57
* 60
. 63
. 6,
. 75
SECTION 16. Language, Geographical Accuracy, &c......
"    17. Honesty and Consistency.  Differences.....
18. Undesigned Coincidences......
if    " C  19. Agreement of Luke's Writings with the Epistles..
"    20. Writings of the Apostle John.......
"    21. Apocrypha of the New Testament.......
"    22. Result of our Inquiries.............
MODERN SPECULATIONS.
SECTION 23. Theories that suppose the Gospel Narratives correct.
24. Theories supposing Fraud.........
"    25. The MIythical Theory..........
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
SECTION 26. General View................,
" 27. Difficulties......................
" 28. Evidence, External and Internal......................
" 29. Old Testament Prophecy..........................
"     30. The Jewish Revelation prophetic of the Christian..
" 31. Individual Prophecies of the Old Testament...
SECTION 32. New Testament Prophecy, and subsequent History of the
Jews......................    119
"    33. Martyrdoms.............123
"    34. Conclusion..............                      129
QUESTIONS FOR EXAMINATION...........  133
viii
I
.. 70
.. 82
.. 85
. 91
.   93
.   97
. 104
. 108
. 113 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
INTRODUCTORY.
SECTION 1. REVELATION.
THE knowledge which men possess with regard to
religious subjects, is, generally speaking, traditional;
that is, derived from those who went before them. But
if we go farther back, and seek for the original sources
of religious knowledge, there are only three that occur
to us as conceivable.  Religious ideas may be innate
within the mind; they may be derived from the contemplation of nature;  or they may be received from
revelation.
Our innate ideas, or intuitive convictions, give evidence of the distinction between right and wrong, of the
existence of some superior Power, and of our destiny to
live hereafter.
Nature, or the order of God's works, confirms these
truths, and assures us of the Unity, Benevolence, and
other attributes of our Creator.
But notwithlstanding these means of knowledge, men
in various ages have fallen into most dangerous errors
1 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
with regard to religion and morality.   They have wor shipped inany gods, instead of one, and have supposed
these beings to be limited in power and knowledge,
stained with the grossest crimes, and only to be concil iated by the most degrading and unnatural services.
From such errors great corruption and misery have
proceeded.
Among the ancient heathen, morality became en tirely separated from religion.   The customs of society
were debased  by ferocity and  licentiousness: witness
the gladiatorial combats, and the open practice of im purities which cannot now even be named. Hiuman
sacrifices were sometimes offered, even in the most pol ished ages of Greece and PRome, and divine honors were
paid to men and women of the most abandoned char acter.
Even now, in the most enlightened countries, those
who reject Christianity are not agreed respecting some
of the most important truths of what is called Natural
Religion.   Some deny the reality of a future life, and
some the existence of a personal God.
Our  innate ideas, and the contemplation of nature,
are not sufficient, then, to impart the knowledge of re ligious truth.   There ap)pears, therefore, a probability
that He who made us would give us further guidance on
subjects of such importance.   He created the human
race for virtue and happiness; would he not interpose
to rescue them when wandering in sin and misery?  He
imparted to them religious capacities and wants; would
he not probably furnish the means for their gratifica tion?
It may be added, that only by revelation could human
2 
INTRODUCTORY.
beings be assured of any personal interest felt in them
by their Creator; the order of nature testifying only to
his care for his creatures generally, or in masses.   The
ideas of God as hearing prayer, and as being ready to
forgive and bless the individual worshipper, though they
might be suggested by innate feeling, could be confirmed
only by revelation.
Thie probability of a revelation having been made is
confirmied by the very general belief of mankind that
such has been the case; -a belief derived, probably,
among heathen nations, from somne dimn tradition of a
primitive divine communication.
SECTION 2. MIRACLE.
A miracle is an occurrence produced by superhuman
power, in a manner different from the common course of
nature.
Revelation, being distinguished from the teaching of
nature, is necessarily miraculous. It may or may not
be accompanied by outward miracles; but if it is extraordinary,-  occurring once only, or at intervals in
the history of the world, -it is itself a miracle, by the
definition given above. It would be as truly a miracle
for God to interfere with the common laws of mind as
with those of matter. To deny, then, the possibility of
miracle is to deny the possibility that God should ever
make a revelation to his creatures.
It is true that the order of nature is marked by beautiful consistency and uniformity; and no departure from
it can be supposed to have taken place, but for the most
important reasons. Yet miracles are not incredible, be
cause, -
0
3 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
1. The power of God to produce them is infinite.
2. The communication of religious knowledge, involving the principles by which life is to be guided, and
happiness secured, here and hereafter, is an object of
such high importanee, that it seems worthy of mniraculous intervention.
3. Science testifies that miracles have been performed.
The creation was a miracle, or rather a succession of
miracles. The world itself bears witness to the action
of its Author, at some former time or times, in a manner different from his usual action by what are called the
laws of nature.   Geology teaches that the earth, for a
long succession of ages, was in a condition in which life
neither did nor could exist.  It testifies, also, that different forms of vegetable and animal life were produced
at successive periods, as the earth was fitted to receive
them. In every such production the action of the
Almighty was different from the common course of nature. That course is to preserve and to propagate; the
action in these instances was to create. These, therefore, were miracles.
Some have imagined that the existing variety of animal and vegetable life was the result of gradual development of complicated forms from those more simple.
If this were true, the number of miracles would be less,
but the fact of miraculous creation must still be admitted, to account for the existence of those simple
forms.
Even if this theory were maintained to the extravagant extent of supposing all forms of life to have sprung
from "monads," or microscopic insects, - these to have
been produced by spontaneous generation, - and, finally,
4 
INTRODUCTORY.
the world itself, and the whole solar system, to have resulted from a rotatory motion in a mass of "nebulous"
or chaotic matter,- still the action of almighty power
in giving that first impulse must  be recognized as a
miracle. All that would be gained by so wild a conjecture would be to reduce the miracles of creation to
one; and that one, being entirely exceptional, would be
more directly contrary to the majestic order and gradual
progress which the course of nature exhibits, than would
a series of creative touches from the divine hand.
Miracles, then, have taken place in creation.  It is
not incredible, therefore, that they have occurred since.
If God thus interposed, at successive periods, to bring
into being the various forms of vegetable, animal, and
human life, he may have interposed, at successive periods since, to communicate his will to his human offspring. This, as we believe, he did, in the primitive,
the Jewish, and the Christian revelations.
4. Miracles may be consistent with laws of nature
unknown to us.
A bird which has always lived in a forest, and has
never seen a human being, finds, on returning to seek
its nest at night, that the tree which bore it is prostrate,
although there has been no storm. This is a miracle to
the bird; it is out of the course of nature to which the
bird has been accustomed. To us it is no miracle; it is
simply that a settler has cut down the tree. The interference, then, of a superior being, or order of beings,
with an inferior, may produce a miracle to the latter;
yet it may be perfectly consistent with the laws of the
superior being's nature.
To take another illustration: The sun rises every
1*
5 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
day, the comet becomes visible perhaps once in a thousand years; yet the appearance of the comet is in
accordance with the laws of nature as truly as the
rising of the sun. So the manifestation, at long intervals, of creative power in geologic epochs, or of
spiritually renewing and wonder-working power in successive revelations, may be in conformity to laws as
firmly established and as sublime as that of gravitation.
It has been contended that all human experience testifies against miracles.  Our individual experience can
count for very little, from the limited range of our observation; and the experience of ages past is known to
us only by the testimony of those who then lived. Some
of these - the sacred writers - expressly declare that
miracles took place. Others are silent respecting them;
but no one directly contradicts, from his own knowledge,
the assertion of the sacred writers. Here, then, is only
testimony against testimony;  nay, testimony which is
merely neutral against that which is positive.
Miracles, however, are confessedly events of very rare
occurrence. We know of but two purposes to which
they are applied- creation and revelation. The reason
is obvious: every other purpose of divine Providence
is best accomplished by the common order of the universe, but these two imply miracle in their very nature.
To command our belief, miracles must meet the following conditions: -
1. They must be, in themselves, worthy of a divine
origin.   The  miracles wrought  by the Savior were
dignified, and, in general, directly beneficent in their
character.
2. The revelation they are wrought to establish must
6 
INTRODUCTORY.
be worthy of our reception. No amount of alleged
miraculous evidence could sustain doctrines dishonorable
to God, or inconsistent with pure morality.
3. They must be proved by satisfactory evidence;
such, for example, as the testimony of several intelligent
eye-witnesses, given independently of each other, and
under circumnstances which showed that they had neither
been bribed nor deluded.
The Christian religion expressly claims to have been
accompanied by miracles. (Mark xvi. 17, 20; John
x. 25, 37, 38; Acts ii. 22, 32.)  We cannot consistently receive it as true, and yet reject its claims in this
important particular.
Even if Christianity should be received as our guide,
on account of the self-evident truth of its instructions,
still its miracles would not be superfluous. They would
mark it as being not a discovery of man, but a revelation from God, possessing authority that entitles it to
obedience, and expressing the love of the Creator, as a
personal message from a father expresses his love to his
children.
The question, however, most suitable for the inquirer
into the truth of Christianity, is not whether it was
best that God should reveal his will miraculously, but
whether he has actually done so.
7 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM.
SECTION 3.  CHRISTIANITY AT FIRST VIEW.
THE inquiry now presents itself, Is the Christian religion worthy of the divine origin it claims? Some
facts respecting it meet us at the first glance.
1. It is the religion of the most enlightened portion
of the world. Christianity and civilization go together;
and the freest and most advanced countries are those in
which this religion is held in its purest form.   Where
the gospel has prevailed, science and art have flourished, and institutions of learning and charity have been
maintained, which before its introduction were unknown.
2. The condition of woman has been more elevated
and  happy in Christian  lands  than  in others.   In
Turkey, woman is a prisoner; in India, a slave and
a victim.
3. The greatest men, in intellectual and moral endowments, have usually been amniong the foremost in
their acknowledgment of Christianity; and, generally
speaking, the most honest men, the most useful citizens, the firmest friends, and the most liberal benefactors, have been decided Christians.
4. The excellence of Christianity has been admitted
by many even of those who did not believe in its authority; and those sceptics who have led virtuous lives have
generally been those who had been brought up in Christian homes.
8 
THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM.
5. While systems of human philosophy have been
improved through successive generations after the death
of their founders, Christianity stands in its best form as
displayed in its original documents.   Endeavors to improve it have merely resulted in corrupting it; and
attempts to reform it find success only as they bring it
back to "the simplicity that is in Christ."
6. When we look at the religion itself, we perceive
that it gives the most exalted ideas of God,- as One,
Infinite, and Eternal; as Holy, Just, and Merciful.
7. It gives, also, the most correct ideas of man,as possessed of great capacities and powers, and destined
for noble purposes; but as led away by sin, and needing
repentance and amendment.
8. It gives rational and elevated ideas of human
duty, as comprised in self-control, usefulness, and piety.
Its morality is not only elevated, but strict, guarding
thought as well as action.
9. It gives a lofty view of mnan's final destiny, representing him as designed by his Maker for immortal life
and happiness.
10. The Christian religion, and that alone, exhibits
a fitness to become universal. Other systems are limited by their peculiarities to the region of their birth.
Ilohammedanism insists on various ablutions, healthful
and agreeable in warm countries, but not adapted to
colder regions. Judaism, though divine in its origin,
was not designed for universal acceptance until coinpleted by Christianity.  It required all males to present
themselves three times a year at the Temple, which was
the onlyone permitted to be built. This, and numerous other restrictions, marked it as a national religion.
91 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
(Exodus xxiii. 17; I)eut. xii. 13, 14.) But Christianity gives the command,  "Preach to every creature"
(Mark xvi. 15), and its character and institutions are
consistent with that command.   Christ came to save his
people, not from the Roman yoke, which would have
been a local and temporary object,  but "from  their
sins," an object of universal character.   (Matt. i. 21.)
SECTION 4.  COMPARISON WITHII OTIHER  RELIGIONS,
e?~ -v-CONTINUED.
The other religions in the world are Judaism, Mohammedanism, Buddhism, Heathenism in its various forms,
and Deism.
Judaism, the religion of the Old Testament, was
given as preparatory to Christianity; is acknowledged
by it as of divine origin, and is, to a great extent, included in it.  It is not complete in itself.  (Heb. xi.
39, 40.)  It does not, as distinctly as Christianity,
represent the Supreme Being, as the impartial Father
of all mankind; does not as strongly impress the obligation of some duties,- that of mercy, for instance;
and does not as clearly teach the doctrine of a future
life.
The sublimity of the Christian ideas of God is more
observable when contrasted with the narrow spirit of
the Jews near the period at which Jesus lived. The
author of the Second Book of Esdras, in the Apocrypha,
apparently a half Christianized Jew, uses' the following language: "0O Lord, thou madst the world for our
sakes. As for the other people, which also come of
Adam, thou hast said that they are nothing." (2 Esdras
10 
THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM.
vi. 55, 56.)  Contrast with this the  Savior's recognition of the brotherhood of all mankind.   (Matt. v.
43-45; Luke x. 27-37; John x. 16.)
Mohammedanism is only a corruption of Judaism
and Christianity. With many excellent precepts, derived from these, it combines many harsh commands
and formal  observances.   Contrary  to the pure  and
peaceful character of Christianity, it places little restraint on sensuality, and encourages the stern, warlike,
and ambitious spirit, rather than the gentle and forgiving. Its inferiority is the more marked, as, coming
later than Christianity, it might have been expected to
have improved upon it.
The corrupted form of Christianity called Mormonism strongly resembles Mohammedanism in the particulars just mentioned, and affords a striking illustration of
the excellence of Christianity, by the miserable failure
of the attempt to improve it.
Buddhism may be properly distinguished from other
forms of heathenism, both on account of its extensive
prevalence, and as being more properly atheistic than
polytheistic. It denies the existence of an eternal God,
gives imperfect rules of human duty, and makes the
highest happiness consist in the extinction of our personal being.
Heathenism, in all its forms, is full of ideas and practices dishonorable to God and degrading to man.
In ancient heathen nations there were great philosophers who rose above their religion and their age, and
taught many exalted lessons of virtue; but they did not
derive the sanction for it from the hope or fear of a
future life. Plato, in one remarkable passage of the
11 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
Phadon, describes Socrates as speaking as a Christian
might speak; but the instance is a solitary one. Generally, the heathen writers speak of the future life in
uncertain language, or describe it in an unattractive
aspect; and seldom appeal to considerations connected
with it, to enforce the obligations of morality.
Neither Mohammedanism, Buddhism, nor any form
of heathenism, has any claim to rest on the evidence of
miracles. Mohammed disclaimed miracles as proofs of
his system, telling his followers that the Koran itself
was a miracle. There are some miraculous stories told
respecting him, as that of his night journey to heaven
on the horse Alborak; but they rest only on his own
word, not having been witnessed by any other person.
The wonders of Brahminism, and those of ancient
heathenism, are alleged to have taken place in far distant ages, before the rise of authentic history. They
rest on the word of poets, not of historians.
If Deism be proposed to take the place of Christianity, under the more specious name of Theism, or the
Religion of Nature, it may be observed that the doctrines usually supposed to constitute this system are
mostly derived from the gospel. The modern Deist,
born of Christian parents, and subjected in youth and
manhood to the influences of Christian instruction and
society, combines the best ideas he has received, and excluding from his spiritual temple the foundation of faith
in Christ, calls the beautiful but now baseless structure
the Religion of Nature. Men are so accustomed to the
thought of God's unity, infinity, and goodness, and to
the doctrine of a future life, that they forget how much
they are indebted, even for these truths, to the Bible.
12
0 
THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM..
And notwithstanding the advantage of Christ's teaching,
those who discard his authority are not agreed with
regard to many of the most important subjects, such
even as the existence of a personal God as distinct from
nature, and the hope of a future life to the individual as
distinct from the continued existence of the race to
which he belongs.
CHRlIISTIANITY IN HIIARMONY WITIH
NATURE.
Among the works of God a degree of harmony may
justly be expected, either in resemblance or in adaptation to each other. This harmony exists between nature
and Christianity.
Christianity coincides with the highest teachings of
natural religion, in the exalted view it gives of the
divine nature and attributes.  And  this harmony is the
more apparent as the teachings of nature have been interpreted by science, proving the immnense extent of creation, and that all portions of it are under the control of
the same grand system of laws. These discoveries correspond to what the Bible taught long before, of the
unity of God, and his unbounded power, wisdom, and
love.
God's moral government, as displayed by Christianity, is analogous to his government over outward nature.
The power of gravitation acts not only on large bodies,
but on small; not only on masses, but on atoms.   So
in God's moral government, the laws of right and wrong
are applicable to the least of our actions as to the greatest; and Christ tells us,   Every idle word that men
2
13
SEOTION 5. 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
shall speak they shall give account thereof in the day of
jud,gmnent." (Matt. xii. 36.)
Nature and Christianity alike teach most clearly what
is of practical importance, leaving theoretical truth for
subsequent discovery. Thus natural instinct prompts to
use the day for labor and the night for rest; but men
did not discover for ages what it was that produced this
interchange  of light and darkness.   So  Christianity
teaches the great practical doctrine of a future state;
but how that state will be constituted is not explained.
Mohammedanism, on the contrary, enters into a minute,
and often an absurd, description of the realms of bliss
and of woe.
The operation of Christianity upon the heart of man,
and upon the institutions of society, is generally gradual, like the changes produced in nature. "First the
blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the ear."
(Mark iv. 28.) In its remedial character it is analogous to other remedies, often, like them, requiring of
its patients self-restraint and self-denial.
In its mediatorial character, too, it is analogous to
nature. To save another fromni evil, it is necessary that
we take some labor or pain upon ourselves. The sick
child is saved by the sleepless care of the mother; the
endangered country by its soldiers, faithful unto death;
the neglected prisoners by the self-sacrifice of the philanthropist. The death of Christ for our salvation is, then,
in harmony with a universal law.
The agreement of Christianity with nature has been
made use of as an argument against its claims. It is
said by some that the teachings of Christ are, in what is
most important, only repetitions of moral and religious
14 
THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM.
lessons-that had been given before.  Efforts have been
made to prove this with respect to the Lord's Prayer
(Matt. vi. 9) and the Golden Rule. (Matt. vii. 12.)
The reply is, that, of course, if the principles taught by
Christ were eternal truth, they could not be new; if
they were truth of the highest importance, God would
not have left the world for ages entirely without them.
Many of the teachings of Jesus, therefore, had very
probably been anticipated by those before his time.
But he came, not so much to declare what was entirely
new, as to give the most important religious and moral
truth to mankind, in a connected form, free from human
error, and with the authoritative sanction of a revelation; and by his example, his death and resurrection,
to illustrate the whole system, and make it effectual for
the salvation of mankind. 
SECTION 6. CHPRISTIANITY ADAPTED TO MAN.
The harmony of the Christian religion with the system of divine government manifested in nature may be
further seen in its adaptation to the various powers and
capacities of man.
It is adapted to the intellect and the imagination; for
it presents to the former the loftiest themes of contemplation, and kindles the latter by its representations
of beauty and grandeur. Not to speak at present of
the lofty poetry of the Old Testament, it is sufficient to
refer to the parables of the Good Samaritan (Luke x.)
and the Prodigal Son  (Luke  xv.); to the discourse
with the woman of Samaria (John iv.), to the portraiture of Charity (1 Cor. xiii.), and the chapter on the
15 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
resurrection (1 Cor. xv.), with the description of the
finaljudgment. (Rev. xx. 11, 12.)
It is adapted to the conscience and the will; for it
holds before the mind the claims of duty, not on the
ground of expediency alone, but on that of God's appointment. It declares the way of virtue to be the way
even of earthly happiness, pointing out the rewards
which attend it, and ascribing them to the wise providence of God.   (Matt. v.; 1 Tim.  iv. 8.)  It denounces, in his name, corresponding penalties against
transgression. (Miatt. v. 21-26.) Still more, it assures
us that the reward of virtue and the penalty of guilt will
be extended beyond this world, teaching us to expect
a righteous judgment.   (Matt. xxv.; Iromn. ii. 5-10.)
By the strictness of its moral requirements, it excites
the conscience, alarming us with a view of our condition
in the sight of God.   (Rom. iii. 19, 20, 23.)  Yet it
encourages us withthe hope of pardon for the past, and
divine assistance for the future.   (Luke xi. 13; xviii.
13,14; 1 Johni. 9.)
It is adapted to the affections; for it places before us
the highest object to which they can be directed- the
infinitely good and holy Being, whom it presents to us
as "our Father in heaven."   (Matt. vi. 9; xxii. 37;
1 John iv. 8.) It displays the resemblance of his perfections in a human form in the Lord Jesus Christ,
whose self-sacrificing labors and sufferings for our sake,
endured with unexampled patience, dignity, and devotion to God, have proved the most effectual means to
touch the heart.   (John xii. 32; Iheb. i. 3; ii. 10.)
And it encourages the domestic and social affections,
making love its great principle of action, and enforcing
'16 
THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM.
it by the example of the Savior. (Matt. xxii. 35-40;
John xv. 12; Rom. xiii. 10; 1 John iv. 20, 21.)
SECTION 7. TIHE MORALITY OF CHRISTIANITY.
By its adaptation to the conscience, the affections,
and the will, Christianity commends and enforces its
moral instructions. We have next to observe what is
the character of these.
They comprise, in the first place, the law of right,
the great principles of justice, purity, and benevolence.
These, which wise men had in part discerned, are more
fully given in the Old Testament, but in their perfection only by the Savior. (Exodus xx.; Matt. v. 17,
18; Rom. ii. 14.) The various manifestations of God's
law, in nature, in the Old Testament and in the New,
are thus harmonious.
The Christian law of morality comprises also some
rules to which neither heathen wisdom nor Jewish inspiration had attained. These are sometimes directly
given, as the limitation of anger (Matt. v. 21, 22),
and of divorces (Matt. v. 31;  Mark x. 2-9); and
sometimes they are clearly implied; as polygamy and
suicide, though nowhere directly forbidden, are evidently contrary, the one to the Christian duty of purity,
the other to that of patient and faithful continuance in
the service of God.
The Christian law is distinguished by the restraint
which it places upon the propensities and passions. It
forbids the exercise of malevolent feelings. Revenge,
which among the heathen was regarded as the mark of
a noble mind, is prohibited by Christianity. (Rom. xii.
2*
17 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
19, 20.) Avarice, pride, vanity, and sensuality are
alike forbidden. (Luke xii. 15; 1 John ii. 16.)
At the same time it avoids the extreme into which
other systems have fallen, which have attempted to
restrain the passions- that of a gloomy asceticism.
(Matt. xi. 19; 1 Tim. iv. 4.)
Among the virtues there are some which have attracted the admiration of mankind in every age, and
which were held in high honor alike by Jews and heathen at the time of the Savior. Such are active courage, friendship, and patriotism. There are others to
which less of popular favor has been given, but which
are no less important to human happiness, and in themselves no less worthy. Such are meekness, patience,
forgiveness. The former class are in accordance with
the natural impulses, the latter imply their restraint.
An uninspired moralist would have advocated the popular virtues more than the unpopular, because he would
have shared the popular feeling. An ambitious leader
would have pursued a similar course, because he would
have expected thus to gain favor. But Jesus gave his
influence for the unpopular virtues, commending a meek,
yielding, and peaceable course of conduct, directing us to
love our enemies, and to return good for evil - precepts
which would appear impracticable if his own example
had not illustrated themn. (Luke xxiii. 34; 1 Peter ii.
21-23.) This course showed at once his divine wisdom
in enforcing those virtues which most needed commendation, and his superiority to all attempts to gain popular
favor, while it renders the success of his religion the
more wonderful. (Matt. v. 1-12, 38-48.)
It has been erroneously argued, even by some defend
18 
THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM.
ers of Christianity, that the Savior, in thus doing, discountenanced the mnanly virtues - courage, friendship,
and patriotism. But this is going beyond the truth. iHe
did not expressly commend these virtues, because they
needed no commendation, being already favorites with
tihe world; but he inculcated the principles from which
they must proceed- reverence for God rather than
man, which is the source of true courage; and love, of
which friendship and patriotism are only applications.
(Matt. xxii. 39; Luke xii. 4, 5; John xv. 12.)
Christianity goes deep into the cause of existing evils
in society, and thus directs efforts more effectually to
their removal. It does not ascribe these evils to the
constitution of society, to defective institutions, to deficiency of wealth, or superabundance of population, but
to sin; and it comes to free mankind from this evil.
Other reformers have endeavored to remove particular
forms of suffering and wrong, and have thus often done
well, carrying out various portions of the great design
of Christianity; but the gospel itself strikes at the root
of all, representing the original evil of all to be man's
disobedience to the divine law, and directing its strongest efforts to remove this.   (Matt. xv. 18; Luke vi.
43.)  This is not the ground which a fanatic would have
taken; for honest enthusiasm, excited by the view of
visible wrongs, would have attacked them directly; nor
could such ground be taken by an impostor, the loftiest
moral truth being discovered by one who himself was
utterly untrue.
This aim of Christianity to remove the evil within, as
the great means for the removal of all outward evil,
presents an answer to those who defend any form of
19 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
wrong - as slavery, for instance - by asserting that it
is not forbidden by Christ; and also to those who con sider his omitting to forbid it as furnishing an argument
against his system.  He did not undertake to specify the
various forms of moral evil. Hie said nothing directly
against despotism; nor did his apostles denounce the
bloody gladiatorial combats, the favorite amusement of
the heathen around them. But Christ and his disciples
alike, aiming to subject the heart to the divine law, inculcated great principles, the most comprehensive of all
being the love of God and man.   Every institution and
practice inconsistent with these is condemned by Christianity, and either has yielded or must yield to its influence.   (Matt. v. 48; vii. 12;-xxii. 37-40.)
It may be said, however, that, excellent as is the
morality of the Christian system, its excellence does not
oblige us to receive the religion; for that moral precepts claim to be obeyed for their own evident truth and
beauty. If we found a good precept in the Koran, we
might adopt it without believing in Mohammed; so we
can use the moral commands of Jesus without believing
in his divine commission. To this we reply,  1. One who sincerely endeavors to obey the law of
Christ for its intrinsic excellence will probably soon be
convinced of his superhuman claims. (John vii. 17.)
2. No merely human wisdom could have originated
so holy a system; or, if it could, those who were pure
and exalted enough to invent it must have been superior to deception; and if the account of its first preachers be true, the system is divine.   (1 John iv. 14.)
3. The morality of Christianity is inseparably connected with its religious teaching. Its philanthropy
20 
THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM.
proceeds from the love of God; its courage from the
reverence due to him.   (Matt. v. 44, 45; x. 28.).
The character of the Savior's teachings is well described in the following words of Professor Norton:
"In the midst of men gross, sensual, uninformed, and
unprincipled, his morality is 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 philosophers of ancient
times, of Socrates and of Cicero, that their notions of
religion and duty have some imperfect resemblance to
those of Jesus of Nazareth." (Internal Evidences, pp.
308. 309.   A
21
CI./
p 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
THE AUTHOR OF CHRISTIANITY.
SECTION 8.  CminACTEP OF JESUS.
W'E have next to consider the character of the person
through whom the revelation was made. In most systems the personal character of the founder is comnparatively of little importance. The works of Plato cornmmand admiration from the intellectual greatness they
display- not from the moral qualities of the writer.
Even the laws of Moses derive their sanction in a very
slight degree from the personal character of the great
lawgiver. But when a teacher claims the love of his
followers, he must display those qualities by which love
is won.  This claim is made by the Author of Christianity. He calls his disciples friends; hlie requires them to
commemorate him by a personal act of affection. (Matt.
xii. 50; xxvi. 26; John xv. 14.)  Neither a fanatic
nor an impostor would have been likely to do this; for
the feelings of the one would have been exclusively engaged on the object of his enthusiasm, and the other
would have been without genuine feeling.
Those who do not receive Christianity as divinely revealed have often admitted the moral excellence of the
Savior's character. Rousseau declared that "Socrates
died like a philosopher, but Jesus Christ like a god;"
and Renan declares, "Whatever may be the surprises
of the future, Jesus will never be surpassed. His worship will grow young without ceasing; his legend will
22 
THE AUTHOR OF CHRISTIANITY.
call forth tears without end; his sufferings will melt the
noblest hearts; all ages will proclaim that among the
sons of men there is none born greater than Jesus."
The character of the Savior, as presented by the
evangelists, combines the strength of man with the tenderness of woman. He is faithful to every duty; and
the virtues of the citizen, the friend, and the son, including some which his religion has been wrongly supposed to depreciate, are all rightly balanced.   (See before, p. 19; see also Luke xix. 41-44; John xiii. 23;
xix. 27.) He has courage to reprove most sternly,
and gentleness to speak forgiveness to the penitent.
(Matt. xxiii. 13-36; John vriii. 11.) While going about
doing good,  and superior to all narrow prejudices of
race or nation, he yet sets a limit to his own action and
that of his disciples, lest their efforts should be wasted
over too wide a field.  (Matt. iv. 23; x. 5; xv. 24;
Luke x. 30-37.) Denouncing the hypocrisy of the
Pharisees, and preparing for the abrogation of the
ceremonial law, he yet pays it respect while it remains
in force.   (Matt. viii. 4; xxiii. 2.)  Forbidding avarice, and censuring the faults of the rich and powerful,
lie teaches the poor and oppressed lessons of patience
and faith, and refuses to intermeddle with the distribution of property.   (Matt. v.; Luke xii. 14.)   He
nmakes claim to the highest dignity, yet simply and unaffectedly; and without impairing his dignity, he performs a menial office when he can thereby teach an
important lesson.   (John xiii. 1-5.)   He calls all men
to come to him; yet, instead of using flattering persuasions, warns themn that they will encounter obloquy and
persecution.   (Matt. xi. 28; Luke xxi. 12-16.)
23 
. EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
But it is as the period of his suffering draws nigh that
the beauty of his character most filly appears.   The
wise and tender counsels to his friends (John xiii.-xvi.),
the prayer with his disciples (xvii.), the struggle with
himself in Gethsemane (Matt. xxvi. 39), the dignity
with which he meets his captors, asking only that his
disciples may be spared (John xviii. 4, 8), the patience
he shows under the abuse of the Sanhedrim (John xviii.
23), the look that brings repentance to the disciple who
has denied him (Luke xxii. 61), the answers and the
bearing that almost subdue the pride and policy of the
Roman governor (John xviii. 33-38),-  these prepare us
for the still higher sublimity of the cross. Here we see
him praying for the pardon of his enemies, and urging
the only plea that could be available for them (Luke
xxiii. 34); in his own agony, showing mnercy to the
penitent thief (43), and love and consideration for his
mother (John xix. 26), and with his last breath commending his soul to God. (Luke xxiii. 46.)
If this holiest of all characters did not exist, whence
came its delineation? It is one of the highest achievements of art to represent a perfect human form; what,
then, must the artist be that could portray a perfect
human soul? Writers of fiction seldom, if ever, create
incidents; they merely vary and combine incidents from
real life; and the occurrences which have been here presented had no prototype except in Jesus himself. The
prayer for his murderers has often been imitated by his
followers (Acts vii. 60), but it was first uttered by himself; and the more than royal exercise of mercy, from a
cross instead of a throne (Luke xxiii. 43), was unexampled in the history of the world.
24 
THE AUTHOR OF CHRISTIANITY.
This argument is thus strongly presented in a manuscript sermon by the present President of Harvard Col
lege: -
"What wonderful, what superhuman genius is this,
in this obscure Jew Matthew, that he should conceive
of the office and work of a Messiah, never having heard
of any Messiah except as an expected king and warrior;
that he should draw the picture of one claiming to have
come fromn God, claiming to be the future judge of the
quick and the dead, claiming to be living in the bosom
of God,    and draw the picture with such majesty and
grace that it has commanded the admiration and implicit faith of all succeeding ages.  Jn moral and intellectual character, Jesus is drawn in such fair and beautiful lines in the Gospels, that you can scarce conceive it
within the possibilities of human genius to have invented
the character. But when you add to this moral worth
and intellectual power the claim to divine origin and
divine authority, and find these immeasurable claims of
Jesus so sweetly blended with humility that the reader
detects no incongruity whatever, you have then a portrait which no human genius ever could, as it seems to
me, have invented, and which certainly no human pencil could have drawn, had not the original been a living
man."
SECTION 9. POSITION, CLAIMS, AND SUCCESS OF
JESUS.
The position, the claims, and the success of the
Savior, taken together, present a proof in favor of his
religion which may well be called a moral miracle.
Eighteen centuries since, there was manifested  amnong
0                                                   t3~
3
25 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
men a new moral power which changed the habits of
thinking and acting among mankind, and advanced the
race in all that was worthy of pursuit far more than all
the teachings of philosophy had done. This great spiritual revolution came from a teacher in the obscure
province of Galilee; humanly speaking, a poor young
man, with few advantages, rejected by his own nation,
and put to death, at their instance, by the Romans, who
ruled them. Yet this poor and suffering teacher has
subdued the civilized world. Perceiving this wonder,
we easily assent to the outward miracles which accompanied it; nay, we receive them as necessary to account
for this.
Let us notice his position, in contrast with his claims.
Jesus was born in humble circumstances (Matt. xiii.
55); he possessed no literary advantages (John vii.
15), and derived his support, while teaching, from the
contributions of friends. (Luke viii. 3.) His cause had
not, therefore, the attractions of worldly power, but
won its way in despite of an opposition which had on
its side the force of wealth, rank, and national favor.
(Matt. viii. 20; John vii. 48.)  Yet the greatness
of his claims is unexampled. He claimed miraculous
power (John x. 25); he asserted that he always did
what was pleasing to God. (John viii. 29.) He allowed
himself to be called the Son of David. (Matt. xxi.
16.) Hie declared himself the promised Messiah (Matt.
xvi. 17; John iv. 26), and that in him the prophecies
were fulfilled. (Luke iv. 21; xxiv. 27.) He asserted
that he was the Son of God (John x. 36), and, in some
sense, one with the Father. (John x. 30.) He foretold
that he should rise from the dead (Luke xviii. 33), and
1 26 
THE AUTHOR OF CHRISTIANITY.
declared that he should hereafter judge the world. (Matt.
xxv. 31   John v.  29.)   He  announced himself as
"the light of the world" (John viii. 12), "the resurrection and the life." (John xi. 25.)  If he was not
divinely commissioned, he was guilty of the most audacious blasphemy, or he was insane. Yet these stupendous claims were advanced with calmness, and often
implied rather than expressed, as if with a quiet assurance of their truth. (Matt. xix. 28.) With these
claims he united a plan of spiritual conquest surpassing
the wildest dreams of earthly ambition; yet he knew,
and foretold, his own approaching fate. (Matt. xx.
17-19; xxi. 38, 39.) But, instead of being discouraged by this, he foresaw in his death the means for the
triumph of his cause. (John xii. 32.) Such confidence
would imply, in a merely uninspired man, the wildest
self-delusion; but the dignity of his demeanor, and the
practical good sense of his precepts, contradict the supposition. As to that of imposture, it cannot be entertained a moment.
With this unfavorable position, and these lofty claims,
the course pursued by this teacher was the most unlikely
to win popular favor. The Jews were at that time
divided into three sects - the Pharisees, Sadducees, and
Essenes. Jesus denounced the formalism and hypocrisy
of the Pharisees; he differed from the unscriptural
views and lax morality of the Sadducees (Matt. xxii.
23-30); and did not sanction the asceticism, the celibacy, and community of goods of the Essenes. (Matt.
xi. 19; xix. 4, 11; Luke xii. 13, 14.)  The one feeling which all had in common - that of national pridehe stirred up against himself. A fanatic would have
27 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
shared this feeling, an impostor would have made use
of it; he, on the contrary, set morality above ceremonies  (Matt. xii. 1-13),  associated with  publicans
(Matt. ix. 10), commended Samaritans (Luke x. 33;
xvii. 16-19), and foretold the destruction of the holy
city and temple.  (Matt. xxiv. 2; xxii. 7.)  And, while
thus alienating the Jews, he did not seek the aid of
the Gentiles. (Matt. xv. 24.) Yet he succeeded in
establishing his system as the religion of the civilized
world.
Let the rapidity of its progress be observed.   The
disciples of Jesus rallied in Jerusalem after their Master's crucifixion, and in the midst of his enemies. The
first day's public preaching is said to have gained three
thousand converts.   (Acts ii. 41.)  Persecution scattered them, but only to spread their sentiments more
widely. (Acts viii. 1, 4.) At length they provoked
a contest with the idolatry of the age, sustained by all
the power of that empire which was then coextensive
with the civilized world. Against all that power Christianity prevailed. The Roman empire fell, but its barbarian conquerors were subdued by the gospel. And
now it is extending its outward conquests, it is purifying itself from corruptions of human device, and it is
manifesting its power in the removal of evil institutions and customs. Such have been, and such are, the
achievements of a system which its opponents would
have us believe is but a collection of doubtful legends
respecting, a young carpenter of Galilee, and the fishermen, his associates! 
28 
THE AUTHOR OF CHRISTIANITY.
SECTION 10. DEATH AND RESURRECTION OF JESUS.
The death and resurrection of Jesus are events which
rest not alone upon the testimony of the New Testament
historians. They must have taken place, in order to account for the existence of Christianity at the present time.
Some of the most important facts of Christianity are
of such a character as never would have been invented
by a writer friendly to its claims; besides which, they
were in their nature facts of general notoriety.   Such
are the birth of Jesus in a lowly station, his rejection
by his countrymen generally, and his execution as a
criminal.
That Jesus died on the cross, we are assured by the
unquestioned tradition, not only of the Christian church,
but of its opponents.  No  heathen or Jewish writer
ever denied the fact.  This assurance, too, is confirmed
by the nature of the case.  He who undertakes the
course of a reformer, and who exposes the vices of the
leading classes, necessarily incurs their hatred.  He
"who, with such a course, combines the claim to a divine
commission, must  either rule or perish.  Unless  his
claim is allowed, the animosity it excites will be satisfied
only by destroying him, as an impostor. The claims of
Jesus were rejected by his nation: this we know, for
that nation still rejects them.   His  execution, then,
mnight be inferred as most highly probable, even if we
possessed no record of it as a fact.
It will not, then, be questioned that Jesus was crucified   a mode of execution most painful, and, as then
considered, most disgraceful. The triumph of his enemnies was complete.
3*
29 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
How, then, can the present existence of his religion
be accounted for? What gave his followers- terrified
and scattered as they must have been - courage to
assemble again, and confidence in a cause which had
been thus signally defeated, so that they commenced and
carried forward the bold and active measures that were
necessary to make it successful?
The resurrection of Jesus alone can answer these
questions. This was early proclaimed as the great fact
of the religion. Such is the testimony of the book of
Acts, which must be admitted to be at least the earliest
and best account of the apostles' preaching that we have.
(Acts ii. 24, 32; iii. 15; xvii. 31; xxv. 19.)  Such
has been the unvarying testimony of the church from
that time to the present.
Such is the testimony, among many others, of the
First Epistle to the Corinthians (xv. 4, 14, 15, 20,
23), respectiing which the ablest of modern sceptics
makes the following remarkable admission: "This conclusion, however, does not shake the passage in the
First Epistle to the Corinthians, which (it being undoubtedly genuine) was written about the year 59 after
Christ, consequently not thirty years after his resurrection. On- this authority we must believe that many
members of the primitive church, who were yet living
at the time when this Epistle was written, - especially
the apostles, -were convinced that they had witnessed
appearances of the risen Christ." (Strauss's Life of
Jesus, Part III. chap. iv. ~ 138; first German edition,
~ 134.)
If Jesus was not divinely commissioned, there must
have been a follower of his of genius equal to his own.
30 
THE AUTHOR OF CHRISTIANITY.
For the very foundation of Christianity is in the death
and resurrection of Christ; and if he did not rise from
the dead, it is impossible that he should build on these
himself. Who, then, was it, that, after the death of
Jesus, remodelled his teaching, rallied his disciples, and
induced them to stand firm, even to the death?  What
a great man! and what  a madman!  The  cross was
ignominious; he tried to make men believe a crucified
Jew the king of the world; and he succeeded!
The mode by which modern scepticismn meets this
argument is twofold. Some have fancied that Jesus did
not really die, but was resuscitated by careful treatment.
This theory will be examined hereafter; at present we
only remark that it would not explain the resurrection
of his religion. If Jesus, after enduring all the pain
and shame of crucifixion, had been brought back to consciousness by human means, he could not have had
either physical strength or mental confidence to resume
the task of leadership; and the depression of his disciples would not have been changed to animation and
courage by his recovery, if it had not implied a divine
interposition.
On the other hand, Strauss, believing that Jesus
actually died on the cross, explains his supposed reappearance as an illusion on the part of the disciples, resulting from the intensity of their feelings respecting him.
But such an illusion - improbable in any case - could
only be possible to minds under the strong excitement
of restored faith. This explanation, therefore, leaves
still unanswered the question how their faith was restored. How could they, who knew that their Master
was dead, and his cause was prostrate, gain faith enough
31 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
to prompt the strong imagination, not in one mind
alone, but in many, that they saw him alive?
The belief of St. Paul that he had seen the Savior, is
accounted for by this writer from an excitable nervous
temperament, subject to epileptic attacks, and disposed to
see visions. This theory does great injustice to one of the
most powerful mninds that have ever existed; and the
difficulty of accounting for the excitement that produced
the vision, is increased in his case by the fact, that he was
not a mourning friend of Jesus, but a determined enenly
of his cause.   (Strauss's Life of Jesus, for the German
People, Book 1. 48, 49.)
32 
INSTITUTIONS OF CHRISTIANITY.
INSTITUTIONS OF CHRISTIANITY.
SECTION 11. ]EVIDENCE FROM INSTITUTIONS.
WE have next to present an argument from the
existence of certain institutions connected with our religion. The present bears the impress of the past.
We  have reasoned, that, as Christianity now exists as
the religion of the civilized world, there must have been
some adequate cause to produce that prevalence; so we
have now to reason from its institutions to the cause
that brought them into being.  This proof is independent of every other, and would continue, even if the Old
and New Testaments were lost. As they exist, however, it confirms their statements.
Institutions preserved  among  large bodies  of men
from age to age, afford proof of the reality of those
events to commemorate which they were established.
We Americans observe the Fourth of July to commemorate the declaration of our national independence. That
observance, so long as it is continued, will be a proof
that the country was once subject to Great Britain, and
that it threw off that subjection. If the whole world
should relapse into barbarism, and all historical records
should perish, this observance, if it was still kept up,
would prove the events on which it was founded. When
civilization revived, those who endeavored to restore
some knowledge of the past would derive from this
institution important testimony. The generation then
33 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
living would assert that they had received this custom
from their fathers, and that these in turn had said that
they received it from theirs. If any one should assert
that the custom might have sprung up in the dark ages
that had intervened, the reply would be, that no nation,
however ignorant, could be persuaded to commemorate,
as a well-known event in their own history, something
which they had never heard of before; still less to
believe, and to teach their children, that this new
observance was an old custom which they had received
from former generations. The keeping of the day,
then, must have arisen from some cause well known at
the time, and important enough to warrant such a
commemoration; and as all the people throughout the
country had the same tradition that this cause was the
declaration of independence of the British government,
there could be no question that such a declaration had
taken place.
Apply this to the institutions of the Old Testament.
The Passover was the Independence festival of the
Jews.   (Exodus  xii. 3-11;  John xii. 1.)  It is observed among them still,'wherever they are scattered
through the world; and they all declare that they observe it to commemorate their deliverance from Egyptian
bondage by an especial act of divine power.   Profane
history testifies that they have thus observed it for at
least two thousand years; but, independently of that
evidence, the fact of their present observance gives
sufficient testimony, not only for that time, but for a
much longer period. No one could have persuaded the
Hebrews of any generation to adopt a new custom and
believe it had been handed down to them by their
34 
INSTITUTIONS OF CHRISTIANITY.
fathers, in commemoration of a great national deliverance, when no such deliverance had ever taken place.
The observance of the Passover by the Jews thus
proves beyond question the event with which it is connected in their tradition-the deliverance from Egypt.
It does not, of course, prove the truth of any particular
account of that deliverance; but, testifying to the fact
itself, it strengthens our faith in the general correctness
of the history which records it.
In the same way the Feast of Tabernacles (Lev.
xxiii. 34) proves the wandering of the Israelites in the
desert; the Feast of Purim (Esther ix. 20-32), still
observed among the Jews, proves that there was a historical foundation for the Book of Esther; and the Sabbath, the Ten Commandments (Exodus xx.), the distinction between clean and unclean meats (Levit. xi.),
and other Jewish institutions, confirm the truth of those
scriptures in which their origin is described.
Still more important to us, as Christians, is the evidence afforded by the institutions peculiar to the New
Testament- the Christian ministry and worship, the
ordinance of baptism, and especially that of the Lord's
Supper. We will exemplify the argument in the lastmentioned instance. In nearly all assemblies for Christian worship it is customary at stated intervals to engage
in an especial observance, in which bread and wine are
partaken, and certain words repeated as having been
spoken by the Founder of the religion: "This is my
body, which is given for you;"   This is my blood, of
the New Covenant, which is shed for many, for the
remission of sins;" "This do in remembrance of me."
(Matt. xxvi. 28; Luke xxii. 19.) These words are
35 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
essentially the same in all churches, and under whatever variety of forms.   Let us suppose that this rite did
not now exist, and had never been heard of,- would it
be possible for any one, however eminent in power or
genius, to induce the Christian world to receive it as
an institution they had known from childhood, and as
having come down from -the first age of Christianity?
Such a deception would be impossible now, and equally
impossible in any former age. The institution, then,
must have come down from the first age of Christianity.
Now let us observe the meaning of the words repeated
in the observance - words as intimately associated with
it as an inscription with the monument on which it is
engraved.  These words imply, first, that the ordinance
was established by the Founder of the religion. They
are in the first person singular: "This is my body."
We have here, then, a memorial from Jesus himnself.
They imply, secondly, that this Teacher foresaw his
own violent death, and that his anticipation was fulfilled. Had it not been, the observance would have
been a mockery.
They imply, thirdly, that he had this foresight, while
at liberty and at ease, seated at table with his friends.
He could, then, have fled from his enemies. Instead,
he employed those precious moments in instituting a rite
commemorative of the death he was incurring.
They imply, then, fourthly, his possession of prophetic foresight and unshaken courage, his voluntary
endurance of a violent death, the affection for his followers which made him wish to secure their loving
remembrance of him, and the confidence in the justice
of his cause, which assured him that they would thus
remember him.
36 
INSTITUTIONS OF CHRISTIANITY.
Lastly, the present existence of this rite shows that
these anticipations were fully confirmed; that the cause
of Jesus did prevail, notwithstanding his death; and that
the reverence and affection of his followers have continued to this day.
This ordinance, then, by itself, presents sufficient
proof that the Founder of Christianity endured a voluntary death for the sake of mankind; that he displayed,
in its anticipation, unequalled dignity, heroic courage,
tender friendship, and prophetic foreknowledge. Could
these have been the qualities of a weak enthusiast, or of
a wicked deceiver?
4
37 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
I. EXTERNAL EVIDENCE.
SECTION 12. THIRD AND FOURTH CENTURIES.
WE have already observed, that, among the religions
prevalent in the world, that of the Bible alone claims to
rest on historical evidence, proving miraculous authentication.
The life and teachings of Jesus, and the miraculous
proofs of his claim to a divine commission, had their
date in an age of intelligence and of literary culture;
were testified to by those who witnessed them, recorded
in part by these, and in part by their immediate followers. The truth of these accounts was maintained by
those who gave them, at the peril of their lives. They
were received as true by the community of Christians,
who had the best means of knowing whether they were
true or not; and no accounts contradictory to these
were thus received. Some legendary additions were
afterwards invented, but they were not admitted by the
church as genuine; and they are easily distinguishable
from the true accounts, contrasting strongly with them
by their indications of weakness, folly, and superstition.
The records of Christianity are the books of the New
Testament, and especially the four Gospels and the Acts
of the Apostles.
To say that a book is genuine, means that it is the
38 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
production of the person whose name it bears; to say
that it is authentic, means that the relations which it
gives are correct.
We have reason to believe in the genuineness and
authenticity of the New Testament writings, alike from
external and internal evidence. We will consider first
that which is external- that is, from the testimony
given by other writers.
The ifour Gospels, and the other books of the New
Testament, have the same traditional evidence of their
genuineness and authenticity on which we receive other
productions of a distant age. They have been given to
us, as the work of the writers whose names they bear,
by those who went before us; they accepted them as
such from those who went before them; and so on to
the beginning.
The original manuscripts of the Gospels have probably long since perished.   Many  manuscripts exist,
however, and some of great antiquity.  About six hundred and seventy Greek manuscripts of the four Gospels, or of different ones amnong them, have been
examined, and some of these bear marks of having been
written as early as the fifth century.  Besides these,
there are numerous manuscripts of early versions of the
Gospels, in eleven different languages; and there are
others, of the works of the Christian Fathers, or early
writers, in which very numerous quotations from the
Gospels occur.
It is generally admitted that the Gospels, as we have
them now, were in comnmon use at the end of the second
century, or the year 200 from the birth of Christ.  It
is needless, therefore, to say much of the numerous
39 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
writers who have quoted them since that time. A few,
however, may well be mentioned.
The year of our Lord 312 marks the era of the
ascendency of Christianity in the Roman empire, which
then included all the south of Europe, the north of
Africa, and much of the west of Asia. In that year,
Constantine, who favored Christianity, defeated his rival
Maxentius, and entered Rome in triumph. Early in
his reign, Eusebius, bishop of Csesarea, wrote a history
of Christianity, in which he distinctly names our sacred
books, attributing them to the same authors to whom
they are now ascribed. He speaks, indeed, of a few
of the less important, as having had their authorship
doubted, but asserts the unquestioned genuineness of
the four Gospels, the Acts, thirteen Epistles of Paul, the
First of John, and the First of Peter.   The discrimination thus made shows that the early Christians did not
receive, with blind credulity, every writing that claimed
apostolic origin, and thus furnishes a strong proof in
favor of those whose claims they unanimously admitted.
The date of Eusebius may be fixed in the year 315.
Origen, of Alexandria in Egypt, died in 253. He
devoted his learning and industry to the exposition of
the books of Scripture, as early as 216. Hie declares that
"the four Gospels alone are received without dispute by
the whole church of God under heaven." His quotations are so numerous that it has been said, "If we
had all his works remaining, we should have before us
almost the whole text of the Bible."
Early in the same century, Tertullian of Carthage
gave equally distinct testimony. It has been observed
that there are in his writings alone more and larger
40 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
quotations from the small volume of the New Testament
than there are from the numerous works of Cicero in all
the writers of several successive ages.
Clement of Alexandria, shortly before Tertullian,
gives an account, which he says he had received from
presbyters of more ancient times, of the order in which
the Gospels were written; and speaks of them as of
the highest authority, distinguishing between them and
another narrative, then extant, called "the Gospel
according to the Egyptians."
An ancient fragment, known as "the Muratorian
Canon," is identified as having been written about the
year 200, by allusions in it to persons then or recently
living. It contains a list of books then received as of
canonical authority. In this list are mentioned the four
Gospels, the Acts, thirteen Epistles of Paul, two of
John, that of Jude, and the Apocalypse. The fragment derives its name from having been discovered,
about a century and a half since, in the Ambrosian
library at Milan, by the celebrated antiquarian Mura
tori.
SECTION 13.  FIRST AND SECOND CENTURIES.
Among the writers of the second century we select
first Ireneous, bishop of the Christian church at Lyons.
He was probably born at Smyrna, about A. D. 130,
and died about the end of the century. In his youth,
at Smyrna, he had been a disciple of Polycarp, who had
himself been a hearer of the apostle John. He had
thus the best means of information, while his residence
in different parts of the empire must have made him
familiar with the opinions of Christians both in the east
4*
41 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
and the west. He expressly relates the origin of the
four Gospels.  "Matthew," he says, "among the Jews,
wrote a Gospel in their own language, while Peter and
Paul were preaching the gospel at Rome, and founding
a church there. And after their exit, Mark also, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, delivered to us in writing
the things that had been preached by Peter; and Luke,
the companion of Paul, put down in a book the Gospel
preached by him. Afterw,ards, John, the disciple of the
Lord, who also leaned upon his breast, he likewise published a Gospel while he dwelt at Ephesus, in Asia."
Pothinus, the predecessor of Irenaus in the charge of
the church at Lyons, was ninety years old about A. D.
170, when that church, with their brethren of Vienne,
sent a letter to some eastern churches, giving an account
of the sufferings of their martyrs.  This letter, which
still remains, has exact references to the Gospels of Luke
and John, and to the Acts. This indicates that the
writers had been taught to hold these books in honor
by their instructor, who must have known how they
were regarded by Christians in his earlier years.
Justin Martyr was born about A. D. 103, at Neapolis,
in Samaria, - anciently Shechem, - and suffered death
for his religion at Rome, about A. D. 165.  Hle has, in
his two principal writings, between twenty and thirty
distinct quotations from the Gospels and the Acts. He
recounts almost the entire history of the Savior, agreeing
with the scriptural narrative in all but two instances
One of these is a sentence ascribed to our Lord, which
appears to be incorrectly quoted; the other, the relation
of a circumstance at his baptism, not mentioned by the
evangelists, but derived apparently from some other
account.
42 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
Justin refers to the Gospel of John, not by name indeed, but in three very marked instances; ascribing the
term "Logos," or "Word," to the Savior (John i.),
quoting the answer of the Baptist to the emissaries from
Jerusalem (John i. 20), and that of the Savior to
Nicodemus.   (Jolhn iii. 3.)  These quotations are of
great importance, as proving the antiquity of this Gospel,
which has been especially the object of attack by recent
writers. It has been contended, however, on the ground
of a slight difference in Justin's language from that of
our common copies of John's Gospel, that he did not
quote from that, but from some other document, now
lost. But the very ancient Greek manuscript lately discovered at Mount Sinai shows that Justin quoted John's
Gospel correctly, and thus proves its existence and received authority in the middle of the second century.
(See Christian Examiner for May, 1866, article on
Tischendorf, by Dr. Hedge.)
The date of Papias is about twenty years before that
of Justin, in the earlier part, therefore, of the second
century.   A  fragment of his writing, preserved  by
Eusebius, tells us that Mark derived his Gospel from the
preaching of Peter, and that the Gospel of Matthew was
first written in Hebrew. This statement accords with
that of Irenoeus, already mentioned.
Polycarp, Bishop of Smlyrna, respecting whom we
have the testimony of his pupil Ireneus, suffered martyr dom in the same persecution with Justin; but, from his
great age, his testimony goes farther back.  It is stated,
that when life was offered him on condition that he would
revile Christ, he replied, "Eighty and six years have I
served him, and he never did me wrong: how then can
43 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
I revile my King and my Savior?" Polycarp had been
a scholar of the apostle John; and his pupil Irenaus
records that he used to relate his conversations with
John and others who had seen the Savior, "both con cerning his miracles and his doctrine." An epistle of
Polycarp remains, containing nearly forty allusions to
books of the New Testament. Among, the historical
books, his allusions are to passages in Matthew and
Luke, and in the Acts.
Clement, bishop or presiding officer of the church in
Rome, is referred to by Paul as his " fellow-laborer," in
Philippians iv. 3. An epistle of this companion of the
earliest teachers still exists, in which he quotes from the
Gospel of Matthew, not naming it indeed, but repeating
passages of some length. He quotes, in the same manner, from the Epistle to the Romans, the First to the
Corinthians, and that to the Hebrews.
The three witnesses we have named last, with some
others, are called the "Apostolical Fathers," as having
lived in the times of the apostles, and in personal intercourse with them. This is fully established with regard
to Polycarp, and appears to us to be so with regard to
Clement. For Papias we have the testimony of Irenarus,
in the next generation, who calls him a "hearer of John,
and companion of Polycarp." He himself quotes as his
instructor "John the Elder;" but the language of Irenous shows that this was no other than John the Evangelist.   (See 2 John i.; 3 John i.; 1 Peter v. 1;
Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. iii. 39;  Rawlinson's  Bampton
Lectures, p. 465.)
Justin, Polycarp, and Clement of Rome, while giving
the testimony which has been described to the facts
44
ii 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
recorded in the Gospels, do not quote those writings by
the names of their authors. Hence, modern ingenuity
has imagined that they used other Gospels than those
we now possess. On this we remark,  1. It is admitted that there were, in the first age,
other accounts of the life of Jesus.  (Luke i. 1.) They
probably were imperfect, or by authors little known, and
therefore fell into neglect on the appearance of full accounts from the pens of apostles and their companions.
2. If those accounts had differed, as far as they went,
from those we now have, they would have been preserved
on account of that very difference.
3. The references in these early Fathers agree with
our present Gospels, sufficiently establishing that these
are the same that they used.
4. Papias distinctly testifies to the authorship of Gospels by Matthew and Mark.
SECTION 14. SUBJECT CONTINUED. IHIERETICAL
WRITERS.
The testimony of the ancient Fathers in favor of the
historical books of the New  Testament,  and of the
greater part of the Epistles, derives additional force
from the fact that there were some books which did not
receive from them the same strong attestation. This
has been observed already, in regard to Eusebius.
Among writers before his time, Dionysius of Alexandria, A. D. 247, expressed doubts concerning the
authorship of the book of Revelation. Origen, somewhat earlier, questioned that of the Epistle to the Hebrews, and the Second of Peter; and Caius, about A. D.
45 
X6 i    EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
200, denieds that Paul wrote the Epistle to the Hebrews.
These facts prove that the early Christians did not receive without discrimination whatever writing purported
to be of apostolic origin, but that they examined carefully, and only yielded their assent where the evidence
was satisfactory. Notwithstanding the doubts referred
to, the vast majority of Christians since have received as
genuine the books which had thus been questioned; how
much more reason is there for receiving those more important documents, the Gospels, the Acts, and most of
the Epistles, whose claims appear to have been undisputed from the first!
The correctness of the accounts in the Gospels may
be strongly inferred from the deep interest which the
early Christians took in the life and teachings of their
Master. His personal history was the basis of their
instruction.  Their teachers were constantly preaching
Jesus Christ, and him crucified," Jesus and the Resurrection."  (Acts xvii. 18; 1 Cor. ii. 2.)  "Now, there
can be no supposition," says Mr.  Norton, "more irrational, than that the history of Christ, which was thus
promulgated by all his first disciples, and received by all
their first converts, was lost before the beginning of
the second century, and another history substituted in its
place." (Genuineness of the Gospels, vol. iii. p. 312.)
The ancient writers quoted above are from the main
body of Christian believers, generally designated as
Catholic," or "Orthodox."   But there were others in
the first age of Christianity who have been, justly or
unjustly, branded as "heretics." An additional proof
of the genuineness and authenticity of the New Testament books is afforded by the concurrence of these in
their favor.
46 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
The earliest among them were the Ebionites, Jewish
Christians, who continued to regard their ancient Law as
in force, even after the destruction of Jerusalem. They
had a Gospel in the Hebrew language; and comparing
this fact with the testimony of Irenoeus and Papias, we
have reason to believe it was the Gospel of Matthew.
(See pp. 42, 43.)
Next to these were the Gnostics, a numerous class,
including a variety of sects. While the Ebionites were
Jews, who retained their Jewish feelings, the Gnostics
were converts from heathenism, who retained the habits
of thought which had been familiar to their heathen
philosophy. They claimed, as their name implies, superior knowledge, and appear to have formed systems of
faith for themselves, by combining what pleased them in
Christianity with a refined or allegorical mythology.
They were inclined to reject whatever was Jewish, maintaining even that the God of the Jews was not the
Suprcme Being.   They would,  therefore, have  been
very unlikely to receive books  from Jewish sources,
unless coming to them with the strongest attestation of
their truth. It is stated, however, by those early writers,
from whom we derive our knoweledge of this sect, that
Marcion, one of their leaders, A. D. 140, selected from
the Gospels that of Luke as the best, and made use of
it, omitting the first two or three chapters, for the reason
tbhat they were contrary to his views. He did not, it
appears, call in question the actions, the miracles, or the
apparent sufferings of the Savior; maintaining however,
that these last were only in appearance.
Heracleon, a Gnostic leader, about A.  D.  125, is
asserted to have written commentaries upon Luke and
47 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
John. Valentinus, at the same period, shows an acquaintance with the ideas and style of John's Gospel,
and is asserted by Irencus to have made use of it.  The
MIontanists, another sect of very early date, must have
derived from this Gospel their idea of the Paraclete
(John xiv. 16, 26); and the Alogi, who objected to the
doctrine of the  "Logos"  (John  i.), prove  by their
very existence the antiquity of the Gospel to which they
objected.   (See Christian Examniner, article quoted on
page 43.)
Basilides, A. D. 120, wrote a commentary, but
whether upon all the Gospels, or only on some of
them, does not appear. He was certainly acquainted
with that of Matthew; and according to the testimony
of an ancient work, recently discovered, he quoted also
that of John. The work referred to is a treatise on
Heresies, ascribed to Hippolytus, bishop of Portus,
A. D. 225.
Thus the life of Christ, as we receive it, had the early
acknowledgment of the Gnostic sect, notwithstanding
the repugnance of their views to anything from a Jewish source. No other work, claiming the title of Gospel,
appears to have been in use with them at this early
period. The later Gnostics had some books which they
called by that name, but they do not appear to have been
accounts of the life of Jesus.
It is asserted by Tertullian, A. D. 220, that the Gnostics undertook to prove their doctrines from the New
Testament. He objects to their right to do this, on the
ground that these Scriptures properly belonged to the regular Christian churches, which could trace the doctrines
they held back to the times of the apostles. His argu
48 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
ment proves that the churches then existing claimed an
uninterrupted connection with the first Christian teachers, who lived not more than a century and a half before;
and it proves, too, that the New Testament was acknowledged as authority, both by these churches and their
opponents.
Without enumerating," says Paley, "the later sects
of heretics, so called, who, with few and slight exceptions, received the same books as their orthodox brethren,
we find that the Sethians, the Montanists, the Marcosians, Hiermogenes, Praxeas, and Artemon, all included
under that name between the years 150 and 200,
received the Scriptures of the New  Testament.".. —..
SECTION 15. JEwISH AND HEATIr.N WRIpERS.
VERSIONS. COINS.
Various Jewish writers have, at different periods,
published works in which testimony was incidentally
given with regard to Christianity.
The Talmuds were composed as early as the second
century. They speak of Jesus, and of several of his
disciples; of his crucifixion; of his miracles, the reality
of which they do not question, but represent them as
wrought by magical power. They thus add the testimony of their national tradition to the truthfulness of
the miraculous accounts in the New Testament.
Josephus held a command among the Jews in their
fatal rebellion, about A. D. 70. In one passage, as it
stands in his works, respectful mention is made of Jesus;
and in another, of James, "the brother of Jesus, who is
called Christ." These passages, however, are of uncertain
5
49 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
genuineness. The evidence of Josephus is of most value
in confirming the representations of Jewish history
and ideas, presented to us in the Gospels. Thus, to
give a few instances, the account he gives'of the cruel
and suspicious character of the first Herod, and the atrocities that marked the close of his reign, agrees, in its
general features, with that presented in the second chapter of Matthew; his account of Herod Antipas, of
Herodias, and of John the Baptist, confirms that of the
evang,elists. (Matt. xiv.) The sudden death of Herod
Agrippa I. agrees, as represented by Josephus, with the
account in Acts xii.; and the moderate character of
Herod Agrippa II., and the fact that he was intrusted
with some authority over the Temple, as Josephus declares, agree with the history given in Acts xxv., xxvi.;
Josephus, Antiq. xvii. 6; xviii. 5; xix. 8; xx. 8; Bell.
Jud. II. 16.
Among heathen writers, the three great opponents of
Christianity were Celsus, Porphyry, and Julian. The
last, nephew of Constantine, and known as the Emperor Julian the Apostate, lived at a period so late that
his evidence is of minor importance. His allusions and
references to the Christian Scriptures are very numerous,
and he never questions their genuineness.
Porphyry, about A. D. 275, wrote a work against
Christianity, which the mistaken zeal of subsequent ages
has destroyed.  What it contained we have to learn from
the replies of Christian writers. From these it appears
that Porphyry referred to the Gospels and Acts as the
only acknowledged histories of Christ and his religion.
Still more valuable is the evidence of Celsus, a heathen
philosopher, who wrote about A. D. 150. His book,
50
I/ 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
like that of Porphyry, is lost; but much may be learned
of its contents from the reply of Origen. He tells us
that Celsus used these words:   I could say many things
concerning the affairs of Jesus, and those, too, different
from those written by the disciples of Jesus; but I purposely omit them." This implies the existence of accounts written "by the disciples;" and it can hardly be
believed that if Celsus really possessed any evidence of
importance contradictory to theirs, he would have suppressed it.
Elsewhere he accuses the Christians of altering the
Gospel, referring in proof to certain readings which were
different in different copies.  This variation, which implied, probably, no evil intent, but only mistakes of
transcribers, shows that copies must have been numerous, and that a considerable space of time must have
passed since the original writing.
In another place, the Jew whom Celsus introduces
closes an argument with the boast, "These things, then,
we have alleged to you out of your own writings, not
needing any other weapons."
The particulars to which  Celsus refers, by way of
objection, are such as are contained in our present Gospels. Such are the genealogies in Matthew and Luke;
the precept not to resist evil (Matt. v. 39); the
woes denounced by Christ (Matt. xxiii. 13-36.); some
of the particulars of his trial and crucifixion; and the
difference in the accounts of the resurrection, given
by the evangelists. He refers distinctly to statements
which we find only in the Gospel of St. John, of the
character of Christ as the "Logos," or divine Word,
and of the effusion of blood and water from the wound
51 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
in the Savior's side (John i.; xix. 34), thus proving the
reception of that Gospel at the early date at which he
wrote. That date was less than a hundred years after
the earliest of the Gospels claims to have been written.
It is evident, from Celsus, that thus early they were
acknowledged by Christians, as they are now, to be the
authentic records of the life of the Savior. And as the
interval of a hundred years is measured by two lives of
no extraordinary length, there is reason to believe that
the Christians of that age had good grounds for their
confidence in these writings.
Besides the evidence of individual writers, we have,
to support the claims of the Christian Scriptures, another
testimony of great importance. Versions or translations
were made of them at a very early date, the Peshito or
ancient Syriac probably in the second century, and many
others at periods soon after. These versions confirm the
general accuracy of the copies of the New Testament
which we possess in the original Greek; and their existence shows the high regard in which those writings were
held, from the fact that the labor of translating them
was so early undertaken.  A similar argument may be
derived from the existence of commentaries, paraphrases,
and harmonies of the Gospels, by Origen, and others of
the ancient Greek Fathers.
In some instances, the minute accuracy of accounts in
the book of Acts is proved by ancient coins still in
existence.   One  of these, struck  at Cyprus, in the
days of the magistrate who succeeded Sergius Paulus
(Acts xiii 7), shows that he bore the same title, of
Proconsul     hich the Christian history assigns to his
predecessor,  Another, of the city of Philippi, proves
529: 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
that it was, as described in Acts xvi. 12, "a colony," or a
place where a body of Roman soldiers had been settled.
In the same manner, four peculiar expressions, used in
the account of the disturbance at Ephesus (Acts xix.),
are shown by ancient coins, as well as by other testimony, to be in accordance with the usage of that city.
Its presiding deity was called "the great Goddess
Diana;" the city professed itself her worshipper by the
peculiar term vlol6eo;. (Verse 35.) One magistrate was
known as  oa,,uxTeC;, translated "town clerk" in the
same verse; and others were designated as "Asiarchs,"
or chief  of Asia.   (Verse  31.)   (See  Rawlinson's
Bampton Lectures, p. 488.)
II. INTERNAL EVIDENCE.
SECTION 16. LANGUAGE; GEOGRAPHIICAL ACCU                   RACY, &C.
We have next to consider the Internal Evidence of
the genuineness and authenticity of the New Testament,
and especially of the Gospels. This evidence comes to
us from an examination of their contents.
1. We observe first the language in which they are
written. It is that of a peculiar period, and a peculiar
class of persons. It is Greek, but not such as we find
used by native Greek  authors.   There  are frequent
Hebrew idioms in it, showing that the writers were
of Jewish origin.
Familiar instances of such idioms may be found in the
use of " and" for other conjunctions, and the use of
"lo," or "behold," as expletive.   (Matt.  ii. 1, 9, 13,
5*
53 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
19.  See 1 Sam. xxiii. 1, 3; 1 Kings xiii. 1.)  "Answered" is used redundantly in the expression " answered
and said." (Luke ix. 49. See 2 Kings vii. 13.) "Thou
sayest" is used as an expression of assent, as it would
be in Hebrew,  with  a particle  meaning  "thus," or
"rightly."   (Matt.  xxvii. 11.  See Exodus  x. 29.)
The expression, "It is easier for a camel to go through
the eye of a needle," is proverbial in the Rabbinical
writings; and they employ the expression "new birth"
for a change of personal character, for which it is never
used in classical Greek.   (John iii. 3.  See also John
iii. 10. See Marsh's Michaelis, chap. iv. sect. 3.)
2. The narratives show, throughout, an intimate acquaintance with the geography, history, government,
customs, and modes of thought and feeling in Palestine
and the other countries where the scene is laid. It is
very difficult for a writer of fiction to be accurate in
these respects; but the instances are extremely rare in
which there is even a seeming inaccuracy regarding them
in the writers of the New Testament.
Take, for an example, the fourth chapter of John.
The three provinces, Galilee, Samaria, and Judea, are
accurately distinguished. (Verses 3 and 4.) This shows
the writer to have been familiar with the country of
which he is speaking.  Even in our time, when books
are nmultiplied by the press, and geography is studied in
every school, how many Americans know what county
in England lies between Yorkshire and Northumberland?
How  many Englishmen know what state lies between
Ohio and Illinois? Still farther (verse 5), a city of
Samaria is named Sychar -a name sufficiently near to
identify it with the ancient Shechemrn, yet changed as it
54 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
would probably be by a long, lapse of time, aided
perhaps by national antipathy, for the word Sychar
means "drunkard." (See Isai. xxviii. 1.) Reference
is made to "a parcel of ground which Jacob gave to his
son Joseph," apparently that spoken of in Gen. xlviii.
22. (Compare, also, Gen. xxxiii. 19; xxxv. 4, 5.) The
city is within sight of a mountain, where the Samaritans
worshipped. (Verse 20.) The hereditary jealousy between Jews and Samaritans (verse 9) is consistent with
narratives and sentiments in 1 Kings xii., 2 Kings xvii.,
Neh. iv., Ecclus. 1. 26, and elsewhere. The separation
still continues; a scanty remnant of the Samaritans still
worship on Mount Gerizim; at its foot is Shechem, on
the road from Judea to Galilee; and the well itself is
still pointed out to the traveller
Renan, an unbeliever in Christianity as a miraculous
revelation, bears witness to the astonishing accuracy of
the Gospels in their local details. lie says, "I have
travelled through the evangelical province in every direction; I have visited Jerusalem, Hebron, and Samaria;
scarcely any locality important in the history of Jesus has
escaped me. All this history, which, at a distance, seems
floating in the clouds of an unreal world, thus assumed
a body, a solidity, which astonished me. The striking
accord of the texts and the places, the wonderful harmony of the evangelical ideal with the landscape which
served as its setting, were to me as a revelation. I had
before my eyes a fifth gospel, torn but still legible, and
thenceforth, through the narratives of Matthew and Mark,
instead of an abstract being, which one would say had
never existed, I saw a wonderful human form live and
move.' (Life of Jesus. Introduction.)
65 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
Strauss testifies not less distinctly to the perfect accuracy of the complicated statement given by Luke
(iii. 1, 2) respecting the date of John the Baptist's
preaching. (Life of Jesus, ~ 48; first German edition,
~ 44. Rawlinson's Bampton Lectures, p. 501.)
The agreement of the New Testament writers, with
what is known from other authorities of the history, the
customs, and the feelings of the age and people described,
is not less striking than their geographical accuracy.
We have seen already (p.50) that their accounts of
the Herod family agree minutely with what we learn
from Josephus. Not one educated Christian in a hundred has a correct knowledge of the complicated relations of that family; but the sacred historians never
confuse one member of it with another.
Such facts are of the more importance because the
Jewish period of Christianity was so short. The Gospel soon found its most numerous adherents among the
Gentiles; and after the Jewish war, A. D. 70, national
prejudice was deepened on either side, and the remnant
of the Jewish Christian church occupied a separate position, and what was at length regarded as an heretical one.
Books from that source would not readily be received
among the Gentile Christians, unless from authors possessing the highest claims.   The  peculiarities of the
New Testament show that it was written by Jewish
Christians; but no Jewish Christians, after the first ag,e,
could have gained acceptance for their books among the
Gentile branch of the church. It must, therefore, have
been written in the first age.
66 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
IHONESTY AND CONSISTENCY.
PERENCES.
3. There are marks of a purpose to tell simply and
honestly the truth.  Such is the absence of eulogy, or
inflated description, indeed of any description whatever,
in relation to the person and demeanor of the Savior, or
of his prominent followers. The few exceptions, occurring mostly in the Gospel of John, are slight, and indicate how little of this character is to be found.   (See
John ii. 24, 25; vii. 46; xiii. 1, 3.)
Such, too, is the narration, without any attempt at
concealment or palliation, of incidents unfavorable to
the intelligence or characters of the first disciples; their
slowness to understand their Master; the earthly nature
of their expectations and motives; the betrayal of him by
one, the denial by another, the desertion by all. (Matt.
xvi. 7, 8; xix. 27; xx. 21, 24; xxvi. 47, 56, 70.)
The narrative of the Savior's trial before the Sanhedrimn, and subsequently before Pilate, is given without
attempt at exaggeration, and represents the examination,
unjust as it was, as marked by no slight degree of deliberation.   (Matt. xxvi. 57-68; John xviii. 13-28.)
The mention of the doubts, that existed in some minds
with regard to the Savior's claims, would have been suppressed by artful partisans.  (See Matt. xxviii. 17; Mark
xvi. 13, 14; John vii. 5.)
4. There are marks of the deep impression which the
Savior's demeanor and words had produced on the minds
of those present.
An illustration of this is afforded in the conduct of the
57
SECTION 17.
Dir 
EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY.
disciples on some occasions, mentioned incidentally, without any apparent purpose, on the part of the narrator, of
exhibiting the greatness of the Savior. (Mark x. 32;
Luklie ix. 45.)
Words in the language which Jesus spoke are sometimes introduced, when the narrative would have been
equally clear and correct if only the Greek translation
of them had been given. The reason obviously is, that
in the instances referred to, the Syriac words were closely
connected with some solemn and striking incident, and
were thus deeply impressed on the memory of those
who heard them, so that their feelings prompted them.
to repeat those very words.   Such  an expression is
"Talitha cumni."   (Mark v. 41.)  Another instance is
"Ephphatha." (Mark vii. 34.) This use of language
not only shows the faithfulness of the writer, but presents a strong proof of the reality of the miraculous
events recorded.   (See Furness's Remarks on the Four
Gospels, p. 204.)
5. The characters described are consistent, each with
himself, even their apparent inconsistencies exhibiting
such faults as were the natural accompanimnents of their
respective excellences.   Thus  Peter, at one moment,
receives high commendation from his Master for his bold
declaration of faith in his Messiahship.   (Matt.  xvi.
16.)   Shortly after, the same vehemence of character
leads him to incur blamne.   (Verse 22.)  He declares
that he never will deny his Lord (xxvi. 33), draws the
sword in his defence (John xviii. 10), but shortly after
denies him.   (Matt. xxvi. 70.)  Similar marks of this
excitable but unstable character lmay be found in Matt.
xiv. 28, 30; John xiii. 6, 9; xxi. 7, 21.
58 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
6. That the Gospels are from the hands of different
authors is proved by the difference of the narratives.
That of Mark is much the shortest, yet he gives some
particulars more fully than either of the other.writers.
(See Mark v.41; vii. 34; ix. 23, 24.)  Matthew and
Luke give different, but not necessarily inconsistent, accounts of wonderful events attending the Savior's birth.
Matthew alone gives the Sermon on the Mount at length
(chapters v., vi., vii.), of which Luke presents only a
sketch. (Luke vi. 17-49.)   Yet Luke is in general the
fullest in his narration, and we have from him alone
the parables of the Good Samaritan (x. 30); of the
Prodigal Son (xv. 11), and of the Rich Man and Lazarus (xvi. 19); the incident of the Penitent Thief (xxiii.
40), and the walk to Emmaus.  (xxiv. 13.)
The Gospel of John differs from the others still more
widely in its narrative, and also in its style of expression
and of thought.  He relates occurrences which are mentioned by no other evangelist, as the conversation with
Nicodemus (chap. iii.), and with the Samlaritan woman
(chap. iv.), and the raising of Lazarus (chap. xi.);
and hlie omits much which the others relate. The parables of the Savior, as given by the other evangelists, are
stories.   (See Luke xii. to xvi.)  Those given by John
are not stories, but comparisons.   (See John x. 1-16;
xv. 1-9.) The whole style of John's Gospel is more
abstract than that of the others. It dwells more upon
the personal character and dignity of the Savior  (see
chap. viii. 12-59, and passages referred to above), and
rises to loftier heights of spiritual grandeur than the other
Gospels.   (See iv. 21-24; xi. 25; xvii.)
But, notwithstanding these differences, the narrative
59 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
in all the Gospels is substantially the same; the character of Jesus, and the great facts of his ministry, his
betrayal, self-sacrificing death, and resurrection, are the
same in all; the parables in Luke, and the comparisons
in John, exhibit the same power of imaginative illustration in the great Teacher; and the representations given
in all, of God's love and of man's duty, are in perfect
agreement.
That there should be differences between the writers,
in regard to style of thought and language, is readily
accounted for by their different mental constitutions.
That there should be differences in the narratives, in
points of secondary importance, is only what takes place
whenever a series of occurrences is related by different
persons.  This is well exemplified by Mr. Norton in the
fact that no two Romnan historians agree fully in the particulars of the assassination of Julius Cesar.
SECTION 18O.  UNDESIGNED COLNCIDENCES.
7. Besides the direct agreement in important points,
spoken of above, there are numerous coincidences between the accounts, which afford the stronger proof of
the faithfulness of the witnesses, from the fact that they
are evidently undesigned. As a specimen of this kind,
see Luke xxii. 27, where an  allusion is made to the
Savior's washing the disciples' feet, as recorded by John,
chap. xiii. Without this narrative by John, we should
not know what the words in Luke meant, "I am among
you as he that serveth." On the other hand, John does
not tell us the reason of this impressive lesson of
humility; this we learn from Luke  (xx. 24), "There
60 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
was also a strife among, them, which should be accounted
the greatest."
In other instances, where the accounts apparently contradict each other, we discover, on examination, that it is
only because circumstances omitted by one historian are
given by another, perhaps supplying what was needed to
explain the narrative of the first. For example, Luke
tells us that the Jews brought Jesus before Pilate on a
charg,e of claiming the title of king -  a charge involving
treason against the existing government;  that Pilate
asked Jesus if he was a king; that he replied in the
affirmative; and that Pilate then said, "I find no fault
in this man." Upon this narrative alone, the result to
which Pilate came is unaccountable; it seems the acquittal of a prisoner whose only words were an avowal
of the truth of the charge against him.   (Luke xxiii.
1-4.) But we discover from John, that Pilate in the
mean time had examined Jesus in private, and learned
from him of the spiritual and unworldly nature of the
kingdom he claimed. (John xviii. 33-38.) 0n the other
hand, John gives us no explanation of the reason why
Pilate asked the prisoner if he was a king. This Luke
supplies, by stating that he was accused of claiming that
title. Thus the two narratives, instead of contradicting,
fit into and explain each other.
The coincidences among the first three Gospels are
very numerous, whole narratives being frequently given
in almost the same words.   (Compare Matt. ix. 14-17,
Mark ii. 18-22, and Luke v. 33-38.) For this reason,
some modern writers have practically reduced the number
of historians who record the life of Jesus from four to
two, maintaining that the first three evangelists, whom
6
61 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
they class together under the name of Synoptics, were
in effect but different copyists from an original document
now lost, or different collectors of the same series of
traditional accounts.   We reply to this, first, that if an
original document had existed, so well known and so
highly prized that three of the four Gospels were drawn
from it, it would have been carefully preserved, and we
should find references to it in the Gospels themselves,
and in other early Christian writings; whereas, not only
is it not in existence, but not a trace of it remains in
ancient record or tradition. That it ever existed at all
is but a modern inference.
Secondly, the supposition that the first three evangelists found their materials in the same series of traditional
accounts is probably true, with the exception that the
accounts were contemporaneous instead of being traditional.  Everything relating to the Savior being eagerly
heard and constantly repeated, there must have been,
current in the primitive churches, an unwritten life of
Christ, expressed in words which the sacred historians
naturally adopted, except where their separate infbrmation gave them reason for departing from it.  (See Norton's Genuineness of the Gospels, vol. i., note D.)
8. The accounts in the historical books are confirmed
by the agreement of the Epistles with them. The most
important of these are of unquestionable genuineness,
being admitted even by writers who dispute the authority
of the Gospels. (See the quotation from Strauss, p. 30.)
They have been received as genuine from the first age,
and from the nature of the case, forgery would have
been nearly impossible without detection; for they are
evidently portions of a correspondence; letters some
62 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
times referring to former letters (2 Cor. vii. 8; 2 Thess.
ii. 2); at other times discussing questions then agitating
the church (1 Cor. viii. 1; x. 25); elsewhere dealing
with personal matters, and containing personal salutations.  (Rom.  xvi;  Philemon.)   The  accounts they
give of Christianity agree, in all important respects,
with those of the Gospels and the Acts.
As instances of this coincidence, we may notice, first,
that the resurrection of the Savior is described by all the
four Evangelists, and is represented in the Acts as occupying, a place of the highest importance in the preaching
of the apostles. (Acts xvii. 18.) Compare with this the
expressions on the same subject in the Epistles. (1 Cor.
xv. 12-18; Col. ii. 12; i Thess. i. 10; 2 Tim. ii. 8.)
The account of the institution of the Lord's Supper,
given in the Gospels, is confirmed in 1 Cor. xi. 23-26.
The peculiar character of the apostle Peter, ardent,
but subject to sudden changes of purpose, already commented on as displayed in the Gospels (see p. 58), is
exhibited alike in an incident narrated in Gal. ii. 11-14.
AGRIEEMENT OF LUKE'S WRITINGS
WITIH THE EPISTLES.
The agreement between different portions of the New
Testament is most strikingly observable with regard to
the Gospel of Luke and the Acts, when taken in connection with the Epistles. These various writings are
connected together, and their authenticity established, by
a peculiar chain of internal evidence. For distinctness'
sake we will designate the links of this chain by Roman
numerals.
63
SECTION 19. 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
I. There are very numerous coincidences between the
Acts and the Epistles, which establish the authority of
the Acts as a history, and that of the Epistles as genuine
letters of the apostle.  This evidence has been brought
forward in a very convincing manner in the Horn Pauline of Dr. Paley.  To exemplify it, we select the following instances:
In Gal. i. 18, the apostle speaks of visiting Jerusalem the first time after his conveition, and remaining only fifteen days. So short a stay in that city, on a
visit which must have been alike interesting and important to himself and to the Christians there, seems to
require explanation.   We find this in Acts ix. 29, and
again in Acts xxii. 18, from which we learn that hlie left
hastily, in consequence of designs against him.
From 1 Thess. iii. 1, 2, 6, it appears that Paul was
for a time alone at Athens, having sent Timothy to
Thessalonica, and that Timothy joined him afterwards.
The history (Acts xvii. 14, 15) agrees with this, except
that Timothy is left at Berea, instead of being sent to Thessalonica. This difference shows that the history and the
Epistle were not artfully conformed to each other. In
fact there is no real disagreement; but only the historian, writing briefly, omitted to mention the sending of
Timothy to Thessalonica, thus leaving the cause of his
absence from Paul unexplained.
It is implied in I Cor. i. 12, and iii. 6, that Apollos
preached at Corinth after Paul had left that city. This
agrees with what is incidentally expressed in the history.
(Acts xviii. 1, 24-28; xix. 1.)
We learn from Romn. xv., that Paul, at a late period
of his ministry (see verse 19), intended to go to Jeru
64 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
salem (verse 25), to carry to the Christians there a
collection made for them by those in Macedonia and
Achaia (verses 26, 28), but that he anticipated danger from the opponents of Christianity at Jerusalem.
(Verse 31.) The account in Acts agrees with this in
every particular. Paul, at a late period of his ministry
(chap. xx.), returned from Achaia, or Greece (verse 2),
through Macedonia (verse 3), to Syria. He was on his
way to Jerusalem (verse 22), with anticipations of danger (verses 22, 23), and on an errand of charity (xxiv.
17); and his anticipations of danger were fulfilled.
The above are but a few specimens of the very numerous coincidences, often in minute particulars, and obviously undesig,ned, which prove alike the genuineness of
the Epistles and the knowledge and faithfulness of the
historian.
II. The fact that this historian was a companion of
the apostle Paul, which might be inferred from the fulness and accuracy of his accounts, is established by the
manner in which he uses the pronoun we when describing
the journeys of the apostle.   (Acts xvi. 10, 11, 16;
xx. 13, 14; xxvii., xxviii.)
III. The abrupt manner in which the book of Acts
terminates shows that it was written during the life of
Paul, and when he had been about two years a prisoner
at Rome.   (Acts xxviii. 30, 31.)
IV. The Gospel of Luke and the Acts were written
by the same person. This is proved by the prefaces or
introductions to both.   (Luke i. 1-4; Acts i. 1.)
V. The Gospel of Luke was written before the Acts;
that is, as early at least as the second year of Paul's imprisonment in Rome, or A. D. 62.   (Acts i. 1.)
6*
65 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
Thus the Epistles and Acts sustain each other, and
the Acts sustains the Gospel; all proving that this account of the Savior's life was written by a companion of
the apostle Paul, not more than about thirty years after
t~he c~rucifixrion.
SECTION 20. WRITINGS OF THE APOSTLE JOHN.
A train of argument somewhat similar furnishes proof
of the genuineness and authenticity of the writings
ascribed to the apostle John.
I. The writer of the Gospel claims for himself (or, if
the passage, John xxi. 24, is from another hand, then
some witness, very near the time of writing, claims for
him) that he was one of the apostles, and distinguished
by the especial love of his Master.
II. The style of this writer is marked by peculiar
expressions, which occur alike in the Gospel and the
Epistles, and one of them in a remarkable passage in
the Revelation. (Compare John i. 1-4 with 1 John i.
1, 2, and Rev. xix. 13. Also John xiii. 34, and 2
John, 5; John xxi. 24, and 3 John 12.)
III. If these works were from the same pen, and the
writer an apostle, we learn from Rev. i. 1, 4, 9, that he
was the apostle John.
IV. The comment on a supposed prediction of the
Savior, in John xxi. 23, indicates that the disciple to
whom it applied was yet living, and appears to be from
his own pen.
V. The designation of one of the apostles by the
terms "another disciple" (xviii. 15), and "the disciple
whom Jesus loved" (xxi. 20), seems only to be accounted
66 
EVIDENCE OF THIE RECORD.
for by the fact that he was himself the writer. It is
hard to conceive the  motive which any other person
would have to suppress the name.
VI.  There is a prominence given to this apostle, in
several occurrences, omitted or less minutely narrated in
the other Gospels, and in some of which he appears in
marked superiority to Peter.   (See John xiii. 23; xviii.
15, 16; xix. 26; xx. 4, 8; xxi. 7, 20-22.)   It is difficult to account for this without admitting that this
apostle was the author of the Gospel. Rdnan conjectures that a degree of vanity or self-intcrest influenced his
judgment or his recollection.  (Life of Jesus, Wilbour's
translation, pp. 26, 27, 322, 349.) This would naturally exhibit itself, not in false statements, but in the
selection of incidents that were most favorable to himself. This supposition, therefore, while it presents the
apostle as liable to human imperfection, does not seriously
affect his credibility as an historian.  More probably
these were instances of faithful simplicity of narration, the facts being known to the writer more fully
because he was an actor in them; but he was
himself aware how difficult it would be to write the
life of his Master and Friend without making himself
prominent, and therefore with studious modesty veiled
his own name under circumlocutions.  Another theory
to account for his prominence in this Gospel is,
that it was written, not by John himself, but by his
attached disciples, from their remembrance of what he
had told them. If so, the Gospel is still, in substance,
his testimony. But this theory is less probable, as his
disciples, intent on doing him honor, would have made
his name conspicuous, instead of concealing it.
67 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
Among the arguments which have been urged, especially by writers of iwhat is called " the Tuibing(en school,"
against the genuineness of John's Gospel, the most important are, the different representation which it gives of
the scene and manner of the $Savior's instructions  its peculiar lantguage concerning the Logos, the Word, or personified Wisdom of God; the remarkable character of its
leading miracle,- that of the raising of Lazarus,- which,
it is said, could not have been omitted by the other evangelists if it had actually taken place; and a difference between the account of this Gospel and that of the others
with regard to the date of the last supper, and consequently of the crucifixion.  The others represent the last
supper as identical with the feast of the passover. (Matt.
xxvi. 19;  Mark xiv. 16; Luke xxii. 13.) John appears
to place it before that feast.   (John xiii. 1I; xviii. 28.)
In answer to these argumnents we hlave first to observe,
that the difference between the accounts of John and
those of the other writers is owing in part to the different style of that apostle, and in part to an obvious
purpose not to repeat what had been said before. His
Gospel appears to be supplementary to the others; and
this, not only in the facts it records, but in its doctrine.
The personal attachment of the writer to his Lord led
him to record, more fully than the three preceding
writers, those discourses in which Jesus asserted his own
dignity (chapters v., vi., x.); and his spiritual insight
made him appreciate and remember such instructions as
those respecting the new birth, and the promise of the
Comforter.   (Chap. iii., xiv. 16, 26.)
The exalted and mysterious dignity of the Savior,
however, is expressed in Matt. xi. 27 as strongly as in
68 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
almost any passage in John; and we find promises of
the assistance of the Holy Spirit in such passages as
Matt. x. 19, 20; Luke xxiv. 49.
It is urged by the writers in question, that the lan guage of this Gospel with regard to the "Word" (in
Greek, Logos, John i. 1-14) resembles that in use among
those who, under the name of Gnostics, endeavored to
combine Christianity with some heathen views which
claimed the name of philosophy. Hence they infer that
this Gospel was not written until such views had become
diffused, fixing its date at about A. D. 150. In reply
to this, we may remark, that the doctrine concerning the
Log,os, the personified Wisdom of God, appears in the
writings of Philo, a learned Jew of Alexandria, who
was contemporary with the Savior, and whose works had
probably found admirers in those populous and cultivated
cities of Asia Minor where John ministered. Besides, the
title, "The Word of God," is applied to Christ, with high
attributes of majesty, in the Apocalypse, which the Tuibingen critics recognize as the genuine work of this apostle.
The omission by the other evangelists of the narrative
respecting Lazarus, has been accounted for by the supposition that he was yet alive when the earlier evangelists
wrote, and that they feared to bring upon him that persecution of which he had already been in danger. (John
xii. 10.)  We would sug gest another explanation -that
none of the disciples but John accompanied the Savior
to Bethany, he having sent the others before to Jerusalem, while he remained with his chosen friend to visit
the afflicted family.
The apparent difference with regard to the Last Supper is explained by the supposition that John used the
69 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
term " Passover," in reference not merely to the observance of the first day, but to that of the whole festival
season.   (Lev. xxiii. 5, 6.)
Whatever strength there may  be in the arrgumnents
alleged, it cannot, in our opinion, compare with that derived from the spiritual character of this Gospel. If it
is not authentic, the " moral miracle" of Christianity
(see p. 25) is doubled.   We  have, then, not only to
account for the wonderful Teacher who gave the Sermon
on the Mount and the Parables, but for another mind,
of genius and tenderness equal to his, who invented the
conversation with Nicodemus (John iii.), that with the
Samaritan woman (iv.), the raising of Lazarus (xi.), and
the parting conversation with the disciples. (xiii.-xvii.)
And this man, of glorious intellect and feeling heart,
has left no remembrance of his name, no trace of his
existence, except this forg,ery, in which he endeavors to
palm off his own thoughts and words as those of Jesus!
Well may 1Rdnan make the admission, "We  have no
example, in the apostolic world, of a forgery of this
kind." (Life of Jesus, p. 26.)
SECTION 21.  APOCRYPHA OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
The endeavor has sometimes been made to depreciate
the authentic Gospels, by representing them as of the
same class with certain other writings, which are known
as the "Apocrypha of the New Testament." These
works have come down to us from an early period of
Christian history, mostly ill the Greek, but partly in the
Arabic language.  Collections of them, in the original
languages, with Latin translations, have been published
70
Z-" 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
in Germainy; and they have also been translated into
English.  It will appear, we trust, on examination, that
these writings, instead of diminishing, should confirm
our confidence in the records of the Christian faith.
We do not deny that there were other attempts, in the
primitive age, to write the history of the Savior, besides
those which resulted in our present Gospels. This we
infer from the preface of Luke. (i. 1.) These accounts,
however honestly designed, were probably from imnperfect information, or unskilfutlly put together, so that
they fell into disuse after the publication of the authentic
Gospels. The most important of them was the Gospel
according to the Hebrews, if indeed this was not, as
there is some reason for believing, the Hebrew  original
of Matthew's Gospel. This is quoted once by Clement
of Alexandria, and twice by Orig,en.  A Gospel according to the Egyptians is also mentioned; but Clement of
Alexandria, who refers to it, says that he had never seen
it; yet his residence in Egypt, and his zeal as a scholar,
would have made him acquainted with it if it had been
considered of much value or authority. Neither of these
books is included, or claimed to be included, in the collections mentioned above; nor is either of them, as far
as is known to scholars, now in existence. These exceptions, if they can be considered such, hardly invalidate the assertion of Paley, "that, besides our Gospels
and the Acts of the Apostles, no Christian history,
claiming to be written by an apostle or apostolical man,
is quoted within three hundred years after the birth of
Christ, by any writer now extant or known; or, if
quoted, is not quoted without marks of censure or
rejection." (Evidences of Christianity, Prop. I., chap.
ix., sect. 11.)
71 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
The writings called the "Apocrypha of the New Testament" are  productions of various ages.   But the
earlier they are dated, the more obvious appears the
contrast between their contents and those of the authentic Gospels. The character of the narratives may be
fairly estimated from the following specimens: —
The following accounts we find in the book of Joseph
the high priest, called by some Caiaphas. He relates
that Jesus spoke even when he was in his cradle, and
said to his mother, Mary,'I am Jesus, the Son of God,
the Word, which thou didst bring forth according to the
declaration of the angel Gabriel to thee; and my Father
hath sent me for the salvation of the world."' (First
Infancy, chap. i. verse 1.)
A boy possessed with devils is cured by the touch of
the swaddling clothes of Jesus. "The devils began to
come out of his mouth, and fly away in the shape of
crows and serpents." (First Infancy, iv. 15. Chap. xi.
of Thilo's edition, Arabic and Latin.)
The Virgin Mary cures leprosy and other diseases
with the water in which the child had been washed.
(Chap. vi. and elsewhere.) A young man, who had
been changed( into a mule, is restored to his proper form
by the child being placed upon his back. (Chap. vii.)
Joseph, being employed to make a throne for Herod,
makes it too narrow. Jesus, however, directs him to
take hold of it on the one side, while himself drawing it
on the other, and it is expanded to the proper size.
(Chap. xvi. )
Another time, Jesus went forth into the street, and
a boy running by rushed upon his shoulder; at which
Jesus, being angry, said to him, "Thou shalt go no
72 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
farther; " and he instantly fell down dead. The parents
complain to Joseph, and say, "Either teach him that he
bless, and not curse, or else depart hence with him, for
he kills our children." Joseph reproves Jesus, who inflicts blindness on the parents who had complained of
himn.   (Second Infancy, or Gospel of Thomas, chap. ii.
Thilo's edition, iv. and v. of the Greek.)
In the "Gospel of Nicodemus, or Acts of Pontius
Pilate," Carinus and Leucius, sons of Simeon, rise
from  the dead, and describe to the Council of the
Jews the transactions in the world of spirits on occasion of the death of Christ, after which they vanish.
Their account is told to Pilate, who, Gentile as he is, is
represented as entering into the holy place of the Temple.
Thie high priests identify Jesus as the Messiah, by a
prophecy "in the first book of the Seventy, where
Michael, the archangel, in speaking to the third son of
Adam, the first man, foretells that after five thousand
five hundred years, Christ, the most beloved Son of God,
was to come on earth." (Thilo, ch. xxviii.) Pilate gives
an account of these occurrences to the Emperor Tiberius, who tries him at Rome for crucifying Christ, and
condemns him to be beheaded; but Pilate being pen itent, his head is received by an angel. (Thilo, pp.
813-816.)
The absurdity of some of these stories, the incon sistency of others with the just and loving character of
Jesus, and the contradiction presented by the last to well known facts connected with the Old Testament, with
Jewish customs, and with the early history of Chris tianity, place these narratives in strong contrast to the
7
73 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
genuine Gospels. They show us what those Gospels
would have been had they been formed by the imagination of the writers, instead of deriving their accounts
from the statements of eye-witnesses. As to their origin,
they appear to have been designed to meet from fancy
the desires which many felt of knowing more respecting
the early years of Jesus, of beholding his cause triumphantly vindicated before Jew and Gentile, and of possessing, something in writing from his own hand. This last
want is met by a letter purporting to be from Jesus to
Abgarus, king of Edessa, who had invited the Savior to
reside with him. These writings were not probably composed with the definite intention of deceiving.   The
Gospel of Nicodemus, especially, may be regarded as a
romance of sacred history, and, as such, of some literary
merit.
The apocryphal Christian writings which now exist,
and those which are lost, so far as anything is known of
them, do not contradict, in any important particular, the
accounts given in the authentic Gospels. Where they
differ, it is by adding to the statements of the evangelists, not by giving narratives opposed to theirs,- that
indirect opposition excepted, which results, as in the
cases given above, from the writers' neglect of historic
truth, or their inability to understand the gentle and
merciful character of Jesus.
74 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
RESULT OF OUR INQUIRIES RESPECT  ING THE RECORD.
It is, then, established by sufficient evidence, that the
four Gospels were generally received among Christians
as correct histories of their Master, from the earliest
age, and that no history inconsistent with theirs was
thus received. A similar conclusion may be held with
regard to the other books of chief importance in the
New Testament, if not to all.
This would be sufficient to entitle these books to be
received as the basis of our Christian faith, even if we
were ignorant of the names  of their authors.  For
instance, if we are sure that the fourth Gospel contains
a true account, it is of little importance to us whether it
was written by the apostle John, by some of his disciples, or by others.
We have also, however, proofs of great strength, that
these books were the  work of the very persons whose
names they bear.   (See especially the testimony of Ire-'
neus, p. 42; the argument from the connection of the
Gospel of Luke with the Acts and the Epistles, p. 64;
and that in relation to the Gospel of John, p. 66.)
In further evidence of this, we may observe,  1. That, having traced these writings back to the
apostolic age, there is no reason why we should not believe the general voice of antiquity, which assigns them
to certain persons then living, and most likely to be
qualified for the task.
2. That this testimony of antiquity is without exception as far as regards the Gospels and the other books
75
SECTION 2 2. 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
of chief importance.  We never find manuscripts of the
Gospel of Matthew bearing the name of Luke, nor of
Luke bearing that of Peter. No ancient writer asserts
that the Gospel which now bears the name of John was
written by any other than that apostle. If either of the
four Gospels is wrongly assigned, it is strange that not
the slightest trace should remain of its true author.
The number of the witnesses is a point of great importance. If we had received the account of the life of
Jesus from one alone, there might be a suspicion of
fraud or delusion; but it comes to us directly from
four evangelists, and is confirmed to us by the agreement, expressed or implied, of the other writers of the
New Testament.  That there should be a combination
among so many to deceive, without some one betraying
the secret, is highly improbable.
It may be urged as an objection to the trustworthiness
of the Christian records, that the ancient manuscripts,
versions, and quotations by the Fathers do not always
agrtee together.  There are various readings; and these,
it is admitted, are numbered by thousands. But it is to
be remembered, that nearly all of these are of very
slight importance.   They arose of necessity in  ages
when the only way of multiplying copies of books was
with the pen.  Among them all there are very few that
possess any doctrinal importance, and none that disturb
at all the great facts of the Christian revelation.
Are these records, then, worthy of our reliance?
They are, if any human testimony can be. Suppose
that we had four memoirs of the campaigns of Washingi,ton, two by officers in command under him, and the
other two by persons in immediate communication with
76 
EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
such officers; what more authentic account of those
campaigns could we desire?
It is safe to conclude that no objection would be made
to the reception of the accounts these books contain, by
any person acquainted with the evidence which supports
them, but for the miraculous character of their statemnents. But many modern writers, assuming that miracles are impossible, refuse their assent to the narratives
of the Gospels, in whole or in part, on that account.
This is the position of those who in our own age have
endeavored to remove the miraculous element from the
Christian history. It is a position to which they have
been led by the philosophical tendencies of the age, both
as connected with the study of outward nature and with
metaphysical investigation.
The researches of physical science have given to those
famniliar with them a deep conviction of the stability of
the laws of nature. The common idea of a miracle,
therefore, as an event in which all laws of nature are set
aside, has been considered inadmissible; and it has not
always been sufficiently kept in mind that there may be
other and higher laws of nature than those with which
we are familiar. (See Section 2.)
In metaphysical philosophy, the German mind has,
for a century past, been more active than that of any
other nation. In Germany, a system of philosophy has
prevailed, known as the Transcendental, and illustrated
by the great names of Kant, Fichte, and many others.
Of this system it may be sufficient to point out one disting,uishing trait-  that it looks for proof of truth within,
and not without; to the soul of man, not to the external
world. Few will deny the nobleness of the direction
77 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
thus given to investigation; few perhaps will deny that
the defenders of Christianity had hitherto been too limited in their efforts -  laboring to prove, almost exclusively by outward testimony, that which bore the stamp
of heaven in its intrinsic excellence.  But the transition
is easy from one extreme to its opposite; and the scholars
of Germany, in their homage to the light within, were
tempted to turn with disgust from the idea of external
proof, of miracle, and even of revelation.
From these causes, many recent writers, instead of
examining whether the miracles are proved, declare or
assume, at the outset, that they are incapable of proof.
This fact is of importance to observe, for it shows that
their theories are not the conclusions of unbiassed minds,
from fair and thorough investigation of the record, but
ingenious attempts to turn the Gospel accounts from
their obvious meaning, or to undermine their authority,
in favor of a preconceived idea.  Thus, Strauss  says,
" No just perception of the true nature of history is possible without a perception of the inviolability of the chain
of finite causes, and of the impossibility of miracles."
(Life of Jesus, ~ 13, vol. i. p. 64, English translation.)
R6nan protests against the charge of "mutilating the
facts in the name  of theory;" but he still reaches the
conclusion, previous to the examination of the New Testament miracles, "that a supernatural narration cannot
be accepted as such." (pp. 43, 45.)
78 
MODERN SPECULATIONS.
MODERN SPECULATIONS.
THEORIES THAT SUPPOSE THE GOSPEL
NARRATIVES CORRECT.
WE will now present a brief view of the principal
classes of attempts.that have been made to account for,
or to remove, the miraculous element in Christianity.
Wre have first to name those theories that proceed on
the supposition that the Gospel narratives are substantially correct.  Among these we must class an explanation of the miracles which admits them to have taken
place as narrated, and receives the testimony they bear
to the holiness of Jesus, but seeks to ascertain a law of
nature in conformity to which they took place. Such
has been the effort of Dr. Furness, in his "Remarks on
the Four Gospels," and subsequent works, ascribing
mnany of these wonders to the natural influence of a
most holy and majestic being over the minds of those
whom  he addressed,  and, through  their ninds, over
their bodily organs. He carries this view so far as to
conceive that it will explain even the raising of Lazarus,
the commnanding voice of Jesus being heard in the spirit
world.  (Remarks, p. 179, 180.)  There are, however,
well-a,ttested miracles, to which this theory is obviously
inapplicable (see  Matt. viii. 27;  xiv. 25;  xxi. 19;
John ii. 9);  and even where  it is applied, the effect
asserted transcends, not only in degree, but in kind, the
natural influence of one mind over another in any case
79
SECTION 2 3. 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
within human experience.   " Since the world began was
it not heard that any man," by the natural power of a
virtuous character and a strong faith, "opened the eyes
of one that was born blind," much less raised the dead
to life. (John ix. 32.) Our dissent from this theory
does not prevent us from doing justice to the distinguished ability, and the reverent and loving spirit, in
which it has been advocated.
Some German writers, known as the "Naturalists,"
of whom Professor Paulus is the best known, ad!nitting
the literal truth of the accounts given by the Evangelists,
represent those accounts as describing events in which
there was nothing supernatural. To show the character
of their explanations a few examples will be sufficient.
In Matt. xvii. 27, Jesus directs Peter, "Go thou to
the sea, and cast a hook, and take up the fish that first
cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou
shalt find a piece of money." According to Paulus, the
only purpose of opening the fish's mouth was to take
out the hook; and the money was "found"  by selling
the fish.  (Paulus, Life of Jesus, ~ 136.)
The  raising of Lazarus  is thus explained:  Jesus,
from his knowledge of diseases, is convinced that Lazarus could not have really died. He therefore goes to the
tomb, and causes the stone to be removed; then, looking
into the tomb, he perceives that his impression is correct,
for the supposed corpse begins to move. He calls out,
therefore, " Lazarus, come forth! " And the accidental
resuscitation of Lazarus has the appearance of being the
result of that command. (~ 151.)
In explanation of the ascension of Jesus, as described
Acts i. 9-11, we are told that Jesus, in taking leave of
80 
MODERN SPECULATIONS.
his disciples, removed himself farther from them. Hereupon, a cloud or mist interposed itself between them,
and concealed Jesus from their sight-  a result which,
on the assurance of two unknown men, they regarded as
a reception of Jesus into heaven. (~ 215.)
"In the supposition that the two individuals clothed
in white apparel were real men, Paulus only disguises a
final and strongly-marked essay of the opinion espoused
by Bahrdt and Venturini, that several epochs in the life
of Jesus, especially after his crucifixion, were brought
about by the agency of secret colleagues. Shall we,
with Bahrdt, dream of an Essene lodge into which he
retired after the completion of his work?  and with
]rennecke appeal, in proof that Jesus long c9ntinued
silently to work for the welfare of mankind, to his appearance for the purpose of the conversion of Paul?  Or
shall we, with Paulus, suppose that shortly after the last
interview, the body of Jesus sank beneath the injuries it
had received?"  From  such modes of representation,
a sound judgment must turn  away with aversion."
(Strauss, Life of Jesus, iii., v., ~ 142; first German
edition, ~ 138.)
It is only necessary to add to the condemnation so
justly passed by Strauss on the conjectures of his predecessors, that if Jesus claimned to have raised Lazarus
from the dead, when the occurrence was only a fortunate
accident, or if he deceived his disciples by the aid of
unknown confederates, his conduct was that of a hypocritical ju,gg,ler, utterly inconsistent, therefore, with the
principles he proclaimed, and with that intellectual and
moral power which has left so deep an impression on the
history of the world.
81 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
SECTION 24.  THEORIES SUPPOSING FRAUD.
? Suppositions have been advanced by some writers,
more distinctly admitting the idea of fraud, either on the
part of Jesus himself or on that of others.
Rernan conceives the character of wonder-worker to
have been forced on Jesus by the credulity of those
around, rather than willingly assumed (Life of Jesus,
pp. 235-239); thus excusing his deception at the expense
of his firmness and good sense. In one remarkable
instance, however, he considers Jesus to have been himself deceived. The raising of Lazarus is supposed to
have been a scene, arranged between Lazarus and his
sisters, to delude not only the people, but Jesus himself,
with the idea that a miracle was performed; and this
impious firaud is represented as wrought from enthusiastic
love towards the -Master upon whom  it was practised.
(p. 305.)
It is, however, with regard to the resurrection of the
Savior that the boldest and most ingenious speculations
have been employed. It was indeed necessary to the
opponents of miracle, that, if possible, sonme natural
explanation should be found for this great event; for, as
we have seen already (section 10), it is sustained by the
most ample evidence, and is in fact implied in the very
existence of the Christian church.   Two ways were su,ggested to account for it.'^ The cultivated intellect of the
present day," says Strauss, " has very decidedly stated
the following dileminma: either Jesus was not really dead,
or he did not really rise again. Rationalism has principally given its adherence to the former opinion."
82 
MODERN SPECULATIONS.
The death of Jesus, consequently, is explained by
many writers as having been merely apparent - a swoon
or catalepsy, from  which he recovered, and appeared
before thile disciples as if risen from the dead. In support of this opinion, the fact is urged, that cases have
been known in which crucifixion did not produce death;
and reference has been made to an instance mentioned
by Josephus, and to tortures voluntarily endured by certain fanatics in France. In all these cases, however,
the victims were taken from the cross for the purpose of
saving them, and restorative means applie]; so that they
would furnish no ground to infer the restoration of Jesus,
unless we admit the use of similar means in his case.
By whom, then, were these means applied?  And on
whom is the deception of the world through so many
ages to be charged?
The supposition of Bahrdt is, that " Jesus, seeing no
other way of purifying the prevalent Messianic idea from
the admixture of material and political hopes, exposed
himself to crucifixion, but, in so doing, relied on the
possibility of a speedy removal from the cross by early
bowing his bead, and of being afterwards restored by
the medical skill of some among his secret colleagues,"those imagined Essene confederates referred to in a previous extract (p. 81), -" so as to inspirit the people at
the same time by the appearance of a resurrection."
"Others have ascribed to his disciples a preconceived planm
of producing apparent death by means of a potion."
(Strauss, Part III., chap. iv. ~ 140.)  Such was the
theory of Schuster, who conceived also that the awaking
of Jesus was aided, and the stone removed from the
mouth of the tomb, by an earthquake and lightning,
83 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
which fortunately occurred at the moment they were
needed. (See Strauss, as above.)
Surpassing even these theories in extravagance, if that
be possible, is the suggestion of a writer in the WNestminster Review (for Jan., 1858), that the person by whom
the crucifixion was prevented from being fatal was Pilate
himself!  That magistrate, it is said, had shown an
earnest desire to save the life of Jesus; and when he
finally yielded to the importunity of the Jews, he resolved to do secretly what he dared not do openly. He
gave private   ders, therefore, that the legs of Jesus
should not be  roken, and that the body should be taken
from the cross before life was extinct. It is not explained
how one of Pilate's soldiers dared to thrust a spear into
the side of the prisoner whom his master-meant to save;
nor how that thrust, which entered the pericardium, as
appeared from the effusion of water with the blood,
fatiled to produce death.   (See John xix. 34, 35, and
commentators on the passage.)
On these strange fancies, we may briefly remark, that
the slow recovery which alone would be possible fromn
natural causes, after the lingering torture had almost
extinguished life, is not consistent with the accounts
given of the Savior's appearance to the women, and to
his disciples, and in particular with the circumstances of
the walk to Emminaus.   (See Luke xxiv. 13-43; John
xx. 14-17, 19.)
We must believe too, upon these suppositions, either
that Jesus thought he had been really dead when he had
not, which is inconsistent with thie wisdom which he
always showed, or that he was guilty of an atrocious
fraud upon his followers, which is inconsistent alike with
84 
MODERN SPECULATIONS.
his instructions and his example.   (See Mark xvi. 14;
Luke xxiv. 26, 46; John xx. 27, 29.)
Rdnan, taking the other alternative of the dilemma,
believes that Jesus actually died on the cross, and
ascribes the story of his resurrection principally to "the
strong imagination of Mary Magdalene." As two of the
Gospels state that her report of the resurrection was at
first not credited, and as all agree in mentioning other
appearances of the Savior, besides the testimony of Paul
to the same effect, we cannot acquiesce in this summary
reduction of the number of witnesses. (See Mark xvi.
11, Luke xxiv. 11, and the accounts of the resurrection
generally; also 1 Cor. xv. 5-8.)
SECTION 25.  THE MYTHIICAL THEORY.
Many probably content themselves with distinguishing,
between the natural and - the supernatural narratives in
the Gospels; receiving the former and rejecting the latter,
simply on the ground that the former are credible and
the latter incredible.
But this position cannot consistently be held, since
both descriptions of narratives rest on the same testimony.   If that testimony is sufficient, we must receive
the miracles; if the miracles are pronounced false, the
testimony of those who record them is discredited, even
when they relate events that were not miraculous. If
John was competent to testify to the conversation of
Jesus with the sisters of Lazarus, which he heard, he
was competent to testify to the raising of Lazarus, which
he saw.
Again, in the Gospels, the miraculous and the spir              8
85 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
itual or didactic are often interwoven in such a manner
that they cannot properly be separated. For instance,
in the narrative just referred to, if we suppose the
Savior only to have instructed Martha that her brother
should rise again (John xi. 23), and to have declared,
I am the resurrection and the life," without the miracle,
we leave the account unfinished, and several sentences
of it unexplained.   (See verses 6, 11, 23-26, 41, 42.)
The touching incidents and instructions after the resurrection are evident fictions, unless the resurrection had
taken place. (See Luke xxiv.; John xx., xxi.)
The explanation of Dr. D. F. Strauss, known as the
Mythical Theory, was not, however, original with him.
It had been applied, by many before his time, to portions
alike of the Old Testament and of the New. But by
him it was developed into a system, and extended, with
cold, unsparing sagacity, to every leading incident in the
life of Christ.  The idea it expresses is, that the stories
respecting Jesus arose without intentional deception on
the part of any one, partly from exaggerations of actual
occurrences, and partly from supposing things to have
really taken place which seemed appropriate to his character, either from the declarations of the prophets, the
popular expectation among the Jews, or any other cause.
These myths or stories Strauss supposes to have been
collected by the Evangelists in good faith, and published
by them with the belief that they contained the real history of Jesus. But all that is miraculous being set aside
as impossible, and events not miraculous being regarded
as mythical, wherever any plausible motive could be
assigned for their fabrication, there remains little that
can be identified as undoubtedly belonging to Jesus.
86 
MODERN SPECULATIONS.
WTith regard to this theory, we may observe, -
1. That it is inconsistent with the evidence presented
above; proving that the Gospels were written by their
reputed authors, who were well qualified to declare the
truth respecting the history of Jesus.
2. Fabulous stories are the growth of a very different
period from that in which Jesus lived. They arise in the
ages of dim tradition, preceding the researches of the
historian; but the period of the Savior was an age of
intelligence, and of literary cultivation.
3. Fabulous stories, under the most favorable circumstances, are of slow growth. The period allowed by
Strauss in his original work, of about thirty years, is altogether too short for their production, and even the longer
time allowed in his recent volume appears inadequate.
4. If the supposed myths were founded on Jewish
expectations of the Messiah, they would have invested
Jesus with some form of temporal royalty. On the contrary, we see him constantly refusing such distinction.
(Luke xii. 14; John vi. 15; xviii. 36.)
5. The childish stories of the  Gospels of the Infancy,"
and the unhistorical acknowledgment of Jesus by Jews
and Romans in the "Gospel of Nicodemus," show us
what our Gospels would have been had they been written
as Strauss imagines.
6. The Savior had companions and followers, or his
religion would  have perished with him.   Did these
companions originate these fabulous stories? This is incredible, for they were better informed. Did they, then,
leave no authentic account of their Master, either in
writing or by tradition, so that all Christendom received
as true the accounts given by persons entirely unauthlorized?
87 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
7. It would have been the interest of the enemies of
Jesus, no less than of his friends, to detect the error or
the fraud that substituted a mythical and miraculous life
of him for the truth. They are, however, not merely
silent with regard to any error or fraud of the kind, but
by explaining his miracles as wrought by magic, they
imply an admission of the authenticity of the books that
record them.
8. The Gentile Christians had received their faith from
some early followers of Jesus. Would they have afterwards accepted as true an account of their MAaster's life
made up not from actual facts, but from Jewish fancies?
9. The Christian religion, whether divinely revealed
or not, is a sublime and beautiful whole, the representation of a perfect character, and an incomparable system
of morals.   Was this system, which has been the admiration of the world for ages, formed by chance- a mere
farrago of idle rumors?
10. In his "Life of Jesus for the German People,"
published in 1864, Dr. Strauss has modified his mythical
theory to a considerable extent, in conformity with the
views of the "Tuibingen School," Dr. F. C. Baur, and
others.  Hie now regards the Gospels  as having been
composed later than he at first admitted; that of Matthew the earliest, Luke before A. D. 135, Mark afterwards, and John about A. D. 150, thus leaving a
longer time for the production of mythical stories.  He
also admits, to some extent, conscious fiction on the part
of the writers, at least of the author of the fourth Gospel. At the same time he recognizes, more fully than
before, something distinct in the person and teaching of
Jesus.  He regards him as a most pure and holy being,
88 
MODERN SPECULATIONS.
combining the best influences of all the world's previous
culture, and excited to noble self-devotion by those passages in the prophets that speak of a suffering Messiah.
Upon these modifications of his system, and upon the
views of the remarkable school on which they ar6eunded, it is not necessary, in this brief volume, to say more
than has already been observed.  (See p. 68.) The  enuineness and authenticity of the Gospels being provee we
have all that is needed.   The change of opinion i Ar.
Strauss prepares us for further changes; and we trust
that he or his successors may, ere long, be  led ti
acknowledge in Jesus, not only the providential, but the
divinely commissioned Leader of mankind. 
The argument against the mythical theory is thus expressed in the same discourse, from which an extract
has already been given (see p. 25): -
The legendary and the mythical history of Greece
and Rome cannot be traced up, in written form, to
within five hundred years of the time to which the
events are ascribed. But here is the history of our
Lord, which, if mythical, is the most wonderful of all
myths, distinctly traced to four writers, who wer4Pliving
at the time, and who wrote and published the  tales
during the lifetime of many eye-witnesses of Jesus's ministry-  a history perfectly self-consistent in its details,
filled with miracle, and crowning them all with the
miracle of a character claiming to be exalted in a
degree hitherto unconceived; claiming, to be the Son
of God; claiming to be the future Judge df the
world; the Lord, not only of life and death, but-of the
living and the dead; the arbiter of our eternal destiny;
and this claim supported by a character so spotless that
8*
89 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
it has commanded the adoring, veneration of all men from
that day to this. And will any man attempt to persuade
me that this wonderful, this unapproachable majesty and
beauty, this self-consistent portrait of the Son of God,
living; and teaching and dying, in Galilee and  Judea,
was the creation of rumor, and popular fancy, and religious aspiration, created and  made a living reality to
thousands of believers, during the short space of thirty
years intervening between the crucifixion of Jesus and
the publication of his biographies? I should regard the
attempt as almost an insult to my understanding. As
reasonably might one attempt to persuade me that the
strength of will and inflexibility of purpose ascribed to
the old hero who occupied the executive chair of our
nation thirty years ago was the pure creation of fanicy
during my own lifetime."
90 
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
SECTION 26.  GENERAL VIEW.
THE New Testament is the foundation of the faith of
Christians. The Old Testament is of value to us as
containing the records of God's dealings with man, in a
revelation preliminary to that by Jesus Christ.  It is
sustained by the testimony of the New, and yields it
support in turn.
It is sustained by the testimony of the New, because, -
1. Our Savior and his apostles frequently quote or
refer to the Old Testament as of divine authority.   (See
Matt. xxii. 43; xxvi. 24; Luke xviii. 31; John v. 39.)
2. The position which Jesus claimed, as the Christ, or
the Messiah, was that predicted by the Old Testament
prophets.
The Old Testament sustains the New,  1. By direct prophecies, which received their accomplishment in Christ.
2. By the proofs which the,Old exhibits of divine
origin and authority for the religion it makes known,
joined to the indications it gives of being imperfect and
temporary, and therefore preparatory to a more permanent system.
The Old Testament presents a system of faith and
morals not unworthy of a divine origin.
1. Its firstprinciple is the Unity of God;  and this
is asserted in marked contrast to the idolatry which
91 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
prevailed throughout the world, and especially in Egypt,
the country from which the Israelites came forth. (Gen.
i.; Deut. vi. 4; I Chron. xvi. 26.)
2. In equally strong contrast with Egyptian superstition, which worshipped its divinities under bestial forms,
it forbade the use of any visible representation of the
Deity.   (Ex. xx. 4.)
3. The very name which it gave to the Supreme,
Jehovah, signifies "He is," or "the Self-existent."  (See
Ex. iii. 15, in the original, where the divine name is
evidently the verb of existence in the third person, as in
verse 14 it is in the first person.)
4. The invisible and spiritual nature of God, and his
superiority to human wants or changes, are strongly set
forth in such passages as Deut. iv. 12-26; Ps. 1. 8-13;
Isaiah i. 10-17; Mal. iii. 6.
5. The moral attributes of God   his justice, mercy,
and beneficence — are declared in numerous passages,
such as Ex. xxxiv. 6, 7; Ps. ciii.  His power and wisdom in creating, and his providence in sustaining the
universe, are constantly acknowledged. (See Gen. i.;
Ps. civ.)
6. The laws given to the Israelites are of consummate
wisdom. The Ten Commandments, especially, form a
most comprehensive code, which still, after the lapse of
thousands of years, and the increased light given by
Christianity, retains the admiration and reverence of
mankind.   (Ex. xx.; Deut. v. 6-21.)
7. The laws relating to the treatment by the people
of their poorer brethren were most wise and humane.
(See Deut. xxiv. 6-22.)  And  although benevolence
towards foreigners was not so strongly inculcated,- the
92 
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
law of universal brotherhood being the especial glory of
the Christian revelation,- yet in some passages the Old
Testament makes a near approach to it.  (Ex. xxii.
21; xxiii. 9.)
8. Even those defective institutions which, in that
early stage of human progress, it was thought best not
to prohibit entirely, were placed under restraints which
greatly diminished their evils, and prepared the way for
their entire removal. Thus it was with divorce (Deut.
xxiv. 1-4; Mark x. 4, 5), with private revenge (Num.
xxxv. 9-34), and with slavery. (Ex. xxi. 1-6, 16, 20,
26, 27.)
9. In contrast to the surrounding idolatry, the worship of the Hebrews was not marked either with cruelty
or impurity; and their religion was free from the superstitions connected with charmis, incantations, omens, and
astrology.
10. The Old Testament is replete with passages of
unrivalled sublimity and beauty, especially when it dwells
upon the majesty of God, and the wisdom manifested in
his works. (Ps. xxiii., xxix., civ.; Job xxviii., xxxix.;
Is. ii. 10-22; xl. 21-31; Jer. iv. 23-26.)
SECTION 27. DIFFICULTIES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Much has been said and written with regard to the
obscurities and difficulties of the Old Testament. On
this subject we offer these remarks:  1. Obscurities and difficulties are to be expected in
ancient documents, from the great difference in thought
and manner of expression between far distant periods of
human development.
93
0 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
2. It was customary with ancient writers to relate
occurrences in a dramatic manner, giving not merely the
result of a conversation, but imagining, the very words that
might have been used. (See the remarks on the language
of Herodotus, in Macaulay's Essay on History.)  This
peculiarity of ancient writing will explain many passages
in the Old Testament, in which the Almighty is represented as speaking, and especially as conversing with
human beings.   (Gen. i. 3; ii. 16; Ex. xxxii. 7-14.)
3. In many of the narratives of the Old Testament,
the account rests, not on the authority of the sacred historian, but on that of some earlier writer, or of tradition.
Thus the occurrences recorded in Genesis could not be
related by Moses from personal knowledge; and he, if
he was the historian, is therefore not accountable for
anything more than a faithful use of the materials he
possessed.   The account in Joshua x. 12-14 is there
spoken of as derived fromn the Book of Jasher, which
was  apparently  a  collection  of poems.    (Compare
2 Sam. i. 18.)
4. If errors in astronomy, geology, or any other
branch of science are discovered, it is to be remembered
that the object of a revelation was not to teach men those
sciences, but their own relation to their Creator.
5. If we find much to condemn in the conduct of persons who are yet mentioned with approval in the Old
Testament, we must remember that they may have been
approved for one quality, though in other respects very
deficient. Thus David is spoken of, in 1 Sam. xiii.
14, as a " man after God's own heart" in the one respect
of faithfulness to the divine commands in the admninistration of public affairs.
94 
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
6. In judging, such characters, we have also to bear in
mind the lower standard of morals in their age, and the
temptations to which they were peculiarly exposed. Thus,
to recur to the instance just spoken of, David is to be
judged, not by the modern and Christian standard, but
as compared with men of his time, and subject, like him,
to the temptations arising from the possession of despotic
power.
7. If the sentiment of the historian himself appear
incorrect, we must remember that good, and even inspired men, who lived before the time of Christ, had not
that full view of duty which he afterwards communicated.   (Matt. xi. 11.)  To  suppose that the  most
gifted of the prophets anticipated all that Christ had to
teach would be to make Christ's teaching superfluous.
8. Even if doubt were cast upon some of the Old Testament books, as regards their genuineness or authenticity, such doubt would not seriously affect the claims
of the Jewish religion to divine authority, and still less
those of Christianity. The great facts would still remain
of the Israelites' rescue from Egyptian bondage, and of
their maintaining for centuries the worship of the One
True God, in a world elsewhere filled with idolatry.
9. The free investigations of recent critics, while, as
has been seen, they do not destroy the evidence on which
the Jewish religion rests, sometimes incidentally remove
objections against it.  (See Colenso, "The Pentateuch
and Book of Joshua," Part I. section 172.)
10. There appears in some writers a disposition to
represent the Jewish religion as on a level with the hea thenism of surrounding nations. Thus the impression is
95 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
given that the Jews regarded Jehovah as the God of
their own nation, not the God of all mankind, in contradiction to the account in Gen. i., which represents
him as the Creator of all, and numerous other passages.
(See Deut. xxxii. 8; 2 Kings xix. 17-19; Ps. xcvi. 5;
Isa. lxvi. 18-21.) In the same spirit, the attempt has
been made, from Gen. xxii., to prove that the religTion
of the Hebrews sanctioned human sacrifices. As the
sacrifice was in that case forbidden, the inference should
be precisely tlhe opposite.
We conclude this section with the following tribute to
the excellence of the Hebrew system, by an eminent
writer, who did not acknowledge its divine authority:
This must be confessed, that under the guidance of
divine Providence, the great and beautiful doctrine of
one God seems very early embraced by the great Jewish
lawgiver, incorporated into his national legislation, defended with rigorous enactions, and slowly communicated to the world. At our day it is difficult to understand the service rendered to the human race by the
mighty soul of Moses, and that a thousand years before
Anaxagoras. His name is ploughed into the history of
the world. His influence can never die. It must have
been a vast soul, endowed with moral and religious
genius to a degree extraordinary among men, which at
that early age could attempt to found a state on the doctrine and worship of one God." (Parker's Discourse of
Religion, p. 59.)
96 
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
</ SECTION 28.  EVIDENCE POR THE OLD TESTAMENT.
The books of the Old Testament are sustained, in regard to their genuineness and authenticity, by internal and
external evidence, as are those of the New Testament.
I. The external evidence is,  1. The testimony of the Jewish nation, by which these
books have been for ages acknowledged and valued,
as containing the ancient records of their race, and the
history of divine communications made to them.
They have, in fact, been regarded with a veneration,
and preserved with a care, which may appear excessive
and superstitious; great attention  being paid to the
slightest minutia of spelling and punctuation, the transcribers not venturing even to correct obvious errors in
these respects, as they supposed that every variation was
intended to indicate some mystery.
2. The Christian Scriptures, even if considered merely
as works dating from the early ages of Christianity,
prove, by numerous references and quotations, the existence of the Old Testament at that tilme, and substantially
in the same form as at present.
3. Josephus, a Jewish commander  and writer, who
was taken prisoner by the Romans about A. D. 68, and
afterwards received into favor by them, gives a history
of his nation, and other writings, which are founded
on the Old Testament, and constantly corroborate its
accounts.
4. Similar testimony is given, though to a less extent,
by Philo, a learned Jew of Alexandria, about the time
of our Savior.
9
97 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
5. The Apocryphal books, written mostly by Alexandrian Jews, shortly before the Christian era, testify, by
frequent references and constant implication, to the existence of the Old Testament writings, and their reception
as of the highest authority among the nation.
6. The Samaritans, a race closely allied to the Jews,
and still existing, though in very scanty numbers, confirm the Old Testament accounts by their traditions; and
particularly by their possessing copies of the Pentateuch,
or first five books of the Bible, in Hebrew, but written
in peculiar characters, different from the common Hebrew
letters, and supposed by some to be more ancient.  The
testimony of the Samaritans is the more valuable, as the
jealousy which existed for centuries between them and
the Jews would have rendered it impossible for any
document of recent origin to be imposed upon them by
their neighbors and rivals.
7. Various testimonies from heathen writers, and from
ancient inscriptions, confirm statements of the Old Testament with regard to historical events. This description of evidence has been well exhibited in Rawlinson's
" Bampton Lectures" (London, 1859), from which the
following statements are selected: -
" Hecateus of Abdera, Manetho, Lysimachus of Alexandria, Eupolemus, Tacitus, Juvenal, Longinus, ascribe
to Moses the institution of that code of laws by which
the Jews were distinguished from other nations; and the
majority distinctly note that he committed his laws to
writing." Of these, the first two were contemporary
with Alexander the Great, in the fourth century before
Christ. Longinus does not mention Moses by name,
but as "the legislator of the Jews," quoting Gen. i. 3
98 
TIlE OLD TESTAMENT.
as an instance of sublimity.   (Rawlinson,  pp.  43,
329-331.)
In the Bhagavat, an ancient Hindoo poem, the Lord
of the universe speaks thus to Satiavrata: "In seven
days from the present time, O thou tamer of enemies,
the three worlds will be plunged in an ocean of death;
but in the midst of the destroying waves, a large vessel,
sent by me for thy use, shall stand before thee. Then
shalt thou take all medicinal herbs, all the variety of
seeds, and accompanied by seven saints, encircled by
pairs of all brute animals, thou shalt enter the spacious
ark, and continue in it, secure from  the flood, on one
immense ocean without light, except the radiance of thy
holy companions." (p. 344.)
A similar account is given by Berosus, the Chaldean
historian, of Xisuthrus, in which the incident of the
sending forth of birds is related, as in Genr. viii. (p. 63.)
Manetho, the Egyptian historian, and Berosus, the
Chaldean, present records of the ancient dynasties that
were said to have governed their respective countries;
and while they ascend to an antiquity far beyond that
recorded in the Bible, this relates alone to a period of
fabulous gods and heroes. When they reach the time
of legitimate history, their dates correspond nearly with
those of the Hebrew Scriptures. (pp. 57-60.)
Three ancient authors, Moses of Chorene, Procopius,
and Suidas, relate that there existed in their times, at
Tingis, or Tangiers, in Africa, an ancient inscription, to
the effect that the inhabitants were descendants of those
fugitives who were driven from the land of Canaan by
Joshua, the son of Nun, the plunderer. (pp. 91, 92.)
Nicolaus of Damascus, the friend of Aug,ustus Coesar,
ee *e*e-...i..
99 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
gives, from the records of his native city, an account of
the war of the ancient king, Hadad, with David, kind of
Judea, confirming the account in 2 Sam. viii. 5, 6. (p. 95.)
In 1 Kings xvi. 31, we are told that Ahab "took to
wife Jezebel, the daughter of Ethbaal, king of the Zidonians." In the Tyrian history of Menander we are told
that Eithobalus, priest of Ashteroth, became king of
Tyre by murdering his predecessor, at a time which exactly agrees with this statement. We are also told that,
during the reign of this prince, a remarkable drought
occurred in Phoenicia, which continued for a year. (See
1 Kings xvii. 1; xviii. 1-5; Rawlinson, p. 127.) The
priestly office held by Eithobalus, and the crime by which
he gained his power, coincide with the blending of idolatrous fanaticism and bloody ambition in his daughter
Jezebel and his granddaughter Athaliah.   (1 Kings
xviii. 4; xxi. 5-15; 2 Kings viii. 18, 26; xi. 1, 18.)
The scriptural accounts of Pharaoh Necho (2 Kings
xxiii. 29-35; Jer. xlvi. 2), and Pharaoh Hophra (Jer.
xliv. 30), are confirmed by Manetho and Herodotus.
(pp. 148, 149.)
Events in sacred history are also confirmed in a very
interesting manner by the recently deciphered inscriptions on the monuments of Egypt, and on those which
have been discovered at Nineveh and other Assyrian cities.
The conquest of Rehoboam  by Shishak, king of
Egypt (1 Kings xiv. 25, 26), "is found to have been
commemorated by Shishak on the outside of the great
temple at Karnac; and here, in a long list of captured
towns and districts, which Shishak boasts of having
added to his dominions, occurs the'Melchi Yudah,' or
kingdomn of Judah." (pp. 125, 126.)
!v.':!*-:....
100 
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
The separate existence of the two kingdoms of Israel
and Judah is abundantly confirmed by the Assyrian inscriptions. Kings of each country occur in the accounts
which the great Assyrian monarchs have left us of their
conquests, the names being always capable of easy identification with those recorded in Scripture, and occurring
in the chronological order which is there given." (p. 125.)
The reign of Ben-hadad  at Damascus, his military
power, and even the peculiar construction of his armies
(1 Kings xx. 1, 25), are illustrated by Assyrian inscriptions. (pp. 130, 407.)  On the same monument
Ilazael appears as successor to Ben-hadad; and Jehu is
mentioned as king of Israel at the same date.
The intervention of Tiglath-Pileser in behalf of Ahaz
against the united forces of Syria and Israel (2 Kings
xvi. 7) is confirmed in the same manner. The erection
by Ahaz of a Syrian, or rather Assvrian, altar at Jerusalem (verse 10), is explained by the inscriptions, from
which it appears that it was customary to require subject
nations thus to acknowledge the gods of the conquerors.
(p. 136.)
The subjugation of Hezekiah by Sennacherib (2 Kings
xviii. 13) is confirmed by a long inscription, agreeing
with the scriptural account in every particular, except
that it states the tribute in silver at a higher amount.
That in gold is precisely the same - thirty talents.
(p. 141.)
We are told, in 2 Chron. xxiii. 11, that the king of
Assyria took Manasseh king of Judah captive, and carried him to Babylon. This statement appears strange,
as Nineveh was the capital of Assyria, and we know
Babylon in connection with a later empire. But the
9*
101 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
inscriptions show us that Esar-haddon, the monarch in
question, and he only of all the Assyrian kings, built a
palace at Babylon, and occasionally held his court there.
Manasseh is mentioned among his subject princes.
(p. 145.)
The king of E,gypt, whose name is given as So in our
translation, would, with different vowel-points, which are
a comparatively modern addition, be recognized as Sevech.
This monarch appears both in Manetho and in the Egyptian inscriptions, and his connection with Assyrian history
is confirmned by the discovery of his seal at Koyunjik, in
Assyria. (2 Kings xvii. 4. Rawlinson, p. 147.)
In Daniel v., Belshazzar is named as the last king
of Babylon, and as having been slain when the city
was  taken by the Medes and Persians.  This statement long appeared to be contrary to that of profane
historians, who named Nabonadius as the last king, and
declared that he was absent from Babylon at the time of
its occupation by the enemy, and that he was afterwards
taken prisoner, and treated with generosity. But in
1854 the discovery was made, from inscriptions at
Mugheir,  the ancient  "Ur  of the  Chaldees," that
Nabonadius had associated with him in the sovereignty
a son whose name corresponds with the account in
Daniel. (pp. 168-170.)
II. The Internal Evidence of the Old Testament is
found in the agreement of the statements and references
there with what is known from other sources of the history, geography, and antiquities of Palestine and neighboring countries; in coincidences between the books,
especially where they are obviously undesigned; and in
the general simple, truthful style of the narrative. For
102 
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
example, the history of the deliverance from Egypt, and
of the wanderings in the wilderness, exhibits a perfect
acquaintance on the part of the writer with the geography of the region where the scene is laid; so that the
route of the Israelites may be readily traced by the traveller. The Red Sea, at the point where the Israelites
are described to have crossed, is a narrow and shallow
sound, where the concurrence of a strong wind and an
ebb tide might facilitate such a passage.
MIuch of the history is given in two accounts, the
books of Chronicles confirming the statements in those
of Samuel and Kings.
There are numerous coincidences between the historical books and the prophecies and psalms.   (Compare,
for instance, Judges ix. 53 with 2 Sam. xi. 21; Josh.
xviii. 1 with Jer. vii. 12; 2 Kings iii. 27 with Amos ii. 1.)
The argument from Institutions, as shown in a previous
section (see p. 34), is applicable to the religion of the
Old Testament, as well as to that of the New.   The
Passover, still observed among the Jews, bears witness
to the deliverance from Eg,ypt; and numerous other
observances, whether now maintained or not, but well
known to have been observed before the destruction of
the temple, testify to the truth of those Scriptures which
alone explain their origin.   (See this argument further
developed in Leslie's " Short Method with Deists.")
It is not necessary, however, in this brief summary,
to dwell further on particulars of this nature.   To
Christians, the great evidence for the authority of the
Old Testament is that derived from its connection with
the New; and for questions of Old Testament criticism,
regarding the authorship of books, or correctness of
103 
EVIDENOES OF CHRISTIANITY.
historical accounts, so far as they do not affect the
acknowledgmoent of the Jewish law as of divine origin,
Christianity is not responsible.
SECTION 29. OLD TESTAMENT PROPHECY.
An important branch of the Evidences of Christianity
is derived from the fulfilment of prophecy.   In considering this, we view first the Prophecies of the Old
Testament fulfilled in the New.
Independently of especial predictions, the history of
the Jews, with that of their thoughts and feelings, possesses a prophetical character.
Other nations have fixed their ideal of human existence in the past. The Greeks and Romans held that
there had been a golden age, when mankind were pure
and happy. The Hebrews shared this view only in
reference to the primitive happiness and innocence of the
Garden of Eden. When that brief period was at an
end their imagination turned towards the future.
All through the Jewish history there appears an anticipation of a glorious Ruler, to be sent by Heaven, and of a
happy and virtuous state. This anticipation not only appears in occasional passages, but it became interwoven
with the thoughts of the people; so that about the
time of the Christian era, the expectation of such a ruler
was general, not only in Judea, but- in the surrounding
nations. This we have on the authority of the Jewish
historian Josephus, and of the Romuans Suetonius and
Tacitus.   (See Josephus, Bell. Jud. vi. 5, ~ 4; Suetonius, Vita Vespasiani, ~ 4; Tacitus, Hist., ~ 13.
This expectation was so strongly fixed in the mind of
104 
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
the Jewish race, that it remained after their rejection of
the claims of Jesus, has survived the disappointments,
wanderings, and sufferings of eighteen hundred years,
and is still cherished by their descendants to this day.
While they looked forward to this personage, whom
they called the Messiah, as a conquering king, they also
anticipated that he would restore the national purity of
worship.
At the same time, they found passages in their
prophetical books inconsistent with the idea of his
uninterrupted success- passages intimating a ministry
of suffering.  Hence some of their writers assert that
there will be two Messiahs; one the son of David, a
royal conqueror; the other the son of Ephraim, a suffering, reformer.   (See Strauss's Life of Jesus, Part III.,
ch. i. ~ 112.)
Such are the indications of the Old Testament, according to the interpretation put upon it by the race who
received it as divinely communicated.
At the age of the world when the expectation of a
Messiah was most active in the minds of men, a person
appeared whose character and history corresponded to
this expectation.   He  is represented to have been a
descendant of David. Although not literally a king, he
called the community he established a kingdom; and the
term was justified by the greatness of the power his
teachings exercised.  Although not literally a conqueror,
his cause has triumphed over the opposition of monarchs
and of nations, and now exerts its control over the civil
ized world.
The predictions of a suffering Messiah have been fulfilled more literally, for Jesus endured poverty, reproach,
105 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
abandonment, and betrayal, and finally laid down his life
in the cause of his religion.
If it be objected that the character in which Jesus
appeared was not that of a triumphant king in which he
was foretold, and that on this account he was rejected by
his own nation, who were best qualified to judge of his
claims, we reply,  1. That it is essential to the character of prophecy
that it should not indicate its accomplishment with perfect clearness. If it did, the fulfilment would appear to
have been brought about by studied effort.
2. The reasons of the rejection of Jesus by his countrymen are apparent. The nation was eager for deliverance from the Roman yoke, and looked for the Messiah
to lead them to this object.  They rejected, therefore,
the claims of a peaceful, spiritual Messiah. Joined to
their disappointment on this account was the opposition
of the ruling classes to all attempts at reform-  an opposition greatly embittered by Jesus' bold denunciation of
their prevalent vices.
3. While the Jews were thus prejudiced by their
national feelings against the claims of Jesus, they had
an answer to the evidence of miracles which would not
be sanctioned by the philosophy of our day. It does not
appear, either from the New Testament or from the
Jewish or heathen writers, that they ever denied the
reality of the miracles; but they asserted that these were
wrought by the power of evil spirits.   (See Matt. xii.
24; Luke xi. 15; John viii. 48.)
4. The chief reason, named above, for which the Jews
rejected the claims of Jesus, is to us a strong proof in
favor of those claims.  He fulfilled the prophecies in a
106 
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
higher sense than the prophets themselves probably were
able to grasp. His nation, in the worldliness of their
views, were disappointed in him; but we, at this distance of time, can perceive their error. The station
which the Savior has held, for ages after ages, as spiritual king of numerous nations, and as the guide of
mankind in the path of virtue, - to say nothing of any
supremacy he may exercise hereafter in the future life,is far higher than the glory of a conquering king of
Palestine. This thought, of the superiority of his spiritual dominion to a kingdom like that of David, he suggested in the form of a question, but found no response.
(Matt. xxii. 45.)
5. Yet it is scarce conceivable that a Jew, in that age
of formal observances and low morality, should (except
by divine revelation) have entertained the idea of fulfilling the prophecies in this higher sense; that he should
have believed the predictions, and that he was the person
to whom they pointed, yet should have refused to tread
the path of military adventure, which all around expected himn to tread, incurring thus the danger of a
shameful death; and that by this strange path he should
actually have succeeded in his bold aspirations.
6. It may be further remarked, that the idea being
imparted to the prophets, by revelation, of a leader and
reformer, divinely sent and consecrated, they would of
necessity imagine him to occupy the station which would
seem most dignified and most favorable for his taskthe station of king and conqueror.
7. We  are taught, by indications in the prophets
themselves, that predictions are somnetimes conditional,
and that their fulfilinent may be prevented by the
107 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
unworthiness of those to whom a promise is made; or
by their repentance, if the prophecy be a threat.   (See
Jer. xviii. 7-10; Jonah iii. 10; iv. 11.)  We can conceive that if the Jews had accepted Jesus as the Messiah,
the prophecies respecting him might have been fulfilled
in their lower sense as well as in their higher. The
gentle spirit of his religion might have prevented the
rebellion which led to their national overthrow; the
gospel might have spread with great rapidity; and
Jesus, without directly interfering with established monarchies, might have ruled them all. Admitting that the
divine promise was to be understood in a strictly literal
sense, we see how it might have been fulfilled, had it not
been forfeited by the national rejection of Jesus.
The above argument, from the Jews' expectation of
the Messiah, and the fulfilment of it by Jesus, would
have force, even if every prophecy now applied to him
were proved to have had some other application. For
the questions would still occur, How came the Jewish
people to anticipate a Messiah? and How, without divine
intervention, was this anticipation met by the coming of
one who should save and rule not only Israel, but the
human race?  The expectation and its fulfilmnent fit into
each other as parts of the same whole.
SECTION 30.  THE JEWISH REVELATION PROPHETIC
OF THE CIIHRISTIAN.
Again, the Jewish revelation is a prophecy of the.
Christian.
The Jewish religion possesses, as we have seen
(p. 91), strong claims to a divine origin.  It teaches
108 
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
the unity and other attributes of God, which all the
surrounding nations denied; it teaches a much purer
morality than theirs; its documents, which  have evidently come down from a very high antiquity, and its
tradition, confirmed by that of the rival branch, the
Samaritans, agree in testifying to ancient divine manifestations, revealing the truths it teaches.   But the
Jewish religion alone is incomplete, deficient. Many of
its instructions are evidently intended for the tribes to
whom it was originally given, not for all mankind. It
prescribes a ritual service, to be performed in one place,
to which the people were required to resort three times a
year (Ex. xxiii. 17), and forbids altars to be erected for
sacrifice elsewhere.   These and other regulations are
evidently national. In some laws, too, the object plainly
was, to keep the people apart from other nations. Thus
the complicated distinctions between clean and unclean
meats, and other rules relating to ceremonial purity, rendered it difficult for Jews to live on terms of familiar
intercourse with foreigners. (Lev. xi.) By such laws
commerce was discouraged, while agriculture was cherished by regulations for the tenure of land, which it was
made impossible for any family permanently to alienate.
(Lev. xxv. 10, 23-34.)
Even if it were admitted that many or most of these
rules were of more recent date than has generally been
assigned to them, we have reason to suppose that their
spirit was in accordance with the known customs and
tendency of the nation.   So too if it were admitted that
the books ascribed to Moses were of later origin than his
time, the general substance of the account they give
must still be in accordance with national traditions. No
10
109 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
man could impose upon a people an entirely false account
of their own origin, and of the derivation and meaning
of all their public observances, for the humblest citizen
would be able to contradict him.   (See p. 33.)
Three suppositions may be formed to account for the
existence of the Jewish religion.
I. That it was the growth of human thought.
II. That it was revealed from above as a system complete and permanent.
III. That it was revealed from above as a system preparatory to a fuller revelation.
1. The first supposition implies the falsehood of all
the historical and traditional accounts, so far as they
involve anything of miracle. It implies, therefore, that
those who taught this system were guilty of imposture
on the largest scale. The peculiar purity and nobleness
of the system render it difficult to believe this respecting
its authors. As we look upon the whole world lying in
the darkness of idolatry, and one only nation worshipping
the living and true God, we naturally recognize this exception, not as the result of vile fraud and jugglery, but
as designed by God to keep alive the remembrance of
truth upon the earth.
2. The second supposition is inconsistent with what
we have pointed out as the temporary and limited characteristics of the system.  It was designed for a single
nation; and, so far from encouraging them to become
teachers of the truth to others, it kept them from intercourse with others by jealous restrictions.  It taught the
brotherhood of all Israelites, but said little of the brotherhood of mankind; and this though it held within
itself, in its account of the common origin of man, the
110 
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
germ of a, more comprehensive liberality.  So, though it
taught the Unity of God, it announced him as especially
the God of Abraham and his descendants.
3. These limitations of the system show its preparatory character. It was from above, but was not the last
nor the best gift of Heaven.   Its character as a local
religion showed that a universal one was yet to comne;
its character as a ceremonial system betokened the future
approach of one which should be spiritual.
And Christianity fulfils this promise of its predecessor.
It does no dishonor to the Jewish system; accepts it as
divine, so far as it goes; but goes beyond it, and renders
it complete. Without Christianity we could not account
for God's giving a system so glorious, yet so imperfect,
as Judaism. Without Judaism we could not account for
the fact that God withheld from the world, for so many
ages, the light of Christianity.
The period when that light was given, and the circumstances which accompanied it, indicate, by their appropriateness, the agency of divine wisdom.  It was when
the Jewish observances had lost much of their spiritual
life, and become debased to formalism and bigotry, and
when the heathen systems around had, to a great extent,
lost their hold on the faith of the nations that yet outwardly maintained them. The tribes of the East had
been brought together into one political famnily by the
conquests of Alexander the Great, and those of the West
by the conquests of the Romans; while the final ascendency of the latter had combined the whole in one great
empire, throughout which two languages, -and those
nearly related to each other,   the Greek and the Latin,
were generally understood.   The  brilliant period of
ill 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
heathen philosophy was past, so that its rivalship to the
new religion was little to be dreaded; and the long and
bloody civil wars of the Roman empire had been closed
by the triumph of Augustus. Then, too, the suc(cessive
invaders of Palestine had carried thence multitudes of
captive Jews, and had settled them in the principal cities
of Asia Minor, Greece, and Italy; so that there was
everywhere the material for formiing, the nucleus of a
Christian church. Thus, by divine appointment, the
conquests of ambitious men and the pride of philosophy
were overruled for the extension of the great blessing
that was about to be given to the world.
If it be objected that these favorable circumstances,
instead of proving the care of Providence for the spread
of the truth, should rather be regarded as sufficient to
account for the spread of an imposture, the reply is easy.
These same circumstances, of intellectual light and profound peace, while they would favor the diffusion of truth,
would be unfavorable to that of falsehood, for they would
render its detection easier. The existence of a Jewish
community in every city not only gave the Christian
teachers the means of obtaining their first hearing, but
it gave their opponents also the means of answering
them, so far as any answer  could be given.  Deceit
prospers best in darkness, but the light was favorable to
Christianity because it was the truth.
If it still be questioned why this blessing of a true
religion was so long withheld from  all the world except Palestine, we reply that both sacred and profane
history afford indications of an earlier revelation than
that given by Moses; and from this primitive communication was probably derived much of the spiritual knowl
112 
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
edge which the heathens possessed. This knowledge
became corrupted by polytheism, and afterwards weakened by scepticism; and then it was that the new and
full revelation was bestowed.
INDIVIDUAL PROPHECIES OF THE OLD
TESTAMENT.
The prophetic passages of the Old Testament which
are adduced in proof of its sacred claims are partly those
which had their fulfilment before Christ, and partly those
which received their accomplishment in him.
Of the former class we shall present some instances,
in predictions of the desolation of cities and regions
which were strong and prosperous at the time when these
predictions were made.   The fulfilment of these prophecies is evident to every one who travels in the East, or
who reads the accounts presented by such travellers of
the desolation of once populous countries, and the ruin
of once proud capitals.   Such predictions respecting
Nineveh may be found in Nahum i. 9, Zeph. ii. 13,
15; respecting Moab, in Zeph. ii. 8, 9, Jer. xlviii. 42;
respecting Philistia, in Zeph. ii. 4.  The fate of Edoin
is foretold in Jer. xlix. 16-18; a prophecy the fulfilnment of which was made evident only recently by the
discovery of the ruins of Petra, the rock-built capital of
Edom.  Respecting Eg,ypt, see Ezek. xxix. 15; xxx.
13; respecting Tyre, Ezek. xxvi. 4, 5; and with regard
to Babylon, Is. xiii. 20, 21.
There are many passages in the Old Testament which
have been understood as prophetic of the Savior. Indeed, some theologians have been fond of recognizing
10 *
113
SECTION 3 1. 
b
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
not only the language, but the characters, of the Jevish
state, as prefiguring the events of the New Dispensation.   Thus  David, Solomon,  and others have  been
represented as types of Christ.
We cannot wonder at this, when we examine such a
portion of Scripture as the seventy-second psalm. This
bears, as its title (of whatever authority the title may
be), "For Solomon;" and to a great extent it seems
applicable to him. But there are verses that cannot be
applied to any temporal sovereign with propriety.   (See
verses 5, 7, 11, 17.) These, therefore, have.been supposed to refer to the Messiah. The usual explanation
has been, that Solomon was a type of Christ, and that
some things were said of him in that character which
were not true of him as an earthly prince.
Another view of the subject is the following: The
prophetic insight into the future had, of course, its limits.
The prophets knew that there was to be a glorious personage, whom they contemplated chiefly under the character of the Messiah, or Anointed, - that is, the Kin,g.
They knew not, however, generally speaking, in what
age he was to appear. Each of them, therefore, while
foretelling the glories of some monarch's reign, and
indulging the hope that he might be the Messiah, would
be led to blend with the nearer prospect the vast but less
definite perspective of the future age of glory. Thus
traits which belong to the Messiah are blended in the
second psalm with an inauguration ode; in the forty-fifth
with a marriage hymn; in the psalm- now before us with
a song of congratulation; in Is. vii., xi., and other passages, with predictions of the times of Hezekiah; and
perhaps in Daniel ix. with what related primarily to
the age of the Maccabees.
114 
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
It will not materially affect the value of prophetical
evidence if we adopt a wider or a stricter theory of
prophetical  foreknowledge.   Whether  any  particular
writer was himself inspired to foretell future events, or
whether he only gave utterance to the national anticipation, derived from divine communications in ages past,
his declarations will alike remain proofs of the Messiahship of Jesus, convincing in proportion to the clearness
with which the reality answered to the prediction.
We subjoin some of the most remarkable prophecies,
which appear to have received their fulfilment in Jesus
Christ.
Genesis xxii. 18. " In thy seed shall all the nations
of the earth be blessed." The hopes of those rude ages
were generally fixed on the conquest of other tribes, not
on conferring blessings. The promise that looks to such
a privilege betokens a wider foresight than that of an
ancient chief.  It is finding its fulfilment in the progress
of Christianity, and could not possibly find it in any
other.
Psalm xxii. In this psalm the following sentences are
most observable. The first words, quoted by the Savior
on the cross, "My God, my God, why  hast thou forsaken me?" were probably not, as used by him, an exclamation of distrust, but an application of the psalm to
himself.  Verses 7, 8. "All they that see me  laugh me
to scorn; they shoot out the lip, they shake the head,
saying, He trusted on the Lord that he would deliver
him; let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him."
Verse 16. "The assembly of the wicked have enclosed
me; they pierced my hands and  my feet."  Verse 18.
"They part my garments  among them, and cast lots
115 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
upon  my vesture."  The coincidence of the sixteenth
verse with the sufferings of Christ is the more remarkable as the punishment of crucifixion was unknown
among the Jews of the age when the psalm was written.
Psalm cx. 4. "The Lord hath sworn, and will not
repent, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek," that is, a priest of an entirely different order
from that of Aaron - a kingly priest, and one without
predecessor or successor in his office, as the expression is
explained in Heb. vii. This psalm is not the less a
prophecy of the Messiah because it portrays him according to Jewish ideas as a conquering  monarch.  If the
prophets had understood and declared the fuill spiritual glory of the revelation that was to come, there
would  have  been  nothing  left for that revelation to
communicate.
Isaiah ix. 6. "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son
is given: and the government shall be upon-his shoulder;
and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor,
the mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of
Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace
there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and
upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with
judg,ment and with justice from henceforth even forever.
The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this." Some
of the epithets admit of a different translation; but
the passage still points to a greater monarch than any
mere Jewish prince.
Isaiah xlix. 5, 6. "Though Israel be not gathered, yet
shall I be glorious in the eyes of the Lord, and my God
shall be my strength.  And  he said, It is a light thing
that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes
116 
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will
also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou
mayest be my salvation unto the ends of the earth." In
this passage the prophet penetrates farther into the future
than at other times, and recognizes the Messiah rejected
by the Jews, but invested with  higher glory as the
Redeemer of mankind.   (See also chapter Ix.)
Isaiah lii. 13, to liii. 12. This remarkable passage is
referred to, as prophetic of the Savior, in Acts viii. 32.
The appropriateness of this application is evident in the
common version, particularly in the 5th, 6th, and 7th
verses. "He was wounded for our transgressions, he
was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our
peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed.
All we, like sheep, have gone astray; we have turned
every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on
him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he
was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought
as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her
shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth." Some
verses, however, acquire a clearer application in the
translation of Dr. Noyes, as verses 8-10:
"By oppression and punishment he was taken away;
And who of that generation would consider,
That he was cut off fiom the land of the living,
That for the transgression of my people he was smitten?
His grave was appointed with the wicked,
And with the rich man was his sepulchre,
Although he had done no injustice,
And there was no deceit in his mouth.
It pleased Jehovah severely to bruise him;
But since he gave himself a sacrifice for sin,
He shall see posterity; he shall prolong his days,
And the pleasure of Jehovah shall prosper in his hand."
117 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
In this  passage we  have  the  ideas  of suffering
patiently endured for the sake of others; of condemnation, execution, and burial; and, notwithstanding all
these, of life continued, usefulness, and glory.
Micahl v. 2. "But thou, Beth-lehem Ephratah, though
thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of
thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in
Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from
everlasting." (See Matt. ii. 5, 6.)
Haggai ii. 7, 9.  "I will shake all nations, and the
desire of all nations shall come: and I will fill this house
with glory, saith the Lord of hosts." "The glory of
this latter house shall be greater than of the former, saith
the Lord of hosts: and in this place will I give peace,
saith the Lord of hosts."
Malachi iii. i.  "Behold, I will send my messenger,
and he shall prepare the way before me; and the Lord,
whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even
the messenger of the covenant, whom  ye  delight in;
behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts."  (See
Matt. xi. 10.)'
Malachi iv. 5, 6. "Behold, I will send you Elijah
the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful
day of the Lord; and he shall turn the heart of the
fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to
their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a
curse." (See Matt. xi. 14.) The last words of the
Old dispensation are thus connected with the coming of
that prophet who was the herald of the New.
118 
NEW TESTAMENT PROPHECY.
SECTION 32. NEW TESTAMENT PROPHECY, AND SUB         SEQUENT HISTORY OF THE JEWS.
I. Besides the proof of Christianity from prophecies
in the Old Testament, which received their fulfilment in
Christ, there is another, from predictions either by Jesus
himself or his apostles, which have been fulfilled in subsequent events.
The most remarkable class of these is that of the predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the
overthrow of the Jewish state. These are found at
most  length in Matt.  xxiv.,  Mark xiii., Luke  xvii.
20-37, xxi. Perhaps, however, they may appear in a
still more striking form in some passages where they
occur incidentally, and which bear so evidently the
marks of the Savior's peculiar style, or of strong
emotion, that we can hardly imagine them to be from
any other source than his own lips. (See Matt. xxiii.
37-39; Luke xix. 41-44; xxiii. 28-31.)
The fulfilment of these prophecies is a matter of unquestionable notoriety. About thirty years after the
crucifixion, the Jews rebelled against the Roman power.
After a war waged with great ferocity on both sides, their
capital was besieged, and suffered every extremity of
distress from famine and from internal discord, as well
as from the arms of the enemy. It was at length taken
by assault, utterly destroyed, and the remnant of the
people carried into captivity.
If it be objected that in some of the passages
referred to indications are given of events which have
not taken place, as of the visible return of Jesus to
119 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
judg,ment, and of the end of the world, it is sufficient to
answer, -
1. That many of the expressions are evidently highly
figurative, and that the figures employed may allowably
be supposed to mean nothing more than the rapid exten sion of the Christian religion, after the Jewish power,
which oppressed it, had been broken down.
2. That, as the ancient prophets, in their visions,
often blended the distant with the near, we need not be
surprised to find that even our Savior did not distinctly
mark the boundaries of time between the events of the
approaching age and the final consummation.
II. As the Old Testament, in its general bearing, has
been shown to be prophetic of the New, by its com bined excellences and deficiencies, necessitating the
coming of the system that was to perfect it, and thus
proving its truth, so, apart from any direct prediction
of our Savior, the events of his life and death necessitated the overthrow of the Jewish state, and his claims
are confirmed by that catastrophe which fulfilled this
implied prediction.
The Israelitish state had stood for fifteen hundred
years.  It had survived repeated conquest and captivity,
and seemed as likelv to endure, in its humble condition,
as any other portion of the immense dominions of Rome.
The conquerors were tolerant to national peculiarities of
belief, and their power was so extensive that rebellion
seemed madness. At this time Jesus appeared. He
claimed to be the promised Messiah; but his claim was
rejected, and himself cruelly put to death by the nation
he addressed. If he was what he claimed to be, this rejection of him required the rejection of the nation in its
120 
HISTORY OF THE JEWS.
turn, its loss of whatever peculiar privileges it had enjoyed before.  This was due, both to retributive justice,
and to the vindication of the Messiah's claims.   If the
Jewish state had stood uninjured for even a hundred
years after the crucifixion of Jesus, the fact would have
afforded a strong argument against his claim to a divine
commission.
But the fact was otherwise. The great transgression
received its punishment in the signal overthrow of the
nation by whom it had been committed. The solemn
ritual they boasted to have observed, with few intervals,
since the days of Moses, was abolished, and has not, for
near eighteen hundred years, been ever restored. In
this event a strong providential confirmation was given
to the authority of Jesus.   Wye have reason to believe
that it was so regarded in the a,ge when it took place,
and that no event contributed more to strengthen the
faith of Christians, and to commnend it to the reception
of others, than this public vindication of the Redeemer's
cause by that divine Providence that rules the affairs of
nations.
It may be further observed, that the overthrow of the
Jewish nation was in exact accordance with the threatenings, by their own prophets, of calamities that should
come upon them if they neglected the law of God.   (See
Deut. xxviii.) But they had been extremely tenacious
of that law, especially during the period preceding their
final overthrow. They had not, therefore, committed
the offence against which the penalty was denounced,
unless it was in rejecting the claims of Jesus; and the
fate that came upon them is unaccountable, except on
that supposition. But if Jesus was such a prophet as
11
I,-)I 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
was foretold in Deut. xviii. 15, then in rejecting him
they transgressed the command,  and incurred thereby
their own rejection.   (See verse 19.  Acts iii. 22, 23.)
The history of the Jewish race, so remarkable in its
previous stages, is not less so since that awful event
which appeared to be its ruin. The very fact that it is
yet existing seems a miracle; it is indeed a moral miracle, such as we have already pointed out in the existence
and power of Christianity in the world. (See p. 25.)
Other nations of that early period have passed away.
The Romans, formerly so powerful, exist no longer; the
tribes which once inhabited France, Spain, and Northern
Africa, have left scarce a trace of their languages or
their institutions. The Greeks, indeed, who, though
subjected, were never actually driven from their soil, nor
incorporated with its conquerors, still exist, and speak
their ancient language in an altered formn; but they profess
different religion from that of their ancestors.  But
the Jews, though their state was utterly overthrown,
though their race, driven from Palestine, was the object
of cruel oppression, by Turk and Christian, in the various
lands through which they were scattered, - yet exist,
cherishing their ancient and peculiar language, and holding in reverence their venerable law. This fact, wonderful
in itself, possesses the greater claim on our regard, as
connected with predictions, both in the Old and New
Testaments, whose fulfilment, in some manner unknown
to us, may still, with reverence, be anticipated. The
Jewish race is apparently preserved for some high purpose; perhaps that its final conversion to Christianity
may establish, in clearer light than ever before, the
divine authority of the gospel.   (See Ezek. xxxvi.
25-38;  Hosea iii. 5:  Rom. xi. 25, 26.)
122 
MARTYRDOMS.
SECTION 33. MARTYRDOMS.
The evidence afforded, by the patient sufferings of the
early Christians, to the truth of their religion, may be
regarded in two aspects.
1. As furnishing proof of the sincerity of its early
teachers, and thus of the truth of the accounts they
gave.
2. As showing the excellence of the religion, and its
divine authority, by the power it exhibited of sustaining
its martyrs, and by the qualities of patience, submission,
forgiveness to enemies, and hope of heaven, which it
communicated to them.
I. In both these respects the sufferings of Jesus himself are first to be considered.
That these sufferings were endured by him in the
manner recorded in the Gospels is confirmed to us by
the absence of all evidence to the contrary. If the enemies of Jesus could with truth have asserted that he
begged for his life, retracted his claims, or exhibited
anything unworthy in language or in conduct, they
would have eagerly proclaimed it; and we should  at
least find traces in the Gospels or Epistles of some controversy on the subject.
We have, then, the facts that the Founder of our religion endured a painful and shameful death, in consequence of his claims, and that he bore it with the most
heroic fortitude, the meekest resignation, and the most
touching exhibition of a forgiving spirit towards those
by whose agency he suffered.
These facts show the sincerity of the sufferer. If he
.123 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
had made claims which he knew to be false, he would
have endeavored to escape by retracting them; or, if his
own pride or the rage of his enemies had prevented this,
the consciousness of guilt would have impaired his courage and composure. His prayer for the forgiveness of
his enemies, and his words to the penitent thief (Luke xxiii.
43), would, then, have been the most blasphemrnons hypocrisy, counterfeiting to perfection the language of heavenly
mercy and divine authority; and his last utterance, at
the very point of death, "Father, into thy hands I coinmiend my spirit," would have been bold mockery of the
God before whom he was to appear. This, when taken
in connection with all we know of his character and
teachings, is utterly incredible.
II. The Christian religion derives a confirmation of
its truth from the sufferings endured by its early preachers; for those preachers must have known the truth or
falsehood of what they proclaimed. For instance, they
universally declared that Jesus had risen from the dead,
and many of them professed to have seen him after his
resurrection.   If this was  not true, they were gross
deceivers. Now, if they persevered in the account they
gave, notwithstanding that it brought upon them obloquy,
danger, and death, their constancy furnishes strong proof
that they were true witnesses.
Of the fact of their sufferings we have, in the first
place, a strong presumption from the nature of the case.
They braved the hostility alike of Jews and Gentiles;
of the Jews, by maintaining that the Teacher whom
they had caused to be crucified was the Messiah, thus
accusing the authorities of the nation of a sacrilegious
murder; and of the Gentiles, by undertaking, in the
124 
MARTYRDOMIS.
name of this new Teacher, to subvert the established
system of heathenism. If they were not persecuted
under these circumstances,  human  nature  must have
been different in that age from what it has been at any
period before or since.
We have, next, proof from Scripture history. That
tells us that some of these early Christian teachers endured
exile (Acts viii. 1), scourging (Acts v. 40; xvi. 23),
imprisonment (Acts xii. 4; xxiv. 27), stoning (Acts
xiv. 19), and distinctly records the violent death of two
of their number (Acts vii. 59, 60; xii. 2), within
twelve years from that of their Master.
We have next the testimony of Jewish and heathen
writers. Josephus tells us of the martyrdom of the
apostle James the Less. He says that in the interval between the death of the procurator Festus and
the arrival of his successor, the High Priest Ananus
caused James, "the brother of Jesus, who was called
Christ," to be put to death by stoning. It is thought
by some that the words we  have particularly quoted
were  added in explanation  by some transcriber;  but
there appears to be no reason to doubt the identity of
the victim, as the account given by Eusebius,  from
Christian tradition, is nearly the same.   (See Josephus,
Antiq. xx. 9, ~ 1.)
Tacitus, who was born in the reign of Nero, about
the middle of the first century, tells us that that Emperor, in order to turn from himself the suspicion of
having, set fire to the city of Rome, "laid the guilt,
and inflicted the most cruel punishments, upon a set of
people who were held in abhorrence for their crimtnes,
and called, by the vulgar, Christians. Great numbers
11 *                   *.. *-. - i..
125 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
of these were put to death, with various torture, - some
being disguised in the skins of beasts and worried to
death by dogs, and others wrapped in pitched shirts,
and set on fire at evening, that they might serve as
torches to illuminate the night." (Annal. xv. 44.)
Suetonius, another writer of the same age, speaks of
the persecution more briefly, and with equal ignorance
of the character of those whom it affected. He says,
only, "The Christians were punished - a set of men of a
new and mischievous superstition." (Vita Neronis, ~ 16.)
The account of Tacitus is confirmed by Juvenal, a
contemporaneous poet, and by Martial, who wrote somewhat later, both of whom refer to the horrible punishment of the pitched garment.
About seventy years after the resurrection, the younger
Pliny (Caius Plinius Secundus), Governor of Bithynia
and Pontus, wrote to the Emperor Trajan an account of
the prevalence of Christianity in the provinces under his
care, and of the measures taken for its suppression.
The "superstition," according to himl, had seized many
of either sex and of every age; not in the cities only,
but through the country, so that the temples of the gods
were comparatively deserted. The profession of Christianity was a capital crime, and Pliny, though humanely
disposed, had put to death many on account of it; but
accusations continued to come in, many from anonymous
sources; and the magistrate could not discover that the
persons accused had been guilty of any criminal practices, except attendance on the rites of their faith. From
the best that he could learn, too, these consisted only of
prayer and singing, a simple banquet, and an exhortation
to each other to avoid bad conduct. He writes, there    *.-.....
126 
MARTYRDOMS.
fore, to the emperor, for further orders. The reply of
Trajan approves his course, and directs him not to encourage informations, but to punish those who should be
convicted and should refuse to retract.   (Plin. Epist.
x. 97.)
To turn from the evidence of their enemies to that of
the Christians themselves, we have the following from
Clement of Rome, one of the apostolical fathers:  Let
us take the examples of our own age. Through zeal and
envy, the most faithful and righteous pillars of the
church have been persecuted even to the most grievous
deaths.  Let us set before our eyes the holy apostles.
Peter, by unjust envy, underwent, not one or two, but
many sufferings; till at last, being martyred, he went to
the place of glory that was due unto him. For the same
cause did Paul, in like manner, receive the reward of his
patience. Seven times he was in bonds; he was whipped,
was stoned; he preached both in thle east and in the west,
leaving behind him the glorious report of his faith;...
he at last suffered martyrdom by the command of the
governors... To these holy apostles were joined a very
great number of others, who, having through envy undergone, in like manner, many pains and torments, have
left a glorious example to us. For this, not only men,
but women, have been persecuted, and, having -suffered
very grievous and cruel punishments, have finished the
course of their faith with firmness."
Passing over the testimony of intermediate writers, we
present an extract from a letter of the church of Smyrna,
soon after the martyrdom of Polycarp, the disciple of
John, A. D. 166. Besides describing his constancy, they
say, "The sufferings of all the other martyrs were
I'-" ) 7 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
blessed and generous, which they underwent accordingr
to the will of God....  And indeed, who  can choose
but admire the greatness of their minds, and that admi rable patience and love of their Master which then ap peared in them? who, when they were so flayed with
whipping that the frame and structure of their bodies
were laid open to their very inward veins and arteries,
nevertheless endured it. In like manner those who were
condemned to the beasts, and kept a long time in prison,
underwent many cruel torments, being forced to lie
upon sharp spikes laid under their bodies, and tormented
with divers other sorts of punishments; that so, if it
were possible, the tyrant, by the length of their sufferings, might have brought them to deny Christ."
In addition to these testimonies from earlier ages, we
have that of numerous writers, both heathen and Christian, establishing the fact that at different periods during
the first three centuries, the most violent persecutions
raged against the Christians. These were sometimes
outbreaks of popular fury, or confined to single provinces; but frequently they were carried on throughout
the empire with all the resources of absolute power, and
all the rage that might mark the death-struggle of the
reigning superstition.  Ten such general persecutions
have been enumerated, and the victims have been computed at not less than three millions.
A very striking confirmation of these historical statements is found in the ancient Christian monuments
existing in the catacombs at Rome.   These  are vast
subterranean excavations, which were used by the Christians as places of burial for their dead.  Their extent is
such that they have been estimated to contain nearly
128 
CONCLUSION.
seven millions of graves, fully confirming  the accounts
of ancient writers respecting the great number who embraced Christianity. Among, the inscriptions here, the
word Martyr, and the palm and other emblems of martyrdom, are of frequent occurrence; and in some instances
the tale of Christian endurance is more fully related.
(See Rawlinson's Bampton Lectures, pp. 282-288, 530.)
The later of these victims could not, of course, present in their sufferings such strong confirmation of the
truth as the first had done; for their belief was founded,
not on personal knowledge, but on the evidence of others.
But they proved their own strong reliance on the good
faith of their instructors, respecting whom they had the
best means of knowledge; and these instructors, in turn,
testified to the fidelity of those who went before them.
The martyrs showed, too, in a most striking manner, the
power of their religion to support the soul, and to impart
the holiest feelings of submission to God, and of forgiveness and love to man. The prayer of the Savior,
pardoning his murderers, found repeated imitation among
those who suffered as his disciples. The patience and
piety with which the Christians bore their persecutions,
won constantly new followers, as those around saw, by
such indications, the divine glory of the faith by which
they were upheld.
SECTION.34.  CONCLUSION.
We have thus presented, in a brief outline, the arguments for the truth of the Christian system. Much
learning and ability have been employed, in times past
and in our own, in developing the various portions of
129 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
this evidence, and guarding the religion of Jesus, at all
points, against the assaults of infidelity.  Such labor
has been of high importance; and yet it is not by ingenious arguments that the disciples of Christ have
generally been won or secured. It has been by the
beauty and holiness of the system, by its adaptation to
human nature, and by the power and excellence of the
influence it has been seen to exert. We conclude, therefore, with a few words upon a subject already presented
among others-  the Efficacy of Christianity.
This has been proved, in the first place, by the public
improvements which the gospel has brought about.
That it has not done all that might be desired, is confessed. It has not removed sin nor sorrow from the
earth; and while man continues a free agent, no means,
however powerful, can effect this. But the gospel has
done much. It put an end to the cruel games of the
Rloman amphitheatre, where men were made to slaughter
each other for the amusement of the citizens.  It restrained licentiousness, and banished almost from human
knowledge some forms of sensuality once freely indulged
in. It has softened the conduct of war, established
bounds to despotic authority, abolished the cruel and
licentious formin of slavery which prevailed eighteen hundred years ago, triumphed over the slavery of the feudal
system, and is now exterminating, throughout the earth,
that later form of this evil which till recently prevailed
in our own country. It has established hospitals, and
encouraged schools and universities. The greatest and
best of reformers have been made such by the Christian
religion. The noblest names among the benefactors of
humanity are inscribed in its annals.
130 
CONCLUSION.
In more private life, the efficacy of Christianity is
witnessed wherever we turn our sight. If we inquire
by what power the evil propensities of a neighborhood
have been subdued, we find that it was by the coniing
among them of some religious teacher. If we hear of a
man, formerly reckless and dissolute, brought to a peaceable and sober life, we learn that he has been converted
at a camp-meeting, or in some more gradual manner
been brought to the love of Christ and his gospel.
If we ask the bereaved what has brought them coilfort,
they answer, the religion of Christ. If we look around,
to see what now is civilizing the globe, we find it is the
gospel in the hands of Christian missionaries.
If we look within, and strive to discern with what
power or influence our best thoughts and feelings are
connected; by what we have been kept back from wrong
or encouraged to right doing; by what we have been
led to repentance, cheered in sorrow, or strengthlened
for virtuous effort, - we find that, from whatever the impulse directly proceeded, it was connected,  nearly or
remotely, with the precepts and example of Jesus Christ.
The enlightening and healing power of the gospel has
come to us from the guidance of Christian parents; from
the teachings of the Christian pulpit, from the institutions, the customs, the habits of thought and feeling of
a Christian community. We recognize in the gospel
the source of every hallowed influence; we perceive its
result within ourselves, and we know that the medicine
must be genuine from its power to heal.
To him in whose inward experience it is fully realized,
this evidence to the truth of Christianity from personal
knowledge of its worth is the most powerful of all.  It
131 
EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.
is this which retains, in firm allegiance to Christ, thousands who have never had it in their power to examine
the testimony of antiquity, or to follow the researches
of science.  They know the truth of the religion because
it has been to them individually  the power of God unto
salvation." Let the assurance they give us encourage
our efforts, and if convinced by the evidences we have
surveyed, that Jesus spake the words of God, let us
strive, by obedience to his holy law, to crown our speculative) faith in his gospel by personal experience of its
inestimable value.
132 
QUESTIONS FOR EXAMINAT1ION.
Section I. - 1. Whence is knowledge on religious subjects commonly derived? 2. What original sources can be named? 3. What do we learn fromn
innate ideas? 4. What from nature?  5. Why are not these means of knowledge sufficient. 6. Into.what errors have men fallen with regard to the nature
of God?  7. What is said of morality among the ancient heathen? 8. What
of customs of society?  9. Human sacrifices?  10. Divine honors?  11. What
is said of those who now reject Christianity? 12. What then seems probable?
13. What instances of God's goodness confirm this probability? 14. Of what
can revelation alone assure us? 15. By what is this probability further
confirmed?
Section II.- 1. What is a miracle? 2. What must revelation be, and
why? 3. What is implied in denying the possibility of miracle? 4. What is
said of the uniformity of the lawsof nature?  5. What of the power of God?
6. Why does religion appear worthy of miraculous intervention.r 7. To what
miracle or miracles does science testify? 8. What does Geology teach?
9. Why must the beginnings of vegetable and animal life have been miraculous? 10. How is this conclusion affected, if we admit the theory of gradual development? 11. How, if creation be resolved into a single impulse?  12. What
inference can we draw from creation to revelation? 13. How may miracles be
consistent with laws of nature? 14. Give the illustration of the bird in the
forest. 15. That of the sunrise and the comet. 16. What has been argued
from human experience? 17. To what does our individual experience amount?
18. Is all the testimony of past ag,es on one side? 19. On which side is the
positive testimony -for miracles. or against them?  20. To what two purposes
are miracles applied? 21. Why not to others?  22. What must miracles be, in
order to command belief?  23. What must the revelation be which they sustain? 24. How must they be proved? 25. What does Christianity claim?
26. What passages are referred to? (This question may be asked in all future
references to passages of Scripture.) 27. What does consistency require of us?
28. Supposing Christianity received on other grounds, what connection would
miracles have with its authority?  29. How would they prove God's love to
man? 30. What is the most suitable question for us to ask P
Section  lII.- 1. What  inquiry now meets us?  2. What is said of
Christianity and civilization?  3. Of the condition of woman?  4. Character of Christians?  5. Admissions of sceptics?  6. Endeavors to improve
12 
QUESTIONS FOR EXAMINATION.
Christianity? 7. What idea does Christianity give of God? 8. What of man?
9. Of duty? 10. Of mnan's destiny? 11. For what does it alone exhibit a
fitness?  12. What is said of the requirements of Mohammedanism?  13. Of
Ju(laism? 14. How does Christianity differ from them?  15. From what does
it propose to save its disciples?
Section IV. - 1. What are the other religions in the world? 2. How was
Judaism given? 3. In what respects is it incomplete? 4. How is the spirit
of Judaism, in some former ages, exemplified in the second book of Esdcras?
5. Fronm what is  Iohliammedanism derived? 6. Whlat is its chlaracter?  7. Whlat
is said of Morinonism?  8. Wily may Buddhisei be distinguishled from otl(her
eat'hen  religions?  9. What are some of its characteristics'?  10. What is
said of Heathenism?   11. What is said of ancienlt plhilosoplhers?   12. Of
Pltto? 13. What is said of other religions respeetitig miracles?  14. What of
Mo'liammredasrism?  15. Bralhminism and Heathenism? 1(6. By what names is
Deisin soimetines called?  17. From what are its doctrines in great part derived?  18. Wlhat doctrines are doubted by some among those who reject
Christianity?
Section  V. - 1. In what does Christianity coincide with natural  religion?
2. Io-ow lias modern science matde this clearer?  3. What resemnblance between
God's  governnent it n atture and in Christianity with regard to small thils?
4.,lhit ii re,ard to the practical and  the theoretical?  5. How does Chlristianity tiaci colicernin   g a future life? (i. How does 3Mohammedanism? 7. How
is Clhristianity analogous to nature in its operation on the heart, and oni society?  8. How in its remedial character?  9. How in its mediatorial character?
10. What cases of suffering are analogous to thie death of Christ?  11. How hlas
this iagreement withi nature been used as an argutment ag,ainst Christianity?
12. Why sioulnd we not expect all the teachings of Jesus to be new?  13. For
what purposes, beyond the teachitng of new truth, did lie come?
Section  VI. - 1. How otherwise may the harmony of Christianity with
nature be seen?  2. How is it addressed to thle intellect? 3. Htow to the imaginaltion? 4. Give an account of some of the passages referred to.  5. How is
Christianity adapted to the conscience and the will? (. What is said respecting, future judgment? 7. What of the excitement of conscience? 8. Hope of
pardon and assistance?  9. How is it adapted to the affections in the idea it
presents of God?  10. How in that of the Savior? 11. How in regard to tlhe
domestic and  social affections?  (Under each question give the passages
referred to.)
Section VII.-1. Wlhat does the moral law of Christianity embrace?
2. How are these principles taught by heathen philosophers, by the Old Testament, and by Christ?  3. What further rules are given by Christianity, expressly or by implication? 4. In what respects is Christianity a system of
restraint? 5. What opposite evil does it avoid? 6. What virtues have been
most popular?  7. What least so?  8. Which would an uninspired teacher
have chiefly commended, and why? 9. Why would an ambitious leader have
uroged them?  10. Which did Jesus commend?  iI. How do his precepts of
meekness and forgiveness appear practicable? 12. What did this course show?
13. Did he discountenance then the popular class of virtues? 14. Why did he
not directly commend them?  15. How did he encourage them? 16. Give the
134
i
I 
QUESTIONS FOR EXAMINATION.
passages referred to. 17. To what does Christianity ascribe the evils that
exist? 18. How have reformers in general directed their efforts? 19. Why
have they done right in this?  20. Why, then, has Christianity done better?
21. Why would not a fanatic have taken this ground?  22. An impostor?
23. How have some defended certain evil institutions?  24. How has the same
fact been used by others?  25. What furnishes a reply to both arguments?
26. What is said of despotism?  27. What of the gladiatorial combats?  28.
What principles did Christ lay down? 29. What institutions and practices are
condemned by him? 30. What distinction may be made by objectors between
receiving the morality of Christ and receiving his religion? 31. If one sincerely obeys his moral precepts, what will probably follow?  32. What does
the holiness of the system prove? 33. With what is its morality inseparably
connected? 34. Give the substance of the extract from Professor Norton.
Section VIII. -1. What is said of the personal character of the founder,
in most systems? 2. What claim did Jesus make? 3. Why would not a
fanatic have done thus? 4. Why would not an impostor?  5. What has been
admitted by many, who did not receive Christianity as divinely revealed?
6. What are the words of Rousseau? 7. What those of Rdenanl? 8. What
qualities does the Savior's character combine? 9. What text illustrates his
feelings as a citizen?  10. What as a friend?  11. What as a son? 12. What his
courage and gentleness?  13. What his superiority to prejudice, and his wise
self-control?  14. What his regard for the law, while he blamed the Pharisees?
15. What his course respecting tile distribution of property?  16. What his
dignity and meekness?  17. Tlhe manner in which he c,lled his followers to
him? 18. When does the beauty of his character most appear?  19. What are
the instances referredl to as preceding his crucifixion?  20. Those accompanying his crucifixion? 21. What is one of the highest achievements of art?
22. What is inferred from this? 23. Can you name any of the incidents here
mentioned which the writers could be supposed to have derived from previous
narratives? 24. What is said of the prayer for his murderers?  25. What of
his words to the penitent thief? 26. Give the substance of the passage from
President Hill.
Section  IX. -1. From wlhat source may another argument for Christianity
be derived? 2. What is said of the change produced eighteen centuries since?
3. Of the teacher who wrought this change?  4. How may so great a result,
from means apparently so inadequate, be regarded?  5. What  is said of
the birth of Jesus? 6. Of his education? 7. Of his means of Support?
8. Of the opposition against him?  9. Of the greatness of his claims?
10. What power did he claim?  11. What in regard to his conduct?  12. What
titles and rank in connection with the Jewish nation?  13. What connection
with God? 14. What did he foretell respecting himself?  15. By what other
lofty titles did he announce himself?  16. Hlow must he be regarded, if not
divinely commissioned?  17. In what manner did he make  these cl,aims?
18. What plan did hie connect with them?  19. What fate did hle foretell for
himself?  20.  -Iow did this knowledge affect him'  21. Why cn wAe not
regard him as deluded? 22. Why not as an impostor?  23. What is said of the
course he pursued? 24. What sects existed among the Jews at that time?
25. What did Jesus denounce in the Pharisees? 26. In what did he differr from
the Sadducees? 27. In what from the Essenes?  28. What feeling had they all
135 
QUESTIONS FOR EXAMINATION.
in common?  29. How would a fanatic have done?  30. How an impostor?
31. [Ilow did Jesus?  32. How respecting ceremonies?  33. Respecting the
Sainaritans?  34. Respecting the Temple?   35. What course did he pursue
wlithl reg,ard to the Gentiles?  36. Yet what was the result?  37. What is said
of the first day's preaching? 38. Effect of persecution?  39. Contest with
RIoman power? 40. With barbarism?  41. Of the present prospects of Christianity? 42. HIow is this triumphant system considered by modern sceptics?
Section X. - 1. For what reason, besides direct evidence, do the death and
resurrection of Jesus claim our belief? 2. What is said of some of the facts
of Christianity? 3. What are these?  4. What is the tradition of the church
respecting the death of the Savior?   5. What is that of its opponents?
6. What does a reformer incur?  7. How  if he claims a divine commission?
8. What, then, is it agreed, did Jesus undergo? 9. What is said of crucifixion?
10. What must have been the state of his followers after his death'? 11. If
they hadI remained in this condition, could the religion have prevailed? 12. What
restored their faith and courage, according to their own account? 13. How was
the resurrection of Jesus proclaimed? 14. What is the testimony of the book of
Acts?  15. What that of 1 Corinthians? 16. What is the admission of Strauss?
17. If Jesus dlid not rise from the dead, what must one of his followers have
been?  18. What, in that case, did this disciple accomplish?  19. How does
modern scepticism meet  this argument?  20. What  have  some  fancied?
21. What does this fail to explain?  22. Why?  23. What is the theory of
Strauss on this subject? 24. How only would such an illusion be possible?
25. In what, then, does this explanation fail?  26. How does Strauss account
for the testimony of St. Paul? 27. How does this consist with the strength of
the apostle's mind?  28. To what further objection is this supposition liable?
Section XI. - 1. What has been inferred from the present existence and
power of Christianity? 2. What similar argument is now proposed? 3. What
is said of this proof, in reference to others? 4. Of what do institutions afford
proof? 5. What does the observance of the Fourth of July prove? 6. How
if all records were lost? 7. Why could not the observance have arisen in intervening ages of darkness?  8. From what kind of cause must it have arisen?
9. What would decide respecting the real cause?  10. What was the Passover?
11. Is it still observed? 12. What does it commemorate? 13. Why could
it not have been instituted at any intervening point of time?  14. What
does the observance prove?  15. What respecting the history which records
that event? 16. What does the Feast of Tabernacles prove?  17. What the
Feast of Purim?  18. What other Jewish institutions?  19. What are named
as New Testament institutions? 20. Describe the Communion. 21. Why
could not this have been introduced in any intervening age?  22. From what
age must it have come down?  23. What do the words connected with it imply,
as to the author of the custom? 24. What must he have foreseen?  25. Why
must his anticipation have been accomplished?  26. What might he have done?
27. HIow does this appear? 28. What did he do instead?  29. What qualities
does this rite show that he possessed? 30. What respecting the fulfilment of
his expectations for the success of his cause? 31. What, then, does the ordinance prove with regard to the character and endowments of the Savior? (It
may be interesting and useful to follow out, in a similar manner, the argument
to be derived from the ordinance of Baptism, Matt. xxviii. 19; that from the
136
I
II 
QUESTIONS FOR EXAMINATION.
institution of the ministry, Matt. x. 1; 2 Tim. ii. 2; and that from "the Lord's
Day," John xx. 19, 26; Acts xx. 7; 1 Cor. xvi. 2; Rev. i. 10.)
Section Xl.- - 1. What claim is peculiar to the religion of the Bible?
2. What was the character of the age in which Jesus lived? 3. By whom were
his actions, instructions, and miracles witnessed and recorded? 4. At what risk
were the statements of these witnesses made?  5. By whom were they received
as true? 6. What of contradictory accounts? 7. What of legendary additions?
8. What are the records of Christianity?   9. When is a book genuine?
10. When is it authentic?   11. Into what classes is the evidence divided?
12. What traditional evidence have we for the books of the New Testament?
13. What is said of the original manuscripts?  14. Hlow many manuscripts of
the Gospels have been examined?  15. What is the age of some of them?
16. What is said of the manuscripts of ancient versions? 17. What of the
works of the Christian Fathers?  18. When are the Gospels admitted to have
been in common use?  19. What is the era of the ascendency of Christianity?
20. By what event was this marked?  21. What did the Roman empire then
comprise?  22. Who wrote about this time?  23. What testimony does he give
to the books of the New Testament? 24. Of what does he speak doubtfully?
25. Of what does hlie speak as undoubtedly genuine? 26. What does this discrimination show? 27. When did Origen die?  28. How early was he engaged
in expounding the Scriptures? 29. What does he testify respecting the Gospels?
30. What is said of his quotations? 31. What was the period of Tertullian?
32. What is said of the quotations in this writer? 33. When did Clement of Alexandria flourish? 34. Of what does hle give an account?  35. What distinction
does he make?  36. What is the Aluratorian Canon?  37. What is its date?
38. How is this ascertained? 39. Of what books does it speak as canonical?
40. By whom and when was it discovered?
Section XIIT.-1. When did Irenceus live? 2. Where and from whom
did he receive instruction? 3. Where did he afterwards minister? 4. How
do these facts affect the value of his evidence? 5. What account does he give
of the origin of the Gospels? 6. What letter was written about A. D. 170?
7. To what books does it contain references? 8. What  was then the age of
Pothinus, bishop of Lyons?  9. What do these facts indicate?  10. When did
Justin live, and why is he called Martyr?  11. What is said of his quotations?
12. What account does he give of the Savior? 13. How far does this differ
from the Gospels? 14. In what instances does he refer to the Gospel of John?
15. Why are these quotations of especial importance? 16. How has this evidence been met?  17. How is the objection removed by the recently discovered
Sinaitic manuscript?  18. What is the date of Papias?  19. By whom is a fragment of his writing preserved? 20. What is his testimony? 21. With whose
does it agree?  22. Where did Polycarp preside?  23. When and how did he
die? 24. What was his answer when life was offered him if he would revile
Christ? 25. Of whom had he been a scholar?  26. What does Irenleus record
of him?  27. What allusions does his Epistle contain? 28. In what books are
the passages alluded to? 29. By whom and where is Clement of Rome namned?
30. From what Gospel does Clement quote? 31. From what Epistles? 32. Who
are generally called the Apostolical Fathers, and why? 33. Whom does Papias
quote as his instructor? 34. Who does "John the Elder "appear to have been,
from the testimony of Ireneus? 35. What has been conjectured of the Gospels
12 *
137
I 
QUESTIONS FOR EXAMIINATION.
used by some of these Fathers?  36. What appears from Luke i. 1. 37. Why
did these other writings disappear?  38. What would have been the case
if they hadt contained different accounts? 39. What shows that they were the
same with ours?  40. What is said finally of the testimony of Papias?
Section XIV.- 1. What fact strengthens the testimony of the Fathers?
2. How is this instanced in Eusebius? (See p. 40.) 3. When did Dionysius lire,
and respecting what  book did he express doubt?  4. Origen?  5. Camius?
6. What do these facts prove? 7. What has been the general decision since
respecting the books then doubted? 8. What ought our decision to be
respecting those which were then undoubted?  9. From what else can we infer
the truth of the Gospels?  10. What passages show the prominence given to
events in the history of Jesus?  11. What is remarked by Mr. Norton? 12. To
what class do the writers thus far quoted belong?  13. Whatt other class was
there? 14. Who were the earliest of these? 15. What were the Ebionites,
and their views? 16. What is said of the Gospel they possessed?  17. What
other class of heretics was there? 18. From what source were their ideas
derived? 19. What does their name imply? 20. How do they seem to have
formed their systems? 21. How were they disposed with regard to anything
Jewish? 22. About what time did Marcion live? 23. What was his course with
regard to the Gospels? 24. What did Heracleon write, and when? 25. What
is said of Valentinus in relation to John's Gospel?   26. The Montanists?
27. The Alogi? 28. When did Basilides live, and what did he write?  29. With
what Gospels was he acquainted? 30. Had the early Gnostics any other Gospels
than ours? 31. What is said of other books called Gospels among the later
Gnostics? 32. What does Tertullian assert? 33. How does he argue against
their right to do this? 34. What does this argument prove? 35. What is said
by Paley respecting early sects?
Section XV.-1. To what class of writers do we now turn? 2. When were
the Talmuds composed? 3. Of what particulars connected with Christianity
do they speak?  4. What account do they give of the miracles of Christ?
5. Why is their testimony valuable?  6. Who was Josephus?  7. What direct
references to Christ appear in his works? 8. What is saidl of these passages?
9. In what is his evidence of most value? 10. Exemplify this in his account
of Herod I. 11. Of Herod Antipas. 12. Agrippa I. 13. Agrippa II. 14. What
heathen writers are named? 15. Who was Julian? 16. What is said of his
testimony?  17. When did Porphyry write?  18. What is said of his work?
19. To what Christian writings did he refer?  20. Who was Celsus? 21. From
what source do we learn respecting his book? 22. What words did he use?
23. What is remarked respecting them? 24. Of what does he accuse the Christians? 25. From what did the various readings probably result?  26. What do
they prove? 27. What other expression of Celsus proves the antiquity of the
Christian writings? 28. What are the-particulars to which Celsus refers by
way of objection? 29. What does his language prove?  30. How long, was
this after the earliest of the Gospels claims to have been written? 31. To what
conclusion does this lead us? 32. From what other source is evidence derived?
33. When was the ancient Syriac version made?  34. What do the versions
confirm?  35. What does their existence show? 36. From what other writings
may a similar argument be drawn? 37. What other source of evidence is
mentioned? 38. What is said of a coin of Cyprus?  39. Of Philippi?  40. Of
coins of Ephesus?
138
i 
QUESTIONS FOR EXAMINATION.
Section XVI. -1. What is the Internal Evidence? 2. What is said of
the language? 3. What examples of Hebraisms in the use of"  and "? 4. " Lo,"
or "behold"? 5. "Answered "?  6. In a proverbial expression? 7. In the
expression "New Birth"? 8. What of the acquaintance of the New Testament
writers with certain subjects? 9. How is it with such accuracy in fictitious
writing?  10. What chapter is taken as an example?  11. What is said of the
position of the three provinces?  12. The name of a city?  13. The parcel of
groufnd? 14. The mountain? 15. The Samaritan worship? 16. Jealousy ofJews
and Samaritans? 17. What passages in Scripture agree with these representations? 18. What existing facts confirm them? 19. What is the testimony of
Renan? 20. Of Strauss? 21. In what besides geography is this accuracy perceived? 22. How is this exemplified in the HIerod family?  23. What makes
these facts of more importance? 24. Where did the Gospel find its most
numerous adherents?  25. What took place after the Jewish war?  26. What
is said of books from Jewish Christian writers after that time? 27. How is the
argument briefly expressed?
Section XVII. -1. What is the third point in the Internal Evidences?
2. What is said of eulogy and personal description? 3. Exceptions  to this
remark? 4. What of unfavorable incidents P 5. The Savior's trial?  6. MAention of doubts?  7. What is the fourth point spoken of?  8. How illustrated in
the disciples' conduct?  9. How by words in the language spoken by Jesus?
10. HIow is the use of these words accounted for? 11. What is the fifth point
spoken of?  12. In what character, and how, is this exemplified?  13. What is
the sixth point referred to? 14. By what is MIark characterized? 15. What is
said of Matthew and Luke in their accounts of Christ's birth? 16. What is
said of the Sermon on the Mount?  17. What parables and incidents are given
by Luke alone?  18. What occurrences does John alone relate?  19. How does
his manner of relating parables differ from the others? 20. What is said of his
style?  21. What examples respecting the dignity of the Savior?  22. What of
spiritual grandeur? 23. How do the narratives agree? 24. What is said of
differences in thought and language? 25. What of differences in the narrative?
26. By what historical event is this illustrated?
Section XVIII. - 1. What is the seventh point mentioned? 2. Exemplify
this in connection with the Last Supper. 3. What is the case sometimes, when
accounts are apparently contradictory? 4. How is this exemplified? 5. What
was the charge against Jesus, as related by Luke?  6. The reply of Pilate?
7. Why does this reply seem strange?  8. What is the explanation, and where
found? 9. What is omitted by John? 10. How supplied by Luke? 11. What
is said of coincidences among the first three Gospels? 12. What have some
inferred from this? 13. What name is given by these writers to the first three
Evangelists? 14. What is probable, respecting the original Gospel, had it
existed?  15. What is the fact?  16. What is, probably, the true explanation?
17. What must have been current in the primitive churches, and therefore the
true basis of all the Gospels?  18. What is the eighth point mentioned?
19. What is said of the genuineness of the Epistles? 20. Why could they not
possibly have been forgeries? 21. To what subjects do they relate?  22. How
do they agree with the Gospels and Acts regarding the resurrection of Christ?
23. Where is the account of the Lord's Supper confirmed?  24. How is the
character of Peter illustrated?
139 
QUESTIONS FOR EXAMINATION.
Section XIX. -1. Among what books is the agreement most strikingly
discernible? 2. How is the authority of the Acts and the Epistles established?
3. In whatwork is this proof developed? 4. Exemplify the agreement of the
accounts in Paul's first visit to Jerusalem. 5. In regard to his visit to Athens,
in what do the accounts agree? 6. In what do they differ? 7. How is the
difference accounted for? 8. What of the preaching of Apollos at Corinth?
9. What do we learn from Romans of Paul's contemplated visit to Jerusalem?
10. What from Acts of the same visit? 11. How do we learn that the historian was a companion of Paul? 12. What do we learn from the conclusion of
the Acts? 13. How does it appear that the Gospel of Luke and the Acts were
by the same author? 14. When was Luke's Gospel written, and how does this
appear? 15. What does this chain of evidence prove respecting the authorship of this Gospel? 16. What respecting its date, with reference to the
crucifixion?
Section XX.- 1. To what other writings may a similar train of argument
be applied? 2. What does the writer of the fourth Gospel claim? 3. How is
this claim affected if the verse which contains it is from another hand?  4. W'hat
is said of his style? 5. Where do we learn the name of the writer?  6. What
may be conjectured from the remark in John xxi. 23? 7. What from the circumlocutions by which he conceals his name?  8. What is said of the prominence given to this apostle? 9. How does Renan account for this? 10. How
would such weakness affect his character as an historian?  11. What is the
more probable explanation? 12. What other supposition remains? 13. If this
were true, what would the Gospel still be to us?  14. Why is this theory less
probable? 15. By what writers has the genuineness of this Gospel been
especially attacked? 16. What are the arguments brought against it? 17. How
do we reply to that from thedifference of its narrative? 18. In what respects
is Johln's Gospel supplementary? 19. How did his personal attachment affect
his writing? 20. How his spiritual insight?  21. What is said, however, of
the testimony of the other evangelists to the same objects? 22. Why do these
critics consider the idea of the Logos as indicating a later date? 23. In what
early writer does the same idea occur? 24. What is said of its occurrence in
the Apocalypse? (Rev. xix. 13.) 25. How is the fact accounted for that the
other Gospels do not mention the raising of Lazarus?  26. What other explanation is suggested? 27. IHow is the apparent difference with regard to the Last
Supper explained? 28. How is the "moral miracle" of Christianity affected
if the fourth Gospel is set aside? 29. If the transactions it records did not
take place, what must have been the endowments of its inventor? 30. How
do these endowments render it improbable that he should impose a false
Gospel on the world? 31. That he should leave no trace of his existence
except a forgery? 32. What is the admission of R6nan?
Section XXI. -1. What endeavor has been made to depreciate the authentic Gospels?  2. What are the Apocrypha of the New Testament?  3. What
result is here anticipated from their examination?  4. What may be inferred
from Luke's preface? 5. Why did these accounts fall into disuse?  6. Whi,ch
seems to have been the most important of them? 7. With what may it have
been identical? 8. By whom is it quoted? 9. What other Gospel is mentioned? 10. By whom is it mentioned?  11. What was his knowledge of it?
12. What further is said of these books? 13. What is the assertion of Paley?
140
i
t 
QUESTIONS FOR EXAMINATION.
14. What is said of the date of the Apocrypha of the New Testament? 15. How
do they compare with the authentic Gospels? 16. Who is quoted as authority in
the First Gospel of the Infancy? 17. How does this agree with what we know
of Jewish High Priests, and of Caiaphas in particular?  18. What wonder is
lie said to relate? 19. What titles are given to Mary in the same Gospel?
20. What is the story of the boy possessed with devils?  21. The cures
wrought by the Virgin with water?  22. Transformation of the young man?
23. Miracle of the throne?  24. Fate of the boy who ran against Jesus?
25. Complaint of the parents, and subsequent conduct ascribed to Jesus?
26. What account is given of Carinus and Leucius? 27. What is told of Pilate?
28. Acknowledgment of the Jewish Council? 29. Prophecy they are said to
havediscovered?  30. SubsequentactionandfateofPilate?  31.Whatremarks
are made upon the character of these stories? 32. From what did they
probably originate? 33. Which of these documents purports to be from the
hand  of Jesus himself? 34. Htow may the "Gospel of Nicodemus"  be regarded? 35. How far are the apocryphal writings inconsistent with the
genuine Gospels?
)
Section  XXII. -1. What appears to be now established respecting the
Gospels? 2. What of other books?  3. For what would this be sufficient?
4. Iow exemplified in the fourth Gospel?  5. What else, however, is proved?
6. What proofs are especially referred to? 7. What is said of the general
voice of antiquity? 8. Its unanimity?  9. How exemplified?  10. Number of
the witnesses?  11. What objection from disagreement of copies?  12. What
is said of the number of various readings? 13. What of their importance?
14. How are they accounted for?  15. What is said of the claims of these
records? 16. HIow illustrated in a modern instance? 17. On what account
are they objected to? 18. By whom is this position taken? 19. How have they
been led to it? 20. What have scientific researches produced?- 21. Why has
this conviction been considered opposed to miracle? 22. How is the objection answered? 23. that is said of intellectual philosophy for a century past?
24. What system has prevailed in Germany? 25. By what names illustrated?
25. What is one distinguishing trait of it? 27. How far is this commendable?
28. When is it carried to an extreme?  29. What is assumed by some recent
writers?  30. What does this assumption show? 31. What is the remark of
Strauss? 32. Against what does R6nan protest?  33. Still, what conclusion
does he reach, previous to examination?
Section XXIII. -1. Of what is a view proposed to be given?  2. On
what supposition does the first class of these theories proceed? 3. What is to
be classed among these? 4. What author has attempted this? 5. To what
does he aseribe many of the Gospel wonders? 6. To what remarkable miracle
is this view applied? 7. In what manner? 8. To what miracles, among others,
is this theory inapplicable? 9. Where it is used, to what objection is it liable?
10. How is the passage, John ix. 32, applied to this theory?  11. What is said
of the manner in which it has been advocated? 12. What is the representation
of the German Naturalists? 13. Who is the best known among them? 14. How
does Dr. Paulus explain the miracle of the fish and the piece of money?
15. HIow the raising of Lazarus?  16. How the ascension? 17. What opinion
of previous writers does Strauss perceive implied in this theory of Paulus?
18. What was the fancy of Bahrdt? 19. That of Brennecke? 20. That of
141 
QUESTIONS FOR EXAMINATION.
Paulus with regard to the fate of Jesus? 21. What opinion does Strauss
express respecting them? 22. What is said of the conduct ascribed to Jesus
by these theories?
Section XXIV.- 1. What is the second class of theories? 2. How does
IRena,nl conceive Jesus to have assumed  the position of wonder-worker?
3. How would this explanation affect our estimate of him? 4. In what
instance does Re6nan suppose Jesus to have been himself deceived?  5. By
whom, and for what purpose? 6., What event has been the subject of the
boldest speculations? 7. For what reason was this? 8. On what two ideas do
the explanations pr oceed? 9. IIow is the death of Jesus explained by some?
10. What is urged in support of this? 11. What cases referred to. 12. Ilow
were these persons restored? 13. What would be required, then, to explain
the restoration of Jesus? 14. What is the supposition of Bahrdt as to the
plan of Jesus? 15. As to the agents in his restoration? 16. What have others
ascribed to his disciples,?  17.  rhat did Schuster suppose?  18. What is tlhe
theory of a writer in the Westminster RIeview? 19. What orders is Pilate supposed to have given, and why? 20. What is observed respecting the thrust
with a spear? 21. What respecting the slowness of recovery in such a case?
22. Why cannot vwe believe that Jesus was mistaken in thinking he had been
dead? 23. Why not that he was deceiving his disciples? 24. To what does
Renan ascribe the story of the resurrection? 25. What objection is made to
this theory?
Section XXV. - 1. What is the ground taken by many?  2. Why cannot
this be held consistently?  3. How is this exemplified in the account of the
raising of Lazarus?  4. What is said of the portions  being interwoven?
5. How exemplified in the same account?  6. Whlat name is given to the theory
of Dr. Strauss?  7. How far is it peculiarly his?  8. Hlow does it suppose the
stories respectiing Jesus to have arisen?  9. With what purpose did the evalngelists collect these myths?  10. Ilow are the miraculous incidents considered?
11. Iow those not miraculous?  12. What remains as true respecting Jesus?
13. With what is this theory inconsistent? 14. How does the Christian era
diTer from the ag,es of fable?  15. What is said of the periods allowed by
Strauss for the production of mnytlhs? 16. I-Iow would Jewish myths have
represented the -Messiah? 17. What do the Apocrypha of the New Testament
show us? 18. Why cannot we believe that the myths originated from the
companions of Jesus? 19. Why not, that they left no authentic account?
20. Had they left such, could  the mythical account have  superseded it?
21. What would have been the interest of the enemies of Jesus?  22. What
does their explanation of his miracles imply?  23. What would have prevented
the reception of these myths by the Gentile Christians? 24. What is the
Christian relig,ion, apart from the question of its divine origin?  25. From
wshat did it arise, according to this theory?  20. What is said of a later work
of Dr. Strauss? 27. What does lie here represent to be the date of the Gospels?  28. What respecting intentional fiction?  29. IHov does he reg,ard
Jesus?.0. What is saidl of the legendary history of Greece  and Itome?
3,1. Wlhat of the history of our Lord?  32. With what miracle is the narrative
cro-vned? 33. WVithI what supposition is the mythical theory fiinally compared?
Section  XXVI.- 1. Why is the Old Testament of value to us? 2.'low
is it sustained by quotations in the New? 3. How by the position of the
142
I
t 
QUESTIONS FOR EXAM3INATION.
Savior?  4. Hlow does the Old Testament sustain the New by prophecies?
5. By what peculiarities of its character?  6. What system does the Ol1 Tests   lment present? 7. Holw does this appear from its first principle?  8. How in
contrast with Egyptian superstition?  9.'low by the name it gives to the
Supreme? 10. HIlow by representations of his nature? 11. How by his moral
attributes, and his power, wisdom, and providence?  12. How by the Ten
Commandmluents?  13. How by laws relating to the poor? 14. IHow by treat   ment of defective institutions?  15. How by contrast withl idolatry?  10. Hlow
by passages of especial sublimity and beauty? 17. Give an account of the 23d
psalm. (Tile same of each of the other passages referred to.)
Section  XXVII..-1. Why are ancient documents liable to be obscure?
2. What was customary with ancient writers? 3. What passages will this flact
explain? 4. On what authority do some of the narratives rest?  5. Hlow far is
the compiler of Genesis accountable for what is there related?  6. From what
source is Joshua x. 12-14 derived?  7. What is observed with regard to errors
in matters of science?  8. Censurable conduct of persons whllo are mentionedl
with approval?  9. Standard of morals, and peculiar temptations?  10. Supposed incorrect sentiments of the sacred historian?  11. Doubts regarding any
particular books?  12. VVWhat facts wo-uldc remain undisturbed? 13. What result
sometimes appears from free investig;ation?  14. What disposition appears in
some writers?  15. What passages, amoing others, contradict suchl representations?  16. What is said of the sacrifice of Isaac?  17. What is 31r. Parker's
tribute to the Hebrew system?
Section  XXVIII. - 1. By whlat kinds of evidence is the Old Testament
sustained?  2. Of external evidence, what is the testimony of the Jewishl
nation? 3. What is said of the care withl which the books have  been preserved? 4. What do the Christian Scriptures prove, if regarded merely as
ancient workls? 5. What is said of Josephus?  6. What of Phiilo? 7. What
of the Apocryphal books?  8. The Samaritans? 9. Wh,"t of the S,amaritan
Pentateluh? 10. What retndlers their testimony the more valuable? 11. WlIt
other sources of evidence are mentioned?  12. Name  some of the heathen
writers who ascribe the Jewish laws to Mioses?  13. When did Hecatoeus aud
M1anetho live?  14. What of Longinus?  15. What ancient Hlindoo poemi is
mentioned?  16. Give an account of the quotation from it.  17. What similar
account is given, and by whom?  18. What of the records of Berosus and
Manetlio? 19. What is related by Moses of Chorene and others?  20. Who
was Nicolaus, and what testimony does h1e tive?  21. How is the marria,ge of
Ahab illustrated? 22. What particulars in regard to Eithobalus agree with
the characters of Jezebel and Atludiab? 23. What coincidence is there in
regarrd to two of the later Egyptian kin,s?  24. By what monuments are
events in sacred history illustrated? 25. Conquest of Rehoboam by Shishak?
26. Kilgdomns of Israel and Judah?  27. Reign of Ben-hadad?  28. Intervention of Tiglath Pileser?  29. Altar of Ahaz?  30. Subjugation of Hlezekiah?
1!. Captivity of Manasseh? 32. So, or Sevech, king of Eg,ypt? 33. Why has
the account of Belshazzar appeared contrary to history?  34. How is this
explained by a recent discovery?  35. In what does the internal evidence of the
Old Testament consist?  36. What does the history in Exodus  exhibit?
37. How is this exemplified in the passage of the'ted Sea? 38. What two
accounts corroborate each other? 39. What other books coincide frequently
143 
QUESTIONS FOR EXAMINATION.
with the historical? 40. What of the argument from institutions?  41. Wliat
is the great evidence to us for the Old Testament? 42. What is said of questions of Old T'estamluent criticism?
Section XXIX.-1. From what is an important branch of Christian
evidence derived?  2. What is said of the history of the Jers? 3. Belief of
other nations reg,arding, the golden a,ge?  4. What of the lHebrew view?
5. What anticipation appears through the Jewish history?  6. What of this
anticipation at the Christian era?.7. From what writers do we learn this?
8. What of this expectation among the Jews since that time?  9. In what
character did the Jews expect the Messiah  to appear?   10. What  is said
of passages inconsistent with this idea?  11. What did some Jewish writers
assert? 12. What took place at tle period when this expectattion wils strongest?
13. F'rom whom is Jesus represented as descended?  14. What did he call the
commrunity he established 1 15. How was the term justified? 16. How of the
predictions of suffering? 17. What objections arc brought against this being
reg,,ardedcl as the fulfilment of the national expectation? 18. What is essential
to tile character of prophecy? 19. What were the reasons for the rejection of
Jesus?  20. What answer had the Jews to the evidence of mrireacles? 21. Hlow
does the chief reason of the Jews for rejectinig Jesus appear to us?  22. How
does the station which they expected himr to assume compare with his real one?
23. In what question did he suggest this thought?  24. What is said of an uninspired Jew entertaining this idea? 25. What rejection and choice wvould it
imply? 26. What would be the probability of his thus succeeding?  27. In what
station would the prophets naturally expect the Messiah to appear?  28. What
appears, from some indications in the prophets, wvithl regard to their predictions? 29. What might have taken place if the Jews had accepted Jesus?
30. Why is the above argument independent of particular prophecies? 31. State
briefly what the argument is.
A
Section  XXX.-  1. What claims does  the Jewish religion possess?
2. State some of the grounds of these clainls. 3. What is there in contrast
with these claims? 4. In what respects does it show its national character?
5. Its purpose to keep the people apart from other nations? 6. If the Jewish
laws were of later date than Moses, what must still be true of them 7 7. If the
account of the deliverance from Egypt were of later date, what must still be
true respecting it? 8. For what reason? 9. IV-hat suppositions may be formed
to account for the Jewish religion?  10. What does the first supposition
imply? 11. What respecting those who taught it?  12. Why cannot this be
believed? 13. What contrast is pointed out between the Jewish nation and
others, and what inference drawvn? 14. With what is the second supposition
inconsistent? 15. In what respects? 16. What of the brotherhood of mankind? 17. What of the divine unity and care for all mankind? 18. What do
these limitations show?  19. What fulfils this promise?  20. How does it
regard the Jewish religion? 21. What difficulty would meet us without Christianity? 22. What without Judaism?  23. What is said of the period when the
newv light was given?  24. What was the condition of the Jewish system?
25. What of heathen systems?  26. What of the political changes in the East?
27. Of those in the West?  28. Final ascendency of the Romans?  29. Heathen
philosophy?  30. Close of the civil wars?  31. Settlement of Jews in various
places? 32. What indications of divine providence do we recognize? 33. What
144
i 
QUESTIONS FOR EXAMINATION.
objection is named? 34. I-low is this answered? 35. How is this exemplified
in the existence of Jewish communities?  36. What question is suggested
concerning the long delay of revelation?  37. Of what do sacred and profane
history give intimations? 38. What was probably derived from this? 39. How
did this early knowledge become corrupted and weakened?  40. What was sent
to supply its place?
Section XXXI. -1. Of what two descriptions are the Old Testament
prophecies? 2. To what do the instances given, of the first description,
relate? 3. How is the fulfilment of these evident? 4. What are such predictions respecting Nineveh?  5. 5Ioab?  6. Philistia? 7. Edom?  8. When and
how did the fulfilment of this prophecy appear?  9. Egypt?   10. Tyre?
11. Babylon?  12. What  has been  the disposition of some  theologians?
13. What psalm is referred to in illustration? 14. What is its title?  15. Repeat
some verses that are not applicable to any temporal prince. 16. What has
been the usual explanation?  17. What is said of the prophetic insight into
the future?  18. What was known to the prophets?  19. Under what character did they conceive of him?  20. What would they be led to hope in
connection with the respective monarchs of whom they wrote? 21. What
prospects would become blended in their description?  22. How is this exemplified in Ps. ii.?  23. In Ps. xlv.?  24. In Ps. lxxii.?  25. In Is. vii. 14?
26. Perhaps in Dan. ix.? 27. By what will this evidence not be materially
affected? 28. Whatever the source of the prophets' foreknowledge, what will
still remain? 29. What prophecy is given from Gen. xxii. 18? 30. How does
this differ from the natural aspiration of a rude age? 31. What is said of the
first words of Ps. xxii.?  32. Repeat the other verses quoted.  33. What renders the coincidence of verse 16 more remarkable?  34. What is the language
of Ps. cx. 4? 35. How is this explained, and where, in the New Testament?
36. How is the objection answered that this psalm speaks of a conquering
monarch?  37. Repeat Is. ix. 6. 38. What is said of the translation?  39. What
still does the passage  indicate?  40. What is said Is. xlix. 5, 6? 41. What
remark is made upon it? 42. What chapter is referred to?  43. Where in the
New Testament is the passage in Is. liii. referred to?  44. Repeat the 5th,
6thl, and 7th verses.  45. The 8th, 9th, and 10th, in the version of Dr. Noyes.
46. Repeat Mic. v. 2. 47. Where is this referred to in the New Testament?
48. What is predicted in Ha,. ii. 7, 9? 49. In DIal. iii. 1? 50. In 5Ial. iv. 5, 6?
51. HIow is this referred to in the New Testament? 52. How are the Old and
New Testaments connected?
Section XXXII.- 1. What other proof is there from prophecy?  2. To
what do the most remarkable of the New Testament prophecies relate?
3. Where are these found at most length? 4. Where else do they appear, in a
striking form?  5. What especial marks of genuineness do these passages
bear? 6. Quote the passages referred to.  7. What is said of their fulfilment?
8. Describe the Jewishi rebellion, and its result.  9. What objection is named?
10. How is this answered by reference to the figurative language employed?
11. How by comparison with the ancient prophets?  12. How has the Old Testainent been seen to be prophetic of the New? 13. HIow do the life and death
of Jesus imply the overthrow of the Jewish state? 14. How long had that
state existed? 15. What had it survived? 16. What was its prospect of
endurance? 17. What were the character and power of the Roman dominion?
13
145
z 
QUESTIONS FOR EXAMINATION.
18. What treatment did Jesus and his claims receive? 19. If he was the
Messiah, what did this rejection of him render necessary? 20. To what considerations was this due? 21. If the Jewish state had stood unitnjured, what argument would the fact have afforded? 22. How did the rejection of Christ
receive its punishment?  23. How was this event regarded when it took place?
24. With what was the overthrow of the Jewish nation in accordance?
25. What is said of their attachment to their law? 26. How only can they be
considered as having incurred the threatened penalty? 27. What prophecy in
Deuteronomy is referred to? 28. What reference is made to it in the New
Testament? 29. What is said of the Jews since that time? 30. What is their
continued existence? 31. What is said of the Romans? 32. Other Western
nations of that period? 33. Of the Greeks? 34. Circumstances which threatened the destruction of the Jews? 35. Their present state? 36. What is said
of predictions yet unfulfilled? 37. For what purpose, perhaps, are they preserved? 38. What are the passages referred to?
Section XXXIII.- 1. In how many aspects may the sufferings of the
early Christians be regarded? 2. How do they show the truth of the accounts
given? 3. How the excellence of the religion? 4. What qualities did the
martyrs display?  5. Whose sufferings are first to be considered?  6. What
confirms the account of these sufferings? 7. What would the enemies of
Jesus have done, if possible?  8. What facts, then, are established?  9. What
do these show? 10. If his claims had been false, what would have been his
endeavor? 11. What effect would an evil conscience have had? 12. What is
said of his last utterances, on this supposition? 13. How does such conduct
compare with all we know respecting him-?  14. By whose sufferings, besides
those of Jesus, is Christianity confirmed?  15. In what manner?  16. How
illustrated in the resurrection of Jesus?  17. What might be presumed from
the nature of the case?  18. How did they offend the Jews?  19. How the
Gentiles?  20. What result would probably follow?  21. What instance is
mentioned in Scripture of their enduring exile?  22. Scourging?  23. Imprisonment? 24. Stoning? 25. The loss of life? 26. What martyrdom is related
by Josephus? 27. When and how did this take place?  28. What words in
this account are doubtful? 29. What appears, even if these words were subsequently added? 30. By what writer is the account confirmed?  31. When was
Tacitus born? 32. What suspicion, does he tell us, fell upon Nero?  33. Upon
whom did he charge the crime, and with what motive? 34. What account does
Tacitus give of the Christians? 35. What tortures were inflicted on them?
36. What is the account of Suetonius? 37. What poets refer to the same occurrences? 38. To what torture do they particularly allude? 39. What station
did Pliny hold, and when? 40. To whom did hlie write respecting the Christians? 41. What did he say of the spread of Christianity?  42. What punishments had Pliny inflicted? 43. What of informations? 44. What had Pliny
learned of the conduct of the Christians? 45. What answer did he receive from
the emperor?  46. Which of the apostles are mentioned by Clement of Rome
as having suffered death? 47. Of what other sufferers does he speak? 48. From
what letter is an extract given? 49. What tortures does it commemorate?
50. Through what centuries did the persecutions continue? 51. How did they
sometimes occur? 52. How more extensively?  53. How many general persecutions have been enumerated? 54. By what monuments are these statements
confirmed?  55. What are the catacombs?  56. How many graves are they
146
iI 
QUESTIONS FOR EXAMINATION.
estimated to contain? 57. What does this prove? 58. What marks of martyrdom
occur on some of the monuments?  59. What did the sufferings of these later
victims prove? 60. What respecting the power of their religion? 61. What
is said of their imitation of the Savior's prayer? 62. What was the effect of
their patience and piety?
Section  XXXIV.-  1. To what has much attention been devoted?  2. By
what have disciples been generally won to Christianity?  3. How  has the
efficacy of Christianity been proved, in the first place? 4. Why has it not
done all that might be desired?  5. What ancient evil custom has it abolished?
6. What of licentiousness and sensuality'  7. What of war and despotism?
8. What account can you give of slavery in ancient times? 9. Of feudal slavery,
and the influecice of Christianity in destroying it? (See Macaulay's History
of Eng-,land, Chap. I. Remarks on the extinction of villenage.) 10. Of efforts
for the removal of modern slavery, and their success? 11. What valuable
institutions has Christianity established?  12. What great Christian philanthropists and reformers can you name? 13. How is the efficacy of Christianity
displayed in civilizing a rude neighborhood? 14. How in reclaiming a reckless
and dissolute man?  15. How in giving comfort to the distressed?  16. How in
extending civilization? 17. How can we perceive its influence within ourselves?  18. Name the means through which Christianity influences us indirectly. 19. What is the most powerful evidence to the individual of the truth
of Christianity?  20. With what suggestion does the book conclude?
l
147
i 
I