|
(Continued
from issue #6).
Letter 4.
And
first—the Book of Acts, which is said to be the work of St. Luke, was
rejected by many, particularly the Marconites and Manicheans; many
others described the acts of the Apostles, yet were they rejected,* for
the same important reason that this was received, that is, because it
agreed better with the doctrines in vogue than the others. St.
Chrysostom complains that this book was little known, and that the
reading of it was much neglected, which shows that even in his time it
was not held in any degree of authority. In this book St. Paul cites a
saying of Jesus,† which is not to be found in any of the gospels; so
that either he had this passage out of some spurious gospel, or it has
been left out of the present copies since his time. Concerning the
authority and genuineness of the epistles, there have been many debates,
and I think all have been doubted and rejected by some party or other,
and this for the same important reason above mentioned, according as
they either agreed or disagreed with the doctrines and opinions embraced
by the different sects; particularly St. Paul's epistles to the Hebrews,
the epistle of James, the second epistle of St. Peter, the second and
third epistles of St. John, and the epistle of Jude. But as the
inspiration of all or either of them can never be proved, I shall say
nothing concerning them, but refer you for a more particular account of
them to Calmet.‡
As to the authority of the Apocalypse, or Book of
Revelations, as its author cannot be ascertained, how is it possible
that its inspiration should? For "Caius, priest of the Church of
Rome, who lived at the end of the second age, seems to assure us that
the Apocalypse, or Book of Revelations, was written by the arch-heretic
Cerinthus; and Deonylas, Bishop of Alexandria, says, that some indeed
thought Cerinthus to be the author of it, that, for his own part, he
believed it to be written by a holy man named John, but he would not
take upon himself to affirm that it was really the work of the apostle
and evangelist of that name. The Apocalypse has not at all times been
owned to be canonical. St. Jerome, Amphilocus, and Sulpitius Severus
remark, that in their time there were many churches in Greece that did
not receive this book."*
On the whole, the writings of the New Testament
appear to me so far from being infallible, or written under the
immediate guidance and influence of God, that I am surprised how it is
possible that any persons should make them the foundation or basis of
their religion: for the contrary most evidently appears; and they are
even destitute of proof that they were written by the persons whose
names they bear; nor, indeed, does it appear that those persons ever
wrote any thing themselves. This uncertainty, together with the
continual alterations they have undergone, makes it impossible to credit
them even as historians. Moreover, it. appears highly improbable that
any of the writings we now have should be the genuine works of the
apostles; because, had this been the case, they would have published
them as such, and nobody could have refused them; for they would then
have been received by all without contradiction, as every person had it
in his power to have satisfaction concerning their genuineness from the
apostle who published them. The contrary of all. this is very evident.
Besides, common and usual facts, such as may happen in the common course
of things, may, and do generally receive credit on the evidence of the
historian; but it would not be the same, were he to relate things out of
the common course of probability, or what appeared improbable; for the
more extraordinary the facts are which he relates, the more
extraordinary ought the evidence to be. But this evidence is nowhere to
be had but in these writings themselves, which is no evidence at all,
they being destitute of proof: and therefore cannot be admitted or
allowed.
The
only thing which seems probable to me from the account transmitted to us
is, that there were many who wrote, and in order to give a greater
repute to their writings, they published them under the names of such
persons as would give them a greater degree of authority, and, as these
writings contained different facts and doctrines, very opposite and
contradictory to each other, so every one chose, and made use of such or
as many gospels as he pleased or liked best. As these gospels were in
private hands, the possessors did not want for opportunities of
changing, interpolating, adding, and curtailing whatever they thought
convenient, or was agreeable to the opinions which they had embraced.
Under these circumstances, it was impossible to have known the true
gospel of either of the apostles, (had there been any,) because it could
have no mark of authority, and the true one must have suffered equally
with the false; for had there been any mark or criterion by which the
true might have been distinguished from the false, every one would have
received it. So that it is plain, either that the apostles did not
publish any gospels, or that they fared no better than those which were
published by others, and were confounded with them.
It
likewise appears to me, that the authors and transcribers thought of
nothing else but inserting and relating surprising and marvellous
events, such as would astonish and catch the credulity of the vulgar,
and also such things as best suited with their prejudices and purposes;
for it seems improbable that the apostles, whose labours and sufferings
are always represented as proceeding from their love of mankind, and
care of their salvation, should be the authors of the writings we now
have under their names, which have caused such disputes, discords,
hatred, disorders, troubles, grievous persecutions, and even wars and
desolations; and all this occasioned by these very writings; for every
party authorizes its doctrines and its proceedings by them. Surely, if
they were such persons as they are represented to be, they never would
have published or authorized any thing like it, unless they were
determined literally to fulfil the saying recorded of Jesus—
"Think not that I am come to send peace upon earth; I come not to
send peace, but a sword;"* which sword has been drawn from the
beginning, and which Christians have taken care not to sheath. It is
well for the doctrine of the infallibility of these writings that the
Christian laity or bulk of mankind, take it on trust; and that few, very
few, take any pains, or make inquiry concerning the evidence of their
inspiration and infallibility; and that those who actually make such
inquiry are disposed or concerned, either through interest or policy,
not to publish their thoughts concerning this matter, contenting
themselves with keeping their discoveries secret; for, were the
infallibility or inspiration of any writings contrary to these to have
no better foundation, how would they publish. their arguments against
them, and expose their insufficiency!
(To
be continued.)
|
