tors being present. Unless; then, we suppose that Christ's disciples were all lunatics-moonstruck madmen-there is no possibility of evading the conclusion that they really saw, heard, and handled, as they said. What judge or jury would, reject their evidence? Even if the life of a fellow-creature depended on it, and we felt it our duty before God most carefully to sift the whole evidence, we could not hesitate a moment in receiving testimony such as this. Christ's disciples neither deceived. The conclusion of the whole matter is that the disci ples of Christ testified about matters of fact in which they could not be deceived. We formdeceivers nor erly saw that they were no impostors—no deceivers. But, if they were neither deceivers nor deceived, it follows that their testimony is true. is to say, the credibility of the New Testament history is proved. Testimo Christians. That IV. But again, we must recollect that we have not only the testimony of the writers of the New Tes ny of early tament and of the Apostles of Christ, but also that of all those individuals who, in the first ages of Christianity, professed their belief of that religion In this case, again, it can be proved-as was proved a bove of the Evangelists and Apostles-that they were neither deceivers, nor deceived. Not deceivers,-for they too were persecuted, imprisoned, killed. Not deceived, for they could test, by the usual rules of evidence, all that was asserted regarding Christ; and when property, liberty, and life, depended on the decision, we may rest as sured they would not have believed, unless ample evidence had been first afforded. Testimo V. The credibility of the New Testament is farther prov ed by the fact that many of its most impor tant statements were fully admitted by those who were not Christians. Pliny the younger, about seventy years after the death of Christ, describes ny of early unbelievers. Pliny. the Christians as constituting a vast multitude in the province of Bithynia alone, and he farther tells us that they Tacitus. worshipped Christ as God. Tacitus the his-atorian relates that the Christians were cruelly persecuted at Rome by the Emperor Nero. This was about thirtyfour years after the death of Christ. The same historian expressly mentions that Christ himself was put to death in Judea during the procuratorship of Pontius Pilate, in Suetonius. the time of the Emperor Tiberius. The historian Suetonius testifies to nearly similar facts. The Josephus. Jewish historian, Josephus, refers to many events that are recorded in the New Testament. Nor is this all, Even the bitterest enemies of Christianity in early days did not venture to deny the truth of the New Testament narrative. It is very remarkable that the early opponents of Christianity, whether Jews or Heathens, admit that the great facts of the life of Christ were such as the New Testament represents them to have been. They never would have admitted this, had not the facts been beyond dispute, Corroboration VI. Besides this express testimony to the great historical facts recorded in the New Testafrom Heathen ment, we find an immense number of writers, of historical state- statements made in the New Testament, ments in N. T. which the authority of Greek and Roman writers abundantly confirms. For example, assertions are made regarding many cities and nations which have been fully described by ancient authors. Thus, we find statements made respecting the cities of Jerusalem, Casarea, Damascus, Antioch, Tarsus, Ephesus, Alexandria, Philippi, Athens, Corinth, Rome and others. Statements are made respecting their modes of government, laws, customs, history, religion, and many other things. But, if the New Testament had not been composed at the time to which it is referred, it would have been utterly impossible Cæ for the writers afterwards to have described such a multitude of events and circumstances, without falling into very frequent errors. But the fact is, that the more carefully we compare the statements contained in the New Testa ment with those made by Greek and Roman writers, the more are we impressed with the surprising accuracy of the assertions in the former. Corrobo VII. Again, we have not only the authors of ancient Greece and Rome as witnesses regarding this matter, but we possess a very large number of Monuments that have come down to us from the time in question, ration from such as coins, medals, and inscriptions monuments. These monuments often corroborate the statements of the New Testament in a very striking manner. Coins still continue to be dug up, after lying buried in the ground for 1800 years-each bearing its peculiar legend, but all consistent with the truth of the facts recorded in the New Testament. This Monumental evidence, as it may be called, is deservedly esteemed of high import. ance. **Before leaving the subject, we may just give an illus tration or two which will clearly shew the nature of the evidence in favour of the truth of the New Testament narrative, which is obtained from general history and monuments still existing. In the book of Acts, Gallio The N. T. is called the proconsul of Achaia. Some minutely accurate. Ex- critics were of opinion that he ought to amples. have been rather styled procurator,-because, although Achaia was originally a senatorial province and the proper title of the governor was proconsul, yet the Emperor Tiberius had changed it into an imperial province, so that the title of the governor must have been changed too. But a passage has been found in the historian Suetonius which shews that the statement in the New Testament is correct; for it tells us that the Emper 30 or Claudius turned it again into a senatorial province, -so that the proper title of the governor again became proconsul. Another assertion in the book of Acts was also somewhat perplexing for a time. Sergius Paulus is called anthypatos, or proconsul, of Cyprus, whereas Cyprus was believed to have been an imperial province and to have of had only a prætor. Coins, however, have recently been discovered which were struck while Proclus, the successor. of Sergius Paulus, was governor,-and the very title anthypatos is given to him. Some passages in Roman authors have also been lately discovered which prove that the assertion in the Acts is perfectly correct. These two instances will shew how exceedingly minute and searching the examination has been, which learned men have instituted into such matters,-and how the truth of the New Testament comes out, often in a manner equally unexpected and triumphant.* I am, &c. * See Tholuck, quoted in Edinburgh Review clxxxii. p. 342. Horne's Introduction Vol. I. p. 195. Among the most remarkable of the many " Monumental Evidences" in support of the facts recorded in the Bible is that which has so anexpectedly come to light among the ruins of ancient Assyria. Scattered over that country there are immense mounds of earth which, when excavated, are found to contain the remains of houses, palacés, and other buildings. Very much has thus been discovered which confirms the statements of the Bible; nothing has been discovered which conflicts with them. Mr. Layard, in his works on Nineveh and Babylon, has frequently occasion to point out the coincidence between the assertions of the Old Testament and the facts he has discovered in his researches. Sir Henry Rawlinson, who has devoted much attention to the monuments of Assyria, finds in them the names of many of the kings and nations mentioned in the Bible, such as Samaria, Sargon, Shalmaneser, Sennacherib, Hezekiah. The agreement between the monumental history of the last king with that contained in the Bible is wonderful; the very number of the talents paid as tribute-money to THE Considerations which have been brought forward in the preceding letters, are, I believe, perfectly sufficient Hto convince any reflecting and candid mind that the history contained in the New Testament is true. Unless we are to disbelieve all ancient history, we must believe the his tory of the New Testament. Unless we shall utterly deny the facts recorded of Plato or Demosthenes in Grecian history, and of Cato or Cicero in Roman history, we must admit the facts recorded concerning Jesus Christ and his Apostles in Christian history. New Testa But it is not enough to say that we possess as strong evidence regarding the facts contained in ment history the books of the New Testament, as we posbetter supported than Greek sess regarding those recorded of the illustri ous men who flourished even in the later and better known ages of Greece and Rome. For, in truth, or Roman. "I doubt Assyria is the same in both cases. Sir H. Rawlinson says: We are properly occupied only with the New Testament at present; but the facts stated in this note will be useful as conveying a clear conception of what monumental evidence is, and of the manner in which remarkable additions still continue to be made from time to time to the vast body of it already existing in support of the Christian Scrip tures. |