The Genuineness and Authenticity of the Holy Scriptures: Old Testament

The Bible, which contains the account of the origin, progress, and nature of the Christian religion, is the production, not of one period, but of many ages. The writers of it succeeded each other, during the space of above 1500 years. The Scriptures of the Old Testament far exceed, in antiquity, all other historical records. Moses, who wrote the first five books, lived more than 1000 years before Herodotus, the father of Grecian history; and rather earlier than the time of Herodotus, Ezra and Nehemiah completed the historical part of the Old Testament Scriptures.

The longevity of the first generations of men, which accelerated the population of the world from a single

* A genuine book is one written by the person whose name it bears, as the author of it. An authentic book is one that relates matters of fact, as they really happened. A pair, rendered a written revelation, between the fall of man and the promulgation of the law at Sinai, less necessary, as the knowledge of the Divine will was, during that period, transmitted from one age to another, by very few individuals. From Adam to Moses, although a space of about 2500 years, it passed through only four intermediate persons. In all that time, God made himself known by visible interpositions and signs, as in the cases of Cain and Babel, and held direct communication with prophets, who were revered as such by the people among whom they lived, which preserved his truth from being corrupted. Thus it was sufficiently early in the days of Moses, permanently to record that authentic revelation, which was then delivered. But, at that period, when the age of man was reduced nearly to its present limits, God separated a people from the nations, and gave them such an establishment, that full security was afforded for preserving entire his written word.

Moses, who, at the giving of the law, acted the part of a mediator between God and the people of Israel, was called up to Mount Sinai, where he received those laws and institutions that were then enjoined. These, together with a history of the creation, and of whatever, from the beginning, was necessary for the instruction of the people of God, were committed by him to writing, in five books, and deposited in the tabernacle by the side of the ark.

These five books, called the Book of the Law, and also known by the name of the Pentateuch, (or five volumes,) constituted the first part of the sacred records, and include the history of about 2550 years.

The law was read every Sabbath-day in the synagogues, and again solemnly every seventh year. The king was required to copy it, and the people were commanded to teach it to their children, and to bear it as “signs upon their hands, and frontlets between their eyes,” The remaining books * of the Old Testament, composed by different writers, carry the history of Israel beyond the Babylonish captivity, and contain the messages of a succession of prophets till 420 years before the coming of Christ, when, at the distance of about 1030 years from Moses, Malacbi, the last of the prophets, wrote.

The books which compose the Old Testament Scriptures, were held by the Jews, in every age, to be the genuine works of those persons to whom they are ascribed; and they have also been universally and exclusively, without any addition or exception, considered by them as written under the immediate influence of the Spirit of God. They preserved them with the greatest veneration; and, at the same time, carefully guarded against receiving any apocryphal or uninspired books. While the Jews were divided into various sects, which stood in the most direct opposition to each other, there never was any difference among them respecting the authority of the sacred writings.

The five books of Moses were also preserved by the Samaritans, who received them nearly 700 years before the coming of Christ. Whatever disagree-

* The exact time when the book of Job was written is not known.

ment, in other respects, subsisted between them and the Jews, and however violent their enmity against each other, they perfectly united in admitting the authenticity and inspiration of the law of Moses, which they both adopted as their religious rule. In addition to all this, about 280 years before the Christian era, the whole of the Old Testament was translated into Greek; a language which, from the time of Alexander’s conquests, was commonly understood by the nations of the world. Thus, Jews, Samaritans, and all the civilized world, had access to these sacred boohs, which prevented the possibility of their being either corrupted or altered without its being generally known.

We are assured by Josephus, the Jewish historian, who was born about five years after the death of Christ, and who lived in the time of the Apostles, that the Jews acknowledged no books as Divine, but twenty-two. “We have not,” he says, “an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from, and contradicting one another, (as the Greeks have,) but only twenty-two Books, which contain the records of all the past times; which are justly believed to be Divine. And of them five belong to Moses, which contain his laws, and the traditions of the origin of mankind till his death. This interval of time was little short of 3000 years. But as to the time from the death of Moses till the reign of Artaxerxes King of Persia, who reigned after Xerxes, the prophets, who were after Moses, wrote down what was done in their times in thirteen books. The remaining four Books contain hymns to God, and precepts for the conduct of human life. It is true, our history hath been written since Artaxerxes very particularly, but hath not been esteemed of the like authority with the former by our forefathers, because there hath not been an exact succession of prophets since that time: And how firmly we have given credit to these books of our own nation, is evident by what we do; for during so many ages as have already passed, no one hath been so bold as either to add any thing to them, to take any thing from them, or to make any change v v -: k in them; but it is become natural to all Jews, imme- ^A “l diately, and from their very birth, to esteem these Books to contain Divine doctrines?* and to persist in’^/vVT^ them, and, if occasion be, willingly to die for them.” Utce^Ac^A — Josephus, ed. 1784, vol. ii. 361. The Books here,.,! referred to are precisely the same that from the be- -wp .ca.Jtys ginning have been received by Christians, and that * are still acknowledged by the modern Jews, concerning whose undivided attachment to them, all that is; ‘y here asserted by Josephus is verified to the present day. /<>.

Tlje authenticity of the Old Testament Scriptures. ’ v against which there is no contradictory testimony, is vconfirmed by many collateral evidences of customs, tra- *” ditions, and natural appearances which have been collected from every part of the world. It is likewise supported by all the notices to be found respecting them in the most ancient Heathen historians. Josephus appeals to the public records of different nations, and to a great number of books extant in his time, but now lost, as indisputable evidence, in the opinion of the Heathen world, for the truth of the most remarkable events related in his History, the account of the early periods of which he professes to have taken principally from the Pentateuch. Porphyry, one of the most acute and learned of the early enemies of Christianity, admitted the genuineness of the Pentateuch, and acknowledged that Moses was prior to the Phoenician Sanchoniathon, who lived before the Trojan war. He even contended for the truth of Sanchoniathon’s account of the Jews, from its coincidence with the Mosaic history. Nor was the genuineness of the Pentateuch denied, by any of the numerous writers against the Gospel, in the first four centuries, although the Christian fathers constantly appealed to the history and prophecies of the Old Testament in support of the divine origin of the doctrines which they taught. The power of historical truth compelled the Emperor Julian, whose favour to the Jews appears to have proceeded only from his hostility to the Christians, to acknowledge, that persons instructed by the Spirit of God once lived among the Israelites; and to confess that the books which bore the name of Moses were genuine; and that the facts which they contained were worthy of credit.

Of the genuineness and authenticity of their Scriptures, the Jews had the strongest evidence, which produced a corresponding impression. The five books of Moses are addressed to the Israelites as his contemporaries, and had they not been both genuine and authentic, they never could have been imposed on his countrymen, whose religion and government were founded upon them. The transactions of their own times were narrated by the several writers of the other books, and the truth of their respective histories was witnessed by all their countrymen who lived at the same period. The plainest directions were given for ascertaining the truth of the mission of all who declared themselves prophets, those who were sent being furnished with ample credentials, while every one who pretended to deliver the messages of God without these credentials was to be put to death. Deut.xviii.20. And although false prophets did arise, and for a time obtained a degree of influence, their wickedness was exposed by the failure of their predictions, or by the judgments inflicted on them as in the case of Hananiah. From the miracles, too, which the people of Israel constantly witnessed, as well as the fulfilment of the prophecies which was all along taking place, they had complete proof that the true prophets wrote by the authority of God himself. During the whole period from Moses to Malachi, a succession of them was raised up, under whose direction the word of God was infallibly distinguished from all counterfeits; and by their means, in connexion with the visible interference of the God of Israel in punishing those who made the people trust in a lie, the Scriptures were preserved pure and unadulterated.

These books are handed down to us by that nation, whose history they record with an impartiality for which we shall seek in vain in the annals of any other historians. There are here no national prejudices, and no attempts at embellishment. The history of the people of Israel is recorded by the uncompromising hand of truth. Their ingratitude, and their obstinacy, are alike exposed; their sinful incredulity on many occasions is published; their virtues are not magnified, and their courage is not extolled. This history contains an account, not in confused traditions, but in minute detail of time, place, and circumstances, of great public facts transacted in the presence of the whole people, in which they were actors, and of which permanent memorials were instituted at the time when they occurred.* These facts involved their submission to a religion entirely different from that of all the surrounding nations, which laid them under great and painful restraints, and to laws and institutions, which, while they secluded them from the rest of mankind, exposed them to their utmost detestation and contempt. Had such facts never taken place, they could not at any period have been forced upon the belief of a whole nation, so as to be ever afterwards acknowledged by them, without one dissenting voice. It is a striking singularity in their laws, that they were promulgated not from time to time, but in one written code, and were permanently binding both on the rulers and the people, never to be in any respect either altered or added to.

* Mr Leslie, who writes on Deism, in proving the authenticity of the books of Moses, lays down the following rules as a test of truth, which all meet in these books. Wherever they do meet, what they refer to, he affirms, cannot be false. On the contrary, they cannot possibly meet in any imposture whatever.

“1. That the matter of fact be such, that men’s outward senses, their eyes and ears, may be judges of it.

“2. That it be done publicly in the face of the world.

“3. That not only public monuments be kept in memory of it, but some outward actions be performed.

Nor are the Jews alone referred to as witnesses of some of the most important of those transactions, the scene of which is not laid in an obscure corner, but in the midst of the most civilized nations of the world. The entrance of their ancestors into Egypt; their continuance for centuries, and increase there; the manner in which they were oppressed; the causes of their being suffered to depart, and the awful catastrophe which accompanied that departure; are facts in which the people of Egypt were equally implicated with themselves. Their subsequent continuance during forty years in an uncultivated desert; their invasion of Palestine; the long continued contest, and their final occupation of that land, — were public and permanent facts, brought home to the inhabitants of

“4. That such monuments, and such actions, or observances, be instituted, and do commence from the time that the matter of fact was done.

“The two first rules make it impossible for any such matter of fact to be imposed on men at the time when said to be done, because every man’s eyes and senses would contradict it. The two last rules render it impossible that the matter of fact should be invented and imposed some time after.”

After proving, in a variety of ways, that all his four rules meet in the books of Moses, he observes: —” You may challenge the whole world to show any action that is fabulous, which has all the four rules or marks before mentioned. It is impossible. — I do not say that every thing- which wants these four marks is false, but that nothing can be false which has them aJLn

It is said that Dr Middleton endeavoured for twenty years to find out some pretended fact to which Mr Leslie’s four rules could be applied, but without success.

that country, who lived in the centre of the civilized world. The train of the history too, which, as well as the style and tendency of all the separate books, is entirely consistent with itself, proceeds in so uniform a manner, and one thing so naturally rises out of another, that unless on the supposition of what goes before., that which follows cannot be accounted for. This remark holds good with respect to the state of the Jews even to this day; and all that is recorded is necessary to explain their present unexampled situation. Impressed with an unalterable conviction of their divine origin, they have, at the expense of every thing dear to men, tenaciously adhered, as far as circumstances permit, to the outward form of the religion, the laws, and the institutions engrossed in their sacred records. And although they themselves are condemned by these books, and know iloo) that theyAare employed to support a system which J they mortally hate, they have, under all circumstances, down to the present hour, continued to be faithful depositaries of the Old Testament Scriptures.

“The honour and privilege,” says Bishop Cosin, in his history of the Canon of the Holy Scripture,” which the posterity of Jacob some time had, above all the world besides, was to be that peculiar people of God, to whom he was pleased to make his laws and his Scriptures known; nor was there then any other church but theirs, or any other oracles of God, than what were committed to them. For they had all that were then extant, and all written in their own language.

“These they divided into three several classes, whereof the first comprehended the five books of Moses; the second all the Profhets; and the third those writings which they call the Chethubim, or books that were written by the holy men of God, who were not so properly to be ranked among the Prophets: From whom both the Jive Books of Moses and these Chethubim were distinguished, because howsoever they were all written by the same propheti- cal spirit and instinct which the Books of the Prophets were; yet Moses having been their special lawgiver, and the writers of these other books having had no public mission or office of Prophets, (for some of them were Kings, and others were great and potent persons in their times,) they gave either of them a peculiar class by themselves.

iC In this division as they reckoned Five Books in the first class, so in the second, they counted Eight, and in the third Nine; Two and Twenty in all; in number equal to the letters of their Alphabet, and as fully comprehending all that was then needful to be known and believed, as the number of their letters did all that was requisite to be said or written. And hereof after this manner they made their enumeration.

Numbers,
Deuteronomy,
Joshua,

Four books of the
former Prophets

Samuel, 1. and 2.
Kings, I. and 2.
Isaiah,

]► VIIL

Four books of the
latter Prophets

And the rest of the
Holy Writers

King David’s Psalter, S
King Solomon’s Proverbs, [
His book of the Preacher, y
His Song of Songs, I
The book of Job, )>
The book of Daniel, j
The books of Ezra and Nehemiah, J
The book of Esther, *
s The book of Chronicles, 1. and 2. J

XXII.

“Which last Book of the Chronicles ‘, containing the sum of all their former histories, and reaching from the creation of the world to their return from Babylon, is a perfect epitome of all the Old Testament, and therefore not unfitly so placed by them, as that it concluded and closed up their whole bible.”

“Other divisions of these books were afterwards made, and the order of them was somewhat altered, (as in divers respects they may well be,) but the books were still the same; and as the number of them was never augmented, during the time of the Old Testament, so there were no additional pieces brought in, or set to any of them at all.”

“It is generally received, that after the return of the Jews from their captivity in Babylon, all the books of the Scripture, having been revised by Ezra, (then their priest and their leader,) who digested them likewise into those several classes before rehearsed, were by him, and the Prophets of God that lived with him, consigned and delivered over to all posterity. But this is sure, that after his age, and the time of the prophet Malachi, (who was one among those that prophesied in that time,) there were- no more prophets heard of among the Jews till the time of St John the Baptist, and therefore no more prophetical and divine Scriptures between them.”

‘; The books then of the old testament, such and so many as they were after the captivity of Babylon, in the time of Esdras, (Ezra,) the same and so many being accurately preserved by the Jews, and containing among’ them unto the time of our blessed Saviour as they do likewise still unto this very day) without any addition, imminution, or alteration, descended to the Christians.”

Nothing then can be better authenticated than the canon* of the Old Testament, as we now possess it. We have the fullest evidence that it was fixed 280 years before the Christian era, when, as has been noticed, the Greek translation, called the Septuagint, was executed at Alexandria, the books of which were the same as in our Bible. And as no authentic records of a more ancient date are extant, it is impossible to ascend hio-her in search of testimony. As held by the Jews in the days of Jesus Christ, their canon was the same a& when that translation was made, and it has since then been retained by them without any variation, though by separating books formerly united, they increase their number. The integrity and divine original of these Scriptures are thus authenticated by a whole nation. — the most ancient that exists. — who have preserved them and borne their testimony to them from

* The word canon signifies a rule or a law. Hence the br.uk- of the Holy Scriptures taken together are called the canon, as designed by God to be the rule of our faith and practice.

the time of Moses down to the present day. That nation was selected by God himself to be his witnesses, Isaiah, xliii. 10., to whom he committed “the lively oracles,” and amidst all their wickedness he prevented them from betraying their trust, the Jews never having given admission into their canon to any other books but to those which by his prophets and servants were delivered to them.

In addition to the unanimous testimony of the Jewish nation to the genuineness and authenticity of the Old Testament Scriptures, of which they had been constituted the depositaries, we have the decisive attestation of the Son of God. Jesus Christ, who appeared on earth 1500 years after Moses, the first of the prophets, and 400 years after Malachi, the last of them, bore his testimony to the sacred canon as held by the Jews in his time, and recorded it by his holy Apostles. Among all the evils with which he charged the Jews, he never once intimated that they had in any degree corrupted the canon either by addition, or diminution, or alteration. Since with so much zeal he purged the Temple, and so often and sharply reprehended the Jews for perverting the true sense of the Scriptures, much more, we may be assured, would he have condemned them, if they had tampered with, or vitiated, these sacred writings; but of this, he never accused them. By often referring to the “Scriptures,” which he declared “cannot be broken,” the Lord Jesus Christ has given his full attestation to the whole of them as the unadulterated word of God. “Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life, and they are they which testify of ??ie.” Here he warrants, in the most explicit manner, the canon of the Hebrew Scriptures. He told the Jews ^: y that they made the word of God of none effect through - ‘« h & their traditions By calling them the word of God, fu uc% he indicated that these Scriptures proceeded from God u&rU 4* himself. In his conversation with the disciples going to Emaus, when, “beginning at Moses and all the ^T^yjf/f Prophets, he expounded to them in all the Scriptures, .~,. -;5. the things concerning himself” he gave the most express testimony to every one of the books of the .Old Testament canon. Just before his ascension, he said to his Apostles, u These are theicords which I spake unto you while I was yet with you, that cdl things’ lu o ^u-jmust be fulfilled which were written in the law of trf*-U/t*g ^fa**^ Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms, con- ^y.^J.-^ cerning me.” By thus adopting the common division ffffa %Jtofa of the Law, and the^PnnDhets, and the Psalms, which ^p,^ y.u comprehejndedall the HebiwScriptures, (to which division Josephus, as we have seen, refers) he ratified ojo-V^.^,^ and sanctioned with his authority the canon of the tr?^Kl5:ln’fj Old Testament, as it was received by the Jews; and fa*. VJkJ>w*! by declaring that these books contained prophecies ^4^^^^ which must be fulfilled, he established their divine^f ^., inspiration, since God alone can enable men toJor&Z^ dej-Jot u tell future events t£iZu£&

The same testimony is repeatetHrjy the Apostles, r, jC **4lo* who constantly appeal to-the Jewish Scriptures as C4^ :< “the lively oracle£^<S{ God. Referring to the whole. ~VL<yj of the OlplTestament, Paul declares, that “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God” The term

Ji&i f- cff t^C-4 CSi/i- &v~T*- h: £#*^J<I cri< £g /-a AlL fs £<-<3 l/f~li cn ‘iX-Csu4~ “Scripture,” or “the Scriptures,” (the writings,) was then, as it is still, appropriated to the written word of God, as both the Old Testament and the New are now, by way of eminence and distinction, called the Bible, or the Book. The same Apostle recognises the entire canon of the Jews, when he says, “unto them were committed the oracles of God.71 The fidelity of the Jews to their trust is here asserted by Paul; and those to whom he writes are required to acknowledge the Scriptures of the Old Testament as of divine authority. While the Apostles affirmed that they spoke” not the words which mans wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth” they uniformly referred to the Old Testament Scriptures, as of equal authority with those of the New Testament, both of which, as commissioned by their divine master, they have delivered over to the Christian Church as “the word of God.” Indeed, so manifestly is it the object of the Apostles to establish the divine authority of the Old Testament, that though they were as fully inspired and accredited as the ancient prophets, or former servants of God, and could establish the truth of any thing they taught by the miracles which they performed, yet they reasoned out of the Old Testament Scriptures, proving and alleging from them the truth of what they declared. Instead of professing to give authority to what was written in them, they uniformly appealed to those writings as authority equal to their own.^ Paul declares, that the Gospel of God, to which he was separated as an Apostle, was that” which he had promised afore by his prophets in the

Holy Scriptures!’ — Rom. 1, 2.* Here, where Paul asserts his Apostolic commission, he gives the whole weight of his Apostolic authority to the ancient Scriptures, which he denominates “Holy writings,” in which God, he affirms, had recorded his promises by his prophets. When the same Apostle declares, that <; whatsoever things were written afore time were

* Much important matter is contained in this verse. The Apostle here tacitly repels the accusation of the Jews, that the Gospel was a novel doctrine. He shows that the Old Testament is the promise of the New, and that the New is the fulfilment of the Old — by its prophecies which foretold a new covenant — by all that it promised concerning the Messiah — by all its legal institutions which contained in themselves the promises which they prefigured — by the whole economy of the law which prepared men for the reception of the Gospel — by all the revelations of grace and mercy which contained the Gospel in substance, and, consequently, promised its more full developement. He also repels the accusation, that the Apostles were enemies to Moses and the Prophets; showing, on the other hand, that there was a complete agreement betwixt them. He establishes the authority of the Prophets and the inspiration of the Scriptures, by declaring that it was God himself who spoke in them. He shows whence we are to take the true word of God and of his prophets, not from verbal tradition, which must be uncertain and fluctuating, but from the written word which is certain and permanent. He teaches that we ought constantly to have recourse to the Scriptures, for that all in religion which is not found in them, is really novel, although it may have been received for many ages; but that what is found there is really ancient, although men may have for a long time lost eyief’ sight of it. Such are the great truths contained in this compendious verse.

lo /Ac

Ct~<^~0 C<^ 6t^L.-C*l f a£1 sL- t^Lt- / C-tcj //Lc*cAs &Alm~ k*f.t~foe<f’written for our learning; that we, through patience rfi^^and comfort of the Scriptures, might have hope,” he •juifCtj/-^ gives his attestation to the whole of the sacred wri- ^2^^ tings, and proves that they exist entire; for he could VK&t&rjd: not nave said this if any of them had been lost, or had C fr&e/^ any additions been made to them.* :/£vtr1’ From the important connexion that subsists be- <t-<^ te-^s tween the Old Testament and the New, the early f/^rir Christian writers carefully examined the Jewish Scrip- ^£ty/; tures, and have given distinct catalogues of these books, precisely the same as we now receive, and as they are still retained by the Jews. Melito, bishop

* It is true, that the sacred writers refer to other books that do not now exist, as of Iddo the seer; but they do not refer to them as canonical books, but as civil records of the kingdom, such as the reference to the civil records of Persia in the book of Esther. Were it even to be admitted that some epistles written by the Apostles have not come down to us, the fact would not imply that the Scriptures have lost an epistle, or a single word. There might have been hundreds of such inspired letters from the Apostles, without implying that ever they made a part of that collection that was designed by God to be a perfect and sufficient standard to all ages. This is said not from a conviction that there ever existed any inspired letters of the Apostles except those which we possess,* but they may have existed in any number, without affecting the integrity of the canon, which some have weakly supposed would follow from the fact, if admitted.

* “Some,” says Theodoret, “imagine Paul to have wrote an epistle to the Laodiceans, and accordingly produce a certain forged epistle (so entitled); but the holy Apostle does not say tpjv <zrgo$ Ae&otiixBtas, the epistle to the Laodiceans, but tvv bk Aaofoxsias, the epistle from the Laodiceans.”

cry “tf&^fiL J^i£. £ tl/* £(sorLep; (rzte. e~wt*sis*z/n*n!^xf “t ‘/~ tt “n?rv&&&£<~” C^oct> of Sardis, travelled in the second century into Palestine, on purpose to investigate the subject. His catalogue, which is preserved by Eusebius, contains the canonical books of the Old Testament, and no more. He names the several books, comprehending under the Book of Ezra, those of Nehemiah and Esther, to which they were commonly annexed, these three being by many accounted but one book. In the Jewish list, the Book of Nehemiah, only, was joined to Esther, as the Book of Lamentations was also annexed to Jeremiah; but the Book of Esther was never wanting in the canon of the Jews. The learned Origen, in the third century, gives a catalogue of the Jewish Scriptures, and says, “that the canonical books of Scripture contained in the Old Testament, are twenty and two in number, which the Hebrews have left unto us, according to the number of letters which they have in their alphabet.” Athanasius also, in the fourth century, specifies the twenty-two books, and, naming them one after another, in the same order in which they now stand, says, that “they are received by the whole church.” Hilary of Poictiers, and many writers in the same century, affirm that these books alone were received as canonical. This fact is confirmed by the Council of Laodicea, which met in the year 363, and gave a list of the twenty-two books, the same as have been received both by Jews and Christians.

Nothing can be more satisfactoiy and conclusive than all the parts of the foregoing evidence of the authenticity and integrity of the Canon of the Old Testament Scriptures. The Jews, to whom they were first committed, never varied respecting them; while they have been fully recognised by the Lord and his Apostles, and consequently, their authenticity is established by express revelation. And that we now possess them as thus delivered and authenticated, we have the concurrent testimony of the whole succession of the most distinguished early Christian writers, as well as of the Jews to this day, who, in every age, and in all countries, the most remote from one another, have constantly been in use of reading them in their synagogues.

The Scriptures of the Old Testament that have been thus so faithfully preserved, and so fully attested, contain the most satisfactory and convincing internal evidences of their truth. The character of God which they exhibit, nowhere delineated in the writings of any of the wisest of this world unenlightened by revelation, is such as carries with it its own confirmation. The character they give of man is verified in the history of every nation, and of each individual. The majesty, purity, and suitableness to the condition of man, of the doctrine they contain — the soundness and unrivalled excellence of the moral precepts they inculcate, and the glory of the succeeding dispensation which, towards their close, they point out with increasing clearness; and all this confirmed and verified in the minutest particulars by the New Testament Scriptures — form a body of internal evidence, to which nothing but the deep corruption of the human heart, and the enmity of the carnal mind against God, could render any one insensible.

In course of time, and in the progress of that corruption in the churches which soon began to work, the sacred canon was denied by the addition and even intermixture of other books, which, through the unfaithfulness of Christians, were admitted first as of secondary, and at length by many as of equal authority and consideration with those of which it was composed.

These books were called Apocryphal, and are supposed to have been so denominated from the Greek word a7F03C£v7TTa, to hide — to conceal, which is expressive of the uncertainty and concealed nature of their origin. Who their authors were is not known. They were written subsequently to the cessation of the prophetic spirit in the time of Malachi, who closed his testimony by reminding the people of Israel of the authority of the law of Moses, and intimating that after himself, no prophet was to arise until the harbinger of the Messiah should appear. They were not written in the Hebrew language, in which all the books of the Old Testament were originally composed, with the exception of a few passages in Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezra, and Esther, which were written in Chaldee. Both Philo and Josephus, who flourished in the first century of the Christian era, are altogether silent concerning these spurious books, which were not contained in the Septuagint version, as set forth by the translators under Ptolemy:* and they form no part of those

*” Of the Greek Septuagint Bible, (as it was first set forth in the time of Ptolemseus Philadelphus,) St Augustin acknowledged no more Books, than what were then translated out of the Hebrew copies sent from Jerusalem, where neither aelT* |Sacrec* wriPgs committed by God to the Jews, uni-L * ovk * iA Yersay acknowledged and preserved by them entire. ^y<JU <L Above a> tney nave not received, like these holy ■it,(kwi.Or wrings, the attestation of Jesus Christ, and his, J-£w or Apostles, placing upon them the broad seal of heaven, ‘qauu. lo-ftu, who have never once quoted them.^ A real and es- ^^mA,o sential difference was constantly maintained by the ujctiwui- early Christians between them and the canonical Ctfwl ed books; and it was not till the fourth century, when l°/LHUtd the churches had become exceedingly corrupt both in ilZ i anc Practices tnat tney came to be permitted to

u*L ^TlC ji aPPear w*tn the canon.

‘De Apocryphal books, though not admitted by

the first Christian writers, or churches, to have any

authority in matters of faith, yet claim for themselves that authority, and even arrogate an equality with the sacred Scriptures, to which they were at length advanced by the church of Rome. They present themselves to the world as a part of the word of God, sometimes communicated immediately by himself, sometimes conveyed through the medium of angels, who are represented as standing before him.

Tobit nor Judith, nor any of that class, were to be found; for, (whatever Genebrard saith of his own head to the contrary,) those additional writings were brought in afterwards, and used only by the Hellenist Jews abroad at Babylon and Alexandria, from whom they were, in time following, commended to be read by the Christians, but never made equal with the other sacred Scriptures, as they are now set forth in the Roman Septuagint by the authority of Sixtus Quintus, which is an edition of that Bible, many ways depraved.” — Cosin, p. 98.

The claim to inspiration is not more explicitly asserted by the writers of the Scriptures, than by some of the authors of the Apocryphal books. No higher demand for attention to their messages can be made by holy prophets and apostles, than when they affirm, f< Thus saith the Lord.” Yet this is the language in which men are addressed by these authors. They “have daubed them with untempered mortar, seeing vanity, and divining lies unto them, saying, Thus saith the Lord God, when the Lord hath not spoken” Ezek. xxii. 28.

In the second book of Esdras, the writer having commenced by declaring his lineage, affirms, “The word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Go thy way and show my people,” &c. “Speak thou therefore unto them, saying, Thus saith the Lord.” — “Thus saith the Almighty Lord” This expression occurs four times in the first chapter. The second chapter opens with “Thus saith the Lord” which in the course of that chapter is repeated nine times; and an angel is represented as speaking to the writer — “Then the angel said unto me, go thy way, and tell my people what manner of things, and how great wonders of the Lord thy God thou hast seen.” The rest of the book proceeds in the same strain, the author continuing to recite divine communications, made to himself as they had been to Moses.

In the book of Baruch, ii. 21, it is written, “Thus saith the Lord”

In the book of Tobit a long interview with an angel is related, who affirms that he is one of the holy angels who go in and out before the glory of the

Holy One. “Now, therefore,” says this angel, “give God thanks, for I go up to him that sent me, but write all things which are done in a book.” Tobit, xii. 15. 20. God himself is often introduced by the Apocryphal writers, as communicating his will to them, and long speeches are ascribed to him.* Thus, the writers of the Apocrypha come as the bearers of messages from God, and as such they deliver them to mankind. They profess to communicate a portion of spiritual light, not borrowed from the Holy Scriptures, but immediately derived from the source of light. In every sense of the word, these books present themselves as a part of Divine Revelation, and if they were what they pretend to be, would be entitled to equal attention and reverence with the Holy Scriptures. Here, then, there is no medium, and the conclusion is inevitable: — The Apocrypha is either an addition made to the Old Testament Scriptures by God himself, or it is the work of lying prophets. This important question ought, therefore, to be considered by every Christian, and happily its solution is attended with no difficulty.

The Hebrew Scriptures come to us, as we have seen, with the fullest and most unequivocal attestations, that they are the oracles of God. On the other hand, if we examine the claim of the Apocryphal books, what do we observe? External evidence of their constituting a

* The absurd, unintelligible speeches, replete with trifling nonsense, ascribed to God in different places, prove the Apocrypha to be not only a human, but a most impious composition. portion of divine revelation they have none. The question, then, is, on this ground alone, even were there no other to which we could appeal, for ever decided against them. But in order to produce the fullest conviction in the minds of all who know the truth as it is in Jesus, and to exclude every doubt, let us call another witness. We shall appeal, then, to the internal evidence of these writings. They contain within themselves their own condemnation. They are inconsistent, absurd, and contrary to the Word of God.

Viewing the Apocryphal writings as standing by the side of the Holy Scriptures, what character do they present? Do they offer any thing new, any thing that it might be of importance to know beyond what is contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament? Do they teach us the way of God more perfectly? This will not be pretended by any one. Do their histories, which they present to us as true, comport with the dignity of holy writ? Do they possess internal marks of being authentic? Do they bear the character of a revelation from God, given for our instruction? So far is this from being the case, that many of their narrations are incredible and self-contradictory, and others irreconcilably at variance with the canonical Scriptures. They are defiled with a variety of errors, vanities, low conceits, and other faults incident to human nature and human infirmity. WThile their style, far different from the grave and chaste simplicity, or the divine and spiritual majesty, of the pure genuine word of God, is deformed with levity, and affectation of worldly wisdom and eloquence.

The Apocryphal books are not only replete with absurdities, superstitions, and falsehoods, in their narrations, but also with false doctrines directly opposed to the doctrine of the Holy Scriptures, such as those of purgatory and prayers for the dead. But waving for the present every other charge on this head against them, let us turn our attention to a single point of the last importance, which involves an answer to that most momentous of all questions. How shall man be just before God? The Scriptures assure us, that if any man denies the doctrine of justification by faith without works, he becomes a debtor to do the whole law. What judgment then are we bound to form of a book which, openly contradicting this fundamental doctrine, and exhibiting another way of acceptance with God, makes void the whole plan of redemption? On this one point, then, of the explicit contravention by the Apocryphal books of the grand Scripture doctrine of justification, let them be tried; — that doctrine which is peculiar to the Christian religion, and unknown to every false one, which so remarkably illustrates and honours the finished work of the Redeemer — that doctrine of which God in his word has affirmed, that the man who perverts it, Christ shall profit him nothing.

It is written in the Apocrypha, “Whoso honour etk his father maketh an atonement for his sins /’ and again, i£ Water will quench a flaming fire, and alms maketh an atonement for sins.” Eccl. iii. 3-30. Sentiments more directly opposed to the doctrine of the Holy Scriptures, more dishonourable to God, more contrary to his holiness, more derogatory to his justice, or more fraught with mortal poison, and more destructive to the souls of men, cannot be imagined.

The apostle Paul solemnly declared to the churches of Galatia, that if an angel from heaven should preach any other gospel than that which he had preached unto them, he should be accursed. That very occurrence which the apostle here supposes, has, according to the Apocrypha, been realised. An angel from heaven, it affirms, has descended and declared .that he came from God. “/ am Raphael, one of the seven holy angels, which present the prayers of the saints, and which go in and out before the glory of the Holy One; — not of any favour of mine, but by the will of our God I camel’ Tobit, xii. 15, 18. And that very doctrine does this angel explicitly contradict which the apostle so earnestly inculcated, accompanied with the solemn asseveration, that the curse of God should rest on any creature who dared to pervert it. “It is better” says this angel, “to give alms than to lay up gold: for alms doth deliver from death, and shall purge away all sin” Tobit, xii. 8, 9. If the man or angel who shall preach another gospel than that which the Bible contains, is pronounced by the Holy Ghost to be accursed, then must this awful denunciation apply to a book, which, pretending to record the message of an angel from heaven, teaches another gospel. On the Apocrypha, therefore, does this anathema rest.

The writers, then, of the Apocryphal books, who tread down the pastures, and foul the residue of the waters with their feet, (Ezek. xxxiv. 18,) are, by confronting their doctrine with that of the holy Apostles, proved to be false prophets, against whom the wrath of God and many woes are denounced in Scripture. In opposition to their folly and wickedness, the Lord says, ie The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff’ to the wheat? saith the Lord. Is not my word like as a fire? saith the Lord; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces? “Jer. xxii. 28.” The prophet, zvhich shall presume to speak a word in my name, which 1 have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other Gods, even that prophet shall die,” Deut. xviii. 20. These, and many other passages, are pointedly applicable to the Apocrypha. The writers of it may be justly termed prophets of deceit, and of their own heart, that prophesy lies in the name of the Lord, “saying, I have dreamed, I have dreamed?’ Jer. xxiii. 25. They have indeed imitated the style of the Scriptures, like the impostors concerning whom it is written, “Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, saith the Lord, that steal my words every one from his neighbour. Behold, I am against the prophets, saith the Lord, that use their tongues, and say, He saith. Behold, I am against them that prophesy false dreams, saith the Lord, and do tell them9 and cause my people to err by their lies, and by their lightness; yet I sent them not, nor commanded them: therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith the Lord!’ Jer. xxiii. 30.” Thus saith the Lord God; Woe unto the foolish prophets that follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing! — Have ye not seen d vain vision, and have ye not spoken a lying divination, whereas ye say, The Lord saith it; albeit I have not spoken? Therefore, thus saith the Lord God; Because ye have spoken vanity, and seen lies, therefore, behold, I am against you, saith the Lord God. And mine hand shall be upon the prophets that see vanity, and that divine lies!’ Ezek. xiii. 3, 7, 9. The Bible then, and the Apocrypha, stand in direct opposition in their doctrine, and the latter is denounced by the former, and lies under its heaviest anathemas. The Apocryphal books, when delivered to the people as part of the divine oracles, are calculated by their absurdities to make men Deists or Atheists rather than Christians, and by their false doctrines to cause their readers to wrest the Scriptures to their own destruction. As their introduction into the sacred canon has been the grand and crowning device of Satan for deceiving and corrupting the Christian world, and supporting the claims of the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth, it will be proper to trace it from its origin.

Although all the Apocryphal books had been called, by the first Christian writers, spurious and supposititious, as not being inspired, but, on the contrary, containing doctrines which subvert the very foundations of the Gospel, and of a sinner’s acceptance before God; yet some of them were at length selected as being supposed to be purer than the rest, and better entitled to be used in public readings and services, and on this account they received the name of Ecclesiastical or Church books. Of these there was even formed a register or inferior canon, to exclude such as were reckoned more erroneous or faulty; and this, in process of time, occasioned the name of canonical to be given in common to the writings which were truly divine, and to those which were reckoned the best of the Apocryphal books. The books of the first canon were esteemed to be divinely inspired, and to be the certain rule of faith. The Apocryphal books I f were reckoned to be instructive and useful, but were ^J^J^^excluded from all authority in matters of faith, and in t u. I termination °f controversies; and when they came ^^^’cui^0 De Permitted to be read in the churches, the reader f<-fi**’LU,-Ci ^£t0°d UP m an inferior place.* It happened, however, J^^^^in the course of years, that all these Canonical and f tL. oct.edu Apocryphal books were conjoined and bound up toge-IjL. IjuiPU ther in one volume, for the greater facility of ecclesias- >^^/X^^^tical use; and for the purpose of uniting the historical parts with the historical, the proverbial with the proverbial, the doctrinal with the doctrinal, they were intermingled with one another, as at present in the Roman Catholic Bibles. But this practice obtained no sanction from the primitive churches, or the best and earliest of the Christian fathers, who, on the contrary, strongly objected against it; and denied that

* Augustine, who lived in the fifth century, relates, that when the Book of Wisdom, and other writings of the same class, were publicly read in the church, they were given to the readers or inferior ecclesiastical officers, who read them in a place lower than that in which those universally acknowledged to he the canonical, were read by the bishops and presbyters in a more eminent and conspicuous manner. these books were possessed of any authority. At the beginning, they were not acknowledged at all, nor admitted into any of the earlier catalogues of the Scriptures, and their introduction to that place which they afterwards unlawfully usurped, was slow and partial.

Justin,* who suffered martyrdom for the Christian faith, in the year 163, never, in any of his writings, cites a single passage of the Apocryphal books, nor makes the least mention of them in his conference with Trypho; while he speaks of it as a special work of Divine Providence, that the Jews had been faithful preservers of the Scriptures. None of these books appear in the catalogue of the Old Testament Scriptures of Melito, Bishop of Sardis, in the second century; nor in that of Origen, in the third century.

In the fourth century, Eusebius, who was Bishop of Csesarea in the year 320, affirms,, that from the time of Jesus Christ, there were no sacred books of Holy Scripture, besides those which had been received into the canon of the Jewish and Christian churches. He had read the Apocryphal books, and makes frequent quotations from them as the writings of particular authors, but never acknowledges any of them as a part of the canonical Scriptures. He declares that the authors of those books which bear the names of the Wisdom of Solomon, and the Wisdom of the Son of Siracb, are writers contradicted, or not

* For a particular account of the writings of the early Christians, quoted in the following pages, see Lardner’s works, where they will be found in their order.

allowed, in the canon. When Porphyry adduced some objections against him from the new pieces annexed to the book of Daniel, he said that he was not bound to defend them, because they had no authority of Holy Scripture.

In the year 325, the first general council was held at Nice, at which were present 318 bishops, besides multitudes of other Christians, from all the provinces and churches of the Roman Empire. That in the Scriptures they made use of, “there were none of the controverted books, appears,” says Bishop Cosin, p. 42, “by the evidence and attestation which both the Emperor, Eusebius, and Athanasius, (the chiefest actors in this council,) have hereunto given us,”

Athanasius, who flourished in the year 340, enumerates the books of the Old and New Testament precisely as we now have them, and asserts that these alone are to be accounted the canonical and authentic sacred writings, admitted by the Lord and his Apostles, and recognised by all the fathers and teachers of the church since the Apostolic age. At the same time he reproves those who had intermixed a number of the Apocryphal books with the catalogue of the acknowledged books of the Old Testament.

“These things,” says Cyril, who was Bishop of Jerusalem in the year 350, ‘” we are taught by the divinely-inspired Scriptures of the Old and New Testament. For there is one God of both Testaments, who in the Old Testament foretold the Christ, who was manifested in the New. — Read the Divine Scriptures, the two- and- twenty books of the Old Testament,, which were translated by the seventy- two interpreters — Read these two-and-twenty books, and have nothing to do with Apocryphal writings. These, and these only, do you carefully meditate upon, which we securely or openly read in the church. The Apostles and ancient bishops, governors of the church, who have delivered them to us, were wiser and holier men than thou. As a son of the church, therefore, transgress not these bounds: meditate upon the books of the Old Testament, which, as has been already said, are two-and-twenty; and if you are desirous to learn, fix them in your memory, as I enumerate them, one by one.” The list of these books Cyril subjoins; it is precisely the same as the Jewish canon which we receive.*

The council of Laodicea, which met in the year 363, prohibited the public reading of any books as sacred or inspired, except the canonical. In their 59th canon, it is declared,” that private psalms ought not to be read (or said) in the church, nor any books

* “— although both he (Cyril) at Jerusalem, and Athanasius at Alexandria, together with other churches, had not the use of the Hebrew Bible among them, hut kept themselves only to the Greek translation of the LXX., whereunto were afterwards commonly added those ecclesiastical books which the Hellenist Jews first introduced, and received into their churches, that so all the most eminent books of religion written in the Greek tongue before Christ’s time might be put together and contained in one volume; yet nevertheless they were always careful to preserve the honour of the Hebrew canon, which consisted of XXII. books only, divinely inspired; and accurately to distinguish them from the rest, which had but ecclesiastical authority;” — Cosin, p. 54*.

not canonical, but only the canonical books of the Old and New Testament.”

“The Hebrews,” says Jerom, who was ordained presbyter of Antioch about the year 378, “have two-and- twenty letters, and they have as many books of divine doctrine, for the instruction of mankind.” He next gives a list of these books, and then adds, “This prologue I write as a preface to all the books to be translated by me from the Hebrew into Latin, that we may know that all the books that are not of this number, are to be reckoned Apocryphal. Therefore Wisdom, which is commonly called Solomon’s, and the book of Jesus the Son of Sirach, and Judith, and Tobit, and the Shepherd, are not in the canon.” In his Latin translation, called the Vulgate, Jerom intermingled the Apocryphal and inspired writings, but to prevent mistake, he prefixed to each book a short notice, in which the reader was distinctly informed of its character, and apprized that the Apocryphal writings were not in the canon of Scripture. He says, that to meet the prejudices of the ignorant, he retained these “fables,” which, though not in the Hebrew, were widely dispersed; but he adds, that according to his custom, he had marked these Apocryphal intruders with a spit or dagger placed horizontally for the purpose of stabbing them.* In his

* After the third verse of the tenth chapter of Esther, where the Apocryphal addition to that book commences, Jerom has inserted the following notice; it is the ancient Vulgate to which he refers, which was the most common version of his time; — “Quse hahentur in Hebrseo, plena fide expressi. Hsec letter to Lseta, written about the year 398, giving her instructions concerning her daughter Paula, he advises that she should read the Scriptures, and in this order: first the Psalms, next the Proverbs, the Acts, and the Epistles of the Apostles. Afterwards she may reac: the Prophets, the Pentateuch, the Kings and Chronicles, but no Apocryphal books; or, if she does, she should first, by way of caution, be informed of their true character. Jerom speaks of the fables of Bel and the Dragon, and says that the Apocryphal books do not belong to those whose names they bear, and that they contain several forgeries. In all his works, he explicitly maintains the distinction between canonical and Apocryphal books. “The latter,” he says, “the church does not receive among canonical Scriptures; they may be read for edification of the people, but are not to be esteemed of authority for proving any doctrine of religion.” His canon of the Old Testament was precisely that of the Jews; and though he and other ancient Christian writers sometimes quote the Apocryphal books, by way of illustration, as they also do Heathen writings, yet they had a supreme regard for the Jewish canon, consisting of those books which were received by the Jewish people as sacred and divine.

Epiphanius, Bishop of Constantia, in the island of

autem, quse sequuntur, scripta reperi in editione vulgata, qua? Grsecorum lingua et literis continentur: et interim post finem libri hoc capitulum ferebatur: quod juxta consuetudinem nostram obelo, id est veru, prsenotavimus.”

Cyprus, who wrote in the year 392, has thrice enumerated the books of the Old Testament as held by the Jews. Of the Apocryphal books he makes no mention, except of the Wisdom of Solomon, and the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach, of which, after referring to the canonical books, he says, “They likewise are useful, but not brought into the same number with the foregoing, and, therefore, are not placed in the ark of the covenant.”

Rufinus, presbyter of Aquileia, who wrote about the year 397, after giving distinct catalogues of the sacred Scriptures, both of the Old Testament and the New, adds as follows: “However, it ought to be observed, that there are also other books that are not canonical, but have been called by our forefathers ecclesiastical, as the Wisdom of Solomon, and another which is called the Wisdom of the Son of Sirach; and among the Latins, is called by the general name of Ecclesiasticus; by which title is denoted not the author of the books, but the quality of the writing. In the same rank is the book of Tobit, and Judith, and the books of the Maccabees. In the New Testament is the book of the Shepherd, or of Hermas, which is called the Two Ways, or the Judgment of Peter. All which they would have to be read in the churches, but not to be alleged by way of authority for proving articles of faith. Other Scriptures they called Apocryphal, which they would not have to be read in the churches.” Thus it appears, that all the early Christian writers, while they were unanimous in acknowledging the Jewish Scriptures, rejected, with one accord, the Apocryphal books as uncanonical, or destitute of all claim to inspiration.

The first catalogue of the books of the Old Testament, in which Apocryphal books were added to the Jewish canon, although some refer it to a later date, is that of the third, sometimes called the sixth council of Carthage, which assembled in the year 397, when the books of the Maccabees were reckoned in the number of canonical books. But the word canonical appears to have been used by them loosely, as comprehending not only the Jewish Scriptures, which were admitted as the rule of faith, but those Apocryphal books also, which they esteemed to be useful. It is said, too, that Innocent, Bishop of Rome, in the year 402, confirmed this catalogue; but this is doubtful. Other Fathers and councils, in the succeeding centuries, speak occasionally of these books as canonical, meaning, however, as appears, in the secondary sense, and generally with express declarations of their inferiority to the Jewish canon, when that question wras agitated. But at length the Council of Trent, in the sixteenth century, in order to check the progress of the Reformation, pronounced the Apocryphal books (except the prayer of Manasseh, and the third and fourth books of Esdras) to be strictly canonical. From that period they have usurped the name of inspired Scriptures, and have been intermingled with the canonical books in the Bibles of Roman Catholics. Thus, in direct opposition to the command of God, an addition was made to the sacred canon, in the very worst form, of many entire books, and these not corresponding with the inspired writings, but in numerous instances, and most important particulars, directly contradicting them.*

We have thus observed the manner in which the Apocryphal books came to be connected with the canonical Scriptures. They were not admitted into the canon without much opposition. The most distinguished Christian writers often protested against them, and although those who patronized them maintained that they never meant to dignify these writings

* The following list of books, which is annexed to the decree of the Council of Trent, will show how completely the Apocryphal books are intermingled in Roman Catholic Bibles. The books of the New Testament are the same as in the Protestant canon.

5 of Moses, i.e.

Genesis

Exodus

Leviticus

Numbers

Deuteronomy

Joshua

Judges

Ruth

Kings, 4f

Chronicles, 2

Ezra, 1 and 2

Nehemiah

Tobias

Judith

Esther

Rest of Esther
Job

David’s Psalms, 150

Proverbs

Ecclesiastes

Song of Songs

Wisdom

Ecclesiasticus

Isaiah

Jeremiah

Baruch

Ezekiel

Daniel

Song of three Children
Susanna

Bel and the Dragon

12 Prophets the less,

i.e.
Hosea
Joel
Amos
Obadiah
Jonah
Micah
Nahum
Habakkuk
Zephaniah
Haggai
Zechariah
Malachi

Maccabees, 2, 1. & IT.

Four books, it will be observed, are incorporated in the body of the inspired texts of Esther and Daniel. with any authority as rules of faith, yet a presentiment, or foresight, of the abuse that might be made of them, induced many in the churches, and even whole churches, to resist their introduction. The Christian assemblies of the East were their principal opponents, and more strietly observed the directions of the Apostle John, who had passed a great part of his life among them. This appears evidently from the conduct and decisions of the Council of Laodicea above quoted, which was held in the fourth century, and which prohibited the reading of any but the canonical books in the churches.

The introduction of the Apocryphal books probably originated in their being written, as is supposed, by Jews, who constantly refer to the authenticated history of their nation, and to the law delivered to their fathers. Although totally devoid of both external and internal evidence of their being from God, yet they came, as we have seen, to be considered as related to the Scriptures, not, indeed, as possessing divine authority, but as profitable for instruction; and in this light they continued to be viewed till the Reformation, which was produced by an open appeal to the Word of God. In vain did the Man of Sin, at that era, protest against tampering with the long-established authority of the church — in vain did he endeavour to prevent the translation and circulation of the Scriptures; the palpable abuses in the Popish system convinced multitudes that it could not be of God, and the desire of examining the Scriptures became irresistible. Amidst all this enquiry, however, the ignorance of Europe was so great, that the Council of

Trent, above referred to, ventured to decree that the Apocryphal books were equal in point of authority, and were henceforth to be viewed as an integral part of the Word of God, and to pronounce its anathema on all who should reject them.

It was then that the design of Satan, in bringing about the unhallowed connexion between the Holy Scriptures and the Apocryphal writings, was brought to light. He had patiently waited his opportunity, and, satisfied with having the books of lying prophets placed in juxta-position with the word of God, had not prosecuted the advantage which he had obtained; but he well knew that, in the course of events, this undefined association of truth and error — of sacred and profane- — would increase to more ungodliness; and when the throne of Antichrist seemed tottering to its foundation, he successfully propped it up by the adulteration of the word of God, for which the unfaithfulness of Christians for a thousand years had paved the way. While the reformers strenuously denied the authority of the Apocrypha, and loudly protested against the blasphemous decree by which it was sanctioned as divine, they yielded to the suggestions of a sinful expediency, and allowed it to retain that affinity to the Scriptures which it had long possessed, by being translated, bound up, and circulated along with them. And who can tell how far this has tended to produce that denial of the full inspiration of the Scriptures, which is so lamentably common among Protestants? Be this as it may, to the present hour the book of God is very generally profaned by this unhallowed connexion, more or less defined or acknowledged. But God now appears td have arisen to plead the cause of his own word. The question in regard to the Apocrypha has, in the course of his adorable providence, begun to be agitated, and it will issue in the purification of the fountain from which those waters flow, that are destined to diffuse life and felicity over the world. Ezek. xlvii. 8, 9. The means by which the attention of Christians has been directed to this all-important subject are very remarkable, and we are forcibly reminded, that in the good providence of God, the most important effects frequently proceed from causes which at first appear to have a directly opposite tendency, and that the friends of truth have often reason to rejoice in the issue of events which at first occasioned the greatest alarm. We are thus taught to adore Him who makes the wrath of man to praise him, and causes human folly and wickedness to redound to the praise of his own glory.

On the subject of adding the Apocryphal writings to the Holy Scriptures, Bishop Hall expresses himself in the following terms: “The Scripture complains justly of three main wrongs offered to it. The first, of addition to the canon. Who can endure a piece of new cloth to be patched unto an old garment? or, what can follow hence, but that the rent should be worse? Who can abide, that, against the faithful information of the Hebrews; against the clear testimonies of Melito, Cyril, Athanasius, Origen, Hilary, Jerom, Rufinus, Nazianzen; against their own doctors, both of the middle and latest age; six whole books should, by their fatherhoods of Trent, be, under pain of a curse, imperiously obtruded upon God and his church? Whereof yet, some purpose to their readers no better than magical jugglings; others bloody self-murders; others, lying fables; and others, Heathenish rites; not without a public applause in the relation .... We know full well how great impiety it is, to fasten upon the God of Heaven the weak conceptions of a human wit; neither can we be any whit moved with the idle crack of the Tridentine curse, while we hear God thundering in our ears, ‘If any man add unto these words, God shall add unto him the plagues written in this book;’ (Apocal. xxii. 18.) Neither know I, whether it be more wickedly audacious to fasten on God those things which he never wrote; or to weaken the authority, and deny the sufficiency, of what he hath written.” — Hall’s No Peace with Rome, fyc.

While there are those who have dared to add certain Apocryphal books to the Jewisb canon, which form no part of it, but are the production of lying prophets, and therefore under the curse pronounced upon such by God, there are others who have contended that certain books included in that canon do not constitute a part of divine revelation. This has been particularly the case respecting the book of Esther and the Song of Solomon, which, it has been alleged, are not quoted in the New Testament. But though this may be true as to particular passages, yet the books themselves are. quoted each time that either the Lord Jesus Christ or his Apostles refer to what “is written,” or to “the Scriptures,”*of which they form a part. Exceptions have been made to these books from their contents, and on this ground their claim to be canonical has been doubted. Such a sentiment is the effect of inconsiderate rashness and presumption/* The arrogant wisdom of man may now pretend to quarrel with the Book of Esther for not containing the name of God, and to find impurity in the Song of Solomon, or imperfection in other books of Holy Writ. But the authority of Jesus Christ has given a sanction to every book in the Jewish canon, and blasphemy is written on the forehead of that theory that alleges imperfection, error, or sin, in any book in that sacred collection. It is not necessary to urge, that the genuineness and authenticity of the two books referred to were not only not doubted, but that they were received by the Jews with peculiar veneration, which is a well-known fact. The incontrovertible proof respecting their authenticity and inspiration is, that they form a part of those Scriptures which icere committed to the Jewish church, and sanctioned by the Lord and his Apostles. On these incontrovertible grounds, all the books of the Old Testament Scriptures are most surely believed by the great body of Christians to be the oracles of God; and could it be shown that any one of them is not worthy of being received as a part of the sacred canon, this would invalidate the claim of all the rest. That man, therefore, who rejects a single one of these books as not being canonical, in other words, equally the dictates of inspiration as the rest, proves that he does not rely on the true and secure foundation which God has laid for entire confidence in that portion of the faithful record of his word. He does it in defiance of all the foregoing evidence; and to deny the whole volume of inspiration would not require the adoption of any other principle than that on which he is proceeding.