well known in his time; and, lastly, to affirm, on the authority of a very learned critic, Dr. Herbert Marsh, in his valuable notes to Michaelis, that the evidence of the Greek manuscripts is decidedly in favour of the authenticity of these two chapters: and that the testimony of the ancient versions is equally decisive, these chapters being contained in them all. Besides, how can it well be imagined that those two are spurious, when the beginning of the third chapter is considered? What writer would begin a history with the phrase, "In “those days?” (q) history to its base. Tacitus has omitted many things which Suetonius supplies, and Dion Cassius specifies many particulars mentioned by neither of the other two; and, with regard to the history of our own country, Philip Henry, Richard Baxter, and Mrs. Hutchinson, relate many things, both curious and important, of Charles I. and his cotemporaries, which none of our eminent historians have noticed. These are received by men of sound judgment upon their own evidence, and without impeaching, in consequence, the veracity of others who have not adverted to them. (q) There is a very able defence of the authenticity of the first two chapters of Matthew's Gospel in the Quarterly Review, vol. i. p. 320 330, from which I should have been happy to borrow some passages, were I not compelled by my plan to consult brevity. But Dr. Magee's summary, being concise and forcible, is here inserted. "How, then,' says he, "stands the evidence upon the whole? The Syriac Version, "which is one of Apostolical antiquity, and the old Italic, both contain "the two chapters. Ignatius, the only Apostolical Father who had occa"sion to make reference to them, does so. The Sibylline Oracles do the Celsus, the bitter enemy of same. Justin Martyr does the same. "the Christian faith, does the same. Hegesippus, a Hebrew Christian, "does the same. Irenæus, and all the Fathers who succeed him, it is "admitted on all hands, do the same. And the chapters are at this day "found in every manuscript and every version of the Gospel of Saint "Matthew, which is extant throughout the world. Thus have we one "continued and unbroken series of testimony from the days of the Apostles to the present times; and, in opposition to this, we find only 66 You will expect that I should produce some evidences in favour of the genuineness of the Apocalypse, or Revelation of St. John, especially since this book has been given up as doubtful by some late writers in favour of the New Testament. Allow me, then, to observe on this subject, that Justin Martyr, Irenæus, Tertullian, and Clemens Alexandrinus, allow the Apocalypse to be an ancient book, and ascribe it to "John "the disciple of the Lord:" and Justin, as well as others, asserts that "it was written by divine inspira"tion." And, if we may credit the testimonies of Eusebius and Jerom, who had in their hands the writings of many of the ancients which are now lost, Papias, Melito, Theophilus of Antioch, and Apollonius, all in the second century, received and quoted it. Indeed, Melito wrote a commentary upon this book: and he, being bishop of Sardis, one of the seven churches addressed, could neither be ignorant of their tradition respecting it, nor impose upon them as to its nature and contents. Consider, in addition to this, the author's own language. "The Revelation of Jesus "Christ," &c.-"sent and signified by his angel unto 66 a vague report of the state of a Hebrew copy of St. Matthew's Gospel, "said to be received amongst an obscure and unrecognized description "of Hebrew Christians, who are admitted, even by the very writers who "claim the support of their authenticity, to have mutilated the copy "which they possessed, by removing the genealogy. I should not have "dwelt so long upon a subject, which is at this day so fully ascertained, as the authenticity of the first two chapters of St. Matthew's Gospel, "did it not furnish a fair opportunity of exhibiting the species of evi"dence, which Unitarian critics are capable of resisting; and the sort of 66 arguments with which they do not scruple to resist it." Atonement, vol. ii. p. 470. Magee on the "his servant John." 66 66 "John to the seven churches." "I John, who also am your brother, and companion "in tribulation". "was in the isle that is called “Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony "of Jesus Christ." "I was in the spirit on the Lord's day." This same writer, who thus positively and unequivocally declares himself to be JOHN, imprisoned in the isle of Patmos, writing, under inspiration on the Lord's day, affirms that "ALL liars shall have their "part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone," and in another place excludes from celestial glory "whosoever loveth and maketh a lie." Adopt, for a moment, the hypothesis that this book was forged, and nothing can be more shocking and blasphemous than the conduct of its author in impiously assuming the language of "Him who searcheth the reins and "the heart;" admit, on the contrary, the genuineness and authenticity of the book, and you are overpowered with the majesty and sublimity of its language, the purity and excellence of its precepts, the awfulness of its denunciations, the supernatural grandeur of its promises; and, to stamp the highest possible authority upon the whole, bear in mind that it contains prophecies, several of which have already been accomplished. Permit me to avail myself of the observations of Dr. Priestley, in reference to the subject before us. "This book of Revelation (says he), I have no doubt, "was written by the apostle John. Sir Isaac Newton, "with great truth, says, he does not find any other "book of the New Testament so strongly attested, "or commented upon so early as this. Indeed, I 66 "think it impossible for any intelligent and candid person to peruse it without being struck, in the most "forcible manner, with the peculiar dignity and sub 66 limity of its composition, superior to that of any other "writing whatever; so as to be convinced that, con"sidering the age in which it appeared, none but a person divinely inspired could have written it. Also "the numerous marks of genuine piety that occur "through the whole of this work will preclude the idea "of imposition, in any person acquainted with human "nature." (r) My labours on the multifarious topics of this letter may now draw to a close. I shall leave you in your future meditations to appreciate the full weight of what I have adduced. In opposition to it you will have merely to place the reiterated, though perfectly unsupported, assertion, that the Scriptures are forged. But had I not wished to put you in possession of a condensed body of evidence, by referring to which you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men," I might have refuted this assertion by simply referring to the great end of the Sacred Volume, and the unity of design in all its authors. I might have affirmed, without fear of contradiction, that the coincidence of the histories, precepts, promises, threatenings, and prophecies of the Scriptures, in that great end, "the glory of God, "and the holiness and happiness of man," is an irrefragable argument, not only of their genuineness and truth, but of their divine authority. I might have affirmed, that if the several writers had been guided by (r) Notes on Scripture, vol. iv. p. 573. their own spirits, and not by the illuminating and supporting influences of the Spirit of truth, they could neither have unfolded to us the various dispensations of God tending to this one point, nor have pursued it themselves with such entire steadiness and uniformity through so many different ages of the world. Viewed in this light, the gradual opening of the design is an invincible argument. The wisdom of man, if it could ever have formed such a design (though that, as I have shown in a former letter, was far from the case), would have rushed forward to the grand conclusion precipitately. On the whole, then, I think every candid inquirer after truth must be constrained to admit, that the various writers of the Bible were not deceivers, that the books they have left us are genuine, that the religion contained in those books is true, that it emanated from GOD. Whence, indeed, -" but from HEAVEN should men unskill'd in arts, "Starving their gains, and martyrdom their price.” DRYDEN. There remains only one other question to consider before I terminate this letter, namely, "Have the "Scriptures descended pure to our hands, or do the .66 copies extant differ materially from those which "existed in the primitive ages?" Now, in answer to this, it may be stated with regard to the NEW TESTAMENT, as the universal opinion of all Biblical critics of competent knowledge and judgment, that we have |