general Epistles of James,
Peter, and John and Jude, and the book of Revelations, contained
in the New Testament at present, must be also placed upon the
long list of pious frauds, fabricated in the first ages of Christianity.]
[fn12 It is an allowed principle of liberal criticism, that when the
expressions of an author are capable of two senses, one of which
would make him contradict himself, and the other would leave him
consistent, it is but fair to suppose that he meant to be consistent,
and therefore should be interpreted in the sense which would
exclude self contradiction. How has the liberal Mr. Everett acted
on an occasion of this kind? I had said in my first work "the Jewish
Christians, the disciples of the twelve Apostles, NEVER received,
but rejected every individual book of the present New Testament."
I had also maintained, that the Gospels were forged after the
middle of the second century. Now any reasonable man would I
believe understand me as using the expressions, "Jewish
Christians, the disciples of the twelve Apostles," in the same
sense as when we speak of the followers of Plato, Whitfield, or
Wesley, by the name of Disciples of Plato, Whitfield, or Wesley,
without confining the expression to signify their immediate
disciples; the insertion of the words, "never received," also
suggests that this must have been my meaning. Nevertheless Mr.
Everett, in order to bring me in contradiction with myself in order to
serve a turn of his own, remarks upon my words, "without
presuming to decide upon the opinions of a writer, so keen in
detecting dissonances as Mr. English, I do presume to think, that if
every individual book, of the present New Testament, was
rejected, by the disciples of the twelve Apostles, that they must
have been in being at the time they were rejected, and therefore
could not have been forged, a century after that period. I am not
conscious of any wish to weaken the force of Mr. English's
arguments, by affecting to speak of them in contemptuous terms, I
would, as I have, answered them fairly, or not at all." p.445.]
[fn13 If so, what becomes of all Mr. Everett's laboured argument
upon Jesus' prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem contained in
p. 401 et seq. of his work; if it be true that the prophecy was
written, after the events predicted took place!]
[fn14 If this opinion be true, and Bishop Marsh may be considered
as having almost demonstrated it to be so in his dissertatio
|