flippantly made by men like M. Renan. 'It is
_universally acknowledged_ that this book was never written by Daniel or
Isaiah or Jeremiah,' '_It is certain_ this chapter is an addition of
such and such a date,' etc. It is _not_ universally acknowledged. It is
_not_ certain. The whole thing is pure guesswork. There is only one way
to prove the authorship of a book, and that is by _testimony_. There is
nothing under the sun more absurd, philologically, than that a common
and very poor stock-actor should have written 'Hamlet.' We know he did
write it, however, not by 'internal evidence,' or from 'philological
criticism,' but by plain human testimony to the _fact_. We cite that,
and leave the 'internal' critics to their profound babble on vowels and
consonants, on long and short syllables, and let them do with the fact
the best they can.

In other words, there is no way by which I can determine whether St.
John wrote his Gospel except by _testimony_. I do not know beforehand
_how_ St. John would write. I can therefore judge nothing by 'style.'
All I can do is to ask of competent witnesses. I do ask. I am told by
such witnesses, straight up to his own day, that he _did_ write this
Gospel, that this is the very one which we now have, for they cite it
and mention its peculiarities. I accept the fact, as I do in the case of
Shakspeare, and let the wise 'critics' settle it among them.

The attempt, therefore, on the part of M. Renan, to get rid of those
large portions of the Gospels which embarrass him in his theory, by
attempting to discredit their authorship, while, at the same time, he
accepts other parts, that stand on the same authority, and the
supercilious way in which he ignores that large part which the miracles
fill, turning them off with a small witticism, or a smaller bit of
sentiment, suggest, at the start, decided suspicions of the honesty of
his intentions and the sufficiency of his theory.

We only hint at these things here. They occur all through his book. They
are not evidence of learning or critical skill. There are no _secrets_
for deciding such matters. The whole _data_ have been public for ages.
All the 'members of the Institute' together do not possess one grain of
evidence that any ordinary scholar in America does not possess as well.
M. Renan rejects, or discredits, or garbles, or slips over silently,
because he finds it necessary for his theory. That is all. He pettifogs
with his witnesses to establish