FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   542   543   544   545   546   547   548   549   550   551   552   553   554   555   556   557   558   559   560   561   562   563   564   565   566  
567   568   569   570   571   572   573   574   575   576   577   578   579   580   581   582   583   584   585   586   587   588   589   590   591   >>   >|  
ds of the clergy only."[463:2] Concerning the _time_ when the canon of the New Testament was settled, Mosheim says: "The opinions, or rather the _conjectures_, of the learned concerning the _time_ when the books of the New Testament were collected into one volume; as also about the authors of that collection, are extremely different. This important question is attended with great and almost insuperable difficulties to us in these later times."[463:3] The Rev. B. F. Westcott says: "It is impossible to point to any period as marking the date at which our present canon was determined. When it first appears, it is presented not as a novelty, but as an ancient tradition."[463:4] Dr. Lardner says: "Even so late as the middle of the _sixth century_, the canon of the New Testament had not been settled by any authority that was decisive and universally acknowledged, but Christian people were at liberty to judge for themselves concerning the genuineness of writings proposed to them as apostolical, and to determine according to evidence."[464:1] The learned Michaelis says: "No manuscript of the New Testament now extant is prior to the _sixth century_, and what is to be lamented, various readings which, as appears from the quotations of the Fathers, were in the text of the Greek Testament, are to be found in none of the manuscripts which are at present remaining."[464:2] And Bishop Marsh says: "It is a certain fact, that several readings in our common printed text are nothing more than _alterations_ made by Origen, whose authority was so great in the Christian Church (A. D. 230) that emendations which he proposed, though, as he himself acknowledged, they were supported by the evidence of no manuscript, were very generally received."[464:3] In his Ecclesiastical History, Eusebius gives us a list of what books at that time (A. D. 315) were considered canonical. They are as follows: "The four-fold writings of the Evangelists," "The Acts of the Apostles," "The Epistles of Peter," "after these the _first_ of John, and that of Peter," "_All these are received for undoubted._" "The Revelation of St. John, _some disavow_." "The books which are _gainsaid_, though well known unto many, are these: the Epistle of James, the Epistle of Jude, the _
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   542   543   544   545   546   547   548   549   550   551   552   553   554   555   556   557   558   559   560   561   562   563   564   565   566  
567   568   569   570   571   572   573   574   575   576   577   578   579   580   581   582   583   584   585   586   587   588   589   590   591   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
Testament
 

settled

 

readings

 

century

 

Christian

 

authority

 
received
 

acknowledged

 

present

 

evidence


learned

 

manuscript

 

Epistle

 

proposed

 

writings

 

appears

 

Church

 

Origen

 

remaining

 
quotations

manuscripts
 
Fathers
 
Bishop
 

alterations

 

printed

 
common
 

undoubted

 
Revelation
 

Epistles

 
Apostles

Evangelists

 
disavow
 
gainsaid
 

generally

 
supported
 
emendations
 

Ecclesiastical

 
considered
 

canonical

 

History


Eusebius

 
universally
 

insuperable

 

attended

 

question

 

important

 
difficulties
 
Westcott
 

impossible

 
extremely