THE
CANON
OF
THE
OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS
ASCERTAINED,
OR
THE
BIBLE COMPLETE
WITHOUT THE
APOCRYPHA AND UNWRITTEN TRADITIONS.
A NEW EDITION,
Revised for the Presbyterian Board of
Publication.
BY ARCHIBALD ALEXANDER,
Professor in the Theological Seminary,
Digitized by Ted Hildebrandt,
PRESBYTERIAN BOARD OF PUBLICATION,
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Entered,
according to the Act of Congress, in the year 1851,
BY A. W. MITCHELL, M. D.
In
the office of the Clerk of the District Court for the
Eastern District of
Pennsylvania.
Stereotyped by SLOTE & MOONEY,
Printed by Wm. S. MARTIEN.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTENTS.
PART. I.
PAGE
INTRODUCTION--The
importance of ascertaining the true
Canon of the Holy Scriptures, 9
SECTION I.
Early
use and import of the word Canon, 17
SECTION
II.
Constitution
of the Canon of the Old Testament by Ezra—
The Canon of the Old Testament as it
now exists, sanc-
tioned by Christ and his
Apostles—Catalogues of the books
by some of the early
Fathers—Agreement of Jews and
Christians on this subject, 21
SECTION III.
Apocryphal
books—Their origin—Importance of distinguish-
ing between canonical and apocryphal
books—Six books of
the latter class pronounced
canonical by the Council of
ancient or modern, 36
SECTION
IV.
Testimonies
of the Christian Fathers, and of other learned
men, down to the time of the Council
of Trent, respecting
the Apocrypha, 46
SECTION V.
Internal
evidence that these books are not canonical—The
writers not prophets, and do not
claim to be inspired, 66
SECTION VI.
No
canonical book of the Old Testament has been lost, 84
SECTION VII.
The
Oral Law of the Jews without foundation, 94
PART
II.
SECTION
I.
Method
of settling the Canon of the New Testament, 113
SECTION II.
Catalogues
of the books of the New Testament—Canonical
books only cited as authority by the
Fathers, and read in
the churches as Scripture, 124
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 CONTENTS.
SECTION III.
Order
of the books of the New Testament—Time of the gos-
pels being written—Notice of the
Evangelists, 144
SECTION
IV.
Testimonies
to Matthew's gospel—Time of publication—Lan-
guage in which it was originally
composed, 154
SECTION V.
Gospel
of Mark—On what occasion published—Ascribed to
the dictation of Peter by all the
Fathers, 165
SECTION VI.
Gospel
of Luke—Testimonies of the Fathers respecting it, 173
SECTION VII.
The
objections of J. D. Michaelis to the canonical authority
of the gospels of Mark and Luke,
considered and answered, 179
SECTION VIII.
The
gospel of John--Life of this Evangelist—Occasion and
time of his writing—Canonical
authority indisputable, 192
SECTION IX.
The
Acts of the Apostles—Luke the author—Canonical au-
thority undisputed by the Fathers —
Rejected only by
heretics, 200
SECTION X.
Testimonies
to the canonical authority of the fourteen epis-
tles of Paul, 205
SECTION XI.
Canonical
authority of the seven Catholic Epistles, 228
SECTION XII.
Canonical
authority of the book of Revelation, 236
SECTION XIII.
The
titles given to the sacred Scriptures by the Fathers —
These books not concealed, but
partially known and refer-
red to by enemies as well as
friends—Citations—Ancient
manuscripts—Remarks of Rennell, 245
SECTION XIV.
No
canonical book of the New Testament has been lost, 258
SECTION XV.
Rules
for determining what books are Apocryphal—Some
account of the Apocryphal books
which have been lost—All
of them condemned by the foregoing
rules--Reason of the
abounding of such books, 270
SECTION XVI.
Apocryphal
books which are still extant—Letter of Abgarus,
King of
Laodiceans—Letters of Paul to
Seneca—Protevangelion of
James—The gospel of our Saviour's
infancy—The Acts of
Pilate—The Acts of Paul and Thecla, 281
SECTION XVII.
No
part of the Christian Revelation handed down by un-
written tradition, 301
APPENDIX-NOTES,
343
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PREFACE.
IN
this edition, the work has been carefully revised by the
author,
and many additions made to the testimonies adduced
in
the former editions; and also several important docu-
ments
not contained in the former editions have been placed
in
the appendix. Some alterations have also been made in
particular
passages, but not of sufficient importance to require
specification.
In the
Morison,
some complaint was made of the want of re-
ferences
sufficiently distinct, to the authors from which the
testimonies
have been taken. In most cases, the works from
which
they have been derived are mentioned; and in a
popular
treatise of this kind, which has more the character
of
a compilation than of a work of original research, it is
not
deemed important to burden the margin with many
notes
of reference; which indeed are seldom used when
most
abundant.
( v )
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
vi PREFACE.
The author has freely availed
himself of all the informa-
tion
within his reach; but the authors to whom he is espe-
cially
indebted are, Cosins's Scholastic History
of the Canon,
of the Old Testament—Jones's New Method of Settling the
Canon of the New
Testament—and
Lardner's Credibility
of the Gospel
History—The Isagoge
of Buddaeus— The The-
saurus Philologicus of Hottinger, and
Prideaux's Connection.
Dr.
Wordsworth's work on the Canon of the Old and New
Testaments,
and Routh's Reliquiae have also been
consulted.
Several
valuable works on the Canon have been published
in
edition
of this work; but, though more valuable for the
scholar,
none of them, in the judgment of the author, are
such
as to supersede this as a popular treatise, which can
be
read with advantage by the unlearned as well as the
learned.
In a Scotch edition of this work, a copy of which
the
author has seen, there is an important error in giving
the
author's Christian name in the title page. Instead of
Archibald, they have put Alexander; making the first and
second
name the same. The only reason for mentioning
this
is, lest some doubt should hereafter arise respecting the
genuine
authorship of the volume.
As the design of this work is to
ascertain where the
revelation
of God is to be found, it is assumed usually
that
the whole of divine revelation has been committed to
writing.
But there are many under the Christian name
who
strenuously maintain, that an important part of the
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PREFACE. vii
revealed
will of God has been handed down through the
Church
by tradition. It therefore seemed necessary, in
order
to render the work complete, to examine the claims
of
tradition; in which the author has departed from the
common
method of treating this subject. And as the Jews,
as
well as the Romanists, pretend to have received an Oral
Law, handed down from Moses
by tradition, a chapter has
been
devoted to this subject, and another to the traditions
of
the Church of Rome.
As the inspiration of the gospels of
Mark and Luke had
been
called in question by John David Michaelis and others,
and
the author could find no satisfactory answer to the
objections
of this learned writer, he felt it to be a duty to
endeavour
to vindicate these books of the New Testament,
and
to prove that they have a right to a place in the Canon;
where
in fact they had always stood. And he has been
gratified
to learn that his arguments on this subject have
received
the approbation of learned and pious men. The
Rev.
Dr. T. H. Horne has inserted the substance of
them
in his "INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW TESTAMENT,"
and
the Rev. Richard Watson has extracted a part of
them
and inserted them in his Theological Dictionary.
There
never was a time when the friends of the Bible as
an
inspired volume had a more important duty to perform
in
its defence, than at the present. The assaults upon the
plenary
inspiration of the sacred Scriptures are, perhaps,
more
dangerous, because more plausible and insidious, than
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
viii PREFACE.
when
divine inspiration is openly denied. On this subject
the
friends of revelation must be firm, and not yield an
inch
of the ground hitherto occupied by the orthodox. "If
the
foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?"
If this volume may be in any measure
useful in the
defence
of divine revelation, the author will not regret the
labour
bestowed upon it. With an humble prayer for its
success
he commits it to the Christian public.
A. ALEXANDER.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTRODUCTION.
THE
IMPORTANCE OF ASCERTAINING THE TRUE CANON
OF HOLY SCRIPTURE.
THE
Bible includes a large number of separate books,
published
in different ages, during a space of more
than
fifteen hundred years. Each of these books
when
first published formed a volume; or at least,
the
writings of each author were, in the beginning,
distinct;
and if they had continued in that separate
form,
and had been transmitted to us in many vo-
lumes
instead of one, their authority would not, on
this
account, have been less, nor their usefulness di-
minished.
Their collection into one volume is merely
a
matter of convenience; and if any persons choose
now
to publish these books in a separate form, they
cannot
with propriety be charged with casting any
indignity
on the word of God.
Hence it appears that besides
general arguments
to
demonstrate that the Bible contains a divine revela-
tion,
there is need of special proofs to evince that
each
of the books now included in that sacred volume,
has
a right to the place which it occupies; or does in
reality
contain a part of that revelation which God
has
given.
If, therefore, it could be shown
(which however it
never
can) that some particular book, now included in
(9)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 INTRODUCTION.
the
Bible, is not authentic, the conclusion thence
derived
would only affect that single production; unless
it
were recognized as divine by the writers of the other
books.
The credit of the whole volume would not be
destroyed,
even if it could be proved that one half
the
books of which it consists are spurious. Infidels
have
much more to effect in overthrowing the Bible
than
they commonly suppose. It is incumbent on
them
to demonstrate, not only that this or that book
is
false, but that every one of these productions is
destitute
of evidence, that it has been derived from
the
inspiration of God.
On the other hand, it is manifest
that the advocate
of
divine revelation is bound to defend the claims of
every
separate portion of this volume; or to reject
from
it that part which has no evidence of a divine
origin.
It is necessary that he should be able to ren-
der
a good reason why he admits any particular book,
to
form a part of the inspired volume.
It is true that the antiquity of
this collection claims
for
it a high degree of respect. The transmission of
this
volume to us, through so many centuries, as HOLY
SCRIPTURE,
should teach us to be cautious how we
question
what is so venerable for its antiquity. But
this
only furnishes one presumptive argument in favour
of
each book. It by no means renders all further
investigation
unnecessary; much less, impious.
It is easy to conceive that books
not written by the
inspiration
of God, might, by some casualty or mis-
take,
find a place in the sacred volume. In fact, we
have
a striking example of this very thing, in the
Greek
and Latin Bibles which are now in use, and held
to
be sacred by a large majority of those who are de-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTRODUCTION. 11
nominated
Christians. These Bibles, besides the books
which
have evidence of being truly inspired, contain
a
number of other books, the claim of which to inspi-
ration
cannot be sustained by solid and satisfactory
reasons.
This inquiry, therefore, is far from being
one
of mere curiosity: it is in the highest degree prac-
tical, and concerns the
conscience of every man capa-
ble
of making the investigation. We agree, in the
general,
that the Bible is the word of God, and an
authoritative
rule; but the momentous question imme-
diately
presents itself, What belongs to the Bible? Of
what
books does this sacred volume consist? And it
will
not answer, to resolve to take it as it has come
down
to us, without further inquiry; for the Bible has
come
down to us, in several different forms. The Vul-
gate
Latin Bible, which alone was in use for hundreds
of
years before the era of the Reformation, and also
the
Greek version of the Old Testament, contain many
books
not in the copies of the Hebrew Scriptures.
Now,
to determine which of these contains the whole
of
the inspired books given to the Jews before the
advent
of Christ and no more, requires research and
accurate
examination. The inquiry, therefore, is not
optional,
but forces itself upon every conscientious
man;
for as no one is at liberty to reject from the
sacred
volume one sentence, much less a whole book,
of
the revelation of God, so no one has a right to
add
anything to the word of God; and of conse-
quence,
no one may receive as divine what others have,
without
authority, added to the HOLY SCRIPTURES.
Every
man, therefore, according to his opportunity
and
capacity, is under a moral obligation to use his
best
endeavours to ascertain what books do, really, and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12 INTRODUCTION.
of
right, belong to the Bible. An error here, on either
side,
is dangerous; for, on the one hand, if we reject
a
part of divine revelation, we dishonour God, and
deprive
ourselves of the benefit which might be de-
rived
from that portion of divine truth; and on the
other
hand, we are guilty of an equal offence, and may
suffer
an equal injury, by adding spurious productions
to
the Holy Scriptures; for thus we adulterate and
poison
the fountain of life, and subject our consciences
to
the authority of mere men.
I think, therefore, that the
importance and neces-
sity
of this inquiry must be evident to every person
of
serious reflection. But to some it may appear that
this
matter has been long ago settled on the firmest
principles;
and that it can answer no good purpose to
agitate
questions, which have a tendency to produce
doubts
and misgivings in the minds of common Chris-
tians,
rather than a confirmation of their faith. In
reply
to the first part of this objection, I would say,
that
it is freely admitted that this subject has been
ably
and fully discussed long ago, and in almost every
age
until the present time; and the author aims at
nothing
more, in this short treatise, than to exhibit to
the
sincere inquirer, who may not enjoy better means
of
information, the subject of those discussions and
proofs,
which ought to be in the possession of every
Christian.
His object is not to bring forth anything
new,
but to collect and condense in a narrow space,
what
has been written by the judicious and the learned,
on
this important subject. But, that discussion tends
to
induce doubting is a sentiment unworthy of Chris-
tians,
who maintain that their religion is founded on
the
best reasons, and who are commanded "to
give to
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTRODUCTION. 13
every man a reason of
the hope that is in them." That
faith
which is weakened by discussion is mere preju-
dice,
not true faith. They who receive the most im-
portant
articles of their religion upon trust from
human
authority, are continually liable to be thrown
into
doubt; and the only method of obviating this
evil
is to dig deep and lay our foundation upon a rock.
If
this objection had any weight, it would discourage
all
attempts to establish the truth of our holy religion
by
argument; and would also damp the spirit of free
inquiry
on every important subject. It is true, how-
ever,
that the first effect of free discussion may be to
shake
that easy confidence which most men
entertain,
that
all their opinions are correct: but the beneficial
result
will be, that instead of a persuasion, having no
other
foundation than prejudice, it will generate a faith
resting
on the firm basis of evidence.
There is, undoubtedly, among
Christians, too great
a
disposition to acquiesce, without examination, in the
religion
of their forefathers. There is too great an
aversion
to that kind of research, which requires time
and
labour; so that many who are fully competent to
examine
the foundation on which their religion rests,
never
take the pains to enter on the investigation;
and
it is to be regretted, that many who are much
occupied
with speculations on abstruse points of the-
ology,
waste the energies of their minds on subjects
which
can yield them no manner of profit, while they
neglect
entirely, or but superficially attend to, points
of
fundamental importance.
The two great questions most
deserving the atten-
tion
of all men, are: first, whether the Bible and all
that
it contains is from God: secondly, what are
------------------------------------------------------------------
14 INTRODUCTION.
those
truths which the Bible was intended to teach us.
These
two grand inquiries are sufficient to give occu-
pation
and vigorous exercise to intellectual faculties of
the
highest order; and they are not removed entirely
out
of the reach of plain uneducated Christians.
From
the fountain of divine truth every one may
draw
according to his capacity. But these inquiries
are
neglected, not so much for want of time and capa-
city,
as because we take no pleasure in searching for
and
contemplating divine truth. Just in proportion
as
men love the truth and value the Bible, they will
take
an interest in all inquiries which relate to the
authenticity,
canonical authority, and correct inter-
pretation
of the sacred books. The time will come, I
doubt
not, when these studies will occupy the minds of
thousands,
where they now engage the attention of
one.
The Bible will grow into importance in the esti-
mation
of men, just in the same proportion as true
religion
flourishes. It will not only be the fashion
to
associate for printing and circulating the Holy
Scriptures;
but it will become customary for men of
the
highest literary attainments, as well as others, to
study
the sacred pages with unceasing assiduity and
prayer.
And, in proportion as the Bible is understood
in
its simplicity and momentous import, the mere doc-
trines
of men will disappear; and the dogmas of the
schools
and the alliance with philosophy being re-
nounced,
there will be among sincere inquirers after
truth,
an increasing tendency to unity of sentiment,
as
well as unity of spirit. The pride of learning and
of
intellect being sacrificed, and all distinctions counted
but
loss for the excellency of the knowledge of
Christ,
a thousand knotty questions, which now cause
------------------------------------------------------------------
INTRODUCTION. 15
divisions
and gender strifes, will be forgotten; and
the
wonder of our more enlightened posterity will be,
how
good men could have wasted their time and their
talents
in such unprofitable speculations; and, more
especially,
how they could have permitted themselves
to
engage in fierce and unbrotherly contentions about
matters
of little importance.
Then also men will no more neglect
and undervalue
the
Scriptures, on pretence of possessing a brighter
light
within them, than that which emanates from the
divine
word. That spurious devotion which affects a
superiority
to external means and ordinances, will be
exchanged
for a simple, sincere reliance on the re-
vealed
will of God; and those assemblies from which
the
sacred volume is now excluded, while the effusions
of
every heated imagination are deemed revelations
of
the Spirit, will become, under the influence of di-
vine
truth, churches of the living God.
In those future days of the
prosperity of
service
of the most high God will be considered by
men,
generally, as the noblest employment; and the
best
talents and attainments will be consecrated on the
altar
of God; and the enterprises, and the la-
bours
which they now undertake to gratify an ava-
ricious,
ambitious, or voluptuous disposition, will be
pursued
from love to God and man. The merchant
will
plan, and travel, and traffic, to obtain the means
of
propagating the gospel in foreign parts, and pro-
moting
Christian knowledge at home; yea, the com-
mon
labourer will cheerfully endure toil and privation,
that
he may have a mite to cast into the treasury of
the
Lord.
Now, many consider all that is given
to circulate
------------------------------------------------------------------
16 INTRODUCTION.
the
Bible, and to send missionaries and tracts for the
instruction
of the ignorant, as so much wasted; but
then,
all expenditures will be considered as profuse
and
wasteful, which terminate in mere selfish gratifi-
cation;
and those funds will alone be reckoned useful,
which
are applied to promote the glory of God and the
welfare
of men.
These, however, may appear to many
as the visions
of
a heated imagination, which will never be realized;
but
if the same change in the views and sentiments of
men
which has been going on for thirty years past,
shall
continue to advance with the same steady pace,
half
a century will not have elapsed from the present
time,
before such a scene will be exhibited to the ad-
miring
eyes of believers, as will fully justify the fore-
going
anticipations.
But I have wandered wide of my
subject—I will
now
recall the attention, of the reader to the consid-
eration
of the exceeding great importance of ascer-
taining,
the true Canon of Holy Scripture. This inves-
tigation
may, indeed, appear and unentertaining,
but
every thing which bears any relation to the great
Charter
of our privileges and our hopes, ought to be
interesting
to us. It has been my object, to bring
this
subject not only more conveniently within the
reach
of the theological student, but also to a level
with
the capacity of the common Christian. That
this
work may in some humble degree subserve the
cause
of the Bible, is the sincere prayer of
THE AUTHOR.
------------------------------------------------------------------
SECTION I.
EARLY
USE AND IMPORT OF THE WORD CANON.
THE
word Canon properly signifies a rule: and it is
used
in this sense several times in the New Testament,
as
Gal. vi. 16; "As many as walk according to this
rule."
Phil. iii. 16; "Let us walk by the same rule."*
But
in these passages there is no reference to the
Scriptures
as a volume.
The word Canon, however, was early
used by the
Christian
Fathers to designate the inspired Scriptures.
IRENAEUS,
speaking of the Scriptures, calls them "the
Canon
of truth." CLEMENT of
to
a quotation of the gospel according to the Egyp-
tians,
says, "But they follow anything, rather than
the
true canonical gospels."†
EUSEBIUS says of Origen, "But
in the first book of
his
commentaries on the gospel of Matthew, observing
the
ecclesiastical Canon, he declares that he knew of
four
gospels only."
ATHANASIUS, in his Festal Epistle,
speaks of three
sorts
of books; the canonical—such as were allowed to
* The word Kanwn literally signifies a
reed, by which the di-
mensions
of anything were measured; and hence it came figura-
tively
to signify a RULE.
The word was used by the Greek
grammarians to designate
those
authors who were considered as authority in matters of
criticism:
Vid. Wordsworth on the Canon, p. 5.
† Strom. Lib. iii. p. 453.
(17
)
------------------------------------------------------------------
18 EARLY USE OF THE WORD CANON.
be
read—and such as were Apocryphal. By the first
he
evidently means such as we now call canonical.
The Council of Laodicea ordained,
"that none but
canonical books should be read in
the church; that is,
the
books of the Old and New Testaments."
RUFIN, after enumerating the books
of the Old and
New
Testaments, goes on to mention three classes of
books.
1. Such as were included in the Canon. 2.
Ecclesiastical,
or such as were allowed to be read. 3.
Apocryphal,
such as were not permitted to be publicly
read.*
JEROME often speaks of the Canon of
Scripture,
and
mentions books which might be read, but did not
belong
to the Canon.†
The third Council of Carthage
ordained, "That
nothing
beside the canonical Scriptures be read in the
church,
under the name of the divine Scriptures."
AUGUSTINE often makes mention of the
canonical
Scriptures,
and the whole Canon of Scripture, meaning
to
designate all the sacred books of the Old and New
Testaments.
"We read of some," says he, "that they
searched
the Scriptures daily, whether these things
were
so. What Scriptures, I pray, except the canoni-
cal
Scriptures of the Law and the Prophets? To
them
have been since added, the Gospels, the Epistles
of
the Apostles, the Acts of the Apostles, and the
Revelation
of John."‡
* Expositio in Symbolum Apostolorum,
p. 26.
After giving a catalogue both of the
books of the Old and New
Testaments,
he says, " Haec sunt quae patres inter Canonem
con-
cluserunt."
†
Prolog. Gal. in multis locis.
‡ De Doctrina Christiana, vol. iii. Lib. ii.
pl. 1, p. 47. Ed.
------------------------------------------------------------------
EARLY USE OF THE WORD CANON. 19
CHRYSOSTOM says, "They fall
into great absurdi-
ties,
who will not follow the Canon of the divine Scrip-
ture,
but trust to their own reasoning."
ISIDORE of Pelusium observes,
"That these things
are
so, we shall perceive, if we attend to the Canon of
truth—
the divine Scriptures."
And LEONTIUS of Constantinople,
having cited the
whole
catalogue of the books of sacred Scripture,
from
Genesis to Revelation, concludes, "These are the
ancient
and the new books, which are received in the
church
as canonical."
EUSEBIUS informs us that Origen, in
his Exposition
on
Matthew, "enumerates the books of
Scripture ac-
cording to the Canon of
the Church."*
EPIPHANIUS, speaking of certain
heretics, says,
"They received the apocryphal Acts of Andrew
and
Thomas, rejecting the
Canon received by the Church."†
PHILASTRIUS speaks of the
distinction of Canonical
and
Apocryphal as well known in his time.‡
From the authorities cited above, it
will evidently
appear,
that at an early period the sacred Scriptures
were
carefully distinguished from all other writings,
and
formed a rule, which all Christians considered to
be
authoritative: and that this collection of sacred
writings
received the name of Canon.||
The division of the sacred books
which is most an-
cient
and universal, is, into the Old Testament, and
the
New Testament. The apostle Paul himself lays
* Eus. Hist. Lib. VI. c. 25. † Hares. 61. ‡ De Haeresibus, 40.
|| It cannot be denied, however,
that the word Canon is not
always
used by the Fathers in the same definite sense. Some-
times,
under this name, they include books not inspired, and this
has
given some plausibility to the Popish doctrine respecting the
Apocrypha.
------------------------------------------------------------------
20 EARLY USE OF TIIE WORD CANON.
a
foundation for this distinction; for, in his second
epistle
to the Corinthians, 2 Cor. iii. 14, he uses the
phrases
Old Testament and New Testament; and in
one
instance, designates the Scriptures of the Law,
by
the former title: "For until this day," says he,
"remaineth
the same veil untaken away in the reading
of
the Old Testament."
It is our object, in this work, to
inquire into the
Canon,
both of the Old and New Testament, and to
discuss
all the principal questions connected with this
subject.
------------------------------------------------------------------
OLD TESTAMENT CANON. 21
SECTION II.
CONSTITUTION
OF THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT BY
EZRA--THE CANON OF THE OLD
TESTAMENT, AS IT NOW
EXISTS, SANCTIONED BY CHRIST AND HIS
APOSTLES--
CATALOGUES OF THE BOOKS BY SOME OF
THE EARLY FA-
THERS--AGREEMENT OF JEWS AND
CHRISTIANS ON THIS
SUBJECT.
The five books of Moses were, when
finished, care-
fully
deposited by the side of the ark of the Covenant,
Deut.
xxxi. 24-26. "And it came to pass, when
Moses
had made an end of writing the words of this
law
in a book, until they were finished, that Moses
commanded
the Levites which bore the ark of the cove-
nant
of the Lord, saying, Take this book of the law,
and
put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of
the
Lord your God, that it may be there for a witness
against
thee."
No doubt, copies of the sacred
volume were made
out,
before it was deposited in the most holy place;
for
as it was there inaccessible to any but the priests,
the
people generally must have remained ignorant,
had
there been no copies of the law. But we know
that
copies were written, for it was one of the laws
respecting
the duty of a king, when such an officer
should
be appointed, that he should write out a copy
of
the law with his own hand. Deut. xvii. 18-20,
"And
it shall be when he sitteth upon the throne of
------------------------------------------------------------------
22 OLD TESTAMENT CANON.
his
kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this
law
in a book, out of that which is before the priests,
the
Levites. And it shall be with him, and he shall
read
therein, all the days of his life; that he may
learn
to fear the Lord his God, to keep all the words
of
this law and these statutes to do them; that his
heart
be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he
turn
not aside from the commandment to the right
hand
or to the left: to the end that he may prolong
his
days in his kingdom, he and his children in the
midst
of
the
direction of Moses, a copy of the law was prepared
for
each of the tribes of
It seems that the book of Joshua was
annexed to
the
volume of the Pentateuch; for we read that
"Joshua
wrote these words in the book of the law of
God."
See Josh i. 8; xxiv. 26. And the matters
contained
in this book were of public concern to
the
nation, as well as those recorded in the law.
For,
as in the latter were written statutes and or-
dinances,
to direct them in all matters sacred and
civil;
so in the former was recorded the division
of
the land among the tribes. The possession of
each
tribe was here accurately defined, so that this
book
served as a national deed of conveyance. When
other
books were added to the Canon, no doubt, the
inspired
men who were moved by the Holy Spirit to
write
them, would be careful to deposit copies in the
sanctuary,
and to have other copies put into circula-
tion.
But on this subject we have no precise informa-
tion.
We know not with what degree of care the sa-
cred
books were guarded, or to what extent copies
were
multiplied.
------------------------------------------------------------------
OLD TESTAMENT CANON. 23
A single fact shows that the sacred
autograph of
Moses
had well nigh perished, in the idolatrous reigns
of
Manasseh and Amon, but was found, during the
reign
of the pious Josiah, among the rubbish of the
temple.
It cannot, however, be reasonably supposed,
that
there were no other copies of the law scattered
through
the nation. It does indeed seem that the
young
king had never seen the book, and was igno-
rant
of its contents, until it was now read to him; but
while
the autograph of Moses had been misplaced, and
buried
among the ruins, many pious men might have
possessed
private copies.
And although at the destruction of
of
the temple by Nebuchadnezzar, this precious vo-
lume
was, in all probability, destroyed with the ark
and
all the holy apparatus of the sanctuary; yet we
are
not to credit the Jewish tradition, too readily re-
ceived
by the Christian Fathers, that, on this occa-
sion,
all the copies of the Scriptures were lost, and
that
Ezra restored the whole by a miracle. This is a
mere
Jewish fable, depending on no higher authority
than
a passage in the fourth book of Esdras, and is
utterly
inconsistent with facts recorded in the sacred
volume.
We know that Daniel had a copy of the
Scriptures,
for he quotes them, and makes express
mention
of the prophecies of Jeremiah. And Ezra
is
called "a ready scribe in the law;" and it is said,
in
the sixth chapter of Ezra, that when the temple
was
finished, the functions of the priests and Levites
were
regulated, "as it is written in the
book of Moses."
And
this was many years before Ezra came to Jeru-
said
that Ezra, at the request of the people, "brought
------------------------------------------------------------------
24 CANON BY EZRA.
the
law before the congregation, and he read therein
from
the morning until mid-day. And Ezra opened
the
book in the sight of all the people." It is evi-
dent,
therefore, that all the copies of the Scriptures
were
not lost during the captivity. This story, no
doubt,
originated from two facts: the first, that the
autographs
in the temple, had been destroyed with that
sacred
edifice; and the second, that Ezra took great
pains
to have correct copies of the Scriptures prepared
and
circulated.
It seems to be agreed by all, that
the forming of
the
present Canon of the Old Testament should be
attributed
to Ezra. To assist him in this work, the
Jewish
writers inform us, that there existed in his
time
a great synagogue, consisting of one
hundred
and
twenty men, including Daniel and his three
friends,
Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego; the pro-
phets
Haggai and Zechariah; and also Simon the
Just.
But it is very absurd to suppose that all these
lived
at one time, and formed one synagogue, as they
are
pleased to represent it: for, from the time of
Daniel
to that of Simon the Just, no less than two
hundred
and fifty years intervened.
It is, however, not improbable that
Ezra was as-
sisted
in this great work, by many learned and pious
men,
who were cotemporary with him; and as pro-
phets
had always been the superintendents, as well as
writers
of the sacred volume, it is likely that the in-
spired
men who lived at the same time as Ezra, would
give
attention to this work. But in regard to this
great
synagogue, the only thing probable is, that the
men
who are said to have belonged to it, did not live
in
one age, but successively, until the time of Simon
------------------------------------------------------------------
CANON BY EZRA. 25
the
Just, who was made high priest about twenty-five
years
after the death of Alexander the Great: This
opinion
has its probability increased, by the considera-
tion
that the Canon of the Old Testament appears
not
to have been fully completed; until about the time
of
Simon the Just. Malachi seems to have lived after
the
time of Ezra, and therefore his prophecy could
not
have been added to the Canon by this eminent
scribe;
unless we adopt the opinion of the Jews, who
will
have Malachi to be no other than Ezra himself;
maintaining,
that while Ezra was his proper name, he
received
that of Malachi, from the circumstance of
his
having been sent to superintend the
religious con-
cerns
of the Jews; for the import of that name a
messenger, or one sent.
But this is not the book of Nehemiah,* men-
tion
is made of the high priest Jaddua, and of Darius
Codomannus,
king of
least
a hundred years after the time of Ezra.
In the
third
chapter of the first book of Chroncles, the gene-
alogy
of the sons of Zerubbabel is carried down, at
least
to the time of Alexander the Great. This
book,
therefore,
could not have been put into the Canon by,
Ezra;
nor much earlier than the time of Simon the
Just.
The book of Esther, also, was probably added
during this interval.
The probable conclusion therefore,
is that Ezra
began
this work, and collected and arranged all the
sacred
books which belonged to the Canon before his
time,
and that a succession of pious and learned men
continued
to pay attention to the Canon, until the
whole
was completed, about the time of Simon the
* Nehemiah xii. 22.
------------------------------------------------------------------
26 CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
Just.
After which, nothing was added to the Canon
of
the Old Testament.
Most, however, are of opinion that
nothing was
added
after the book of Malachi was written, except
a
few names and notes; and that all the books be-
longing
to the Canon of the Old Testament, were col-
lected
and inserted in the sacred volume by Ezra him-
self.
And this opinion seems to be the safest, and is
not
incredible in itself. It accords also with the uni-
form
tradition of the Jews, that Ezra completed the
Canon
of the Old Testament; and that after Malachi
there
arose no prophet who added anything to the
sacred
volume.*
Whether the books were now collected
into a single
volume,
or were bound up in several codices, is a ques-
tion
of no importance. If we can ascertain what books
were
received as canonical, it matters not in what
form
they were preserved. It seems probable, how-
ever,
that the sacred books were at this time distri-
buted
into three volumes, the Law; the Prophets,
and
the Hagiographa. This division, we know to be
as
ancient as the time of our Saviour, for he says,
"These
are the words which I spake unto you while I
was
yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled
which
are written in the law, and in the prophets,
and
in the psalms, concerning me." Luke xxiv. 44.
Josephus
also makes mention of this division, and it is
* The Jews are accustomed to call
Malachi the "seal of the
Prophets."
Jerome says: "Post Haggaeum et Zachariam nul-
los
alios Prophetas usque ad Johannem Baptistam videram." That
is,
"After Haggai and Zacharias, even to the time of John the
Baptist,
I have found no other prophets." In Esaiam xlix. 2.
------------------------------------------------------------------
SANCTIONED
BY CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES. 27
by
the Jews, with one consent, referred to Ezra, as its
author.
In establishing the Canon of the Old
Testament,
we
might labour under considerable uncertainty and
embarrassment,
in regard to several books were it not
that
the whole of what were called "the Scriptures,"
and
which were included in the threefold division
mentioned
above, received the explicit sanction of our
Lord.
He was not backward to reprove the Jews for
disobeying,
misinterpreting, and adding their tradi-
tions
to the Scriptures, but he never drops a hint that
they
had been unfaithful or careless in the preserva-
tion
of the sacred books. This argument for the in-
tegrity
of the books of the Old Testament was used
by
Origen, as we are informed by Jerome, who says:
"Si aliquis dixerit Hebraeos libros, a Jutaeis esse
fal-
satos, audiat Origenem: Quod nunquam Dominus
et Apostoli, qui caetera crimina in Scribis, de hoc
crimine quad est
maximum, reticuissent." In Esai.
cvi,
tom. iii. p. 63. So far from this, he refers to
the
Scriptures as an infallible rule, which "must
be
fulfilled," Mark xiv. 49, and "could not be bro-
ken."
John x. 35. "Search the Scriptures," John
v.
39, said he, "for in them ye think ye have eter-
nal
life, and they are they which testify of me." The
errors
of the Sadducees are attributed to an igno-
rance
of the Scriptures: and they are never men-
tioned
but with the highest respect, and as the un-
erring
word of God. The apostle Paul, also, referring
principally,
if not wholly, to the Scriptures of the Old
Testament,
says, "And that from a child thou hast
known
the holy Scriptures, which are able to make
thee
wise unto salvation. All Scripture is given by
------------------------------------------------------------------
28 CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
inspiration
of God." 2 Tim. iii. 15, 16. They are also
called
by this apostle, "the oracles of God;" "the
lively
oracles," "the word of God;" and when
quotations
are made from David, it is represented as
"the
Holy Ghost speaking by the mouth of David."
Acts
i. 16; iv. 25. The testimony of Peter is not
less
explicit, for he says, "The prophecy came not
in
old time by the will of man, but holy men of God
spake
as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." 2 Pet.
i.
21. And the apostle James speaks of the Scrip-
tures
with equal confidence and respect: "And re-
ceive
with meekness," says he, “the ingrafted word
which
is able to save your souls." James i. 21-23.
"And
the Scripture was fulfilled which saith," &c.
"Do
ye think that the Scripture saith in vain?" James
iv.
5, &c.
We have, therefore, an important
point established
with
the utmost certainty, that the volume of Scrip-
ture
which existed in the time of Christ and his apos-
tles
was uncorrupted, and was esteemed by them an
infallible
rule. Now, if we can ascertain what, books
were
then included in the Sacred Volume, we shall
be
able to settle the Canon of the Old Testament
without
uncertainty.
But here lies the difficulty.
Neither Christ nor, any
of
his apostles has given us a catalogue of the books
which
composed the Scriptures of the Old Testament.
They
have distinctly quoted a number of these books,
and,
so far, the evidence is complete. We know that
the
law, and the Prophets, and the Psalms were
included
in their Canon. But this does not
ascertain,
particularly,
whether the very same books which we
now
find in the Old Testament were then found in it
------------------------------------------------------------------
SANCTIONED
BY CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES. 29
and
no others. It is necessary then, to resort to other
sources
of information. And, happily, the Jewish
historian
Josephus furnishes us with the very informa-
tion
which we want; not, indeed, as explicitly as we
could
wish, but sufficiently so to lead us to a very sa-
tisfactory
conclusion. He does not name the books
of
the Old Testament, but he numbers them, and so
describes
them that there is scarcely room for any
mistake.
The important passage to which we refer is
in
his first book against Apion. “We have,” says he,
“only-two-and-twenty
books, which are justly believed
to
be of divine authority---of which five are the books of
Moses.
From the death of Moses to the reign of
Artaxerxes,
the son of Xerxes, king of
Prophets,
who were the successors of Moses, have
written
in thirteen books. The remaining four books
contain
hymns to God, and precepts for the regulation
of
human life." Now, the five books of Moses are uni-
versally
agreed to be Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus,
Numbers,
and Deuteronomy. The thirteen books
written
by the prophets will include Joshua, Judges,
with
Ruth, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah with La-
mentations,
Ezekiel, Daniel, the twelve minor Pro-
phets,
Job, Ezra, Esther, and Chronicles. The four
remaining
books will be, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesias-
tes,
and the Song of Solomon, which make the whole
number
twenty-two. The Canon then existing proved
to
be the same as that which we now possess. It
would
appear, indeed, that these books might more
conveniently
be reckoned twenty-four; and this is the
present
method of numbering them by the modern
Jews;
but formerly the number was regulated by that
of
the Hebrew alphabet, which consists of twenty-two
------------------------------------------------------------------
30 TESTIMONY OF JOSEPHUS.
letters:
therefore they annexed the small book of Ruth
to
Judges; and probably it is a continuation of this
book
by the same author. They added, also, the La-
mentations
of Jeremiah to his prophecy, and this was
natural
enough. As to the minor prophets, which
form
twelve separate books in our Bibles, they were,
anciently,
always reckoned one book, so they are con-
sidered
in every ancient catalogue, and in all quota-
tions
from them. Josephus adds, to what is cited
above,
the following: "But as to the books which have
been
written since the time of Artaxerxes until our
times
they are not considered worthy of the same
credit
as the former, because they do not contain ac-
curate
doctrine sanctioned by the prophets."*
It will not be supposed that any
change could have
occurred
in the Canon from the time of our Saviour
and
his apostles, to that in which Josephus wrote.
Indeed,
he may be considered the contemporary of the
apostles,
as he was born about the time of Paul's con-
version
to Christianity, and was therefore grown up
to
man's age long before the death of this apostle;
and
the apostle John probably survived him. And it
must
be remembered that Josephus is here giving his
testimony
to a public fact: he is declaring what books
were
received as divine by his nation; and he does it
without
hesitation or inconsistency. "We have,"
says
he, “only twenty-two books which are justly be-
lieved
to be of divine authority."
We are able also to adduce other
testimony to prove
the
same thing. Some of the early Christian Fathers,
who
had been brought up in Paganism, when they em-
* Contra Apionem; Euseb. iii. 10.
------------------------------------------------------------------
CATALOGUES
BY THE EARLY FATHERS. 31
braced
Christianity, were curious in their inquiries
into
the Canon of the Old Testament; and the result
of
the researches of some of them still remains.
LITO,
bishop of
very
purpose of satisfying himself, on this point. And
although
his own writings are lost, Eusebius has pre-
served
his catalogue of the books of the Old Testa-
ment;
from which it appears, that the very same books
were,
in his day, received into the Canon, as are now
found
in our Hebrew Bibles. In the catalogue of
Melito,
presented by Eusebius, after Proverbs,
the
word
Wisdom occurs, which nearly all
commentators
have
been of opinion is only another name for the same
book,
and not the name of the book now called "The
Wisdom
of Solomon." There is however, an omis-
sion
of Esther and Neheiniah. As to the latter,
it
creates
no difficulty for Ezra and Nehemiah are com-
monly
counted as one book; and some learned men
are
of opinion that Ezra being the author of Esther,
this
book also is included under the name Esdras.
The
interval between Melito and Josephus is not
a
hundred years, so that no alteration in the Canon
can
be reasonably supposed to have taken place in this
period.
Very soon after Melito, ORIGEN
furnishes us with a
catalogue
of the books of the Old Testament, which
perfectly
accords with our Canon, except that he omits
the
Minor Prophets; which omission must have been
a
mere slip of the pen, in him or his copyist, as it is
certain
that he received this as a book of Holy Scrip-
ture:
and the number of the books of the Old Testa-
tament,
given by him in this very place, cannot be
------------------------------------------------------------------
32 CATALOGUES BY THE EARLY FATHERS.
completed
without reckoning the twelve Minor Pro-
phets
as one.
After Origen, we have catalogues in
succession, not
only
by men of the first authority in the church, but
by
councils, consisting of numerous bishops, all which
are
perfectly the same as our own. It will be sufficient
merely
to refer to these sources of information. Cata-
logues
of the books of the Old Testament have been
given
by ATHANASIUS; by CYRIL; by AUGUSTINE;
by
JEROME; by RUFIN; by THE COUNCIL OF LAODI-
CEA,
in their LX. Canon; and by the THE COUNCIL OF
catalogues
exactly correspond with our present Canon
of
the Hebrew Bible, the evidence, I think must ap-
pear
complete to every impartial mind that the Canon
of
the Old Testament is settled, upon the clearest his-
torcal
grounds. There seems to be nothing to be
wished
for further in the confirmation of this point.
But if all this testimony had been
wanting, there is
still
a source of evidence to which we might refer with
the
utmost confidence, as perfectly conclusive on this
point;
I mean the fact that these books have been
ever
since the time of Christ and his apostles in the
keeping
of both Jews and Christians, who have been
constantly
arrayed in opposition to each other; so that
it
was impossible that any change should have been
made
in the Canon, by either party, without being
immediately
detected by the other. And the conclu-
sive
evidence that no alteration in the Canon has oc-
curred
is the perfect agreement of these hostile parties
in
regard to the books of the Old Testament at this
time.
On this point, the Jew and Christian are har-
monious.
There is no complaint of addition to, or
------------------------------------------------------------------
AGREEMENT
OF JEWS AND CIIRISTIANS. 33
diminution
of, the sacred books on either side. The
Hebrew
Bible of the Jew is the Bible of the Christian.
There
is here no difference. A learned Jew and a
Christian
have even been united in publishing an excel-
lent
edition of the Hebrew Bible.* Now, if any alter-
ation
in the Canon has occurred, it must have been by
the
concert or collusion of both parties; but how
absurd
this idea is must be manifest to all.
I acknowledge what is here said of
the agreement
of
Christians and Jews can only be said in relation to
Protestant
Christians. For as to those of the Romish
and
Greek communions they have admitted other books
into
the Canon, which Jews and Protestants hold to
be
apocryphal; but these books will form the subject
of
a particular discussion, in the sequel of this work.
The fact is important, that a short
time after the
Canon
of the Old Testament was closed, a translation
was
made of the whole of the books into the Greek
language.
This translation was made at
in
delphus,
king of
these
sacred books in the famous library which he was
engaged
in collecting. It is called the Septuagint,
from
its being made, according to the accounts which
have
been handed down, by seventy, or rather seventy-
two
men; six from each of the tribes of
many
fabulous things have been reported concerning
this
version, that it is very difficult to ascertain the pre-
cise
truth. But it is manifest from internal evidence,
that
it was not the work of one hand, nor probably of
one
set of translators: for, while some books are ren-
dered
with great accuracy, and in a very literal manner,
* See the Biblia Hebraica, edited by
Leusden and Athias.
------------------------------------------------------------------
34 THE SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH.
others
are translated with little care, and the meaning
of
the original is very imperfectly given. The proba-
bility
is that the Pentateuch was first translated, and
the
other books were added from time to time by
different
hands; but when the work was once begun,
it
is not likely that it would be long before the whole
was
completed. Now this Greek version contains all
the
books which are found in our common Hebrew
Bibles.
It is a good witness therefore to prove that
all
these books were in the Canon when this version
was
made. The apocryphal books, which have long
been
connected with this version, will furnish a subject
for
consideration hereafter.
There is, moreover, a distinct and
remarkable testi-
mony
to the antiquity of the five books of Moses in
the
Samaritan Pentateuch, which has existed in a form
entirely
separate from the Jewish copies, and in a
character
totally different from that in which the
Hebrew
Bible has been for many ages written. It has
also
been preserved and handed down to us by a people
who
have ever been hostile to the Jews. This Penta-
teuch
has, without doubt, been transmitted through a
separate
channel ever since the ten tribes of
were
carried captive. It furnishes authentic testimony
to
the great antiquity of the books of Moses, and
shows
how little they have been corrupted during the
lapse
of nearly three thousand years. The Samaritans
were
the people transplanted from other countries into
the
places vacated by the captivity of the ten tribes of
annoyed
by wild beasts, they supposed it was because
they
knew not how to worship the God of the country.
They,
therefore, requested that a priest should be sent
------------------------------------------------------------------
THE SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH. 35
to
them of the Israelitish nation to instruct them.
Their
request was granted; and this priest, no doubt,
brought
with him a copy of the law. At one time it
was
doubted whether a Samaritan Pentateuch was in
existence,
but a learned man going into
obtained
several copies. And they have also a trans-
lation
of the whole into the Samaritan language.
The
Pentateuch, though Hebrew, is written in Sama-
ritan
characters, which many learned men think was
the
original Hebrew character.
------------------------------------------------------------------
36 THE APOCRYPHA.
SECTION III.
APOCRYPHAL
BOOKS, THEIR ORIGIN—IMPORTANCE OF DIS-
TINGUISHING BETWEEN CANONICAL AND APOCRYPHAL
BOOKS—SIX BOOKS OF THIS CLASS
PRONOUNCED
NONICAL BY THE COUNCIL OF
HEBREW, NOR RECEIVED BY THE JEWS,
ANCIENT OR
MODERN.
THE
word Apocrypha signifies concealed, obscure,
without authority. In reference to the
Bible, it is
employed
to designate such books as claim a place in
the
sacred volume, but which are not canonical. It
is
said to have been first used by MELITO, bishop of
An inquiry into this subject cannot
be uninteresting
to
the friends of the Bible; for it behoves them to
ascertain,
on the best evidence, what books belong to
the
sacred volume, and also, on what grounds other
books
are rejected from the Canon. This subject as-
sumes
a higher importance from the fact, that Chris-
tians
are much divided on this point; for, some re-
ceive
as of canonical authority, books which others
reject
as spurious, or consider merely as human com-
positions.
On such a point every Christian should
------------------------------------------------------------------
THE APOCRYPHAL CONTROVERSY. 37
form
his opinion upon the best information which he
can
obtain.
In controversy with the Romanists
this subject
meets
us at the very threshold. It is vain to dispute
about
particular doctrines of Scripture until it de-
termined
what books are to be received as Scripture.
This subject gave rise to a very
unpleasant contro-
versy
between the British and Foreign. Bible Society
and
some of the leading ministers of
principle
adopted at the beginning by the Bible So-
ciety
was, to circulate nothing but the text of the
Holy
Scriptures, without note or comment. But
in
order to get the Scriptures into the hands of the
Romanists,
Bibles containing the Apocrypha were
circulated,
which proceeding gave just offence to the
ministers
of the Church of Scotland, and, to the effi-
cient
auxiliaries of that country.
A strong remonstrance was therefore
made to the
Managers
of the British and Foreign Bible Society,
and
their answer not being entirely satisfactory, the
Scotch
ministers withdrew from the Society in Lon-
don,
and established one independent of the mother
Society;
and this breach has never been healed. But.
it
is due to the British and Foreign Bible Society to
state,
that in consequence of the discussion, they
adopted
a correct principle for their future proceedings.
The whole subject was referred to a
select and
learned
sub-committee; who, after mature delibera-
tion,
brought in a report which was adopted, and led
to
the following wise resolution in the General, Com-
mittee,
viz. "That the funds of the Society be ap-
plied
to the printing and circulation of the canonical
books
of Scripture to the exclusion of those books
------------------------------------------------------------------
38 APOCRYPHAL CONTROVERSY.
which
are termed apocryphal; and that all copies
printed,
either entirely or in part, at the expense of
the
Society, and whether such copies consist of the
whole
or of any part of such books, be invariably is-
sued
bound, no other book whatever being bound with
them;
and further, that all money grants to societies
or
individuals be made only in conformity with the
principle
of this regulation."
"In the sacred volume, as it is
to be hereafter
distributed
by the Society, there is to be nothing but
divine
truth, nothing but what is acknowledged by all
Christians
to be such. Of course all may unite in the
work
of distribution, even should they regard the vo-
lume
as containing but part of the inspired writings;
just
as they might in the circulation of the Pentateuch
or
the Book of Psalms, or the Prophets, or the New
Testament.
Such harmonious operation would not,
however,
be possible, if the books of the apocrypha
were
mingled or joined with the rest; and besides,
those
who have the strongest objection to the apocry-
pha,
are, ordinarily, those who are most forward in
active
and liberal efforts to send the word of God to
all
people."
This judicious decision of the
Committee of the
British
and Foreign Bible Society depends for its cor-
rectness
on the supposition that the books of the apo-
crypha
are not canonical; for, whatever may be said
about
circulating a part of the Bible, it was undoubt-
edly
the original object of this Society to print and
circulate the whole of the sacred volume. Hence
appears
the practical importance of the inquiry which
we
have here instituted, to ascertain whether these
------------------------------------------------------------------
THE APOCRYPHA CANONIZED BY
books
have any claim whatever to a place in the sa-
cred
Canon.
At a very early period of the
Christian church,
great
pains were taken to distinguish between such
books
as were inspired and canonical, and such as
were
written by uninspired men. It has never
been
doubted
among Christians, that the canonical books
only
were of divine authority, and furnished an infal-
lible
rule of faith and practice; but it has not been
agreed
what books ought to be considered canonical
and
what apocryphal. In regard to those which have
already
been enumerated, as belonging to the Old
Testament,
there is a pretty general consent of Jews
and
Christians, of Romanists and Protestants; but in
regard
to some other books there is a wide difference
of
opinion.
The council of
a
catalogue of the books of the Old Testament, among
which
are included Tobit, Judith Wisdom
Ecclesi-
asticus, Baruch, and two books of the Maccabees.*
Besides,
they include under the name Esther and
Daniel,
certain additional chapters, which are not
found
in the Hebrew copies. The book of Esther is
made
to consist of sixteen chapters; and prefixed to
the
book of Daniel, is the History of Susannah; the
Song
of the Three Children is inserted in the third
chapter;
and the History of Bel and the Dragon is
added
at the end of this book. Other books which
are
found in the Greek or Latin Bibles, they rejected
as
apocryphal; as the third and fourth books of
* See Note A.
------------------------------------------------------------------
40 THE APOCRYPHA IN ENGLISH BIBLES
Esdras;*
the third book of Maccabees; the cli. Psalm;
the
Appendix to Job; and the Preface to Lamenta-
tions.
Both these classes of books, all
denominations of
Protestants
consider apocryphal; but as the English
church,
in her Liturgy, directs that certain lessons
shall
be read from the former, for the instruction of
the
people, but not for confirmation of doctrine, they
are
retained in the larger copies of the English Bible,
but
are not mingled with the canonical books, as in
the
Vulgate, but placed at the end of the Old Testa-
ment,
under the title of Apocrypha. It is certainly to
be
regretted that these books are permitted to be in-
cluded
in the same volume which contains the lively
oracles,—the
word of God,—the Holy Scriptures; all
of
which were given by inspiration; and more to be
regretted
still, that they should be read in the church
promiscuously
with the lessons taken from the cano-
nical
books; especially as no notice is given to the
people,
that what is read from these books is apocry-
phal;
and as in the Prayer Book of the Episcopal
church
the tables which refer to the lessons to be read,
* The first and second books of
Esdras are very frequently
called
the third and fourth; in which case the two canonical
books,
Ezra and Nehemiah, are reckoned the first and second:
for
both these books have been ascribed to Ezra as their author;
but
these are not included in the list of canonical books sanc-
tioned
by the Council of Trent, and therefore they do not come
into
controversy. Indeed, the second of these books is not found
even
in the Greek, but only in the Latin Vulgate, and is so
replete
with fables and false statements that it has never been
esteemed
of any value. They are both, however, retained in
our
larger English Bibles, and are honoured with the foremost
place
in the order of the apocryphal books.
------------------------------------------------------------------
41 NOT IN THE HEBREW.
have
this title prefixed—"Tables of lessons of Holy
Scripture
to be read at Morning and Evening Prayer,
throughout
the year." The Rev. Doctor Wordsworth,
in
his work on the Canon, defends the practice of re-
taining
in the Bible, and publicly reading in the church,
certain
lessons from the apocryphal books, principally
because
this was done by the ancient church; and he
apologizes
for the practice by saying, that these les-
sons
are never read on the Lord's day. But as he
acknowledges
that they are not inspired, and are not
canonical,
the inference is plain, that they ought not
to
be included in the same volume with canonical
books,
and ought not to be read as Scripture in the
churches.
Now, however good and instructive these
apocryphal
lessons may be, it never can be justified,
that
they should thus be put on a level with the word
of
God.*
But it is our object at present to
show, that none of
these
books, canonized by the Council of Trent, and
inserted
in our larger English Bibles, are canonical.
1. The first argument by which it
may be proved
that
these books do not belong to the Canon of the
Old
Testament, is, that they, are not found in the
Hebrew
Bible. They are not written in the Hebrew
language,
but in the Greek which was not known to
the
Jews, until long after inspiration had ceased, and
the
Canon of the Old Testament was closed. It is ren-
dered
probable, indeed, that some of them were written
originally
in the Chaldaic. Jerome testifies this to be
the
fact, in regard to 1 Maccabees and Ecclesiasticus;
* See Tables prefixed to the Book of
Common Prayer; also,
the
Sixth Article of Religion of the Episcopal Church.
------------------------------------------------------------------
42 REJECTED BY THE JEWS.
and
he says, that he translated the book of Tobit
out
of
Chaldee into Latin; but this book is now found in
the
Greek, and there is good reason for believing that
it
was written originally in this language. It is cer-
tain,
however, that none of these books were composed
in
the pure Hebrew of the Old Testament.
Hottinger, indeed, informs us, that
he had seen the
whole
of the apocrypha in pure Hebrew, among the
Jews;
but he entertains no doubt that it was translated
into
that language, in modern times: just as the whole
New
Testament has recently been translated into pure
Hebrew.
It is the common opinion of the
Jews, and of the
Christian
Fathers, that Malachi was the last of
the
Old
Testament prophets. Books written by uncertain
authors
afterwards, have no claim to be reckoned ca-
nonical,
and there is good reason for believing that
those
books were written long after the time of Ezra
and
Malachi, and some of them perhaps later than the
commencement
of the Christian era.
2. These books, though probably
written by Jews,
have
never been received into the Canon by that peo-
ple.
In this, the ancient and modern Jews are of the
same
mind. Josephus declares, "That no more than
twenty-two
books were received as inspired by his
nation."
Philo, who refers often to the Old
Testa-
ment
in his writings, never makes the least mention of
them;
nor are they recognized in the Talmud as ca-
nonical.
Not only so, but the Jewish Rabbies expressly
reject
them.
RABBI AZARIAH, speaking of these
books, says,
"They
are received by Christians, not by us."
R. GEDALIAH, after giving a
catalogue of the books
------------------------------------------------------------------
REJECTED BY THE JEWS. 43
of
the Old Testament, with some account of their
authors,
adds these words, "It is worth while to know,
that
the nations of the world wrote many other books,
which
are included in their systems of sacred books,
but
not in our hands." To which he adds, "They say
that
some of these are found in the Chaldee, some in
the
Arabic, and some in the Greek language."
R. AZARIAH ascribed the book called
the Wisdom
of
Solomon to Philo; and R. GEDALIAH, in speaking
of
the same book, says, "That if Solomon ever wrote
it,
it must have been in the Syriac language, to send
it
to some of the kings in the remotest parts of the
East.
"But," says he, "Ezra put his hand only to
those
books which were published by the prophets,
under
the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and written in
the
sacred language; and our wise men prudently and
deliberately
resolved to sanction none, but such as were
established
and confirmed by him."
"This book," says he,
"the Gentiles (i. e. Chris-
tians)
have added to their Bible." "Their wise men,"
says
Buxtorf, "pronounced this book to be apocry-
phal."
The book called Ecclesiasticus, said
to be written
by
the son of SIRACH, is expressly numbered among
apocryphal
books in the Talmud. "In the book of
the
Son of Sirach, it is forbidden to be read."
MANASSEH BEN ISRAEL has this
observation, "Those
things
which are alleged from a verse in Ecclesiasticus
are
nothing to the purpose, because that is an apocry-
phal
book." Another of their writers says, "The
book
of the son of Sirach is added to our twenty-four
sacred
books by the Romans." This book also they
call
extraneous, which some of the Jews prohibit to be
------------------------------------------------------------------
44 REJECTED BY THE JEWS.
read.
With what face then can the Romanists pre-
tend
that this book was added to the Canon not long
before
the time of Josephus?
"BARUCH," says one of
their learned men, "is re-
ceived
by Christians," (i. e. Romanists,) "but not by us."
Of
TOBIT, it is said in Zemach David, "Know, then,
that
this book of Tobias is one of those which Chris-
tians
join with the Hagiographa." A little afterwards,
it
is said, "Know then, that Tobit, which is among us
in
the Hebrew tongue, was translated from Latin into
Hebrew
by Sebastian Munster." The same writer
affirms
of the history of Susannah, "That it is received
by
Christians but not by us."
The Jews, in the time of Jerome,
entertained no
other
opinion of these books than those who came after
them;
for, in his preface to Daniel, he informs us,
"That
he had heard one of the Jewish doctors deriding
the
history of Susannah, saying, ‘It was invented
by
some Greek, he knew not whom.’"*
The same is the opinion of the Jews
respecting the
other
books, which we call apocryphal, as is manifest
from
all the copies of the Hebrew Bible extant; for,
undoubtedly
if they believed that any of these books
were
canonical, they would give them a place in their
sacred
volume. But will any ask, what is the opinion
of
the Jews to us? I answer, much on this point.
The
oracles of God were committed to them; and they
preserved
them with a religious care until the advent
of
Messiah. Christ never censures them for adding
to
the sacred Scriptures, nor detracting from them.
Since
their nation has been in dispersion, copies of the
Old
Testament in Hebrew have been scattered all over
* See the Thesaurus Philologicus of
Hottinger.
------------------------------------------------------------------
NEVER QUOTED BY CHRIST. 45
the
world, so that it was impossible to produce a uni-
versal
alteration in the Canon. But it is needless to
argue
this point, for it is agreed by all that these books
never
were received by the Jewish nation.
3. The third argument against the
canonical autho-
ity
of these books is derived from the total silence
respecting
them in the New Testament. They are
never
quoted by Christ and his apostles. This fact,
however,
is disputed by the Romanists, and they even
attempt
to establish their right to a place in the Canon
from
the citations which they pretend have been made
from
these books by the apostles. They refer to
xi.
and Heb. xi., where they allege that Paul has cited
passages
from the Book of Wisdom. "For who hath
known
the mind of the Lord, or who hath been his
counsellor?"
"For before his translation he had
this
testimony
that he pleased God." But both these pas-
sages
are taken directly from the canonical books of
the
Old Testament. The first is nearly in the words
of
Isaiah; and the last from the book of Genesis;
their
other examples are as wide of the mark as these,
and
need not be set down.
It has already been shown that these
books were not
included
in the volume quoted and referred to by Christ
and
his apostles, under the title of the Scriptures, and
and
are entirely omitted by Josephus in his account of
the
sacred books. It would seem, therefore, that in
the
time of Christ, and for some time afterwards, they
were
utterly unknown or wholly disregarded.
------------------------------------------------------------------
46 THE APOCRYPHA DISOWNED.
SECTION IV.
TESTIMONIES
OF THE CHRISTIAN FATHERS, AND OF OTHER
LEARNED MEN DOWN TO THE TIME OF THE
COUNCIL OF
THE
fourth argument is, that these books were not
received
as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but
were
expressly declared to be apocryphal.
JUSTIN MARTYR does not cite a single
passage, in
all
his writings, from any apocryphal book.
The first catalogue of the books of
the Old Testa-
ment
which we have, after the times of the apostles,
from
any Christian writer, is that of MELITO, bishop
of
is
preserved by Eusebius. The fragment is as follows:
"MELITO
to his brother ONESIMUS, greeting. Since
you
have often earnestly requested of me, in conse-
quence
of your love of learning, a collection of the
Sacred
Scriptures of the Law and the Prophets, and
what
relates to the SAVIOUR, and concerning our whole
faith;
and since, moreover, you wish to obtain an accu-
rate
knowledge of our ancient books, as it respects
their
number and order, I have used diligence to ac-
complish
this, knowing your sincere affection towards
the
faith, and your earnest desire to become acquainted
with
the word; and that striving after eternal life,
your
love to God induces you to prefer these to all
other
things. Wherefore, going into the East, and to
------------------------------------------------------------------
BY THE CHRISTIAN FATHERS. 47
the
very place where these things were published and
transacted,
and having made diligent search after the
books
of the Old Testament, I now subjoin and send
you
the following catalogue:—"Five books of Moses,
viz.,
Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuter-
onomy,
Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings,
two
of Chronicles, the Psalms of David, the Pro-
verbs
of Solomon, or Wisdom,* Ecclesiastes, the Song
of
Songs, Job, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Twelve [prophets] in
one
book, Daniel, Ezekiel, Ezra."†
ORIGEN also says, "We should
not be ignorant, that
the
canonical books are the same which the Hebrews
delivered
unto us, and are twenty-two in number,
according
to the number of letters of the Hebrew
alphabet."
Then he sets down, in order, the names
of
the books, in Greek and Hebrew.‡
ATHANASIUS, in his Synopsis, says,
" All the
Scriptures
of us Christians are divinely inspired;
neither
are they indefinite in their number, but deter-
mined,
and reduced into a Canon. Those of the Old
Testament
are, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers,
*Whether Melito, in his catalogue,
by the word Wisdom,
meant
to designate a distinct book; or whether it was used as
another
name for Proverbs, seems doubtful. The latter has gene-
rally
been understood to be the sense; and this accords with the
understanding
of the ancients; for Rufin, in his translation of
this
passage of Eusebius renders paroimiai h sofi<a Salomonis Pro-
verbia, quae est
sapientia;
that is, The Proverbs of Solomon, which
is Wisdom. PINEDA, a learned
Romanist, says, "The word
Wisdom
should here be taken as explicative of the former, and
should
be understood to mean, The Proverbs."
†
Euseb. Hist. Ecc. Lib. v. c. 24.
‡
Origen's catalogue of the books of the Old Testament is
presented
by Eusebius, in his Ecc. Hist. Lib. vi. c. 25.
------------------------------------------------------------------
48 THE APOCRYPHA DISOWNED
Joshua,
Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, Chroni-
cles,
Ezra, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles,
Job,
the twelve prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel,
Daniel."*
HILARY, who was contemporary with
Athanasius,
and
resided in
books
of the Old Testament, in the following manner
"The
five books of Moses, the sixth of Joshua, the
seventh
of Judges, including Ruth, the eighth of first
and
second Kings, the ninth of third and fourth
Kings;
the tenth of the Chronicles, two books; the
eleventh,
Ezra (which included Nehemiah;) the
twelfth,
the Psalms. Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the
Song
of Songs, the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth;
the
twelve Prophets the sixteenth; then Isaiah and
Jeremiah,
including Lamentations and his Epistle,
Daniel,
Ezekiel, Job, and Esther, making up the full
number
of twenty-two." And in his preface he adds,
that
"these books were thus numbered by our ances-
tors,
and handed down by tradition from them."†
GREGORY NAZIANZEN exhorts his
readers to study
the
sacred books with attention, but to avoid such as
were
apocryphal; and then gives a list of the books
of
the Old Testament, and according to the Jew-
ish
method, makes the number two-and-twenty. He
complains
of some that mingled the apocryphal
books
with those that were inspired, "of the truth of
which
last," says he, "we have the most perfect per-
* It is a matter not agreed among
the learned whether the
"Synopsis"
which has been ascribed to Athanasius was written
by
him. It is, however, an ancient work, and belongs to that
age.
†
Proleg in Psalmos.
------------------------------------------------------------------
BY THE CHRISTIAN FATHERS. 49
suasion;
therefore it seemed good to me to enumerate
the
canonical books from the beginning; and those
which
belong to the Old Testament are two-and-
twenty,
according to the number of the Hebrew al-
phabet,
as I have understood." Then he proceeds to
say,
"Let no one add to these divine books, nor take
any
thing away from them. I think it necessary to
add
this, that there are other books besides those
which
I have enumerated as constituting the Canon,
which,
however, do not appertain to it; but were pro-
posed
by the early Fathers, to be read for the sake
of
the instruction which they contain." Then, he
expressly
names as belonging to this class, the Wisdom
of
Solomon, the Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith,
and
Tobit.*
JEROME, in his Epistle to Paulinus,
gives us a cata-
logue
of the books of the Old Testament, exactly cor-
responding
with that which Protestants receive:
"Which,"
says he, "we believe agreeably to the tra-
dition
of our ancestors, to have been inspired by the
Holy
Spirit."
EPIPHANIUS, in his book concerning
Weights and
Measures,
distributes the books of the Old Testament
into
four divisions of five each. "The first of which
contains
the law, next five poetical books, Job, Psalms,
Proverbs,
Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs; in the third
division
he places Joshua, Judges, including Ruth,
first
and second Chronicles, four books of Kings.
The
last five, the twelve prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah,
Ezekiel,
Daniel. Then there remain two, Ezra and
Esther."
Thus he makes up the number twenty-two.
CYRIL of Jerusalem, in his
Catechism, exhorts his
* Epist. ad Theod. et Lib. Carm.
------------------------------------------------------------------
50 THE APOCRYPHA DISOWNED
catechumen
diligently to learn from the church, what
books
appertain to the Old and New Testaments, and
he
says, "Read nothing which is apocryphal. Read
the
Scriptures, namely, the twenty-two books of the
Old
Testament, which were translated by the seventy-
two
interpreters." And in another place, "Meditate,
as
was said, in the twenty-two books of the Old Tes-
tament,
and if you wish it, I will give you their
names."
Here follows a catalogue, agreeing with
those
already given, except that he adds Baruch to
the
list. When Baruch is mentioned as making
one
book with Jeremiah, as is done by some of the
Fathers,
it is most reasonable to understand those
parts
of Jeremiah, in the writing of which Baruch
was
concerned, as particularly the lii. chapter; for, if
we
understand them as referring to the separate book
now
called Baruch, the number which they are so
careful
to preserve will be exceeded. This apocry-
phal
Baruch never existed in the Hebrew, and is never
mentioned
separately by any ancient author, as Bel-
larmine
confesses. This book was originally written
in
Greek, but our present copies differ exceedingly
from
the old Latin translation.
The Council of Laodicea forbade the
reading of any
books
in the churches but such as were canonical; and
that
the people might know what these were, a cata-
logue
was given, answering to the Canon which we
now
receive.
ORIGEN barely mentions the
Maccabees. ATHA-
NASIUS
takes no notice of these books. EUSEBIUS, in
his
Chronicon, speaks of the History of the Macca-
bees,
and adds, "These books are not received as di-
vine
Scriptures."
------------------------------------------------------------------
BY THE CHRISTIAN FATHERS. 51
PHILASTRIUS, an Italian bishop, who
lived in the
latter
part of the fourth century, in a work on Heresy
says,
"It was determined by the apostles and their
successors,
that nothing should be read in the Catho-
lic
church but the law, prophets, evangelists,"
And
he complains of certain Heretics, "That they
used
the book of Wisdom, by the son of SIRACH, who
lived
long after Solomon."
CHRYSOSTOM, a man who excelled in
the knowledge
of
the Scriptures, declares, "That all the divine books
of
the Old Testament were originally written in the
Hebrew
tongue, and that no other books were re-
ceived."
Hom. 4. in Gen.
But JEROME, already mentioned, who
had diligently
studied
the Hebrew Scriptures, by the aid of the best
Jewish
teachers, enters into this subject more fully
and
accurately than any of the rest of the Fathers.
In
his general Preface to his version of the Scrip-
tures,
he mentions the books which he had translated
out
of Hebrew into Latin; "All besides
them," says
he,
"must be placed among the apocryphal. There-
fore,
Wisdom, which is ascribed to Solomon, the book
of
Jesus the son of Sirach, Judith, Tobit and Pastor,
are
not in the Canon. I have found the first book of
Maccabees
in Hebrew, (Chaldee;) the second in Greek,
and,
as the style shows, it must have been com-
posed
in that language." And in his Preface to Ezra
and
Nehemiah, (always reckoned one book by the
Jews,)
he says, "Let no one be disturbed that I have
edited
but one book under this name; nor let any one
please
himself with the dreams contained in the third
and
fourth apocryphal books ascribed to this author;
------------------------------------------------------------------
52 THE APOCRYPHA DISOWNED
for,
with the Hebrews, Ezra and Nehemiah make but
one
book; and those things not contained in this are
to
be rejected, as not belonging to the Canon." And
in
his preface to the books of Solomon, he speaks of
"Wisdom
and Ecclesiasticus; the former of which,"
he
says, "he found in Hebrew, (Chaldee,) but not the
latter,
which is never found among the Hebrews, but
the
style strongly savours of the Grecian eloquence."
He
then adds, "As the church reads the books of Ju-
dith,
Tobit, and the Maccabees, but does not receive
them
among the canonical Scriptures, so, also, she
may
read these two books for the edification of the
common
people, but not as authority to confirm any
of
the doctrines of the church."
Again, in his preface to Jeremiah,
he says, "The
book
of Baruch, the scribe of Jeremiah, is not read in
Hebrew,
nor esteemed canonical; therefore, I have
passed
it over." And in his preface to Daniel, "This
book
among the Hebrews has neither the history of
Susanna,
nor the Song of the three Children, nor the
fables
of Bel and the Dragon, which we have retained
lest
we should appear to the unskilful to have curtailed
a
large part of the Sacred Volume."
In the preface to Tobit, he says,
"The Hebrews
cut
off the book of Tobit from the catalogue of Di-
vine
Scriptures." And in his preface to Judith,
he
says, "Among the Hebrews, Judith is placed among
the
Hagiographa, which are not of authority to deter-
mine
controversies."
RUFIN, in his Exposition of the
Creed, observes,
"That
there were some books which were not called
canonical,
but received by our ancestors, as the
------------------------------------------------------------------
BY THE CHRISTIAN FATHERS. 53
dom
of Solomon, and another Wisdom of the Son of
Sirach;
of the same order are the books of Tobit,
Judith,
and the Maccabees."
GREGORY the First, speaking of the
testimony in
the
Maccabees, respecting the death of Eleazer, says,
"Concerning
which thing we do not act inordinately,
although
we bring our testimony from a book which is
not
canonical."
AUGUSTINE is the only one among the
Fathers who
lived
within four hundred years after the apostles, who
seems
to favour the introduction of these six disputed
books
into the Canon. In his work On Christian
Doc-
trine, he gives a list of the
books of the Old Testa-
ment,
among which he inserts Tobit, Judith, the two
books
of Maccabees, two of Esdras, Wisdom, and
Ecclesiasticus.
These two last mentioned, he says,
"are
called Solomon's, on account of their resem-
blance
to his writings; although it is known that one
of
them was composed by the son of Sirach: which
deserves
to be received among the prophetical books."
But
this opinion he retracted afterwards.*
AUGUSTINE was accustomed to the
Greek and La-
tin
Bibles, in which those books had been introduced,
and
we must suppose, unless we would make him
contradict
himself, that he meant in this place merely
to
enumerate the books then contained in the sacred
volume;
for in many other places he clearly shows
that
he entertained the same opinion of the books of
the
Old Testament as the other Fathers.
In his celebrated work of "The
City of God," he ex-
presses
this opinion most explicitly—"In that whole
* See Note B.
------------------------------------------------------------------
54 THE APOCRYPHA DISOWNED
period,
after the return from the Babylonish captivity,
after
Malachi, Haggai, Zachariah and Ezra, they had
no
prophets, even until the time of the advent of our
Saviour.
As our Lord says, the law and the pro-
phets
were until John. And even the reprobate Jews
hold
that Haggai, Zachariah, Ezra, and Malachi, were
the
last books received into canonical authority."
In his commentary on the xl. Psalm,
he says, "If
any
adversary should say you have forged these pro-
phecies,
let the Jewish books be produced—The Jews
are
our librarians." And on the lvi. Psalm, "When
we
wish to prove to the Pagans that Christ was pre-
dicted,
we appeal to the writings in possession of the
Jews;
they have all these Scriptures."
And again, in the work first cited,
"The Israelitish
nation,
to whom the oracles of God were entrusted,
never
confounded false prophecies with the true, but
all
these writings are harmonious." Then in another
work,
in speaking of the books of the Maccabees, he
says,
"This writing the Jews never received in the
same
manner as the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms,
to
which the Lord gave testimony as by his own wit-
nesses."
And frequently in his works, he confines the
canonical books to those properly
included in this three-
fold
division. He also repeatedly declares that the
canonical
Scriptures, which are of most eminent autho-
rity,
are the books committed to the Jews. But in the
eighteenth
book of the City of
Judith,
he says, "Those things which are written in
this
book, it is said, the Jews have never received into
the
Canon of Scripture." And in the seventeenth
book
of the same work, "There are three books of
Solomon,
which have been received into canonical
------------------------------------------------------------------
BY THE CHRISTIAN FATHERS. 55
authority,
Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Canticles; the
other
two, Wisdom and Ecelesiasticus, have been called
by
his name, through a custom which prevailed on
account
of their similarity to his writings; but the
more
learned are certain that they are not his; and
they
cannot be brought forward with much confidence
for
the conviction of gainsayers."
He allows that the Book of Wisdom
may be read
to
the people, and ought to be preferred to all other
tracts;
but he does not insist, that the testimonies
taken
from it are decisive. And respecting Ecclesias-
ticus,
he says when speaking of Samuel's prophesying
after
his death, "But if this book is objected to be-
cause
it is not found in the Canon of the Jews," &c.
His
rejection of the books of Maccabees from the
Canon
is repeated and explicit. "The calculation of
the
times after the restoring of the temple is not found
in
the Holy Scriptures, which are called canonical, but
in
certain other books, among which are the two books
of
Maccabees. The Jews do not receive the Macca-
bees
as the Law and the Prophets."
It may be admitted, however, that
AUGUSTINE
entertained
too high an opinion of these apocryphal
books,
but it is certain that he did not put them on a
level
with the genuine canonical books. He mentions
a
custom which prevailed in his time, from which it
appears
that although the apocryphal books were read
in
some of the churches, they were not read as Holy
Scripture,
nor put on a level with the canonical books;
for
he, informs us that they were not permitted to be
read
from the same desk as the Canonical Scriptures,
but
from a lower place in the church.
INNOCENT the first, who lived about
the same
------------------------------------------------------------------
56 THE APOCRYPHA DISOWNED
time,
is also alluded to as a witness to prove that these
disputed
books were then received into the Canon.
But
the epistle which contains his catalogue is ex-
tremely
suspicious. No mention is made of this epistle
by
any writer for three hundred years after the death
of
INNOCENT. But it is noways necessary to our
argument
to deny that in the end of the fourth and
beginning
of the fifth century, some individuals, and
perhaps
some councils, received these books as canon-
ical,
yet there is strong evidence that this was not the
opinion
of the universal church; for in the council
of
Canons
of the council of
catalogue
of the genuine books of the Old Testament,
are
adopted. And it has been shown already that these
apocryphal
books were excluded from that catalogue.
But it can be proved that even until
the time of the
meeting
of the Council of Trent, by which these books
were
solemnly canonized, the most learned and judi-
cious
of the Popish writers adhere to the opinions of
JEROME
and the ancients; or at least make a marked
distinction
between these disputed books and those
which
are acknowledged to be canonical by all. A
few
testimonies from distinguished writers, from the
commencement
of the sixth century down to the era
of
the Reformation, shall now be given...
It deserves to be particularly
observed here that in
one
of the laws of the Emperor JUSTINIAN, concerning
ecclesiastical
matters, it was enacted, "That the Canons
of
the first four general councils should be received
and
have the force of laws."
ANASTASIUS, patriarch of
Creation,
makes "the number of books which God
------------------------------------------------------------------
BY THE CHRISTIAN FATHERS. 57
hath
appointed for his Old Testament" to be no more
than
twenty-two; although he speaks in very high
terms
of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus.
LEONTIUS, a learned and accurate
writer, in his
book
against the SECTS, acknowledges no other canoni-
cal
books of the Old Testament, but those which the
Hebrews
received; namely, twelve historical books,
five
prophetical, four of Doctrine and Instruction, and
one
of Psalms; making the number twenty-two as
usual;
and he makes not the least mention of any
others.
GREGORY, who lived at the beginning
of the seventh
century,
in his book of Morals, makes an apology for
alleging
a passage from the Maccabees, and says,
"Though
it be not taken from the canonical Scripture,
yet
it is cited from a book which was published for the
edification
of the church."
ISIDORE, bishop of
books
of the Old Testament into three orders, the
Law,
the Prophets, and the Hagiographa; and after-
wards
adds," There is a fourth order of books which
are
not in the Hebrew Canon of the Old Testament."
Here
he names these books, and says, "Though the
Jews
rejected them as apocryphal, the church has re-
ceived
them among the canonical Scriptures."
JOHN DAMASCENE, a Syrian Presbyter,
who lived
early
in the eighth century, adheres to the Hebrew
Canon
of the Old Testament, numbering only two-and-
twenty
books. Of Maccabees, Judith and Tobit, he
says
not one word; but he speaks of Wisdom and
Ecclesiasticus,
as "elegant and virtuous writings, yet
not
to be numbered among the canonical books of
------------------------------------------------------------------
58 TESTIMONY OF LEARNED MEN.
Scripture,
never having been laid up in the ark of the
Covenant."
VENERABLE BEDE follows the ancient
method of
dividing
the books of the Old Testament into three
classes;
but he remarkably distinguishes the Macca-
bees
from the canonical books by classing them with
the
writings of Josephus and Julius the African.
ALCUIN, the disciple of Bede, says,
"The book of
the
son of Sirach was reputed an apocryphal and
dubious
Scripture."
RUPERT, a learned man of the twelfth
century, ex-
pressly
rejects the book of Wisdom from the Canon.
PETER MAURITIUS, after giving a
catalogue of the
authentic
Scriptures of the Old Testament, adds the
six
disputed books, and says, "They are useful and
commendable
in the church, but are not to be placed
in
the same dignity with the rest."
HUGO DE S. VICTORE, a Saxon by
birth, but who
resided
at
Old
Testament, which includes no others but the two-
and-twenty
received from the Jews. Of Wisdom,
Ecclesiasticus,
Tobit and Judith, he says, "They are
used
in the church but not written in the Canon."
RICHARD DE S. VICTORE, also of the
twelfth cen-
tury,
in his Books of Collections, explicitly declares,
"That
there are but twenty-two books in the Canon;
and
that Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Tobit, Judith, and
the
Maccabees, are not esteemed canonical although
they
are read in the churches."
PETER LOMBARD, in his Scholastic
History, enume-
rates
the books of the Old Testament, thus—Five books
of
Moses, eight of the prophets, and nine of the Ha-
giographa,
which leaves no room for these six disputed
------------------------------------------------------------------
TESTIMONY OF LEARNED MEN. 59
books;
but in his preface to Tobit he says expressly,
that
it is "in no order of the Canon;" and of Judith,
that
"Jerome and the Hebrews place it in the apocry-
pha."
Moreover, he calls the story of Bel and the
Dragon
a fable, and says that the history of Susannah
is
not as true as it should be.
In this century also lived John of
Salisbury, an
Englishman,
a man highly respected in his time. In
one
of his Epistles, he treats this subject at large, and
professes
to follow Jerome and undoubtedly to believe
that
there are but twenty-two books in the Canon of
the
Old Testament, all which he names in order, and
adds,
"That neither the book of Wisdom, nor Eccle-
siasticus,
nor Judith, nor Tobit, nor the Pastor, nor
the
Maccabees, are esteemed canonical."
In the thirteenth century, the
opinion of the learned
was
the same, as we may see by the Ordinary
Gloss on
the
Bible, in the composition of which many persons
were
concerned, and which was high approved by all the
doctors
and pastors in the western churches. In the
preface
to this gloss, they are reproached
with igno-
rance
who hold all the books, put into the one volume
of
Scripture, in equal veneration. The difference be-
tween
these books is asserted to be as great as between
certain and doubtful works. The canonical books are
declared,
"To have been written by the inspiration of
the
Holy Ghost; but who were the authors of the
others
is unknown." Then it is declared, "That the
church
permitteth the reading of the apocryphal books
for
devotion and instruction, but not for authority to
decide
matters of controversy in faith. And that
there
are no more than twenty-two canonical books of
the
Old Testament, and all besides are apocryphal."
------------------------------------------------------------------
60 TESTIMONY OF LEARNED MEN.
Thus
we have the common judgment of the church, in
the
thirteenth century, in direct opposition to the de-
cree
of the Council of Trent in the sixteenth. But
this
is not all, for when the writers of this Gloss come
to
the apocryphal books, they prefix a caution, as--
"Here
begins the book of Tobit, which is not in the
Canon;"—"Here
begins the book of Judith, which is
not
in the Canon," and so of every one of them; and
to
confirm their opinion, they appeal to the Fathers.
HUGO, the Cardinal, who lived in
this century, wrote
commentaries
on all the Scriptures, which were uni-
versally
esteemed; in these he constantly keeps up the
distinction
between the canonical and ecclesiastical
books:
and he explicitly declares that "Ecclesiasticus,
Wisdom,
Judith, Tobit, and the Maccabees, are apoc-
ryphal,—dubious,—not
canonical,—not received by the
church
for proving any matters of faith, but for in-
formation
of manners."
THOMAS AQUINAS also, the most famous
of the school-
men,
makes the same distinction between these classes
of
books. He maintains that the book of Wisdom
was
not held to be a part of the Canon, and ascribes
it
to Philo. The story of Bel and the Dragon, he
calls
a fable; and he shows clearly enough that he did
not
believe that Ecclesiasticus was of canonical autho-
rity.
In the fourteenth century no man
acquired so exten-
sive
a reputation for his commentaries on the Bible, as
Nicholas
Lyra, a converted Jew. In his preface to
the
book of Tobit, he says, "That having commented
on
all the canonical books, from the beginning of
Genesis
to the end of Revelation, his intention now
was
to write on those books which are not canonical."
------------------------------------------------------------------
TESTIMONY OF LEARNED MEN. 61
Here
he enumerates Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Judith,
Tobit,
and the Maccabees; and then adds, "The ca-
nonical
books are not only before these in time but in
dignity
and authority." And again, "These are not
in
the Canon, but received by the church to be read
for
instruction in manners, not to be used for deciding
controversies
respecting the faith; whereas the others
are
of such authority that whatever they contain is to
be
held as undoubted truth."
The Englishman, WILLIAM OCCAM, of
counted
the most learned doctor of his age, in his
Dialogues,
acknowledges, "That that honor is due only
to
the divine writers of Scripture, that we should esteem
them
free from all error." Moreover, in his Prologues,
he
fully assents to the opinion of Jerome and Gregory,
"That
neither Judith, nor Tobit, nor the Maccabees,
nor
Wisdom, nor Ecclesiasticus, is to be received into
the
same place of honour as the inspired books; "for,"
says
he, "the church doth not number them among
the
canonical Scriptures."
In the fifteenth century, THOMAS
ANGLICUS, some-
times
called the Angelical Doctor on account of his
excellent
judgment, numbers twenty-four books of the
Old
Testament, if Ruth be reckoned separately from
Judges,
and Lamentations from Jeremiah.
PAUL BURGENSIS, a Spanish Jew, who,
after his
conversion
to Christianity, on account of his superior
knowledge
and piety, was advanced to be bishop of
the
same distinction of books which has been so often
mentioned.
The Romanists have at last, as they
suppose, found
an
authority for these disputed books in the Council
------------------------------------------------------------------
62 TESTIMONY OP LEARNED MEN.
of
decree
in which the six disputed books are named and
expressly
said to be written by the inspiration of the
Holy
Ghost.
Though this Canon were genuine, the
authority of a
council
sitting in such circumstances, as attended the
meeting
of this, would have very little weight; but Dr.
Cosins
has shown that in the large copies of the acts
of
this council no such decree can be found, and that
it
has been foisted into the abridgment by some impos-
tor
who omitted something else to make room for it,
and
thus preserved the number of Canons unchanged,
while
the substance of them was altered.
ALPIIONSO TOSTATUS, bishop of
account
of his extraordinary learning, was called the
wonder
of the world, has given a clear and decisive
testimony
on this subject. This learned man declares,
"That
these controverted books were not canonical,
and
that the church condemned no man for disobedi-
ence
who did not receive them as the other Scriptures,
because
they were of uncertain origin, and it is not
known
that they were written by inspiration." And
again,
“Because the church is uncertain whether
heretics
have not added to them.” This opinion he
repeats
in several parts of his works."
Cardinal XIMENES, the celebrated
editor of the
Complutensian
Polyglot, in the preface to that work,
admonishes
the reader that Judith, Tobit, Wisdom,
Ecclesiasticus,
Maccabees, with the additions to Esther
and
Daniel, which are found in the Greek, are not
canonical
Scriptures.
JOHN Pious, the learned count of
Mirandula, ad-
------------------------------------------------------------------
TESTIMONY OF LEARNED MEN. 63
hered
firmly to the opinion of Jerome and the other
Fathers
on the subject of the Canon.
FABER STAPULENSIS, a famous doctor
of
acknowledges
that these books are not in the Canon.
LUDOVICUS VIVES, one of the most
learned men of
his
age, in his commentaries on Augustine's City of
God,
rejects the third and fourth books of Esdras, and
also
the history of Susannah, and Bel, as apocryphal.
He
speaks in such a manner of Wisdom and Ecclesi-
asticus
as to show that he did not esteem them canoni-
cal;
for he makes Philo to be the author of the former,
and
the son of Sirach of the latter, who lived in the
time
of Ptolemy about an hundred years after the last
of
the Prophets; and of the Maccabees, he doubts
whether
Josephus was the author or not; by which he
sufficiently
shows that he did not believe that they
were
written by inspiration.
But there was no man in this age who
obtained so
high
a reputation for learning and critical skill as
ERASMUS.
In his exposition of the Apostles' Creed
and
the Decalogue, he discusses this question respect-
ing
the canonical books, and after enumerating the
usual
books of the Old Testament, he says, "The
ancient
Fathers admitted no more;" but of the other
books
afterwards received into ecclesiastical use,
(naming
the whole which we esteem apocryphal,) "It
is
uncertain what authority should be allowed to them;
but
the canonical Scriptures are such as without con-
troversy
are believed to have been written by the
inspiration
of God." And in his Scholia on Jerome's
preface
to Daniel, he expresses his wonder that such
stories
as Bel and the Dragon should be publicly read
in
the churches. In his address to students of the
------------------------------------------------------------------
64 TESTIMONY OF ROMANISTS.
Scriptures,
he admonishes them to consider well,
"That
the church never intended to give the same
authority
to Tobit, Judith and Wisdom, which is given
to
the five books of Moses or the four Evangelists."
The last testimony which we shall
adduce to show
that
these books were not universally nor commonly
received,
until the very time of the Council of Trent,
is
that of Cardinal CAJETAN, the oracle of the church
of
us
this as the rule of the church—"That those books
which
were canonical with Jerome should be so with
us;
and that those which were not received as canoni-
cal
by him should be considered as excluded by us."
And
he says, "The church is much indebted to this
Father
for distinguishing between the books which are
canonical
and those which are not, for thus he has
freed
us from the reproach of the Hebrews, who other-
wise
might say that we had framed a new Canon for
ourselves."
For this reason he would write no com-
mentaries
on these apocryphal books; "for," says he,
"Judith,
Tobit, Maccabees, Wisdom, and the additions
to
Esther are all excluded from the Canon as insuffi-
cient
to prove any matter of faith, though they may
be
read for the edifying of the people."
From the copious citations of testimonies
which we
have
given, it is evident that the books in dispute are
apocryphal,
and have no right to a place in the Canon;
and
that the Council of Trent acted unwisely in de-
creeing,
with an anathema annexed, that they should
be
received as divine. Surely no council can make
that
an inspired book which was not written by inspi-
ration.
Certainly these books did not belong to the
Canon
while the apostles lived, for they were unknown
------------------------------------------------------------------
TESTIMONY OF ROMANISTS. 65
both
to Jews and Christians. SIXTUS SINENSIS, a
distinguished
Romanist, acknowledges that it was long
after
the time of the apostles, that these writings came
to
the knowledge of the whole Christian church. But
while
this is conceded, it does not terminate the con-
troversy,
for among the many extraordinary claims of
the
Romish church, one of the most extraordinary is
the
authority to add to the Canon of Holy Scripture.
It
has been made sufficiently manifest that these apoc-
ryphal
books were not included in the Canon during
the
first three centuries; and can it be doubted whether
the
Canon was fully constituted before the fourth con-
tury? To suppose that a Pope or a Council can make
what
books they please canonical, is too absurd to de-
serve
a moment's consideration. If, upon this princi-
ple,
they could render Tobit and Judith canonical,
upon
the same they might introduce Herodotus, Livy,
or
even the Koran itself.
------------------------------------------------------------------
66 INTERNAL EVIDENCE AGAINST THE APOCRYPHA.
SECTION V.
INTERNAL
EVIDENCE THAT THESE BOOKS ARE NOT CANONI-
CAL--THE WRITERS NOT PROPHETS, AND
DO NOT CLAIM
TO BE INSPIRED.
I
COME now to the fifth argument to disprove the
canonical
authority of these books, which is derived
from
internal evidence. Books which contain mani-
fest
falsehoods; or which abound in silly and ridiculous
stories;
or contradict the plain and uniform doctrine
of
acknowledged Scripture, cannot be canonical. Now
I
will endeavour to show, that the books in dispute,
are
all, or most of them, condemned by this rule.
In the book of Tobit, an angel of
God is made to
tell
a palpable falsehood—"I am Azarias, the son of
Ananias
the great, and of thy brethren;"* by which
Tobit
was completely deceived, for he says, "Thou art
of
an honest and good stock." Now in chapter xii.
this
same angel declares, "I am Raphael, one of the
seven
Holy Angels, which present the prayers of the
saints,
and go in and out before the glory of the Holy
One."
Judith is represented as speaking scarcely
anything
but
falsehood to Holofernes; but what is most incon-
sistent
with the character of piety given her, is, that
she
is made to pray to the God of truth, in the following
* Tobit v. 12, 13.
------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNAL
EVIDENCE AGAINST THE APOCRYPHA. 67
words,
"Smite by the deceit of my lips, the servant
with
the prince, and the prince with the servant."
Who
does not perceive, at once, the impiety of this
prayer?
It is a petition that he who holds in utter
detestation
all falsehood, should give efficacy to pre-
meditated
deceit. This woman, so celebrated for her
piety,
is also made to speak with commendation of
the
conduct of Simeon, in the cruel slaughter of the
Shechemites;
an act, against which God, in the
Scriptures,
has expressed his high displeasure.
In the second book of Maccabees,
RAZIS, an elder
of
for
destroying his own life, rather than fall into the
hands
of his enemies; but, certainly, suicide is not,
in
any case, agreeable to the word of God.
The author of the book of Wisdom,
speaks in the
name
of Solomon, and talks about being appointed to
build
a temple in the holy mountain; whereas it has
been
proved by Jerome, that this book is falsely
ascribed
to Solomon.
In the book of Tobit, we have this
story: "And as
they
went on their journey they came to the river
man
went down to wash himself, a fish leaped out of
the
river, and would have devoured him. Then the
angel
said unto him, Take the fish. And the young
man
laid hold of the fish and drew it to land. To
whom
the angel said, Open the fish, and take the heart,
and
the liver, and the gall, and put them up safely.
So
the young man did as the angel commanded him,
and
when they had roasted the fish, they did eat it.
Then
the young man said unto the angel, Brother
Azarias,
to what use is the heart, and the liver, and the
------------------------------------------------------------------
68
INTERNAL EVIDENCE AGAINST THE
APOCRYPHA.
gall
of the fish? And he said unto him, Touching the
heart
and the liver, if a devil, or an evil spirit trouble
any,
we must make a smoke thereof before the man
or
the woman, and the party shall be no more vexed.
As
for the gall, it is good to anoint a man that hath
whiteness
in his eyes; and he shall be healed."* If this
story
does not savour of the fabulous, then it would be
difficult
to find anything that did.
In the book of Baruch, there are
also several
things
which do not appear to be true. Baruch is
said
to have read this book, in the fifth year after
the
destruction of
king,
and all the people dwelling in
upon
hearing it, collected money and sent it to Jeru-
alleged
to have read this book in
canonical
Scriptures, to have been carried captive into
Jer.
xliii. 6. Again, he is represented to have read in
the
ears of Jeconias the king, and of all the people; but
Jeconias
is known to have been shut up in prison, at
this
time, and it is nowise probable that Baruch would
have
access to him, if he even had been in
The
money that was sent from
the
priests to offer sacrifices to the Lord, but the tem-
ple
was in ruins, and there was no altar.‡
In the chapters added to the book of
Esther, we
read,
that "Mardocheus, in the second year of Ar-
taxerxes
the Great, was a great man, being a servitor
* Tobit
c. vi. † Baruch i. 1-6.
‡ Baruch
i. 10. " And they said, Behold we have sent you
money
to buy you burnt-offerings, and sin-offerings, and incense,
and
prepare ye manna, and offer upon the altar of the Lord our
God."
------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNAL
EVIDENCE AGAINST THE APOCRYPHA 69
in
the king's court." And in the same, "That he was
also
one of the captives which Nabuchodonosor carried
from
between
these two periods, there intervened one hun-
dred
and fifty years; so that, if he was only fifteen
years
of age, when carried away, he must have been
a
servitor in the king's court, at the age of one hun-
dred
and seventy-five years!
Again, Mardocheus is represented as
being "a great
man
in the court, in the second year of Artaxerxes,"
before
he detected the conspiracy against the king's
life.
Now, Artaxerxes and Ahasuerus were the same,
or
they were not; if the former, this history clashes
with
the Scriptural account, for there it appears, that
Mordecai
was not, before this time, a courtier, or a
conspicuous
man; if the latter, then this addition is
manifestly
false, because it ascribes to Artaxerxes,
what
the Scriptures ascribe to another person.
Moreover, this apocryphal writing
places the con-
spiracy
against the king's life before the repudiation
of
Yashti and the marriage of Esther; but this is
repugnant
to the canonical Scriptures.
It is also asserted, in this book,
(see chap. xvi.) that
Mardocheus
received honours and rewards for the
detection
of the conspiracy; whereas, in the Canonical
book
of Esther, it is declared, that he received no re-
ward.
And a different reason is assigned, in the two
books,
for Haman's hatred of Mordecai. In the
canonical,
it is his neglect of showing respect to this
proud
courtier; in the apocryphal, it is the punish-
ment
of the two eunuchs, who had formed the con-
spiracy.
And finally, Haman, in this spurious
work, is called
------------------------------------------------------------------
70
INTERNAL EVIDENCE AGAINST THE APOCRYPHA.
a
Macedonian; and it is said, that he meditated the
design
of transferring the Persian kingdom to the
Macedonians.
But this is utterly incredible. The
most
obscure, and probably wholly unknown, at the
Persian
court. But this is not all: he who is here
called
a Macedonian, is in the canonical book said to
be
an Agagite. The proof of the
apocryphal charac-
ter
of this addition to Esther, which has been adduced,
is
in all reason sufficient.
The advocates of these books are
greatly perplexed
to
find a place in the history of the Jewish nation, for
the
wonderful deliverance wrought by means of Judith.
It
seems strange that no allusion is made to this event
in
any of the acknowledged books of Scripture; and
more
unaccountable still, that Josephus, who was so
much
disposed to relate everything favourable to the
character
of his nation, should never make the least
mention
of it. Some refer this history to the period
preceding
the Babylonish captivity; while others are
of
opinion, that the events occurred in the time of
Cambyses,
king of
priest
here mentioned, does not occur with the names
of
the high priests contained in any of the genealogies.
From
the time of the building of the
to
its overthrow by the Assyrians, this name is not
found
in the list of high priests, as may be seen by
consulting
the vi. chapter of 1 Chronicles; nor, in the
catalogue
given by Josephus, in the tenth chapter
of
the tenth book of his Antiquities. That this history
cannot
be placed after the captivity, is manifest, from
this
circumstance, that the
------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNAL
EVIDENCE AGAINST THE APOCRYPHA. 71
standing
when the transactions which are related in
this
book occurred.
Another thing in the book of Judith, which is very
suspicious,
is, that Holofernes is represented as saying,
"Tell
me now, ye sons of
is,
that dwelleth in the hill country, and what are the
cities
that they inhabit." But how can it be reconciled
with
known history, that a prince of
wholly
ignorant of the Jewish people?
It is impossible to reconcile what
is said, in the close
of
the book, with any sound principles of chronology.
Judith
is represented as young and beautiful, when
she
slew Holofernes; but here it is said, "That she
waxed
old in her husband's house, being an hundred
and
five" years old. And there was none that made
the
children of
Judith
nor a long time after her death." In whose
reign,
or at what period, we would ask, did the Jews
enjoy
this long season of uninterrupted tranquillity?
Some writers who are fully convinced
that the his-
tory
of Judith cannot be reconciled with authentic
history,
if taken literally, are of opinion, that it contains
a
beautiful allegory;—that Bethulia, (the
virgin,)
represents
the
Nebuchadnezzar
signifies the opposition of the world
and
its prince; that the victory obtained by a pious
woman,
is intended to teach, that the church's deli-
verance
is not effected by human might or power, but
by
the prayers and the piety of the saints, &c. This,
perhaps,
is the most favourable view which we can
take
of this history: but take it as you will, it is clear
that
the book is apocryphal, and has no right to a place
in
the sacred Canon.
------------------------------------------------------------------
72 INTERNAL EVIDENCE AGAINST THE APOCRYPHA.
Between the first and second books
of Maccabees,
there
is a palpable contradiction; for in the first book
it
is said, that "Judas died in the one hundred and
fifty-second
year:" but in the second, "that in the one
hundred
and eighty-eighth year, the people that were
in
and
health unto Aristobulus." Thus, Judas is made
to
join in sending a letter, six-and-thirty years after his
death!
The contradiction is manifest. In the same
first
chapter of the second book, there is a story inserted
which
has very much the air of a fable. "For when
our
fathers were led into
then
devout, took the fire of the altar privily and hid
it
in a hollow place of a pit without water, where they
kept
it sure, so that the place was unknown to all men.
Now
after many years, when it pleased God, Nehe-
mias,
being sent from the king of
the
posterity of those priests that had hid it, to the fire:
but
when they told us they found no fire, but thick
water,
then commanded he them to draw it up and
bring
it, and when the sacrifice was laid on, Nehemias
commanded
the priests to sprinkle the wood and things
laid
thereon, with the water. When this was done
and
the time came that the sun shone, which before
was
hid in the clouds, a great fire was kindled." 2
Mac.
ix. But the Jews were not carried to
to
tion,
whatever, in truth.
In the second chapter we have
another fabulous
story
of Jeremiah's taking the ark and altar, and altar
of
incense, to
hollow
cave, and closing them up. This place Jere-
miah
declared should be unknown, "until the time
------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNAL
EVIDENCE AGAINST THE APOCRYPHA. 73
that
God gathered his people again together, and re-
ceived
them into mercy; when the cloud as it ap-
peared
unto Moses, should appear again." 1 Mac.
viii.
16.
There is another contradiction
between these books
of
Maccabees, in relation to the death of Antiochus
Epiphanes.
In the first, it is said, that he died at
Elymais,
in
year;
but, in the second book, it is related, that after
entering
temple
and city, he was repulsed by the inhabitants;
and
while on his journey from this place, he was
seized
with a dreadful disease of the bowels, and died
in
the mountains. 1 Mac. vi.; 2 Mac. ix.
Moreover, the accounts given of
Nicanor, in the
seventh
chapter of the first book, and in the fourteenth
and
fifteenth chapters of the second book, are totally
inconsistent.
In the first book of Maccabees an
erroneous account
is
given of the civil government of the Romans, where
it
is said, "That they committed their government to
one
man every year, who ruled over all their country,
and
that all were obedient to that one." Whereas, it
is
well known, that no such form of government ever
existed
among the Romans.
Finally, it is manifest that these
books were not
inspired,
and therefore not canonical, because they
were
not written by prophets; but by men who speak
of
their labours in a way wholly incompatible with in-
spiration.
Jerome and Eusebius were of opinion,
that Josephus
was
the author of the books of the Maccabees; but it
has
never been supposed by any, that he was an in-
------------------------------------------------------------------
74 THE APOCRYPHA NOT WRITTEN
spired
man; therefore, if this opinion be correct, these
books
are no more canonical, than the Antiquities, or
Wars
of the Jews, by the same author.
It has been the constant tradition
of Jews and
Christians,
that the spirit of prophecy ceased with
Malachi,
until the appearance of John the Baptist.
Malachi
has, on this account, been called by the Jews,
"the
seal of the prophets."
Josephus, in his book against APION,
after saying
that
it belonged to the prophets alone, to write inspired
books,
adds these words, "From the time of Artax-
erxes,
there were some among us, who wrote books
even
to our own times, but these are not of equal
authority
with the preceding, because the succession
of
prophets was not complete."
EUSEBIUS, in giving a catalogue of
the leaders of the
Jews,
denies that he can proceed any lower than
Zerubbabel,
"Because," says he, "after the return
from
captivity until the advent of our Saviour, there
is
no book which can be esteemed sacred."
AUGUSTINE gives a similar testimony.
"After Mala-
chi
the Jews had no prophet, during that whole period,
which
intervened between the return from captivity
and
the advent of our Saviour."
Neither does GENEBRARD dissent from
this opinion.
"From
Malachi to John the Baptist," says he, "no
prophets
existed."
DRUSIUS cites the following words,
from the Com-
piler
of the Jewish History, "The rest of the discourses
of
Simon and his wars, and the wars of his brother,
are
they not written in the book of Joseph, the son
of
Gorion, and in the book of the Asmoneans, and in
the
books of the Roman kings?" Here the books of
------------------------------------------------------------------
BY INSPIRED MEN. 75
the
Maccabees are placed between the writings of
Josephus
and the Roman history.
The book of Wisdom does indeed claim
to be the
work
of Solomon, an inspired man; but this claim
furnishes
the strongest ground for its condemnation.
It
is capable of the clearest proof from internal evi-
dence,
that this was the production of some person,
probably
a Hellenistic Jew, who lived long after the
Canon
of the Old Testament was completed. It con-
tains
manifest allusions to Grecian customs, and is
tinctured
with the Grecian philosophy. The manner
in
which the author praises himself is fulsome, and
has
no parallel in an inspired writer. This book has
been
ascribed to Philo Judaeus; and if this conjecture be
correct,
doubtless it has no just claim to be considered
a
canonical book. But whoever was the author, his
endeavouring
to pass his composition off for the writ-
ing
of Solomon, is sufficient to decide every question
respecting
his inspiration. If Solomon had written
this
book, it would have been found in the Jewish
Canon,
and in the Hebrew language. The writer is
also
guilty of shameful flattery to his own nation, which
is
entirely repugnant to the spirit of all the prophets.
He
has also, without any foundation, added many
things
to the sacred narration, contained in the canoni-
cal
history; and has mingled with it much which is of
the
nature of poetical embellishment. And, indeed,
the
whole style of the composition savours too much
of
artificial eloquence, to be attributed to the Spirit
of
God; the constant characteristic of whose produc-
tions
is, simplicity and sublimity.
Ecclesiasticus, which is superior to
all the other
apocryphal
books, was written by one Jesus the son
------------------------------------------------------------------
76 THE APOCRYPHA NOT WRITTEN
of
Sirach. His grandfather, of the same name, it
seems,
had written a book, which he left to his son
Sirach;
and he delivered it to his son Jesus, who took
great
pains to reduce it into order; but he no where
assumes
the character of a prophet himself, nor does
he
claim it for the original author, his grandfather.
In
the prologue, he says. "My grandfather, Jesus,
when
he had much given himself to the reading of the
law
and the prophets, and other books of our fathers,
and
had gotten therein good judgment, was drawn on
also
himself to write something pertaining to learning
and
wisdom, to the intent that those which are desir-
ous
to learn, and are addicted to these things, might
profit
much more, in living according to the law.
Wherefore
let me entreat you to read it with favour
and
attention, and to pardon us wherein we may seem
to
come short of some words which we have laboured
to
interpret. For the same things uttered in Hebrew,
and
translated into another tongue, have not the same
force
in them. For in the eight-and-thirtieth year,
coming
into
continuing
there for some time, I found a book of no
small
learning: therefore I thought it most necessary
for
me to bestow some diligence and travail to inter-
pret
it; using great watchfulness, and skill, in that
space,
to bring the book to an end," &c. Surely
there
is no need of further arguments to prove that
this
modest author did not claim to be inspired.
The author of the second book of the
Maccabees pro-
fesses
to have reduced a work of Jason of Cyrene,
con-
sisting
of five volumes, into one volume. Concerning
which
work, he says, "therefore to us that have
taken
upon us this painful labour of abridging, it was
------------------------------------------------------------------
BY INSPIRED MEN. 77
not
easy, but a matter of sweat and watching." Again,
"leaving
to the author the exact handling of every
particular,
and labouring to follow the rules of an
abridgment—to
stand upon every point, and go over
things
at large, and to be curious in particulars,
belongeth
to the first author of the story; but to use
brevity,
and avoid much labouring of the work, is to
be
granted to him that maketh an abridgment." Is
any
thing more needed to prove that this writer did
not
profess to be inspired? If there was any inspira-
tion
in the case, it must be attributed to Jason of
work
is long since lost, and we now possess only the
abridgment
which cost the writer so much labour and
pains.
Thus, I think it sufficiently appears, that the
authors
of these disputed books were not prophets;
and
that, as far as we can ascertain the circumstances
in
which they wrote, they did not lay claim to inspira-
tion,
but expressed themselves in such a way, as no
man
under the influence of inspiration ever did.
The Popish writers, to evade the
force of the argu-
ments
of their adversaries, pretend that there was a
two-fold
Canon; that some of the books of Scripture
are
proto-canonical; and others deutero-canonical. If,
by
this distinction, they only meant that the word
Canon was often used by the
Fathers, with great lati-
tude,
so as to include all books that were ever read in
the
churches, or that were contained in the volume of
the
Greek Bible, the distinction is correct, and signi-
fies
the same, as is often expressed, by calling some
books
sacred and canonical, and others, ecclesiastical.
But
these writers make it manifest that they mean
much
more than this. They wish to put their deute-
------------------------------------------------------------------
78 THE APOCRYPHA NOT WRITTEN
ro-canonical books, on a level with
the old Jewish
Canon;
and this distinction is intended to teach, that
after
the first Canon was constituted, other books
were,
from time to time, added: but when these
books
thus
annexed to the Canon have been pronounced upon
by
the competent authority, they are to be received
as
of equal authority with the former. When this
second
Canon was constituted, is a matter concern-
ing
which they are not agreed; some pretend, that in
the
time of Shammai and Hillel, two famous rabbies,
who
lived before the advent of the Saviour, these
books
were added to the Canon. But why then are
they
not included in the Hebrew Canon? Why does
Josephus
never mention them? Why are they never
quoted
nor alluded to in the New Testament? And
why
did all the earlier Fathers omit to cite them,
or
expressly reject them? The difficulties of this
theory
being too prominent, the most of the advocates
of
the apocrypha, suppose, that these books, after hav-
ing
remained in doubt before, were received by the
supreme
authority of the church, in the fourth century.
They
allege, that these books were sanctioned by the
council
of Nice, and by the third council of
which
met A. D. 397. But the story of the method
pursued
by the council of Nice, to distinguish between.
canonical
and spurious books, is fabulous and ridiculous.
There
is nothing in the Canons of that council relative
to
these books; and certainly, they cited no authori-
ties
from them, in confirmation of the doctrines estab-
lished
by them. And as to the third council of
it
may be asked, what authority had this provincial
synod
to determine anything for the whole church,
respecting
the Canon? But there is no certainty that
------------------------------------------------------------------
BY INSPIRED MEN. 79
this
council did determine anything on the subject;
for
in the same Canon, there is mention made of Pope
Boniface,
as living at that time, whereas he did not
rise
to this dignity, until more than twenty years after-
wards;
in which time, three other popes occupied the
See
of
formed
by the third council of
some
copies it is inserted, as the fourteenth of the
seventh
council of
we
may be confident, that no council of the fourth cen-
tury
had any authority to add to the Canon of Scrip-
ture,
books which were not only not received before, but
explicitly
rejected as apocryphal, by most of the
Fathers.
Our opponents say, that these books were
uncertain
before, but now received confirmation. How
could
there be any uncertainty, in regard to these
books,
if the church was as infallible, in the first three
ages,
as in the fourth. These books were either
canonical
before the fourth century, or they were not:
if
the former, how came it to pass that they were not
recognized
by the apostles? How came they to be
overlooked
and rejected by the primitive Fathers?
But
if they were not canonical before, they must have
been
made canonical by the decree of some council.
That
is, the church can make that an inspired book,
which
was never given by inspiration. This absurdity
was
mentioned before, but it deserves to be repeated,
because,
however unreasonable it may be, it forms the
true,
and almost the only ground, on which the doc-
trine
of the Romish church, in regard to these apocry-
phal
books, rests. This is, indeed, a part of the
Pope's
supremacy, Some of their best writers, how-
ever,
deny this doctrine; and whatever others may
------------------------------------------------------------------
80 THE APOCRYPHA NOT WRITTEN
pretend,
it is most certain, that the Fathers, with one
consent,
believed that the Canon of sacred Scripture
was
complete in their time: they never dreamed of
books
not then canonical, becoming such, by any
authority
upon earth. Indeed, the idea of adding to
the
Canon, what, did not, from the beginning, belong
to
it, never seems to have entered the mind of any
person
in former times. If this doctrine were correct,
we
might still have additions made to the Canon, and
that
too, of books which have existed for hundreds of
years.
This question may be brought to a
speedy issue,
with
all unprejudiced judges. These books were
either
written by divine inspiration for the guidance
of
the church in matters of faith and practice, or they
were
not; if the former, they always had a right to a
place
in the Canon; if the latter, no act of a pope or
council
could render that divine, which was not so
before.
It would be to change the nature of a fact,
than
which nothing is more impossible.
It is alleged, with much confidence,
that the Greek
Bibles,
used by the Fathers, contained these books;
and,
therefore, whenever they give their testimony to
the
sacred Scriptures, these are included. This argu-
ment
proves too much, for the third book of Esdras
and
the Prayer, of Manasses were contained in these
volumes,
but these are rejected by the Romanists.
The
truth, however, is, that these books were not
originally
connected with the Septuagint; they were
probably
introduced into some of the later Greek ver-
sions,
which were made by heretics. These versions,
particularly
that of Theodotion, came to be used
pro-
miscuously
with that of the LXX; and to this day,
------------------------------------------------------------------
BY INSPIRED MEN. 81
the
common copies contain the version of the book of
Daniel
by Theodotion, instead of that by the LXX.
By some such means, these apocryphal
books crept
into
the Greek Bible; but the early Fathers were
careful
to distinguish them from the canonical Scrip-
tures,
as we have already seen. That they were
read
in the churches, is also true; but not as Scrip-
ture;
not for the confirmation of doctrine, but for
the
edification of the common people.
Some of the Fathers, it is true,
cited them as author-
ity,
but very seldom, and the reason which rendered
it
difficult for them to distinguish accurately between
ecclesiastical
and canonical books has already been
given.
These pious men were, generally unacquainted
with
Hebrew literature, and finding all these books in
Greek,
and frequently bound up in the same volume
with
the canonical Scriptures, and observing that they