CHRISTIANITY. HISTORICAL DISQUISITIONS CONCERNING CHRISTIANITY. IN vain have several of the learned expressed their wonder, that in the historian Josephus (9) they (2) That the passage concerning Christ in Josephus's history is universally allowed to be interpolated, is not true; very learned men have maintained the contrary. Besides, this is but a negative argument, which can be of no manner of weight against the positive and undoubted authorities of Pagan writers, not one of whom is mentioned by our author. Nothing can be more disingenuous. The star that appeared at Christ's birth, and the journey of the Chaldean wifemen, are mentioned by Chalcidius the Platonist: " Est quoque "alia sanctior & venerabilior historia, quæ perhibet 66 ortu stellæ cujusdam non morbos mortesque denun ciatas, sed descensum Dei venerabilis ad humanæ "conservationis, rerumque mortalium gratiam : quam "stellam cum nocturno tempore inspexissent Chal"dæorum profecto sapientes viri, & consideratione 66 rerum cælestium satis exercitati, quæsisse dicuntur "recentis ortum Dei, repertaque illa majestate "puerili veneratos esse, & vota Deo tanto conveni"entia nuncupasse. In Commentario ad Timæum." The slaughter of the innocents by Herod is related by Macrobius, who, at the same time, has given us a reflection made on that occasion by the Emperor Augustus: "Cum audisset inter pueros, quos in Syria He"rodes rex Judæorum intra bimatum jussit interfici, "filium quoque ejus occisum, ait, "Melius est Herodis porcum esse quam filium." Lib. ii. cap. 4. G4 Christ's they meet with no trace of Jesus Christ, the little passage relating to him in his history being now universally given up as interpolated. Yet Josephus's father must have been an eye-witness of Christ's crucifixion under Pontius Pilate is related by Tacitus "Tiberio imperitante, per procuratorem "Pontium Pilatum supplicio affectus erat." Lib. xv. The earthquake and miraculous darkness attending it, are recorded by Phlegon, lib. xiii. Chronicorum sive Olympiadum. Τῷ δ ̓ ἔτει τῆς C. Β. Ολυμπιάδος ἐγένετο ἔκλειψις ἡλίκ μεγίςη τῶν εγνωρισμένων προτε ξονα και νυξ ώρα της ἡμέρας ἔγένετο, ώςε και αςέρας εν κρανῶ φανῆναι, σεισμός τε μεγας κατὰ Βιθυνίαν γενομενός τα πολλα Νικαιας κατέςεψε. Besides, these very circumstances were mentioned in the public Roman records, to which the early writers of Christianity used to appeal, as of undoubted authority with their adversaries. See Grotius de Ver. Rel. Chr. lib. iii. Dr. Clarke on the Evidences of Natural and Revealed Religion, p. 357. And Mr. Addison, in his little treatise on the Christian Religion, sect. 2. The difficulties in the history of the Evangelists are such as may be easily removed by consulting the annotations of learned expositors, or even by a diligent meditation of the Scriptures. If the obscurity of a work were an argument against its authority, there would be an end of all historical credibility. We meet with difficulties in Polybius, Livy, Plutarch, and yet we doubt not of their veracity. But to come to the difficulties mentioned by our author: 1, The Zachariah mentioned by St. Matthew, is most probably concluded to be the son of Jehoiada, whom the Jews stoned to death in the very court of the temple, at the command of Joash (Chron. ii. 24.) And as for the father's name not agreeing, Jehoiada might of Jesus's miracles. This historian was of the priestly lineage, and being related to queen Mariamne, Herod's wife, is minutely particular on all that prince's proceedings, yet wholly silent as to the life and death of Christ. Though neither concealing nor palliating Herod's cruelties, not a word might have two names, which was not an uncommon thing among the Jews. Besides, even if we could not find such a Zachariah in the Jewish history, is it a proof that he never existed? Is it to be supposed the Scripture has given us every transaction of that nation, and that nothing has been omitted by the sacred historian ? 2. The difficulties about the genealogy of Christ have at all times been made use of as an argument by the adversaries of our holy religion. St. Matthew and St. Luke have given us two genealogies, which differ in appearance, but agree in the main. The Jews were very exact in their genealogies, and no doubt but the evangelists took that of our Saviour from the public records, But it is supposed by very learned writers, and with the greatest probability, that one of these genealogies is that of Mary, and the other that of Joseph. St. Matthew made the genealogy of Joseph, who was the last male of David's race descended from Solomon; and St. Luke that of the Virgin Mary, by Nathan from David. There are other opinions in regard to the solution of this difficulty; but this is sufficient to shew that the two genealogies may be reconciled. To conclude, we may safely affirm, with the learned Dr. Clarke, that the evidence which God has afforded for the truth of our religion is abundantly sufficient; and that the cause of men's infidelity is not the want of better evidence, but the dominion of their passions, which prevents them from hearkening to any reason. able conviction. a word does he say about his ordering the chil dren to be massacred, on an information that a king of the Jews was just born. According to the Greek calendar the number of children put to death on that occasion amounted to fourteen thousand. Of all the cruelties ever committed by all the tyrants that ever lived, this was the most horrible; a like instance is not to be found in history. Yet the best writer the Jews ever had, the only one of any account with the Romans and Greeks, makes no manner of mention of a transaction so very extraordinary, and so very dreadful. He says not a word of the new star which had appeared in the east at the Saviour's nativity; and a phænomenon so singular could not escape the knowledge of such an accurate historian as Josephus he is likewise silent as to the darkness which, at noon day, covered the whole earth for the space of three hours, whilst the Saviour was on the cross; the opening of the tombs at that awful time; and the number of the just who rose from the dead. ་ It is no less a matter of wonder to the learned that these prodigies are not taken notice of by any Roman historian, though they happened in the reign of Tiberius, under the very eyes of a Roman governor and garrison, who naturally would have sent the emperor and senate a circumstantial account of the most miraculous event ever heard of. Rome itself must for three hours have been involved in thick darkness, and surely such a prodigy would have been noted in the annals of Rome, and those of all other nations. But God, I suppose, would not allow that such divine things things should be committed to writing by prophane hands ('). The same learned persons likewise meet with some difficulties in the evangelical history. They observe, that in St. Matthew, Jesus Christ says to the Scribes and Pharisees, that upon them should come all the innocent blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to that of Zachariah the son of Barac, whom they slew between the temple and the altar. In all the history of the Hebrews, say they, we meet with no such person as Zachariah killed in the temple before the coming of the Messiah, nor in his time; but Josephus, in his history of the siege of Jerusalem, (chap. xix. book iv.) mentions a Zachariah the son of Barachiah, who was killed in the middle of the temple, by the faction of the Zelotes. This has given rise to a suspicion that St. Matthew's gospel was not written till after the taking of Jerusalem by Titus. But if we consider the infinite difference there must be between books divinely inspired and such as are merely human, all these doubts, difficulties, and objections, immediately vanish. It was God's pleasure that his birth, life, and death, should be shrouded in a cloud of respectable darkness. His ways in all things are different from ours. The learned are also at a great loss to reconcile the difference of the two genealogies of Christ. In St. Matthew, Joseph's father is Jacob, (*) Josephus's silence is very well accounted for by the bishop of Cloyne, in his MINUTE PHILOSOPHER, P. 313. |