SECT. V.

The true Value and Credit of the Book.

THE foregoing obfervations on its contents and hiftory, lead us to the following decifion on the book of Revelation. It is undoubtedly very old; it was known as early as the beginning of the second century after Chrift. But, it may be asked, what led fo many and creditable men to receive it as an apoftolical and divine Scripture? To this it may be answered, that its author was called John; and this, as appears probable, was the cause of its having been placed by these men among the divine Scriptures of the New Teftament; they mistook him for the Apostle of the fame name. Who he was, and where he lived, we know not; but the contents of the book clearly evince. that he was a Chriftian teacher and a

pious man. It contains also many paffages diftinguished both for matter and compofition; it has always been, and will always continue to be read by many with real advantage, as an excitement to virtue, and as affording means of confolation. But as we neither underftand its contents, nor can depend with certainty on the prefent text as genuine, the use of it is only fo far fafe, as its contents agree with the other writings of the New Teftament. Whether, laftly, the book was written by the Apostle St. John, or even by any Apostle, cannot be pofitively either afferted or denied.

CHAP.

CHAP. VI.

Conclufions drawn from the above-mentioned Teftimonies.

AFTER having heard fo many clear and weighty teftimonies of antiquity, how is it poffible for any intelligent and impartial man to affert, that the prefent Scriptures of the New Testament were not declared to be genuine and divine before the Council of Laodicea, which was held about the year 364?' The enemies of. Chriftianity,for these only make the affertion,would confequently wish to infinuate to the world, that before the fourth century Chriftians were entirely divided in their opinions concerning the genuine Scriptures of the Apoftles and Evangelifts, and that at one time more, at another, fewer books were received under this title, until at length the de

cifive

cifive fentence of the Council of Laodicea eftablished the prefent Canon. The author of the Dictionnaire philofophique portatif' has lately brought this story again into notice. But if our adverfaries would caft only a flight glance over the writings of the abovementioned teachers of the first two centuries and a half, they would undoubtedly blush at their own ignorance and boldness.-Juftin Martyr, Irenæus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen, prove their tenets by authorities taken from thefe fcriptures; and indeed from thefe only, rejecting all others as either forged, or merely human compofitions. Many teachers of the firft and fecond centuries mention a collection of the evangelical and apoftolical writings as already exifting, All the ancient writers whom Eufebius has cited, pronounce either unanimoufly or with a great majority of voices, thefe writings and only thefe,

to

to have been genuine works of the Evangelifts and Apoftles. Notwithstanding these circumftances, it is pretended that the first centuries were quite undecided and uncertain on this fubject! Notwithstanding thefe circumcumftances, it is afferted, that the Council of Laodicea firft established our prefent Canon!

All the Scriptures of our New Teftament, it is confeffed, have not been received with univerfal confent as genuine works of the Evangelifts and Apoftles. But that man must have predetermined to oppose the most palpable truths, and muft reject all hiftory, who will not confefs, that the greater part of the New Teftament has been univerfally received as authentic, and that the remaining books have been acknowledged as fuch by

This Canon of the Council is moreover fpurious, See Prof. Spittler on this subject.

See above, p. 170.