Tentamen Anti-Straussianum. The Antiquity of the Gospels asserted on Philological Grounds, in refutation of the Mythic Scheme of Dr. David Friedrich Strauss. An Argument by ORLANDO T. DOBBIN, LL.D., Trinity College, Dublin. London: Ward and Co. THIS very clever argument ought to be in the hands of every one who is interested in the defence of Revelation, and who feels that an attack upon the authenticity of the Gospels must, if not steadily met, lead to a repudiation of the word of God at no very distant period. It is based upon a principle, which it would be well if others would recollect, that the sacred books of the Christians, when assailed, will be found sufficient for their own defence; and that, as new methods of attack are contrived by those who impugn them, even from those books will new methods of repulsion appear. Our author speaks as follows:

"The great question in the Christian Church, for a century past, has undoubtedly been the age of the Gospels. The comparative recentness of their composition has never been maintained with so much vigour, nor with so much presumed success, as by Dr. David Friedrich Strauss. The more intellectual of the Neologian party seem already to have adopted him as their apostle, and to vaunt of his book as a new revelation. In fact a vague but general impression prevails in our British circles that the German divine is something more than any previous opponent of Christianity, for that not only is his mythic theory ingenious, but his logic (that is the favourite merit ascribed to him) unanswerable." (pp. v., vi.)

Now, his aim is not to depreciate Dr. Strauss' abilities, nor to disparage those who have gone before him in the conflict. Of him and them he speaks well enough of the latter in terms of high commendation; but he would add his own argument, which aims at proving, from philology, that the Gospels were composed much within thirty years of our Lord's death (p. xi.), and consequently could not be, with justice, regarded as they have been by German theologians.

The author commends his essay to the candid consideration of believer and unbeliever alike, as an humble and sincere expression of his love for what he deems the truth, and declares that it will be a rich reward, if it should be considered to add to the panoply of the evidences of Christianity, and begs that, if successful, scorn may be cast upon him rather than upon it; and although we are aware that custom makes observations of this sort appropriate to a preface, we do not think there is much fear of the result. Dr. Dobbin will have to put his modesty into his pocket, and accept of the praises of the public; for we cannot suppose that the reader, in this instance, can be otherwise than most benevolent.

As Dr. Dobbin's work may be had for a trifle, it would be unfair to make large extracts from it-much more would it be so to transfer to our pages the substance of his argument, so as to take from it that freshness which it enjoys in the original. We shall do no such thing-we shall give only enough to let our readers know what it is with which he has to contend, and how he proposes to meet his adversary, and leave them to follow his argument themselves; for we are perfectly convinced that he has treated it successfully, and that they will gladly go to his pages for enlightenment as to the main points upon which he relics. From the historical portion of the work before us we shall draw the following:

"Shortly after Paulus of Tübingen, the facile princeps of the Rationalists, had graduated with such eclat in the school of German naturalism, and reduced the evangelical history to a mere common-place record of a life, whose features varied in no respect from that of every-day men, save in the success with which Jesus practised upon the credulity of his followers, or the easiness with which they submitted to be duped, a new battery was opened upon Christianity from another quarter, by Dr. David Friedrich Strauss, in his Life of Jesus.'

"But the myth itself was no new device for getting rid of inexplicable or miraculous occurrences in the volume of revelation. Both in the Old and New Testaments, from Semler to the Coryphoeus of the mythics just named, a mythic element had been detected. Eichhorn, Gabler, Kaune, Meyer, Schelling, Vater, Bauer, De Wette, and De Vatke, have all been labourers in the same field, with much zeal and various success. From fable in the beginning of Genesis-the amount of the discoveries in this department at first-they proceeded, until, at length, there was found to be little else than fable down to the close of the Apocalypse. The singular renown of Dr. Strauss is not built upon his being the inventor of this system, but its most masterly exponent and methodiser, and the most daring experimenter in its application to New Testament history. Others laboured, and he entered into their labours; and, if a rash purpose, and powers more than respectable, could have done it, put the finishing stroke to their rude work of demolition on the sacred books. Of the seamless robe of historic truth in the life of Christ, they leave not a rag or tatter; and its entire fabric, from its commencement to its close, is a fond figment of the human heart of that day, modified by its Hebrew affinities." (pp. 16, 17).

But naturalism is different from mythicism, though they are each of them species of anti-supernaturalism; and our readers may like to know what are the characteristics of that with which Dr. Dobbin has to contend. We go, then, to the following:

"Quotations from Strauss. A myth is the invention of a fact by the help of an idea. A nation or religious community finds itself in a certain position in the midst of certain institutions and notions in the spirit of which it lives; the nation or community finds itself constrained,

by invincible yearnings after satisfaction, as to the origin of those observances and views, to imagine to itself an origin for them. The real origin is concealed in the darkness of the past; or it is not sufficiently clear to correspond with the clearness and fulness of their enlarged conceptions and desires. By the light of those conceptions, and at the instigation of those desires, they trace upon the obscure canvass of the past an attractive picture of fabulous incidents, their incidents being but the reflection of their present thoughts and aspirations.' (Intro., § x.) The great difficulty (he had said before) to be cleared away, when we turn from the Old to the New Testament, in the mythic conception, is this that we do not ordinarily search for myths except in the primitive and fabulous ages of the human race; that period when men had not already begun to consign the history of events to writing.' 'But,' he observes in the way of obviating this objection, Gabler calls attention to the fact, that the idea of antiquity is a relative idea.' Without doubt, with regard to the Mosaic religion, the Christian religion is modern; but, in itself, it is sufficiently old to justify us in ranging the primitive history of its founder with the ancient times. There were, it is certain, in those times, written documents upon other subjects; but here that does not affect the question, and, indeed, proves nothing, if it be possible to show that, during a long period, no one possessed any writing concerning Jesus, more particularly respecting the commencement of his life. All was confined to oral relations, which, it is not hard to conceive, were adorned by the colours of the marvellous, and impregnated with the ideas of the contemporary Jesus, thus becoming true historic myths....... For the Old Testament, we have seen that the mythic conception could only be maintained by those who deny that the historic documents contained therein had been composed by ocular witnesses, and contemporaries. It was precisely the same for the New Testament.......Since the opinion is now established that the three first evangelists proceed from oral tradition, it is, as we know, especially since that period that either mythic ornament, or the pure myth, have been found in those traditions. On the other hand, the major part of our cities now consider the Gospel of John as authentic, and, in consequence, of a certitude perfectly historic; while those who, with Bretschneider, doubt even the existence of the apostle, are still able to allow a large place in that gospel to the mythic element. (Intro. ix.)

"But (it will be said) this divine origin rests nowhere upon so authentic a documentary basis as in the Hebrew and Christian religions. While the mythic cycles, amongst the Greeks and Romans, consist of mere collections of unaccredited legends, the biblical history has been written by eye-witnesses, or, at least, by persons who, on the one hand, stood in such a relation to the eye-witnesses as enabled them to relate the truth; and whose evident honesty, on the other hand, permits us not to doubt the existence of their good inclination to relate it. Certainly, it would be of most decisive importance for the credibility of the Bible history, if it could be proved that it is written by eye-witnesses, or even by near neighbours, in point of time, to the occurrences recounted for although mistakes, and consequently false narrations,

may find room even in the case of eye-witnesses, yet the possibility of unintentional error (besides intentional imposture, is easily detected) is confined within much narrower limits, than when the narrator is removed from the events by a longer interval, and compelled to draw his accounts from the oral reports of others."-§ xiii. (pp. 82-84.)

Now, Dr. Dobbin addresses himself to this admission, and triumphantly proves that the four gospels were histories, written. by men capable of testing facts rigidly, and detailing them precisely, as being the works of men who lived in the times which they speak of; and he does it by the production of internal evidence the production of a usage in the gospels, which does not appear as the epistles of the New Testament, and which not only does not appear in them, but could not be co-ordinate. with the usage of times more remote: and, though we will not detail the argument, for the reasons above assigned, we have no hesitation in saying that it is complete, and in every respect worthy of the perusal of our readers. Indeed we have not seen an argument, for many a day, so free from objection as this. It has given us great pleasure, and is calculated to do the same for all who will read it. A challenge is given to Strauss which we doubt if he will accept: if he accept it, it will tend only to further confusion.

Plain Lectures on the Gospel according to St. Matthew. By the Hon and Rev. C. G. PERCEVAL, Rector of Calverton, Bucks, in Four Volumes. Vols. 2, 3, 4. London: Capes and Co.

Now

THE first volume of this work was noticed by us in the Number for April, 1845, when we drew the attention of our readers to the simplicity and plainness aimed at by Mr. Perceval. that the work is complete, we do not hesitate to say that it will be found highly useful to all who have a sense of the value of these properties. Indeed, we think that, if the author would reprint them in double columns, and a small but clear type, so as to bring them into the compass of one volume, and within the reach of people of small means, he would be amply repaid by the increase of circulation-not but what they are cheap now, in comparison to the style in which they are got up-but they are beyond the reach of those to whom they would be most useful-out of the grasp of the great majority of our popu lation-too costly for those who, though the creators of wealth, know little beside its creation.

A Brief Plea for the Old Faith, and the Old Times of Merrie England, when Men had Leisure for Life and Time to Die. Addressed principally to the Industrial Classes of his Fellow Countrymen and Women. By their sincere Well-Wisher, FRANK FAIRPLAY. London: Dolman. 1846.

THIS book is an ad captandum argument, addressed principally to the manufacturing population, who, as has been truly observed, "have neither time to live nor time to die," whose lot is thrown amongst toil and labour, and to such an extent as to allow of little else than the provision for the moment. Who can look forward for a provision against casualties, much less against the sorrows of age; and whose moments are so engrossed as to preclude a right estimation of eternity? And the specific which is offered to them is a return to Popery, and the channel through which relief is to flow is monasticism.

It is contended that, as in days of old, relief was extended to the poor through the agency of religious houses, so in the present day, relief would be derived to the same class from similar sources; and that, but for Protestantism, a Malthusian poorlaw would never have been heard of, and perhaps not a rural police. And all the ills that flesh is heir to, and some to which it is not, are of course spoken of as the necessary consequents of Protestantism-if not a development of its idea. In short, it is alleged, that we must sue humbly for the pardon of the Pope -earnestly seek re-union with that centre of unity of which he is the representative before "cakes and ale" will flow in-first most religiously cursing Henry the Eighth and the Reformers, whom we have hitherto, like so many fools, been blessing.

In order to get the steam up for this purpose, a very elaborate analysis of the "History of the Reformation " is presented to Frank Fairplay's readers; but it is remarkable that all the care has been bestowed upon one side-none has been thrown away upon the other; and the consequence is, that if we have not an impartial account, we have a racy one, of the interesting period which is alluded to. No one, perhaps, in the present day could equal our author-Cobbett must be revived to surpass him. Our author is certainly inferior to him in talent, but may challenge a comparison in virulence. But Cobbett will not arise to dispute possession of the field, and so our author will probably enjoy his ill-earned honour.

We will not deny that there were circumstances connected with the Reformation which no one, in his senses, will attempt to justify. Perhaps we might not be unwilling to admit that our religion"first shone in full radiance upon England from Mistress Boleyn's charming eyes." Perhaps, too, other circumstances, which had as little to do with the religion as her fascinations,