UC-NRL.F 
 
 ^B lliD 5b3 
 
 
 •^*' 
 
 •t X-- 
 

 '^2 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. 
 
 GIRX O] 
 
 ^-M 
 
 08* 
 
 Received . Septemhei% i885 . 
 
 Accessions No. ^'^'^<^^- Shelf No. X S^ rt 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2007 with funding from 
 
 IVIicrosoft Corporation 
 
 I 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/dissonanceoffourOOevanrich 
 
THE 
 
 DISSONANCE 
 
 OF 
 
 THE FOUR GENERALLY RECEIVED 
 
 JEir^JVGEJLISTSj 
 
 AND THE 
 
 Evidence of their respective Authenticity, 
 EXAMINED; 
 
 WITH THAT OF 
 
 SOME OTHER SCRIPTURES, 
 
 DEEMED CANONICAL. 
 
 EDWAKJ^' EVANSON, M M. 
 
 9»^ 
 
 THE SECOND EDITION; 
 /« reJiich many Arguments are considerably improved and strengthened) 
 
 AND WITH THE ADDITION OF 
 
 A TABLE OF CONTENTS, 
 
 ** I have chosen the way of truth: thy judgments have I laid before me." 
 ** As for lies, I hate and abhor them; but thy Law do I love." 
 
 Psalm cxix. SO. 163. 
 
 GLOUCESTER : 
 
 PRINTED BY D. WALKER, 
 
 ^©R JOSEPH JOHNSON, 72, ST. PAUL'S CHURCH-YARD} S0k9 
 
 ALSO BY W. VIDLER, J.87, HIGH HOLEORN, LONDONj 
 
 AND JOHN WASHBOURN, GLOUCESTER. 
 
 1805. 
 
\9 0^ 
 
 ^^^^^^ 
 
i-: j:ir 
 
 la 'jv! 
 
PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR, 
 
 And Sold hy J. Johnson, 72, St. PauVs Church-yard ; W. Vidler, 
 187, High-Holborn, London; and J. Washbourn, Gloucester, 
 
 1. A Defence of the Dissonance of the Four Evan- 
 gelists, in reply to the Objections of Dr. Priestley and 
 the Rev. Mr. Simpson ; in a Letter to Dr. Priestley's 
 Young Man, with a Postscript, Price 2s, 
 
 2. Arguments against and for the Sabbatical Ob- 
 servance of Sunday ; together with a Letter to the 
 Rev. Dr. Priestley. Price 2s. 6d. 
 
 3. Reflections upon the State of Religion in Chris- 
 tendom; containing a full and regular, though con- 
 cise. Explanation of the Apocalypse, or Book of Reve- 
 lation. Price 2s. 6d. 
 
 4. Second Thoughts on the Trinity, recommended ta 
 the Bishop of Gloucester. Price Is. 6d. 
 
PREF^CK 
 
 T9* 
 
 T N bdtli the general spirit and particuto 
 precepts at* the religion ioF Jesus Christ, 
 there is something so amiable, so obviously 
 conducing to the diminution 'ofiliisery, and 
 thedifiusion of comfort and happiness amongst 
 mankind, that, it may reasonably be presumed, 
 no man duly acquainted with that beaiitilVd, 
 that perfect system of morality, can beso un- 
 feeling for the concerns of Jiis felloiv-creatureb^ 
 and so little a real frie\id to himself, as 'ifiotto 
 wish the truth of the Gospel Revelation ciould 
 be so 'Satisfactorily demonstrated, -as'^to'coEi"- 
 vince the minds of men' of all degrees and 
 stations, and induce them, not merely- to 
 profess to receive it, for that alone can answer 
 no desirable purpose,- hut conscientiously to 
 make it the rule of their lives and conduct; at 
 all times, and on all occasions, bothaiii>pu:biic 
 and in private. To accomplish this,-it! is,, in 
 the first^plade^ absolutely necessary; that its 
 celestial- origin- and cauthenti city should be 
 fully tiviA clcariy ascertained, and'^na ^just 
 
5V " PREFACE. 
 
 cause left for cloiibt and uncertainty about it; 
 for the least room for doubting in such a case, 
 throws so considerable a ^veight into the scale 
 of immediate self-interest, and our natural ap- 
 petites and infirmities^ as renders it next to 
 impossible that its precepts should have any 
 valuable efficacy upon him who doubts; not- 
 withstanding all the prudential suggestions of 
 modern preachei's, that he who walketh religi-^ 
 ously, walketh surely; and that the truest wis- 
 dom is to act upon the supposition of the truth 
 of the Christian Revelation. Men sometimes 
 act upon uncertain^ dubious prospects, in the 
 trifling concerns of the present life; but the 
 views of futurity, opened to us by revelation, 
 are too vast, too impoitant for the calculation 
 of chances, or the principles of commercial 
 speculation: if they are not indisputably 
 certain, they are nothing. 
 
 The Apostles and primitive Christians acted 
 under a full conviction of the infallible cer- 
 tainty of the doctrines which they believed 
 and taught. And if satisfactory proofs of the 
 truth and divine authority of the Gospel, and 
 a complete knowledge and understanding of 
 its intent and doctrines, be really attainable 
 to the ordinary faculties of the human mind, 
 and easy to be comprehended by children and 
 
the most illiterate of the people, 1Ms' tli^n 
 like what it was represented to be when h 
 first preached to the* unlearned and the poor; 
 %vorthy of the impartial benevolence of the 
 common father of the human race; and fit to 
 be an universal rule of life, and source of re- 
 ligious information, to every rational indivi- 
 dual of all the nations of the earth. If, on the 
 contrarj^ its own truth, and the authenticity 
 of the scriptures w^hich teach it, rest solely 
 upon the plurality of the voices of corrupt 
 and erring men, of no authority from heaven, 
 and supported only by the power of earthly 
 magistrates; if its most important, because its 
 fundamental, doctrines are to be interpreted 
 only by the critical sagacity of the learned, 
 respecting the meaning of a few controverted 
 words or sentences of Greek or Hebrew, it is 
 then involved in endless doubt and uncer- 
 tainty ; is totally unlike the Gospel preached 
 originally by Jesus and his Apostles; abso- 
 lutely useless, because unintelligible, to the 
 great bulk of mankind; and, in every Avay, 
 unbecoming that eternal fountain of wisdom 
 and intelligence from which it is said to be 
 derived. 
 
 ' Under this dilemma, thinking the certainty 
 of either the truth or falsehood of ^ revelation 
 
 A 3 
 
*»1 PEEFACE, 
 
 of the will of God to be of the hio-hest iui- 
 portance, the Author of the following disqiii- 
 sition, at once to satisfy his own mind, and to 
 qualify himself for a faithful and beneficial 
 perforqiance of the duties of the Christian 
 ministry, for which he had been educated, 
 i^iany j^ars ago determined to study the scrip- 
 tures diligently, with no other illustration than 
 what they reflect upon each other; and more 
 especially those prophetic parts of them 
 which, if duly fulfilled, must afford the strong- 
 est and most convincing evidence of the di- 
 vine authority of. the revelation itst>lf; and 
 almost necessarily lead to a right understand- 
 ing of the nature of that religious Covenant 
 ^tp which they bear a supernatural attestation. 
 ])- He had remarked, indeed, that amongst its 
 professional teachers, all the ablest advocates 
 J*or the truth and divine authority of ti>c Got:^- 
 fpel, as if they knew of no certain, demon- 
 strative, pvoof which could be adduced in a 
 case of so much importance, seemed to con- 
 ,tent themselves, and . expe^ct their readers 
 .should- bQ satisfied, with, an; accumulation of 
 probable arguments in its favour. And the 
 Author has even been told, that the case ad- 
 mits of nq other ^ift^l; of proof He is happy , 
 IWY.^y?^* to h^.v.Q; ;l^ai:\ied, ift'QiP t^e; only in- 
 
PREFACE. \u 
 
 fallible authority, the direct contrary. And 
 he begs all professed Christians of that per- 
 suasion to consider, whether it covdd be re- 
 conciled to any just ideas of wisdom in an 
 earthly Potentate, if he should send an am- 
 bassador to a foreign state to mediate a nego- 
 ciation of the greatest importance, without 
 furnishing him with certain indubitable ere* 
 dentials of the truth and authenticity of his 
 mission. And to consider further, whether 
 it be just or seemly to attribute to the omni- 
 scient, omnipotent Deity, a degree of weak- 
 ness and folly which was never yet imputed 
 to any of his human creatures : for unless men 
 are impious and hardy enough to pass so 
 gross an affront upon the tremendous Ma- 
 jesty of Heaven, the improbability that God 
 should delegate the Mediator of a most im^ 
 portant Covenant to be proposed to all man-^ 
 kind, without enabling him to give them clear 
 and indisputable proof of the divine authority 
 qf his mission, must ever infinitely outweigh 
 the aggregate sum of all the probabilities 
 which can be accumulated in the opposite 
 scale of the balance. So that to all those who 
 know of no other, proof of the divine autho- 
 rity of the Gospel, no rational proof of it ex- 
 ists. Mere human testimony, whether re- 
 
 a4 
 
Corded in written liistorj^ or deduced to us 
 by oral tmdition, is manifestly incompetent 
 to afford satisfaction to any unprejudiced 
 Iftind respecting communications of a sujoer- 
 niafnrai kind. And with regard to rniiacles, 
 nrider the Old Covenant, God himself, by his 
 prophet Moses, cautioned' the Jews against 
 receiving the religious doctrines of any pre- 
 tended prophet, though he should even work 
 miracles to convince them, because they 
 would be liabk to be deluded and deceived 
 by such evidence:* and under the New Cove- 
 nant he has warned lis, by his prophet Jesusi 
 in the persons of his Apostles Paul and John^ 
 that the false and fabulous superstition, which 
 would for so man 3^ centuries supplant the true 
 religion of the Gospel, would be embraced 
 by the people, in consequence of their deia- 
 sibn by '^ sig7is and lying wonders,']- and all the 
 " dcceivahlcness of unrighteousness'' llus be- 
 ing the case with miracles considered in 
 themselves alone, God, by his prophets both 
 of the Old Covenant and the New, hath ixiveu 
 us another, an infellible criterion by which to 
 distinguish the true from a false religion, and, 
 as 1 have shew A- in- the following pages, refer 
 
 * Deut xiii. 1—5. 
 "f-Thess ii; 9j 10? Apoc. xiii. ^3, tl, and xix. 'iO. 
 
PREPACP. IX 
 
 US solely to the testimony of completed pro- 
 phecy, which he would not have done, if any 
 other had been necessary, or to be depended 
 upon with equal certaint)'^ and satisfaction of 
 mind. 
 
 In religion, as in every other science found- 
 ed in truth, if we recur to its first principles, we 
 shall find them self-evident propositions, by 
 means of which thie truth of all its doctrines- 
 may be clearly and satisfactorily demonstrated. 
 For instance, that the whole is greater than 
 any of its parts, is not a more unquestionable 
 truth than the proposition, that no effect can 
 exist without some adequate producing cause. 
 And on tliis axiom is founded, that certain, 
 satisfactory demonstration, which tlie visible 
 structure of the universe, and all it contains, 
 affords us of the being; of a God. From the 
 very same axiom — if predictions of any men 
 exist, respecting events that were not to take 
 place till many ages after the deaths of those 
 men themselves; which predictions are known 
 to have been promulged to the world several 
 centuries before their completion, and which 
 history and our own experience inform us 
 have been punctually accomplished — a sure 
 demonstrative proof arises, that the prophets 
 could have received their information only 
 
3fc piie:face. 
 
 through a revelation, communicated to thcra 
 by the Deity, of his will and decrees concern- 
 ing the events of futurity ; for such prophe- 
 cies are eflects which no other cause is com- 
 petent to produce. 
 -In the course of an investigation formed 
 upon this plan, and pursued upon these 
 grounds, the Author soon found hmiself con- 
 vinced of the truth of Christianity, as taught 
 by its first preachers; but was led also to re- 
 mark many obvious inconsistencies and im- 
 probabihties in several of the canonical 
 scriptures of the New Covenant, which he 
 could not account for, on a supposition that 
 the authors were men of that veracity and in- 
 formation of their subject, which must be ex-* 
 pected from the Apostles and other miracu- 
 lously gifted disciples of Jesus Christ. He 
 therefore resolved to examine thoroughly into 
 the nature of those proofs of the genuine au-^ 
 thenticity of the books of the New Testament, 
 which, till then, he had taken for granted, and 
 supposed I to be uncontrqvertibly demonstrat- 
 ed; and was astonished- to find, upon what 
 sliglit and unsatisfactory grounds scriptures 
 of the greatest consequence have been univer- 
 sally received i>y j>rofessed Christians, as the 
 infallible word, <>i, God. . From his studious 
 
PREFACE.. kt 
 
 rit^-cnlion to the prophetic parts of those scrip- 
 tures, wkich abne carry certain evidence of 
 their own divine authority along with them, 
 he could not fail als^) to observe^ that the 
 chief and almost only arorument in favour of 
 the present canon of scripture, Avhich does not 
 rest upon mere human authority of the most 
 suspicious kind, is manifestly fallacious; he 
 means the arijument which uro:es, that both 
 the wisdom and goodness of God required 
 the interposition of his povidence, to preserve 
 pure and uncorrupt the genuine authentic 
 records of that Gospel which he had thought 
 fit, at the expence of so many miracles and 
 prophecies, to publish to the world. — For 
 having, by his prophet Paul, declared that 
 Christians, of times succeeding the apos- 
 tolic age, would apostatize from the original 
 faith and doctrines of the Gospel; that some 
 with hardened hypocrisy would publish lies;^ 
 and that professed Christians in general, would 
 turn away their ears from the truths and be 
 turned imlo fables ;'f the veracity of the God 
 of truth plainly demanded, that lying fictions 
 and fabulous scriptures should, at least, be 
 joined with the true and genuine records of 
 the religion of the New Covenant, or it would 
 
 * 1 Tim. iv. 2. f 2 Tim. iv. 4. 
 
%H PREFACE. 
 
 have been impossible for the apostate Church 
 to fulfil those prophecies, by disregarding the 
 latter and paying devout attention to the for- 
 mer. That many therefore of those scrip- 
 tures, which form the most essential part of 
 the canon of the apostate Church, must be 
 fabulous and false, seems as certain, as that 
 the woi'd of God is true. 
 
 Strongly impressed with this apparently 
 inevitable consequence from those prophecies, 
 and dissatisfied with all the external evidence 
 which the case admits, he turned his attention 
 more particularly to those internal marks of 
 authenticity or spuriousness, which genuine 
 or fictitious scriptures must always necessarily 
 contain. And that attentive examination 
 brought him to the conclusions which he 
 here submits to public consideration. He 
 does this the more cheerfully, because the 
 subjects of discussion, like the Gospel of 
 Christ itself, are level to common capacities, 
 and intelligible to every person who will exert 
 his rational feiculties about tliem : for where 
 the detection of forgery and falsehood de- 
 pends upon gross and palpable inconsistencies 
 and contradictions, it is not peculiarly the 
 J-irovince of tbH^t critical skill which requires a 
 knowledge of the original langu^e of the 
 
PREFACE. Xm 
 
 •scriptures attainable to few ; but, when those 
 contradictions are pointed out, becomes the 
 proper business of the common sense of every 
 reader of even the vulgar translations. He 
 is fully persuaded, that nothing can so effectu- 
 ally amend and bless mankind, as a general, 
 rational comprehension and well-grounded 
 belief of the Gospel Covenant; and that 
 nothing can so much promote the cause of 
 Christian truth and piety, as the distinguish- 
 ing them from fabulous falsehood and impious 
 superstition. Unconnected for near thirty 
 years with any religious sect or party what* 
 soever, disapproving in every point of view 
 of the office of a teacher of so plain a thing 
 as Christianity, considered as a lucrative oc- 
 cupation, and much too far advanced in 
 life to have any temporal interest in view, 
 the Author trusts his mind has been per- 
 fectly unbiassed and impartial in its inve^* 
 ligations. But if he should liave deceived 
 himself, and be judged by others to be in the 
 wrong, still his errors, if found to be such, 
 may most easily be exposed and refuted ; and 
 no one will be better pleased than himself 
 with their just and candid refutation. Should 
 this, however, be attempted, he hopes it will 
 be effected in a more manly, rational manner, 
 
XIV PftSFACE. 
 
 than was adopted by the only two gentlemen 
 who th6ught proper to make any public at- 
 tack upon the first edition, :by clearly recon- 
 ciling the several objectionable passages, as 
 the scriptures really exist, withont recdrring 
 either to ^ny huriiau authoritjv or to a fanci- 
 ful transposition of paragraplis, or to hypo- 
 thetical systems unwarranted by the. Gospels 
 themselves; for^ by such means, a man of a 
 fertile imagination may possibly frame an 
 ideal history of Jesus, which may comprehend 
 the most incongruous circumstances, as geo- 
 metricians can contrive to draw a circle of 
 some dialneter .'or other through any three 
 points which lie not in a right line; but, if 
 such modes of interpreting scripture may be 
 allowed, the mofet ingenious novel-writer will 
 make the ablest commentator; and in removing 
 the difficulties of the evangelical histories; 
 will far surpass the eiforts of the most learned 
 doctors of Christendom* 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 INTRODUCTION, 
 '6ecti<m. Psge. 
 I. General remarks upon the contents of the Evangelical His- 
 tories, and tlie historical evidence of their authenticity* • 17 
 II. The only certain evidence of the truth of any Divine Re- 
 velation • • '21 
 
 III. Reasons why the testimony of those writers whom the Church 
 
 call Orthodox, cannot afford us satisfaction • ^ £S 
 
 IV, Further reasons for not admitting the testimony of the Fa- 
 
 thers of the Church, of the second and third centuries. . 30 
 V. Still greater defects in their testimony, derived from thexe- 
 ceived maxim of those schools of Philosophy in which 
 
 they had all been educated ...;.«•.. 33 
 
 VI. Reasons for preferring the Histories of Luke, and making 
 them the standard of comparison between the Evangelical 
 Histories ......,^, ,^ 
 
 Chap. I. — Gospel according to Luke* 
 
 I. Remarks on the style and composition of this Gospel— Coi;- , 
 rupted with sundry interpolations— The story of the herd 
 
 of swine 44 
 
 II. Interpolations in the Lord's Prayer — Baptism of Jesiis — 
 
 Temptation — And Transfiguration • *53 
 
 HI, One of greater importance in the two first chapters—Some 
 
 others of less moment *57 
 
 CHAPi II.— Gospe/ according to Luke continued, 
 I, Agreement between the internal and external evidence in 
 favour of Lulce*s Histories-— Supern?.tural testimony also 
 necessary to prove the truth' ©r any historian of a'divine 
 revelation . . ....". . .". . ..■.■.'..'.■.■, . :'."i;-.-., i, ', .','.".;".: . , aS 
 
 II. Miracles recorded In this Gospii' :^l^J:::i/:\:i:7::v. '% 
 
 ■ : ■ • ■• -Jf - ■::.:1(>7 (;"'-.i,'. "j-'-'j - 
 
 * The Sections in *he pages marked..tb4f 4* V'^'«^«<>*" if Mr^n.tf'.t^H^^ ; 
 
 but the fresh paragraph in wch, denotes where they ought to hayc heen in- 
 
XVI CONTENTS. 
 
 Section, ^ Pt'^t. 
 
 III. Prophecies — Two of the Baptist — Of fa#ting — Of the death 
 
 and resurrection of Jesus — Of the kingdom of God .... 89 
 IV. Destruction of Jeiiisalem — Parable of the mustard-seed and 
 leaven — Doctrine of atonement— Whether few shall be 
 saved — Answer .of Jesus to those who counselled him to 
 
 quit Galilee »101 
 
 V. The suddenness of the Jewish destruction — The unjust 
 Judge — General want of faith at Christ's conring-^Para- 
 ble of the ten pounds — Lamentation over Jerusalem- 
 Why these predictions could not be written after Jerusa- 
 lem was destroyed — Tlie husbandmen and vineyard — 
 Promise oi baptism with the Holy Ghost — Important 
 
 observations 116 
 
 VI. Review of the evidence in favour of this <jospel — Silas, 
 the real author of this History, and of the Acts of the 
 Apostles — Reflections on the evidence of the authenticity, 
 accuracy, and credibility of the two Histories of Silas or 
 Xuke - 132 
 
 Chap. III. — Gospel according to MaUheir. 
 
 " "I. General remarks — Not a translatioii from another language 
 — Not written till after Luke's — ^Nor before the second 
 
 century 145 
 
 %1. Observation respecting the two first chapters-r-The Au- 
 thor's genealogy of Jesus — Its inconsistency witlxhis own 
 purpose— Misapplication of the celebrated prophecy of 
 Isaiah — Ditto of the prophecy of Micah — ^Fable of the 
 magi and star — Ditto of Herod's massacre of the inno- 
 cents — Perversion of a prophecy of Hosea — Ditto of one 
 of Jeremiah — A fictitious prophecy not to be found — The 
 return from Egypt ^. ..♦•••••••• • 143 
 
 III. Remarks on the history of John's baptism — The author 
 Ignorant of the meaning of tlie kingdom of God — Direct 
 contradiction to Silas or Luke — Our Lord's forty days 
 fast and tem{)tation 161 
 
 IV. Instance of the author's imperfect knowledge of Palestine 
 
 — Contradiction to Luke — Decapolis — No such country — 
 Distribution of the JewisUterritory by the Romans*— Con- 
 cluding remarks • • . • • • ;^t t'^ri^V^ * t'« • . • . lOa 
 
contents; xyH 
 
 Ci!ap. IV .-^Gospei according to Matthew continued. 
 
 "Action. * -Pog^f 
 
 I. The Sermon upoii the Moiint— trnprobable that it was de- 
 lu'ered at such time and place — Its assertion respecting 
 the Law contradictory to the Prophets of both Covenants 
 — That the Lord's Prayer was taught at this time, incon- 
 sistent with Luke's History — Inconsistency of the direc- 
 tions given Tor fasting — Casting pearls before swine . • • • 1^ 
 11. Miracle of healing the Centurion's servant — Of the demons 
 in the herd of swine — Enumeration of the names of the 
 Iwelve Apostles — Kingdom of Heaven suffering violence, 
 and taken forcibly by violent men — Another misapplica- 
 tion of this writer of one of the old prophecies— -The au- 
 thor ignorant of the meaning of the sign which Jonah was 
 to the Ninevites i ......,;. 18^ 
 
 III. Remarks oh the parables of this writer compared with those 
 of Luke — Parable of the sower — Ditto of the man who 
 sowed good seed in his field — Two ditto transcribed from 
 Luke — Ditto of the merchant seeking goodly pearls — Pa.-. ^ 
 rable of the nfet cast ihto the sea • . . i . . . . . . ii . . . ..... 199 
 
 iV. Cause of the death of John the Baptist— -That rnan is defiied, 
 hot by that which goeth into his mouth, but that which 
 Cometh out — Parable of the king that took account of his 
 
 servants—Different kinds of eunuchs 20d 
 
 V. Parable of the householder hiring labourers into his vineyard 
 — Misappfehehsloh of the writer of Zechariah's meaning in 
 the words, ** an ass and a coltj the foal of an ass" — Pam- 
 bie of the maii whb had two sons — I*arable of the house- 
 holder who planted a vJneyarct aiid let it out — i?arable of 
 the king tvho made a Carriage for his son ... .J"^ •••,.• . 20$ 
 
 VI. Inconsistency df this writer with Luke, in the time"^ 
 signed for our Lord's nlaking Bis pathetic ejaculation 
 over Jerusalein— Parable of the ten virgins— Ditto' bf the 
 talents — This writer's description of the day of jutlgmeht 
 — History of the institution of the Lord's Supper, and it» 
 5 nconsistency with that of Luke ' .'.'.". .....,....'..... . . 2 19 , 
 
 ^H. Subseqii'snt contradictidns betwfeeh this writer and "Luke, ' 
 to the conclusion df his Crospel, which infallibly prove 
 that one of thcgi is flibulous and foUe .....,».»..,.,., 937 
 
-VVUll COKTENTS, 
 
 Section. , . , Pos^- 
 
 VIII, Miracles of Jesus recorded by this writer — ^Testimony of 
 the prophecies recorded in this Gospel — Prophecy of 
 the destruction of Jerusaleni . • • . ♦ .,.,.., f . t o.i§ 
 
 Chap, y .^^Gospel according to Mark. 
 
 I. General remarks — Style in which it is written — Its man- 
 ner of beginning— And contradictory conclusion — 
 
 •^ ISfiunieration of the nanies of the Apostles — parable 
 
 of the sower .........'...,,,... 2,56 
 
 II. That the Apostles anointed the sick they healed with oil — 
 Origin of extreme unction — ^Jesus curing a person deaf 
 and dumb — Inconsistency of this Gospel with both the 
 preceding, respecting the sign of the Prophet Jonas — 
 Jesus giving sight to a blind man — Prophecy of the re- 
 
 i ' "CcJrfjpehse of persecuted Christians, even in the present 
 
 Jife-^Predittioh respectiiig Peter's denying Tiis Master . • 2(5^ 
 
 Chap. Yl.*^Gospel accordwg to John* 
 
 r. Remq,rks on the style in which this Gospel is written— 
 Contradiction between this writer and Matthew, re- 
 ' specting John the Baptist — This writer's inconsistency 
 with Luke in his account of the first disciples of Jesus, 
 and of their motives for following him — Similar incon- 
 sistency respecting our Lord's driving the traders out 
 
 of the temple ♦-...» , l.'6r 
 
 II. 'I'he writer's assertion that Jesus by his disciples baptized 
 more persons than John, before John was cast into pri- 
 son — The discourse of Jesus with the woman of Sa- 
 maria— Assertion of our Lord, that other men labour- 
 ed, and that his disciples reaped the fruits of their 
 labour — The writer's confused account of the feasts of 
 the Jews — His ignorance that one of the Apostles was 
 the brother of Jesus — Inconsistency of this writer's ac- 
 count of the places of our Lord's residence with that 
 
 given us by Luke • • • • • • • 274 
 
 lit. His contradiction to Luke, in thp circumstances which 
 preceded, accompanied, and followed our Lord's cru- 
 cifixion . r • • • • • • • • ' ....,..,.., , ^84; 
 
CONTENTS. XIX 
 
 IV. Miracles and extraordinary acts of our Saviour, peculiar ta 
 
 this writer — The changing water into wine — Healing the 
 noblemaii"'s son at Capernaum — Miraculous efficacy of the 
 pool of Bethesda — Story of the woman taken in adultery — 
 Giving sight to a man born blind — The resurrection of 
 
 Lazarus 288 
 
 V. Nothing in this Gospel that can be deemed a prophecy, but 
 a few short sentences which seem to refer to futurity— 
 *' Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it 
 up" — That the hour would come when men should neither 
 woiship God in the mountain of Samaria, nor yet at Je- 
 rusalem — That the Jews, though they would not receive 
 him coming in his father's name, would receive another 
 Messiah, who should come in his own name — Our Lord^s 
 assertion, that if a man keep his saying, he shall never 
 see death — His promise to his disciples of divine inspira- 
 tion after his death — His assertion, that his disciples 
 should be immediately scattered, every one to his own 
 home, and should leave him alone • 299 
 
 Chap. VII.— Of the Epistles. 
 
 I. Reasons for extending this disquisition to several of the 
 
 Epistles— Epistle to the Romans 305 
 
 II. The EpistU to the Ephesians— And to the Colossians .... 312 
 
 III. The Epistle to the Philippians— To Titus — And to Phi- 
 
 lemon • 314, 
 
 IV. The Epistle to the Hebrews— And the Epistle of James . . 321 
 
 V. The first Epistle of Peter— Second Epistle of Peter— And 
 
 the Epistle of Jude 329 
 
 VT. The three Epistles attributed to the Apostle John— The 
 
 want of that internal testimony of the spirit of prophecy 
 
 in all these Epistles, which accompanies PauPs Epistles 
 
 to the Corinthians, Galatians, Thessalonians, and Timothy 332 
 
 VII. Reasons for objecting to the Epistles to the seven Churches 
 
 of Asia, introduced into the Book of the Apocalypse* • • • 336 
 CONCLUSION 340 
 
r.oloD ?: 
 
THE 
 
 DISSONANCE AND EVIDENCE 
 
 OF 
 
 THE EKAJVGELISTS 
 
 EXAMINED. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 SECTION I* 
 
 A PTER so many writers, some of them 
 ■^^ of great erudition and distinguished 
 abilities, in almost all ages of what is called 
 the Christian Church, have undertaken to 
 harmonize and shew the perfect agreement of 
 the four generally received Evangelists, and 
 to reconcile all the seeming differences in both 
 the facts and order of their several narrations; 
 it will undoubtedly appear the highest degree 
 of presumptuous arrogance to attempt now at 
 last to demonstrate, that so much learned and 
 ingenious labour hath been bestowed in vain. 
 Yet after all that hath been said and written 
 upon the subject, those Evangelical histories 
 contain such gross, irreconcileable contradic- 
 
IS THE DISSONANCE 01^ 
 
 tions, that no close reasoning, unprejudiced 
 mind can admit the truth and authenticity of- 
 them all. 
 
 It is an obvious axiom, that, in the inves- 
 tigation of the doctrines of Christianity, tlie 
 first necessary §tep is to inquire into the truth 
 and authenticity of those original writings in 
 which they are contained : but tlie misfor- 
 tune is, that nobody takes this important, 
 necessary step of the inquiry, in any firm and 
 satisfactory manijer. If \^^. ej^amine, for in- 
 stance, upon what grounds professed Chris- 
 tians of the present age ai'e convinced, that the 
 four Gospels (as thj^y ar-e usu^\ly called) were 
 really written by the mei^i whose names they 
 tjear, we are.re^eri^^djtgi^tlije.concumng.^ 
 mony of a,U the ecclesias.t|ical histprians and 
 divines from the agj^,of (^on^tantine to our o w n ; 
 sajn,d to the cons.ent^oi^ (^\^u the most formida- 
 ble ^dycrsariie^ of t%, Chjuvqh^ ^^Isijis, ^^or- 
 phyry, a^jui J^uli^u^ ^X'^R ^1^ ^J'P^^^^d the, (plpspels 
 to be vyritteii by tlios^, Apostles., and their dis- 
 ci pleSj to whom they ajT. universally attributed. 
 ;put, it nius^t be qb.Ssgived by tb^ wa3(, that th^^ 
 Consent o^ t^Qsg ^^^Ij: 9fl>:ersarit^]^ of Cbristi- 
 anity, is; ve^ry far from l;>eing, in any d^egree, a 
 proof of the point in qi^pstion. They w^re 
 aU,n)jich I0.9 gi;e^t ma,st?r3,,Q^ a^^u9lj|^|lj;^ja9^ 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. /T"^^ ^^^ 
 
 to see how greatly that very concess^op was 
 in their favour. And were not the aiitK&i' of 
 these pages convinced, as he really is, upon 
 better and firmer grounds^ of the truth and 
 divine authority of the revelation by Jesus 
 Christ; and had he an inclination to preju- 
 dice the gospel in the opinion of thinking men ; 
 he cannot imagine a stronger argument than 
 might be drawn against it, from the objection- 
 able, contradictory passages contained in those 
 books, on a supposition that they were all ac- 
 tually written by its first and most authorita- 
 tive teachers : but he has no object in view, 
 in this publication, besideshe investigation of 
 truth, and the promotion of moral virtue and 
 human happiness, by endeavouringto demon- 
 strate the sure and certain grounds upon which 
 the genuine religion of Christ is founded; 
 v/hich, he is persuaded, can only be effected by 
 clearing the pure and simple seed of the divine 
 word, not from any chaff, from any native in- 
 cumbrances of its own, for it has none, but 
 from the gross, fictitious varnish and filthy 
 rubbish with which idolatrous superstition 
 hath so long clogged and overwhelmed it, 
 that not only its natural beneficial powets of 
 vegetation remain suspended ; but it is even 
 become exceedingly difficult for mankind t^ 
 
 B 2 
 
^ THE DISSONANCB OF 
 
 discern what it is. For this purpose, after 
 the mature dehberatioii of a greater number 
 of years than the Roman Po^t thought fit to 
 prescribe for pubhcations of a less import- 
 ant kind, the author presumes to trace the 
 abuses and corruptions of Christianity to their 
 source; and to distinguish the truth of re- 
 vealed religion from the fables of credulous 
 superstition, in those very scriptures which 
 have be^n hitherto regarded as being all of 
 equal authority and credibility, and as con- 
 taining, in common, the fundamental truths 
 and essential doctrines of the Gospel of Jesus 
 Christ. 
 
 When we consult that succession of eccle- 
 siastical winters, to which we are referred, 
 from the establishment of the Church by Con- 
 stantine, we find they received the four Gos- 
 pels, which they have transmitted tons, upon 
 the authority of those professed Christians of 
 the second and third centuries, whom they 
 have thought fit to denominate orthodox; 
 and w ho, rejecting all those numerous Evan- 
 gelical histories which Luke informs us were 
 written iu his time, admitted and preserved 
 tliese four alone, and attributed them to 
 the authors under whose names they no\f 
 appear. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 21 
 
 This, it is apprehended, is a true, impar- 
 tial state of the historical evidence, that 
 Matthew and John the apostles, and Mark 
 and Luke disciples of the apostohc age, were 
 the writers of the several histories which bear 
 their name. But this evidence, satisfactory 
 as it hath been thought to be, is really at- 
 tended with such suspicious circumstances as 
 make it liable to much reasonable distrust ; 
 for either the orthodox religion established by 
 the Emperor Constantine, is a blasphemous, 
 idolatrous superstition, an apostasy from the 
 Gospel of Jesus Christ, which it has sup- 
 planted, and, of course, the Fathers of that 
 Church of the preceding centuries, were by 
 no means fit judges of the genuine Evangeli- 
 cal writings; or else the Gospel itself cannot 
 be admitted to be true. For thus stands the 
 case. 
 
 II. A DIVINE Revelation, being a super- 
 natural interposition of the Deity in human 
 affairs, cannot, by any prudent person, be 
 acknowledged as such upon common and 
 merely natural evidence of any sort whatever. 
 To gain it admission and belief at first, it 
 must ever be attested by a display of miracu-. 
 
 B 3 
 
32 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 lous supernatural power, as in the case of 
 Moses and the prophets under the Jewish 
 Law, and of Jesus and his apostles under the 
 Gospel ; and to all future ages, prophecy, 
 the completed prediction of events out of the 
 power of human sagacity to foresee, is the 
 only supernatural testimony that can be al^ 
 leged in proof of the authenticity of any Re-» 
 velation. To those, for example, of the pre- 
 sent age, who have any doubt about the cer-^ 
 tainty of the Christian Revelation, s^nd conse- 
 quently of the truth and authenticity of those 
 histories in which it is recorded, it cannot be 
 of the least use to allege the mimculous acts 
 there, and there only, related to have been 
 performed by the first preachers of that Re- 
 velation ; because those acts making a very 
 considerable part of the narration, tiie autho- 
 rity and credibility of the histories must be 
 firmly established, before the miracles con- 
 tained in them can reasonably' be admitted 
 as r^al facts. But with prophecy the case is 
 widely different. The testimony it adduces^: 
 deperjds not ia the least upori the veracity or 
 credibility of the writer, but every man ca-^ 
 pable of iinderstanding the meaning of the 
 predictiop, and of comparing it with the com 
 
Ti^E EVANGELISTS. H 
 
 responding events whereby it hath been 6f is 
 conipleated, is a competent judge of the de- 
 gree of proof it affords. 
 
 Prophecy', therefore, is by far the most sa- 
 tisfactory, d.nd the only lasting, supernatu- 
 ral evidence of the truth of any Revelation. 
 To this the Jewish, to this ihfe Cliristian Reve- 
 lation both appeal, as the great criterion oi 
 iheiY divine origin and authority. In the old 
 Testanient, God, by his prophet Isaiah,* de- 
 clares this to be the proper distinguishing 
 mark between false fdigions and the true, 
 ^'g^Produce your cause, suith the Lord ; bring 
 " forth your stroiig reasons, saith the King of 
 " Jacob. Let them bring them forth, and 
 " shew us what shall happen ; let them shew 
 " the former things what they be, that Wi 
 " may consider tKem, and know the latter end 
 " of them; or declare us things for to come, 
 " shew the things thai art io come hereafter, 
 " that W6 may know thai ye are gods,'* And 
 agaiuj-f- " Tlnls saith the Lord, — I am the 
 " first and I am the last, and besides me there 
 " is no God. And who, as I, shall call and 
 *^ shall declare it, and set it in order for me, 
 " since I appointed the ancient People? And 
 " the things that art doming tnd shall come, Ut 
 
 B 4 
 
24 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 " them shew unto them" with many other pas- 
 sages of the hke import. In Deuteronomj ,^ 
 prophecy is particularly referred to as the only 
 satisfactory proof of the divine mission of the 
 mediator of the new covenant, who is there 
 expressly promised to the Jewish nation. " If 
 " thou say in thine heart, how shall we know 
 *^ the word which the Lord hath not spoken ? 
 ^' when a prophet speaketh in the name of 
 " the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come 
 " to pass, that is the thing which the Lord 
 " hath not spoken, but the prophet hath 
 " spoken it presumptuously: tiiou shalt not 
 " be afraid of him." And in the New Testa- 
 ment, in conformity to this criterion given us 
 by Moses, we are assured vipon the highest 
 authority ,-|- that " the testimony of Jesus is 
 *' the spirit of prophecy." We are necessarily 
 reduced to this alternative, either to adiuit 
 that, therefore, those predictions contained in 
 the New^ Testament, which relate to the pie- 
 sent time and to times ahead}'' past, have 
 been fulfilled, or that the Gospel itself is an 
 imposture and of po authority at all. 
 . .Now the obvious purport of almost ^11 the 
 prophecies of the Gospel, as they are dis^ 
 parsed indiflferent scriptures of the N^w Tes-^ 
 
 *^. xvjii. ^1 aad ^2, f Apoc. xix. 10. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS/ 25 
 
 tament, is to predict tke circumstances of a 
 most unhappy ebrruption of the genuine reli- 
 gion of Jesus, which began to operate even 
 in the days of the apostles themselves, and 
 was to end in an entire apostasy from the 
 truths of the Gospel, and the establishment 
 of a f^lse, fabulous, irrational, idolatrous, 
 blasphemous superstition, first by the civil 
 power of the Roman Empire, under some 
 signal change in its circumstances, and after- 
 wards by the civil power of all those separate 
 western kingdoms, into which that Empire, 
 at its dissolution, was to be divided* And the 
 same prophecies assure us, that the true reli- 
 gion of Christ would be no where generally 
 received, till after the same civil powers which 
 estabhshed it, shall have abolished and de- 
 sti'oyed the Anticliristian Church thus pre- 
 dicted. : Unless therefore the testimony of 
 these prophecisss fail us entirely, and the- Gos- 
 pel itself be ftilse, the orthodox Church estab- 
 lished by Constantine, which is now and has 
 been ever since his time, in some modification 
 of it orother, the only religion established by 
 the civil- :pOweTSy of Europe, is the very object 
 of these prophecies, the completion of the pre- 
 dicted apostasy :/or no other is to be found.* 
 
 * if^there'be, let 'file zrealous advocatei'of tht doctrines of that 
 Church, andhe^ canonical'"sCTiptnreis> point'lt out to us j or if that be 
 
•2« THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 III. For this reason, to an impartial inves- 
 tigator of the truth of Christianity, the mere 
 testimony of any writer whom the long estab- 
 lished European Church hath denominated 
 orthodox^ is so far from affording satisfactory 
 proof of the authenticity of the several books 
 of the New Testament, that, unless it be con- 
 firmed by evidence of another kind, it eveii 
 affords, not merely strong grounds of suspi- 
 cion, but absolute proof, that they are not, 
 either in the whole, or, at least, in some 
 parts, the works of the apostles or primitive 
 disciples of Jesus Christ: because part of the 
 prophetic description of the antichristian 
 Church is, that its members should* turn away 
 their ears from the truths and listen to fahlesj 
 and believe falsehoods; circumstances of the 
 prediction which, taken together, cannot have 
 been fulfilled, unless fables and falsehoods 
 are, at least, intermixed w^th disregarded 
 truth, in those writings to which the Church 
 of Constantine hath, in all ages, appealed as 
 containing the grounds and foundation of 
 every doctrine she hath taught. What ren- 
 ders this still more probable is, that before 
 the invention of printing it \vas very easy for 
 
 iicA'm't'heir power, let tlieMhahcstly and caiidi^ly yield to the force 
 f f arguments founded upon the infallible word of the God of truth. 
 * 2 Timt iv. 4; and 1 Tim. iv. i? ^C 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 2r 
 
 artful or superstitious copyists, not only to in- 
 terpolate authentic writings with such altera- 
 tions and additions as accorded with their 
 own creduUty or cunning, but even to pro- 
 duce entiiH3 pieces of their own or otliers' for- 
 gery under the name of any writer they 
 pleased. And this practice was actually so 
 common amongst several who called them* 
 selves Christians, in the second and succeed- 
 ing centuries, that if what we call the scrip- 
 tures of the New Testament were not so tam^ 
 pered with, they are almost the only writings 
 upon the same subject of those early times, 
 which have escaped free. 
 
 Archbishop Wake took the pains to collect 
 all the writings extant, except those that hav6 
 been received into the canon of the church, 
 which are attributed to any christian writer^ 
 within the first half of the second century j 
 and every competent, impartial judge must 
 agree with the timly learned and candid Pro^ 
 fessor Mosheim, that, of the whole collec- 
 tion, there is no satisfactory proof that any 
 one piece worth notice, is really the work of 
 the writer whose name it bears, except the 
 lirst Epistle of Clemens the Roman : and 
 even that hath been evidently corrupted by 
 
f8 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 an interpolation of the absurd Pagan fable of 
 the Phoenix. Irenaeus informs us* that the 
 different sectarists of those early ages, had 
 pubhshed an innumerable multitude of apo- 
 cryphal and spurious scriptures to astonish 
 the weak and ignorant. And TertuHian-f* 
 mentions that an Asiatic priest had been de- 
 tected in ascribing to Paul a work entirely 
 his own. And that the writings of Luk^, on 
 many accounts by far the most respectable 
 historian in the canonical collection, did not 
 escape untouched by the hands of the inter- 
 polators, even after the second century, we 
 have the clearest conviction; forOrigen tells 
 us that s(^veral believers in his time were of- 
 fended with that part of Luke's Gospel, 
 wherein our Lord promises the penitent thief 
 upon the cross that he should that day be 
 with him in Paradise^ as being absolutely in- 
 consistent with the history of our Lord's own 
 circumstances and situation from his death to 
 his resurrection ; and declared, that passage 
 was not in the older copies, but a late addition 
 of some of the interpolators.:]; And though 
 Origen himself does not agree with them, 3^et 
 
 •* Lib. I. c. xvli. f De Bap. sec. xvii. 
 
 „J fahovcyoi^ See his Comm. on John. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 39 
 
 they were assuredly in the right ; for neither 
 Justin, nor Ireneeus, nor Tertullian, take the 
 least notice of so very remarkable a circum- 
 stance, though they have quoted almost every 
 other passage of Luke relating to the cruci- 
 fixion ; and though Tertulhan in particular has 
 written a treatise upon the soul, in which he 
 expressly considers the different opinions con- 
 cerning the intermediate state of the souls of 
 good and bad men between their death 
 and resurrection, repeatedly quotes the pa- 
 rable of the rich man and Lazarus, from 
 which, as being only a parable constructed 
 upon the popular notions of the Jews, no sa- 
 tisfactory argument can be deduced ; whereas 
 that single passage of Luke's history, had it 
 existed in his time, must have settled the 
 point beyond all dispute: and consequently 
 it could not have been omitted by him when 
 writing on such a subject. It is clear there- 
 fore that as the doctrine of an intermediate 
 state of Purgatory and Paradise gained 
 ground in the orthodox church after the se- 
 cond century, that particular passage was in- 
 terpolated to give the sanction of holy scrip- 
 ture to the newly received doctrine ; as Sir 
 Isaac Newton has proved to the conviction 
 
80 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 of every unprejudiGed* mind^ the famous se-^ 
 venth verse of John's first Epistle was inserted 
 some ages later, to comitenance another long 
 controverted doctrine of the same Church, 
 the Trinity in Unity. 
 
 IV. The whole weight of the historical 
 evidence in favour of the authenticity of the 
 four Gospels, amounts to no more than thisy 
 that those books, in the main of their con- 
 tents, %vere extant in the latter end of the se- 
 cond century, and were received by all the 
 Christian writers, w^iose works have been 
 suffered to come down to us, as the writings 
 of the several apostles and apostohc men 
 "whose names they bear. But besides the 
 suspicious circumstance already mentioned, 
 arising from the prophecies of the Gospel, 
 this evidence is defective in such essential 
 points as render it wholly unsatisfactory and 
 insufficient to prove any matter of conse- 
 quence, even in the ordinary courts of jus- 
 tice: for neither the competency nor veracity 
 of the witnesses can be depended on. 
 
 * Even the prejudiced and uncandid must surely, now, be si- 
 lenced, at least, by the learned and ingenious letters of Mr. Porson 
 to Archdeacon Travis. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. St 
 
 To convince me, for instance, that histo- 
 ries recording such very extraordinary, use- 
 less, ill-supported, improbable facts as are 
 contained in the Gospels of Matthew and 
 John, are really the works of those apostles, 
 and not either some of the many spurious 
 productions with which, we learn from Ire- 
 neeus, that early age abounded, calculated to 
 a.stonish the credulous and susperstitious, ot 
 else writings of authors, of the same ^ge, who 
 were themselves infected with the grossest su- 
 perstitious credulity; of what use can it be 
 %o adduce the testimony of the very few- 
 writers of the same or the next succeeding age, 
 when the very reading their wofks shews me 
 that they themselves were tainted with that 
 same superstitious credulity of which I sus- 
 pect the real authors of the histories in ques- 
 tion ? When one* of them illustrates and 
 pleads for the toleration of the orthodox doc- 
 trine of the generation of the Word by the hea- 
 then Emperors, because of its resemblance 
 to the fabulous origin of their own Deities 
 Mercury and Minerva ; and justifies the doc- 
 trine of tlie incarnatifiri by its siinila^rity to the 
 births of Esculapius and tjei'cuksy ^nd tha 
 other illustrious Godr-meu of pagaij: oiy tUpio- 
 
 * Justift Martyr, £^29^-^ h 
 
52 THE DISSONANCE OF* 
 
 gy ; and accounts for this similarity betweert 
 tlie orthodox doctrines ^nd the lables of the 
 Poets, by asserting that the Pdets delivered 
 them through the inspiration of Demons and 
 evil geniuses, in order to prejudice the world 
 against the reception of those orthodox tenets, 
 when the time should come for their promul-* 
 gation. When another,* describing the Mil- 
 lennium, gravely assures me, upon the autho- 
 rity of the apostle John himself, not only that 
 every productive part of the vine from the 
 stem to the bunch, and of wheat from the 
 root to the ear, shall be multiplied by ten 
 thousand, every bunch containing ten thou- 
 sand grapes, and every ear ten thousand grains, 
 but that every grain of wheat shall yield ten 
 pounds of pure Jine flour ^ and every grape four 
 hogsheads of wine, and that when any of the 
 Saii}fs shall be going to gather one of these 
 bunches, another will cry out, I am a better 
 bunch, take me and bless God by me. When a 
 third'f asserts, upon his own knowledge, that 
 the corpse of one dead Christian, at the first 
 breath of the pi^ayer made by the Priest, on 
 occasion of its own funeral, removed its hands 
 from its sides, into the usual posture of asuppli-- 
 CGf;if, and, when the service was ended, restored 
 
 * Irenaeus Lib. v, c. xxxiii. f TertulUan, De, ^n. c. U. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 83 
 
 them again to their former situation; and re- 
 lates as a fact, which he and all the ortho- 
 dox of his time credited, that the body of 
 another Christian already interred moved it- 
 self to one side of the grave^ to make room for 
 another corpse, which was going to be laid bi/ 
 it. It is an obvious rule in the admission of 
 evidence in any cause whatsoever, that the 
 more important the matter to be determined 
 by it is, the more unsullied and unexcep- 
 tionable ou2;ht the characters of the witnesses 
 to be. And when no court of justice, in de- 
 termining a question of fraud to the amount 
 of a few pounds, will admit the testimony of 
 witnesses v/ho are themselves notoriously con- 
 victed of the same crime of which the de- 
 fendant is accused; how can it be expected, 
 that any reasonable, unprejudiced person 
 should admit similar evidence to be of weight, 
 in a case of the greatest importance possible, 
 not to himself only, but to the whole human 
 race? 
 
 V. But there is still a greater defect in the 
 testimony of those early writers, than even 
 their superstitious credulity. I mean their 
 disregard of honour and veracity in what- 
 
S4 ^TW I?lSSONANCE OF 
 
 e\^er concerned the cause of their particu- 
 lar system. 
 
 Tiiough Luke assures us, that many, even 
 before he wrote his histories for the use of his 
 friend Theophihis, had written upon the same 
 subject, who of course were chiefly converts 
 from amongst the Jews; and many more 
 must have written afterwards, some of them, 
 without doubt, hke Timothy, educated from 
 their infancy in the rehgion of Jesus Christ, 
 as taught by the Apostles themselves, whose 
 writings, on that very account, would have 
 been particularly valuable: so singularly in- 
 dustrious have the Fathers and succeeding 
 Sons of the orthodox Church been in destroy -r 
 ing every writing upon the subject of Christie 
 anity, which Ihey could not by some means 
 or other apply to the support of their own 
 blasphemous superstition, that no work of 
 importance of any Christian writer within the 
 three 'first centuries hath been permitted to 
 (•ome down to us^ except those books which 
 they have thqught fit to adopt and transmit 
 to: us^ as the canon of apostolic scripture; 
 and the works of a few other writers, who 
 w^re all of them, not only converts from Pa- 
 ganism, but men who had been educated and 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. ^9 
 
 >veU instructed iu the philosophic schools of 
 the later Platonists and Pythagoreans. 
 
 The established maxim of those schools 
 was, that it was not lawful only, but com- 
 mendable, to deceive and assert falsehoods, 
 for the sake of promoting, what they thought, 
 the cause af truth and piety : and the effects 
 of this maxim, which was soon adopted by 
 the orthodox and other sects of nominal Chris- 
 tians, produced that multiplicity of false q,nd 
 spurious writings, wherewith the latter end 
 of the second and succeeding centuries 
 abounded- For, as Professor Mosheim hath 
 very justly observed,* ^^ the Christian teach-^ 
 ^' ers, who had been instructed in the schools 
 " of Sophists and Rhetoricians, transferred 
 " tlie arts of their masters to the Christian 
 " discipline, and adopted that mode of con- ' 
 " tending with their adversaries, in which 
 ^' truth was pot 30 much their aim as victory j 
 ^' and they were confirmed in this practice 
 " by the Platonists, who asserted, that a man 
 '^ did no wrong who supported truth, when 
 ^' hard pressed, by deceit and lies. This vi- 
 ^' cious eagerness, not to vanquish their ad- 
 ^^ versaries by reason and fair argument, but 
 • ^' life ;Ov^rthrow and confound them,'' conti- 
 
 * Hist. Eccl. 8jb5c. III. p. 2. c. iii. 
 
 :■.. . C ^ ' . 
 
.S6 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 nues the Professor, " produced so many 
 " books, falsely attributed to persons of great 
 " eminence and renown. For, since great 
 " part of mankind are guided more by autho- 
 " rity than by reason, or the word of God 
 " itself, they thought it their best way to coun- 
 " terfeit the authority of writers of the great- 
 " est renown, to oppose to their antagonists." 
 There is also another well-known, incon- 
 testable proof of the deceit and falsehood of 
 the orthodox Christians of early times, of 
 which every person in the least conversant 
 with the ecclesiastical history of those times, 
 must be convinced — their pretended power 
 of working miracles. From the history of 
 the first age of the Gospel dispensation, as re- 
 corded in the Acts of the Apostles, we learn 
 that the supernatural power of working mira- 
 icles, which could onl}^ be intended to gain 
 the new religion- attention from the world, 
 and to be a pi'esent testimony of its divine 
 origin and authority, till the more lasting and 
 more satisfactory proof of completed pro- 
 phecy could take place, was communicated 
 only two ways ; first, by the signal, miraculous 
 eftusion of the holy inspiration, whereof there 
 were but two instances, the one general, at 
 the feast of Penteccst, which followed our 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. dT 
 
 Lord's ascension; the other particular, in the 
 house of Cornehus : and, secondly, by the 
 lai/ing on of the hands of the Apostles, a pri- 
 vilege confined, as appears from the story of 
 Simon the Magician, and other circumstances, 
 solely to the persons of the Apostles them- 
 selves. And as there is no record of their 
 ever delegating, or of their having the power 
 to delegate, this privilege to any other per- 
 sons, it is manifest, that all the supernatural 
 effects of that divine inspiration which was 
 vouchsafed to the Christians of the apostolic 
 aoe, must have ceased and determined with 
 the lives of Christians of that generation; that 
 is, before the expiration of the first half of 
 tijjs second century. Yet it is w^ell known, 
 that both the Fathers of the orthodox Church 
 of the latter half of that century, and of the 
 third, and the members of the same Church, 
 after it w^as established by Constantine, dur- 
 ing several succeeding centuries, pretended 
 to the supernatural power of working mira- 
 cles. But so indeed it was predicted* of the 
 antichristian apostasy, that it should estab- 
 lish itself Z>j/ lying wonders^ and deceive the 
 world hy falsehood and pretended miracles, 
 
 * 2 Thess, ii. 9. &c. and Apoc. xiii. 14rf 
 
 c 3 
 
38 THE DISSONANCE CF 
 
 Since, then, the external evidence of the au^ 
 thenticity of the four Evangelical histories^ is 
 so very unsatisfactory to an unprejudiced 
 mind; a rational inquirer into the truth of 
 the Christian revelation, will consider tho- 
 iroughly the internal evidence of veracity and 
 authority which the histories themselves af^ 
 ford. For different composers of false, ficti- 
 tious narratives, will, almost inevitably, be 
 found frequently inconsistent with themselves^ 
 or with each other, and contradictory to ob- 
 vious truth and probability. 
 
 Vl. Ik this investigation^ as the Gt)spei 
 attributed to Matthew stands first in the ca* 
 Bonical collection; as it is said to have been 
 written by him, an eye*witness of what h^ 
 records, by much the first in order of lime, 
 viz. about eight years after our Saviour's ciu- 
 cifixion; whereas Luke's appears to have 
 been written at least twenty-height years after 
 that event; it should seem most , regular to 
 begin with that, and make it a sort of stan- 
 dard, by which we might compare the other 
 Ihree: but the very reading over the histories 
 th€mselves in thici original, with aiiy critical 
 •attention^ seems to render this iiiipossiblcc 
 
THE EVANGEXISTS. ;; 
 
 For it is to be observed, that the Gospels ac- 
 cording to Matthew and Mark, contain not 
 the slightest insinuation that their authors 
 'were apostles of Jesus Christ, or even men of 
 the apostohc age; whilst the writer called 
 Luke professes himself to have been a fellow- 
 traveller of Paul ; and is the author of two 
 distinct histories, which, if w^e except some 
 interpolations of the fx^^mpyoi, the ready-fin- 
 gered scribes of those times, which appear 
 not difficult to be distinguished by an accu- 
 rate, attentive reader, are perfectly rational^ 
 probable, and consistent, not only with themv 
 selves and with each other, but also with all 
 other histories of the same thiies. That these 
 histories were originally written by Luke in 
 the language in which we have received them, 
 is also unanimously asserted by all the writers 
 'of Christian antiquity. But it is not so with 
 the Gospel attributed to ]\Jatthew. The only 
 wiiters who inform us that he vvrote any evan~ 
 gelical history, assure us he wrote it in He- 
 brew; and, one of the earliest, that he wrote 
 it when Peter and Paul were preaching the 
 Gospel and founding the Church at Rome ; 
 that is, at the Greek Calends ; for there is no 
 sufficient reason to induce us to believe, that; 
 
 c 4 
 
to THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 Peter, peculiarly the apostle to the Jews, as 
 Paul was to the Gentiles, was ever at Rome : 
 at least, he certainly was not there -when 
 Paul first went to Rome, in the beginning of 
 Nero's reign ; and yet we learn from the Acts, 
 that then Paul founded the Christian Church 
 at Rome, when he preached the Gospel there 
 for two years, in his ow^n hired house. And 
 if we inquire how the Gospel received as 
 Matthew's, came to be in Greek, if he wrote 
 it in Hebrew; the same waiters inform us, 
 that it was afterwards translated into Greek: 
 but we find, nobody knows when, w^here, or 
 T)y whom. So far are they also from assuring 
 us, that any one person, w^ho understood both 
 languages, had compared the translation with 
 the original Hebrew, and certified its fidelity 
 and correctness, that they do not even afford us 
 any satisfactory evidence, that such an origi- 
 nal copy was ever seen by any person capa- 
 ble of reading it. Surely, mankind are very 
 easy of belief, in whatsoever is offered them 
 under the pretended sanction of religion! 
 otherwise they could never, under such cir- 
 cumstances, have been satisfied, that the 
 Greek book which bears his name was really 
 a correct and faithful translatimi of the He^ 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 41 
 
 brew Gospel of Matthew, and have acqui- 
 esced in it for so many centuries, as the words 
 of divine inspiration, even if it had been 
 certain that Matthew actually Avrote such a 
 Gospel. 
 
 But a critical attention to the language of 
 the Greek writing itself, compared with that 
 of Luke's histories, seems sufficient to con- 
 vince any impartial reader, that it cannot be 
 a translation from any uniform original ; that 
 it must have been written long after Luke's 
 second history, and Mark s after that ; that 
 both of them vvxre of later date than Jose- 
 phus's history, most probably not earlier than 
 the latter end of Trajan's reign, or beginning 
 of Adrian's ; and that the writer of what we 
 call Matthew's Gospel, is so far from being 
 an i\postle, that his ignorance, both of the 
 geography of Palestine, and of the customs 
 of the Hebrew people, shew that he was 
 not a Jew. To the same purpose might be 
 alleged, his not understanding the prophecies 
 of the Jewish scripture, particularly those 
 apphed by him in the first and second chap- 
 ters : but as one of those he has quoted is an 
 obvious forgery, existing in no part of the Old 
 Testament, and since it is not possible that a 
 
42 tut i^issonAnci: of 
 
 tvritei* who had the whole of the othci* pro* 
 |>hecies before him, either in the original or 
 the Greek translation, could misunderstand 
 their real meaning, ^nd not be conscious that> 
 if he had quoted an>^ one of them entirely, it 
 would have appeared to have had no relation 
 to the subject of his history ; the maimed^ 
 partial quotation, which he has given from 
 each, must have been done designedly, and 
 with intent to deceive those who were unac- 
 quainted with the Jewish scriptures : and 
 therefore the author was assuredly one of 
 those many champions of Orthodoxy with 
 which the second and succeeding centuries 
 abounded, who thought it allowable to sup- 
 port the religious, system he had adopted, 
 even by fraud and falsehood. 
 
 If the reader has patience enough to sustain 
 the shock, which these assertions wdll most 
 probably give to his earliest formed preju- 
 dices, and to peruse the following pages with 
 a candid dispassionate mind, *it is hoped he 
 will be convinced, that, new and harsh as 
 they may seem, they are far from being rash 
 and unfounded ; though in this place they 
 are' anticipated, merely as reasons for giving 
 the preference to the histories of Luke, wdiich 
 
THE EVANGBLISTiS. 43 
 
 were certainly first in order ^f time ; and for 
 making them the standard of comparison be- 
 tween the several Evangelical histories. We 
 will begin therefore with the Gospel accord- 
 ing to Luke ; and examine the iiiternal evi- 
 dence which it affords of its oW«n, or ^of" the 
 aUthenticit}' of the others. 
 
CHAPTER I. 
 
 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO LUKE, 
 
 SECTION I, 
 
 JN this investigation, the first thing that pre- 
 sents itself to our observation in this Gos- 
 pel> is the style and language in which it is writ- 
 ten ; which in both Luke's histories is, in ge- 
 neral, not only pure and unexceptionable, 
 but the diction and composition of the para- 
 bles and speeches recorded by him, are so just 
 and elegant, that, independently of the sub- 
 jects on wliich he writes, as hath before been 
 remarked by much abler critics, he well de- 
 serves to be reckoned amongst the fine writ- 
 ers of the Greek language. But the found- 
 ers of the orthodox faith of the second cen- 
 tur}^ were so ready at interpolating genuine, 
 as well as at forging spurious writings, that 
 we must not take it for granted, that the 
 whole of what is received as Luke's histories, 
 is in every part and passage just what he 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 45 
 
 wrote. I have already mentioned one famous 
 passage, respecting a paradise, and the rea- 
 sons why I think it a manifest interpolation. 
 There are also some others, in each of his 
 histories, which are liable to much reasona- 
 ble distrust. Such, for instance, in his Gos- 
 pel, is the story of the demoniac possessed 
 by a legion of demons, who petitioned and 
 were permitted to enter into the herd of 
 swine ; and, in the Acts of the Apostles, the 
 passage w^hich says, that diseases and luna- 
 cies were cured by handkerchiefs or aprons 
 brought from Paul's body. In the first, there 
 is every circumstance of improbability, and 
 of inconsistency with .the rest of the history, 
 that can well be imagined ; for Luke repeat- 
 edly speaks of what was then called by the 
 ignorant, superstitious vulgar, being possessed 
 of demons^ and in more modern terms, being 
 bezmtched^ as bodily diseases, which they un- 
 doubtedly were, and calls, what was termed 
 casting out the demon^ healing the patient ; 
 the exclamations therefore recorded by him 
 in other cases, w^ere evidently the ravings of 
 the lunatics ; and no preternatural cause of 
 the disease is insinuated as subsisting, and 
 acting, after the cure was effected: but in tliis 
 story of the demoniac of Gadara, tlu3 num is 
 
40 THE DISSONANei^ 5)F 
 
 ^akl, not, as when other demcmriaqsar^ men-* 
 tioned, to have an umlean spirit^ :\yv\t, tj| ham 
 mamj demons. These, demons al^o, «^ ggents, 
 quite- distinct from the m^an, hol^^'u verse 
 with- Jesus, andy having obtained histyje^'nus- 
 sion-, enter into and dcs.troy an whole iierdqf 
 swine. \ ; I 
 
 :Strong objection to the vemeity ^f this 
 fcitor}^ have, been frequently urgqdv bothifrom 
 the great .improbability of Jewish people 
 keeping herds of $wine, and ftom the uni- 
 versally benevol^Bt, in$tea<l;of jpjqrious cha- 
 racter, of our Lord himself irfeLi^tijere appeaj 
 to occur still stronger objections against it, 
 from the history itself ; and suc^i asinay well 
 warrant a conclusion, that the whole passage 
 was interpolated in the second centurj^ Fo-r 
 in the preceding part of Luke's narrative, we 
 fmd our Lord was. at Capernaum, on the 
 western, side of ,tli€ Lake or Sea of Galilee ; 
 ^nd, in the eighth chapter, he takes ship with 
 liis disciples, to go unto the other ^ide of the 
 Lake, without doubt, to preach the Gospel to 
 those parts of Palestine which were situated 
 en the eastern side ; but, according to this 
 most extraordinary story of the demoniac 
 and the herd of swine, almost as soon as he 
 was landed on the eastern shqre, the Gadat** 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 47 
 
 renes, terrified and alarmed by the injurious 
 though miraculous destruction of their swine, 
 entreated him to leave their coasts : sand he 
 accordingly went up into the ship, and returned 
 hack again to Capernaum. In Galilee, there- 
 fore, on the western side of the Lake, he ought 
 to be found in the following part of the his- 
 tory ; yet, in the very next chapter, we are 
 plainly told, without the slightest insinua- 
 tion of his having crossed the Lake again, 
 that he was on the eastern side of the Lake ; 
 for from thence he sent out his twelve Apos- 
 tles, and thither they I'eturned to him again : 
 because, immediately on their return, he took 
 them aside into a desert place helonging to tjte 
 fHy Bethsaida , which we learn from Jose- 
 phus,^ w^ho, having had the command of the 
 forces of the Jews in that district, must have 
 been perfectly acquainted with the situation 
 of ever}^ town upon the Lake, was on the east- 
 ern side-j- of the Sea of Galilee. If then this 
 very exceptionable miracle be an intei'pola- 
 tion, and not part of the original writing of 
 Luke, the narrative proceeds consistently 
 and regularly: but if it be taken as authen- 
 tic, there is such a geographical conftisioii 
 
 * jQSephus,p. 1066. Ed. Hadspn. 
 t See Josephus, Ant i;ib.'''3e^&.*i!^ iSt! 
 
4a THE DISSONANCE OP 
 
 and disorder in this part of the history^ as oc- 
 curs no where else in tliis author s works ; and 
 such as can neither be allowed, nor indeed 
 suj3posed, in an historian, who, writing upon a 
 subject of the greatest importance, sets out 
 with professing to write accurately and in 
 order. 
 
 There is, however, another circumstance in 
 this story of the demoniac, as also in the pas- 
 sage cited as objectionable in the Acts of the 
 Apostles, which, if considered as it deserves^ 
 appears very satifactorily to evince the spu- 
 riousness of both passages, and even to point 
 out nearly the date of their interpolation: 
 ^vhich is, that the word legion in the first, and 
 the Avords aprons and handkerchiefs^ in the 
 second, are not Greek, but Latin words 
 written in Greek characters. 
 
 When different and distant nations, b}^ the 
 means either of conquest or commerce, have 
 much and frequent intercourse with each 
 otherj they must of necessity soon adopt the 
 proper names of many places and persons, 
 and also of coins, and perhaps of some mea- 
 sures, in use amongst each other ; but in all 
 other cases, where the words of one language 
 are capable of being rendered by correspond- 
 ing words of the other, the writers in the one 
 
THE EVANGELISTS^ 4^ 
 
 will not adopt the words of the other and use 
 them as their own, especially where the cha- 
 racters, in which the two languages are writ- 
 ten, are totally different, till after a great- 
 length of time, and a concurrence of many 
 particular ' circumstances, have introduced 
 such a custom. And, with respect to the 
 Greek and Latin languages in particular, the 
 Romans themselves acknowledged the Greeks 
 to be so superior to them in the arts and sci- 
 ences, and their language so much more 
 copious and expressive than their own, 
 that for many ages after their first inter- 
 course with the nations who spoke Greek, 
 instead of the Greeks introducing Latin 
 words into their language, the Roman writ- 
 ers were continually adding to their na- 
 tive tongue, by the adoption of words and 
 phrases from the Greek. It is not probable, 
 therefore, that common Latin words were 
 'adopted into the Greek language by any, and 
 still less so by good writers, till after the arms 
 and arrogant haughtiness of the Romans, and 
 the servile adulation of the conquered pro- 
 vinces, had been carried to their greatest 
 height ; that is, till the latter end of the reign 
 of Trajan, or beginning of the second cen- 
 tury of the Christian aera. The conquests of 
 
^0. Tm msSONANCE OF 
 
 Rome reached their utmost extent under 
 that Emperor: and the consequent insolence 
 of the Roman Nobihty, and fawning servihty, 
 even of Philosopliers and men of letters 
 amongst the Greeks, so indignantly described 
 by Lucian* not long afterwards, easily ac- 
 count for the adulatory practice of later 
 Greek writers, in affecting to borrow words 
 from the Latin; as if the language of the 
 Romans was more copious and expressive 
 than the Greek, and as much superior to 
 the languages,, as their arms had proved to 
 the arms, of all other nations. I do not re- 
 collect any Greek writer of note who has 
 adopted such a practice, prior to the histo- 
 rian Herodian, in the third century. But 
 Lucian, in his tract upon the proper man- 
 ner of writing history, Sect. 15, tells us, 
 that one of the Greek historians of Aurelian's 
 war with the Parthians, which was not ended 
 till the year 164, though a professed imitator 
 of the style of Thucydides, had adopted 
 many Roman names of arms and machines, 
 and even those of a foss, a bridge, and the 
 like. His manner of noticing it, however, 
 and tlie indignation he expresses at seeing- 
 
 ^ In his discourse about those Greeks who were hired to be com' 
 panions to the wealthy ilomans. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. ^ 
 
 the language of Attica interspersed with Ita* 
 he words, as if by way of ornament, shew3 
 that the practice even then was quite novel ; 
 and therefore it cannot be supposed to have 
 been in use at all earlier than near the mid- 
 die of the second century. At least, that it 
 was not in use some time after the writings 
 of Luke's histories, appears evidently from 
 the writings of Josephus, who, though he 
 composed some of his works in the very camp 
 of Titus, and was induced by every considera- 
 tion to adopt such a mode of expression, as was 
 most likely to please the Emperor and ingra^ 
 tiate himself with the Romans, instead of 
 using Latin military terms, even those which 
 had no directly corresponding term in the 
 Greek language, such as Legio for instance, 
 never once writes the Latin word itself in 
 Greek characters, but translates it by an ori- 
 ginal Greek word, deaioting a corps of sol- 
 diers regularly arrayed. In the same man- 
 ner, in every other passage of Luke's histo- 
 ries where a Roman legion is mentioned, it 
 is expressed by a Greek word which signifies 
 a band or collection of soldiers, even where 
 some particular Legion* is spoken of to dis-a 
 tinguish it from the others, and consequently 
 
 f Legio Italica, Legio Augusti, 
 
 X) St 
 
M THE DISSONANCE OP 
 
 where there was some reason to consider the 
 Koman appellation as a kind of proper name 
 of that particular corps. 
 
 This seems satisfactorily to demonstrate, 
 that, in and after the age of Luke, it was 
 not usual for writers in. Greek to adopt words 
 from thQ Latin language, even in military 
 terms pecuhar to the Romans, much less to 
 )3orrow Roman words, as in the passage 
 quoted from the Acts, to express, in Greek, 
 articles of dress or personal convenience in 
 common use, amongst both nations. If there- 
 fore we could suppose a lunatic of the He- 
 brew common people, intending, according 
 to the story, to make a company of Jews ap- 
 prehend ihsit many demons had entered into 
 him^ upon being asked his name, (a question, 
 by the way, which seems to be cisked for no 
 other purpose than merely to draw forth the 
 conceit of the term Legion) would pass over 
 all the literal or figurative terms of multitude, 
 in common use amongst the Jews, and adopt 
 a Latin word, never used in such a significa- 
 tion even by the Romans themselves ; yet still 
 the historian, when relating the circumstance, 
 would undoubtedly -have rendered the term 
 Legion by tlie same Greek word which he hath - 
 used to' express it on every other occasion. 
 
THE evangelists; 54 
 
 I must confess that this single circumstance 
 of the language strikes my mind so strongl3% 
 that I suspect every passage and writing, 
 wherein it is found, to be either an interpola- 
 tion or fiction of no earlier date than the mid- 
 dle of the second century; and, if coiTobo- 
 rated by other circumstances of inconsistency 
 or great improbability, it affords to me a full 
 conviction of their spuriousness and want of 
 apostolic authenticity. 
 
 If the plain, express dictates of the Lord 
 Jesus himself could not escape free from ma- 
 terial alterations and additions, by the pens 
 of copyists of these books, in the third, 
 fourth, or fifth centuries, what other parts of 
 them can we suppose secure from their daring 
 interpolations, whenever they hoped to serve 
 by them the cause of their particular religious 
 system ? Yet, that the concise, instructive 
 formula, in which Luke tells us, he, at their 
 own request, taught his disciples to pray to 
 God, has been so interpolated out of the 
 Gospel called Matthew's — the latest eminent 
 editor of the Christian Scriptures in their ori- 
 ginal language, that learned and diligent 
 collator, professor Griesbach, has so satisfac- 
 torily shewn, from the earliest comments 
 upon, and the best authenticated copies of, 
 
 D 3 
 
M THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 Luke's Gospel now existing, that he himseif 
 has rejected the additions out of the original 
 text of that prayer; and, in so doing, has 
 been followed bj the late learned and candid 
 Primate of Ireland, Archbishop Newcome, 
 in his English translation of the New Testa- 
 ment. And we now know that the Lord'^ 
 Prayer, as originally recorded by this Evan- 
 gelist, consisted only of the following words 
 « — Luke xi. 2 — 4* : Father, hallowed be ihy 
 name. Thy kingdom come. Give lis day by 
 day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins ; 
 for we forgive every one that is indebted to us. 
 And lead us not into temptatiofi. Now we 
 Jnay reasonably ask, what unprejudiced, re- 
 flecting mind does not perceive, that those 
 interpolated words which assign a local ha- 
 bitation to God, in heaven, are as incon* 
 gruous to the attribute of omnipresence, 
 which both reason and revelation teach us is 
 essential to th,e Deity, as the insinuation that 
 his will is not done upon earth, is to his om- 
 nipotence or wisdom ? And with what pro<^ 
 priety can men pray to God, to deliver them 
 from eyilj when, under the all-directing pro- 
 vidence of an almighty, benevolent Being, no 
 evil can be supposed to exist, but for the wise 
 ?md.gracious purpose of producing filial good? 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 'U 
 
 ,► -After so convincing a proof of the daring, 
 ft^ warrantable liberties taken with this most 
 important and sacred part of the evangelical 
 history of Luke, for the purpose of making 
 it more conformable to that attributed to 
 INIatthew, one sees clearly; that for the same 
 purpose, from the fabulous fictions of the 
 same source, Luke's history has been inter- 
 polated also, with the story of the baptism 
 of Jesus, by John ; of his forty days' fasting ; 
 and most extraordinary kind of temptation by 
 some poziderful antagonist of omnipotence^ here 
 called the Devil; and of his transfiguration 
 on the mountain. For it well deserves our 
 notice, that if we pass from the account of 
 John's imprisonment, by Herod, Lukeiii. 20, 
 to iv. 14, and read. Then came Jesus, instead 
 of, and Jesus returned, the histories both of 
 John and Jesus proceed regularly and in or- 
 der ; and the ministry of Jesus, as is most 
 probable, commenced upon the cessation of 
 the Baptist's ministry, by his being shut up 
 in prison.^ But if the account of our Lord's 
 being baptized by John were genuine, He- 
 rod's imprisoning the latter must have been 
 related very much out of its proper order ; 
 iand Luke would have given us no date for 
 
 » See Acts X. "Sr; 
 D 4' 
 
•Sa THE DISSONANCE OP 
 
 the commencement of our Lords minktry, 
 wbich, it was reasonably to be expected, an 
 historian would have done, who professes to 
 relate every thing accurately and in order^ 
 though he has been so particularly exact in 
 fixing the date of the commencement of 
 John's preaching. Besides, the purpose of 
 John's mission was merely to prepare the 
 Jews, for the reception of the Messiah and his 
 new covenant, by preaching to them the bap- 
 tism of repentance for the remission of sins ; and, 
 to say nothing of the bodily shape like a dovcy 
 which savours strongly of the superstition of 
 the second century, with what propriety 
 could he, who knew no sin^ receive such a 
 baptism ? or the destined Messiah attend the 
 preaching of his own precursor, to be pre- 
 pared by him for the coming of himself? An^ 
 , what probability is there, that our Lord 
 would have studiously avoided calUng him- 
 self the Son of Godj during his whole minis- 
 try; and forbidden his disciples before his 
 <Jeath, to announce him as such to the Jews, 
 if God himself had miraculously declared 
 him to be so, by a voice from heaven, in the 
 ^udipnce of so great a multitude ? Or how 
 could John, after such an attestation, have 
 ?ver entertained a doubt whether Jesus was 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 57 
 
 the expected Messiah ; which, from Luke 
 vii. 18, 19, &c. it appears he did entertain. 
 As to the account of the transfiguration, it is 
 so directly contradictory to the repeated doc- 
 trine of the Gospel, that Jesus was the first 
 man whom God raised from the dead, that it 
 cannot be a true, authentic story. For what- 
 ever may be thought of Elias, Moses, we are 
 expressly assured, died^ and was buried: if, 
 therefore, he was alive in the reign of Tibe^ 
 I'ius, and visited our Saviour on the Mount, 
 . Moses, and not Jesus, must have been the 
 Jirst fruits from the dead. 
 >*^^ But there is a part of the Gospel accord- 
 ing to Luke of much greater magnitude and 
 importance, which, from the testimony of 
 Luke himself, as well as from the numerous 
 circumstances of inconsistency and improba- 
 bihty that attend it, we need not hesitate to 
 pronounce none of his, but the daring fiction 
 of some of the easy c2;ortog interpolators, as 
 Origen calls them, of the beginning of the 
 second century, from amongst the pagan con- 
 verts ; who, to do honour, as they deemed it, 
 to the author of their newly-embraced reli- 
 gion, were willing that his birth should, at 
 least, equal that of the paga;n heroes and 
 demi-gods, Bacchus and Hercules, in its woa- 
 
.58 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 derful circumstances and high descent ; and 
 theveby laid the foundation of the succeeding 
 orthodox deification of the man Jesus, which, 
 in degree of blasphemous absurdity, exceeds 
 even the gross fables of pagan superstition : 
 inasmuch a^ it makes him equal in Godhead, 
 power, and even in eternity of existence, with 
 his celestial Sire, tlie supreme Deity himself. 
 .What I mean is, the whole of the two first 
 cliapters, which follows the short introduc- 
 tory preface to Theophilus, containing tlie 
 narrative of the birth of John the Baptist, 
 and the history of the birth, infancy, and 
 twelve first years of the life of our Lord Jesus. 
 To an impartial reader many difficulties 
 will occur in this part of the history attributed 
 to Luke, besides the repeated appearance of 
 an Angel under the same appellation, by 
 which Daniel denominates one that appeared 
 to him in his prophetic visions, as if the word 
 Gabriel did not signify a celestial being in 
 human form, that is, an Angel; but as if 
 Angels like Men were distinguished from each 
 other by proper names: and he will find no 
 small stumbling block at the very threshold. 
 For Elizabeth is said to be not only of the 
 ^t^ibe of Levi, but, of the daughters of Aaron; 
 ifiud yet she ia spoken of as nearly related to 
 
THE EVANGELISTS, ^Jg 
 
 ■\iary, who if there could botany trutfi ifi thfe 
 story of the miraculous birth of Jesus, must 
 necessarily have been, in an uninterrupted 
 line^ of the tribe of Judah and family of 
 David, to make him, in any sense, a descend- 
 ant from thkt Prince. It is true that amonij: 
 the Jews, heiresses alone v/ere forbidden ta 
 marry out of their own tribe, but since the 
 whole tribe of Levi, and more especially the 
 family of Aarori', were separated from all the 
 other tribes and families, and peculiarly sanc- 
 tified and appropriated to the rites and offices 
 of their religion; it is in Ihe highest degree 
 improbable that they should intermarry with 
 any other tribe. Neither is it at all probable, 
 that the providence of the Almighty should 
 destine the Jewish prophecies, respecting the 
 Messiah and his precursor, to be accomplished 
 in two persons, related by consanguinity to 
 each other ; and whose parents were so inti- 
 rnately connected, as might afford the incre- 
 dulous strong grounds whereon to apprehend 
 some family-collusion in the case, and to sus- 
 pect the pretensions, of both the cousins, to 
 distinguished regard, of artful imposture. 
 
 Had the familiar intimacy, described by the 
 author of these two chapters, and which is so 
 
^ THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 nBtural ^nd usual amongst relations, really- 
 subsisted between the mothers of John and 
 ^Jesus, strengthened and increased as it nmst 
 have been by the very extraordinary circum- 
 stances of the two angelic annunciations, and 
 the two miraculous conceptions, the two chil- 
 dren must have passed great part of their 
 early years together; must have been in- 
 formed by their parents, and those about 
 thpm, of the angehc and human testimonies, 
 the predictions and uncommon events respect- 
 ing each of them ; and have grown up in ha- 
 bits of mutual regard and personal intercourse 
 and intimacy, at least, to the time of John'^ 
 retiring into the wilderness. Yet^ if we might 
 rely upon the testimony of the Baptist him- 
 self, as recorded by the Gospel attributed to 
 the apostle John, he was an intire stranger to 
 Jesus when he came to be baptised by him ; 
 and he should not have known him to be the 
 predicted Messiah, but for an immediate re- 
 velation from heaven. But though this palpa- 
 ble inconsistency, between these two histories, 
 affords one striking proof of the easy credulity 
 of those who receive them both for authentic 
 scripture, and even as the inspired, infallible 
 w^ord of God, no stress is laid upon it, in the 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. J&\ 
 
 case before us, for reasons which will appear 
 hereafter. What is much more to our present 
 purpose is, that this whole history of tlie con- 
 sanguinity and intimate famiUarity between 
 Mary and Elizabeth, is equally irreconcileable 
 to the subsequent narration of Luke himself. 
 For in the seventh chapter he informs us, that 
 upon the fame of Jesus being celebrated 
 throughout the Land, on account of the won- 
 derful miracles effected by him, the disciples 
 of John, who was at that time confined in. 
 prison by Herod, related to him all that past 
 concerning the new prophet Jesus: and we 
 find that John, like a person unacquainted 
 with Jesus, and uncertain whether he was the 
 Messiah, the promised prophet, to whose ap- 
 pearance his own mission and preaching were 
 only preparatory, sent two of his disciples to 
 ask him the question indirect terms, whether 
 he really was the predicted Messiah, or they 
 were to expect another person to fulfil that 
 important character. In his answer, our 
 Lord, instead of reminding him of the angelic 
 testimonies of his being the tj'ue Messiah, 
 which he must know preceded both their mi- 
 raculous births, and, of the subsequent testis, 
 monies of his own father Zacharias, and the 
 
63 tllE l3tSS0NANCE OP 
 
 propHet and prophetess, Simeon and \Anna, 
 refers liira only to some well known predict 
 tions of Isaiah respecting the Messiah, which 
 John's messenp-ei-s saw were then sins-ularlv 
 accomplished'in his wonderful works. Now 
 it seems absolutely impossible that John, 
 after being from his earliest infancy personally 
 acquainted with Jesus, and not only in pos- 
 session of all the information respecting him, 
 which he must have learnt from the two fa- 
 milies, but so miraculously impressed with af- 
 jfection and reverence for him, as^ to exult for 
 joy, though but an embryo in the womb, at 
 the mere sound of his mother's voice, could> 
 at any time, have entertained the least ddubt 
 of Jesus being the Messiah. And since cir- 
 cumstances and facts of such public notoriety, 
 must have been known to the disciples of 
 both, if their masters were faithful instructors 
 — ^as indeed it is evident they were, if the two 
 chapters in question were written by Luke — > 
 it appears to be next to impossible, if not 
 quite so, that any serious, consistent writer 
 should be the author of the first chapter, and 
 afterwards relate the story of John's embassy, 
 without the smallest reference to the contra- 
 dictory narrative of that chapter, and without 
 
THE EVANGELISTS, 6.1' 
 
 a single remark upon either the unaccount- 
 able incredulity or farcical absurdity of Jdha' 
 displayed in such a legation. 
 
 In the first chapter also, the Angel is made 
 to inform Mary, that the child to be born o^ 
 her should be called the Son of God, and for 
 this reason, because it was to be produced 
 by the Holy Ghost coming upon her, and the 
 power of the highest over-shadowing her : yet 
 in the subsequent part of hi^ history, Luke, 
 as if he meant directly to contradict this 
 heavenly annunciator, except in the acclama- 
 tions of some lunatics, never once mentions 
 him by any other appellation than Son of 
 Man or Son of David, till after his resurrec- 
 tion. Then, indeed, he speaks of him as 
 being commonly and publicly called the Sott 
 of God; but in the discourses of the Apos- 
 tles, where they call him so, they give a very 
 different reason for it from that alleged by the 
 Angel; and refer for the cause of it, not to 
 any circumstances of his carnal birth, but 
 to his being raised from the dead to a new 
 aiid spiritual life, by the immediate power of 
 the Almighty. Indeed were the story of his 
 miraculous birth undoubted truth, yet, since 
 it could be certainly knowri tb be sb by no 
 mortal Uesides Mary herself, it could not be 
 
6t THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 of sufficient notoriety to induce men to call 
 him bj^ that name; especially since, in the 
 whole course of his own and his Apostles' 
 preaching the Gospel, the circumstance of 
 his preternatural conception is not once men- 
 tioned, nor so much as alluded to. The 
 falsehood, tiQwever, of this prediction of the 
 pretended Angel, that he should be called 
 Son of God because of his miraculous birth, 
 appears incontestibly fvom other scriptures, 
 both of the Old and New Testament, which 
 teach us that the Son of God was so far from 
 being a title which the Messiah promised to 
 the Jews, acquired from any wonderful cir- 
 cuDpiStances of his nativity, in the reign of 
 Augustus Caesar, that he had been commonly 
 spokei;^ of under that very denomination long 
 before his birth, even from the time of his 
 progenitor David ; for that God himself had 
 given him that appellation in the prophecies 
 of him recorded in the book of Psalms, where, 
 speaking to and of this future descendant of 
 David, in the name of his forefather, he says, 
 ". thou art niy Son, this day have I begotten 
 " thee ;'' apd again, " he shall be to me a Son 
 "and 1 will he to him a Father ;'' and asjain, 
 "I will make him, my first-born, higher than 
 "the Kings of the Earth/'. Now that Jesus 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. t'S 
 
 could not become the Jirst-born of God, in 
 any sense respecting his human birth, is evi- 
 dent, because in that sense Adam was beyond 
 all controversy his Jirst-born. And that the 
 begetting here spoken of had not the least re- 
 ference to the carnal birth of the Messiah, but 
 to his regeneration after death, to a new and 
 spiritual state of existence, in which he is 
 truly the Jirst'born of God, is expressly taught 
 us by the Apostles in their discourses to the 
 Jews, recorded by Luke himself, in his his- 
 tory of their Acts. 
 
 From Luke's own narrative of what passed 
 at our Lord's examination before the Jewish 
 council, previous to their accusation of him 
 before Pilate, it is evident that, in the esti- 
 mation of the Jews, occasioned, without 
 doubt, by the above quoted prophecies, to 
 declare a person to be the Christy or to declare 
 him to be the Son of God^ was exactly the 
 same thing ; for intending to render him ob- 
 noxious to the Roman Governor, as a rebel 
 against the authority of Caesar, the only 
 point on which they examined him was, whe- 
 ther he avowed himself to be the Christy that 
 is, the person, of whom their prophecies pre- 
 dicted, that God would anoint him to reign 
 over them to the end of time: to which he 
 
M THf PISSONANCE OF 
 
 answered, that if he told them he was so, they 
 , would not believe him, neither, if he at- 
 tempted to argue with them, about the mean- 
 ing of their prophecies, would they answer 
 him nor let him go. But, adds he, from this 
 time forth (so it should have been translated) 
 shall he, who, at present, assumes no title nor 
 character h\xt th,e Sou of Ma/i^ be exalted to 
 that super-eminent station of empire and au- 
 thority, which, in. the 110th Psalm, is pro- 
 phesied of by the term, sitting on the right 
 hand of the power of God. Knowing that to 
 be a propliecy of the Messiah, that Son of 
 David, whoija God had promised to make his 
 own Soii^ W[idfirst-bor?iy and with r^a^on sup- 
 -.posing himself to be the San of Man he spake 
 of, they all exclaimed togetheiv (ivt thou then 
 the SoTi of Qod? art thou. ^^ Son of Man^ 
 who is to be exalted to th^ glojions character 
 of Son of God^ And on his acknowledging 
 himself to be so, they cried out, what need we 
 qny further witnpss? for we ourselves hane 
 Jteard of his omi mouth; and immediately 
 coDtducted hin;i tp Pilate, and accused him of 
 perverting the, n0i4)n^ and forbidding to give 
 tribute to Cossary by sayings that he himself was 
 .Christ J a King, The Christy therefore, or 
 ^anointed Kipg, and the SonofGod, Ixad pre- 
 
THE EVANGELIST$' M, 
 
 cisely the same meaning. Yet both our Lord 
 himself and his Apostles, expressly teach us/ 
 that he could not become the Christy or Soji 
 of Gody but by his resurrection after death to 
 a new and spiritual life. Even in his life 
 time, he taught the Sadducees, that it was the 
 being raised from the dead, by the immedi-* 
 ate vivifying power of God himself, which 
 aloiie could make him or any man the Son of 
 God ; when he told them that, " they which 
 ^* shall be accounted worthy to obtain that 
 " world and tlie resurrection from the dead, 
 "are equal unto the Angels, and are the 
 " Children of God^ being the Children of the 
 " resurrection/' And to lead them to apply 
 this instruction, that men became Sons of 
 God by a resurrection to a future life, to the 
 particular case of the predicted Messiah or 
 Christ, and thereby to. a right understanding 
 of their own prophecies respecting himself, 
 immediately after this defence and explana- 
 tion of the doctrine of the resurrection, he 
 asks how the Scribes could say that any Soil 
 of David would, as such, be the expected 
 Christ : when David himself, in the very pro- 
 phecies concerning him, acknowledges the 
 Christ to be his Lord ? plainly intimating, 
 that by dying to this mortal life, he must 
 
 £ 2 
 
# THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 cease to be David*s Son, and by a resurrec- 
 tion to a spiritual life, be made the Son of 
 Gody before he could become the Christy and 
 be exalted to that high degree of celestial 
 power, Avhich is called being seated at the right 
 haiid of God, where he would be Lord, 
 not only over David, but over all the gene- 
 rations of men, whether dead or living. To 
 the same purpose, after his resurrection, 
 Luke assures us, he expounded the prophe- 
 cies respecting himself, to the two disciples 
 at Emmaus, and afterwards to the whole 
 assembly of disciples at Jerusalem ; to con- 
 vince them, that it was necessary he should 
 have suffered death and burial before he 
 could -enter into the glorious character of the 
 Christ, Impressed with this conviction, Pe- 
 ter, on the memorable day of Pentecost, ex- 
 plains the same prophecies to the Jews in ge- 
 neral ; informs them of the actual resurrec- 
 tion from the dead of this promised Son of 
 David, and that the miraculous gift of 
 tongues, which they then witnessed, was the 
 influence of that power to which God had, 
 «ince his ascension into heaven, exalted him; 
 and adds, " therefore let all the house of Is- 
 " rael know assuredly that God hath made 
 *^* that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 69 
 
 ^' both I-ord and Christ." Paul also, some 
 time after, preaching at Antioch, interprets 
 the predictions of the Messiah, contained iu 
 the book of Psalms, in the very same man- 
 ner; and particularly refers to the resuiTec- 
 tion, for that birth, whereby he was made the 
 Son of God. " The promise," says' the Apos- 
 tle, *' which was made unto the Fathers, Gro'd 
 " hath fulfilled the same Unto us, their' chil- 
 *' dren, in that he hath raised up Jesus again, 
 ** as it is also written in the second Psalm, 
 ^^ Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten 
 " thee." And the author of the Epistle to 
 the Romans, in the same spirit of interpreta* 
 tion, asserts that Jesus Christ "was made of 
 " the seed of David according to the flesh;'* 
 that is, at his first birth, was the natural bom 
 Son of David, and " determined, or consti* 
 " tuted, the Son of God ^ with power, accord- 
 " ing to the spirit of holiness, by" his second 
 birth, " the resurrection from the dead." 
 
 But the falsehood of the pretended Angel 
 respecting the reason of our Lord's being de- 
 nominated the Son of God, is not the only in- 
 consistency between this Pagan fable of the 
 miraculous conception of Jesus Christ, and 
 the subsequent narrative of both the histories 
 written by Luke. It contains in it a contra- 
 
 3e3 
 
ro THE dissonh^nce of 
 
 diction of much greater importance, which, 
 if admitted to be true, would destroy the very • 
 fundamental article of the Christian Faith, as 
 Luke himself informs us it w^as originally 
 preached both by our Lord and his apostles; 
 and would utterly overthrow every pretension 
 of Jesus to be the Messiah predicted in the 
 scriptures of the Old Testament. For the pro- 
 phecies concerning the Messiah, in the books 
 of MoseSj assure us that he was to be theseed^ 
 tlmtis, the natural born descendant of Abra- 
 ham, through Isaac. Jacob, and Judah; to 
 which subsequent predictions add, that he 
 .should also he the Son or seed of David ; and 
 tliat he was to be a prophet, rr//5ed tip from 
 amongst the Jewish people, like unto Moses. 
 Under these prophecies, our Saviour claimed 
 .the title of the promised Messiah or Clnist, 
 .in his conversations wi-th his Apostles after 
 ^his resurrection: and to the completion of 
 these same prophecies in their Master's pei- 
 ^spia^ the Apostles theiT>selves constantly ap- 
 pealed J in preaching his Govspel to their brer, 
 thren t)ie Jews. They assert,* that he was 
 tJi^ $ee4 of Abrahp^m, promised and sent to 
 Wess all mankint} ;' th^t-'j- he was the seed of 
 
 * Atts'tii/25and-26. Gal. ili. la. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS; fl 
 
 David; the fruit of his l&im; the** predicted 
 Jewish prophet like unto Moses. It necessa* 
 rily follows, therefore, either that our Lord Je* 
 SLis was such a Jewish prophet as Moses^ and 
 the naturally descended Son of Abraham and 
 David, or he was not the Christ, the Messiah 
 promised in the Jewish prophecies; and all 
 our faith in him, as such, is vain^ The futile 
 sophistry of school divines is well known^ 
 whereby they attempt to satisfy the preju- 
 dices of orthodox minds, respecting these pro- 
 phetic descriptions of the Messiah, suggesting 
 a partial resemblance between Moses and the 
 miraculously conceived Son of Mary, in 
 their common characters of mediators, and 
 deliverers, and promulgers of God's will to 
 Men; and supposing that nothing more is 
 meant by his being the lineal descendant of 
 Abraham and David, than his being, though in 
 a preternatural manner, the offspring of a 
 daughter of Abraham and David : but the 
 express words of the sacred scriptures thein- 
 selves, will by no means warrant these miserg^ 
 ble subterfuges of bigotted superstition. 
 
 The words of Moses are, " God will taiae 
 ^' thee up from amongst thy brethren^ a pro- 
 ** ph€t like unto me ;" that is, will exalt a 
 
 * Acts Hi. 2^.— .viL 3f . 
 E 4 
 
n THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 common Jewish man like myself to the dis- 
 ^^ tinguished character of such a prophet as I 
 am. Now a God, or an Angel incarnate, 
 though commissioned to every office that Mo- 
 ses was, is so far from being one of the Jewish 
 people raised up to the prophetic character, 
 that it is a being, infinitely, ortranscendently 
 superior to any man, degraded into the station 
 of an human prophet : and even a mere Man, 
 created without the intervention of an human 
 Father, by the miraculous influence of God 
 himself on the mother, is not one of the Jew- 
 ish people like Moses, nor like any thing else 
 that was ever heard or read of, except in the 
 absurd, fabulous legends of pagan mythology. 
 'Neither will the derivation of Mary's genea- 
 logy from David and Abraham at all remove 
 the obvious contradiction between this story 
 of the miraculous conception of her son, and 
 ^those scriptures which assert, that he was the 
 seed of Abraham and the fruit of the loins of 
 David ; for the female, from whatsoever fa- 
 mily descended, is no more than the seed- 
 bed formed to mature the seed of the male; 
 and therefore^ in the genealogies of all na- 
 "tionSj the children ate accounted the seed or 
 Jineal' descendants of the male line only„ 
 without any regard to the family, or even the 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. ff^ %^ 
 
 nation, of the female. Thus, tor cSk^^jpplep 
 David is justly accounted the seed of^'^l*' 
 ham, and as true an Israelite as any other 
 descendant from Jacob, though he and his 
 father Jesse wei^e the offspring of Obed, the 
 son of a Moabitish woman. Were it tru^e, 
 therefore, that the Almighty, in the single in- 
 stance of Mary's conception, had miracu- 
 lously created seed, like^ that of the human 
 species, to become an euibryo in her vvomb, 
 to be matured and brought forth like other 
 children, after the usual period of gestation; 
 yet such a child would no more be the seed 
 of Abraham, nor the fruit of Davids loins, 
 than Adam himself. He would be the seed 
 of no man ; but, like the first created of our 
 species, the immediate production of the 
 plastic power of God. For this reason, either 
 this very extraordinary history of Mary's mi- 
 raculous conception of her son Jesus, must be 
 false and fabulous, or else Jesus is not the 
 Messiah promised to the Jews. 
 
 Ever since these two chapters annexed to 
 Luke's history, and the Gospel according to 
 IMatthew, have been acknowledged by the 
 Fathers of the orthodox Church to be the ge- 
 nuine writings of Matthew and Luke, that is, 
 ever s^ince^ the latter half of the second cen- 
 
74 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 cury .of the Christian aera, the miraculous con- 
 ception of Jesus by a virgin has been taught, 
 referred to, and commented upon, by every 
 apologist for the orthodox religion, and every 
 expositor of those four Gospels, which the 
 Church of Constantine, some ages later, for- 
 jnally decreed in council to be the only true, 
 apostolic histories of the Gospel ; has been a 
 fundamental article of the orthodox faith, 
 andj as such, expressly recited in every creed 
 or formulary of belief which has ever been in 
 use. It is evident, indeed, that this must ne- 
 cessarily have been the case. And, for the 
 same reasons, if this story of the preterna- 
 tural origin of our Lord Jesus, had been 
 Jvuown and credited by the apostles and first 
 preachers of Christianity, they also must have 
 mentioned it in their discourses and letters of 
 instruction to their converts, and instead of 
 dwelling upon prophecies concerning the de- 
 scent of the Messiah, absolutely incompatible 
 with so extraordinary a circumstance, without 
 once alluding to it, they must have enume- 
 rated it amongst the necessary articles of a 
 Christianas belief. Yet in no one apostolic 
 Epistle, in no one discourse recorded in the 
 Acts of tlie Apostles, is the miraculous con- 
 ception, or in any one circumstance of. the 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. .7^ 
 
 history of Jesus, previous to John s Baptism, 
 hinted at even in the most distant inauner: 
 on the contrary, that Baptism is repeatedly* 
 referred ta and mentioned as the proper 
 commencement of evangelical instruction; 
 and when the eleven Apostles proceeded to 
 elect a twelfth, to supply the place of Judas, 
 the only quaUfication made essentially requi- 
 site in the candidates was, their having been 
 eye-v/itnesses of our Lord's ministry, from 
 the Baptism of John to his Ascension. Now, 
 to lay no stress upon the dissimilarity of style 
 observable between these two first chapters 
 and the rest of Luke's histories, and the af- 
 fected, but sometimes unsuccessful imitation-|- 
 of his common phraseology, nor upon the 
 inconsistency of the stories they contain, of 
 the prophet Simeon and the prophetess An- 
 na, with the well known historic truth, that 
 there never was a prophet amongst the Jews, 
 fi^om the time of their return from their cap- 
 tivity to the preaching of John the Baptist, it 
 appears impossible that any writer, though of 
 
 * Acts i. i^.—x. 37.— xili. 23, 24. 
 f For example, this interpolated fable begins with the same word 
 fy£vsTO, with wkich Luke begins most of his paragraphs j but in Luke 
 it always means, it caine to pass, or he was made or becaipe, and 
 never, there was, which is its only jneaning here, and for which 
 -Luke always u'!st?s'»iv»- 
 
76 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 a degree of respectability much inferior to 
 v/liat Lulie is, on many accounts, justly en- 
 titled to, should so grossly, so absurdly con- 
 tradict himself in the same history, without 
 so much as attempting to reconcile, or even 
 noticing, such palpable inconsistencies; and, 
 had we no other grounds to proceed upon, 
 we need not hesitate to pronounce, that the 
 writer of the twenty-six last chapters, and of 
 the Acts of the Apostles, could not be the 
 author of the wonderful two first chapters of 
 the Gospel according to Luke. 
 
 Happily, however, for the cause of tnith 
 and rational religion, we have Luke's own 
 testimony to convince us, that this is the case; 
 and do not depend upon any man's inferences 
 or opinion. He has addressed both his his- 
 tories to the same Theophilus ; aiid in the ad- 
 dress, which is introductory to his second 
 book, he gives an accurate description of the 
 contents of the first. " The former treatise,'* 
 says he, " I have made of all that Jesus began 
 " todo and to teach, until the day in which 
 *' he was taken up.'' That is, mj^ former book 
 is a history of the acts and doctrine of Jesus, 
 from their first commencement to his ascen- 
 sion. Luke himself, therefore, assures us, 
 (and a writer's word may surely be taken for 
 
THE EVAI^GELISTS. ^f 
 
 the contents of his own work) that his first 
 history went no higher than the beginning of 
 the public ministry of Jesus, and enHed with 
 his ascension into heaven. Now, if we turn 
 to the third chapter of what is called the Gos- 
 pel according to Luke, we find the proper, 
 regular commencement of an accurate his- 
 tory, specifying, with precision, in what year 
 of the reigning Emperor, and under what sub- 
 ordinate Mao;istrates of the several divisions 
 of Palestine, the Baptism of John, which im- 
 mediately preceded the public ministry of 
 Jesus, took place ; and ending in the twenty- 
 fourth chapter, as Luke himself describes it, 
 with a brief account of his ascension. And 
 this history, so accurately described by the 
 author of it, comprises only a period of two 
 years ; whilst the two first chapters, of which 
 Luke takes not the least notice, comprehend 
 a history of near fourteen years, beginning, 
 according to the generally received opinion, 
 full thirty years before John's Baptism and 
 the commencement of our Lord's ministry; 
 which Luke himself mentions to Theophilus, 
 tor whose information both his books were 
 %vritten, as the beginning of his first treatise. 
 Nay, even in his introduction to his Evange- 
 lical history itself, he in reality asserts the 
 
7q 'Tim DISSONANCE OF 
 
 very same thing, that it commenced with the 
 account of the Baptism of John : for he tells 
 llieophilus, that to the end he might know 
 the certainty of the doctrine in v/hich he had 
 been instructed, having dihgently investigated 
 every circumsttoce from the veri/. Jirsi, ahcv 
 the example of many others, he had written 
 for him a, regular narration of those things, of 
 which they had received a full assurance, hav^ 
 ing been taught them by those, who from the 
 hegmning were eye-witnesses, and were made 
 ministers of the Christian doctrine, that is, by 
 the Apostles. ; Now it is evident, that the 
 b^inning 3Xid the v^rij Jirst^ here alluded to, 
 must be the public preaching and baptism 
 of :John> not.QJiJy because that is tte a^'a of 
 the Christian instruction determined by the 
 Apostles themselves, as hath been before re- 
 marked, from their election of Matthias and 
 their own preachirng recorded in the Acts ; but 
 also because the full assurance of the disci- 
 ples here mentioned, depended upon the 
 circumstance of their teachers having!: been 
 eye-witnesses of the facts they taught; and 
 since, before the mission of the Baptist, the 
 Apostles were all strangers both to John and 
 Jesus, they could not have been eye-witnesses 
 of any fact antecedent to it> nor, of course, 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 49 
 
 to any thing related in those two first chapV 
 ters. As to the fundamental article of the 
 jfaith of the church of Constantine, the mira- 
 culous conception of Jesus, it is not capable 
 of being assured by the testimony of any eye* 
 witness whatsoever. 
 
 There is also another unaccountable in- 
 consistency between the story of the miracu- 
 lous conception, and the subsequent history 
 of Luke, as it now stands ; I mean, the genea* 
 logy of Jesus to prove his lineal descent from 
 David and Abraham : for it is the genealogy 
 of Joseph, which indeed, if Jesus be allowed 
 to be his natural born son, and the genealogy 
 to be a correct one, would answer the purpose 
 of proving him to be, in that respect, the ob- 
 ject of the prophecies concerning the family 
 of the Messiah contained in the Pentateuch, 
 and the book of Psalms; but if his miraculous 
 birth related in the first chapter be admitted, 
 he was no more the son of Joseph than of 
 Pontius Pilate; and to answer any, even the 
 sophistical purpose of a polemic divine on the 
 occasion, the writer should have given us the 
 genealogy of Mary, and not of Joseph. Such 
 a genealogy, however, derived from the female 
 line, could not have been allowed by any 
 Jew^ nor indeed by any unprejudiced pei'soii; 
 
^ THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 for in eva^ry country, anc3 more especially 
 where a plurality of wives is customary, as in 
 Judea, men being at liberty to marry women, 
 not only of any family, but of any nation, 
 were the caprice of deriving a genealogy 
 from the female instead of the male to be 
 indulged, the same man's children might be 
 proved to be of different families, and perhaps 
 C>f different nations, and the confusion of 
 pedigrees would be inexplicable. By taking 
 the mother's side at Obed, David's grandfa- 
 ther, David, and consequently his descendant, 
 the Messiah, might be proved to be a Moa- 
 bite, the offspring of the incestuous bed of 
 Lot, instead of being proved an Israelite, the 
 lineal, legitimate sou of Abraham: for which 
 reason, even the genealogy attributed to Mat- 
 thew is the genealogy of Joseph, not of Mary* 
 However, this additional contradictory cir- 
 cumstance is not much to be insisted on, 
 because it must be frankly confessed, that 
 there is room for doubts likewise about the 
 authenticity of this genealogy; for from the 
 second letter of Paul to Timothy, compared 
 with Luke's own history of the Apostles, it 
 appears that Luke was the constant, faithfully 
 attached disciple, friend, and companion, of 
 Paul; and therefore it is most probable he 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 81 
 
 had approved and adopted the same precepts 
 and instructions, Avhich Paul urged upon his 
 other disciples ; and, in his first letter to Ti- 
 mothy, we find Paul earnestly dissuading him 
 from givi?ig heed to endless genealogies^ as fur- 
 nishhig matter of dispute and vain jangling^ 
 rather than Godly ^ edifijiijg, and Christian cha-- 
 rity. There is, therefore, very strong reason 
 to believe that the genealogy was not con- 
 tained in the original history as written by 
 Luke. In the list of the twelve apostles, also 
 given ch. vi. 13, compared with that which 
 the author has given us in his second history, 
 i. 13, there is a perturbation of the order of 
 their enumeration, evidently occasioned by a 
 similar interpolation from the Gospel accord- 
 ing to Matthew, with what we have seen 
 was practised respecting the Lord's Prayer, 
 in order to make Luke agree with the pre- 
 tended Matthew, in asserting the Apostle 
 Andrew to be Simon Peter's brother. Al- 
 though from the whole tenor of Luke's history 
 of Peter, in both his books, it plamly ap- 
 pears, that he had no brother; and that 
 between him and Andrew, there was no do- 
 mestic connexion of any kind. But of this, 
 more when we come to the Gospel of Mat- 
 thew. There are also two or three other 
 
9t THE DISSONANCE, &c. 
 
 passages of little moment, not mentioned on 
 this occasion, of which, from some suspicious 
 circiimstances attending them, or from their 
 abrupt incoherence with both the preceding 
 ^nd following sentences, one is tempted to 
 exclaim, assidtur y annus ! This savours much 
 ■of a patch tacked on by some interpolatmg 
 copyist of the second century ! 
 
CHAPTER IL 
 
 THE GOSFEL ACCORDING TO LUKE, 
 
 CONTINUED. 
 
 SECTION I. 
 
 THE before mentioned passages except- 
 ed, the internal evidence of both these 
 histories, the Gospel according to Luke and 
 the Acts of the Apostles, agrees with the 
 txternal testimony of all the earliest writers, 
 that they were written by Luke, who was not 
 himself indeed an Apostle, but one of the 
 first converts amongst the Jews, a disciple, 
 and personal attendant, of the Apostles : for 
 though the author does not call himself Luke, 
 but Silas, yet he professes to have been the 
 companion and fellow traveller of Paul, which 
 from Paul's Epistles we learn that he really 
 was. These histories also, which contain a 
 record of the principal transactions amongst 
 the first Christians, during a period of above 
 thirty years, are perfectly consistent with 
 themselves and each other, and with the 
 
 n 2 
 
84 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 Jewish and Roman .histories of tlie same 
 period : and the talents, the temper, and 
 thorough information of his subject, displayed 
 by the writer, are such as would vindicate 
 his credibihty, and claim our respect, in any 
 ordinary historian. 
 
 But in the historian of a supernatural 
 event, such as the promulgation of a divine 
 revelation of the will of God to Man, still 
 more is requisite. The duly authorized pro- 
 mulger must necessarily be enabled to pro- 
 duce immediate acts of miraculous powerj in 
 attestation of the truth of his divine mission, 
 and to confirm it by the more sober, rational, 
 .and satisfactory testimony of prophecy. The 
 history of such a person, therefore, must con- 
 tain a relation of thc^semirac]es,and of tlie seve- 
 ral events predicted by the e:^.traprdinary mes- 
 senger, before they carxie to pass : and, be- 
 fore we give implicit credit to. the veracity of 
 the relater, reason suggests, that we should 
 examine whether the recorded miracles be 
 such^as are properiy adapted to the circum- 
 stances of the case, and worthy of the inter- 
 position of that almighty being, by whose 
 power only they could have been effected; 
 an Deo dignus mndice 7iodus ? For no leason- 
 ing mind can think it grobab^e,^^that the 
 
THE EVANGELISTS* 85 
 
 dhine fountain of all wisdom, as w^ll as of 
 all power, should enable any {)erson to work 
 miracles for trivial, unimportant pux^poses ; 
 much less such as are inconsistent with equity 
 and goodness, or any other of his. eternal, im- • 
 mutable attributes. And with regard to the 
 predictions he records, we should consider 
 Avhether the events are such as human sagacity 
 could not foresee ; whether they are predicted 
 to take- place at such different intervals as to 
 afford the indispensably requisite testimony of 
 completed prophecy to the hearers of that 
 time, and to all succeeding generations : and 
 above all, whether such of them, the period 
 of wdiose accomphshment is already past, 
 have really been completed. It will be ne- 
 cessarv, therefore, to examine both the mira- 
 cles and predictions attributed to Jesus 
 Christ, in the Gospel according to Luke, in 
 these points of view. 
 
 II. \^ considering the recorded miracles, 
 and the degree of probability which arises 
 from their propriety, the leading criterion must 
 be the genius and spirit of the revelation, the 
 divine authority of which they are intended 
 to attest. Thus in the religion revealed by 
 Moses, in an age of the world when the un* 
 
 r 3 
 
85 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 improved, unenlightened state of human rea- 
 son, taken in the aggregate, may be justly 
 deemed the intellectual childhood of man- 
 kind, the chief object intended by it being, 
 to preserve a just and rational idea of the 
 Deity amongst men, till the maturity of their 
 reasoning faculties, and an increase of light 
 and knowledge should render them capable 
 of a purer and more spiritual religion ; and, 
 for that purpose, to teach the Jews that, both 
 as individuals, and as a nation, they and all 
 mankind depended solely upon the power and 
 providence of the one true God, for every in- 
 stance of temporal prosperity or adversity, 
 for their preservation or destruction. Nothing 
 eould accord better with the genius and in- 
 tent of that revelation than the miracles 
 wrought in Egypt and at the Red Sea, to ef- 
 fect their deliverance from Pharaoh's tyrann}^ 
 and afterwards amongst themselves, during 
 their peregrination in the Wilderness; be- 
 cause they could not fail of making a lasting, 
 national impression upon their minds, and 
 convincing them of the tremendous power of 
 God to accomplish all those temporal blessings 
 or curses which were the sanction of that Law 
 ot Fear. But to gain attention to- the hea^ 
 irenly promulgation of the New Covenant, 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 8f 
 
 the Evangelicnl Law of Love, which teaches 
 mankind to look up to the supreme Deity 
 with grateful affection, as to their common 
 Father, Friend, and Benefactor, and to regard 
 the whole human race as brethren entitled to 
 every instance of kindness, beneficence, and 
 love from each other, miracles of a A^ery dif* 
 ferent nature seem obviously requisite to 
 make them correspond with the intent and 
 spirit of the revelation itself. Accordingly, 
 in the history which Luke hath given us of 
 instances of miraculous power exerted in 
 proof of the divine authority of their mission, 
 both by Jesus Christ himself and his Apostles^ 
 if we except the interpolated miracle of the 
 destruction of the herd of swine, and the* 
 miraculous suppression of the dangerous 
 storm Avhich had alarmed the fears of his 
 disciples in crossing the Lake, (a miracle sin- 
 gularly calculated to confirm their entire con- 
 fidence in the protection of that almighty 
 power by which their Master was commis- 
 sioned to preach the Gospel) they are all 
 
 * I have omitted the wonderful draught of fishes, not knowing 
 whether it be universally admitted to be a miracle. Vet, consider- 
 ing the situation and circumstances of the Apostles, no miracu- 
 lous act could have been more proper, both to attach them to their 
 Master, and to prove their own disinterestedness concerning worldly 
 v»'^alth. 
 
 p 4> 
 
83 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 works of mercy, benevolence, and tender 
 compassion : such as feeding the hungry, 
 healing every kind of sickness and disease, 
 giving sight to the bhnd, and soundness to the 
 lame, and restoring suspended animation, to 
 comfort a disconsolate widow or the deeply af- 
 flicted parents of an only child: works which 
 breathe the same spirit of benevolence and 
 universal love as the religion whose divine au- 
 thority they were intended to attest, and 
 which hold forth to all the disciples of that 
 religion a most striking lesson of duty, to 
 exert, on all occasions, whatever faculties 
 they are endowed with, for the same amiable 
 purposes of charity and beneficence. And that 
 this suitableness of the nature of the miracles 
 to the spirit of our religion itself was not ac- 
 cidental, but intentional, our Lord himself 
 teaches us, in the rebuke he gave to his dis- 
 ciples, when, provoked by the inhospitable 
 affront put upon their Master by some Sama- 
 ritans, they proposed his calling down mira- 
 culous destruction upon them, like one of the 
 Jewish prophets, " Ye know not,'' says he, 
 " what manner of spirit ye are of. For the 
 ** son of man is not come to destroy men's 
 " lives, but to save them." And also by de- 
 legating to his apostles and the ^seventy dis- 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 80 
 
 ciples, power to, be exerted only in tlie 5ame 
 benevolent acts. 
 
 II L In reviewing tlie predictions contained 
 in the evangelical liistory of Luke, the two 
 first which present thennselves, are in the con- 
 cise account given us, in the third, or, us 
 I reckon it, in the first chapter, of the preaci:- 
 ing of John the Baptist. When John asks 
 the people, who had warned them to flee from 
 ihe wrath about to come upon them ? and 
 teaches them the only way to avoid it ; and 
 adds, even now the axe is laid at the root of 
 the trees; he plainly intimates that the divine 
 vengeance, denounced upon that nation by 
 their own prophets^ was fast approaching, and 
 would actually come upon that depraved ge- 
 neration. A prophetic admonition of an 
 event which it was not in the power of any 
 man to foresee by his own sagacity; but 
 wdiich we know was fully and fatally accom- 
 plished, w^ithin little more than forty years • 
 afterwards, by the intire destruction of Jeru- 
 salem, and extirpation of the Jews from their 
 .own country. The second is a prediction of 
 the Baptist respecting the true Messiah, 
 whom he declares himself not to be, but says 
 
to THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 that he is coming ; and instead of hspUmi^ 
 his disciples with water, like himself; should 
 baptize them with the hohj inspiration and with 
 Jive. This very prediction is repeated by 
 Jesus Christ himself to his disciples, after his 
 resurrection ;* and, by its literal completion a 
 few days afterwards, on the memorable day 
 of Pentecost, afforded the Apostles and first 
 followers of our Lord a most convincing, 
 double proof of the truth and divine authority 
 of the mission, both of their Master and the 
 Baptist John. 
 
 In the fifth chapter, verse So^ we find our 
 Saviour, in the answer he gives to the question 
 of the Scribes and Pharisees, why his disciples 
 never fasted ? which those of John and of the 
 Pharisees did frequ en tl}^ foretelling, that he 
 the Bridegroom^ adopting the same parabolical 
 denomination by which he is sometimes 
 spoken of, both in the preceding predictions 
 of the Jewish prophets, and in the subsequent 
 Christian prophecy of the Revelation, should 
 Jye taken away from them; and that, during 
 that separation, his disciples indeed should 
 fast;\\mi is, should really be in a state of 
 kumiliation, sufferins:, and affliction, lliat 
 
 * Acts i. 5. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. m' 
 
 tliis is our Lord*s true meaning, and not that 
 his disciples would adopt days of voluntary 
 fasting and humiliation, as a religious obser- 
 vance Hke the Pharisees, is evident from the 
 parable which he subjoins immediately to this 
 answer, by wdiich he teaches the Jews, that 
 for him to graft his spiritual religion upon the 
 carnal ordinances of the Mosaic ritual, would 
 be as improper and as absurd as for a man 
 who had purchased a new garment, instead of 
 wearing it and laying aside his old one, to 
 repair and patch his old garment with pieces 
 cut out of the new ; which could only spoil 
 the new, and make a ridiculous motley of the 
 old: And though it was no more Wonderful, 
 that they should prefer the rites and ceremo- 
 nies of their Law to the simple purity of his 
 Gospel, than that men, whose palates had 
 been long habituated to old wdne, should not 
 immediately relish new, though perhaps of a 
 superior quality, which they had never tasted 
 before; yet the old ordinances and observan- 
 ces of their Law were as ill suited to the 
 spirit of the religion he preached, as old, de- 
 cayed, leathern bottles were, to contain new 
 wine whose fermentation was not yet over. 
 That fasting, in its strictest sense, made a part 
 
92 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 of the afflictions endured by his i\postles and 
 eariiest disciples, appears from Paul's enu- 
 meration of the sufferings he had endured for 
 the Gospel's sake,* where he recounts his 
 being m hunger and thirsty in fastings often; 
 and therefore our Lord, by a very common 
 figure of speech, putting a part for the whole, 
 answers the question as if he had said, " Fast- 
 " ing is a state df grief, affliction, and humilia- 
 " tion; and whilst I, the delegate of heaven, 
 " who announce to them the joyful tidings of 
 *' the New Covenant, remain with them, such 
 " U state were as improper and as unnatural 
 " for them, as it would be for the attendants of 
 " the bridegroom at a marriage feast: but the 
 " time approaches, when I shall be removed 
 " from them, and during my absence, it will 
 ^' be their lot to be amply grieved, humbled, 
 " and afflicted." To the same purport many 
 other prophetic admonitions, contained in 
 this history, in the Acts and in the Apoca- 
 lypse, repeatedly assert the constant state of 
 affliction and persecution, in which the faith- 
 ful, conscientious disciples of Jesus Christ 
 would continue, from his ascension to the 
 period of his appearing again to mankind, in 
 
 * 2 Cor. xi. 27. 
 
• THE EVANGELISTS. d3 
 
 the prophetic character of the lamb-like 
 bridegroom, when the true christian church, 
 Im wife,^ shall have made herself readj/. 
 
 It is the more , necessary to point out to 
 public notice the real meaning of this predic- 
 tion, because, whilst the well-known^ too 
 literal completion must convince u§, of the 
 divine authority of the prophet, the very- 
 recording this and similar prophecies, of the 
 same import, by the Apostles and first Disci- 
 ples of Jesus Christ, affords the most striking 
 and satisfactory proof that can be conceived, 
 of their own disiuterested sincerity in;€?rpbra€r 
 ing and preaching to the world the rejigipn of 
 the Gospd; for, the spirit of prophecy being 
 expressly declared to he- the testimony of Jeszis, 
 and of every authentic messenger of heaven, 
 the truth of their masters mission, and even 
 their own veracity, depended upon the ac- 
 complishment of these predictions in their 
 o^V^n persons^ anii ithose 'pfr their fellow 
 christians. From their >yriting3 it appears, that 
 they wetr^wellaw^re of this; and accordingly 
 expected, and were prepared, as the certain 
 consequence of the religious profession they 
 embraced, and to which they zealously invited 
 others, not only to abandon all hopes of tem- 
 
 * Apoc. xix. 7. 
 
m THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 poral emolument and prosperit}', but also 
 to undergo the contempt and hatred of 
 the rest of the world, and all the most mju- 
 rlous or painful inflictions of unrelenting 
 persecution. Unless, therefore, we suppose 
 them to have been the grossest fools and 
 madmen, which no person, who enjoys his 
 own senses, and has read the genuine writings 
 of Luke and Paul, can suppose, it is abso- 
 lutely impossible that any thing less than the 
 most satisfactory^ conviction of the actual 
 resurrection of their illustrious Master to an 
 immortal life, and the firmest confidence that, 
 their present life ended, they, like him, should 
 be amply recompensed for all their sufferings 
 for the Gospel's sake, could have induced them 
 to profess, much less to propagate^ the religion 
 of Jesus Christ. 
 
 The orthodox church, indeed, established 
 by the Emperor Constantine, hath experi- 
 enced none of these prophetic marks of the 
 true disciples of Christ. She very early placed 
 herself under the protection, and prostituted 
 herself to the will, of the Princes of the pre- 
 sent world ; and, instead of suffering humili- 
 ation or afflictions of any kind, by her influ- 
 ence over them, she hath amply shared the 
 authority of her royal paramours, and even 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 97, 
 
 wantoned in the continual enjoyment of tem- 
 poral honours, opulence, and power. But 
 though, for this, amongst many other reasons, 
 she herself cannot be justly allowed the title of 
 the true Church of Christ,* yet, from the first 
 moment of her establishment to the present 
 hour, she hath been the chief means of ac- 
 complishing these prophecies upon the con- 
 scientious disciples of Jesus and his apostles, 
 by the confiscation of their propert}^ the im- 
 prisonment and punishment of their bodies, 
 the deprivation, in numberless cases, of their 
 lives, and, in all, of their natural rights, as 
 men and denizens of their native countries. 
 And it must be matter of no small consola- 
 tion to those faithful Christians, who are able 
 to disceim the signs of the times, that the pre- 
 dicted period of her presumptuous," cruel 
 triumph, and of their own state of degra- 
 dation and oppression, hastens fast to its 
 conclusion. 
 
 In the ninth chapter, verse 21, &c. Luke 
 informs us, that our Lord checked his disci- 
 
 * It is obvious that, by parity of reason, her elder Sister, the 
 Church of Arius, is also barred of all claim to the same title j for 
 though the contest ended at last in favour of the orthodox Church, 
 they were long rivals in the affections of the same worldly potentates, 
 and, during several reigns, enjoyed alternately the same imperial 
 protection, the same honours and emoluments, and disphyed the 
 very same spirit of intolerant persecution. 
 
96 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 pies, for calling him ^//e C//m^ o/'Gor/; that 
 is, the predicted anointed King of the Jews ; 
 and forbad them to call him so to any man ; 
 telling them (without doubt, both to remove 
 -from their minds all expectation of present 
 emolument to themselves, from the idea, so 
 prevalent amongst the Jews, that the pro- 
 mised Messiah was to reio;n over them in all 
 the M'orldly pomp and splendour of a tempo- 
 ral prince ; and to prevent their furnishing 
 the Rulers of the Jews, with the very pretence 
 thej sought for, of accusing him to the Ro- 
 mans, as one who proclaimed himself their 
 King ;) that before he, whose onlj character 
 at present was that of the Son of Man^ or an 
 human prophet, could appear in the glorious 
 character of the Christy or anointed sovereign 
 of the Jews, promised by their prophets, he 
 *' must suffer much, be rejected of the elders, 
 " chief priests, and scribes," as it is repeated 
 in the 44th verse of this chapter, and still 
 more circumstantially, c. xviii. 31 — 34 — " be 
 " delivered into the hands of men, of the 
 *' Gentiles, and be slain, and rise again the 
 *' third day/' Nay, he even described unto 
 them, the particular mode of his suffering 
 death, by adding, that if they were resolved 
 to be his followers, they must learn self-de- 
 
THE EVANGfiLIStS. - Wf 
 
 nial, and imitate him, by being daily prc;? 
 pared to undergo the death of the cross* 
 To these clear and explicit prophecifts of 
 his own death and resurrection, the vision 
 of angels, recorded in the 24th chapter, 
 referred the women ^ who came to embalm 
 jbis body on the third day after his death i 
 and though, being prophecies penned by 
 the historian after the event, they afford 
 its no satisfactory evidence in themselves, yet 
 to his disciples, who well recollected the 
 Words of these predictions, though they did 
 not, at the time, comprehend their meaning, 
 and who then saw them so literally and won^ 
 derfully accomplished, they must have af- 
 forded the most convincing as well as asto- 
 nishing proof of the divine authority of their 
 master's mission, that can be imagined. 
 
 In the conclusion of the same discourse with 
 his disciples, in which he assures them, that 
 after being put to death he should appear in 
 the glorious character of the predicted Christ, 
 or King, and be invested with heavenly 
 power and authority, he adds, " I tell you of 
 ^' a truth, there be some standing here which 
 " shall not taste of death till they see the 
 " kingdom of God/' In ord^' to understand 
 gur Lord's meaning in this prediction, that 
 
|8 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 the kingdom of God wovild appear even 
 before the death of some of those disciples 
 to whom he was then speaking, it is necessary 
 to observe, that though a difierent sense is 
 sometimes given to these words in other 
 scriptures,, and. consequently by commenta- 
 tors upon those scriptures, yet in the writings 
 of Luke and Paul, and in* the book of the 
 Jlevelation; the phrase. Kingdom of God,, or of 
 Christ, is invariably used to signify only the 
 state of the present world under the New 
 Covenant of the Gospel, or the establishment 
 of true Christiaoity amongst mankind. For 
 this reason, when the Pharisees, with ideas of 
 a very different kind,; of earthly kingdom, 
 which they expected: from the Messiah, asked 
 our Saviour,* wheji the kingdom of God should 
 come?, hq answered, that the kingdom of God 
 ^vould not be an object of external shew and 
 observation, but the faithful, obedient sub- 
 jection of the internal disposition and hearts 
 of men to the will of God. Ye shall not be 
 able to point it, out when it comes, saying, 
 " lo, here! or, loj. there! for behold the king- 
 *'* dom of God is within you.'' But. that, after 
 his resurrection, he was actually invested with 
 the heavenly glory and power, of the pre- 
 
 • Luke xvii. 20. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS; 0^. 
 
 dieted Son ' of Gody the Christy or Messiah^. 
 promised to the Jews, was manifested to 
 the eleven apostles and all his other disciples, 
 in his miraculous ascension from off the earth; 
 in the prophetic revelation of the future state 
 of his Church, to his apostle Johil; in his 
 glorious personal appearances, many times 
 vouchsafed to his twelfth, posthumous, apos- 
 tle Paul; and paore extensively in the display 
 of those supernatural powers, with which he 
 endowed the first preachers of his Gospel to 
 the world. And with respect to the estab- 
 lishment of the religion of the New Covenant 
 amongst mankind, there are but two ways of 
 its being effected, suggested to us, in the sacred 
 scripture. One of these is the conviction and 
 conversion of the different nations of the 
 world, to the rational religion of the Gospel, 
 by the preaching to them that word of God, 
 attested to the first ages by the supernatural 
 evidence of miraculous acts, as well as by 
 completed predictions, and to all succeeding 
 generations, by the continually increasing 
 weight of evidence arising from a long series 
 of prophecies; which predication of the 
 truths of the Gospel, in the figurative lan- 
 guage of the Apocalypse, is called* a sharp 
 
 * Apoc. xix. 15. ' 
 G 2 
 
idO THE DISSONANCE eP 
 
 sword proceeding out of the mouth of Christ, 
 a weapon that we are assured will, at length, 
 prove invincible, and entirely extirpate super- 
 stitious error, deceit and falsehood, howsoever 
 powerfully supported : the other, by the sig- 
 nal, providential destruction pf those earthly 
 powers which oppose, and endeavour to sup- 
 press, its progress. By the first pf these 
 means, most oi* the Apostles and first preachers 
 of Christianity saw the kingdom of God take 
 place, in a very considerable degree, before 
 their death, in the conversion of great num- 
 bers^ not of Jews only, but of Pagans, both in 
 Asia and Europe; and by a very memorable 
 and signal instance of the second, in the pre- 
 dicted destruction of the temple and city of 
 Jerusalem, the desolation of the country of 
 Judea, and the entire dispersion of the whole 
 nation of tfae Jews, those first malignant op- 
 posers of the Gospel, and persecutors of the 
 followers of Christ, (an event, which, as it 
 "took place within forty years after the cruci- 
 fixion of Jesus, some of his disciples must have 
 Jived to see^) the rites and ceremonies of the 
 Mosaic religion, were rendered absolutely 
 impracticable for the time to come; the Old 
 Covenant made with that people by the 
 mediation of Moses, cancelled and abolished ;^ 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. lOi 
 
 and no other left subsisting between the 
 Deity, and any of his creatures, except the 
 New Covenant of the kingdmi ofGod^ pro*^ 
 posed to all mankind in the Gospel. 
 
 In the eleventh chapter, verse 29, &c. aixd 
 again in the conclusion of the same chapter, 
 our Saviour, like the Baptist, expressly limits 
 the predicted destruction of Jerusalem, and 
 the calamities that were coming upon that 
 nation, in consequence of their impenitence, 
 and obstinate, inhuman rejection of him, 
 their last and greatest prophet, to that gene- 
 ration to which he was then speaking ; and 
 in verse 29 and 30, specifies the precise num- 
 ber of years that were to intervene between 
 his preaching to them and that dreadful ca- 
 tastrophe. " Thi^ evil generation,'' says he, 
 " seeketh a sign ; and there shall be no sign 
 " given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet. 
 " For as Jonas was a sign unto the Ninevites, 
 " so shall the Son of Man be to this genera- 
 " tion/' The writer usually called Matthew, 
 without the least reason or propriety, makes 
 this similitude, between Jonas and our Sa- 
 viour, to consist in the time that the former 
 was in the whale's belly, and the latter in 
 the grave ; but if the fabulous interpolation 
 of the two first chapters of the Book of Jo* 
 
 G 3 
 
105 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 Ml 
 
 iiah, (to which Mendelsohn,* the late learned 
 Jew of Berlin, assures'us no reasonable Jew 
 ever pays the least regard) could be true ; yet 
 w^hosoever compares the geographical situa- 
 tion of Nineveh, with respect to the Mediter- 
 ranean sea, will be convinced that nothing 
 transacted upon that sea could fall under 
 the notice of the inhabitants of Nineveh, nor, 
 consequently, be any sign to thein at all. 
 The only sign that Jonas was to the Ninevites, 
 was his being a prophet, commissioned by 
 God, to preach to them repentance and righ- 
 teousness; to upbraid them with their vicious 
 immoralities ; and to denounce, if their wic- 
 kedness was continued, the destruction of 
 their city, ^^iXhmforUjdays^ that is, (according 
 to the tmiform meaning of that expression in 
 prophetic language) /or-^^/ //^«^^> ixom. the time 
 of his preaching. Such a preacher of re- 
 pentance and righteousness, onlj^ in a much 
 superior and more distinguished character, 
 Avas Jesus Christ, to the nation of the Jews ; 
 he repeatedly assured them, that "except 
 ^^ they repented, like those Galileans, whose 
 *' blood Pilate had mingled with their sacri- 
 " fices, and those upon whom the tower of 
 
 ^ ,• See the. Letter prefixed to his Dialogue on xh& Immortality of 
 ''iheSoul. 
 
THE EViVNGEtlSt^ ife 
 
 " Siloain fell and slew them, they should all 
 " likewise perish ;" and by ^this similitudfe 
 between the denunciation of Jonah' and his 
 own, he plainly declares, that the destruc- 
 tion of Jerusalem would be ' accomplished 
 within forty years after his death ; for tliat 
 they would not hearken to his preaching, and 
 repent, as the men of Nineveh did at the 
 preaching of Jonas, and that, therefore^ the 
 destruction of their city would not be post- 
 poned beyond the then existing generation, 
 like that of Nineveh, and that, in the judg- 
 ment which was so soon coming upon them, 
 they would stand condemned by the striking 
 contrast between the behaviour of the people 
 of Nineveh and, their owu. Agreeably to 
 this prophetic denunciation of our Saviour, 
 from his crucifixion, that is, from the seven- 
 teenth of the emperor Tiberius, to the final 
 destruction of the city and temple of Jerusa- 
 lem, by Titus, in the second year of the reign 
 of Vespasian, is a period of exactly forty 
 years.* 
 
 * Luke informs us, thnt the ministry of John the Baptist began in 
 the fifteenth year of Tiberius; and as the Jewish year commenced 
 only fourteen days before the Passover, at which time it was the duty, 
 both of John himself, and the nation of the Jews, in general, to be 
 engaged at Jerusalem in the celebration of that feast, it is next to 
 certain, that he did not begin to preach and baptise, till after the feast 
 of the Passover of that year; If any time at all, therefore, be allowed 
 for the ministry of John, before Jesus began to preach the new covenant 
 
 G 4 
 
104 TW[E' DISSONANCE OF 
 
 The thirteenth chapter of the Gospel ac- 
 cording to Luke, verse 18-^21, contains two 
 prophetic simiUtudes of the kingdom of God, 
 that is of the state of true Christianity in the 
 world, which are plain predictions, that the 
 religion of the Gospel, of however small ex^ 
 tent and influence at the beginning, will in 
 time become sufnpieutly extensive to j^fFord 
 refuge and consolation, to the various nations 
 .of the earth ; and that though its influence 
 may be slow, and for some time scarcely per- 
 
 of the kingdom of God, the haiVest, previous to which our Lord's dis- 
 ciples r4.ibbed the ears of corn for food, must have been the harvest of 
 the sixteenth year of that emperor ^ and his public ministry, which pre- 
 ceded that circumstance but a short time, must have begun soon after 
 the Passover of that year, and after Herod had imprisoned John, 
 through a jealous fear of his popularity. Consequently, the succeed- 
 'iftg Passover, at which, Luke tells, our Saviour was crucified, was m 
 the «eventeenth year oF the reign of Tiberius. Now Tiberius reigned 
 twenty-two years and almost seven months, and died March l(5th ; 
 so "tliat'from the Crucifixion to the Pa§sover, which, followed th^ 
 death of 
 
 Y. M. D. 
 
 Tiberius, was just ...,.,....•.. 6" 
 
 Caligula reigned 3 10 8 
 
 Claudius .-t 13 820 
 
 Nero f. 13 8 
 
 Galba ........ ^ 7 13 
 
 Otho 3 4 
 
 Yit;ellius> about • f 8 
 
 38 9 15 
 
 So -that from our Lord's death to the first Passover after Vespasian wat^ 
 made Emperor, was thirty-nine years j aiid consequently to the same 
 festival, in the second year of his reign, when his son Titus l^d 
 the fatal siege to that devoted city, was exactly forty.years. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. l&r* 
 
 ceivcd, yet it will assuredly at length, spread 
 itself over the whole globe. These prophecies 
 still remain to be completed, and therefore, 
 at present afford no satisfactory evidence of 
 the truth and divine authority of the Gospel. 
 They naturally suggest, however, some very 
 important reflections to the observing mind, 
 which is desirous to distinguish truth from 
 error, and to avoid embracing the latter for 
 the former. 
 
 It is natural for many sorts of seeds, which, 
 at length, rise to the size of extensive trees, to 
 lie long in the ground, before their vegetation 
 is perceptible, and to increase very slowly for 
 a considerable length of time ; a very small 
 quantity of leaven also, inclosed within a 
 great bulk of meal, must necessarily operate 
 very slowly, and require a long time before 
 much effect from it can he discerned, and a 
 cold, unfavourable season would naturally 
 restrain the vegetation in the one case, and 
 check the fermentation in the other ; yet in 
 process of time both might be completely per- 
 fected : but when a seed is once grown to 
 the dimensions of a large tree, it is contrary 
 to the whole course of nature for it to rfe- 
 crease ; and dough once leavened cannot be- 
 come unleavened. We may- therefore, pro- 
 
106 THE I>ISSONANCE OF 
 
 nounce with certainty, upon the credit of 
 these prophetic similitudes, that," notwith- 
 standing its being called, and professing to be> 
 Christian, the rehgion which spread so rapidly 
 in the second and third centuries, which, in 
 the fourth century was established, by the au- 
 thority of the Roman emperors, under the ti- 
 tle of the orthodox and holy catholic church, 
 and which, for some ages, prevailed exclu- 
 sively in every country in Europe, and in a 
 very large part of Asia and Africa, was not 
 the church of Christ, nor the religion of his 
 Gospel. For, besides that it did not make 
 its progress in the slow, gradual manner here 
 described, in the seventh century, upon the 
 rise of the Mahomedan superstition, it soon 
 decreased^ ,and became diminished in its ex- 
 tent, and continued gradually losing ground^ 
 till at length, it was supplanted by it out of 
 all Asia, Africa, and a considerable part of 
 Europe, that is, particularly out of all those 
 regions of the world, where it originated, and 
 was first established ; and the fabulous reli- 
 gion of the pretended Arabian prophet, at 
 this day, occupies a much larger extent of 
 the earth, tlian ever was occupied by the re- 
 ligion oi tiie orthodox church, in its most 
 flourishing condition. As the members of 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. lOT 
 
 tliat church make a merit of foregoing the 
 use of their reason, in questions concerning 
 their religion, it is no wonder that difficulties 
 like these, affect them not with the slightest 
 impression, though they acknowledge that 
 the constant over-ruling providence of God 
 restrains or promotes every important change 
 in the affairs of men : but a disinterested, un- 
 prejudiced observer will easily discern suffi- 
 cient reason for God's so conspicuously de- 
 claring his preference of the Maliomedan to 
 the orthodox superstition. If ^Ye compare 
 them only in two striking features, the one 
 respecting the Deity him3elf, the other as in- 
 fluencing the morals of mankind, we shall 
 find that Mahomedariism, by teaching the 
 undivided uncom^pounded unity of almighty 
 God, gives its professors a just and rational 
 idea of the purely spiritual, incorporeal na- 
 ture of the author of their existence, and the 
 only proper object of their adoration; and, 
 as it prohibits and prevents idolatry of every 
 kind, it so far coincides with the first great 
 purpose \ and design of all revealed religion, 
 and must so far, therefore, meet with the 
 approbation of the immutable God of truth; 
 whilst the orthodox church, on the contrary, 
 represents God as of a compounded nature. 
 
JOS THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 SO monstrous and irrational, that she herself 
 declares her own definition of him to be un- 
 intelligible, though it must be believed; and 
 by addressing distinct and separate worship 
 to each of the three different agents, that 
 compose her triform Deity, and to one of 
 them as incarnate in an human body like our 
 own, she directly contradicts the voice of the 
 Almighty, concerning himself,, and estab- 
 lishes, as a religious duty, every species of 
 idolatry forbidden by divine Revelation. The 
 Koran also, by the single prohibition of the 
 use of strong drink, whilst it effectually en- 
 forces on its disQiples a rigid observance of 
 the Gospel precepts of continual temperance, 
 b}'' constantly preserving the temperament of 
 their bodies cool and undisturbed, and their 
 irational faculties clear and unclouded, can^' 
 not fail of having a powerful influence, highly 
 favourable to their bodily health, and the 
 moral virtue of their minds;* whereas, in 
 Christendom, the constant, copious use, and 
 very frequent intemperate and excessive 
 
 * I was, many years ago, assured by an intimate friend, an intel- 
 ligent, worthy man, who had traded largely, both in the northern 
 parts of Africa, and in many different countries of Europe, that I;e 
 \vas never once deceived in cpnfiding in the honour and integrity of 
 a Mahomedan ; Hiit that, through the perfidy and dishonesty of somes 
 
 'of thos« he dealt w ith, he had been defrauded and injured in every 
 
 , nation of yrofe^itd C hristians. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. ' 109. 
 
 abuse, of fermented liquors, has eifFects fatally 
 pernicious both to the bodily health and mo- 
 rals of its inhabitants. 
 
 It is tme, the orthodox church preaches the 
 pure ethics of the Gospel, and the virtue of 
 temperance amongst the rest; but she has, at 
 the same time, ingeniously and impiously, 
 contrived to render her own, and what is still 
 worse, all the preaching of the Gospel, of none 
 effect, by her doctrine of the death of Jesus, 
 considered as a propitiatory sacrifice of infi- 
 nite efficacy, and an universal atonement for 
 sin. Even the protestant subdivisions of that 
 church, in their most sacred and solemn acts 
 of devotion, as well as in the sermons of their 
 preachers, declare that, by his death, afulU 
 perfect and sufficient sacrifice^ oblation mid 
 satisfaction, hath been made to the divine jus- 
 tice, jfor the sins of the whole world. Gracious 
 God, have mercy upon the presumptuous 
 folly and madness of thy erring €reaturesl — 
 By this single doctrine, she has erected an 
 universal asylum, as far as another life is con- 
 cerned, not for intemperance alone, but for 
 every other vice and crime, of which human 
 nature is capable. The miserable, quibbling 
 supplement to this shocking doctrine, tliat 
 repentance and a proper faith is necessary, 
 
110 tHE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 for the particular application of the benefits 
 of this atonementj can be of no avail; for no 
 sinner can believe that a jW Being will 
 inflict any punishment on account of offences 
 foi* which he has already actually received 
 perfecl mid sufficient satisfaction: and, besides, 
 since the people are also taught, that a sinner 
 may effectually recur to this saving faith and 
 repentance, even on his death-bed, or in the 
 condemned dungeon of Newgate, what reli- 
 gious motive can any man have to curb and 
 restrain his natural passions or inclinations, 
 so long as he hath it in hi^ power to gratify 
 them, at any rate, when he knows, that to the 
 last moment of his life, he can hope to screen 
 himself against the deserved consequence of 
 his wickedness, by taking refuge at the cross 
 of Christ ? If any reflecting person . can 
 doubt of the dreadfully pernicious influence, 
 which such a persuasioti as this, must have 
 tipon the morals of the people in general,* 
 
 * I say, in general, because, so congenial is moral virtue to our 
 tmcorrupted nature, that the world hath, at all times,' produced ex- 
 emplary, virtuous individuals, even amidst the grossest abuses of 
 superstition of every kind. Without doubt there are, and always 
 have been, many good and amiable characters amongst the members 
 of the orthodox Church, in spite of the. naturally evil tendency of 
 her doctri^ies ; as Pagan Athens^ even in the libertine and vicious 
 age of Alcibiades arid Aristophanes, could boast a Socrates'and a 
 Xcnophon» . '. ' . 
 
THE Evangelists. ut 
 
 wheresoever it is embraced, let him, for a 
 moment, consider what would be the certain 
 effect, should the Legislature set up an asy- 
 lum for murder, in every parish in the king- 
 dom, to which, if the wilful murderer could 
 flee before he was apprehended, he should be 
 exempt from punishment. Society would 
 soon experience the evil consequences of such 
 a policy, in the centuple multiplication of in- 
 stances, even of that crime the most shock- 
 ing to human nature. And, to complete 
 his conviction of the similar effects, whieli 
 this docti'ine has, and ever hath had, upon 
 the morals of professed Christians, he needs 
 only to review the moral history of Christen- 
 dom, from the beginning of the fourth, and 
 attend to the vicious immoralities every 
 where continually practised by persons of all 
 stations, within the sphere of his own obser- 
 vation, in this first decade of the nineteenth 
 century of the Christian iEra.* 
 
 * To maintain a religious establislirnent, whose main object is the 
 preaching up this pernicious asylum to the people, according to ti;e 
 estimate of the Lord Bishop of LandafF,* costs this country two mil- 
 lions sterling every year. But, on a supposition that the amount 
 of ^1 the landed eatates in our own country, which may be justly 
 deemed ecclesiastical, are equivalent to all the Lay impropriations or 
 tithes in Lay hands, which, I persuade myself, cannot be far from the 
 xruth, it is easy to shew that the v^iue of our ecclesiastical revenue, 
 
 * Seehijs Charge to the Clergy, 179 i. 
 
112 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 In the answer which our Lord gives, verse 
 24 — 30, to the question, whether there were 
 few that should be saved from the woes he 
 
 is above double what the learned and liberal minded Prelate takes if 
 to be. For since, in the cases of new inclosures, the smallest pro- 
 portion of land allotted to the Clergy, by the Legislature, in lieu of 
 tythes, is one seventh, the value of the tithes of the Whole kingdom 
 ipust be equal to, at least, one seventh of the land. Now, from 
 the calculations of Sir John Sinclair, and other the most able 
 estimator!?, it appears, that tlie anniial rental of the whole kingdorrt 
 amounts to full si* ty millioas j but as houses, except in the city of 
 London, are not subject to any kind of tithe, supposing the rental of 
 all the rest of the houses to be equal to that of the land, the titheable 
 property will then amount totkirty millions yearly, the seventh part 
 of which is rather more than four millions and a quarter. A sum 
 "Which, whenever the thlie arrives when our Rulers, thinking it 
 right to prove themselves the impartially equitable, common parents 
 of the whole national family, by favouring the tenets and opinions of 
 no one sect or party above the rest, instead of vainly attempting to 
 controul and regulate the minds of their subjects, in matters concetn* 
 ing only God, and their own consciences, shall content themselves 
 with restraining and regulating their overt actions and civil conduct, 
 by the vigorous and equal execution of wise and wholesome laws, and 
 leave ever}'^ man, like the various sects of dissenters of the present 
 day, to chuse his own mode of worshipping the Deity, and remune- 
 rating his own religious instructor, will be sufficient, by selling the 
 tithes to the several proprietors of land, at only twenty-five years' 
 purchase, and the estates to the highest biddei*, greatly to reduce the 
 present immense national debt, and thereby exonerate the people of 
 between three and four millions of taxes. In the fortunate, affluent 
 circumstances of this nation, should Administration have wisdom, 
 and equity, and true christian piety enough, to adopt such a plan of 
 religious reformation, without waiting till it is forced upon them, bjr 
 the tumultuous, violent paroxysm of some convulsion of the state, 
 it might be quietly effected, in the course of a few years, without the 
 smallest injury to any one individual, by a gradual abolition of the 
 present ecclesiastical establishment, and a proportional diminution 
 of the public burthens, on the voidance of every benefice, either by 
 the death or voluntary resignation of the leveral incumbents, 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. llj 
 
 <ienounced against the faithless and disobe- 
 xlieiit, by being admitted members of the 
 kingdom of God) that is of the society of 
 true and faithful Christians? he advises his 
 hearers to endeavour to enter into that king- 
 dom through the lowly, narrow entrance of 
 the persecutions, difficulties^ and discourage- 
 ments which awaited them, for that great 
 numbers would seek to obtain the name of 
 Christians by very different means, but that 
 though they should call themselves his dis- 
 ciples, and plead that his Gospel had been 
 preached amongst them, he would reject them 
 as strangers to his religion, because they had 
 been worker a of iniquity : yet that the mem- 
 bers of his Church and faithful subjects of 
 God's earthly kingdom should be composed 
 of people of the different nations from every 
 quarter of the globe. And, in the 28th verse, 
 he seems to predict, that at the prophetic 
 period, denominated Christ's coming, to de- 
 stroy the opposers of his Gospel and to estab- 
 lish his promised kingdom over the earth, not 
 only those faithful Christians who have suf- 
 fered persecutions and violent deaths, for his 
 sake, shall miraculously be restored to life 
 again before the rest of the dead, as the pro'« 
 phets Paul and John assure us, but that the 
 
 H 
 
til THE DISSONANCE Of 
 
 tiiree great Patriarchs also, and all the distin- 
 guished Jewish prophets, will partake of the 
 ^ame happy, glorious pre-eminence. To this 
 honourable, happy event the Angel seems also 
 •to allude, when, at the close of the piophetic 
 visions vouchsafed to Daniel, he says to the 
 Prophet, " But go thou thy way till the end be : 
 ?^ for thou shalt resi^ and stand in thy lot at the 
 1'end of the days/' But the force of the testi- 
 tnony of these, like that of all other unaccom- 
 plished prophecies, cannot be felt before the 
 time of their actual completion shall arrive. 
 
 In the conclusion of this thirteenth chap- 
 ter, out blessed Saviour, replying to some 
 who advised him to depart out of Galilee for 
 fear of Herod, assures them, that he should 
 securely continue working miracles in that 
 district for three days longer, for that his 
 death could be accomplished only at Jerusa- 
 lem; and apostrophizing the inhabitants of 
 that metropolis, in a pathetic commiseration 
 of the desolation so soon to come upon them 
 in consequence of their obstinate incredulity 
 and rejection of his mission, he adds, that, 
 nevertheless, they should not see him till they 
 should say. Blessed is he that cojneth in the 
 name of the Lord. When he predicted this 
 cii:feumstanee, he was at a considerable dis- 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 515 
 
 tance from Jerusalem, attended only by the 
 Apostles and a few other disciples who fol- 
 lowed him from Galilee; but as he approached 
 the metropolis, \Ve may easily conceive what 
 crowds of its inhabitants the fame of such an 
 extraordinary prophet would draw forth, to 
 see him and his wonderful works, and to hear 
 his instructions ; and upon his entry into the 
 citj% Luke informs us*, that this whole mul- 
 titude burst forth into a spontaneous comple- 
 tion of this prediction, exclaiming. Blessed is 
 the king that cometh in the name of the Lord: 
 peace in heaven and glory in the highest. To 
 those who had heard his words in Galilee, this 
 event must have afforded a convincing proof 
 of the divine gift of prophecy with which 
 their master was endowed from heaven : but 
 since this history was penned, long after 
 that event had come to pass, it can, in itself, 
 be of no important use to w5, except to shew 
 that the Apostles and first disciples of Jesus 
 Christ, having received proofs of his heavenly 
 mission, by means of completed prophecy as 
 well as miracles, had every requisite and pos- 
 sible means of being fully and rationally con- 
 vinced of the truth and divine authority of 
 that Gospel, which they preached after his 
 
 * chap. xix. 38. 
 H 2 
 
tieJ rnt DISSONANCE OF 
 
 death, arid for which they wilUngly sacrificed 
 all their interests in the present world. 
 
 V. We have seen that in the 11th chapter, 
 our Lord predicted that the total destruction 
 of Jerusalem would happen within forty 
 years from his preacliing the Gospel to the 
 Jews ; and in the IJth chapter, from verse 
 22 to the end, he foretells, that its destruc- 
 tion, which is here described as one instance 
 of his coming with power to establish his pro- 
 mised kingdom, by the signal, providential 
 extirpation of the first inveterate enemies 
 and opposers of his religion should be sudden 
 and unexpected, like the flash of lightning 
 that frequently begins a Avddely destroying 
 storm ; and when the people should as little 
 think of the fatal danger impending over 
 them, as the men of Noah's age thought of 
 being overwhelmed by the deluge, or the in- 
 habitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, of perish- 
 ing by sulphureous showers of fire. Accord- 
 ingly, Josephus informs us, that such a cala- 
 mity was so little expected at the time when 
 it befel them, that Jerusalem was then filled 
 with multitudes who w^ere come from every 
 quarter to celebrate the Passover ; and that 
 Titus himself, far from intending to destroy 
 
THE EVANGELISTS, Ij? 
 
 the city, much less with the shocking circum- 
 stances with which the siege was attended, 
 took every measure in his power to prevent 
 it, till impelled to it by the irritating, wicked 
 conduct of that miserable, devoted people. 
 In the last verse of this chapter, to the ques- 
 tion, where is this unexpe(^ted slaughter and 
 devastation to happen? our Lord replies; 
 where the great carcase of the nation, their 
 metropolis, 25, there will the eagles^ a phrase 
 peculiarly expressive of the Roni^n armies, be 
 gathered together to its destruction. That 
 this prediction, respecting the actual destroy- 
 ers of the city of Jerusalem, within so short a 
 space as forty years, was literally accom- 
 plished, we all know, and many of those who 
 heard it uttered, must have lived to see : but 
 according to all appearances, at the time 
 when it was given, nothing could be more 
 improbable. Judea was already a Roman 
 province, and the Jews, in peaceable submis- 
 sion to the mild yoke of their conquerors, en- 
 joyed tranquillity and prosperity ; and their 
 chief magistrates were upon so good terms 
 with the Roman Governors, that, to comply 
 ^vith their earnest solicitations, after having 
 in vain repeatedly endeavoured to dissuade 
 them from their request, Pilate sacrificed, not 
 
 11 3 
 
%i| THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 only the common feelings of humanity, but 
 all sense of the honour and justice of a luleiv 
 by ordering a man to be crucified, whom he 
 himself declared to be -without fault : and one 
 of his successors, above twenty-five years af- 
 ter\^^ards, ^yen in the moment of quitting his 
 government, for the very same purpose of 
 doing the Jews a pleasure^ left Paul in bonds 
 and imprisonment, though fully satisfied of 
 hi$ innocence. When, therefore, we consider, 
 that it Wj^s )the great body of the Jewish na- 
 tion assembled at Jerusalem, to keep the fes- 
 tival of tire Passover, who, haying accused 
 him to the Roman power, as one who endea- 
 voured to excite a rebellion against Caesar, 
 rejoiced in having unjustly accomplished the 
 ignominious, cruel death of the meek and inno- 
 cent Jesus, the messenger of heaven, and the 
 mediator of that new covenant, whicii God, 
 by Moses and the old prophets, had assured 
 theii^ fathers he would make with their poste- 
 rity; and that it was at the very same national 
 assembly forty years afterwards, that they 
 themselves, on account of their own atrocious- 
 ly crimiaial, infatuated conduct, and being in 
 actual nebellion against Caesar, began to suf- 
 fer every possible destructive cruelty of a siege, 
 in the end of which, Jerusalem was rased and 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. H» 
 
 levelled with the ground, by that very Roman^ 
 power ; not only the completion of a pro- 
 phecy, which, at the time of its prediction, 
 seemed so unlikely to come to pass, but so 
 signal an instance of retributive justice, in 
 the course of the divine providence over the. 
 affairs of men, must surely strike every ra- 
 tional mind with the most awful and import- 
 ant reflections. 
 
 In the beginning of the 18th chapter^ which 
 is a continuation of the conversation we 
 have just been considering, a parable is in- 
 troduced, by way of instructing his disci- 
 ples that they should never fail to offer up 
 their daily prayers to almighty God : and the 
 inference deduced from it is in these words :. 
 " Hear what the unjust judge saith. And 
 " shall not God avenge his own chosen 5er- 
 '^ vants^ who cry day and night unto him, 
 " though he bear long with them ? I tell you 
 " that he will avenge them speedily," or ra- 
 ther suddenly. The sudden and hasty de- 
 struction of the Jewish nation, just mentioned 
 above, was one memorable instance of God's 
 severely avenging the unmerited sufferings 
 and cruel persecution of Jesus himself, ^nd 
 his apostles and first faithful followers, after 
 bearing with them for forty years; and is an 
 
 u 4 
 
tsa THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 earnest of the full completion of the divine 
 vengeance, according to this and many otiier 
 predictions, upon the enemies of his Gospel^ 
 and the persecutors of his conscientious dis- 
 ciples, at that now not very distant period, 
 which the scriptures denominate Ms coming. 
 
 This prophetic assurance is immediately 
 followed by an affecting, tender exclamation, 
 recorded only by Luke, but of a nature 
 equallyprophetic, and so peculiarly expres- 
 sive of the present state of true and rational 
 Christianity in the world, that it affords a 
 most convincins: testimonv, both of the divine 
 authority of the prophet, and the correct 
 fidelity of the historian. " Nevertheless,'' 
 exclainis our blessed Lord, " when the son of 
 *' man cometh, shall he find faith on the 
 " earth ?*' The extreme paucity of his faith- 
 ful disciples to be found in the world at that 
 great predicted a3ra5 so clearly foretold in thia 
 pathetic ejaculation, is very strongly marked 
 also in the Apocalypse, by the expression, 
 " ray two witnesses,"* that is, a number only 
 just sufficient to bear legal and credible tes- 
 timony to the truth of his Gospel; for under 
 the law of Moses, the regulation ordained by 
 God himself, Avas, "at the mouth of two ox 
 
 * Apoc. xi. 3c 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. m 
 
 ** three witnesses, shall every matter be estab- 
 /' lished/** If indeed tiiose professed Chris- 
 tians, tiie members of the orthodox imperial 
 chmxh of Coustantine, have really adopted 
 the true Christian Faith, our Lord, wke?! he 
 cometh^ can have no difficulty in finding what 
 he so feelingly prelaments the ^vant of He may 
 ^nd it tolerated by the Mahomedans in i\si- 
 ?itic and European Turkey, and reigning tri- 
 umphantly under the protection of the civil 
 powers in all the rest of Europe, from Lap- 
 land to Gibraltar, and from Muscovy to the 
 Azores; he may find it in Africa, America, 
 and in the Indies of the East ; and the wit'- 
 nesses in favour of the orthodox Faiths appear 
 upon the earth, not by twos and threes, but 
 by millions ; so that, on this supposition, 
 there is not the least foundation for our Sa- 
 viour's sorrowful foreboding ; and, as far as 
 predictions of the scarcity of his faithful dis- 
 ciples are concerned, he must be pronounced 
 a false prophet : but the truth is, the religion 
 of that imperial church is so far from being 
 the faith of his Gospel, that it is diametrically 
 opposite to it I and when we deduct in our 
 investigation Jews, Pagans, Mahomedans, 
 the members of the orthodox church, and all 
 
 * Deut, xix. 15. 
 
ISKT THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 tliose speculative, reflecting minds, whom 
 the gross absurdities and contradictions, 
 which that church represents to them as the ' 
 docti'ines of Revelation, have driven to the 
 entire rejection of all revealed religion as fa- 
 bulous and false, well indeed may we adopt 
 Ihe words of our Lord's pathetic ejaculation, 
 and exclaim, " where shall we find Faith on 
 "' the earth ?'Mf 
 
 The parable of the ten pounds, recorded in 
 i}}e succeeding chapter, is said to have been 
 delivered expressly to teach his disciples, 
 (who, notwithstanding his having repeatedly 
 foretold thejn of his death, with all the parti- 
 cular circumstances attending it, still per- 
 suaded themselves that he would immediately 
 assume the sovereignty of the predicted king- 
 dom of God) that he must first go into a re- 
 gion far from the limits of the earthly globe, 
 to receive from tiie supreme Majesty of Hea- 
 ven, the earthly kingdom promised him, and 
 was not to iake possession of it till his return ; 
 ibiit that then he will cause all his enemies to 
 be destroyed, who refuse to acknowledge his 
 iiuthprity, and will reward those faithful ser- 
 vants, who, vvaiting patiently, in full confi- 
 deacje of hi? actually retuj-ning again, invest- 
 ed with supreme power and glory, have made 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. lS»i 
 
 the best improvement tliey could of those mo- 
 ral instructions with which he hath furnbhed 
 them- 
 
 Wtijen-our Lord spoke that parable, he had 
 passed through Jericho and was journeying 
 towards Jerusalem ; and when he came within 
 view of the city, the historian informs us, he 
 could not refrain from weeping over it, at the 
 contemplation of those calamities, which, as 
 a prophet, he foresaw, and so repeatedly de- 
 nounced against it; saying, ^' if thou hadst 
 ** known, even thou, at least in this thy day, 
 ^^ the things which belong to thy peace! but 
 " now they are hid from thine eyes. For the 
 " days shall come upon thee, that thine ene- 
 *' mies shall cast a trench about thee, and 
 '* compass thee round and keep thee in on 
 *' erery side, and shall lay thee even with the 
 ■ ' ground, and thy children within thee: and 
 " they shall not leave in thee, one stone upon 
 " another: because thou knewest not the time 
 " of thy visitation/' In the 21st chapter, 
 this last circumstance is again repeated : and 
 botli that and the entire circumvallation of 
 Jerusalem, two things, quite unusual with the 
 Romans in their sieges, were literally accom- 
 plished by them, in the case of that unhappy 
 city. Nay, the whole prediction of the de- 
 
iU THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 struction of Jerusalem, expressly limited to 
 the experience of that generation of the Jews, 
 as it is recorded by Luke, contains so many 
 singular, extraordinary circumstances, pre- 
 cedino; tand attendin^j that sieoe, not men- 
 tioned by Moses, nor any of the old prophets, 
 though some shocking circumstances pre- 
 dicted by them, are (no doubt, for that very 
 reason) omitted by our Saviour, which, who- 
 ever has read the history of that fatal period, 
 -knows to have exactly come to pass, that the 
 Jews themselves have no way of eluding such 
 an incontestable testimony of his divine mis- 
 sion, according to the criterion laid down for 
 them by Moses, but by refusing to admit the 
 authenticity of this evangelical history, saying, 
 that no satisfactory proof is given them, that 
 the history itself was not written, after the 
 event had taken place : but that Luke s his- 
 tory was not so written, is evidenced by every 
 circumstance, that can combine to prove the 
 contrary. 
 
 From the age of the Apostles to the present 
 time, piT)fessed Christians have received, and 
 transmitted down^ this history and the Acts of 
 the Apostles, as written by Luke, an early 
 convert to Christianity, and the friend and 
 companion of Paul; and in the second of 
 
THE EVANGELISTS] 36^^ 
 
 these histories, we, accordingly, find the 
 author describing the travels of Paul, as being 
 himself a partaker of them, and speaking, 
 casually, in so circumstantial a manner, of 
 times, places, and persons, as is scarcely pos- 
 sible for any writer to do, who was not living 
 at the time of the transactions which he re- 
 cords. This second history, relates the situa- 
 tion of the primitive Christian Church, as low 
 as about the fourth year of the emperor Nero, 
 and no lower; and as the author Avrote both 
 his histories, avowedly for the use and perfect 
 information of a friend, amongst the converts 
 to the religion of Jesus, if he had written his 
 latter history, after the reign of that emperor, 
 he must have mentioned many later occur- 
 rences; particularly the unmerited, cruel 
 treatment of the Christians, at Rome, on ac- 
 count of that conflagration, of which, every 
 body was convinced, Nero himself was the 
 real incendiary. So little ground is there, 
 therefore, to imagine that even the Acts was 
 written, after the siege and destruction of Je- 
 rusalem, and the dispersion of the Jews, that 
 there is not tlie least reason to believe, the au- 
 thor was living after those events; and, to 
 suppose that book to have been written later 
 than the fourth or fifth year of Nero, is to con- 
 
U^ . THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 clud6 directly contrary to every degree of ra* 
 tional probability: yet in that work, he refers 
 his friend Theophihis, to his history of the 
 public ministry of Jesus, which contains this 
 wonderful prediction, as to a work already in 
 his possession. But there appears, one par- 
 ticular purpose of that prophecy, which it 
 would not only have been useless, but absurd, 
 to have penned after the event; especially 
 since the accomplishment of that purpose, is 
 no where expressly recorded, and is disco- 
 verable only, by fair inference, from the very 
 silence of the historians of that siege. I mean, 
 that it was intended as a timely warning to our 
 Lord's disciples, amongst the Jews, to preserve 
 them from sharing in the dreadful evils, so 
 soon to befall their country. To this end, the 
 prediction, as far as it relates to circum- 
 stances, previous to the siege, is not expressed 
 in the usual, figurative language of prophecy ; 
 but, in the plainest and most literal terms, 
 they are warned against the pretended Mes- 
 siahs, whom artful imposture or visionary en- 
 thusiasm should produce; are bidden not to 
 be too much alarmed at those wars and com- 
 motions, which would, for some years, pre- 
 cede the final destruction he was predicting; 
 but that, as soon as they should see Jerusalem 
 
THE EVANGELISTS.- pa 
 
 itself invested with armed forces, they should 
 hasten to quit both the metiopolis, and coun- 
 try of Judea; for that then, tliey might be 
 certain the time was come, when the predicted 
 vengeance would be inevitably inflicted on 
 that people; and since no historian mentions 
 any of the Jewish Christians, as involved in 
 the cruel fate of that dreadful calamity, 
 though Josephus repeatedly enumerates all 
 the other sects, and parties, amongst them^ at 
 that critical time, we must conclude, that the 
 Christians, of whom Luke informs us thei-e 
 had always been a considerable church, at 
 Jerusalem from the resurrection of Jesus, to 
 the reign of Nero, and which undoubtedly 
 subsisted still later, profiting by these timely 
 admonitions, and observing the prophetic to- 
 kens of their danger, by separating tliemselves 
 from their nation, and native country in time, 
 escaped the compHcated distresses of the ge- 
 neral ruin. That tliis deliverance of his dis- 
 ciples, was one main purpose of the prophecy^ 
 is still more evident from the reflections whicli 
 our Lord himself makes upon it, as a matter 
 of consolation to them, under the previous per- 
 secutions they were to suffer, from their Jewish 
 brethren, described v. 11 — 19, assuring thenij 
 that when the tokens he has described, begar 
 
126 TPIE msSONANCfe OP 
 
 to come to pass, they might then take comfort 
 and courage; for that their redemption, that is^ 
 their dehverance from their most rancorous 
 and inveterate enemies, drew nigh, and that^ 
 as they could judge, by the natural progress 
 of vegetation, when summer was nigh at hand^ 
 so likewise, when they should see these things 
 come to pass, they might be certain, that the 
 establishment of the new covenant of the 
 kingdom of God amongst men, would very 
 soon commence, in the signal destruction of 
 its first great opposers, and the consequent 
 entire abolition, of the old covenant of 
 Moses. 
 
 But there remains unnoticed another cir- 
 cumstance of this prophecy, which could not 
 be written after the event, because it is at 
 this day fulfilling, and as surely as it is thd 
 dictates of divine truth, will continue to be 
 so for some time longer. " Jerusalem,'' say& 
 the prophet, " shall be trodden down of the 
 *' Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be 
 " fulfilled/' The meaning of this last ex- 
 pression no Jew can be at a loss to under-' 
 stand ; he knows that it always signifies, till 
 the measure of their iniquities is full, accord- 
 ing to the ordinary course of God's providen- 
 tial forbearance with mankind. Thus the 
 
THE feVANGELIStS. 129 
 
 times of the Canaanites were not fulfilled till 
 400 years after God had promised Abraham, 
 that he vrould give their land to be an inheri- 
 tance to his posterity ; the times of the Jews 
 themselves were fulfilled 40 years after their 
 crucifixion of Jesus Christ: and, according 
 to the prophecies of the Gospel, the times of 
 the Gentiles will be fulfilled 1260 years after 
 the perfect establishment of the fabulous and 
 blasphemous superstition, ordained by the 
 Emperor Constantine, in those European 
 states, which compose what once was the 
 body of the Roman Empire. That Jerusa- 
 lem hath hitherto continued in the state here 
 described for full seventeen centuries, every 
 Jew can testify, who must so far bear testi- 
 mony, even against his will, to the truth of 
 this prediction ; and there is not the least ap- 
 parent probability, that its condition will be 
 altered, till the world shall see that grand re- 
 volution in human affairs take place, at the 
 period denominated, in all the Christian scrip- 
 tures, the coming of Jesus Christ, and the 
 establishment of the kingdom of God upoii 
 the earth. ^^ 
 
 The parable of the viiieyat'd and husband- 
 men also, in the twentieth chapter, is evi- 
 dently prophetic of the same event, viz-, that 
 
 I 
 
ISO THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 in return for their fathers' cruel treatment 
 of the old prophets, and for that death which 
 he knew awaited himself at their hands, God 
 would extirpate their nation from their native 
 land, and give it up to be possessed by other 
 people ; teaching them that he was the ob- 
 ject of the prophecy of David, contained in 
 the 118th Psahii, and, though rejected by 
 them, who ought to have been the wilUng 
 builders, would be made the head corner 
 stone of that new religious edifice, which the 
 Almighty had decreed, should be erected 
 amongst men ; and adding, according to the 
 constant tenor of his prophecies on the same 
 subject, " whosoever shall fall on that stone 
 " shall be broken, and on whomsoever it shall 
 ** fall, it will grind hhn to powder,'' that is, 
 will utterly destroy him. 
 
 The last prophecy of our blessed Saviour, 
 recorded in the Gospel according to Luke, 
 being, together with the history of its won- 
 derful accomplishment, within ten days after 
 the prediction, professedly written long after 
 the event, can, of itself, afford no satisfactory 
 evidence to m of his veracity, or divine autho- 
 rity, as a prophet ; but to his disciples, who 
 were the objects of it, it could not fail to yield 
 the fullest conviction of the truth and hea- 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. -tSl 
 
 venly origin of that new religion, they were 
 commanded to preach to the world, at the 
 same time, that it peculiarly qualified them 
 for their commission ; I mean the promise of 
 their being baptised, according to the decla- 
 ration of God, by his prophet the Baptist, 
 with the holy inspiration and with fire ; for so 
 Luke himself explains it, in the first chap- 
 ter of the Acts, where the transactions of Je- 
 sus, from his resurrection to his ascension, are 
 related more particularly and at large. " Be- 
 ^' hold,'' says he, c. xxiv. v. 49, " I send the 
 " promise of my father upon you : but tarry 
 *V3^ in Jerusalem, until ye be endued Avith 
 " power from on high." 
 
 The candid reader is in treated to observe, 
 that, in the conversations between our Lord 
 and his disciples, previous to this prophetic 
 promise of the effusion of the holy inspira- 
 tion, wherein Luke informs us he pointed out 
 to them the completion of those predictions 
 in the Old Testament, which related person- 
 ally to himself and to the preaching the New 
 Covenant of the Gospel, it is particularly 
 insisted on, that its promulgation was des- 
 tined to begin at Jerusalem ; that, on the day 
 of his resurrection, he manifested himself to 
 P.eter, at Jerusalem, and to the two disciples, 
 
 I 2 
 
iSf THE t>UtONAKCE 6F 
 
 as they went toEmmaus; and that, on the sub- 
 sequent evening, that is, according to the Jew- 
 ish computation of time, on the beginning of the 
 second day of the week, he appeared to all the 
 ekven apostles, and thehundred other disciples 
 who accompanied them, in the city of Jeru- 
 salem ; that he continued to instruct and con- 
 verse with them, in the same city and its 
 neighbourhood, for forty days after his resur- 
 rection, and, immediately before his miracu- 
 lous ascension, commanded them to tarry in 
 the city of Jerusalem till they received the 
 promised gift of supernatural inspiration ; 
 and that they accordingly did so, and conti- 
 nually frequented the temple, to offer their 
 praises and thanksgivings to Almighty God, 
 for all the w^onders of v/hich they had been 
 witnesses. The apostles, therefore, never 
 departed from Jerusalem, from the resurrec- 
 tion to the day of Pentecost, 
 
 VJ. Let us then, after this brief review of 
 the miracles and prophecies recorded in the 
 evangelical history of Luke, consider what 
 the whole combined weight of evidence, in 
 favour of its genuine authenticity, amounts 
 to, when cleared of those fabulous and 
 oiroundless additions, which the coarertfl; 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. lit 
 
 from Paganism, and the schools of the later 
 Phitonists, made to it in the beginning of the 
 second century. 
 
 All the historical and other writings of pro- 
 fessed christians, which are extant, agree, as, 
 is before observed, in attributing this Gospel 
 and the Acts of the Apostles, to a very early 
 disciple, though not an apostle, named Luke. 
 Tlie writer himself informs us, that his name 
 %vas Silas ; that he was one of those chief men 
 among the brethren, w^hom the Apostles and 
 the Elders, wath the whole church at Jerusa- 
 lem, sent to acquaint the converted Gentiles 
 in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia, wdth their de- 
 cision respecting the only observances of the 
 Jewish I^aw, that were judged necessary for 
 them ; that he himself Avas a prophet, a duly 
 qualified teacher of the Gospel, and preached 
 much to the people at Antioch, to exhort 
 them to continue in the faith they had adopt- 
 ed; that when his co-delegate, Judas, re- 
 turned to Jerusalem to the Apostles there, he 
 chose to remain in Antioch w ith Paul and 
 Barnabas; that upon the separation which 
 took place, in consequence of a dissension 
 between these two, he was chosen by Paul to 
 supply the place of Barnabas ; and that from 
 that time, to his being sent prisoner to Rome, 
 
 I 3 
 
134 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 and during his residence in that imperial city, 
 he continued Paul's constant adherent, fiiend 
 and fellow-traveller. 
 
 That it was Silas, who wrote these two his- 
 tories, appears thus. From the conclusion of 
 the fifteenth and beginning of the sixteenth 
 chapter of the Acts, we find that when Paul 
 left Antioch, no one but Silas accompanied 
 him, as far as Derbe and Lystra; and that 
 there they were joined by Timotheus, whom 
 Paul chose also to travel with him ; that they 
 three went through Phrygia and Galatia, and 
 came to Troas, where Paul, in a vision, was 
 directed to go over into Macedonia : " and 
 " after he had seen the vision," says the au- 
 thor, " immediately we endeavoured to go 
 '^into Macedonia, assuredly gathering, that 
 f the Lord had called us to preach the Cos- 
 " pel unto them/' This is the first passage 
 in which the writer speaks in his own person ; 
 and in the same person, he frequently ex- 
 presses himself afterwards to the end of his 
 history. Now, since it is evident from this 
 part of the Acts, compared with 2 Cor. c. i. v. 
 ,19, and with the address of both the epistles 
 to the Thessalonians, that Paul had no at- 
 tendants when he first preached the Gospel 
 in Macedonia and Greece, besides Silas or 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. I3g 
 
 Silvanus, of which last name Silas is merely 
 an abbreviation, and Timotheus, one of those 
 two must be professedly the writer of these 
 histories. That it' was not Timotheus, ap- 
 pears from Acts c, xx. v. 4 and 5, where the 
 author enumerates Timotheus amongst those 
 disciples who accompanied Paul, on his re- 
 turn into Asia, and adds, " these going before, 
 /* tarried for us at Troas/' It is Silas or Silva- 
 nus alone, therefore, who professes himself to 
 have been the author of both these important 
 histories. And his manner of informing us 
 that he was so, affords infinitely greater satis* 
 faction respecting the truth of his informa- 
 tion, than could be derived from any titular 
 ascription of them to him, either by himself 
 or others. And though this circumstance, at 
 fii'st, has the appearance of contradiction to 
 the universal historic testimony, which attri- 
 butes them to Luke, they really only confirm 
 the veracity of each other; for Lucas, that is 
 Luke, is exactly the same abbreviation of 
 Lucanus, a name derived from luciis^ a grove 
 or wood, that Silas is of Silvanus from Sylva, 
 a word of the same signification. Since, 
 therefore, we find that amongst those Jewish 
 Christians, particularly, Avho were most con- 
 
136 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 versant amongst the Greeks and Romans, it 
 was customary to change their original Hebrew 
 names, without doubt, the more to familiarize 
 tliemselves to those people, as Tabitha was 
 exchanged for the Greek word Dorcas, and 
 Saul for the Roman name Paulus ; and as is 
 still usual with the Jews in every country ; it 
 seems clear that the name of the author of 
 these histories, which in the Hebrew most 
 probably was some word of similar import, 
 viz. belonging to a grove or wood, might be 
 translated indifferently by the Roman names, 
 Lucanus or Silvanus,* and though he was, at 
 first, called Silas, yet upon the persecution 
 raised by Nero, or some other prudential rea- 
 son, it might be deemed right to vary it to 
 Luke, for many circumstances concur to ren- 
 der it liighly probable, that the Lucas w.hom 
 Paul mentions to Timothy in his second Epis- 
 tle, as the only person who remained with him, 
 is the very same as Silas, both which names, if 
 re-translated into the original Hebrew name, 
 must be expressed by the same word, A very 
 
 * In the same manner, the Hebrew name Aaron, niight have been 
 familiarized to the Iloraans, by being rendered CoUinus or Monta- 
 nus J and an Englishman of the name of Wood, might domesticate 
 his very name in France, by calling himself either Du Bois, or Lsk 
 •Fortt, 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. IST 
 
 probable circumstance, which may well ac- 
 count for later writers calling him by that 
 name. 
 
 It appears, then, upon the united testimonj- 
 of the early Christian writers, and of the au- 
 thor himself, corroborated by that of the 
 Apostle, with whom he was joined in the 
 commission to preach the Gospel in Mace- 
 donia and Greece, that these two books were 
 really written by Silas or Luke, who w^as so 
 well qualified a witness of what he relates, 
 that he was the approved friend and assistant 
 of all the Apostles, from whom he could not 
 fail to receive perfect information, of every 
 fact and doctrine he has recorded, previous to 
 his own conversion ; and was so considerable 
 a personage in the transactions he has related 
 afterwards, that, in the words of the Roman 
 Poet, he might justly have called himself a 
 relater of events, qiiceqiie ipse vUliy et quorum 
 pars 7nagna fid; events whereof he had not 
 only been an eye-witness, but in which he 
 himself had been, for the most part, actively 
 concerned. 
 
 On reviewing and comparing these two 
 histories of Luke, we find the dates of all the 
 important facts clearly and accurately ascer- 
 tained ; there appears in them a perfect har- 
 
iSt THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 mony and consistency, not only with each 
 other and with the epistles of Paul, but with 
 all other historians, who have written of the 
 same times.'*' The miracles recorded in them, 
 
 * of how great importance it is to have the true Author of these 
 histories ascertained, may be seen from the xii. Section of MichaelHs's 
 Introduction to the New Testament. For, owing to his not having 
 observed the satisfactory information given us by the Author him- 
 self, that these histories were written by the Silas mentioned in the 
 second of them, as being himself an inspired Prophet, delegated by 
 James and the rest of the Apostles resident at Jerusalem, the learned 
 Professor is led to imagine, that the Author " was not a native of 
 " Palestinr, but, having accompanied St. Paul thither, made only a 
 *' short stay in Jerusalem, an i spent the greatest part of his time in 
 «* Cesarea." And merely on the grounds of this misapprehension, 
 though he allows him " to appear in all other respects to most ad- 
 ** vantage, when put in competition with the other writers of the 
 •« New Testament," except *' in some particular facts which disagree, 
 «* either really or apparently, with the relations which have been- 
 *' given by profane Historians." And tells us, that even admitting 
 tome errors, " he ceases not to be a most valuable Historian, espe- 
 ** cially in the Actis of the Apostles, where he speaks either as an 
 ''eye-witness himself, or instructed by St. Paul, the companion of 
 •« his journey." Yet lays a greater stress upon the difficulties sup- 
 posed to be found in Luke's writings, than upon those which appear 
 in all the rest, as being more irreconcilable to profane History. All 
 these suppose i difficulties-, except one, exist in the Acts of the Apos- 
 tles, w hi'-h the learned Professor himself, as well as Dr. Lardner, has, in 
 a masterly manner, shewn to be ungrounded j and that Luke's His- 
 tory is entitled to greater credit than that of Josephus, who chiefly 
 contradicts him. So that the only irreconcilable difficulty is, that, 
 ** in the beginning of the Second Chipter of his Gospel, that Christ 
 ** was born during the taxation of Judea, when Quirinius was Go- 
 <' vernorof Syrii, when it is certain, from the Roman historians, that 
 '' Quirinius war^ at that period in a different country." And as I 
 have shewn, from the testimony of the Author himself, that Silas or 
 L'i!:3 wv.s not the Author of the two first Chapters of his Gospel, he 
 must remain, according to the testimony of the learned Professor 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 139 
 
 breathe all thesaine compassionate, benevolent 
 spirit, which is so peculiarly characteristic of' 
 the religion of Jesus Christ ; and they contain 
 the requisite evidence of sundry prophecies, 
 some for the conviction of the first disciples, 
 fulfilled within a few days or weeks after their 
 prediction, others, at the interval of forty 
 years, when the writer himself, in all proba- 
 bility, was not alive, and others extending to 
 all ages, from the first promulgation of the 
 Christian Covenant to the present time, and 
 to a period yet to come. We have here, 
 then, every kind of evidence, whereof the na- 
 ture of the case admits, to convince us of the 
 genuine authenticity and veracity of both 
 these histories; and with these, for my own 
 part, I am abundantly satisfied. Others, per- 
 haps, submitting their judgments to early pre- 
 possessions, or to the decisions of the ortho- 
 dox church, may persuade themselves, with 
 that father of the Church, Theophylact, that 
 God has given the world just four Gospels, 
 neither more nor less, because there are just 
 four cardinal virtues, four seasons of the year, 
 four quarters oftheworid, north, east, south 
 
 himself, a most valuable Historian ; and appear in all respects to supe- 
 rior advantage, when compared with the writers of the other Evan- 
 gelical Histories. 
 
140 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 and west ; and because, as these Gospels arc 
 intended to be pillars to support the whole 
 world, it is necessary there should be one for 
 each of those four principal points of the com- 
 pass : but these and all such ingenious, rheto- 
 rical arguments, have so little weight M-ith me^ 
 that I profess myself better pleased with 
 one evangelical history, satisfactorily authen- 
 ticated, than with four thousand that should 
 be found spurious, or even of doubtful • and 
 reasonably suspicious authority.* 
 
 * *^ It IS very probable, that every one of tlie four Evangelists hatfi 
 ill his book the whole substance, all the necessary parts, of the Gos^ 
 pel of Christ. But for St. Luke, that he hath written such a perfect 
 Gospel, in my judgment, it ought to be with them that believe him no 
 manner of question. Consider, first the introduction to his Gos- 
 pel, where he declares, what he intends to write, in these words*: 
 Voramiuck as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration 
 of those things ti>hirJi are most surcli/ believed aynongaf us, even as they 
 delivered them unt.) usy zvhiehj'rom the beginning were Eye-witnesses, and 
 JSlinisters of the Word^ it s:cmed good to ine also, having had ])erfect 
 VTidcrstanduTg of all tfrir/gs,J'ront the very first, to write to thee, in order, 
 wost excellent Theopkilus, that thou mightesi know the certaintyi of those 
 things, Toherein thou hast been instructed. Add to this place, the en- 
 trance to his History of the Acts of the Apostles : The former Trtatisc 
 have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began, both to do and teach, 
 until the day in which he was taken vp. Weigh well these two places, 
 and then answer me freely and ingenuously to these demands t 
 t. Whether St. Luke doth not undertake the very same thing, which, 
 ha ^i\Y^,tnnny h.id taken in Jumd? 2- Whether this were not to set 
 firih in order, a declaration of those things zvhich were most surety be- 
 lieved amongst Christ iansi o. Whether the whole Gospel of Christ, 
 and cveiy necessary doctrine of it, were not surely believed among 
 Chrrstiims ? 4. Wlretlier tliey, which were Eye-witnesses and Ministers 
 ttflhe Woid,from the beginuint, delivered not the whole Gospel of Christ? 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. Ui 
 
 From what Lukeand other Avriters inform us, 
 there is no doubt but the orthodox church, if 
 •slie had chosen to preserve them, might at this 
 liour have had forty instead of four different 
 Gospels ; and many of them much more de- 
 serving her regard, than three of those she 
 hath thought fit to select and save from the 
 o-eneral wreck, in which the writinsrs of the 
 primitive Christians have been involved : but, 
 as far as the providence of Almighty God is 
 concerned in preserving sufficient notice of 
 the Evangelical Covenant, which he hath 
 proposed to all mankind, I can see no more 
 reason why there should be four distinct au- 
 
 5. Whether he doth not undertake to write in order these things, 
 zvJiereofhe had perfect understanding from the first ? 6. Whether he had 
 not perfect understanding of the whole Gospel of Christ ? 7. Whether 
 2ie doth not undertake to write to Theopbilus of all those things, ■wJxrt- 
 in he had been instructed ? 8- And whether he had not been instructed 
 "in all the necessary parts of the Gospel of Christ ? 9.' Whether, in 
 the other text. All tilings which Jesus begun to do and teach, must not 
 ?-t least imply, all the princlp:d and necessary things ? 10. Whether 
 this be not the very interpretation oF your llhenhh Doctors, in 
 their annotation upon tkis place ? 11. Whether all these Aiticlesc^" 
 the Christian Faith, without the belief whereof, no man can be saved,, 
 be not the principal and most necessary things wh.ich Jesus taught f 
 •12, and l.istly. V/hether many things which St. Luke hath wrote la 
 his Gospel, be not less principal, and less necessary, than all :;nu 
 eveiy one of these ? When you have well considered these propo- 
 sals, I believe you will be very apt to think (if iSt. Luke he of credit 
 with you) that all things necessary to salvation, are certainly con- 
 tained in his writings alone." 
 
 ChillinowortHj chap. iv. art. 4o. 
 
14S THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 thentic histories of the very short period from 
 the Baptism of John to the resurrection of 
 Jesus, than that there should be four histories 
 of the much longer, and equally important 
 period, comprised in the Acts of the Apostles ; 
 or than the Jews should have had four dif- 
 ferent histories of the creation and their 
 Patriarchs, and of the deliverance of their 
 forefathers from the Egyptian bondage. How- 
 ever, since many great, learned and saga- 
 cious men have been in the habit of taking 
 the authenticity of the other three for granted, 
 they certainly ought not to be rejected as 
 spurious, unless sufficient reason can be 
 shewn for so doing. Having, therefore, in 
 Luke's two histories, found a firm and so- 
 lid basis for the genuine religion of Jesus se- 
 curely to stand upon, I the more willingly 
 and cheerfully proceed to examine the pre- 
 tensions and merits of each of the other three 
 Gospels, and to try them also by the same 
 criterion : only remarking previously upon the 
 Gospel according to Luke, that from the 
 manner in which it is referred to in the intro- 
 duction to the Acts, it appears not to have 
 been written any great length of time before 
 the latter history, which must have been com- 
 posed after the fourth year of the reign of Ne- 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 143 
 
 ro, that is full thirty years after our Saviours 
 death and resurrection ; and from the reasou 
 alleged in the short preface to what is called 
 his Gospel, for writing it, we may conclude 
 with certainty, that he knew of no such his- 
 tory then written by any of the Apostles 
 themselves. For he tells Theophilus, (wii€- 
 ther that be the real name of any particular 
 friend, or only the common appellation of 
 every sincere Christian) for whose use and in- 
 formation he intended both his works, that, 
 because many had undertaken to publish an 
 account of the great objects of their faith, as 
 they liad been taught them by the Apostles, 
 and those who had been eye-witnesses jQf 
 what they had related, he also having had 
 perfect information from the beginning, had 
 written to him an account of every thing, iu 
 order, that he might know the certainty of 
 those things in which he had been instructed. 
 Now had Matthew or any other Apostle, 
 published a history of this kind, it would 
 have entirely superseded the necessity oi' 
 Lukes writing ; and instead of a treatise of 
 his own^ he would undoubtedly have sent, or 
 recommended to him, the narration of the 
 Apostle : at least he could never have pre- 
 sumed to differ from that account, in either 
 
U4> TH£ DISSONANCE, 5cc. 
 
 the order or circumstances of the facts re* 
 corded, in the manner in which every atten* 
 tive reader of the Gospels must know he docs 
 differ from the history attributed to Matthe\v. 
 So that Luke's work itself very strongly im- 
 phes, that Matthew had written no Gospel 
 at all before the fourth year of Nero: for as 
 he had resided several years Avith Matthew 
 and the other Apostles at Jerusalem, |^d 
 did not leave them till nineteen years after 
 their Master's death, that is full ten years 
 after the date usually allotted to Matthew's 
 Gospel, he could not have been ignorant of 
 such a publication, had it really existed at that 
 time. It is true, some critics^ on very insuf- 
 ficient grounds, postpone the Gospel of Mat* 
 thew to a much later date ; yet still they all 
 agree that it was written before Luke's. 
 
CHAPTER nr. 
 
 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW. 
 
 sectio:n^ !• 
 
 *¥N observing critically the Gospel attri- 
 -^ bated to Matthew, the first circumstance 
 to be remarked is, that the author himself 
 gives not the slightest hint to suggest to us 
 who he was, much less that he was an Apos- 
 tle of* Jesus Christ; so that the mere opinion 
 of the fathers of the orthodox church of the 
 second century, is all the foundation there is 
 for its being called Matthew's, which, w^e have 
 seen, is not the case with Luke's histories. 
 The next is, that all those early writers, who 
 inform us that Matthew wrote a Gospel, as- 
 sure us he wrote it in Hebrew ; and that our 
 copy is a translation of it into Greek, by 
 what hand is uncertain. The work itself, 
 however, has by no means the appearance of 
 an uniform translation from any language: 
 for one can hardly suppose that any person 
 
 K 
 
146 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 not duly skilled in the Greek language, would 
 undertake to translate it; and whilst the 
 greatest part of it is exceeding bad Greek, 
 abounding with barbarous idioms, which is 
 not to be accounted for, if the translator was 
 properly qualified for the work, there are 
 many passages, and several of them of con- 
 siderable length, which are not only ex- 
 pressed in pure and elegant diction, but are 
 nearly word for word the same as they stand 
 in the Gospel according to Luke. This last 
 circumstance is so obviously remarkable, 
 both in this and the Gospel according to 
 Mark, that to account for so improbable a 
 fatit, Grotius, Mills, and every candid critic, 
 who has adopted the orthodox persuasion, 
 that these Gospels were written in the same 
 order in which the cailon of the church hath 
 placed them, have been forced to acknow- 
 ledge that, it is evident, the writer of one 
 must have transcribed from the other ; and 
 that, therefore, Avhen Mark wrote his Gospel 
 he must have had Matthew's before him, and 
 Luke both the others. But it is absohitely im- 
 possible for me to suppose that Silas or Luke, 
 who suffered so much, and so disinterestedly, 
 to testify the truth of the Gospel, could profess 
 to write accurately, and in order, an account 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 
 
 of those acts and doctrines of Jes{v8^y>\vlilch 
 w^re taught them bv those who had been 
 eje-witnesses of his ministry, and were his 
 chosen Apostles; and yet, with the written 
 account of an Apostle before his eyes, not 
 olil}' in many places invert the order of the 
 narration, but diifer greatly from him in the 
 circumstances attending some of the most re- 
 markable facts, and in others directly contra- 
 dict him. Besides, in Luke, those verbally 
 <:orresponding passages of the different Gos- 
 pels are regular coherent parts of one uni^ 
 form, well composed whole; whereas in 
 Matthew they are quite incongruous to the 
 rest of the language in which the book is 
 written, and, like the ill-suited passages of 
 those inconsistent poems condemned by Ho- 
 race, purpurei late splendent panni. It must 
 be observed also, that these two Gospels of 
 Matthew and Mark abound in instances of 
 Latin words, written in Greek letters ; I do 
 not toean proper names, nor even the names 
 of coins, weights or measures, such as the 
 Romans perhaps made use of, even i*n the 
 most distant provinces, but military terms and 
 words of common use in every language. In- 
 stead of the Greek words which Luke, Jose- 
 phus, and, I believe, every other Greek writer 
 
 K 2 
 
143 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 within the Hmits of the first century, use for 
 Taxes or Tribute, Legion, Spearman, Watch 
 or Guard, Centurion, to Scourge, and some 
 others, they give us the names by which the 
 Romans expressed them in their own language 
 written in Greek characters : a circumstance 
 which, though in itself not fully demonstra- 
 tive of the age in which they were really 
 written, when corroborated by other evidence 
 of their spuriousness, is of considerable weight 
 to convince us, that these two Gospels can- 
 not be older than nearly the middle of the 
 second century : and, therefore, the writer 
 called Matthew might very probably see and 
 transcribe from the Gospel according to Luke, 
 and the pretended Mark from both. I^et us 
 examine each Gospel in its turn. 
 
 ' 11. The two first chapters of Matthew 
 Contain so many wonderful circumstances, 
 repugnant both to the other scriptures and to 
 common sense, and so entirely unsupported 
 by any other history, sacred or profane, that 
 many persons, both of the present and former 
 ages, have rejected them as a forgery, added 
 by some other writer to the work of Matthew, 
 (as, I persuade myself, I have demonstrated 
 to have been the case with Luke's Gospel) 
 
THE EVANGELISTS, ug 
 
 and that this book also originally began at 
 the third chapter, with the Baptism of John ; 
 though there is no proper beginning of a his- 
 tory at that chapter, as there evidently is in 
 Luke's. But to me, who find full as many 
 extraordinary things, equally inadmissible, in 
 the two last chapters, and several more in the 
 body of the w^ork, the whole appears to be of 
 equal authenticity, or rather, equally spuri- 
 ous and false. With the reader s leave, there- 
 fore, we will take a cursory review of the whole. 
 
 Of the Genealogy, Avith which this Gospel 
 begins, it is unnecessary to remark its irrecon- 
 cileable contradiction to that introduced into 
 Luke s Gospel, because it has been so gene- 
 rally noticed by all commentators, and must 
 strike the most superficial reader, as it traces 
 Joseph's descent from David, through a line 
 totally different : I only wonder that, under 
 such a circumstance, any rational creature 
 can be found, who can really believe both 
 these contradictory pedigrees to be true, and, 
 what is still more, the inspired word of God. 
 My intent, therefore, is only to point out the 
 glaring inconsistency of the author, on this 
 occasion, with himself. 
 
 Tlie sole purpose of these two first chap- 
 ters, is to teach, that Jesus was not the son of 
 
 K 3 
 
1^0 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 Joseph, but, like Bacchus and Hercules 
 amongst the Pagans, the offspring of Mary, 
 impregnated by the influence of the supreme 
 Peity of heaven. Yet, to prove to us that, 
 as the completion of the old prophecies con- 
 cerning the Messiah required, he was the li- 
 neal descendant of David and Abraham, he 
 gives us the pretended genealogy of Joseph 
 only frpm those Patriarchs : and with such a 
 proof the orthodox church hath been satis- 
 fied for 1600 years \l But whilst the celes- 
 tial origin he attributes to our blessed Saviour 
 effectually precludes the possibility of many 
 prophecies of the Old Testament, relative to 
 the Christ, being accomplished in his per- 
 son, the author has endeavoured to persuade 
 us, that the miraculous ciucurastance he re- 
 lates, of his birth, was predicted in another 
 prophecy, and accordingly refers us to that 
 well known prophecy in Isaiah, c. vii, v. 14. 
 '^ Behokl a' young wx-)man shall conceive and 
 " bear a son,'' &c. The word which I trans- 
 late a ?/ow?/^^ woman,, he renders a virgin^ and 
 insinuates that, by virtue of that singfe word, 
 the prophet meaTii a miraculous conception, 
 ivithout the intervention of a man ; and that 
 the. child intended m 'the 'prophecy was the 
 child Jesus. ^Nothing raoi^^e, however, i^ ne- 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 151 
 
 cessary to convince an unprejudiced person 
 that both these insinuations arc perfectly 
 groundless, than to turn to the book of Isaiah 
 itself. We there find that the child, whose 
 birth is predicted, is given to King Ahaz and 
 his subjects, who were alarmed at the pros- 
 pect of an invasion by the confederate kings 
 of Syria and Samaria, as a sign, that before the 
 child which was at that time to be conceived 
 should be born, and be old enough " to chuse 
 " good from evil,'' or, as it is repeated in the 
 subsequent chapter, (where the child is ex- 
 pressly said to be a child of Isaiah's, by his 
 own wife, and that he took faithful witnesses 
 to record the time, that they might be cer- 
 tain the promised male child was actually 
 born at nine months from the delivery of the 
 prophecy) before the child should be able to 
 speak, that is, within two years from the day 
 of the prediction, the enemy's country should 
 be deprived of both the menacing kings, who 
 should be slain, and the spoil of Damascus 
 and Samaria be carried away by the king of 
 Assyria. So that the prophecy has no more 
 reference to the age of Augustus Caesar, or 
 the son of Maryj than it has to the author of 
 this Gospel himself. As to the word trans- 
 - lated a virgin, on which so much stress is, in 
 
 K 4 
 
15« THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 vain, unreasonably laid, it is evident, that in 
 the original it does not necessarily signify any 
 thing more than a woman young enough to 
 bear childien, from its being the very same 
 word which is used in Proverbs, c. xxx. v. 19, 
 and there translated a maid ; for a virgin^ in 
 the strict sense of the word, could not be 
 meant in that place, because, " the way of a 
 man with" such an one is by no means track- 
 less and undiscernible ; and because the wri- 
 ter expressly uses it to signify a married wo- 
 man, saying, " such is the way of the adulte- 
 " rous woman." 
 
 In the second chapter, this writer informs 
 us that our Saviour was born at Bethlehem, 
 in Judea, in direct contradiction to both the 
 histories of Luke, which, by repeatedly cal- 
 ling him Jesus of Nazareth, assure us he was 
 born at Nazareth, in Galilee, as Paul of Tar- 
 sus, Timotheus of Derbe, and the like, ahrays 
 signify that those persons were natives of tlie 
 places so mentioned ; and as a reason for his 
 being born there, he alleges a propliecy of 
 Micah, respecting the Messiah, which, if the 
 author had been, I do not say an Apostle of 
 Christ, but merely an intelligent Jew, he could 
 not have so misapprehended or misapplied. 
 The purport of the prophet is simply that ^)f 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. • 153 
 
 almost all the prophecies of the Messiah, sub- 
 sequent to the reign of David, to declare that 
 this predicted Saviour, and prince of peace, 
 would l)e, not the son of no mortal man, as 
 this Ml iter tells us he was, but the lineally 
 descended son of David, who was a native of 
 Bethlehem, as was his father Jesse and all his 
 family. Not only, therefore, this particularly 
 predicted descendant, but every son of David, 
 is justly said to have sprung originally from 
 Bethlehem, though perhaps not one of them 
 was born there ; and provided Jesus was truly 
 the son of David by natural descent, this 
 prophecy would have been equally accom- 
 plished in his person, whether he had been 
 born at Bethlehem, Nazareth, or even at 
 Rome. But the ingenious author has more 
 marvels to introduce, in consequence of this 
 misapplication of the prophet Micah, de- 
 signed, no doubt, to catch the attention and 
 admiration of the ignorant and credulous of 
 his own times. A legation of idolatrous 
 Chaldean Astrologers, who had calculated 
 the nativity of this new-born king of the Jews 
 by a star, though entire aliens from the Jewish 
 Law, is dispatched from the East to do him 
 homage even in his cradle; and when, by 
 the help of this prophecy, the chief priests 
 
154 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 and scribes had informed Herod, he inform?^ 
 these Eastern Magi, that he was to be bora 
 at Bethlehem: but though he was anxiously 
 solicitous to discover who and where this rival 
 of his throne was; neither curiosity, policy, 
 nor hospitality, induced him either to ac- 
 company them himself, or to send any trusty 
 person with them, under the plausible and 
 decent pretext of guiding the extraordinary 
 strangers on their way. The star, however, 
 more humane and hospitable than Herod, 
 led them safe to Bethlehem, (as it might as 
 well have done without inquiring of Herod 
 at all ; but then the inhuman massacre and 
 other wonders that follow could have had no 
 place ;) and even directed them to the very 
 house where the young child was. In this 
 wonderful story, which, with the generality, 
 of people, has so long passed for the infallible 
 word of the God of Truth, there are two cir- 
 cumstances absolutely impossible; the one is, 
 that any splendid object in tlie atmosphere 
 even a meteor, sufficiently elevated to be, 
 wdtb the least propriety, called a star, should 
 in the natwe of things mark out any parti- 
 cuJar hous<5 ; for even on a supposition that it 
 was stationed directly over the house, the eye 
 of the beliDlder could Bot possibly perceive 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 155 
 
 that, but must of necessity refer it to the 
 same situation with all the other stars in that 
 part of the firmament opposite to his eye, 
 when looking at the supposed meteor; and, 
 therefore, it must always appear to him 
 equally distant from him with the remotest 
 star in the heavens. The other impossibility 
 is, that the immutable Deity, whose word 
 spoken by the Jewish prophets is replete 
 with taunting sneers at the vanity and folly 
 of the pretended science of Astrology, and 
 ja0i^ who expressly commanded all Astrolo- 
 gers amongst his own people to be put to 
 death, should so greatly change his sentiments 
 and conduct respecting it, as to give it the 
 most distinguished token of his approbation 
 and encouragement, by permitting Pagan 
 diviners to discover the nativity of the pro- 
 mised Messiah by their skill in Astrology, 
 and become the first promulgers of it to the 
 Jewish Government. 
 
 Upon these Astrologers returning home, 
 without giving the Jewish king the intelli- 
 gence he desired, and which, without de- 
 pending upon them for it, he might easily 
 have obtained, if he had been possessed of 
 either common decency of conduct towards 
 strangers, or even of common sense, Herod, 
 
1S6 'THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 violently intent upon the destruction of his 
 infant rival, that he might be sure of mur- 
 dering the right child, formed and executed, 
 the historian tells us, a project of the most 
 diabolical, unexampled cruelty, in massacre- 
 ing all the infants '* from two years old and 
 " under,'' that were in Bethlehem and the 
 adjoining country; the writer does not ex- 
 cept even the females. Now, if a Tyrant 
 could be found wantonly cruel enough to at- 
 tempt to execute such a project, it is impos- 
 sible that the execution of it should not have 
 excited an insurrection of the people. It is 
 not in human nature for»all the parents of a 
 whole city, and considerable extent of terri- 
 tory, to submit tamely to have their infants 
 torn from their arms and butchered before 
 their eyes, without opposing the murderers, 
 and endeavouring to secrete or flee away 
 with their children: yet there is no record of 
 such an insurrection ; and since the escape 
 of one sinde child, which it was not in his 
 power to prevent, might defeat his whole aim 
 and intention, Herod must have been, ac- 
 cording to this writer, the most senseless as 
 well as most inhuman of men. Luke has re- 
 corded many particular anecdotes and do- 
 mestic circumstances of the princes and chief 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 157 
 
 persons of the times of which he wrote, and 
 they are all both probable in themselves and 
 confirmed by the testimony of otlier writers ; 
 but this highly improbable story stands upon 
 the very doubtful authority of this Gospel 
 alone, unsupported by the evidence of any 
 other writer, sacred or profane, Josephus 
 and the Roman historians give us particular 
 accounts of the character of this Jew^ish king, 
 who received his sovereign authority from the 
 Roman emperor, and inform us of other acts 
 of cruelty which he was guilty of in his 
 own family; but of this infamous, inhu- 
 man butchery, which to this day remains 
 unparalleled in the annals of tyranny, they 
 are entirely silent. Under such circum- 
 stances, if ray eternal happiness depended 
 upon it, I could not believe it true: but 
 though I readily exclaim with Horace 7ion 
 ego^ I cannot add, as he does, credat Judcetcs 
 apella ; for I am confident there is no Jew 
 that reads this chapter, who does not laugh 
 at the ignorant credulity of those profes- 
 sed Christians, who receive such ground- 
 less, improbable ' stories for the inspired 
 ^vord of God, and lay the foundation of 
 their religion upon such incredible fictions 
 as these. 
 
158 THE £>tSSGNANCE 0^ 
 
 After all, however, we find that this bar- 
 barous inhumanity was in vain $ for, in obe- 
 dience to the divine admonition of a dream, 
 Joseph, we are informed, preserved the life of 
 the infant Jesus, by escaping with him into 
 Egypt ; and, to give a sanction to his story, 
 he makes this circumstance also the comple- 
 tion of another prophecy of tlie Old Testament, 
 as he does likewise the massacre of the inno- 
 cent children, referring us to Hosea, c. xi. v. 1. 
 But as his not understandiiig the meaning of 
 Micah's prophecy proves the author not to have 
 been a Jew, so his application of a pretended 
 prophecy in this, and the two following ift- 
 Stances, prove him to have been a writer 
 who had adopted the maxims of the Pytha*- 
 gorean, and Platonic schools, that deceit and 
 falsehood were allowable in promoting \vhat 
 he deemed the cause of christian piety ; for 
 the very reading over the passage of Hosea, 
 here alluded to, is sufficient to convince any 
 man, that the prophet's words in this place 
 have not the least reference to any future 
 event, but are an upbraiding of the Jewish 
 people, for the ungrateful return they had 
 made to God, for his kindness to them, in 
 the infancy of their nation, when he delivered 
 them from their bondage in Egypt. In 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. t$b 
 
 the same manner, the passage of Jeremiah, 
 c. xxxi. V. 15, is only a prophecy of the 
 restoration of the Jews from the Babylonish 
 captivity, fully completed in that event nmny 
 centuries before the birth of Chiist; and 
 which. the writer, whoever he was, must know 
 could not, in any sense, apply to the tran* 
 saction he has recorded ; because, tte very 
 next words are, '' Thus saith the Lord, Re- 
 frain thy voice from weeping and thine eyes 
 from tears : for thy work shall be rewarded, 
 saith the Lord, and they shall come again 
 from the land of the enemy. And there is 
 hope in thine end, saith the Lord, that thy 
 children shall come again to their own borcjler*' 
 As to the prophecy mentioned in the last 
 verse of this chapter, that the IVIesismh was 
 to be called a Nazarene, it is not to be found 
 any Avhere else, and therefore must be tlic 
 mere production of the writer's own fertile 
 imagination, to account, in some manner, for 
 our Lord's being so often spoken of by the 
 title of Jesus of Nazareth ; but in the account 
 he has thought fit to give us of the cause of 
 his dwelling at Nazareth, in Galilee, he has 
 betrayed an ignorance of the Geograpliy of 
 Palestine, which cannot be attributed tt> 
 Matthew, nor to any other native of tkat 
 
160 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 country. He tells us, that Joseph, on his re- 
 turn out of Egypt, after the death of Herod, 
 finding that his son reigned in his stead, was 
 afraid to go into Judea, and thei'efore, by 
 divine admonition, " turned aside into the 
 " parts of Galilee." Here the reader is 
 requested to remark, first, that Galilee having 
 been as much under Herod's jurisdiction as 
 Judea, and his kingdom having been divided 
 amongst his sons after his death, it was a son 
 of Herod who reigned in his stead, in Galilee 
 as well as in Judea, consequently the child 
 Jesus could be no securer in one province 
 than in the other. He is next desired to cast 
 his eyes upon the map of Palestine, and ob- 
 serve how impossible it was for Joseph to hav^e 
 gone from Egypt to Nazareth, without tra- 
 velling through the whole extent of Arche- 
 laus's kingdom, unless he undertook a long 
 peregrination through the deserts, on the 
 north and east of the lake Asphalites, and the 
 country of Moab, and then either crossed the 
 Jordan into Samaria, or the lake of Gennesa- 
 reth into Galilee, and from thence went to the 
 city Nazareth : and if it were at all credible, 
 that the latter was the case, with what propriety 
 could such a tedious journey have been deno- 
 minated, turning aside into the parts of Galilee? 
 
^HE EVANGELISTS. 161 
 
 HI. In the history of John's Baptism, re- 
 Corded in the third chapter, there are many 
 sentences copied word fot word from the 
 Gospel according to Luke, notwithstanding 
 which, it contains one ver}^ essential differ- 
 ence, and one direct contradiction to it. 
 Tlie first is in the second verse ; where we are 
 told that John preached, "saying, Repent 
 '* ye, for the khigdom of heaven is at hand/' 
 If this account were true, then Jesus and his 
 Apostles could not be the first preachers of 
 the Gospel ; for these are the very words they 
 use, to announce the commencement of the 
 Gospel Covenant to the Jews : but Luke in- 
 forms us, not only in the parallel place of 
 his first history, but also in a speech of Paul, 
 related Actsxix. 4, that John only "preached 
 " the Baptism of repentance for the remis- 
 " sion of sins /'* and since our Saviour tells 
 the Jews^ Luke xvi. l6. that the Law and 
 the Prophets, that is, the Mosaic Covenant, 
 subsisted until John, but that since John's 
 time, the New Covenant of the kingdom of 
 God was preached, we may be certain j that 
 
 * The advocates of the doctrine of atonement and satisfaction 
 would do well to consider, how the supposed sacrifice of the death 
 of Jesus could be necessary to the Deity-'s pardoning the sins of man;- 
 kind, when, before the ministry, of Jfesus, John was commissioned by 
 God to preach the remission of sins, on condition of repentanc only^ 
 
 L 
 
i62 THE DISSONANCE OP 
 
 John s mission was only preparatory to that 
 of Jesus ; and that Jesus was the first pro- 
 mulger of the Gospel Covenant, and of the 
 supersession of the Old Covenant, by the 
 commencement of the kingdom of God*, or, 
 a3 this author calls it, the kingdom of heaven, 
 in the world. This passage therefore is one, 
 and as we proceed, there will be occasion to 
 point out several other proofs, that the writer 
 of this history, whoever he was, did not un- 
 derstand the phrase kingdom of God, in the 
 sense in which only it is used by our Lord 
 himself, in the prayer he taught his disciples, 
 by Luke, and by every other primitive 
 preacher of the Gospel. In the seventh 
 verse, the latter half of which is transcribed 
 literally from Luke, we are told that this me- 
 morable prophetic exclamation of the Bap- 
 tist, " O Generation of Vipers, who hath 
 " warned you to flee from the wrath to 
 " come ?" was addressed to " many of the 
 *' Pharisees and Sadducees, who came to his 
 " Baptism," in flat contradiction to Luke, 
 who not only aflSrms it was made to the 
 whole " multitude of the Jews, that came to 
 "be baptised of him,'' but c. vii. v. 30, ex- 
 pressly assures us, " that the Pharisess and 
 " Lawyers were not baptized of him," It is 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 168 
 
 not possible, that both these contradictory 
 assertions should be true ; and on which the 
 guilt of falsehood rests, every man must 
 judge for himself. 
 
 IV. The fourth chapter commences with 
 the most extraordinary and incredible narra- 
 tive of our Lord's forty days' fast, and subse- 
 quent temptation, by that manichean, ima- 
 ginary being, denominated the Devil. A 
 narrative, which, I have before observed, 
 there is the strongest reason to believe, was 
 from hence interpolated into Luke's history, 
 in the second century, together with the 
 story of his Baptism by John. And as the 
 mortification of long fasting, or (to use Paul's 
 prophetic language, respecting the first au- 
 thors of the apostasy from the true religion 
 of Christ) frequent abstinence from meats, which 
 God hath created to be received with thanks* 
 giving^ was held amongst the sect of the En-- 
 cratiteS) that arose early in the second cen- 
 tury, to be the next meritorious virtue to cell* 
 bacy and unnatural chastity, there seems iid 
 doubt but that the whole Gospel, and this 
 fable in particular, was the production of 
 one of that apostate sect of professed Chris- 
 tians, with a view to authorize and encou- 
 
 L 2 
 
164 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 rage the general adoption of the tenets of 
 their own superstition, by the pretended exam- 
 ple of our Lord himself. In verses 13, 14, 
 15, we have another remarkable instance of 
 the author s very imperfect knowledge of the 
 geography :of Palestine, which cannot be 
 supposed of any native of the country ; as well 
 as another direct contradiction to the much 
 more probable account given us by Luke* 
 As if he imagined the city of Nazareth was 
 pot as properly in Galilee, as Capernaum 
 was, (which indeed seems implied also in the 
 second chapter, where he tells us Joseph 
 V went aside," not into Galilee, but "into 
 "the parts or coasts of Galilee,") he informs 
 liSy that after John s imprisonment, our Sa- 
 viour departed into Galilee^ and, leaving Naza- 
 reth, came and dwelt at Capernaum, in order to 
 fulfil a saying of Isaiah's, respecting the 
 country beyond Jordan, in Galilee of the Gen* 
 ides. Now to Isaiah, or any inhabitant of 
 Judea, the country beyond mM^t be the 
 country east of the Jordan, as Gaulanitis or 
 Galilee of i the Gentiles, is well known to 
 have been; whereas, Capernaum was a city 
 on the western side of the lake of Gennesa- 
 reth, through which the Jordan flows.. This 
 wholes tory of theremoval of Jesus fromNa- 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 105 
 
 zareth to dwell at Capernaum, is also in di- 
 rect opposition to the history of Luke ; for 
 he assures us, c. iv. that the reason of our 
 Lord's leaving Nazareth was, because the 
 inhabitants, offended with his discourse to 
 them, drove him out of their city, with in- 
 tent to throw him headlong from an adjoin- 
 ing precipice ; but that he escaped through 
 the midst of them, and went down to Caper- 
 naum, where he preached to the people for a 
 short time, and wrought many miracles of 
 healing ; but was so far from taking up his 
 dwelling there, that, though the inhabitants 
 entreated him to stay and not depart from 
 the?n^ he left them saying, he must preach the 
 kingdom of God to other cities also ; for that 
 was the purpose of his mission. 
 
 In the last verse of this chapter, the au- 
 thor infoi'ms us, that great multitudes of peo- 
 ple followed Jesus, amongst other places, 
 from Decapolis ; and speaks of this Decapo- 
 lis, not only as a particular country or pro- 
 vince, but as a country, which did not lie 
 eastward of the Jordan, because he expressly 
 distinguishes it from " the country beyond 
 " Jordan :" and the writer called Mark, 
 speaking of the same Decapolis, c. vii. v. 31, 
 more than insinuates that it was a country 
 
 L 3 
 
(»»• THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 lying north-west of the sea of Gahlee ; for he 
 tells us, that Jesus " came from the coasts of 
 " Tyre and Sidon, to the sea of Galilee, 
 " through the midst of the coasts of Decapolis'* 
 These are circumstances, which merit the 
 critical attention of every candid reader, who 
 wishes to satisfy himself, respecting the true 
 time when these two Gospels were reall}' 
 written : for no such country as Decapolis is 
 once mentioned by any other writer of either 
 Testament ; and, from the geographical de- 
 scription of Palestine, given us by Luke, con- 
 firmed both by Josephus and Tacitus, it ap* 
 pears that in the fifteenth j^ear of Tiberius, 
 and during his whole reign, the Jewish terri- 
 tory was divided by the Romans into four tet- 
 rarchies, Judea in the south, which was go- 
 verned by a Roman prefect ; the north-east- 
 ern t^trarchy, which contained Trachonitis, 
 Iturea, and Batanea, with Gaulanitis, or Ga- 
 lilee, east of the Jordan, under the govern- 
 ment of Philip, a son of Herod ; the western, 
 comprehending Galilee proi)er, and all the 
 coVintry west of the Jordan, and north of the 
 prefecture of Judea, to w hich was annexed 
 the province of Perea, on the eastern banks 
 of the Jordan, governed by Herod, another 
 son of Herod the great ; and Abilene, so 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 167 
 
 called from its metropolis Abila, including^ 
 except Perea, all Palestine east of the Jor- 
 dan, and south of Gaulanitis, subject to the 
 dominion of Lysanias. Under this division 
 by the Romans, its conquerors, Palestine 
 seems to have remained, until the reign of 
 of the emperor Claudius, who, Tacitus in- 
 forms us,* erected several smaller principali- 
 ties or prefectures in that country, to gratify 
 his freedmen and favourite Roman knights, 
 alluding, most probably, to the toparchies 
 that Judea was, at length, divided into, 
 which are enumerated, though with some 
 httle difference, by Josephus and the elder 
 Pliny, and to some others which are occasion- 
 ally mentioned by Josephus. In. the twelfth 
 year of his reign, Claudius-f- gave the coun- 
 try, which had formed the tetrarchies of Phi- 
 lip and Lysanias, as a kingdom, to Agrippa : 
 but though Josephus particularly describes 
 the kingdom allotted by the Emperor to 
 that Jewish prince, and the several addi- 
 tional grants of territory, which were made 
 to him afterwards ; though several of the ten 
 cities which, Pliny tells us, were generally 
 reckoned to compose the Decapolis, were si- 
 tuated in the country expressly said to be 
 
 * Hist. 1. V. c. 9. t Jos. Ant. 1. xx. c. 5 
 
 L 4 
 
168 THE DISSONANCE OP 
 
 assigned to i\grippa ; and though, in the 
 preceding parts of his hiiitories, he has re- 
 peatedly given us accurate geographical de- 
 finitions of the several provinces of Palestine 
 and the adjacent countries, no such province 
 or ethnarchy, as Decapolis, is taken notice of 
 by Josephus, nor does he once mention the 
 name, . before Vespasian was governor of 
 Syria, and general against the rebehious 
 Jews, in the latter end of Nero's reign, and 
 then only says of it,* that " Scythopolis was 
 *^ the largest city of the Decapolis;" and, 
 though he afterwards, (in his life) several 
 times, mentions the cities intended by the 
 name Decapolis, he never again uses that 
 aggregate term, of the singular number 5 
 but calls them the t€7i ^ cities of Syria: and 
 since he speaks of the insurrection of tiio 
 Jewish against the Syrian inhabitants of 
 some of those cities, it is natural to con-- 
 elude that, from some particular motives, 
 the Romans had been induced to annex ten 
 Jewish cities to the government of Syria, and 
 to place in them colonies of Syrians, to whom 
 the Hebrew inhabitants could not be recon-- 
 ciled ; and as the first disturbances amongst 
 the Jews began in that part of Palestine. 
 
 * Bell. 1. iii. c. IC, 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 169 
 
 which formed the kingdom of Agrippa, it is 
 most probable, that those rebelUous insurrec- 
 tions cave rise to the estabhshment of such a 
 line of mihtary stations, peculiarly subject to 
 the authority of the Proconsul of SjTia, and 
 that before that period of Nero's reign, the 
 very name Decapolis did not exist. At least, 
 ^ince Pliny tells us,* that the territory which 
 intervened between those ten cities, and which 
 surrounded each of theui, was not subject to 
 the same government as the cities themselves, 
 but to the adjoining tetrarchies, and Jose^ 
 phus informs us, that all those ten cities ap- 
 pertained to the government of Syria, it is 
 evident that the Decapolis was not anj^ dis- 
 tinct country or continued district, as the 
 pretended Matthew and Mark represent it, 
 but merely the general appellation often de- 
 tached, insulated cities, lying all, except Scy- 
 thopolis, beyond, or east of, the river Jordan, 
 which in later times, for some military conve- 
 nience to the Romans, were taken from the 
 jurisdiction of the original tetrarchies, (most 
 of them probably long after the time allotted 
 for the writing these Gospels) and made sub- 
 ject to Syria. So that to talk of any per- 
 son's going to or coming from the Decapolis, 
 
 ♦ Nat. Hist. 1, V. c. 18. 
 
ITO THE DISSONANCE, Sec. 
 
 without specif]^ing which of the ten cities is 
 meant, is to use a language devoid of mean- 
 ing and perfectly unintelligible: and to speak 
 of it as a province, like Galilee or Trachoni- 
 tis, and as being situated north-west of the 
 Sea of Galilee, is to betray an ignorance of 
 the geography of Palestine too gross to be 
 attributed to any native of that country; and 
 shews that the authors were not primitive 
 disciples of Jesus Christ, but writers of a 
 much later date, who, being personally unac- 
 quainted with the country, adopted a term 
 they had heard applied to it, whose significa- 
 tion they did not understand* 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 THE GOSPEL JCCORDING TO MATTHEW, 
 
 CONTINUED. 
 
 SF-CTION I. 
 
 THE fifth and two following chapters con- 
 tain what is commonly called, our Lord's 
 sermon uoon the mount, a desultory, uncon- 
 nectcd harangue, composed of many passages, 
 taken, almost verbatim, from the discourses 
 which Luke has related to us, as held upon 
 many different occasions, with additions either 
 deduced from the writinos of the Old Testa- 
 ment, or according with the author's own ideas 
 of Christianity. Concerning the first circum- 
 stance, as well as all the other parts of this 
 Gospel, which are expressed exactly, or very 
 nearly, in the words of Luke, I have only to 
 observe, that either Luke must have copied 
 them from this book, or this writer must have 
 adopted them from Luke; but as Luke in 
 both his histories has shewn himself to be a 
 good and elegant writer of the Greek language, 
 
172 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 whilst this writer's language, wherever it does 
 not verbally correspond with Luke, is bad, 
 abounding with barbarous idioms, no impartial 
 person can doubt but that it was written after 
 Luke's; and that the bad writer borrowed 
 from the good one, the only flowers wiiich 
 adorn his work, and not the good from the 
 bad. 
 
 That such a discourse as this was dehvered 
 by our Saviour, at such a time and in such a 
 place, is in the highest degree improbable; for 
 being addressed particularly to his disciples, if 
 it was dehvered at all, it must have been in* 
 tended as a lesson of instruction in Christian 
 ethics, to them in general, and especially to his 
 i\postIes, who were to teach the same doc- 
 trines to the world : it is but reasonable, there- 
 fore, to suppose that so full and ample a moral 
 lecture would have been postponed, at least^ 
 till all those who w^re to be his Apostles, were 
 called to be his disciples, and actually ap' 
 pointed to their office. Accordingly, Luke in- 
 forms us this really was the case; and that the 
 fast moral lesson given to his disciples particu- 
 larly, but in the audience of a great multitude 
 of people, was delivered after he had chosen 
 the tsvclve Apostles, 'iliat instructive dis- 
 course is recorded by Luke, c. vi. v. 20, &c. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. * 1?8 
 
 and, what is worthy of notice, begins, like this 
 we are considering, with beatitudes of encou- 
 ragement to his followers; and though this 
 writer has greatly altered their sense and im- 
 port, and added several to the number, and has 
 omitted the woes entirely, yet from the first 
 and last beatitude he has given us, as well as 
 from many entire passages of Luke interwoven 
 in different parts of this sermon, it is evident 
 he had Luke's Gospel before him. So incon* 
 sistent, however, is this writer, not with Luke 
 only, but with himself, that fi"om his ninth 
 chapter, v. 9^ we find that Matthew, the very 
 Apostle who is supposed to be the author of 
 this book, and to have so circumstantially 
 recorded this Jong, incoherent, moral lecture, 
 was not so much as called to follow our 
 Saviour, till some time after it was deliveix^d, 
 and consequently the Apostles were chosen 
 still later, as mentioned, c. x. So much for 
 the time when this sermon is said to have been 
 preached. Respecting the place of its deli- 
 very, I beg leave to observe, that, as Luke 
 explicitly assures us was the case, though our 
 Lord addressed himselt^ in the first place to his 
 disciples, yet he intended his instructions also 
 for the w^hole multitude of auditors, with which 
 he w^as surrounded; indeed, if he had uot>,he 
 
^74 THE DISSONANCE OF* 
 
 would have acted directly contrary to his own 
 doctrine, and instead of displaying the moral 
 light of his religion to the people^ would have 
 covered it with a bushel: and since this writer 
 himself tells us, that " when Jesus had ended 
 " these sayings, the people were astonished at 
 " his doctrine," and that when he descended 
 from his mountainous pulpit "great multitudes 
 " followed him/' we must conclude that this 
 discourse was intei^ded to be, and actually was, 
 heard by the surrounding multitude. Now 
 let any man, who knows what it is to speak 
 to a crowd of people, conceive what situa* 
 tion a speaker, who wished to be heard by as 
 many as possible, would choose for himself 
 on such an occasion. If the people were in 
 an open plain, he would endeavour to take 
 the advantage of some small rise in the 
 ground, or other mode of elevating himself, 
 so as to be seen by his audience ; or, if an 
 hill were adjoining, he would ascend the slope 
 of the hill a little way, so as to answer that 
 purpose, whilst the people remained in the 
 plain, or if they ascended the side of the hill, 
 he would accomplish the same effect, by re- 
 maining himself at the foot of it, in the plain : 
 but would any man in his senses, so circum* 
 stanced, and intending to be heard by the 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 175 
 
 crowd, go up to the top of the hill, which 
 from its convex form, must necessarily pre- 
 vent, all but those who immediately surrounded 
 him, from either seehig or hearing him, and 
 even there set himself down before he began 
 to teach them ? Yet precisely such is the si- 
 tuation in which the author of this history 
 makes our Saviour place himself to instruct 
 the people, in the moral duties of the Gospel. 
 Luke, on the contrary, informs us, that when 
 he gave his disciples and the whole multitude 
 that instructive lesson, after the choice of his 
 Apostles, " he came down and stood in the 
 " plain;'' and that, on another previous occa- 
 sion, on the banks of the lake^f Gennesareth, 
 he went into a fishing-boat, and, being at a 
 little distance from the land, he sat down 
 and taught the people who stood on the shore. 
 In the seventeenth verse of the fifth chap- 
 ter, our Lord is represented as saying, " Think 
 " not that I am come to destroy the Law ; I 
 ** am not come to destroy, but to fulfil ;" an 
 assertion which flatly contradicts the pro- 
 phets of the Old Testament, as also Luke 
 and Paul, and the whole scope and intent of 
 the Gospel Covenant. 
 
 At the time when Moses administered to 
 the Jews the Old Covenant of the Law, he 
 
ire tflE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 informed them it was to continue onlj till the? 
 coming of that prophet of a New Covenaiit, 
 w4iom the Lord their God would raise up 
 up unto them, from amongst their brethren, 
 like unto himself; for says he,^ "unto him 
 " shall ye hearken, and whosoever Avill not 
 " hearken unto my words, which he shall 
 " speak in my name, (saith the Lord God) 1 
 " will require it of him/' By the prophet 
 Jeremiah, God saysj-f- " Beliold the days 
 " come, when I will make a New Covenant 
 " with Israel and Judah, not according to the 
 " Covenant which I made with their fathers, 
 " when I brought them out of Egypt; but 
 ^* (instead of a* Law written upon tables of 
 " stone) I will put my Law in their inward 
 " parts, and write it in their hearts/' Ac- 
 cordingly, Jesus Christ declares of the New 
 Covenant,^ that the kingdom of God intended 
 to be established by it, is not an object of 
 external observation, but is within those who 
 receive it. He affirms also,§ that the Law 
 of Moses ended with John the Baptist; and 
 that, since the time of his imprisonment, the 
 New Covenant of the kingdom of God is 
 preached to the whole world. In confirma- 
 
 * De«t. c. xviii. v. 15, &c. f Jer. e. xxxi. v. 31> &c. 
 
 J Luke c. Jivii.v. ^0& 21. § Luke c. xvi. v. 16. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 177 
 
 tion of this assertion, he denounced the 
 speedy destructiou of that temple, the exist- 
 ence of which was absokitely necessary for 
 the ritual observances of theMosaicLaw ; and, 
 without any suggestion that it would ever be 
 rebuilt, declares that Jerusalem itself " shall 
 " be trodden down of the Gentiles," until 
 the new covenant of his Gospel is actually 
 established in the nations of the earth. That 
 such was the doctrine also of the disciples of 
 Jesus, immediately after their miraculous de- 
 legation to preach the Gospel covenant, is 
 evident from the history of Stephen's death; 
 for though he was falsely accused of bias- 
 phem'mg the temple and the law of Moses, we 
 fmd that the sole ground of this accusation 
 Avas, his having said that *' Jesus of Nazareth 
 would destroy their temple, and change the 
 customs which Moses delivered them :" and 
 in his answer, he is so far from denying or 
 retracting that doctrine which was the same 
 that his master had always taught, that his 
 w^hole discourse to the council of the Jews 
 is calculated to prove the truth of it. He 
 reminds them, that the covenant made with 
 Abraham preceded that of Moses, and was 
 to continue till the object of it was acjcom- 
 plished in the appearance of that promised 
 
 M 
 
ITS THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 seed of the Patriarch, in whom all the kin- 
 dreds of the earth are to be blessed ; that 
 when Moses established the covenant of the 
 Law, he assured them it would be superseded 
 by a future prophet, whom they were to obey, 
 and whom he then predicted to them ; and 
 that under the new covenant of this promised 
 prophet whom they had just crucified, tem- 
 ples according to the prophecy of Isaiah 
 relating to the very same period, were of no 
 kind of use ; and that it was mere superstition 
 to imagine that the Almighty inhabited tem- 
 ples of human structure; " heaven is my 
 throne and earth is my footstool ; what house 
 will ye build me ? saith the Lord, or where is 
 ihe plac€ of my rest r" At such instruction 
 as this^ Luke informs us, the Jews were highly 
 enraged; and, upon Stephen's extatic excla- 
 »iatioii, that he beheld Jesus exalted to the 
 station of the predicted Messiah, at the right 
 hand of God, consequently endued with 
 power to vanquish all his foes, and to ac- 
 complish, according to his own prophecies, 
 the destruction of their city and temple, and 
 with it, the abolition of the Moi>aic Covenant, 
 they ran upon him furiously, ejected him ftom 
 the city, and stoned him, a^^on^iillly-cdrt- 
 victed of the charo:e whiclr tiie witnesses had 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 1T9 
 
 alleged against liinl. Paul, likewise, who had 
 himself consented to the death of Stephen as 
 fust and legal, afterwards^ in his discourse to 
 the Athenians, urged this same doctrine of 
 Isaiah, that the use of temples, and the wor- 
 shipping God with external rites and cere- 
 monies, were abolished under the Gospel dis- 
 pensation : and, in the third chapter of his 
 Epistle to the Galatians, he adduces the very 
 same arguments suggested by Stephen, re- 
 specting the two Old Covenants, and ex- 
 pressly declares, that the covenant of the 
 Law of Moses was only added to the cove- 
 naut made with Abraham " till the seed 
 should come to whom the promise was made ;" 
 that, therefore, the Law was only the School- 
 master of the Jewish nation, to educate them 
 for a manly maturity in tlie rational religion 
 of Jesus Christ ; and that, now the Christian 
 faith is come, '' they are no longer under a 
 Schoolmaster/' Indeed common sense as- 
 sures us, that the declarations which God 
 made to the Jews . by their prophets, that, 
 in time to come, he would give them a new 
 law, and make a new covenant with them, 
 must imply the abolition of the old ; for the 
 subsistence of an- old covenant, with only 
 some new additions made to it, can with ik> 
 M 2 
 
180 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 more propriety be called a new covenant, 
 than an old garment, upon the addition of 
 lace or fringes, could be called a new gar- 
 ment : and from Paul's argument to the Ga- 
 latians it plainly appears, that, under the new 
 covenant of the Gospel, it Avere as unreason- 
 able even for the Jews themselves to recur to 
 the ritual observances of the Mosaic Law, as 
 it woidd be for men arrived at the maturity of 
 manhood, again to subject themselves to 
 the circumstances of <:hildhood, and submit 
 to the discipline of the ferula and rod. 
 So gross af contradiction of the uniform doc- 
 trine of the best authenticated scriptures, both 
 of the Old Testameut and the New, can never 
 he justly nor reasonably attributed to an 
 Apostle of JesuS Christ, but must be the com- 
 position of a much later writer, who himself 
 did not understand either the genius or the 
 doctrines of the religion he hath presumed ta 
 teach. 
 
 To the same ignorance or misapprehension, 
 respecting jthe abolition of temples under the 
 New Covenant, must be iascribed also what 
 the author puts into our Lord s mouth, in 
 the following verses, about altars, and gifts to 
 be offered wponilmm, all which are peculiar 
 to this -writer.:. Indeed, it would be both cu- 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 181^ 
 
 rious and useful to extract from this sermon, 
 and other parts of his book, all the unsup^ 
 ported doctrines that are to be met with only 
 in this writer: but my present intent is merely 
 to advert to such passages as are ai^solutely 
 Irreconcilable to better authenticated scrip- 
 tures. 
 
 In this lecture to his disciples, c. vi. v. 5 — 
 13, our Saviour is made to give them ample 
 directions for the manner of offering up their 
 pi'ayers to God, and to teach them tlie very 
 formulary he would. have them use, which is 
 commonly known by the name of the Lord's 
 Prayer. Their so early instruction, however, 
 in the use of this prayer, is directly contra- 
 dictory to the account given us by Luke, who 
 informs us, that long after the time allotted 
 to the sermon on the mount, even some time 
 after the return of the seventy disciples, they 
 were so far from having already received this 
 instruction, that, observing their master in 
 prayer to God, when he had finished, one of 
 them entreated him to teach them to pray, as 
 John the Baptist had taught his disciples; 
 and immediately, without reminding them or 
 upbraiding them for not remembering what 
 he had taught them before, he began to teach 
 them, as for the first time, this very form of 
 
 M 3 
 
182 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 prayer. Here one of these two writers mti'^t 
 certainly have given us a false account. It h 
 to be observed, that the Doxology which closes 
 this prayer, according to the supposed Mat- 
 thew, is not found in any copy of the prayer 
 recorded by Luke; and if I thought it had 
 been inserted by the wiiter himself, I should 
 urge it as another proof that he did not un- 
 derstand the Gospel meaning of the phrase 
 Idngdom of God; and that, by the addition of 
 this Doxology, he has made nonsense of the 
 prayer; but, though the orthodox church 
 still continues to make use of it, the best cri- 
 tics have very satisfactorily shewn that it did 
 not exist in the original copies of even this 
 work ;* and, therefore, it nmst be the addi- 
 tion of some later copyist, who understood 
 
 ' ^ Of tBis the Reformers, of the English Church were so well 
 convinced, that, from the time of Elizabeth, to the rebellion in the 
 I'eign of Charles I. in the established Book of Common Prayer, the 
 Doxology is not once printed. And whoever will look into that 
 edition of the Liturgy, which was printed so late as t!he jrear 1640, 
 will see that this Mtas not an accidental omission, but, the result of 
 mature deliberation : because, where the Lord's Prayer is abbreviated 
 in the printing, thus, " (!>ur Father, &6*^* the abbreviatioil is Mirdly 
 ever carried on to the end. Bwt the c^ c is followed by the last peti- 
 tion, ** And lead us not into temptation ; but deliver us from evil. 
 Ara^n.'" Yet ever sinte the sera Of the Restoration, so much moro 
 uhfekilled in biblical history, or so ijiuch less attentive to propriety, 
 luve the IcaTiing English Clergy Ueen than their predecessors at th4 
 ^eformmioh, that the Doxology has ever since been printed in most 
 ^ f lace^wH ere thuf prater occurs, and continues to be' in general us^f 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 1C3 
 
 not what Jesus meant by *' thy kingdom 
 " come," and whose weak mind supposed tlie 
 Ahuighty Lord of heaven and earth, like hu- 
 man sovereigns^ to be pleased with fawning, 
 flattering expressions, and superfluous, verbal 
 acknowledgments of his power and greatness. 
 
 In the sixteenth, and following verses, the 
 pretended Matthew represents our Lord as 
 teaching his disciples in what manner they 
 should fast; a doctrine quite inconsistent, 
 not only with what Luke assures us, but even 
 with what this writer himself, c. ix. v. 14, &c. 
 has copied from Luke, viz. that his disciples 
 did not fast at all; and that such formal, car- 
 nal observances of the Jewish ritual, were by 
 no means suited to the genius of that new 
 religion, which he came to establish in the 
 world. 
 
 In chapter vii. verse 6, we find a vulgar 
 proverb, antecedent to the mission of Jesus 
 Christ, converted into a precept of the Gos- 
 pel — " Give not that which is holy unto the 
 "** dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before 
 " swine, lest they trample them tmder their 
 " feet, and turn again and rent you.'' If these 
 words have any meaning in this place, it must 
 be to prohibit the teaching his holy religion, 
 and propounding the valuable doctrines of the 
 
 M 4 
 
184 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 Gospel to such profligate, profane, and brutal 
 characters, as it was probable would only 
 treat their instructions with scorn and con- 
 tempt, and rcAviard their zeal with persecution 
 and personal violence. Yet such a precept is 
 directly contrary to the well-known constant 
 practice of our Lord himself, and all his Apos- 
 tles, and utterly repugnant to the most ex- 
 plicit, repeated lessons of duty urged upon 
 his disciples on other occasions; the uniform 
 tenor of which is, tiiat in preaching the Gos- 
 pel they must expect and be prepared to en- 
 dure odium, contempt, and ignomin}^ and 
 the most cruel persecutions of every kind, 
 even unto death. 
 
 11. In the eighth chapter, this writer re- 
 cords the story of the healing the Centurion s 
 •servant, but with circumstances directly con- 
 tradictory to liuke's account of the same mi- 
 racle; for he tells us that the centurion came 
 to our Lord himself, and conversed with him 
 in person; whereas Luke informs us, that he 
 only sent a deputation to him of the Elders 
 of r the Jews, and declared that he did not 
 think himself worthy to come to him, and 
 for that reason did not come himself. Here 
 again one of these historians must relate a 
 
THE EVANGELISTS.- 185 
 
 falsehood. It is observable also, that, accord- 
 ing to this Gospel called Matthew's, this mira- 
 cle, in order of time, preceded the healing of 
 Peter s mother-in-law, the calling of iMatthew 
 himself, and the choice of the twelve Apostles; 
 whereas Luke tells us that it was subsequent 
 to all the three. Yet Luke assures Theophi- 
 lus, that having attained perfect information 
 of every- thing from the very first, he had 
 written him an account of every transaction 
 in order. Now, he could have received his 
 •information only from the Apostle^ he lived 
 with at Jerusalem,: of whom MatthcAV was 
 one; and> as it is impossible but Matthew 
 mu^ have known whether he w^as himself 
 with Jesus, when this miracle was wrought, 
 or not, he could not have written that he 
 was. not, and have informed Luke that he 
 was; and therefore the writel' of this Gospel 
 could not be Matthew, nor any other of the 
 Apostles. To avoid unnecessary repetitions, 
 the reader is desired to. consider this as a ge- 
 neral remark upon the many instances of con- 
 tradiction, in the order of the narration, be- 
 tween this writer and Luke, which are both 
 numerous, and obvious to the least degree of 
 attention. 
 
im THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 In the conclusion of this chapter, the au- 
 thor has introduced also the miracle of the 
 Demons and the herd of Swine; but having 
 in the second chapter literally out-beroded 
 Herod, he was determined here to out-do the 
 interpolater himself; for he makes two de- 
 moniacs instead of one, and, of course, two 
 lesions of devils. 
 
 . In the enumeration of the names of the 
 twelve x\postles in the tenth chapter, the first 
 remarkable circumstance is the authors re- 
 presenting the Apostle Andrew as Simon Pe- 
 ters brother, which indeed he had prepared us 
 for in the fourth, by telling us expressly that 
 he was so, and that he was called to be an Apos- 
 tle at the same time, and in the same terms, 
 with Peter. Luke, on the contrary, informs us, 
 that no such person as Andrew was with Peter 
 at the time of his call; that James and John, 
 tlic isons of Zebedee, were his only partners ; 
 and that his destination to be an Apostle> 
 implied in the words, " from henceforth thou 
 shalt catch men," w^as announced to him 
 alone in the singular number, and not in the 
 plxiira;!, as this author relates it. Indeed, from 
 both Luke's Histories, as no brother of Peter 
 is once spoken of, it is most obvious, that he 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 387 
 
 bad no brother ; and since in tlie enumeration 
 of the names of the Apostles, in Acts i, James 
 and Jolin intervene before Andrew, it appears 
 that there was no family connexion between 
 him and Peter, llie next circmnstance de- 
 serving our observation* is, that the Apostles 
 James and John are said to be brothers, and 
 sons of Zebedee. Yet, from Luke's Histories, 
 and. from Paul's Epistle to the Galatians, it 
 plainly app(^ars, that James the Apostle was 
 the brother of the Lord Jesus, and that the 
 two sons of Zebedee, were not Apostles,but are 
 the brothers mentioned. Acts xii. v.2 ; of whom 
 James was put to death by Herod, and the 
 other brother, John, was most probably thie 
 game whose surname was Mark. Nothing can 
 be more express than Paufs assertion, that 
 the Apostle James was the Lord's brother; who 
 consequeutly could not be James, the son of 
 Alpheus. And Luke clearly informs us of 
 the same thing, when telling us, c. xxiii. v, 55^ 
 that the women, who came with him from 
 Galilee, beheld the sepulchre, and how his 
 
 ♦ For this remark of the ignorance, not only of this writer, but also 
 of the pretended Mark and John, respecting the relationship of the 
 Apostle James to tlie Lord Jesus, which affords such a decisive proof 
 of the spuriousness of these three Gospels, the Author is obliged to 
 Mr. Richard Foster, of Dal ton, near Huddersfield, Yorkshire, who, 
 in 1796, favoured him with a letter upon the subject, but who, he is 
 sorry to say, in otber respects, still remains an entire stranger 'to him. 
 
168 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 body was laid^ and prepared spices to t^m- 
 balm it ; and, mentioning their names in 
 c. xxiv. V. 10, to be Mary Magdalene, and 
 Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, tells 
 us also ' that James was brother of the Lord 
 Jesus; for, from Lukeviii. 2,3, 19, it ap- 
 pears, that no other Mary, but Mary Mag- 
 dalene, came with Jesus out of Galilee, 
 except his own mother. Mho accompanied 
 hmi with all her children. And Luke calls 
 her, in c. xxiv. the mother of James, because 
 Jesus hinlself was no longer living. But in 
 Acts i. wliei'e the history informs us Jesus 
 was alive again, the same Mary is again called 
 the mother of Jesus. Now, if theJ author of 
 this Gospel had himself been an Apostle, lie 
 could not possibly have called his brother 
 Apostles, James and John, sons of Zebedee, 
 when he must have known that they never 
 were Apostles, and that the Apostle James 
 was the brother of Jesus. A circumstance, 
 which satisfactorily accounts for James being 
 made the President of the Council of tlfe 
 Apostles resident at Jerusalem. 
 
 In proceeding with this Author s enumera- 
 tion, instead of Judas the Son, or, as our 
 translators chose to render $t, tlie brother of 
 James, mentioned by Luke, we rpad " Leb- 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 18^ 
 
 beus sumamed Thaddcus;'' to account for 
 this seeming contradiction, commentatoi-s ob- 
 serve, that Thaddeus is a Syrian word of much 
 the same signification with Judas : but if Mat- 
 thew wrote any Gospel, he wrote it in He- 
 brew, not in Syriac; and had he adopted a 
 Syrian, instead of the Hebrew name of his 
 brother-apostle, still any consistent wTiter 
 would have repeated the same Syrian denomi- 
 nation for the same name, and the last of the 
 twelve also would have been called Thaddeus 
 Iscarriot. As Luke conversed and lived long 
 with all the Apostles, he could not be ignorant 
 of the name by Aviiich they called the son of 
 James; and therefore this writer cannot be 
 one of them, because he would then, as usual, 
 have called him Judas, not Thaddeus, and still 
 less Lebbeus. 
 
 In chapter xi. v. 12, not to remark upon 
 the confused jumble of two distinct conversa- 
 tions of our Saviour, which in Luke are sepa- 
 rated by the intervention of no less than nine 
 chapters, the author affords us a very striking 
 proof of his entire ignorance of the Gospel 
 meaning of the phrase, the kingdom of God, or, 
 as hi calls it, of heaven \ for, not comprehend- 
 ing the sense of Luke, c. xvi. v. 16, he sa3s, 
 " From the days of John the Baptist, w/i/// 
 
^90 th£ dissonance of 
 
 naw^ the kingdom of heaven sufiereth violence^ 
 and the violent take it by force.*' From the 
 days of Jolm the Baptist, uqtil the age of this 
 writer, I have no doubt, was a period of many 
 years; but what sense can the words imiil now 
 have, supposing them to have been used by 
 our Saviour whilst John was hving, and withiix 
 tvyo months, or perhaps less, after his baptiz- 
 ing and preaching publicly ? And in what 
 meaning can the New Covenant of the king- 
 dom of God, which was in np degree estab- 
 lished in the world, till after our liOrd's resur- 
 rection, be said, at any time, but especially 
 at the very beginning of his ministry, to suffer 
 iJio/ence, and to be taken forcihly by violent men? 
 Can any unprejudiced person believe, thaf 
 an Apostle of Jesus Christ could be the author 
 of such a sentence ? 
 
 In chapter xii. v. 14 — 21, we have anpther 
 instance of the uncommon ingenuity of this 
 writer, in the application of the old prophecies 
 so conspicuously displayed by him in the first 
 and second chapters of his work. Not to 
 dwell upon the impossibility of a person's re- 
 maining unknown, who was followed by great 
 multitudes^ and healed all the sick whom those 
 multitudes brought unto him, consequently 
 the unreasonable absurdity of such a person s 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 191 
 
 charging the multitudes not to make him 
 known, the writer tells us, that this very cir- 
 cumstance was the completion of a well known 
 prophecy of Isaiah respecting the Messiah, 
 which, like many prophecies of the New Tes- 
 tament, predicts, that the religion of the new 
 covenant should be embraced by the Gentiles, 
 and that all nations will become subject to the 
 authority of Christ ; a prophecy which at this 
 day remains to be fulfilled, and which had 
 therefore no more reference to the circum- 
 stances here recorded of our Saviour, than the 
 prophecy of the return of the Jews from their 
 Babylonish captivity, applied in the second 
 chapter, had to the pretended slaughter of the 
 infants. 
 
 At verse 40, the author, not understanding 
 our Lord's meaning about the sign which 
 Jonas was to the Ninevites, as recorded by 
 Luke, not only shews that his credulity easily 
 swallowed tiie fabulous legend of the prophet 
 in the whale's belly ; but, in order to make 
 out some kind of similitude between his situa- 
 tion there and our Saviour's, tells us, that as 
 Jonas was confined in that extraordinary 
 prison three days and three nights, so the son 
 of man should be three days and thrice nights 
 in the heart of the earth. Even this \nx- 
 
192 THE DISSONA'NCE 0¥ 
 
 tended similitude, however, has not one coiv 
 responding feature in the two parts ; for, in 
 the first place, our Lord >vas in the grave 
 only one day and two nights ; and, in the 
 next, Jonas, according to this incredible 
 story, was alive the whole time, praying to 
 and praising God, whereas Jesus was amongst 
 the dead, and buried, of whom the Psalmist 
 says,* " the dead praise not thee, O Lord, 
 " neither they that go down into silence/' 
 
 IIL In the thirteenth chapter we find that, 
 according to this writer, our Lord had greatly 
 changed his mode of preaching to the peo- 
 ple since the time of his delivering to them 
 his sermon on the mount : for though in that 
 ample collection of unconnected moral apho- 
 risms, there is scarcely any thing like a para- 
 ble to be met with, now^ the author tell us, 
 " he spake not unto them without a parable/' 
 Accordingly, the w^holeof his discourses given 
 us in this chapter, both from the ship and even 
 after he w^as come into the house, except 
 where they are interrupted by explanations 
 to his disciples alone, consists of a collection 
 of seven parables, three of which are evident- 
 ly borrowed from Luke ; two of them ver- 
 
 ♦. Psalm cxv. 17. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 193 
 
 batim, and the other four are the autho/s 
 own composition. To this circumstance the 
 reader's particular attention is requested; for, 
 I persuade myself, there is no person of taste 
 or feeling, who has attentively read the writ- 
 ings of Luke, and has not admired the para* 
 bles of his first, and the speeches of his se- 
 cond history, as pieces of masterly Composi- 
 tion, whether he considers the elegant sim- 
 plicity of the diction, the justness and force 
 of the sentiment and doctrine intended to be 
 conveyed by them, or the strict propriety, 
 and consistency of character, of the several 
 agents or speakers introduced, either allego- 
 rical or real : but whoever impartially consi- 
 ders the various parables, related by the 
 writer called Matthew, will find that every 
 one of them, which is not taken from Luke, 
 is grossly defective in some or all of those 
 particulars ; and that, of those which he has 
 evidently copied from Luke, there is not one 
 which is not injured, exactly in the propor- 
 tion in which he has thought fit to deviate 
 from the very words of Luke. Of all this, 
 the parables that compose this chapter afford 
 us most striking examples. The first is the- 
 well known parable of the sower ; from se- 
 veral circumstances of which, it is as clear as 
 
 N 
 
194 ~ TH£ dissonance OF 
 
 lights* as Dr. Mills expresses it, tbat the au- 
 thor mui^t have borrowed it, and transcribed 
 several sentences from Luke; but he has 
 ehosen to vary some parts of the phraseolo-^ 
 gy, and, in&toad of telling us, in tha words of 
 the latter, that "some fell upon, a rock, and, 
 " as soon as it sprung up, it withered away 
 " because it lacked moisture," he says, " some 
 " fell on stoney places, where they (the seeds) 
 *' had not much earth, and forthwith they 
 ** sprung up, because thiey had no depth of 
 *^ e^ti\\9 and wheix the sun was up they wem 
 *^ scotched^ and because tbey had not root 
 " tliey withered^away/' Here, the concise 
 simplicity and strict propriety of: :Luke's ex- 
 pression, and the^aukwardly. laboured pe- 
 riphrasis of this au/thor, togother ;with the 
 falser idea it suggests, that see^d vegetates 
 the kboner for want of depth .of soil, form; 
 so glaring a contrast, as. mus.t surely strike 
 every attentiA^e reader: aiad where Luke 
 tells us^, "other fell on good ground, and 
 " sprang up, and bare fruit an hundred fold,'' 
 this writer ' saysj no doubt, Avitb .' intent to 
 improve upon his niqdel, thait >^jolh^r fell 
 ^* into good ground, and brought forth fruit, 
 "some an Imndred fold, some skty fold, and 
 
 * Lwce Clariu9» 
 
THE EVANGELIStS. 1^5 
 
 *' some thirty fold/' Now, if the criterion of 
 good ground be, its producing an hundred 
 fold, that which produces only thirty or even 
 sixty fold, is certainly not good ground ; 
 and the author, instead of apprehending our 
 Savioui's meaning, in the parable I'ecorded 
 by Luk^, seems to have been misled into 
 these three different degrees of produce, of 
 what he calls good ground^ by the very dis- 
 similar parable of the talents, and an atten- 
 tion to the different capa:cities oi. men ; but 
 that difference is by nO means the object of 
 this parable, as stated by Luke; and, there- 
 fore, he is far from attributing the product of 
 the fruit of the Gospel, in any degree, like 
 this writer, to the mental capacity of the 
 hearer, but represents his Master as teaching 
 us, that by the seed on the good ground, is 
 meant all those, who, "in an honest and 
 " good heart,, having heard the word, keep it, 
 " and bring forth fruit with patience/^ The 
 intellectual abilities of men, indeed, vary as 
 greatly as the degrees of their bodily strength, 
 but in capacity for moral virtue they 'are all 
 equal ; the weakest and most illiterate may 
 possess as honest and as good a heart, as the 
 wisest and most exalted genius that ever 
 lived : the moral virtue of the latter may have 
 
 N 2 . ^ 
 
190 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 a. more extensive influence than that of the 
 former, but that difference is merely acci- 
 dental ; his heart cannot be justly represented 
 38 a better and more fruitful soil in its pro- 
 portion, though it might, with propriety, be 
 compared to a more extensive field of 
 equally productive soil, whose produce must 
 of consequence be more extensively bene- 
 ficial. 
 
 The second parable of this collection is 
 entirely the author s own ; and the reader 
 will in vain search in it for that propriety of 
 expression, and consistency of doctrine, which 
 are so eminently conspicuous in Luke's com- 
 positions of the same kind. It begins with 
 resembling the kingdom of heaven to '' a 
 " man who sowed good seed in his field ;'^ 
 but what idea must this writer have formed 
 to himself, of the meaning of the kingdom of 
 heaven^ that he could think of likening it to 
 a husbandman ? The kingdom of heaven (or, 
 as it is always called by other writers, of God, 
 or of Christ, as that phrase is used by Jesus 
 in the prayer he taught his disciples, by Luke, 
 Paul, and John in the apocalypse) uniformly 
 signifies, as I have before observed, the duti- 
 ful state of submission and obedience of 
 mankind, to the terms of the New Covenant 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 197 
 
 of the Gospel ; and what similitude can 
 there be between such a state of the world, 
 and the husbandman in this parable ? It is 
 said, indeed, to obviate objections to many 
 solecisms that are observable in the language 
 of some parts of the canonical scriptures, that 
 though the miraculous gift of tongues sup- 
 plied the writers with a knowledge of differ- 
 ent languages, so far as to enable them to 
 make themselves understood by those to 
 whom they preached the Gospel ; it did not 
 endow them with that elegance, and pro- 
 priety of diction, which is acquired gradually 
 by the cultivation of natural learning : but 
 why the knowledge of any language, infused 
 into thQ mind at once, by the influence of 
 divine inspiration, should be less complete 
 and perfect than the slower attainments of 
 human industry and application, is not easy 
 to see. It is certain, if Luke acquired his 
 Greek on the memorable day of Pente- 
 cost, few scholars, in the ordinary ways of 
 learning, could ever make a greater profi- 
 ciency; and, whether he did oV not, it must 
 be remembered that, according to all those 
 who tell us this history was written by Mat- 
 thewj he wrote it not in. Greek, but $n his 
 
 K 3 
 
198 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 own native language, Hebrew : and w|iat 
 credit or regard ought to be paid to an un- 
 known translator, who presumes to translate 
 any work, and, above all, a work of import- 
 ance, into a language of which he himself is 
 not thoroughly master ? A work, however, 
 so evidently borrowed in many passages, and 
 in some literally transcribed, from Luke, and 
 in all the rest of it so badly written, cannot 
 be a translation of any original Hebrew^ 
 -work ; but must have been composed, in the 
 very form in .which we have received it, long 
 ^ftev the publication of the Gospel of Luke, 
 and consequently not by Matthew nor any 
 other Apostle. Indeed if, after all the in- 
 structions of their great Master, and the su- 
 pernatural illumination of their minds, by di- 
 vine inspiration, any one of them could still 
 remain so ignorant of the propriety of the 
 comn)oix fovms of speech, as to tells us, our 
 Saviour compared the kingdom to the person-* 
 ^ge, of his parable, who represents the King^ 
 he was very unUke those pieachers of Chris- 
 tiixj^ityy whom we read of in the Acts, and 
 vei:y unfit for the in;iportant object of his 
 TO^i^on; But. lev MS pass by this o.bvious so- 
 lecism at the. beginning, a^id attend to iIk;.' 
 
. THE EVANGELISTS. I9f 
 
 meaning of the parable, as it is explained by 
 the author himself, v. 37? &c. We are there 
 given to understand that> according to the 
 system pf the Manichces, the world, even 
 under the Gospel Covenant, is still subject 
 to the influence of two opposite principles, 
 counteracting each other ] that as fast as Je- 
 sus Christ, the delegate • of God, sovvs the 
 seeds of virtue and righteousness amongst 
 men, his equally potent enemy, the Devil, 
 ROWS the seeds of vice and wickedness ; that 
 God himself cannot cause the wicked to be 
 rooted out of the world, without destroying 
 the righteous with them ; that, therefore, the 
 good and bad will always remain blended to- 
 gether amongst men, whilst the world lasts ; 
 but that, at the end of the world, the angels 
 will separate them, and the wicked will be 
 thrown into hell-fire ; but the righteous will 
 be received with honour into the kingdom of 
 God. By the writer's giving that appellation 
 to the future existence of the virtuous, in a 
 state of happiness and immortality in hea- 
 ven, it is manifest that, whoever he was, he 
 did not understand our Saviour's meaning iu 
 that expression, so frequently used by him, 
 and so peculiar to his Gospel ; for, besides 
 
 jsr 4 
 
200 THE DISSONANCE ©F 
 
 that no other writer of the New Testament 
 uses it in that sense, the obvious meanins; of 
 the second petition of the Lord*s Prayer, and 
 of all the prophecies of both Testaments, ref- 
 lating to the Messiah or Christ, makes it re- 
 fer merely to the state of human affaii-s in the 
 present world, and not to that future state 
 which is to succeed the general resurrection : 
 -and, instead of teaching us, like this parable, 
 that sin and wickedness will continue amongst 
 men to the end of this world, all the other 
 scriptures assure us, that the very purpose of 
 the mission of Christ, and the preaching his 
 Gospel, is to eradicate, and put an end to, 
 the growth of these tares of vice and iniquity ; 
 and that the reformed state of mankind in 
 the present world, under the universal influ- 
 ence of the righteousness and moral virtue of 
 the Gospel, is what is peculiarly denominated 
 the khigdom of God, or of his Christ. Who 
 then can believe that an Apostle of Jesus 
 Christ could either be so ignorant of the great 
 end and design of the Gospel, or so culpa- 
 bly daring as to put into the mouth of our 
 blessed Saviolir a doctrine so absurdly false 
 and impioiL/^ as is taught us in this parable, 
 and so diiectly contradictory to every idea 
 
THE 'evangelists. 001 
 
 ^iverrus of the new covenant of the Messiah 
 by all the other sacred writers, whether Jew* 
 or Christians ? 
 
 The two prophetic parables or similitudes 
 introduced at verses 31 and 33, are tran- 
 scribed evidently from Luke ; so that there 
 is nothing w^orthy of remark in them, except 
 that the author, from his own misconceived 
 idea, that what Luke calls the kingdom ofGody 
 means the future state of the virtuous in hea- 
 ven, has, in both these cases, changed it for 
 the kingdom of heaven, as he has done in most 
 instances throughout his book, though he is 
 the only writer who has made that alteration 
 of the phrase. 
 
 In the two next parables, verses 44, 45, 
 and 46, we have the same idea held out to 
 us of the kingdom of heaven, as meaning a 
 future state of happiness ; only in the latter, 
 the author has been guilty of a similar sole- 
 cism to that observed in the parable of the 
 wheat and tares ; and, instead of comparing 
 the eternal happiness of heaven to the pearl 
 of great value, as he does to the hidden trea- 
 sure in the former, he here compares it to the 
 trader, who purchases the pearl. 
 
 In the last of these seven parables, v. 47, 
 this writer gives us another idea of the king-- 
 
.2^ THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 (lorn of heaven^ according to which, it signifies, 
 jieither the earthly npr th^ heav.enly 3tate of 
 men, but the day of general judgment, and 
 final distribution of punishments and rewards 
 to the wicked and the just. So- little con- 
 sistent is he with himself, as well as. so contra- 
 dictory to the best attested scriptures ? 
 
 IV. I]^' the fourteenth chapter, we have a 
 very singular story told us, of the cauge of the 
 .death of Jojm the Baptist ; but it is the pe- 
 culiar fate of this historian,, to have almost a]I 
 the uncommon facts he. has related, uncon- 
 firme.d.by mj other v/rit^r. Luke, though 
 he mentions John's being beheaded by He- 
 rod, speaks of it in the person of Herod, as 
 his own voluntary act, and gives not the least 
 hint, that he was artfully drawn in to murder 
 him, against his own inclination : and Jose- 
 phus, who is equally silent about the daugh- 
 ter of Herodias, pleasing Herod by her danc- 
 ing, expressly assures us, that Herod, after he 
 had iuiprisoued. him,, put him to death, be- 
 causq he was jealous of the great influence 
 his character. ^n.d preaching had upon the 
 people, and because he thought it easier and 
 more prudent, by his death .to. prevent any 
 insurrection upon his account, than to inflict 
 
THE EXANGEJi-ISTS, i^^S 
 
 tlic same puiiisjiment on liim, after a tumult 
 might be begun. 
 
 In chapter xv. verse il, we have the fol- 
 lowing curious piecQ of instruction addressed 
 to the multitude : " Not that which goeth 
 "into the. mouth defileth a man ; but that 
 ^' whjch GometUoutof the mouth, tliis defileth 
 " a m^n :" and ^t v., 15. this is called a para- 
 ble. Surely thisr writer did not consider what 
 constitutes a. pe^rable,, when he called it by 
 that name ; for here ^s no similitude nor alle- 
 gorical allusion whatsoever, but a plain, di- 
 dactic aphorism, so very perspicuous, that 
 even the explanation of it, said to be given 
 to the disciples, at the request of Peter, in 
 the 17th and following verses, is not in any 
 degree more intelligible, though much more 
 absurd ; for, with what propriety can evil 
 thoughts, murders, and th<^fts, be said to pro- 
 cecdout of the mouth? Indeed, to say that 
 ^ny thing which proceeds out of the mouth, or 
 even out of the heart of man, defdeth him, is 
 as absurd as it were; to say, tliat the turbid 
 stream, w4iich flows from a polluted fountain, 
 defileth the fountain. Accordino; to Luke, 
 our Saviour, on the contrary, with much more 
 reason and propriety, taught both his disciples 
 and the multitude, c. yi. v. 45, that " a good. 
 
':oi THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 '' imtYiy out of the good treasure of his heart, 
 " bringeth forth that -which is good ; and an 
 ^^ evil man, out of the evil treasure of his 
 " heart, bringeth forth that which is evil : for 
 *^ out of the abundance of the heart his mouth 
 ^' speaketh/' We cannot wonder, however, 
 that thi& writer should be found inconsistent 
 with Luke, when he even palpably contra- 
 dicts himself. We have seen above, that, in 
 the sermon on the mount, he makes our Lord 
 expressly declare, that he was not come to 
 destroy one jot or one tittle of the Law of 
 Moses. Yet that Law prohibited many un-^ 
 clean meats, the eating of which certainly 
 defiled any member of that covenant: to 
 teach, therefore, that nothing which a man 
 eat defiled him, was at once to destroy a very 
 considerable part of that Lavv, for the observ- 
 ance of which, Peter himself, notwithstanding 
 this pretended early instruction to the con- 
 trary, was zealous, long after his Master's 
 ascension, as appears from his vision in the 
 matter of Cornelius, and of which every Jew, 
 to this day, is particularly tenacious. 
 
 The author, chapter 18, has introduced 
 another parable of his own composition, the 
 obvious scope of which is an exceeding good 
 one, viz. the enforcing the Christian doctrine 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 20^ 
 
 of mutual forgiveness : but he has been very 
 far from attaining that happy propriety of 
 figurative expression and character, which so 
 strikingly distinguishes all the parables of our 
 Saviour recorded by Luke. It begins with a 
 repetition of his former solecism, the likening 
 the kingdom to the king ; and here the king' 
 dom of heavcfiy instead of meaning what the 
 Ic'mgdom of God always means in Luke, has a 
 new signification, different even from any 
 which he himself has before assigned to it ; 
 for it represents the government of the divine 
 providence over the affairs of men : but in his 
 endeavours to inculcate the necessity of the 
 duty he intended to teach, he has entirely 
 Jost sight of justice and honour, in the con* 
 duct of his parabolic king. Had he repre- 
 sented him, as the Lord's Prayer represents 
 the Almighty to us, forgiving his offending 
 subject, on condition that he forgave his fei^ 
 low subjects, the conclusion of the parable 
 had been consistent both with propriety and 
 equity ; but after an absolute, unconditional 
 forgiveness onoe granted, to recant that par- 
 don, and enforce the payment of his debt i)y 
 the severest penalties, because the man did 
 not shew similar mercy to his own debtor, is 
 downright tyranny and injustice. Let us sup- 
 
eo6 tfiE^ DISSONANCE* OF 
 
 pose, that at ^ubj^dt had oti sbine occasion 
 aim^ a stroke with his sWord M- an earthly 
 sovereign, arid that^ ttith iincoifAiriofi magna- 
 nimity and mercy; moved by his sitbmfissidn 
 and apparent penitenecytHe • sovereign had 
 granted him a full and fVeepatdo^ ; and that, 
 on his return from the palace, he received a 
 blo\V himself from one of his fellow subjects, 
 against whom he immediately instititted a 
 prosecution in the courts of justice, that the 
 offender migto be legally punished for the 
 assault ; in such ih case,: could th<& sovereign, 
 with any shadow of equity or honour, breaH 
 his; own word, awd cau^e the man m be ap-^ 
 prehended, tried and executed for that high 
 treason, which he. had already pardoned ? 
 Yet such and so unjustifiable is tlie conduct 
 attributed to the king in thia parable ! 
 
 In chap* xix. V. 12, the author, very inad- 
 vertently, puts into the moiith of our Saviour 
 an expression, which plainly betrays the ago 
 in w^hich this spurious Gospel was written, 
 and the particular sect of apostate Christians, 
 which he himself favoured ; for in reply to a 
 remark of the disciples, upon a pretended 
 condemnation of the divorces allowed by the 
 Mosaic Law, our Lord is made to say, that 
 " there are some eunuchs, which were so born 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. tOr 
 
 ** from their ulother s womb ; and there arc 
 " some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs 
 ** of men ; and there be eunuchs, which hacc 
 " made themselves eunuchs, /or tjie kingelom of 
 " heaveiis sake" Now the prophetic marks 
 of the predicted antichvustian apostasy given 
 us by Paul, 1 Tim. c. iv. 2 and 3, are first, 
 that its authors would speak Iks in hypocr'mi^ 
 hav'mg a seared conscience (a character, as fkr 
 as I am able to judge, strongly and strik- 
 ingly exemplified in this writer); and secondly, 
 that they would forbid marTiage^\ and. abstain 
 from meat& :• in conformiity to the last distin- 
 guishing character of this early a^pos^tasy, this 
 author, as 1 have before observed, ifi contrar 
 diction, not only to what Luke, but to what 
 he himself elsewl'iere relates, as our Saviour'^* 
 doctrine, makes him give directions for faist- 
 ing; and, on another occasion, to ;§ayj that 
 even the miira^ulous power of God, in curium; 
 some kind of Demoniacs, couki not be effi- 
 caciously exerted " without prayer andy^6'^- 
 ^' ing,'' on the part of the Ahiiighty s agent ; 
 and here he clearly discovers to us thc^ second 
 of these prophetic marks, pre-noticed by 
 Paul, by making our Saviour approve of.a^ 
 determined^ unnatural abstinence from ma^-- 
 riage, for the kingdom of heavens sake. These 
 
eu8 TIi£ DISSONAKCE OF 
 
 were the petuliar doctrines of the Encfra-* 
 tites or Contineutes, a sect which appeared 
 very early in the second century^ a-iid amongst 
 whom it is not improbable, that tlie same 
 madness of superstitious enthusiasm, which 
 soon after led men into hermitages, monaste- 
 ries, and even to stand for a great length of 
 time in ^n erect posture on the top of a pillar, 
 liiight have produced some instances of the 
 unnatural self-violence the author speaks of, 
 not long after the rise of that s^ct, the very 
 allusion to which convicts him of being a wri- 
 ter later than those instances, that is, not ear- 
 lier than near the middle of the second cen- 
 tury; but it is absolutely impossible that in 
 our Saviour's time, almost as soon as the New 
 Covenant of the kingdom of God was begun 
 to be preached, and even before his disciples 
 comprehended its nature and intent, any men 
 could have made themselves eunuchs for the 
 sake of it. In the latter half of the second, 
 and within the third century, indeed, such 
 numerous instances occurred in consequence 
 of the approbation of our Saviour himself, 
 supposed to be given in this spurious Gospel, 
 which had been received as the Apostle 
 Matthew's, that early in the fourth century, 
 the first Council of Nice, in conformity to 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 200 
 
 the Mosaic Law* which forbad any Man, 
 that had a blemish or defect, from performing 
 the office of a priest, decreed that no man, 
 who had castrated himself, should be admit- 
 ted into, or retained in any clerical office : 
 though the same Council evinced their at- 
 tachment to the principles and doctrines of 
 the Encratites, by decreeing, at the same 
 time, that no man of the clerical order should 
 be allowed to marry. It should be observed 
 also, that in the introduction to this curious 
 discourse, the writer again betrays the gross- 
 est ignorance of the geography of the coun- 
 try ; for he says, it passed when our Saviour 
 *' leaving Galilee, came into the coasts of 
 ** Judea beyond Jordaii ;' though the Jordan 
 was the eastern boundary of both the Jewish 
 and Roman province of Judea, and conse* 
 quently no part of it was beyond the Jordan. 
 
 V. The twentieth chapter begins with ano- 
 ther parable peculiar to this author, who, 
 with his usual incongruity of figurative lan- 
 guage, hei-e resembles the kingdom of heaven 
 to an householder hiring labourers into his 
 vineyard, at different hours of the day, and 
 in the evening, paying those who were hired 
 
 » Lev. xxi. ir— 24. 
 O 
 
m THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 i^arly in the morning, the stipulated, custom- 
 ary price of their day's labour, and generously 
 giving the very same sum to all those who 
 were hired later, or even to such as had 
 worked only a single hour. But if, by work- 
 ing in the vineyard, is meant men s perform- 
 ing the moral duties of the Gospel ; and by 
 their payment in the evening, is to be under- 
 stood, the rewards of that future life, which 
 God has promised to all faithful and true 
 Christians ; there is not the least resemblance 
 of any kind between the circumstances of 
 the Gospel Covenant and those of the bar- 
 gain made with the labourers in the parable : 
 for ever since the Gospel has been preached 
 to the world, wheresoever it is known, the 
 labourers in the Christian vineyard are in- 
 vited all together to enter into it ; and the 
 same covenanted terms are proposed to all, 
 without any partial choice or predilection, 
 viz. an eternal life of happiness in heaven. 
 Now in this parable, though the labourers, 
 who had wrought the entire day, having re- 
 ceived the bare payment they had earned, 
 had certainly no right to complain of injus- 
 tice in the householder, nor to controul his 
 generosity towards the others, in giving them 
 more than they had earned ; yet surely they 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 211 
 
 must feel tlie great difference between his 
 mere justice to themselves, and his extraordi- 
 nary liberality to those who had wrought but 
 one hour; and we cannot wonder that they 
 murmured at so seemingly unreasonable a 
 preference and partiality, in the distribution 
 of his bounty. But the eternity of happiness, 
 promised us in the Gospel, is so transcendent 
 a recompense that, in comparison of it, the 
 difference between the longest and the short- 
 est life of man becomes perfectly evanescent ; 
 we are all, therefore, taught to consider our- 
 selves as unprofitable^ that is, unmeriting ser- 
 vants, who, in constantly doing our utmost, 
 can barely do our duty : and, instead of 
 finding cause to murmur, the best of men 
 must see reason for endless gratitude to the 
 Deity, for the Gospel promises of such an 
 infinite and undeserved portion of his be- 
 neficence. 
 
 The beginning of the twenty-first chapter 
 contains the history of our Lord's entry into 
 Jerusalem, amidst the hosannas of the peo- 
 ple, as predicted by the prophet Zechariah, 
 " meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt, 
 " the foal of an ass ;" but this writer was so 
 ignorant of the usual pleonasm and redun- 
 dancy of the Hebrew idiom, that, misunder- 
 
 o 2 
 
212 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 standing the prophet, who only means to say, 
 that the promised king would come riding on 
 an ass, and that the ass he should ride on, 
 would be a young one, or an ass's colt, he 
 supposes him to predict his riding upon two 
 asses ; and therefore, to shew that the pro- 
 phecy was more literally accomplished than 
 Luke/s history had shewn it to be, he informs 
 us, our Lord sent two of his disciples to fetch 
 an ass and a colt with her : that " they 
 " brought the ass and the colt, and put on 
 " them their clothes, and they set him upon 
 '" them" In v/hat position either the writer 
 himself, or those who, for so many centuries, 
 have believed him to be an Apostle of Jesus 
 Christ, conceived our Saviour to have been 
 seated on two animals at a time, I pretend 
 not to determine ; but surely, a more glaring 
 instance of the gross ignorance of the one, re- 
 specting the Jewish prophecies, and of the 
 extreme credulit3^ of the others, need not 
 be produced ! ! 
 
 At the twenty-eighth verse of this chapter, 
 there is a kind of an attempt at another pa- 
 rable ; but whether working in the vineyard 
 means becoming Christians, or living righte- 
 ously under any religious institution ; why 
 publicans and harlots are styled the eldest 
 
THE EVANGELISTS ai^ 
 
 son of the master of the vineyard, and the 
 chief priests and elders of the Jews, his 
 younger son ; whether the repentance and 
 righteousness preached by John the Baptist, 
 or the Gospel of Christ, be here meant by 
 the kingdom of God ; and upon what autho- 
 rity, harlots are mentioned as particularly 
 flocking to John's baptism ; does not appear 
 from the parable itself, at least, it is not in 
 my power to discover. 
 
 The following parable, verse 33, with some 
 trifling alterations in the expression, is taken 
 entirely from Luke, and is very perspicuous 
 and intelligible ; but, towards the close of it, 
 Luke represents our Saviour, as asking, 
 " what, therefore, shall the Lord of the vine- 
 " yard do unto them?" and supplying the an- 
 swer himself in these words, ** He shall come 
 '' and destroy these husbandmen, and shall 
 " give the vineyard to others :" whereas, this 
 writer tells us, the chief Priests and Pharisees 
 answered his question, in words nearl}' to the 
 same purpose, in direct contradiction to Luke, 
 who assures us, they were so far from de- 
 nouncing such a judgment against them- 
 selves, that, when they heard our Saviour ut- 
 ter it, they exclaimed, God forbid ! 
 
 3 
 
f!14 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 The twenty-second chapter begins with 
 another remarkable parable, the idea of which 
 is evidently borrowed from one of Luke's ; 
 but the time, place, language, circumstances, 
 and general scope of the whole, are so altered, 
 that it may, with reason, pass for the author's 
 own. In Luke, c. 14, the parable is merely 
 prophetic of the preaching of the Gospel to 
 the Gentiles, in consequence of the chief per- 
 sons of the Jewish nation refusing to receive 
 it, from an interested attachment to, what 
 they thought, their temporal welfare, an 
 event which took place before the destruction 
 of Jerusalem; and, therefore, the poor and 
 lowxr classes of the Jews, whereof our Lord's 
 first disciples mostly consisted, are repre- 
 sented by the indigent and distressed fre- 
 quenters of the streets and lanes of tlie 
 Jewish, city, and the Gentiles, by those who 
 were found about the highways and hedges : 
 but this author, who, I have no doubt, wrote 
 Ions: after the destruction of Jerusalem, makes 
 the invitation of the Gentiles, to accept the 
 Gospel Covenant, posterior to that calamity. 
 The parable, therefore, in the first seven 
 verses, refers only to tlie preaching the New 
 Covenant to the Jews ; describes their cruel 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. »il5 
 
 persecution of the Apostles and the first 
 preachers of the Gospel, and the vengeance 
 inflicted on them by heaven, in the utter 
 ruin of their city and nation ; after which, the 
 messengers of the Gospel are ordered to go 
 and preach it to the Gentiles. The manner, 
 however, in which that is done in the parable, 
 shews that the writer did not live in the age 
 of Matthew, but at a time, when Christianity 
 was, with great numbers, a mere external pro- 
 fession, and the state of the Church so cor- 
 rupt, that the majority of its members were 
 bad men ; for he tells us, the king's ser- 
 vants furnished the wedding with guests, by 
 collecting together " as many as they found, 
 " both bad mid good'* This is a pretty accu- 
 rate description of the state of professed 
 Christianity, as it is at present, and as I am 
 well convinced it was in the age of this 
 writer, and has been ever since ; but nothing 
 can be more unlike the state of the true 
 Church of Christ, as it was founded by Mat- 
 thew and the other Apostles ; and as, where 
 it subsists at all, it must for ever continue to 
 be : for the Apostles and the first preachers of 
 the Gospel were so far from admitting bad 
 men into the Christian society, th^-jt Paul 
 stric^y enjoins the Gentile converts, 1 Cor. 
 
 o 4 
 
J 16 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 c. V. V. 11, not to suffer any man, who was 
 guilty of any of the vices prohibited in the 
 Gospel, to remain a member of their commu- 
 nity, nor to associate, nor even so much a? 
 to eat, with him. In the conclusion of the 
 parable of the labourers in the vineyard, the 
 author informs us, as the reason of the mas- 
 ter's partiality, that though, under the Gos- 
 pel Covenant, " many are called, yet few 
 *' are chosen ;" and he repeats the same 
 words at the end of this parable also ; for, 
 since he considered all the professed christi- 
 ans of his own time to be called, and was 
 sensible that but few of them, in comparison 
 of the whole number, were really virtuous, 
 good men ; and ignorantly supposed, that 
 such would be the state of the Christian reli- 
 gion to the end of the world ; it was natural 
 for him to conclude, that those, whom God 
 would finally approve at the day of judgment, 
 would be very few indeed. But had he been 
 an Apostle of Jesus Christ, or had he under- 
 stood the Gospel meaning of the kwgdoni of 
 God, or the sense of the old prophecies, re- 
 specting the state of the world under the New 
 Covenant of the Messiah, he would have 
 known^ that no immoral, bad man could be 
 a member of the true Church of Christ, 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. «ir 
 
 M hatever his profession might be ; and that, 
 therefore, the whole congregation of faith- 
 ful Christians are denominated the chosen or 
 elect of God; and, instead of their being 
 found to be few at the day of general judgment 
 and retribution, he would have known also, 
 that the very end and design of the religion 
 of Jesus Christ, is to bless all the families of the 
 earthy v/ith the happy effects of its moral in- 
 fluence in the present life; and that, Avhea 
 the marriage of the king's son really takes 
 place, righteousness will overspread the 
 earth, as completely as the waters cover the 
 sea. With respect to the guest, who had not 
 on a wedding garment^ whatever the author 
 meant by that figurative expression, though 
 the man, it seems, had nothing to say for 
 himself, one cannot help pitying him: be- 
 cause, from the circumstances of the para- 
 ble, he appears to have been, in a manner, 
 pressed to attend at the marriage feast ; and, 
 if any particular robe was necessary, since 
 the king's servants must see that he had 
 none, they ought either to have supplied him 
 with one, or not to have invited him at all : 
 and it seems rather hard, that, in conse- 
 quence of their inattention or neglect, the 
 unhappy wretch should be bound hand and 
 
!?J8 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 foof^ and thrown into outer darlmess, there to 
 remain weeping and gnashing his teeth. 
 
 VI. At the close of the twenty- third chap- 
 ter, we meet with a very remarkable instance 
 of this writer's ignorance of, and astonishing 
 inattention to, the meaning of Luke's history, 
 though he has made so free and copious an use 
 of it in patching up his own. The reader will 
 recollect, that, in the tliirteenth chapter of 
 Luke, our Saviour is represented, whilst he 
 was yet in Galilee, as breaking out into a 
 hfeautiful, pathetic ejaculation, upon the fore- 
 sight of his own death, ,and the consequent 
 destruction of the city of Jerusalem ; and, 
 though he was urged to hasten out of Herod's 
 jurisdiction, saying, he should still stay a few 
 days longer in Galilee, and predicting that 
 the people of Jerusalem should not see him, 
 till they were prepared to receive him with 
 exclamations of *' Blessed is he that cometh 
 *• in the name of the Lord ;'' a prediction 
 which, we have seen, was hterally fulfilled, 
 at his entering Jerusalem upon a young ass, 
 as the prophet Zechariah had foretold. But 
 this writer having already, in his own ex- 
 traordinary manner, related the accomplish- 
 nient of that prophecy, in the twenty -first 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 219 
 
 chapter, here, when our Lord is actually 
 teaching at Jeiusaleni, in the temple, not 
 only makes him utter the same tender apos- 
 trophe to that city, but makes him also add 
 the same prediction of the people's hosannas, 
 at his entry into Jerusalem, after it had been 
 fulfilled, " For I say unto you, ye shall not 
 " see me henceforth^ till ye shall say. Blessed 
 " is he that cometh in the name of the Lord/' 
 What meaning the writer could intend to con- 
 vey by these words, I cannot imagine ; be- 
 cause such a prediction, given at the date 
 which he has assigned to it, even according to 
 his own history, was not completed, and was, 
 therefore, absolutely false : for, in the very 
 next chapter, he informs us, that, as soon as 
 our Saviour had so said, he left the temple, 
 and went out of the city, to the Mount of 
 Olives, fj'om thence to Bethany, where he 
 was a guest to Simon the Leper; and though 
 he returned again to Jerusalem to eat the 
 Passover, and was seen by the whole city, 
 during his examination before the council, 
 and before Pontius Pilate, and at his cruci- 
 fixion, yet no such circumstance, as is here 
 predicted, is so much as said to have taken 
 place. 
 
no THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 The twenty-fifth chapter contains two more 
 parables, the first entirely this autlK)r*s, in 
 which the kingdom of heaven is compared to 
 ten virgins^ half of them prudent, and careful 
 to be always prepared for the expected com- 
 ing of the bridegroom ; and the other half 
 improvident, and unprepared for his sudden 
 appearance. Here again we have a just re- 
 presentation of the state of mankind in gene- 
 ral, under every other system of religion ; but 
 not at all suited to the circumstances, that 
 are predicted of the world under the Gospel 
 Covenant, when it is become the kingdom of 
 God. This parable, therefore, is another proof 
 that the writer^either did not comprehend, or, 
 at least, did not believe, the universal, moral 
 reformation of that prophetic state of man in 
 the present life ; and, consequently, that he 
 was not an Apostle of Jesus Christ. 
 
 The next is the parable of the talents, 
 which is evidently an imitation, though a 
 very aukward and faulty one, of Luke's pa- 
 rable of the ten pounds. In the latter, our 
 Saviour is represented as distributing the ad- 
 vantages of light and knowledge displayed in 
 his Gospel, in the same equal proportion, to 
 all his followers of every rank and. degree, a^ 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 221 
 
 is strictly the case ; because his precepts and 
 religious instructions are equally intelligible 
 to all ; but, since the natural powers and abi- 
 lities of men are very different, his servants are 
 described, as making different degrees of im- 
 provement of those equal advantages, except 
 one, who, corresponding to those persons, 
 who, having been instructed in the religion 
 of Jesus Christ reject it, as the unwarranted 
 imposture of an artful, unjust man, refused 
 to make any use of them at all.* The pre- 
 tended Matthew, on the contrary, makes him 
 distribute his talents in the most partial, un- 
 equal manner — one only to one of his fol- 
 lowers, twice as many to another, and fiv^e 
 times as many to a third, as he himself ex- 
 presses it, " to every man according to Ms 
 *' abilities ;' as if the religious instruction of 
 
 * It should be remarked, that the word napkin, used in this ser- 
 vant's answer, in our copies of Luke's Gospel, is a Latin word, 
 written in Greek characters j but that it cannot be the word origi- 
 nally used by Luke himself, is manifest from the obvious sense of 
 the sentence, and the participle annexed to the substantive napkin, 
 which is not wrapped or tied up, but laid up j for the servant means 
 to tell his Lord, that he has Icept tlie pound deposited in a place of 
 security, that he might be sure of receiving his own, when he re- 
 turned, though nothing more j accordingly, in this parable attri- 
 buted to Matthew, he is said to have concealed the money under 
 ground } but a jiapkin is no place of security to lay up money in ; 
 and therefore, the deficiency of the original word in the earliest co- 
 pies of Luke, has undoubtedly been capriciously supplied, by some 
 unskilful copies t of the second century, 
 
^22 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 that Gospel, so peculiarly preached to the 
 poorest and most illiterate, was not equally 
 intelligible to men of all capacities and 
 degrees. 
 
 The latter part of this chapter is a descrip- 
 tion of the day of judgment, and expressly 
 teaches, not only that the righteous will then 
 be rewarded with eternal life in heaven, but 
 also, that the wicked will suffer everlasting 
 punishment. There is such palpable injus- 
 tice ascribed to the righteous Lord of heaven 
 and earth, by all those who represent him as 
 inflicting infinite punishment for the definite, 
 momentary oflFences of finite creatures, that 
 such a doctrine would make me strongly sus- 
 pect the authenticity of any scripture in 
 which I found it ; and it is with great satis- 
 faction I can remark, that this doctrine is 
 peculiar to this spurious Efvangelical history, 
 and as repugnant to the positive declaration 
 of the other scriptures of the New Testament, 
 as it is to strict justice arid the voice of rea- 
 son ; for they assure us, that, not an endless 
 life of torment, bat utter destruction and a 
 second death await* the unreformed wicked. 
 
 The history of our Saviour's eating the 
 Paschal lamb with his Apostles, and of the in- 
 
 * See 2 Thess. i. Q.—Apoc. xx. Q. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 2SS 
 
 stitution of the Lord's supper, is contained 
 in the twenty-sixth chapter; but attended 
 with so many different and contradictory cir- 
 cumstances, that it is absolutely irreconcila- 
 ble to Luke's history of the same things. For 
 Luke informs us, that, according to the uni- 
 versal practice of the Jews in celebrating the 
 Passover, our Lord began w ith taking a cup 
 of wine, which, after thanking God for the 
 mercies recorded in that festival, he handed 
 round to the Apostles, with an apology for 
 his own non-observance of the custom of 
 drinking of it first himself, as every master of 
 a family did on the same occasion ; that next, 
 as was customary also, he took a loaf of 
 bread, and, having oflfered up the usual 
 thanksgiving to God, brake the bread, and 
 distributed of it to each of them, bidding 
 them consider that bread as an emblem of 
 his body, which was given for them, and to 
 observe a similar ceremony amongst them- 
 selves in remembrance of him ; that he then 
 partook with them of the Paschal supper ; 
 and that, after supper, he distributed to them 
 in the same manner, the grace-cup, with 
 which that festive meal was always closed, 
 bidding them to consider the wine also as an 
 emblem of his blood, which w^as about to be 
 
224 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 shed, to ratify the New Covenant, which 
 God now made with them ; that, nnmedi- 
 ately after, as if it were by way of contrast to 
 that affectionate, grateful remembrance of 
 him, which he had just enjoined them prac- 
 tically to retain, he exclaimed, *' But, be- 
 " hold, the hand of him that betrayeth me, 
 " is with me on the table :" that so extraordi- 
 nary a declaration set them to enquire amongst 
 themselves^ which of them could be meant : 
 as the annunciation of his approaching death 
 made them contend, which of them should be 
 accounted their chieftain after that event ; 
 that, to put an end to a strife so unbecoming 
 the spirit of his unassuming religion, he told 
 them, no one of his disciples, as such, should 
 aiTogate a superiority over his Christian 
 brethren ; and that they were to expect no 
 other authority or pre-eminence, besides 
 what they were destined to partake of, in 
 some degree with himself, after their death, 
 at the final, complete establishment of his 
 kingdom, or the kingdom of God, upon earth : 
 but, according to Luke, he did not interpose 
 one word to settle their doubts about the per- 
 son of the traitor. The writer, called Mat- 
 thew, on the contrary, who, instead of being 
 a Jew himself, appears to have been very 
 
tHE EVANGELISTS. . 325: 
 
 imperfectly acquainted with either the pro- 
 phecies or customs of the Jews, takes not the 
 least notice of the cup preceding the supper, 
 and in telling us that tlie apology for his own 
 not drinking of the wine, was made by Jesus 
 at the grace-cup, when he ordained the ce- 
 remony of the Lord's supper, he really be- 
 trays his own ignorance, by teaching us tliat 
 lie did not begin the feast, as was customary, 
 with the cup ; for if he didjand the apology for 
 his not drinking of it himself was given then, 
 there could be no propriety in his repeating 
 it so soon after, at the grace-cup ; especially 
 when we consider, that the latter was pro- 
 posed to them, as a commencement of that 
 commemorative rite of which he was to be 
 the object, not the partaker: whereas, the' 
 participation of the cup before the supper 
 was the common form of beginning the Pas- 
 chal feast, Avliich, as a Jew, concerned him 
 as much as his disciples. In contradiction 
 also to Luke, who tells us, that what was said 
 of the traitor, was said after the supper was • 
 ended, and the commemorative observance 
 instituted — and plainly intimates, that he 
 did not explain whom he meant — this writer 
 informs us, that it passed whilst they were 
 eating the supper, and, what is singularly un- 
 
t26 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 accountable, even before the breaking an(J 
 distributing the unleavened bread ; and says, 
 that every one of the Apostles asked him, 
 whether it was he, and upon Judas's asking 
 him the same question, he declared before 
 them all, that he was the person ; yet he im- 
 mediately proceeded to institute, what we 
 call, the Lord's supper, and enjoined it upon 
 Judas equally with the rest. One of these 
 two histories, therefore, must be false; and 
 which it is, another very remarkable differ- 
 ence, concerning the expi'ess terms, in which 
 that part of the Lord's supper that regards 
 the wine, was instituted, will perhaps help 
 us to determine ; for this autlipr tells us, our 
 Lord s words were, " This is my blood of 
 'Vtlie New Covenant, which is shed for many, 
 '^for the remission of sins;' words which have 
 proved the source of that fatal inefficacy of 
 the moral influence of the Gospel, occa- 
 sioned by representing the death of Jesus as 
 a propitiatory sacrifice, and a satisfactory 
 atonement for the sins of the whole world ; 
 whereas, Luke mentions nothing of the re- 
 mission of sins; but says, his words were, 
 ^^ This cup is the New Covenant in my 
 ^^ blood, which is shed for you." And that 
 Luke s account is tlie true one, we have the 
 
'The evangelists. 5^7 
 
 most convincing evidence from Panl, who, 
 1 Cor. c. xi. V* 25, assures us, that he re*- 
 ceived the account of this institution from 
 our blessed Saviour himself; and that his 
 words were, as Luke has recorded them, 
 " This cup is the New Covenant in my 
 "blood,'' without one syllable of the remmiOTf, 
 
 VII, From hence, to the conclusion of 
 this Gospel, the differences and contradic- 
 tions, between this writer and Luke, are so 
 numerous and so great, that it appears asto* 
 nishing, notwithstanding Paul's early predic- 
 tion to the Thessalonians, that so it would 
 be, that the inhabitants of Christendom, of 
 every intellectual degree, should, for so many 
 centuries, have received, for the word of truth 
 itself, the most gross and palpable falsehood, 
 which^ of two contradictory histories, one of 
 them must certainly be. But it is well worth 
 our while tp consider, with all our attention, 
 that Paul tells us, that, even under the influ- 
 ence of this predicted, strong delusion^ men 
 Avould stand condemned in the sight of God ; 
 because the real, though unavowed reason of 
 their rejecting truth for fables and fictitious 
 falsehood, has been their taking pleasure in 
 
 p 2 
 
52* THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 unrighteousness. Now that the doctrine of 
 Christ's death being a full satisfaction to the 
 divine justice, for all the sins and unrighteous- 
 ness of men, which is founded principally 
 upon this fabulous and spurious Gospel called 
 Matthew s, is particularly alluded to, by the 
 Christian prophet, in this prediction, I have 
 no doubt : and that this hath always been the 
 grand inducement, with the members of the 
 orthodox Church of Constantine, next to the 
 compulsion and temporal allurements of the 
 civil magistrate, to attach them to its fabu- 
 lous, idolatrous superstition, is evident from 
 the testimony even of her present most zea- 
 lous champions, bishops, and other grave di- 
 vines, who, to disparage those modern 
 preachers of the Gospel, (who, ceasing to 
 blaspheme the Almighty Creator of the uni- 
 verse, by a communication of his Godhead 
 and divine honours to a mortal man, have 
 reject(^d also this doctrine of an universal 
 asylum for sin and wickedness) tell us, that 
 the religion which they preach is an uncom- 
 jortable religion. Uncomfortable ! Are these 
 right reverend and reverend personages then 
 unacquainted with the heart-felt comfort of 
 a life duly regulated by the moral precepts of 
 tlie Gospel of Christ ? Are the conscious expe- 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 92* 
 
 rience, except in very extraordinary cases, 
 of the continual blessing of God in this life, 
 and the certainty of enjoying after deeith, im- 
 mortality and happiness in a future life, no 
 comforts ? Or, are these to be accounted of 
 no value, unless the orthodox doctrine of 
 atonement afford men the additional comfort 
 of being able, securely to lead lives incon- 
 sistent with Christian righteousness, and to 
 attain the rewards of the next life, through 
 the unwarrantable gratifications of their pas- 
 sions and sensual appetites in this? Such 
 divines, howsoever eminent in worldly dig- 
 nity or learning, may teach what they please ; 
 but they, and their flocks too, will find, at 
 last, that under the Christian, as well as the 
 Mosaic Covenant, there is no comfort ^ saith 
 Gody to the imrighieous. 
 
 Luke informs us, that, after the supper 
 was ended, a very serious, important conver- 
 sation took place, between our Saviour and 
 his Apostles, upon several subjects suited to 
 the occasion, in the course of which he pre- 
 dicted Peters thrice denying that he knew, 
 him ; and that, after this, he went ovit of Je- 
 rusalem, to his lodging at the Mount of 
 Olives, as usual. This writer, on the cqur. 
 trary, informs us, that " when they had sung 
 
 p 3 
 
250 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 ^ an. hymn/' after supper, " they went out 
 " into the Mount of Ohves," and that there 
 he predicted not only Peter^s denial of him, 
 but that all his Apostles should that night he 
 offended because of him ; of the verification of 
 which there is not the smallest degree of evi- 
 dence. He makes our Lord declare also, 
 that, after he is risen, he will go before them 
 into Galilee^ though Luke assures us, that af- 
 ter his resurrection, he appeared to them all 
 at Jerusalem; that he there daily conversed 
 with them till his ascension; that, by his ex- 
 press command, tiiey continued at Jerusa- 
 lem, from the Passover to the feast of Pente- 
 cost : and that the Apostles abode there long 
 after. 
 
 In Luke too, our Lord is represented, as 
 from his station and character we might Ex- 
 pect him to be, perfectly collected and undis- 
 turbed, (for the two verses, recording his 
 agony and the vision of an angel strengthen- 
 ing him, are known to be an interpolation, 
 because they are not found in the oldest and 
 best copies of Luke) introducing into his 
 nightly devotions, a singfe petition to God, 
 to remove that cup from him, if it was his 
 will'; but immediately rcsigning himself, v^^ith 
 the liiost calm and dutiful submission, ■ to 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 281 
 
 the accomplisliment of the divine will^ in pre- 
 ference to his own incUnation. The writer 
 before us, on the contrary, represents him as 
 greatly afflicted, and exceedmg sorrowful, at 
 the approach of his expected death, soUcit* 
 ing heaven with prayers, repeated three dif- 
 ferent times, that, if possible, thatxup might 
 pass from him; and, after the offering up 
 his reiterated prayers, so very confused and 
 discomposed, as to address his sleepy Apos- 
 tles in the following incoherent, irrational 
 language : " Sleep on now and take your rest, 
 ^^ behold the hour is at hand, and the son of 
 " man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. 
 " Rise, let ns be going; behold he is at hand 
 " that doth betray me/' 
 
 Luke tells us, as is most probable, that those 
 who apprehended our Lord detained him 
 all night in custody in the hall of the High 
 Priest's palace ; and that Peter sat down ,ia 
 the hall amongst them ; that after his fear had 
 thrice induced him, simply to deny his ac- 
 quaintance, and connexion with Jesus, upon 
 the cock's crowing, our Lord turned and 
 looked upon him, which, making him imme- 
 diately recollect what had before passed upon 
 that subject, affected him so much that he 
 JiR^as ft)i;ced to go out, in order to give the na- 
 
 V 4 
 
232 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 turai vent to his sorrow ; that " as soon as it 
 *' zms day, the elders of the people, and the 
 " chief priests, and the scribes, came together, 
 " and led him into their council ;" that, tiiere 
 he answered every question put to him, as he 
 did afterwards before Pontius Pilate, to whom 
 they carried him, as soon as they had drawn 
 from him the ground of their accusation of 
 him to the Romans, a declaration that he was 
 the object of the prophecies respecting the 
 Christy : or anointed king of the Jewish na^ 
 tion, which they strove to construe into a re- 
 bellion against Coesar; and the words in 
 which he made that declaration, Luke says, 
 were, " from this time forth" (not hereafter, 
 as our translation hath it) ^' shall the son of 
 " man sit on the right hand of the pov/er of 
 " God ;'' intimating, as he did on several other 
 occasions, that it was not till after his death 
 that he should be invested with the glorious 
 character of the Ciirist. The pretended 
 Matthew, on the other hand, informs us, that 
 the apprchenders of our Lord led him directly 
 ^* to Caiaphas the High Priest, where," at 
 that late hour of the night, the whole Jewish 
 council " was assembled" to receive witnesses 
 Against iiim, that they might " put him to 
 ^' death/' • 'I'hat here, as abo afterwards be^ 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. fiSS 
 
 fore Pilate, he persisted in an indecent, sul- 
 len silence, till the High Priest adjured him, 
 by the living God^ to say, whether he was the 
 predicted Christ, or not; that then he ac- 
 knowledged he was, and added, " neverthe- 
 *' less, from this time forth, shall ye see the son 
 " of man sitting on the right hand of power, 
 ^* and coming in the clouds of heaven :" a pre- 
 -diction absohitely false, because the Jewish 
 nation, from that time to this, have never 
 ^een any such tiling, but still remain incredu- 
 lous to his being the proniised Christ. Upon 
 his speaking thus, however, the author makes 
 the High Priest rend his clothes, through in- 
 dignation at the blmphemy of the speech, which 
 J believe no man else can discover in it ; and 
 tells us, the members of the council, after 
 pronouncing him guilty of death, amused 
 themselves till morning, in putting on him all 
 sorts of contemptuous, ludicrous, and wanton 
 indignities and abuse ; and that then, having 
 consulted together in what manner he should 
 be put to death, "they bound him, and led 
 *' him away, and delivered him to Pontius 
 ^' Pilate the Governor ;" that, in the mean 
 while, Peter was not admitted into the coun- 
 cil chamber, as we may easily suppose, but 
 as " he sat without in the palace/' where it 
 
«84 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 was^ impossible for our Lord to look upon 
 Jiiniy as Luke assures us he did, three dif- 
 ferent persons successively challenged him as? 
 l>eing a follower of Je&us ; and that he was 
 «ot contented with barely denying any know- 
 ledge af his master, but accompanied his de- 
 nial with oaths and imprecations, a& unwor- 
 thy the character of one chosen to be an 
 Apostle, as they are contradictory to the^ ac- 
 coufi^t given us by Luke. 
 
 In the beginning of the twenty-seventh 
 trhapter, the author informs us, that when 
 Judas saw that the Jewish council had con- 
 demned our Lord to die, (though he mu^t 
 have known from the first, when he cove- 
 nanted with them to betray him into their 
 hands, that they could have no other intent,) 
 he repented, brought again the price of his 
 treachery, threw the money down in the tem- 
 ple, and went and hanged himself'^ and that 
 the priests did not put the money info the 
 treasury of the temple, because it was the 
 price of blood ; but purchased with it the 
 potters field, to bury strangers in, which, says 
 the author^ "was called the field of blood 
 -• unto this day;' an expression denoting that 
 a long interval of time had elapsed between 
 that event and 'the . da:te ^f his history, not 
 
THE EVANCaiSTS: fiS^ 
 
 ciglit or nine years only, the period at which 
 Mattl)ew is said to have written. Hereby^ 
 he tells us, they accomplished a prophecy of 
 Jeremiah; but, like the prophecy of the 
 Messiah's being called a Nazarene, quoted ia 
 the second chapter, it is no where to be 
 found in Jeremiah, tior in the writings of any 
 other prophet of thi3 Old Testament. Luke, 
 on the contrary, in the first chapter of the ^ 
 Acts, assures us, that Judas, far from repent- 
 ing and restoring the money he had received, 
 having traiterously abandoned his apostleship, , 
 that he might go to a place peculiarly his own, 
 purchased some land with the reward of his 
 iniquity; and that he \vas afterwards killed 
 upon the land he had bought by the violence 
 <tf a fall, which was so great as to force out 
 his very bow^els ; that the circumstance was 
 well known to all the inhabitants of Jerusa* 
 km, who from thence, or on account of the 
 nature of the purdhase money, or perhaps 
 from both together, denominated it the field 
 of blood. It is not possible to draw up two 
 stories of the same thing more directly con- 
 tradictory to each other than these two; one 
 of them, therefo]^, must necessarily be a fic- 
 tion, and a shameful falsehood. Let the reader 
 judge to which author the imputation oaost 
 
236 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 justly belongs. From a Note of the late learned 
 Bishop of Rochester, upon this passage in the 
 Acts, it appears, that the irreconcilable con- 
 tradiction of these two accounts struck him 
 so forcibly, that he infers from it, as well as 
 from other circumstances^ which he does not 
 specify, but which are sufficiently obvious 
 to an attentive and unprejudiced reader, that 
 Matthew's Gospel was not written till after 
 the publication of both the histories of Luke; 
 and his inference is certainly just : for since 
 Luke professes to write of every thing as it 
 had been delivered to them by the apostles, 
 he never could have so flatly contradicted the 
 written account of an apostle. But if this 
 Gospel of Matthew was published later than 
 the fifth or sixth year of Nero's reign, as it 
 must have been, to make it posterior to Luke's 
 second history, the testimony of all the early 
 writers, who inform us it was prior to Luke's 
 Gospel, must be false; and not the slightest 
 evidence of any kind remains, that Matthew 
 ever wrote an Evangelical History. Besides, 
 as Luke, we have seen, lived with Matthew 
 and all the other apostles at Jerusalem; and, 
 on account of the election of Matthias to sup- 
 j)ly his place, the story of Judas, must have 
 been often mentioned amongst them, he could 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. SSf 
 
 not be ignomnt of the circumstances with 
 which Matthew himself related the story; and 
 it is equally improbable that he should con- 
 tradict his oral as his written account of this 
 transaction; at the same time, no man can 
 suppose, that an apostle of Jesus Christ, or 
 any other person, who had the least regard to 
 truth, or to his own character, could deUver 
 a verbal account of any fact to Luke and the 
 other disciples, in one manner, and, in writing 
 afterwards, relate the same fact in another, 
 utterly inconsistent with it. 
 
 I omit to animadvert upon the dream and 
 extraordinary interference of Pilate s wife; as 
 also upon the improbability of the Governors 
 washing his hands before the multitude, to 
 cleanse himself from the guilt of the innoeeni 
 blood of 3, just person, which he was going to 
 shed ; and upon the horrid imprecation of the 
 people upon themselves and their posterit}', 
 which are all peculiar to this writer. But I 
 cannot forbear remarking, that as Pilate was 
 convinced of our Lord's innocence and inof- 
 fensive behaviour, and sacrificed him to the 
 clamorous entreaties of the Jews, acjainst his 
 own judgement and inclination, it isr not at all 
 consistent with the polished humanity of the 
 Romans, that he should have subjected Wm 
 
$253 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 to any unnecessary, barbarous, and cruelly 
 insulting treatment from the Roraan soldiers ; 
 that, according to Luke, the gorgeous robe 
 and contemptuous mockings were put upon 
 him, not by them but by Herod ; and that 
 his history of the crucifix^ion makes no men- 
 tion of the crown of thorns, nor of the other 
 wanton indignities attributed to the Roman 
 soldiers by this writer. 
 
 At verse /ii, . we are told, that both the 
 thieves joined with the people, in taunting 
 him when on the cross; whereas Luke as- 
 sures us, that one of them only did so; and 
 that he was reproved. .for- > it by the other ma-r 
 
 lefactor. ;;:: n- ;' 
 
 In verse 46, &c. we read, that^, when he 
 had hung three hours upon the cross, our 
 Lord i exclaimed, "my God, my Qod, why 
 'Vhast thou forsaken me?" and, when he had 
 exclaimed a second time, expired. Luke, 
 on the contrary, is so far from; making him 
 utter any thing that could lead the people to 
 think, or that might appear as if he himself 
 thought, he was in any sense forsaken by Al- 
 mighty God, that he tells us, at the ninth 
 hour, " he cried with a loud voice, and said, 
 ". Father, into thy hands I commend my spir 
 " x\tv, and having said thus, died," 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. aS# 
 
 They both mention, that the vail of tije 
 temple was rent: but this author alone in^ 
 forms us of the earthquake that rent the rocks 
 and opened the graves; and that many bo- 
 dies of the dead saints arose, and, taking ad^ 
 vantage of the aperture, " came out of the 
 ''^ graves after his resurrection/' (what they 
 did in the interval is not mentioned,) " and 
 *^ went into the holy city, and appeared unto 
 ^' many/' Surely this story is well worthy of 
 those spurious legends of the beginning ol 
 the second century, which^ Irenaeus tells u^^ 
 were calculated to astonish the credulous and 
 supei^titious! For who. can be meant bj tlie 
 saints? That was an appellation commo^nlj 
 given to the Christians in after times ; but at 
 the time of our Lord s crucifixion it was ap-. 
 plied to no particular set of people. And 
 what became of these bodies of the saints 
 after they came into tJiQ city ? Had they joined 
 the society of. pur Lord's disciples, we should 
 have heard of them in the Act^; but per- 
 haps the author meant we shodd understand 
 that, after just exhibiting so extraordinary aii 
 appearance, they returned q^uietly unnoticed, 
 every one to his own. narrow sepjUlchral cell^ 
 and there let us kave them undisturbed* 
 
040 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 Luke informs us, that " when tlic Centu- 
 " rion saw what was done" at our Saviour s 
 expiration, he said, " certainly this w-as a 
 " righteous man/' But this writer tells us, 
 that he and those who were with him said, 
 " truly this was the" (or rather a) " son of 
 " God/' In what sense a Roman Centurion 
 could use the latter expression, and which 
 denomination it is most probable he should 
 make use of, I submit to the reader's deter- 
 mination. 
 
 According to Luke, as soon as Jesus was 
 dead, Joseph of Arimathea w^ent to Pilate, 
 and begged his body; and hasted to bury it, 
 because the sabbath, which began at sun-set, 
 drew on; that his female disciples attended 
 the burial, observed how his body was placed 
 in the sepulchre, and returned and prepared 
 spices and ointments to embalm it with, be- 
 fore the sabbath commenced; and then rested 
 the sabbath day, according to the command- 
 ment. The pretended Matthew, however, 
 tells us, that " Ziehen even was come" that is, 
 when the sabbath was actually begun, Joseph 
 went to beg the body, took it down, wrapped 
 it in linen, and buried it; and that Mary Mag- 
 dalene and the other Mary were sitting over 
 
l^tiE EVANGELISTS. 241 
 
 against the sepulchre. From the time this 
 writer has thought fit to allot for the burial 
 of our Saviour, it is evident that he was not 
 only no Jew himself, but so ignorant of the 
 customs of the Jews, that he did not know 
 their day always began with the evening; 
 or he could never have emplo^^ed Joseph in 
 doing ^vhat no Jew would, nor dared to have 
 done, after the commencenjent of the sab- 
 bath. He takes no notice at all of tlie pre- 
 paration made by the women to embalm the 
 body ; for that would not have agreed with 
 the sequel of his truly wonderful story ; but, 
 to make up for that omission, he informs us 
 of a circumstance, with which Luke's history 
 shews us he was perfectly unacquainted : for 
 he tells us, that " the next day that followed 
 " the day of the preparation '—such is the peri- 
 phrasis that he uses for the sabbath day ! It 
 is well known, that amongst the Jews, it was 
 customary to prepare and set out, in the af- 
 ternoon of the Friday, all the food and neces- 
 saries for every family, during the sabbath 
 day, because they were forbid to light a fire, or 
 to do an}^ the most trivial servile work, on that 
 day, and therefore Friday was very properly 
 called the day of preparation ; but it ap- 
 pears to me next to impossible, that any Jew^ 
 
 Q 
 
3418 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 or any other person who had been accustomed 
 to keep the sabbath as a rehgious ordinance, 
 should call the sabbath the day that followed 
 the day of the preparation: yet this singular his- 
 torian so denominates it, and goes on to in- 
 form us, that the Chief Priests and Pharisees 
 went to Pilate, to ask for a guard to be placed 
 round the sepulchre till the third day, to pre- 
 vent his disciples from stealing away his body, 
 and then saying he was risen from the dead ; 
 and that, after obtaining the Governor s per- 
 mission, they went and secured the sepulchre^ 
 by sealing the stone that was rolled against 
 it, and setting a watch. Here it is wonder- 
 ful, that the Jewish rulers should, in so public 
 a manner, thus violate the precept for ob- 
 serving the sabbath day ; more wonderful, 
 that they should have so much better attended 
 to and comprehended the meaning of our 
 Lord's prediction of his rising to life again, 
 than any of his own disciples did ; and most 
 wonderful, that a Roman Proconsul should 
 consent to let his troops keep watch round 
 a tomb, for fear it should be thought that a 
 dead man was come to life again. But 
 though our author's history of these extraordi- 
 nary facts is neither consistent with reason 
 and probability, nor with any other history 
 
of the same event, it proceeds in pretty strict 
 ccmformity to the manner in which it sets out ; 
 for^ to convince xis still more fully that the 
 author was totally ignorant of the mode of 
 computing time, in use amongst the Jews, and 
 habituated to that used by the Greeks and 
 Romans, he reckons the sabbath to last till 
 day-light on the Sunday moniing, and says, 
 c. 28, that^ " in the end of the sabbath, as it 
 ^ began to^ tlawn toward the first day of the 
 *' week,'* the two Marys, before mentioned, 
 came, not, as according to Luke, to embalm 
 the body, for, with a guard round the sepul- 
 chre, that must have been impracticable, but 
 tx) see the sepulchre. Whilst they were there, 
 the author tells us, there was another great 
 earthquake, and an angel descended, rolled 
 awav the stone, and sat upon it ; at whose 
 sight, the soldiers trembled and were frighted 
 to death ; but to prevent the like effect of his 
 appearance upon the w^omen, he said unto 
 them, " fear not i/e, for I know that ye seek 
 ^^ Jesus who was crucified/' That the women, 
 as well as the soldiers, w^ere present at the 
 "descent of this- angel, appears, not only front 
 there being nobody else, by whom these un^ 
 common circumstances ccmld have been re- 
 lated, but afeo by the pronoun personal ye, 
 
 Q 
 
9i4 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 inserted in the original Greek, which in that 
 language is never done, unless it be empha- 
 tically to mark such a distinction or antithe- 
 sis, as there was, on this occasion, between 
 them and the Roman guard. Here, how- 
 ever, the author is, inadvertently, inconsistent 
 with himself, as well as with every other his- 
 torian, agreeably to the vulgar proverb of 
 our own country; and, forgetting that the 
 sole intent of rolling away the stone, was to 
 open a passage absolutely necessary for our 
 Lord's body to come forth out of the sepul- 
 chre, and that, if he had risen after the angel 
 had rolled it away, both the women and the 
 soldiers must have seen him rise, he makes 
 the angel bid them look into the sepulchre 
 to see, he was not there, and tell them, that 
 he was already risen; that they should in- 
 form his disciples of it ; and that he was 
 going before them into Galilee^ where they 
 should see him. In their way, the author adds, 
 Jesus himself met the women, and said, " be 
 "not afraid; go, tell my brethren to go into 
 '' Galilee, and there shall they see me :'' that 
 the eleven Apostles accordingly went into 
 Galilee to an appointed mountain, and not 
 only saw him there, but, contrary to what they 
 ever did at any other time, either before or 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 5245 
 
 after, they worshipped him, notwithstanding 
 some of them were so incredulous, as not to 
 believe even the testimony of their own 
 senses. In the interim, whilst the women 
 were going to the Apostles, the author tells us, 
 " some of the watch," some strictly disciplined 
 Roman soldiers, left their station, to bring an 
 account of what had passed, not to the Go- 
 vernor their General, nor to any other of 
 their own officers, but to the Chief Priests 
 of the Jews ; that they assembled a council 
 of the Elders upon the occasion, and, after 
 deliberating what was to be done, induced 
 the soldiers, by large bribes, to run the risk 
 of being put to death themselves, upon the 
 highly improbable chance of the Jewish ru- 
 lers having influence sufficient, with a Ro- 
 man Proconsul, to prevail on him, to submit 
 to the indelible infamy of neglecting the dis- 
 cipline of the army under his command, to 
 such a degree, as to suffer an entire guard of 
 soldiers avowedly to sleep upon their station, 
 ^vithout any notice being taken of it, and to 
 say, that our Lord's disciples stole his body 
 away, whilst they slept. This incredible 
 story is another instance how necessary it is, 
 that those, who do not adhere closely to the 
 truth, should have extraordinary good memo- 
 
 Q 3 
 
2^6 THE r/lSSONANCE OF 
 
 riesj.to enable them to keep dear of gross 
 absurdities, or palpable contradictions, in 
 jtbeir narrations ; for how were the tongues of 
 these sokMers to be restrained, amongst the 
 inquisitive inhabitants of a great city, at that 
 time particularly crowded, on account of 
 the Paschal feast, not only in their way to 
 the Cliief Priests, but also during the whole 
 time whilst^ the Priests assembled the council, 
 and deliberated with the Elders what was to 
 be done ? /And if that pait of the watch^ 
 wiiQ, the author says, came to inform the 
 Jew^, were .pioltroons enough, for the sake of 
 a bribe, to undergo so shameful a disgrace to 
 themselves, as well as to hazard the resent- 
 ment of their General, how could they un- 
 ^dertake that all their comrades, who re- 
 mained at the sepulchre, would do the same ? 
 And to what purpose could the Jewish Coun- 
 cil bribe so?ii€, without a possibility of know- 
 ing how the rest Qf the corps would act ? And, 
 even supposing all these difficulties sur- 
 moimted, and that the whole guard had 
 agreed and persisted in Sciying, that " lus 
 " jdificiplcs sto^e him away wlulst they slept," 
 of what service could that be to the Jewish 
 rulers, except to demonstrate the folly of 
 jjiitjtij^' any guard at all?' For, if the guards 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. l(TJ5^ * S4f^ 
 
 were asleep, they could be no evi^nce that 
 his body was stolen away ; and it must be 
 ]u»t as probable, tliat he might rise to life 
 again whilst the watch was asleep, as it was if 
 no watch had been set. Our author subjoins, 
 " And this saying is commonly reported 
 " amongst the Jews, until this day ;" another 
 inadvertent slip, if he really meant to pass for 
 Matthew, (of which, however, I must do him 
 the justice to say, I see not the least proof;) 
 for it evidently implies, that from these events 
 to the time of the author, a long series of 
 years had intervened : and, therefore, such an 
 expression could not, at any time, have been 
 used with propriety by Matthew, especially 
 if he wrote his Gospel so early as is asserted. 
 For my own part, from the number of La- 
 tin words w^ritten in Greek characters, w^hich 
 this book contains; from the authors evident 
 ignorance of the customs, prophecies, and 
 country of the Jews ; from the form of bap- 
 tism enjoined at the conclusion ; from the 
 Roman centurion being made to call our Sa- 
 viour a Son of God, which words, in the 
 mouth of a Pagan, could only mean, that he 
 must be a Hero or Demigod, like Bacchus, 
 Hercules, or^Escuiapius; and from the women 
 and all the Apostles being represented as 
 
 Q 4 
 
:: 8 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 worshipping their Master, without an}'' rea- 
 son alleged, or even suggested, for tlieir 
 idola'rj ; I am perfectly convinced, that this 
 Gospel was not written earlier than near, the 
 middle of the second century ; and that it is 
 the patched-work composition of some con- 
 vert from the Pagan schools. Whether my 
 arguments may work the same conviction 
 upon an}^ of my readers, is not for me to 
 judge ; but I am confident, that whoever im- 
 partially considers, that, according to Luke's 
 histories, the Christians of the apostolic age 
 did ' not baptize in the terms of the form 
 here prescribed, but simply in the name of 
 the Lord Jesus ; that his disciples were so far 
 from knowing a watch was set round tlie se- 
 pulchre, that the women came early on Sun- 
 day morning to embalm the body; and were 
 perplexed at finding the stone rolled away, 
 and that the body was not in the sepulchre; 
 that a vision of two angels, in human shape, 
 informed them he Avas risen, and reminded 
 them, that it was only what he had foretold 
 them must come to pass, long before they 
 came to Jerusalem ; that they gave them no 
 orders to send the .Apostles into Galilee to 
 see him ; on the contrary, that, though he did 
 not appear to two of the women, as the pre- 
 
THE evangelists: ^4^ 
 
 tended Matthew asserts, yet he appeared 
 that same day to Peter, at Jerusalejn ; to two 
 other disciples, as they went to Emmaus ; 
 and, the succeeding night, to the whole con- 
 gregation of the disciples, not in Galilee^ but 
 at Jerusalem ; and that, by his express com- 
 mand, the Apostles did not go into Galilee, 
 but remained at Jerusalem till the feast of 
 Pentecost; cannot rationally believe both these 
 contradictory histories, and consequently he 
 must be satisfied that one of them is grossly 
 fabulous and false. 
 
 VIII. In reviewing the miracles of Jesus 
 recorded by this writer, we find most of 
 them, like those of Luke, works of mercy and 
 benevolence; only he relates more of them; 
 and, with a view, no doubt, to aggrandize the 
 miracle, it is observable that he frequentl}^ 
 doubles the object or the malady to be healed, 
 making two where Luke mentions but one ; 
 or making the demoniac, that Luke tells us 
 was dumb, both blind and dumb also. But 
 there are a few of a very different kind re- 
 lated by this author, of which Luke makes 
 Bot the least mention; those are, c. xiv. our 
 Saviour's walking on the water of the sea of 
 Galilee, in the night time, to overtake his 
 
^$9 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 disciples, whom he had ''' constrained to get 
 " into a ship, to go before him unto the other 
 "side," though, as the ship was detained by 
 -contrary winds in the midst of the sea, till he 
 came to them, their embarking seems to have 
 answered no end, except the display of his 
 supernatural power in this singular miracle ; 
 and his curin. all the ma*adies of the people 
 of Gennesaret, by letting them only touch the 
 hem of his garment; c, xvii. his paying tribute 
 at Capernaum, by directing Peter to take the 
 required piece of money out of a fish s mouthy 
 where the miracle is rendered the more w^on- 
 derful by the fish's being able to hold the 
 money fast in its mouth till Peter took it out, 
 though it was caught and pulled up with au 
 hook and line; and c. xxi. the cursing the 
 fig-tree because he found no fruit on it, 
 w^herevvith to mitigate his hunger. Whether 
 such miracles as these are suitable to the cha- 
 racter of Jesus Christ ; and whether it be any 
 disparagement to the Gospel according to 
 Luke, that they are not to be found in it, I 
 leave to the candid reader to determine. 
 
 As to that most important mark, and to us 
 the onlv convincing: evidence of the authen- 
 ticityofany sacred scripture, the testimony 
 of the prophecies recorded in it, w4ien com- 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. i^l 
 
 pared with their corresponding events, I find 
 bat one in this Gospel attributed to Matthew, 
 which is not evidently lx)rrowed, and for the 
 most part verbally copied from Luke; that is 
 c xvi. V. 18 and 19, wiiere the author makes 
 our Lord foretell, that" the gates of hell shall 
 " not prevail against liis church;'' and that 
 he will give to Peter the keys of the king- 
 dom of heaven, and that whatsoever he shall 
 hind .or loose on earth shall be bound or 
 loosed in ^heaven. But w^hat is meant here 
 fey the gates of hell, and by not prevailing 
 ^against the church of Christ ? Does the first 
 ^expression mean impious violence, or death 
 jftiid destruction, or all together ? And does 
 4he last mean only, according to the literal 
 -sense of the original Greek word, growing 
 strong and powerful against it? or does it 
 signify utterly destroying it, so as to prevent 
 its being finally established in the world ? If 
 the last only be all that is intended, it is not 
 ^o intelligibly expressed, but predicts merely 
 the same thing as the two prophetic parables 
 of the mustard-seed and the leaven hid in 
 three measures of meal ; but, in every other 
 sense, it is a false prediction : for the violence 
 and deadly persecution of Pagans and of the 
 orthodox church, as other better authenti- 
 
^52 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 cated prophecies foretold they would do, 
 have- prevailed so greatly against the true 
 church of Christ, that a very small number of 
 its members is any where to be found. And 
 should any be inclined to think, as without 
 doubt many do, that the orthodox church it- 
 self is the true church of Christ, yet ask Asia, 
 Africa, and the south-east of Europe, w]ie- 
 ther Mahomedanism has not prevailed against 
 her? And with respect to the latter part of 
 the prediction, the very nature of the Gospel 
 Covenant, as well as the whole history of 
 Peter and the other Apostles, shews us, that 
 neither he nor any of them had the powder of 
 forgiving or retaining sins; and that neither 
 the whole college of Apostles, nor even J^sus 
 Christ himself, ever have been or will be able 
 (if it were possible to suppose them willing) 
 to admit one vicious, unreformed person into, 
 nor to exclude one virtuous, benevolent man 
 out of, the kingdom of lieaven. Indeed the 
 whole conversation, of which this prophecy 
 makes a part, is so exceedingly different from 
 that which 1 Aike tells us our Saviour held on 
 the same occasion, that it cannot be entitled 
 to any degree of credit, except-with those, if 
 airv such can be, who think fit rather to re- 
 ject the Gospel of Luke. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 055 
 
 The twenty-fourth chapter is one entire 
 long prophecy concerning the destruction of 
 Jerusalem, and, as the author expresses it, 
 the end of the worlds composed of two sepa- 
 rate prophecies of that event recorded by 
 Luke, with a few alterations and additions. 
 From some of these, one is led to tliink, the 
 author must have intended to allude to the 
 final day of judgment; but since he has 
 adopted the very words of Luke, that the ge- 
 neration living in our Saviour's, time should 
 not pass away till all those predictions were 
 fulfilled, we must suppose him to mean only 
 the destruction and desolation of Jerusalem 
 and the Jewish nation, and the commence- 
 ment of the end of the worlds as signifying the 
 last dispensation of the New Covenant of tlie 
 Gospel, by the actual abolition of the Old 
 Covenant of Moses. But then one addition 
 which he has made to these prophecies is ma- 
 nifestly false; for he says, v. 14, "This Gos- 
 " pel of the kingdom shall be preached in all 
 " the world for a witness unto all nations, and 
 *' then shall the end come:" yet the Gospel 
 was so far from being preached to all the na- 
 tions of the world, be tore the destruction of 
 Jerusalem, that there are still many amongst 
 whom it is utterly unknown. even at this day. 
 
45* THE DISSONANCE or 
 
 —At V. 9, he has directly contradicted Luke, 
 at the time he was copying from him; for he 
 tells us, that " then" (after the civil wars and 
 great natural evils, which were to precede the 
 destruction of Jerusalem,) " the Christians 
 " should be persecuted, killed, and universally 
 "hated;" all which our Lord, according to 
 Luke, expressly said would come to pass, 6e- 
 fore all these things: and the whole Christian 
 history demonstrates that the fact was as he 
 has stated the prediction. — There is also ano- 
 ther remarkable difference between these two 
 writers in stating this prophecy : Luke in- 
 forms us, that our Lord told his disciples> 
 plainly^ that they needed not apprehend the 
 ruin of the Jewish nation, at the beginning of 
 the insurrections and wars in Palestine, for it 
 would be some years afterwards before that 
 calamity would take place; but that Avhen 
 they should see Jerusalem itself invested with 
 armies, then the fatal period was arrived, and 
 they should lose no time in saving themselves 
 from the general ruin, by a speedy flight out 
 of the devoted country; and there is every 
 reason to believe, that the Christians actually 
 profited by this plain and timely admonition : 
 but this writer makes our Lord tell them to 
 flee out of Judea, when they shall see the abonii' 
 
THE EVANGELISTS, £53 
 
 nation of desolation spoken of by Daniel stand in 
 the holy place ; words to them absolutely unin- 
 telligible without an explanation, and which 
 must, therefore, have rendert d the prophetic 
 warning entirely useless to them. And what 
 could the author mea i by adding, v. 22, that, 
 ^* except those days should be shortened, 
 *' there should no flesh be saved ; but that for 
 ^' the elect's sake those days should be shorten- 
 *' ed ?" To what circumstances, in the destruc-^ 
 tion of Jerusaleui and the ruin of the Jewish 
 nation, can such a sentence refer ? 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MARK. 
 
 SECTION I. 
 
 TT ET us next examine what internal evi- 
 -^*-*^ dence of authenticity is to be found in 
 the Gospel according to Mark ; and compare 
 that also with the Evangelical history of 
 Luke. This is the more necessary, because 
 the author himself no where pretends to be 
 Mark ; and nothing can be slighter or less 
 satisfactory than the external testimony or 
 historic evidence in its favour ; as every can- 
 did inquirer will be convinced, who atten- 
 tively peruses the collection of those testimo- 
 nies prefixed to the best editions of this Gos- 
 pel, the chief of which, respecting a revela- 
 tion to Peter of Mark's having written it, &c. 
 are manifestly fabulous. 
 
 If we pursue the plan adopted with the 
 two others, and begin by examining the style 
 in which this history is composed, we shall 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. IL^X 
 
 ^ ■■*. 
 
 find it, with a very few exceptions, and no. 
 greater alterations than modern liarmonists 
 and paraphrasers make in these books every- 
 day, compiled entirely of passages copied, of- 
 ten literally, either from the Gospel called 
 Matthew's, or Luke's. It is certain, therefore, 
 that whoever the author was, he must have 
 had both those Gospels before him, and con- 
 sequently could not have written till after the 
 former was published ; that is, if there be any 
 force in the arguments already submitted to 
 the reader, not sooner than the beginning of 
 the second century. He too, like the writer 
 called Matthew, uses several Latin words 
 written in Greek characters, contrary to the 
 custom of all ordinary writers in Greek, prior 
 to the reign of Trajan. From these circum- 
 stances^ it seems impossible to consider the 
 unknown author of this Gospel, in any other 
 light, than as the first person who attempted 
 to harmonize the two contradictory Gospels 
 of Matthew and Luke ; and, by extracting 
 from each what he thought the most mate- 
 rial passages, to compose of them one regular, 
 consistent history of the public ministry of 
 our Saviour. With this view, finding it ab- 
 solutely impracticable to reconcile the two 
 genealogies and accounts of the ^tivity and 
 
^ftA THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 infancy of Jesus, like many other later com- 
 mentators, when they find themselves unable 
 to elucidate the text, he has entirely omitted 
 those parts of the two histories ; and begins, 
 where the original writing of Luke certamly 
 began, with the preaching and baptism of 
 John. For the same reason, as it is impossi- 
 ble to make the conclusions of those two 
 Gospels harmonize together, this compiler 
 abruptly broke off his history, at the eighth 
 Vers'e of the last chapter; and the twelve fol- 
 rowing verses, which are compiled partly from 
 JLuke and Matthfew, and still more from the 
 Gospel attributed to John, not havhig been 
 found in the earliest and best copies of this 
 work, arc undoubtedly the addition of some 
 still later hand, who has betrayed himself, by 
 inadvertently making his addition expressly 
 contradict the author whom he personated ; 
 for, in conformity to Matthew's Gospel, 
 which he transcribed from, the pretended 
 Mark, in the seventh verse, makes the anget 
 order the two women to fell his disciples to go 
 into Galilee, and there they should see him ; but 
 this Gospel -finishing Copy is tv at the ninth 
 verse, begins a distinct history of our Lord's 
 resurrection, 'different from that related six or 
 seven verseB before ; and informs us, that in- 
 
THE EVANGELISTS, 250 
 
 stead of their seeing him in Galilee^ he ap- 
 peared at Jenisalem^ to Mary Magdalene, in 
 one form ; to two of the disciples, who were 
 walking into the country, m another form^ 
 and afterwards, at Jerusalem again, (he docs 
 not say, whether in a third form or not) " to 
 " all the eleven, as they sat at meat." 
 
 In enumerating the names of the twelve 
 Apostles, in chap. iii. it is observable, that, 
 though this writer has followed the Gospel 
 called Matthew's, in making the Apostle An- 
 drew, brother to Simon Peter, he has placed 
 the name of Andrew, not second, but fourth 
 in the list, as he stands in that given us by 
 Luke, in Acts i, ; which, since this writer has al- 
 most always transcribed literally from the Gos- 
 pel of Matthew or Luke, affords great reason 
 to think, that, in his copy of Luke, Andrew 
 stood there, in that order, at the time of his 
 writing. Yet he also shews his entire igno- 
 rance, that the Apostle James was the bro- 
 ther of the Lord Jesus, by calling him the 
 son of Zebedee, and John, his brother; so 
 that it is plain, he could be ao writejr of the 
 Apostolic age. 
 
 In a book, which contains but a very few 
 sentences, that are not directly copied from 
 the two otiier Gospels, or close imitations ojf 
 
 R 2 
 
i60 THE msSONANCE OF 
 
 them,* there can be but very little, peculiar 
 to the author, to remark upon. One of these 
 few passages is a parable, c. iv. v. 26*, &c. 
 which, though the hint is obviously taken 
 from that of Matthew, of the wheat and tares, 
 as it is here stated, is entirely this authors. 
 He has kept clear of the solecism in the be- 
 ginning, customary with the pretended Mat- , 
 thew ; and uses the words kingdom of God ^ in 
 the same sense Avith Luke; but with what pro- 
 priety can it be said, that the conversion of 
 mankind to the religion of the Gospel, is as 
 imperceptible and unaccountable, as the ve- 
 getation of plants from seed ? Was it not the 
 reasonable and visible effects of the miracles 
 and doctrines of its first preachers, which 
 produced a conviction of its truth and di- 
 vine authority ? And if the harvest here re- 
 presents the day of judgment, as in the Gos- 
 pel of Matthew, (which, without doubt, the 
 author intended) the insinuation, that that 
 day would take place, as soon as the state of 
 mankind, under the influence of the Gospel, 
 is maturely accomplished, is equally repug- 
 nant to common sense and reason, and to the 
 
 • According to the tables of Ammianus, there are but twenty pas- 
 sages of ajij kind, in the whole Gospel, which are peculiar to .this 
 
THE EVANGELISTS, ' IQQX 
 
 clearest and most expressive prophecies of 
 the New Testament. 
 
 II. In the sixth chapter, verse JL3, this 
 writer tells us, without the least warrant from 
 his orighials, Luke and Matthew, that when 
 our Lord sent out the twelve i\postles, with 
 miraculous power, to cure diseases, they 
 anointed the sick they healed, with oih 
 Now, since the very intent of these miracu- 
 lous cures was to convince the Jews who be- 
 held them, in a way peculiarly adapted to the 
 kind, benevolent genius of the Gospel, of the 
 supernatural interposition of the Deity, in fa- 
 vour of the new religion they announced ; 
 every application, though of the most simple 
 kind, must necessarily tend to counteract the 
 belief of the miracle, and afford ground for 
 suspicion, that tlie cure was effected by some 
 medical virtue of the oil they used, not by 
 the immediate power of God ; and therefore, 
 as no such application is ever said to have 
 been used by our Saviour, or any of his dis- 
 ciples, in either of Luke's histories, it is in 
 the highest degree improbable, that any such 
 unction was ever used by them ; and the very 
 mention of such a circumstance in this Gos- 
 pel, and in the Epistle attributed to James, 
 
 R 3 
 
2G2 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 affords a very strong presumptive proof, that 
 neither of the writers Hved in the Apostolic 
 age ; but that, they both wrote in the second 
 century, when the preachers of Christianity, 
 no longer having the miraculous gift of heal- 
 ing, yet pretending to possess it, conscious 
 that no effect would be produced upon the 
 patient, by their word or touch, introduced 
 the formal ceremonj^ of anointing with oil, 
 accompanied by the united prayer of the 
 Presbytery ; and if, as, no doubt, sometimes 
 happened, the sick person recovered, the 
 cure was attributed to the miraculous efBca- 
 cy of the pious, greasy ritual, which, that it 
 might not be deemed, in any case absolutely 
 ineffectual, whenever the patient died, was 
 transferred to the next world, to secure his 
 eternal salvation there ; for which purpose 
 alone, under the title of extreme unction^ it is 
 still used by the most perfectly and most con- 
 sistently orthodox Church in Christendom. 
 
 The seventh chapter, v. SS^ contains an 
 account of our Lord's curing a deaf and 
 dumb person, with such unmeaning gesticula- 
 tions, as are very unworthy the character of 
 the messenger of Almighty God — putting his 
 fingers into his ears, and touching his tongue 
 with his spittle. 
 
THE EVANGEtlSTS. Jjf8 
 
 In the eighth chapter, v. 12, the author, ur* 
 able to reconcile his mind tp w^at t)^e pre- 
 tended Matthew has said of the sign of the 
 prophet Jonas, though he w^s actually co- 
 pying from him, has thought proper flatly to 
 contradict both him and Luke, and to make 
 our Saviour declare, that no sign at all shQ\il4- 
 be given to that generation. 
 
 At the twenty-third verse, this writer agsiin 
 represents our Saviour, in a very unbecoming 
 manner, applying his spittle to the eyes of a 
 blind man, in order to give him §ight; and, as 
 if one interposition of Almighty ppwer were 
 not sufficient to accompli^U a perfect cure, 
 the man's sight is not coippletely acquired, 
 till he has applied his hands a second time to 
 his eyes. It is worth observing also, that if 
 this blind man had ever seen before, as seems 
 ta^ be insinuated ipi the word restored^ it is 
 inconceivable how, with even an indistinct 
 vision, he could find the least resemblanc)^ 
 between men and trees walking \ and, if he had 
 never eftjoyed the blessing of sight till then, 
 it was not possible for him to have had any 
 idea of the ocular appearance of either men 
 ©r trees. 
 
 To convince us, how improbable it is, that 
 either our Saviour, or the Apostles whom he 
 
 R 4< 
 
264. THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 delegated, should, in curing diseases, have 
 used any such external applications as are 
 recorded in thi^ and the preceding chapter; 
 and how displeasing such a conduct would 
 have been to the Deity ; it is only necessary 
 to adv^t to the history of Moses striking the 
 rock,* which tended to make the people be- 
 lieve that his stroke alone gave vent to the 
 imprisoned waters, and made them flow. For 
 it is recorded, as being immediately con- 
 demned by the Deity himself; and in pu- 
 nishment for his not clearly manifesting the 
 niiracuious interposition of the Almighty, 
 by merely speaking to the rock, as he was 
 commanded, he was doomed, like all the 
 other rebellious Israelites, to die in the wil- 
 derness, a;nd not to enter into the promised 
 land. And 'Md' Jesus of Nazareth been 
 guilty of the practices ascribed to him in this 
 Gospel, and in that attributed to John, he 
 inust have been equally criminal in the sight 
 ofGod. - '' -' 
 
 ' I'he only prophecies that I have observed 
 peculiar to this Gospel, attributed to Mark, 
 are, first, c.x. v. 30, where he makes our 
 Lord predict, that whosoever hath forsaken 
 hguses, lands, or friends, for his sake and the 
 
 * Num. XX. 7—12. 
 
rnt EVANGELISTS. HdS 
 
 Gosp^lX ^hall [receive not only e'temal life in 
 the world to cbmef\i\il now in this time,, the very 
 same articleis multiplied an hundred fold, with 
 persecution. '^ As persecution can be exerted 
 only upon a person's property, liberty, or life, 
 it seems inconceivable how possessimis of any 
 kind should be so greatly multiplied in a state 
 of persecution; and the very terms of the 
 prediction appear to imply in them a mani- 
 fest contradiction: but, howsoever they may 
 be interpreted, the whole history of religious 
 persecution, from the illustrious messenger of 
 the New Covenant to the present hour, proves 
 the prophecy to be absolutely false, and the 
 writer of it altogether unworthy of credit. 
 
 The second is the prediction respecting 
 Peter's denying his Master, c. xiv. v. 30, 
 where, in direct contradiction to both the 
 writings he had before him, he makes our Lord 
 tell him, that before the cock should crow 
 twice he would thrice deny him. Accord- 
 ingly, V. 68 — 72, he says, the cock crew as 
 soon as Peter had once denied him ; and, after 
 he had repeated his denial twice more, with 
 oaths and curses very unbecoming a chosen 
 disciple of Jesus Christ, the cock crew a se- 
 cond time. This relation is so absolutely ir- 
 
20 THE DISSONANCE, &c. 
 
 reconcilable with what is given us in the Gos- 
 pel according to Matthew, and that with the 
 circumstances of the same event recorded by 
 Luke, that two of the three must inevitably 
 be false ; and which those are, the judicious 
 reader will decide as he thinks fit. 
 
CHAPTER VI. 
 
 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO JOHN. 
 
 SECTION I* 
 
 "^T^TE come now to the fourth of thege- 
 ^ ^ nerally received Evangelical histories, 
 which, by the tradition of the orthodox 
 Church, is attributed to the Apostle John, the 
 avowed autiior of the prophetic book of the 
 Apocalypse. And as in our examination of 
 the internal evidence of the authenticity of 
 the other three, we have begun with taking 
 notice of their style, it is impossible not to 
 observe the striking difference there is be- 
 tween the language of the Apocalypse, and 
 that in which this Gosj^el is written. To re- 
 move so obvious a difficulty in the way of at- 
 tributing these two works to the same writer, 
 commentators are accustomed to insinuate, 
 (but without any proof of the fact) that, as 
 John wrote his Gospel many years after he 
 had written the Apgcalypse, he had acquired. 
 
208 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 by practice and experience, a much better 
 knowledge of the Greek, than had been com- 
 municated by the miraculous gift of tongues : 
 and, on that account, the style of his later 
 work is quite unlike that of his first. The 
 same critics might, with equal reason and 
 equal satisfaction to their readers, have re- 
 marked also, that the same superior advan- 
 tage of time and experience had given him a 
 knowledge of the Platonic philosophy, of 
 .wliigh, in hi3. earlier days, he Avas entirely ig- 
 norant; forw^hoever the writer of this Gospel 
 really was, it must be evident to every com- 
 petent, unprejudiced judge, who reads it in the 
 original, particularly the exordium, that he 
 ivas well acquainted w^ith the writings of 
 Plato. 
 
 According to the tradition, that John was 
 the Apostle who, in this Gospel, is said to 
 have been the beloved disciple of Jesus, and 
 to have leaned upon his bosom, at the last 
 supper, the book itself tells us he was the au- 
 thor ; for, speaking of him, c. xxi. v. 24, it 
 sa^^s, "This is the disciple which testifieth of 
 " these things and wrote these things, and we 
 '' know that Ins testimony is true :" but since 
 it is unaccountable, how any Avriter should 
 speak of himself in such a manner as this, the 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 9m 
 
 same critical sagacity has invented a mode of 
 solving this difficulty also, and informs us, 
 merely upon its own conjecture, that the 
 Gospel written by John ends with the twen- 
 tieth chapter; and that the following chapter 
 is an addition made afterwards by the Church 
 of Ephesus : by which means, the palpable 
 falsehood contained in the last verse, under 
 the pretence of an hyperbole, is also entirely 
 thrown upon the same Church. However, 
 since both the diction and credibility of the 
 narrative appear to be the same in the twenty- 
 fii^t, as in all the other chapters, the whole 
 seems to merit to be accounted equally spu- 
 rious, or equally genuine and authentic. Let 
 us bring the whole, therefore, to the proposed 
 test; observing, by the way, a gross contra- 
 diction between this writer and the pretended 
 MatthcAV, at the very outset: for, c, i. v. 32^ 
 he tells us, that John the Baptist declared he 
 did not know Jesus to be the destined Mes- 
 siah, till he saw the Holy Spirit descending 
 on him; whereas the Gospel of Matthevr, 
 c. iii. V. 14, informs us that he knew him as 
 soon as he came to him; and, at first, refused 
 to baptize him, "saying, I have need to be 
 " baptized of thee, and comest thou to mer*" 
 Yet still the orthodox receive both these Gos- 
 
fro THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 pels for the genuine works of Apostles; and 
 believe both these contradictory assertions 
 to be truths and even the inspired word of 
 God!!! 
 
 Luke informs us, that, previous to our 
 Lord s having any particular!}^ attached dis- 
 ciples, he wrought many miracles in the dif- 
 ferent cities of Galilee, especially at Caper- 
 naum, where he healed Simon s mother-in- 
 law of a fever ; and, since not the least hint 
 is given of his being a different person of the 
 same name, from the situation of Capernaum, 
 from his so readily receiving our Lord on 
 board his fishing boat, and letting down his 
 net again at his command, contrary to his 
 own opinion and inclination, it is natural to 
 conclude, that it was the same Simon of 
 Capernaum who, with the sons of Zebedee, 
 struck with the wonderful draught of fishes, 
 superadded to the cure of his mfe s mother, 
 immediately forsook their former occupation 
 and their homes, and became the first faithful 
 followers of Jesus. This writer, on the con- 
 trar3% Avith whom, if he was the Apostle John, 
 Luke long lived, and must have frequently 
 conversed upon the subject at Jerusalem, 
 after our Saviour's death, informs us, c. i. v. 
 35, &c. that before our Lord bad worked any 
 
THE EVANGELISTS, tli 
 
 iniracle, two of the Baptists disciples, one of 
 ^vhom was Andrew, whom he also makes Si- 
 mon Peters brother, without any call from 
 Jesus, being told by John that he was the 
 Lamb of God, followed him and attached 
 themselves to him ; and that Andrew induced 
 his brother Simon to do the same, by telling 
 him they had found the Messiah or Christ. 
 So that Simon Peter instead of being the 
 first, as Luke represents him, according to 
 this Gospel, was only the third of our Lords 
 disciples ; and none of them were induced 
 by any such motive as the miraculous cure 
 of a disease or the extraordinary draught of 
 fishes ; and far from telling us, like Luke, that 
 Zebedee's sons, John and James, commenced 
 disciples and followers of Jesus at the same 
 time with Simon, the pretended John gives 
 no account at all of the time or manner of 
 their becoming disciples; but — telling us that 
 Simon and Andrew were not citizens of Ca- 
 pernaum, but of Bethsaida ; that Philip of 
 the same city was called to be the fifth, and 
 Nathaniel the sixth disciple, who, though de- 
 clared by our Lord to be witliout guile, was 
 not one of his iVpostles, nor is ever once men- 
 tioned in any other history — the author goes 
 an to inform us, that the beginning of our Sa^ 
 
^n THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 Tiours miracles was his turning water into 
 wine, at a marriage feast in Cana, to which 
 he, and his mother, and his disciples, were in^ 
 vited. How others can^ w^ith satisfaction to 
 their own minds, receive both these contra- 
 dictory histories for truth, I know not; to nic 
 it appears incontestable that one of them is 
 fictitious and false. 
 
 According to Luke, our Saviour never 
 went out of Galilee from the commencement 
 of his public ministry till the feast of the 
 Passover, at which he was crucified; and, 
 upon his going to Jerusalem on that oc- 
 casion, after entermg the city amidst the ac- 
 clamations of the multitude, who proclaimed 
 him their promised king, he began (i. e. at- 
 tempted) to eject those out of the temple, 
 who indecently, as predicted by Jeremiah, 
 c. vii. V. 11, made that house of prajer a 
 place of traffic and unjust gain; a circum- 
 stance which, it is by no means probable, 
 should have occurred to him twice. This 
 writer, on the contrary, tells us, that a few 
 days after his miracle at Cana, he went up to 
 Jerusalem, to the feast of the Passover; and 
 that there, in what would appear a sudden 
 paroxysm of frantic zeal, if he were not re- 
 presented as deliberately cool enough to plat 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 27S 
 
 und prepare a scourge of small cords for the 
 purpose, he drove all the traders and animals 
 out of the temple, overthrew the tables of 
 the money-changers, and scattered all their 
 money about, with a violence as unbecoming 
 the meek and benevolent Jesus, as it is impro- 
 bable it would hav6 been tamely submitted 
 to by the other parties. It is to be observed 
 also, that this supposed Apostle, in recording 
 the instrument of violence, constructed and 
 used by our Saviour, in this extraordinary 
 manner, expresses it by a word, neither of 
 Greek nor Hebrew origin, but by a Latin 
 Avord, barbarously written in Greek charac- 
 ters, which, as I have observed in the case 
 of the two preceding Evangelists^ of itself 
 affords strong grounds of presumption, that 
 whoever the writer may be said to be, he did 
 not live till after the beginning of the second 
 century ; and, when corroborated by other 
 circumstances, so highly improbable in them- 
 selves, and so directly contradictory to the 
 history of Luke, is a very satisfactory proof 
 that he was no Apostle, nor any Jew^ nor 
 even a respectable Greek convert of the 
 Apostolic age; but one of the many com- 
 posers of spurious and fabulous writings of 
 
(^■4, THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 the secand century ; and that he deserves 
 not the least credit or attention. 
 
 JI. When our Saviour liad staid some 
 time at Jerusalem, this author informs us, 
 C. iii. V. 22, still in contradiction to the whole 
 tenor of the Gospel according to Luke, that 
 i^e 4welt with his disciples in the land of Judea ; 
 ^ftd; that, by his disciples, as it is explained, 
 15,. iy^^- 3» h^ baptized there greater numbers 
 tha^n John, at the same time that Mm bap^ 
 tized in Eiion^ for tha^t John was not yet cast 
 into prison. This passage is so replete with 
 the most palpable falsehood, that it is asto- 
 Xitishing how any kind of delusion should have 
 induced creatures, endowed with reason, sq 
 long to have received it as the word of truth, 
 ;^nd the work of an A]K)stle of Jesus Christ. 
 In the first place, the two writers called Mat- 
 thew and Mark both positively assert, that 
 Jesus did not enter ijpoxi his public ministry, 
 Upr was followed by a single disciple, till af- 
 ter J^hp mas cast into prison ; and though, for 
 reasom already stated, if Luke's history did 
 not more thar^ insinuate the same thing, their 
 testimony woi^iid; h^yQviju^ weight with me, yet 
 Siich: gross Qoutmdictioft ought to conv.inca 
 
THiE tVANGELi^TS. 27^ 
 
 lilt? ttiDist orthodox, that there must ht false- 
 hood on one side or the Other, if not 6n both ; 
 and that, therefore, comirion sense and reason 
 Acquire them, at leasts to reject as false and 
 spaiiv/Lis, eittier this Gospel attributed to 
 John, or both tlie Gospels attributed to the 
 othet" two. In the next places, from the two 
 respectable histories of Luke, confirmed by 
 the very nature and circumstances of the Gos- 
 pel, we know for certain, th^t baptism was 
 never used by the disciples of Jesus, till after 
 the memorable day of Pentecost, and then 
 only tor the same purpose, for which it had 1 
 been always used by the Jews, as a form of 
 admitting proselytes to their religion; a reli- 
 gion they then preached for the first time, 
 and which, during their niastef's life, they did 
 not themselves understand. When the twelve, 
 and afterwards tlie seventj^, were sent forth to 
 (Excite the atteiition of the people, by mira- 
 culous acts of kindness and compassion, and 
 to announce" to them the approaching pro- 
 ftiulgation of the Ne#' Covenant of the king- 
 dom of God, baptizing made no part of their 
 cbmmis^ioA ; and they returned without any 
 addition to their numbers ; nay, so far were a/Z 
 fricji from coming to Jfesus as disciples, as is 'as- 
 serted v. 26, that when the Apostles and the 
 
 s 2 
 
tre THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 whole society of Christians were assembled 
 together, after his ascension, the number 
 amounted but to one hundred and twenty, 
 that is, only about forty more than those ori- 
 ginal disciples, who had been deputed on the 
 two commissions ; whereas the Baptist's dis- 
 ciples were so numerous, that Josephus attri- 
 butes his death to Herod's jealousy of him on 
 that very account. 
 
 In the fourth chapter, this historian relates 
 our Lord's removal from his dwelling in Ju- 
 dea to Galilee; and, as the road lay through 
 Samaria, he entertains us with an episode 
 concerning our Saviour and a libidinous wo- 
 man of Samaria, who, having had no less than 
 five husbands, was then living as the concu- 
 bine of a sixth man. This woman expresses 
 her surprise, that he, who was a Jew, should 
 ask drink of a Samaritan, which the author 
 explains by informing us, that the Jews have 
 no dealings with the Samaritans; though, to 
 account for our Lord s being left alone, he 
 had just told us, that all his disciples, who, a 
 few verses before, are represented, to be so 
 numerous, " were gone away into the Sama- 
 " ritan city Sychar,'* (a city never heard of 
 by any one else) " to buy meat." On their 
 return with the meat, whilst the woman went 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. ^77 
 
 into the city to tell the people she had found 
 the Messiah or Christ, in a conversation with 
 his disciples, he observes that it was then 
 four months to the time of harvest, which 
 fixes the time of year to be about our Ja- 
 nuary ; so that this writer makes our Lord 
 continue in Judea, after the preceding Pass- 
 over, baptizing and making disciples, during 
 John s baptizing and preaching, as long a 
 time as the three other Gospels allot to the 
 duration of his whole public ministry; which 
 they as&ure us did not begin till John's mi- 
 nistry was ended by his imprisonment. From 
 the natural harvest, he takes occasion to sug- 
 gest the spiritual harvest, which then presented 
 itself in the ripeness of the Samaritans for 
 conversion ; Avho, if this account be true, 
 were wonderfully more mature than their 
 neighbours the Jews, though, as is re- 
 marked, v. 22, they were far more ignorant 
 in affairs of the true religion; and though, 
 according to Luke's histories, the Samaritans 
 refused to receive him, when he was goino: to 
 the feast of the Passover, at which he died ; 
 and no Samaritan city was converted to the 
 Gospel, till Philip preached it in Samaria, af- 
 ter the death of Stephen. In the words of 
 this writer, our Lord adds, " Herein is that 
 
 s 3 
 
Srs THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 *^ saying true, one soweth and another rcapeth^ 
 *' I sent you to reap that whereon ye be- 
 " stQwed no labour; other men laboured, and, 
 ^lye are entered into their labour." Luke m- 
 forms us, that after our Saviour had preached 
 ^nd performed many miracles throughout all 
 Galiljee, that i^, Ipng after the period here re- 
 qorded, because the wiiter tells us the second 
 qf his miracles in Galilee was not done till af- 
 ter this conversation, he sent out two different 
 deputations of his disciples, to precede him, 
 in announcing to the Jews the approaching 
 cst^ablishment of God's New Convenant with 
 them and all the w^orld ; that, after his death, 
 they were commissioned and miraculously 
 qualified to preach Christ and the New Cove- 
 nant of the kingdom of GocJ, first to the Jew- 
 ish nation, and afterwards to the Samaritans 
 and Gentiles of the whole world; this preach- 
 ing, w^e find, the}" called planting, and sowing 
 the seed of the Gospel, in allusion to their 
 liOrd's parable of the sower ; and the only 
 harvest intended and hoped for by them was 
 the fruits of moral virtue, in the lives of their 
 converts ; as fpr themselves, they knew they 
 were \o, receive no recompense nor advantage 
 frona their owu labour, till after death. Who 
 the,a were these sowers of the word of God, 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 279 
 
 prior to the disciples of Christ ? Whea 
 ^vtYG his disciples sent to reap and not to 
 so^7 ? What did tliey ever reap, about which 
 they had bestowed no labour f^ And who were 
 those other men^ into whose labours they en- 
 tered? Surely, a writer so little consistent 
 w^ith the best confirmed truth, and Avith com- 
 mon sense, is very unjustly accounted an 
 Apostle of Jesus Christ ! In the same strain 
 of fictitious jargon, this writer continues to 
 inform us, that our Lord taught and con- 
 vinced both the w^oman and the Samaritans of 
 that city, that he was the Christ, the Saviovr 
 of the world ; though, according to Luke, he 
 never announced himself in that character, 
 to the Jews, in his life-time ; but checked his 
 own disciples, and forbad them to call him 
 so to any man ; and, after his resurrection, 
 convinced them, from the prophecies, that he 
 could not become the Christ, the predicted 
 King under theNew Covenant, till after he had 
 died, and been made literally the son of God, 
 by being hh first-born from the dead to a life 
 of immortality. 
 
 In the fifth chapter, the author tells us, that 
 after the cure of the nobleman^s son at Caper- 
 naum, which, he says, was the second of our 
 Saviours miracles in Galilee, he went asain to 
 
 s 4 
 
280 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 Jerusalem, to a feast of the Jews; but doc* 
 not say what feast. According to his own 
 description of the time of our Lord's return ta 
 Galilee, that it was four months before harvest, 
 it ought to be another feast of the Passover, 
 miless we suppose him to have transgressed the 
 injunction of the Mosaic Law. If this writer, 
 therefore, were a Jew, or well versed in the 
 customs and ordinances of the Jews, he nmst 
 mean that this was a second Passover, at which 
 our Saviour attended, after the commence- 
 ment of his public ministry; yet after his re- 
 turn again into Galilee from this feast in the 
 very next chapter, we are told that he crossed 
 the sea of Galilee, and that " the Passover, a 
 " feast of the Jews, was nigh." Surely this 
 writer is the most extraordinarj^ chronologist 
 and historiographer that ever appeared in the 
 world ! However, he does not say, that Jesus 
 went up to this third approaching Passover ; 
 but after relating the same miraculous feeding 
 a large multitude, and walking upon the water> 
 recorded in the Gospel attributed to Matthew,. 
 with a discourse to the multitude altogether 
 pecuhar to lumselfj the author tells us, in the 
 seventh chapter, that Jesus continued in Gali- 
 lee, because the Jews of Judea sought to kill 
 him ; hut that, the feast of tabernacles being 
 
THE EVANGELISTS 881 
 
 near, after his brethren were gone up without 
 him, " he also went up to the feast secretly " 
 and jet " in the midst of the feast, he went 
 *' up into the temple and taught" publicly. 
 In the fifth verse of this ehapter, the author 
 of this gospel tells us, that the brethren of 
 Jesus did not believe on him ; so that he also 
 was ignorant that the Apostle James w^as a 
 brother of Jesus, and directly contradicts 
 both Lukes histories, the first of which in- 
 forms us that his mother and his brethren ac- 
 companied him from Galilee to Jerusalem, and 
 the second, that after his death, resurrection, 
 and ascension, they continued at Jerusalem 
 with the eleven Apostles. From this feast till 
 after the feast of Dedication, this writer tells 
 us our Lord continued in Jerusalem or its en- 
 virons; then, to avoid the attempts of the 
 Jews to apprehend him, he retired to the 
 country beyond Jordan, where John first bap- 
 tized ; and from thence, c. xi. upon the death 
 of Lazarus, he came again into Judea to Beth- 
 any ; that, to escape the malice of the Chief 
 Priests, he withdrew with his disciples, to the 
 city of Ephraim, adjoining the wilderness of 
 Judea, and continued there till he went again 
 to Bethany, six days before the Passover, at 
 which he sutfered ; and from thence to Jerusa- 
 
 ^ 
 
9m- THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 lem, riding on a young ass, amidst the ho^att* 
 nas of the people, who came forth to meet 
 fcitn. 
 
 We see then, that, according to this writer, 
 tmv Saviour entered upon his public ministry 
 tvhilst that of John the Baptist still subsisted: 
 and that the Pas^sover, at which he was cru- 
 cified, was the fourth from the comencement 
 rfhis ministiy. I^ike, on the contrary, plainly 
 intimates, as indeed is reasonable to expect,. 
 that John's ministry had ceased in conse- 
 quence of his imprisonment by Herod, before 
 Jesus began to teach and to make himself 
 conspicuous ; and assures us, that our Lord 
 'was crucified at the very first Passover after 
 his entering on his mini&try. This writer tells 
 us, that be resided chiefly, and perfoi^med most 
 of his miracles, at Jerusalem and in Judea; 
 that be was but very little in Galilee ; and that 
 he made and had great numbers of disciples 
 in Judea : yet from the Acts of the Apostles, 
 e. i. V. 11, and c. ii. v. 7, we find, that all his 
 disciples were Galileans; and, from Lukes 
 Gospel, that almost all his miracles were 
 wrought in Galilee ; and that he did not quit 
 the jurisdiction of Ilerod, till he set out, with 
 his disciples, to travel through Samaria to 
 Jerusalem, in order to keep the fatal Passover; 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. SS8 
 
 that he did not sojourn at the city of Ephraim ; 
 but kept tlie direct road from Jericlio; and 
 when lie cauie near Bethany, instead of going 
 to visit the family of Lazarus, he only sent 
 two of his disciples to fetch the ass's colt on 
 which lie proposed to enter Jerusalem. It is 
 not possible, tlierefore, for two histories of the 
 life and actions of the same person to be more 
 directly contradictor}-' to each other; consc- 
 <juently they cannot both be true. The lan- 
 guage ealso of these two scriptures, respecting 
 the person of our Lord himself, is equally 
 irreconcilable. The supposed John begins 
 with representing him as the divine Logos of 
 Plato, under an human form, dwelling amongst 
 Uien; repeatedly represents him as Omnisci- 
 ent,* and in almost every conversation with 
 Samaritans, Jews, or his own disciples, makes 
 him declare himself to be the Christ, the son 
 of God, aiid never to ai knowledge any other 
 father but God ; though this writer, c. vi. v. 42, 
 as well as Luke, c. iv. v. 22, informs us, that 
 he wa^ know^n by all tae inhabitants of Naza- 
 reth to be the son of Joseph; and Luke, that 
 he never spuke of himself, but under the de- 
 nomination of the son of man; and that he ex- 
 pressly forbad his being called the Christ 
 
 * See c. i. v. 48.--ii. 25.-- iv. 18.— xxi. IT. 
 
28* THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 during his life, for reasons which he suggested 
 in some of his discourses, before his death ;. 
 but which he explained more clearly after his 
 resurrection. From all whicli, it is abundantly 
 evident, that the author of this Gospel was 
 not the Apostle John, with whom Luke long 
 lived in intimacy, and from wham and the 
 other Apostles, he received the chief materials 
 of his first history ; but a convert of the second 
 century from the Platonic school, w^ho did 
 not understand the Jewish prophecies con- 
 cerning the Christ or Son of God, even after 
 the explanation given of them by Jesus him- 
 self and all his Apostles : and who was one of 
 the earliest fathers of that apostate, anti- 
 christian Church, whose doctrines are a hetero- 
 geneous compound of Paganism, Judaism^ 
 and Christianity. 
 
 III. Let us continue our attention, how^- 
 ever, to the sequel of his narrative; and com- 
 pare his account of what preceded, accompa- 
 nied, and followed our Lords crucifixion, 
 with that which is given us by Luke. 
 
 The last named writer, we have seen, in- 
 forms us, that the last supper our Saviour eat 
 with his Apostles was the I^aschal supper, 
 which he told them, he had been particularly 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. sas 
 
 desirous to eat with them; that at that sup- 
 per, after instituting the communion of bread 
 and wine, as a rite to be observed by his dis- 
 ciples, merely in grateful remembrance of him, 
 he declared that one of them would betray 
 him; but did not explain who it was. This 
 author, on the contrary, tells us, that the last 
 supper he eat with them was before the feast 
 of the Passover ; and, instead of the institution 
 of the Lords supper, represents our Saviour 
 as suddenly, after supper was ended^ adopting 
 the very unnecessary, useless, and unbecom- 
 ing ceremony of washing his Apostles' feet, a 
 species of extraordinary, unmeaning humilia- 
 tion, which none of them ever imitated ; that, 
 after this ceremony, he told them, one of 
 them would betray him; and intimated to one 
 Apostle, his favourite above the rest, that it 
 was Judas Iscariot, by giving him a sop^ 
 though supper was already over. From hence, 
 to his being led to Pilate's judgement hall, 
 this author's narration differs very greatly from 
 that of Luke; and there it flatly contradicts 
 him. For persisting to say, that it was the 
 preparation for the Passover, though Luke 
 assures us the preceding day was the day on 
 which it was necessary to kill the Paschal 
 lamb; and that our Saviour accordingly theia 
 
t8o ruE mmoNANc% of 
 
 eat it with bis Apostles; the author telli^ m^ 
 that the nilers of t\ie Jews theut^lves, did not 
 go into the judgement hall j for fear tliey should 
 be defiled, so as to be prevented eating the 
 Passover; and that, for that reason, the Ro- 
 man Governor, with an ama^iing degree of 
 Condescension, went out and in from his judg- 
 ment seat to them, and tVom them to the judg- 
 ment.seat, several times. Luke, however, iii 
 terms as diametrically opposite as ti'uth to 
 falsehood, affirms^ thut tlte Chief Priests and 
 Elders of the Jews were presenit at Pilate's 
 examination of our Saviour, and tirged the 
 only accusation against him ; and tells us, 
 that after Herod had sent him back to hiw^ 
 Pilate assembled the rulers a^d people of t%^ 
 Jews, and " said unto^ them, ye have brought 
 " this man unto me, as one that perverte^h 
 "the people; and behold I, having examined 
 *' him before youy have found no fault in him.'^ 
 When Pilate had consented to gTatify them 
 by his crucifixion, this writer says, that Jesus 
 himself bare his own cross to the plaice whei*^ 
 be was crucified ; Lufee, that the Jews com- 
 pelled one Simon, a Cyrenian, to bear the 
 cross after Jesus. Luke tells us, that af- 
 ter our Lord's death, Joseph of Arimathea 
 took the body, and laid it ito a nelf sc^ 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 9^ 
 
 pulchre ; that the women were present, and 
 saw how and where it was laid ; and went 
 and prepared spices and ointments to em- 
 balm it with, as soon as the sabbath was 
 ended. This writer, on thecontrai'y, informs 
 us, that Joseph and Nicodemiis txjgether em- 
 bahned the body with an hundred poomd 
 weight of myrrh and aloes, and other spices, 
 ** as the manner of the Jews is to bnry ;" and 
 then laid it ia the sepulchre. Luke ass^M^es 
 us, that in the evening after our Lord's res-ur- 
 rection, that is, in the t^eginning of the seeoiwl 
 day of the week^ he appeared to ali tlie e/e- 
 ven Apostles and other disciples, wha were 
 assembled togetter with them; and, &om 
 that time to his ascension, was frequently 
 seen bj them at Jerusalem ; that he then ex- 
 plained to them, the meaning of the propte- 
 cies concerning himself; instructed them m 
 the natm^e and purport of the Gospei; aai<4 
 bid them tarry at Jerusalem tLlJL the day of 
 Pentecost, when they were, t<x receive the 
 Holy Ghost,!. or holy inspiration: that they 
 did so, and never returned again to dwell in 
 their own country, Gahlee. The p^vetende^ 
 John, in contradiction to all this, tells us, 
 that tlie evening on which the disciples saw 
 our Saviour, W4is the first day of the weeki,, 
 which shews that he was no Jew, t^i^t on^ 
 
288 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 who reckoned his time Hke the Greeks and 
 Romans: that all the eleven Apostles were 
 not present ; for that Thomas was not with 
 them, and did not see him till eight days af- 
 ter; that, instead of telling them to vvait till 
 Pentecost for the gift of the holy inspiration, 
 he then " breathed on them, and said, receive 
 " ye the Holy Ghost;" and at the same time, 
 (O impious falsehood!) gave them power to 
 remit or to retain any person's sins ; that, after 
 this, instead of continuing at Jerusalem, they 
 all went back to Galilee; that our Lord there 
 appeared to them for the tltird time after his 
 resurrection, at the Sea of Tiberias, to reclaim 
 them, by a second wonderful draught of fishes, 
 from their old occupation to which they had 
 returned ; and that, after ordering Peter, if 
 he loved him more than the fishes he had 
 caught, to feed his lambs and his sheep, he 
 left them all in Galilee. Were such irrecon- 
 cilable, contradictory evidence aS this to be 
 brought to support any cause whatever in our 
 own courts of justice, what would be the sen- 
 timents of every impartial, honest jury-man, 
 concerning it? 
 
 IV. In prosecution of the plan of in- 
 quiry laid down and pursued with the other 
 three Evangelical histories, our next step is 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 28* 
 
 id observe the miracles and extraordinary acts 
 attributed to our Saviour, which are pecuhar 
 to this writer) and then the prophecies re- 
 corded by hirii. 
 
 The first liiiracle he has related, and which 
 he calls the beoinnino; of the. miracles; oi Je- 
 sus, is the changing the water- into wine' at a 
 marriage feast, when the ihviters stock! of 
 wine grew low; though the story itself in- 
 forms us, that the guests had already drunk; sa 
 well^ that the master of the feast judged it 
 more probable^ that if any more wine bad 
 been brought them, it would have been 
 of an inferior quality to what they had been 
 drinking; but this miraculous wine' was of so^ 
 superior and excellent a flavour, that it must 
 necessarily re-excite even the sated appetit^i 
 and tempt then! to continue their intern pe^ 
 tance with a: fresh relishr That this writer,- 
 and many another orthodox preacher of what 
 is called Christianity, had he been endowed 
 with sufficient power, would have performed,^ 
 and gladly partaken of^ the intemperate joys 
 of so wonderfully seasonable a transmutation,^ 
 I can easily suppose ; and think it not impro- 
 bable that lie would also haver exerted his su-r 
 pernatural ability to the enriching himself and^ 
 ]^s poor disciplesj by transmuting ;tiie chea^j 
 
i90 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 and baser metals into gold, and to the enjoy- 
 ment of many other instances of sensual in- 
 dulgence, equally laudable and equally Chris- 
 tian as tlhe intemperate use of strong liquor: 
 but whosoever rightly apprehends the cha- 
 racter and doctrine of the holy Mediator of 
 the New Covenant, and has observed how ut- 
 terly incompatible every degree of sensual ex- 
 cess is with the Gospel precepts of sobriety, 
 temperance, moderation, and the subjection 
 of our bodily appetites to reason and reli- 
 gious duty, will find such a miracle as this in- 
 credible, though it had been recorded in all 
 the four histories ; and coming in so very ex- 
 ceptionable a form, upon the single, unsup- 
 ported testimony of so very exceptionable an 
 historian, it is altogether as unworthy of be- 
 lief as the fabulous Roman Catholic legend 
 of St. Nicholas's Chickens, of later times. 
 To Luke's credit, he is so far from giving it 
 the least confirmation, that though he informs 
 us our Lord, from motives of compassion for 
 a large multitude who had followed him to 
 such a distance from their own homes, and 
 staid to hear him so late, that they could 
 not otherwise have been provided with ne- 
 cessary sustenance, miraculously fed five 
 thousand peisons with only five loaves and 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. tM 
 
 two fishes ; yet he does not tell us of his 
 cji^^nging so much as one firkin of water into 
 wine on that charitable occasion, though, 
 here, he is said to transmute eighteen firkins, 
 to prolong the festivity of those who, by their 
 own confession, had already drank very 
 abundantly. 
 
 The second miracle recorded by this writer 
 is the healing the nobleman's son at Caper- 
 naum, without seeing him, in the fourth 
 chapter: a miracle much more becoming 
 the character of Jesus than the foregoing. It 
 appears, however, to be an imitation of the 
 healing the centurion s servant of the same 
 city, delated by Luke; though many of the 
 principal circumstances are so altered, that it 
 cannot pass for the same ; and it is highly 
 improbable, that two different cases, so simi- 
 lar to each other, should occur at the same 
 place, within so short a space of time. 
 
 In the fifth chapter, our author relates the 
 miraculous cure of a poor, friendless, impo- 
 tent man. So far all is credible. Bi]xt unfor- 
 tunately he tells us, this man had been long 
 waiting to obtain his cure from the miracu- 
 lous efficacy of the Pool of Bethesda, whose 
 waters, being disturbed at certain seasons, by 
 ^n Angel, w^hp descended for th^t purpose^ 
 
 T 2 
 
252 THE DISSONANdE OF 
 
 acqitired for a moment the wonderful virtue of 
 healing every kind of sickness or disease ; but 
 lost it again so instantaneously, that none, but 
 the single patient who got first into the pool af- 
 ter the troubling of the water, could receive the 
 least benefit from it. In contradiction, there- 
 fore, to the whole tenor of the Jewish history^ 
 from whence we learn, that there was no pro- 
 phet, nor any supernatural interposition of di- 
 vine providence, amongst the Jews, from the 
 time of their last return from Babylon, to the 
 <:omingof Jesus Christ, this writer informs us 
 of a standing miracle amongst them, notorious- 
 ly and frequently repeated in the sheep-mar- 
 ket, that is, in one of the most public places in 
 Jerusalem. Had this been true, it could ne- 
 'ter have escaped the notice of either Jew or 
 "Koman, resident in that metropolis ; but must 
 have been often spoken of by every historian 
 who gave an account of that city: yet no 
 "siich circumstance is so much as once hinted 
 M by Luke, Josephus, nor any of the Romaa 
 historians. 
 
 The next extraordinary, though not pro- 
 
 -perly miraculous, transaction related of our 
 
 Saviour by this writer, is his conduct respect- 
 
 ittg: the woman taken in adultery, g. viii. a 
 
 6tory,^vhich has not one single circumstanee 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 3?» 
 
 attending it to recommend it to our belief. In, 
 the first place, the Jewish law did. not order 
 the convicted of adultery to be stoned, but 
 only to be put to death. Secondly, before 
 any criminal could be stoned to death, as we 
 see in the case of Stephen, he was to be 
 brought, not before a private individual, like 
 our Saviour, in no office of magistracy, but 
 before the Jewish Council; where, if he was 
 condemned, the whole congregation of the 
 people were to stone him ; and the witnesses 
 of his guilt, not those who were without sin 
 amongst the people, were to cast the first 
 stone at him. Thirdly, the Mosaic law says, 
 *' the man who committed adultery with his 
 " neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adul- 
 " teress shall surely be put to .death:*' yet, 
 thouo-h the woman is said to have been taken 
 in the very fact, the man, who must have 
 been taken so too, and whom the law points^ 
 out as principal, both in the crime and in 
 the punishment, is not brought by these 
 Scribes and Pharisees together w^th the a^o- 
 man. Fourthly, our Lord, to the very end 
 of his life, shewed himself a zealous observer 
 of the laws of the Mosaic Covenant, which 
 were not cancelled till after his resurrection 
 and the promulgation of the New Covenant 
 
 T 3 
 
i9l THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 of the Gospel, And, lastly, Luke asvsures us, 
 tHat, when applied to on another occasion, to 
 settle a dispute between two brothers^ respect- 
 ing the division of their patrimony, he referred 
 them to the proper legal arbitrators of such 
 matters, asking the party that applied to 
 him,* who made me a judge or a divider over 
 you ? 
 
 The next miracle, mentioned by this author, 
 is in the ninth chapter, the giving sight to a 
 man born blind, by anointing his eyes with 
 clay, made from the dust of the ground, and 
 his spittle, and then sending him to wash it 
 off in the pool of Siloam ; upon which, as I 
 have done on similar instances, in the Gospel 
 according to Mark, I niust observe, that, if 
 he would have us think that Jesus intended 
 to peirsuade the people, that such an unguent, 
 worthy only of a mountebank, had any me- 
 dical virtue, he deceived them, and trans- 
 ferred the honour of the cure from the imme* 
 diate influence of the supernatural power of 
 the Almighty, to his own medical sagacity, 
 which could combine simple natural causes, 
 of such apparent inefficacy, so as to produce 
 tjie most wonderful effect ; and, whether he 
 intended it or not, such an application could 
 
 ♦ Luke c. xii. v, 14. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 
 
 only derogate from the glory due to God, by 
 bringing the miracle into suspicion with the 
 less credulous amongst the people, and in- 
 ducing them to attribute the cure to the vir- 
 tue of some more powerful medicine, con- 
 cealed under the form of an unguent, made 
 of powder of dirt and human spittle. In every 
 \iewy therefore, such trifling mummery is too 
 unbecoming the character of our blessed Sa- 
 viour, to be received upon the bare testimony 
 of such a writer as this. 
 
 The only other miracle recorded by this 
 author, remaining unnoticed, is the resurrec- 
 tion of Lazarus of Bethany, in the eleventh 
 chapter, a legend which, as far as 1 am ca- 
 pable of judging, has many strong marks 
 upon it of fictitious falsehood ; but not one 
 single feature of probability belonging to it. 
 For, first, Lazarus is represented as being 
 our Lord's particularly beloved friend ; and 
 if any one man had been so preferred by him, 
 it seems impossible that the man himself, 
 and above all, his miraculous restoration to 
 life, should not have been repeatedly men- 
 tioned by Luke, in both his histories ; yet he 
 is so far from suggesting to us that Jesus had 
 any such friend, that he informs us, when 
 he was told that his mother and brethren were 
 
 T 4 
 
295 THE- DISSONANCE OF 
 
 enquiring for him, he answered, that 7^/5 near* 
 est -arid dearest friends and relations were his 
 disciples, who lieard the word of God an4 
 obeyed it. Secondly, our Lord repeatedly 
 declared, that no man was worthy of him, or 
 could be his disciple, who did not forsake fa- 
 mily, friends, and all he had, for his sake and 
 the Gospefs; yet, according to this historyXa^ 
 zarus, his dearl}^ beloved friend, never forsook 
 his family and abode ^t Bethan}^ to accom- 
 pany him, like his .Apostles ; nor is he said, 
 even by this only writer who mentions him, to 
 hav^ ever taken an active part in the promul- 
 gMion of that New- Covenant to mankind, 
 to estabhsh which, Avas the sole object of our 
 *i)ord'S life, death, and- resurrection from the 
 dead; and which, during his whole public 
 ininistryy seemed alone to occupy his thoughts 
 a=nd attention. Thirdly, of all the instances 
 of dead persons restored to life again, related 
 in either the Old or New Testament, this of 
 Lazarus is by far the most wonderful mira- 
 cle r for, in all the other cases, the renovation 
 of life so soon followed the expiration of the 
 deceased, that they appear to have been in- 
 stances of suspended respiration restored; 
 and the supernatural influence of divine 
 power had only to cause the same renewal of 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. fifiT 
 
 the vital motion of the fluids, whereon sense 
 land animation depend, which, in cases of 
 drowned or suffocated persons, is frequently 
 produced in our times, b\^ warmth, persever- 
 ing friction, and the application of stimulat-^ 
 ing medicines ; nay, even of our Lord's resur- 
 rection itself, we are told^ that David's pro* 
 pliecy concerning it, was literally fulfilled, 
 and that " he, whom God raised up, saw no 
 ^' corruption :" but of Lazarus, we are in- 
 formed, that ^^ he had lain in the grave four 
 ^^ days," and that, (as to be sure was likely in 
 that hot chmate) his body was already pu- 
 trifled. Now, for what purpose is this greatest 
 of all such miracles supposed to be wrought? 
 Here was no desolate, disconsolate widow, or 
 distressed, aged parent, to be supported and 
 comforted by his restoration to life, where the 
 miraculous 'cctertion w^ould have strikingly 
 displayed 'the spirit of compassion, and mer- 
 ciful benevoljence, so peculiar to the religion 
 of the New Covenant ; no use proposed from 
 it, for the conversion of the Jews, for our 
 Lord had foretold, that even his own resur- 
 rection would be ineffectual for that purpose, 
 declaring, that if they hearkened not to the 
 predictions of Moses and the prophets, con- 
 cerning him, " they would not be persuaded, 
 
^m- ' THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 " though one rose from the dead/' And with 
 respect to the Gospel, tlie grand object of 
 of our Saviour's mission, Lazarus was never 
 of the least use in preaching it ; so that the 
 Almighty is here introduced, as enabling Je- 
 sus to perform the greatest miracle imagina- 
 ble, for no kind of purpose whatsoever. The 
 writer, indeed, tells us, that, on this account, 
 Jnany of the Jews at Jerusalem believed on 
 liira ; but this is flatly contradicted by Luke, 
 wlio, as I have before observed, assures us, 
 that all his disciples, at his death, were Gali- 
 leans ; and that the whole number amounted 
 but to one hundred and twenty. Fourthly, 
 the name Lazarus signifies a person, destitute 
 of aid and support, and as such, is with great 
 propriety applied by our Lord, in the para- 
 ble, to the wretched object of commiseration, 
 that lay begging at the rich man's gate. But 
 was the groundless fancy of some commenta-^ 
 tors justly founded, that Lazar, without the 
 Greek termination, is the same as Elea^ar, 
 still, who can imagine, that our Saviour would 
 have chosen to denominate the feigned beg- 
 gar, of a parable of his own invention, by the 
 peculiar name of a beloved friend, so dear to 
 5iiui, as he is here represented to have been? .. 
 . ^ iit.431, the very relation of the circumstances 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 299 
 
 of this pretended miracle asserts an absolute 
 impossibility; for it tells us, that, at our 
 Lord's command, Lazarus came forth from 
 from the sepulchre, though he was bound hand 
 and foot^ with grave clothes, and his face was 
 hound about with a napkin, and that, after he 
 was come forth, Jesus bid them loose him and 
 let him go. Such, and so very different from 
 those recorded bj Luke, are the miracles of 
 what the orthodox receive for the Gospel ac- 
 cording to the Apostle John ! 
 
 V. As to what is to us the grand internal 
 testimony of authenticity, indispensably ne- 
 cessary in every scripture, which contains the 
 history of a supernatural revelation, predic* 
 tions of future events, verified by their actual 
 completion, after all that we have already 
 sjeeh of this writer, to find out such evidence 
 m his work, peculiar to himself, would be as 
 unaccountable and wonderful as any of the 
 extraordinary miracles, with which he has en- 
 deavoured to astonish the ignorant credulity 
 of the second century ; but though, with a 
 degree of circumstantial minuteness, which no 
 writer of credit would have pretended to, he 
 has reported, with verbal exactnesss, the dis- 
 courses, not of Jesus only, but of John the 
 
coo THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 Baptist also, to his particular disciples, at 
 the distance of, at least, thirty-six years af- 
 ter they were uttered, and some of them 
 of very considerable length ; he has not 
 thought fit to introduce any thing, which 
 can, with propriety, be deemed a prophe- 
 cy. Some few short sentences, however, 
 are scattered here and there, which, as they 
 seem to refer to futurity, demand our atten- 
 tion on this occasion ; although the sense of 
 them, so far as it is discoverable, is only what 
 is met with in better authenticated scriptures, 
 confessedly written long before this history. 
 
 ' Of these, the first that occurs is, c. ii. v. 19j 
 where, speaking, as the author himself ex- 
 plains it to us, of the- temple of his body, Jesus 
 says to the Jews, " destroy this temple, and in 
 *' three days, I will raise it up/' The obvious 
 sense is only, what is much more clearly 
 expressed by our Saviour to his disciples, ac- 
 cording to Luke, viz, that, after his cruci- 
 fixion he should rise to life again the third 
 day ; but the mode of expressing it, in this 
 place, contradicts the account given of that 
 important event, by e^ery other primitive 
 preacher of the Gospel ; for it makes our 
 Lord assure them, that^ though dead, he 
 
 : would raise himself, up ; whereas, all the other 
 
THE EVANGELISTB. SOI 
 
 i\postlcs, and even John himself (for he was . 
 in company with, and therefore 'agreed with 
 Peter, Acts iii. 15) unanimously assert, that . 
 it wa^ not himself, but God, who. rhked hiifi . 
 from the dead. 
 
 In chapter iv. v. 21, the author makes out 
 Saviour say to the Samaritan woman, "b^-, 
 *' lieve me the hour cometh, when ye shall, 
 *' neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusa- 
 ^' lem, worship the Father." Had the words 
 been, that, under the New Covenant, God 
 should no longer be' worshipped there ^tith 
 sacriiSces and oblations, they would have beeii 
 true, and of the same import with* many other 
 passages, bot h of the Old and New Testa- 
 ment; but in the indefinite sense, in which 
 they are here used, nothing can be falser; 
 for Christianity teaches nieu- to worship God*, 
 both at Jerusalem and Samaria, Und in every 
 place upon the globe. n^-^^^^n >c\ h..a '' 
 
 In chapter v. vers6 43, we find our LoM 
 saying to the Jews^ " I am come in my'T^- 
 *' ther s name, and ye receive me not ; if ano- 
 "ther shall come in his own name, him ye 
 **will receive/' Which words evidently ^fni- 
 ply, first, that someone would falsely ^ssumB 
 the character of the predicted ]\idssiah, witli- 
 out deriving his authority fronVGod; and se- 
 
502 THE DISS(W3ANC^ (yT 
 
 condljj that the Jewish nation would receive 
 him as such ; but of all the false Christs, who 
 appeared amidst the final wars and calamities 
 of Judea, there was not one who did not pre- 
 tend to come with the authority of God, and 
 to be able to evince it, by working miracles ; 
 and though each was followed by more or 
 fewer of the common people, yet the Jewish 
 nation in general, who rejected our blessed 
 Saviour, from that time to this, have never re^ 
 ceived any man as their expected Messiah. 
 
 In chapter viii. v, 51, our Lord is repre- 
 sented, as saying, " verily, verily if a man 
 " keep my saying, he shall never see death," 
 or, as it is repeated in the next verse, " shall 
 " never taste of death f and again, c. xi. 
 V. 25 and 26, he not only says " he who be- 
 •' heveth on me, though he were dead, yet 
 " shall he live,'* but also, " whosoever livcth 
 " and believeth in me, shall never die/' 
 What meaning could the writer have, in such 
 absurd and groundless predictions as these ? 
 Paul, as well as daily experience, assures us, 
 that in Adam, in our human nature, all men 
 die, and we know, that our Lord himself, his 
 Apostles, and all his most faithful disciples, 
 died, or, in the words of the author, have seen 
 or tasted of death; and if we should suppose 
 
THE EVANGEtrSTS. 3fi3 
 
 that he only intended to insinuate that, oi\ 
 account of the certainty of the resurrectioi| 
 of his disciples, their natural death was not; 
 to be accounted dying; yet still, aqcordin^ 
 to tliis author himself, the quibble would 
 hold as truly of the most profligate unbeliever 
 as of those who believed on him ; for, c* v. 
 V. 28 and 29? he says, " the hour is coniing 
 ^ in which all that are in the graves shall hear 
 " the voice of the Son of God, and shall cpm^ 
 *' forth, they that have done good unto the re^ 
 *' surrection of life, and they that have donq 
 *' evil unto the resurrection of damnation.'" 
 
 In chapter xiv. v, l6, &c. our Lord, in the 
 style peculiar to this writer, is made to pro- 
 mise his disciples, after his death, the spiri- 
 tual comfort and assistance of divine inspi- 
 ration ; but this is an event, which had taken 
 place long before the earliest date allotted fot* 
 the composition of this pretended GospeL 
 
 In chapter xvi. v. 32, Jesus, in his last dis- 
 course, says to his disciples, *^ Behold the 
 " hour Cometh, yea is now come, that ye shall 
 " be scattered, every man to his own home, 
 " and shall leave me alone :" and accordino- to 
 this writer, they not only deserted him at his 
 appreijcnsion, but after his death and resur- 
 rection; and even after his giving them the 
 
S04 THE DISSONANCE, &c. 
 
 Holy Ghost, they went eveiy one to his o\^ti 
 home in Galilee, and reGommenced their for- 
 mer occupations : but, unhappily for the au- 
 thors credit, this is not only repugnan: to rea- 
 son and probability, but irreconcilably contra^ 
 dictory to both the histories of Luke. These, 
 and two or three more sentences such as these, 
 to be picked out of the long, valedictory con- 
 versation of JesuSy said to be held with his 
 disciples immediately preceding his cruci- 
 fixion, make up the whole of the internal tes- 
 timony of the spirit of prophecy to be met 
 with in this scripture, so long injuriously at- 
 tributed to the prophetic Apostle John. 
 
CHAPTER VIL 
 
 THE EPISTLES 
 
 SECTION r. 
 
 AVING thus stated, what to me appear 
 contradictions absolutely irrecoocila* 
 ble; and submitted to the pubhc, the reasons 
 which have long induced me to rqect tinea 
 of the four generally received Gospels, as 
 spurious fictions of the second century, un- 
 necessar}^^ and even prejudicial, to the cause 
 of true Christianity, and in every respect un- 
 worthy of the regard which so many ages 
 have, paid to them ; I have accomplislied all 
 that I at first proposed. Leaving every 
 reader^ therefore, to judge for himself, as I 
 have donCy and to criticise tn}^ reasoning with 
 the same unreserved freedom, with whichjj 
 though a sincere convert to the Gospel Co- 
 venant, I have found it necessary for my own 
 rational conviction to scrutinize the respective 
 authenticity and credibility of these import^ 
 
305 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 ant scriptures, it was my original intention^ 
 hei^ to have closed the present disquisition* 
 But, because the same ti'ain of investigation 
 hath led me to reject likewise several of the 
 canonical Epistles, upon the sole authority 
 of which, several fundamental doctrines of 
 the orthodox Church, anil of various sects of 
 professed Christians, ai-e confidently taught 
 the people, for doctrines of the Gospel of 
 Christ, I think it my duty, to add briefly my 
 reasons for expunging also ont of the volume 
 of duly authenticated scriptures of the New 
 Covenant^ the Epistles, to the Romans — to the 
 Ephesians — to the Colossians-^ to the He- 
 brews — of James — of Peter^-of John— -of 
 Jude^— and, in the book of the Revelation, 
 the Epistles to tlie seven Churches of Asia. 
 Of these, wiiosoever is at all acquainted 
 tvith the history of the constitution of the 
 present canon of the Christian scriptures, well 
 knows that the Epistles to the Hebrews, of 
 James, second of Peter, second and third of 
 John and of Jude^ were rejected as spurious 
 bj many Churches, from the first of their ap- 
 pearance t and not universally received as 
 genuine writings of the authors whose names 
 they bear, till the fifth centuryj when a hia* 
 jority of votes^ in -the Council of C^irthag^, 
 
rut EVANGELISTS. S07 
 
 for the Greek Church, and the decision of 
 Pope Innocent, for the Latin, determined 
 the long controverted question, in favour of 
 their genuine authenticity ; a determination 
 which, to me, who am both a Protestant 
 against papal infallibility, and fully convinced 
 of the corrupt apostasy of the prelates of the 
 Church, much earlier than the fifth century, 
 aflfbrds no kind of satisfaction, but rather ex- 
 cites the contrary. 
 
 In the Epistle to the Romans, the author 
 writes indeed in the name of Paul ; but he 
 writes to a Christian Church, already subsist- 
 ing at Rome, and celebrated for its faith in 
 Christ throughout the whole worlds before he 
 himself had been there; for, v. 13 — 15, he says, 
 " I would not have you ignorant, brethren, 
 " that often-times I purposed to come unto 
 " you (but was let hitherto), that I might have 
 " some fruit among you also, even as among 
 " other Gentiles ; I am debtor both to the 
 " Greeks and the barbarians, both to the wi^e 
 «' aind the unwise. So, as mufch as in me is, I 
 " am ready to preach the Gospel to you that 
 " are at Rome also.'* In c. xv. v. 25, &C. he as- 
 certains the time of Paufs writing this Epistle 
 to be, when he was going to Jerusalem, with the 
 CGhtributi:of^ forthe- pdor Christians of th^t 
 
 u 2 
 
5oa THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 city, that is, in the reign of Claudius ; and 
 says tliat, when he has peiformed that good 
 office, he will come, by way of Rome, into 
 Spain. Now, whoever has read^ with proper 
 attention, the history of Paul's travels, 
 written by his friend and fellow-traveller, Si- 
 las or Luke, in the Acts of the Apostles, must 
 be convinced, that Paul never had the least 
 idea of travelling into Spain; and that he did 
 not go to Rome, till, by the partiality of Fes- 
 tus to his persecutors, he was constrained to ap^ 
 peal unto Ccesar. From the same history it 
 is evident also, that when Paid arrived at 
 Rome, for the first time, in the reign of Nero^ 
 there was no Christian Church there, as in- 
 deed it is not at all probable there should 
 have been; because Paul was ttie Apostle 
 particularly chosen and delegated for that 
 purpose, and he, accordingly, first preached 
 the Gospel to the distant Gentiles, as re- 
 corded in the Acts. From the same history, 
 there is every reason to believe, that the Gos- 
 pel had never been preached beyond the li- 
 inits of Asia, till Paul was, in a vision, ad- 
 monished to go into Macedonia, and from 
 thence into Greece ; yet Paul is made to 
 write this Epistle to the Christian converts at 
 Rome, whil:st he was preaching the Gospel 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. ^g 
 
 at Corinth. Who then was that other Apos- 
 tle to the Gentiles, who so far preceded Paul, 
 as already to have reached Rome, without 
 preaching the Gospel to the inhabitants of 
 the intervening countries of Asia Minor and 
 Greece, and to have founded a Church there, 
 early enough for its being spoken of flirough- 
 out the whole worlds when Paul, in the execu- 
 tion of the commission miraculously given to 
 him by Christ himself, had advanced no far- 
 ther than Macedonia and Greece ? Besides, 
 from the last chapter of the Acts, it appears 
 incontestably, that they were not Christians, 
 but Jews, who met Paul at Appii Forum ; 
 that his first step, when he arrived at Romcj 
 was to call together the Jews resident there, 
 and exculpate hmiself for having appealed 
 to the Emperor ; that those Jews, far from 
 knowing the Gospel to have been already 
 preached and received at Rome, declared 
 themselves totally ignorant concerning it, ex- 
 cept that it was every where spoken against, 
 and were desirous to be informed of its doc- 
 trines by him ; that they all assembled for 
 that purpose, at his lodging, on an appointed 
 day, when he preached to them the New Co- 
 venant of the kingdom of God the whole day, 
 and pointed out to them those passages of 
 
 ¥ 3 
 
SIO THE DISSONANCE OT 
 
 the Law of Moses and the prophets, wherein 
 it was predicted ; that upon their disagreeing 
 ^nd leaving him, he said, '' Be if known to 
 ^^ you, that the salvation of God is sent (that 
 ^' is, the Gospel is to be preached) to the 
 " Gentiles, and that they will hear it/* 
 Whereas, according to this Epistle, it must 
 have bepi known already to the Jev/s of Rome, 
 that the Gospel had been preached to the 
 Gentiles of that city, and that they had re^ 
 ceived it. These palpable, and as tliey seem 
 to me, irreconcilable contradictions, oblige 
 me utterly to reject this Epistle, called PauFs, 
 and to regard it only as one of the many spur 
 rious forgeries of the second century, unwor- 
 thy the least serious attention. I cannot, 
 however, forbear remarking iarther the incon- 
 sistency of this writer, (which indeed must 
 generally be discernible in all falsifiers) in mak- 
 mg Paul personally acquainted with so long a 
 list of members of the Church at Rome, where 
 he had never been, amongst whom we find 
 4quila and Priscilla, and even his own mo- 
 ther, to whom he sends salutation in the last 
 chapter, v. 13. Of the two first, Luke tells 
 \i.s^ that) about or rather heforp the pretended 
 date of this Epistle, they had left Rome, be- 
 ing Jews, in obedience to an edict of Clau- 
 
.-.'THE EVANGELISTSv fiU. 
 
 dius. And, if there is any reason to believe 
 that Paurs mother was then living, is it credi- 
 ble, that an old woman of Tarsus, in Cilieia> 
 whose son was so wonderfully appointed to 
 preach the Gospel, and who was occupied in 
 that commission in Asia and Greece, should 
 Jeave her native country and such a son, aiid 
 ramble after other preachers of the Gospel, 
 ut so advanced an age, to the far distant 
 metropolis of Italy ? But, in the eleventh 
 chapter, the author clearly betrays himself to 
 be, not Paul, but some person who lived and 
 wrote some time after the destruction of Je- 
 rusalem and the dispersion of the Jews ; for 
 to these events alone, can the following sen- 
 tences refer : v. 12, " If the fall of them" 
 (the Jews) " be the riches of the world, and 
 ^ the diminishing of them the riches of the 
 " Gentiles, how much more their fullness ?'* 
 Again, v. 15, " If the casting away of them 
 " be the reconciling of the world, what sliall 
 "the receiving of them be?'' Again, v. 21 
 and 22, " If God spared not the natural 
 " branches, take heed lest he also spare 
 " not thee. Behold the goodness and severity 
 " of God : on them which fell severity ; but 
 "towards thee goodness, if thou continue in 
 
 u 4 
 
S12 THE DISSONANCE CF 
 
 *^ his goodness ; otherwise, thou also slialt b6 
 "cut of ;r Sec. 
 
 II. The Epistle to the Ephesians is also writ- 
 ten in the name of Pan], but under a suppo-* 
 sition that a Christian Church was settled at 
 Ephesus, before Paul himself preached the 
 Gospel there; for, c. i. v. 15 and 16, the 
 writer makes him say, " Wherefore I also, 
 " after / heard of your fi^ith in the Lord Je- 
 • *^ sus and love unto all the Saints, cease not 
 " to give thanks for you,'' &c. and c. iii. v. 1, 
 &c. " for this cause, I Paul, the Frisoner of 
 ** Jesus Christ, for you Gentiles, if ye have 
 " heard of the dispensation of the grace of God 
 " which is given to me to you-ward ; how that 
 ^^ by revelation he made knov/n unto, uie 
 *' the mystery (as / wrote afore in few words) ; 
 " whereby when ye fxad, ye may. understand 
 " my knowledge in the mystery of Chiist/' 
 This supposition, however, cannot possibly 
 be allowed by any one who credits the his- 
 tory of the Acts of the Apostles; for in that 
 we are expressly told, e. xviii. apd xix. that 
 Paul himself preached the Gospel at Ephe- 
 sus, first in the synagogue of the Jews, at twg 
 ^liflerent times, and afterwards in the scho(A 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 313 
 
 t>f T}Tannus, for the space of two years; and 
 to read over his valedictory discourse to the 
 ciders of the Church of Ephesus, at Miletus, 
 recorded Acts xx. is amply sufficient to con- 
 vince every impartial mind, that Paul could 
 never have written to the Ephesians in the 
 above quoted language of this Epistle. Some 
 critics indeed, wittiout the least proof, sug- 
 gest that this Epistle was originally inscribed 
 to the Church of Laodieea, and not of Ephe- 
 sus ; but if there was really any satisfactory 
 evidence, that, notwithstanding the great 
 dissimilarity of the names, the transcribers of 
 all the existing copies had conspired to make 
 so extraordinary a change, still the difficulty 
 would not be removed ; because, according to 
 the Acts, Paul was the first preacher of the 
 Gospel at Laodicea also, and every other 
 part of Asia Minor 
 
 The same insuperable objection lies against 
 the Epistle to the Colossians, which is mani- 
 festly fabricated by the same opificer who 
 composed that to the Ephesians. In c. i. 
 V, 4 — 9^ the author makes Paul say, that it 
 was Epaphras who first preached the Gospel 
 to the Colossians ; and that it was from him 
 he had heard of their faith and love in Christ 
 Jesus. AndjC. iio v. 1, he makes him ex- 
 
^M THE DISSONANCE (W 
 
 pressly declare, that neither they nor the Lac>- 
 dicesns had mtn hh face in the Jlesh, Yet 
 jColo&se aiard Laodicea were both cities of 
 Phry^](ia, where Luke assures us^^ Psml, ac- 
 etxmpanied by himself, repeatedly preached 
 the Gugpel to every icity iu order. 
 
 m^ There are also some circumstances 
 Sii the Epistles to the. Philippians and to Ti- 
 -tus, which render them both apocryphal in 
 my estimation ; btit as they may not, per- 
 iaps, he thought by others to afford the same 
 '.satisfactoiy demonstration of their spnrious- 
 tness, as 1 : persuade myself I h^ve produced 
 .itithd three preceding; cases, I;. oiily mention 
 them by the. wgjy r ttnd submit them ta the 
 mattire comsideration of those who, as well as 
 myself, niaythink it of the first importance, 
 to both the teacher and learner of the Gospel, 
 ^ to' separate truth from fabulous falsehood^ 
 and the genuine scriptures of Christ s primi- 
 tive disciples from the presumptuous fictions 
 . and forgeries of the fathers of the grand apos- 
 tasy in the second and third centuries. 
 
 In the very first verse of the E|Vistle to the 
 
 PinHppians, there, is a distinction madebe- 
 
 .twtetii the general iGQirigregatiaii of the Saints 
 
 ' * Acts-x'vi, 6i — xwm.'HS 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 315 
 
 or Christians, and the Bishops and Deacons, 
 which is not to be found in any. other episto- 
 lar}^ addrei^s of Paul ; ^;[;id which, if it be not 
 an interpolation, savours very strongly of a 
 much later, ^ge than that of the Apostles. 
 At verse 13 — ^18, compared with c. iv. v. 22, 
 we .are informed, th^t through the notice 
 taken of him during his imprisonment, many 
 of the Emperor Nero's court -were converted 
 to Christianity, a fact in the highest degree 
 improbablC;^ and far fripm being confirmed by 
 Luke or any .Roman historian.; ^nd that ma.- 
 ny xlisciples of the pospel, wlijQi, to be manjj, 
 must h^ye been con vjerted before Paul's ar- 
 rival at Rome, wl>ich Luke's bistorj makes 
 quite incredible, emboldened by his success, 
 pre^ch^d the Gospel there at, the same time 
 that he did, some of them, good .Christians! 
 only enviously for contention and strife's 
 sake, in hopes to vex and teaze him; all 
 which seems irreconcilable to the account 
 given us in the last chapter of the Acts. In 
 c. iii, v^ 2, the Philippians aie bid to beware 
 of dogs and of the concisioriy expressions never 
 used by Paul in any other writing. The latter 
 seems a very improper, unbecoming manner 
 of speaking of a divine ordinance, which, as 
 the Mosaic Covenant was not then actually 
 
sift THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 abrogated, still subsisted, and was even prac- 
 tised by Paul himself on his disciple Timo- 
 th}' , though he was only the son of a Jewish 
 mother by a Greek father. And if by the 
 former we are to understand the Cynic philo- 
 sophers, what was there in their numbers, 
 doctrines, or lives, that could make Paul 
 point them out as so peculiarly inimical to 
 Christianity above the other philosophic 
 sects? In chap. iv. v. 3, he in treats his yoke- 
 fellow, whom, however, he does not name, to 
 '^ help those women who labour with him in 
 •^ the Gospel f yet Luke assures us, that 
 none but he and Timoth}^ accompanied Paul 
 into Macedonia and Greece: and, 1 Cor. 
 c. ix. v. 5, Paul himself plainly intimates, that 
 though some other Apostles and preachers of 
 the Gospel were accompanied by their wives 
 or female relations, he and Barnabas had 
 no Avomah who attended them. In the fifth 
 verse the wTiter saj^s, the Loj^d is at hand; ap- 
 parently meaning that the predicted coming 
 of Chi'id \xns nearly approaching; but that is 
 directly contradictory to Paul's own explicit 
 doctrine in the second chapter of his second 
 Epistle to the Thcssalonians. In verses 
 10—19, we find the author describing him- 
 self as in a state of ajfliction and pecuniary 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. ttf 
 
 distresSj and very seasonably relieved by the 
 supply they had sent him by Epapliroditus; 
 remindmg them, that at his first preacliing 
 the Gospel in Macedonia, they were tiie only- 
 Christian Church who gave him any thing ; 
 and that they, two or three times, relieved 
 his necessity^ when he was at Thcssalonica* 
 Yet Luke tells us, that, no accusation being 
 sent to Rome by the Jews against Paul, he 
 was under no affliction and very little re- 
 straint, being permitted to dwell where he 
 pleased, under the guard of a single soldier; 
 and that he " dwelt two whole years in his 
 " own hired house, and received all that came 
 *' in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God 
 *' and teaching Christianity boldly, no man 
 ^* forbidding him/' And we know that Pauls 
 constant boast was, that he always* mam- 
 tained himself by his own labour, and never 
 made his preaching the Gospel a charge to 
 any body; and thougii, 2 Cor. xi. 9, he says, 
 that the Macedonian converts supplied that 
 pecuniary deficiency, which was occasioned 
 by the persecutions that interrupted his ma- 
 nual labour, far from intimating tiiat the Plii- 
 hppians had been particularly benevolent 
 and liberal towards him, at his first preach- 
 
 * 1 Cor. ix. 14 and IS.^See also Acts xx. 'Jti—35. 
 
Sl^l TJKE DISSONANCE OV 
 
 irig thi Gospel to them and to the Thessata^ 
 liians, he says to the latter, 1 Thess. c. ii. 
 V. 2,6, 9j "'After we had suffered before, and 
 '^ were shamefiilly entreated, as ye kno\V, aJ 
 *^ PkiUppr^ we were bold in our God,'to speak 
 *' unto you the Gospel of God, with much 
 ^* contention. — Ndr of men sought we glory^ 
 I' neither of j'du, nor yet of others, when we 
 " might have been burdensome, as the i\pos- 
 " ties of Christ. — For ye remember^ brethren, 
 *' our labour and travel : for labourina: nis^ht 
 " and day, because we would not be charge- 
 ** able unto any of you, w^e preached unto 
 *^ you th^ Gospel of God.'^ 
 ^' In the Epistle to Titus, the very introduc- 
 tory address excites in my mind a strong sus- 
 picion, that it was not written by Paul: for 
 he calls himself, what he never does in any 
 other Epistle, a servant of God; though, to 
 the Galatians, c. iv. v. 6 and 7, he s^ys, "" be- 
 " cause ye are sons, God hath sent forththxi 
 " spirit of his son into yoiir hearts, ciying Abba 
 " Father, wherefore thou art no move a sermnij 
 " but a son, &c." He adds also, ''an Apbstle 
 " of Jesus Christ,'' (not by the will of God^ as 
 he usually expresses it, hni)'' according to the 
 ^' faith of God's elect and the acknowledging of ' 
 /' the truth f all which, in Paul's mouth, is 
 
"THt: EVANGELISTS. '.^l^ 
 
 quite a new kind of langirage. As T pmceed, 
 my suspicion is greatly confirmed by finding 
 a most malicious, illiberal, national reflectibil 
 of a Greek Poet upon the moral character of 
 the Cretans quoted by the author, affirmed by 
 him to be true, aiid the Poet himself deno- 
 fninated a Prophet. The-satrrical verse herc 
 quoted is taken from Epimenides, a Poet of 
 Crete, but that part of it which accusfcs tlie 
 Cretans of being liars, is copied literally from 
 a hymn -of Callimachus in hdnoUr'of Jupitei% 
 and he explains the grounds of his accusation 
 to be, that *^the Cretans had alwaj^s boasted, 
 ^* that they liad the sepulchre of JupiteT in 
 •" their island^ which must be falst^', because it 
 *^ was impossible for the supreme of the im- 
 *' mortak to have died and been buried any- 
 *' where/'" Who c?in believe that the Apos^tle 
 I^aul would have Sanctioned such a slander, 
 founded u pon sudh groutids' as these ? fee- 
 sides, the Btate of the Church ii^ Cretie, :as 
 described in the seven last verses' of the fii^t 
 chapter, and tlie direction about ha-ctics, 
 c. iii. v. 10, are lAuch -more i^uifeble-^% ^ 
 «tateof the Church itr lafer tirtics, ^radicted 
 hy Paul to Timothy,* than at aW period 
 during the life of PauL The author of the 
 
 • 1 Tim/ivJ 1, iid 2 Tim/iv. 3 and 4. 
 
i^ THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 Epistle also, c. iii. v. 3, represents himself 
 and Titus, as having, in the former part of 
 their lives, before their conversion to Chris- 
 tianity, been " foolish, disobedient, deceived, 
 *' serving divers lasts and pleasures, liviug in 
 " malice and envy, hateful, and hating one 
 " another/' Now, when Paul enumerates 
 several unchristian immoralities to the Corin^ 
 thians,* he adds, not including himself, nor 
 even the majority of the heathen converts^ 
 ^ and such were some of you; but ye are 
 *' washed/' &c. And of himself be confi- 
 dently declared before the Jewish Council^ 
 Acts c. xxiii. v. 1, " Men and brethren, I 
 " have lived in all good conscience before 
 " God, until this day/' 
 
 As to the Epistle to Philemon, it is too in- 
 significant to merit much attention ; but it is 
 observable, that, in this short letter,, Paul not 
 only talks of his bonds, a phrase not uncom- 
 monly applied to any kind of confinement or 
 restraint, but speaks of his fellow-prisaner : 
 and yet we learn from the Acts, that he him- 
 self was the only Christian prisoner sent thi- 
 ther by Festus; and that he was permitted 
 " to dwell by himself ^ with a soldier that kept 
 '' him/' 
 
 ♦ 1 Cor. YJ. 9 and !•. 
 
The Evangelists. six 
 
 if. That the Epistle to the Hebrews 
 could not' be' written by Paul, is so evident to 
 anv reader^' who compares the style atid scope 
 of it with those of his other Epistles, that it 
 '^eenis astonishing that, eVen in the fifth 
 century, it should have been' decreed to 
 t)e his, especially since the writer does not 
 'pretend to be Paul; and the only circum- 
 stance of probability that he was so, is the 
 'mention of Timothy, in the close of the Epis- 
 tle ; as if there never was more than one 
 'Christian of that name. But that it is of 
 miich later date than the Apostolic age, is 
 manifest i'rom chap. xiii. v. 7 and 17? where 
 the teachers of Christianity are said to rule 
 over their congregations, in direct contra- 
 diction to our Saviour's express injunctions, 
 and to the constant practice of Paul liiiTiself 
 and all the primitive preachers of the Gos- 
 pel. Indeed, I cannot iiiiaghie a grossier af- 
 Tronf to the memory of the great Apostle to 
 the Gentiles, tliau to ascribe to /^^/;^, either 
 the interpreting the Greek word for Covenant 
 to signify a will or testament ; or tiie assertion 
 of this writer, c. iv. v. 2, that the Gospel was 
 preached'to the Israelites in the wilderness, 
 as well as to us ; or all the nonsensical absur- 
 dity, in chap. vii. about Melchisedec, as a 
 
 X 
 
332 ' THE DISSONANCE OP 
 
 man having neither beginning of days nor end 
 of life ; or, lastly, the reckoning as the per- 
 fection of the Christian doctrine, c. vi. v. 1 
 and 2, far superior to the doctrines of Re- 
 pentancCy Faith, the Resurrection, and a fu- 
 ture Judgment^ the explanation of the Old 
 Covenant of the Mosaic Law, as a type and 
 .shadow of the New Covenant of the Gospel, 
 which, upon the principles laid down by 
 Paul himself, in his Epistle to the Galatians, 
 is just as trifling and useless, as it would be to 
 represent the scholastic discipline, under 
 which we are educated in our childhood, as 
 the type and shadow of our conduct, when 
 arrived at manhood, and a full maturity of 
 reason. It must be considered also, that the 
 writing to the Jewish converts particularly, 
 either in general or in any one country, by 
 the appellation of Hebrews, is to make and 
 keep up a distinction between them and the 
 Gentile converts to Christianity, a behaviour 
 quite unjustifiable in any teacher of the Gos- 
 pel ; because all distinctions tend naturally 
 to destroy that unity and mutual affection ne- 
 cessary in the disciples of Jesus Christ ; and, 
 as far as our religion is concerned with the 
 writings of theOldTestament, the Gentile con- 
 verts were equally interested in them with the 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 323 
 
 Ikbrew disciples ; and Paul, especially, could 
 never have made such a distinction ; for he 
 assures us, Gal. iii. 27 and 28, that, " as many 
 " as have been baptized into Christ, have put 
 *' on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, 
 " there is neither bond nor free, there is nei- 
 " ther male nor female ; for ye are all one in 
 ^' Christ Jesus/* The author too has thought 
 fit to change the original words of the fortieth 
 Psalm, in order to make them confirm his new 
 doctrine, that the body of Jesus crucified was 
 a propitiatory sacrifice for sin ; and quotes the 
 Psalmist, as saying " sacrifice and offering 
 " thou wouldst not, but a body hast thou pre- 
 *' pared me ;" whereas David really says, 
 " sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire, 
 " mine ears hast thou opened :" that is, thou 
 hast made me olx^dient to thy word ; express- 
 ing the superiority of the New Covenant 
 over th€ Old, in nearly the same sentiment 
 with that of Samuel, " behold, to obey is bet- 
 " ter than sacrifice, and to hearken than the 
 " fat of rams." Whether this extraordinary 
 transmutation of the sense of the royal Psal- 
 mist, was made by the error of the translators 
 of the Septuagint, or whether the Septuagint 
 itself was thus altered by the ready-fingered 
 interpolaters of much later times, to accom- 
 
 X 2 
 
S24 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 niodate it to the doctrine taught in this Epis- 
 tle, I know not ;* but this I know, that no 
 Hebrew, writing particularly to the Hebrews, 
 could have quoted the scriptures of the Old 
 Testament, in the words of the Greek trans- 
 lation, instead of those of the original He- 
 brew ; especially where the sense of the two 
 differed very materially ; and, therefore, 1 am 
 fully satisfied, tiiat neither Paul, nor any other 
 Jew, was the author of this Epistle. In c; ii. 
 y. 13, the author has had the effrontery, to 
 quote the words of Isaiahj c. viii. v. 18, as 
 meaning Jesus Christ and his disciples, 
 though, whoever turns to the book of the 
 Jewish prophet must see, that he is speaking 
 only of himself and his own children, as ap- 
 pointed by God to be signs to Ahaz and the 
 inhabitants of Jerusalem at that time. In 
 c. iii. V. 1, this writer calls Christ Jesus, the 
 Apostle of our profession^ that is, I suppose, of 
 the Christian faith; but the denommation. 
 Apostle^ in all the genuine scriptures, is pe- 
 
 . • Dottor Whitby supposes, tliat this accommodation was made by 
 ■tiie suggestions of the Holy Spirit to the minds of the seventy trans- 
 lators 5 but it is more consonant to reason to believe, that the Holy 
 Spirit supplied the Royal Prophet, in the first instance, with words 
 duly expressive of the meaning of the Deity : and, therefore, they, 
 who are acquainted with the practices of the puhovpyoi of the second 
 and third centuries of the Christian a?ra, will think it much more 
 *^robable,thatthe accommodating alteration was their ingenious work. 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 3?^ 
 
 culiarly appropriated to those who were de- 
 legated by him to preach the Gospel ; and, 
 as Pauls constant boast is, that he was an. 
 Apostle of Jesus Christy it seems impossible, 
 that he should have given the same denomi- 
 nation to Jesus Christ himself. Let us con- 
 sider also, to w^hom this Epistle could h?tve 
 been sent by Paul. It is said to be written 
 from Italy to the Hebrews, that is, the Jews; 
 but there were Jews in every city where hq 
 had preached the Gospel, and he had first 
 taught in their synagogues ; and when the 
 majority of them had every where rejected 
 the Gospel, he had determined to turn froin 
 them to the Gentiles, whose conversion was 
 the peculiar object of his apostleship, as 
 that of the Jews was of Peter's; the Jews, 
 therefore, in every Gentile city, made too 
 small a part of the Christian Church, to 
 be particularly written to by Paul; and, 
 since there were some in every city, to which 
 of them was this letter sent ? for it could 
 not be delivered to them all. If, by the 
 word Hebrews^ is meant the Hebrew nation 
 of Palestine, and we are to understand, that 
 this Epistle was sent to the Jews of the 
 Christian Church at Jerusalem ; it is by no 
 means credible, that Paul should so iar de- 
 
 X 3 
 
S26 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 part from his own peculiar province, and in- 
 vade that of Peter, as to send such a letter as 
 this to that Church, of which Peter himself, 
 and all the other surviving Apostles, were re- 
 sident members. Besides, in c. ii. v. 3 and 
 4, the author expresses himself in terms, 
 which plainly shew, he was not Paul, and that 
 he lived after the Apostolic age ; for he says, 
 the Gospel " at the first began to be spoken 
 " by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by 
 " them that heard him ; God also bearing 
 " them witness, both with signs and wonders, 
 " and with divers miracles and gifts of the Holy 
 *' Ghost/' The writer is here evidently speak- 
 ing of persons, circumstances, and times al- 
 ready past ; and distinguishes himself and his 
 contemporaries from the Apostles and first 
 preachers of the Gospel, who confirmed their 
 doctrine by the testimony of miracles, lie 
 cannot therefore be Paul, wdio repeatedly as- 
 sures us, that he received his instruction in 
 the Gospel from no man living, but by imme- 
 diate revelation from Jesus Christ ; and who 
 was himself endued with the power of work- 
 ing miracles, and enjoyed the gifts of the 
 holy inspiration in the highest degree. 
 
 The same objections whicli have been urged 
 against the Epistle addressed particularly to 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 327 
 
 the Hebrews, lie in full force against the 
 Epistle of James also; for thougli it is pro- 
 fessedly written to Christians, who, as such, 
 were no longer Jews, it is addressed " to the 
 "twelve tribes which are scattered abroad i' 
 an expression which seems to refer to the 
 final dispersion of the Jews under Vespasian, 
 and consequently to imply that it was not 
 penned till after that event: yet such a de- 
 nomination, even if we should suppose, that 
 some out of all the twelve tribes of the Jews 
 had been converted to Christianity during the 
 ministry of the Apostles, could no longer be 
 given to them with the least propriety, for 
 reasons which I have already mentioned. 
 And to what place could a letter so addressed 
 have been sent? Indeed, from the whole te- 
 nor of the Epistle it is evident, that it was 
 not written in the age of the Apostles, but in 
 after times, when professed Christians w^ere 
 guilty of many immoralities plainly repug- 
 nant to the precepts of their religion ; and 
 one cannot suppose that the converts from 
 Judaism alone merited the writer's admoni- 
 tions and reproofs, nor see why they should 
 be so particularly directed to them. In c. v. 
 V. 8, the writer tells them, that " the coming 
 
 X 4 
 
528 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 "of the Lord draweth nigh/' which he con- 
 firms in the next verse, by adding, " behold 
 " the judge standeth before the door;" 
 whereby he plainly shews that he was no 
 Apostle of Christ, nor well instructed in the 
 Gosj)el prophecies respecting our Lord's com- 
 ing again : for Paul wrote expressly to the 
 Thessalonians to correct their misapprehen- 
 sion upon that very point, and to assure them, 
 that before that predicted period would ar- 
 rive, true Christianity would be shamefully 
 corrupted, and a lamentable, sinful apostasy 
 from the faith of the Gospel would be estab- 
 hshed in the world; which John told them 
 would continue to prevail for near thirteen 
 centuries. At the tenth verse, he tells them, 
 to " take the prophets who have spoken in 
 " the name of ttie Lord," (without doubt 
 meaning the Apostles) •' for an example of 
 " suffering affliction and patience;" which 
 proves that he was not himself an Apostle. 
 The origin also of extreme unction, for which 
 a direction is given, v. 14, is a demonstration 
 that the writer himself was, not endowed with 
 the gift of healing; and that he wrote after 
 those miraculous powers had ceased in the 
 Church. The shocking doctrine also, v. 15, 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. ^3t 
 
 tlmt a wicked Christian, upon the bed of sick* 
 ucss, ma}^ receive forgiveness of; his sins by 
 means of the pra3^ers of the KUlers of the 
 Church; and the institution of auricular con- 
 fession, v, l6, atford much more convincing 
 proofs that this Epistle is one of the many 
 spurious writings of the third century, than it 
 is possible to produce in favour of its authen- 
 ticity. 
 
 V. The Epistle called the first of Peter, is 
 supposed also to have been addressed to the 
 Jewish converts to Christianity, that were dis- 
 persed throughout the several countries of 
 ^sia Minor ; and, if so, it is liable to the ob- 
 jections already urged against the two last- 
 mentioned Epistles. But, in c. ii. v. 10, 
 speaking of those to whom the Epistle is di- 
 rected, the author says, " which, in time past, 
 " were not a people, but are now the people 
 " of God ;" words which, in the prophecy of 
 Hosea, from whence they are quoted, are 
 spoken particularly of the conversion of the 
 Gentiles, and could never, with any propriety, 
 be applied to the Jews. However, whether 
 it be supposed to be written to the Jewish or 
 the Gentile converts, since the countries men- 
 
9$0 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 tioned are precisely those where it was pecu- 
 liarly allotted to Paul to preach the Gospel, 
 whilst the province of Judea and Palestine 
 was as peculiarly allotted to Peter, it cannot 
 be believed, without much better evidence 
 than is produced in favour of this Epistle, 
 that Peter wrote it ; especially when we find 
 the author professing himself, c. iv. v. 3, to 
 have been, in the former part of his life, a 
 lascivious, lustful, drunken, riotous, and abomi- 
 nable/ idolatrous Gentile. Peter also could 
 not have been so io-norant of the sense of the 
 Christian prophecies as to affirm, as this 
 writer does, c. iv. v. 7, that when he wrote, 
 ilie end of all things was at haiid. The an* 
 thor professes too to Avrite from Babylon, 
 where, whether we understand Assyrian or 
 Egyptian Babylon, there is not the least rea- 
 son to believe Peter ever went. Could any 
 Apostle of Jesus Christ write such nonsense 
 as we find, c. iii. v. 19 and 20, about Christ^s 
 going by the spirit, and preaching to the spi- 
 rits in prison, who were disobedient at the 
 time of Noahs flood? And what is said, e. 
 ii. V. 12, of the Christians being accused as 
 evil-doers, v/hich, we know from Pliny's testi- 
 mony, was not the case in the beginning of the 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. S81 
 
 second century, is another proof that this 
 Epistle also, was not the work of any man of 
 the Apostohc age, but of the third century. 
 
 Of the second Epistle of Peter, and the 
 Epistle of Jude, which were both evidently 
 written with the same view, viz. to condemn 
 those who opposed the ambitious growth of 
 Clerical power and authority, that advanced 
 apace and to a very unchristian height, in the 
 third century and beginning of the fourth, 
 and both, as seems probable from the style 
 and similarity of expressions, by the same 
 author, it is sufficient to remark, that they 
 have no one testimony of their authenticity, 
 of the least weight, either internal or external; 
 and that they were generally rejected as spu- 
 rious, from the time of their first appearance 
 till the fifth century: that the author of the 
 second epistle of Peter, c. iii. v. 15 and l6, 
 speaks of Paul's Epistles as being collected 
 together, and universally known in his time ; 
 professes to have read them all; and says, 
 there are some things in them hard to be un- 
 derstood; not oneof which circumstances can 
 be reasonably supposed of Peter: that both 
 these Epistles refer to the fabulous legend of 
 the fallen angels^ and the story of Balaam's 
 ass; and to some apocrypha] fiction of a con- 
 
^2* THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 test between Michael and the Devil about 
 the body of Moses ; for the truth of all which^ 
 x\rhether any other person be able to find faith, 
 I cannot tell; but I am sure such a belief is 
 utterly out of my power. 
 
 '^ 'VI The three remaining canonical Epis- 
 tles are attributed to the Apostle John, the 
 autlior of the Apocalypse, although the style 
 fe very different. Of these, the two last are 
 too insignificant to merit much attention; it 
 is, therefore, sufficient to observe concerning 
 tliem, that all the writers of the fourth cen- 
 tury, who are the fii^st that mention them, in- 
 form us they were spoken against, and by 
 'many rejected as spurious. As to the first 
 and most important of the three, it is evidently 
 the work of the same hand as the Gospel at- 
 tributed to the same Apostle; for, like a 
 staunch disciple of the Platonic School, he 
 si>eaks of our Saviour in his introduction, as 
 he had done before in the introduction to his 
 Evangelical History, as the Divine Logos of 
 Plato, manifested to the world in human form. 
 Bui he very satisfactorily discovers that he 
 was riot John; arid that he did not write this 
 Epi'stle'till a considerable time after the Apo- 
 olic ^^i f6-r,'C.' H.'.V^ 18, be says,*^- Little 
 
T^E EVANGELISTS. SSS 
 
 << Children, it is the last time: and ;^s ye^^ 've 
 ^^ lieard that Antichrist ^hvW come,'e\Tnmoir 
 *' are tliere many 'Antichrists^ whereby wse 
 ^' know that it is the last time," In this extra-^ 
 ordinary assertion are several circuinstaTi^^ei 
 deserving particular attention. First,- th^ 
 term Antichrist, which is no v>^here to be foniid 
 in any other scriptm^e, is here, and agstin^ 
 4C. iv.'V, S, mentioned by this Avriter as a de^ 
 iiommation well known by the Christians of 
 iiis' time to express the fatal object of the 
 il^hief prophecies of the Gospel, which- they 
 had heard .should come. Now, since no isncli 
 ^ord as this is to be met with, either in the 
 prophecies of the Apocalypse or in Pauls pre- 
 dictions of the same event, it is plain that the 
 term Antichrist could not become conimonlj 
 used and understood by Christians in general, 
 till, being accustomed to reflect, and talk, 
 and write about the Revelation c^f Jahn, 
 and more especially about Paul's prophecy 
 contained in 2 Thessalonians, chap. ii. thejr 
 'had agreed to call by that peculiar name the 
 sinful human pouier, or t1iat man of'sin^s^ 
 Paul expresses it, who should oppo.^e his au- 
 thority to that of God and Christ, and con- 
 tinue in ^dme degree till our Lords glorious 
 'coming; btlt itis not possible, that this siK)uld 
 
884 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 have been the case with Christians in genefalj 
 till those books had been in common use, and 
 been often read and commented upon ; which 
 it is in the highest degree improbable should 
 happen till long after the death of both Paul 
 and John. Secondly, the writer deems all the 
 heterodox teachers of his own time to be 
 Antichrists, in the sense of these prophecies ; 
 though it is manifest from the prophecies 
 themselves, that the opposition to God and 
 Christ, which they describe, is of a very dif- 
 ferent kind. Thirdly, he declares that the 
 predicted opposer of Christ was then already 
 in the worlds though Paul expressly affirms, 
 that he would not appear till after there had 
 been a general apostasy of professed Chris- 
 tians from the true and rational faith of the 
 Gospel; an event which did not take place for 
 above a century after the death of all the Apos- 
 tles, and which, indeed, Paul tells Timothy, 
 1 Ep. c. iv. V. 1, would happen at some distant 
 period, saying, it would come to pass in the 
 latter times^ or, as it should rather have been 
 translated, in succeeding or future tunes Last- 
 ly, the author of this Epistle affirms the time 
 in which he w rote to be the last time^ and says, 
 that by the Antichrists which then existed, 
 he knew it to be the last tune ; an assertion 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. S35 
 
 winch we, who live 1700 years after the death 
 of John, and 1500 years after the appear- 
 ance of this Epistle, know to be an absolute 
 falsehood, because the last time is not yet 
 come. We know also, that the prophetic 
 author of the Apocalypse could never have 
 uttered such an assertion, because he him- 
 self, as well as Paul, hath assured us, that 
 the last time of Christianiy is the time when 
 the sph'it and power of Antichrist will be an- 
 nihilated, and the pure uncorrupted religion 
 of the Gospel prevail amongst mankind, 
 which he repeatedly assures us, will not be ac- 
 complished till full 1260 years after the com- 
 plete establishment of a fabulous, blasphe- 
 mous superstition in every country of Eu- 
 rope, by means of that predicted anti-chris 
 tian power, which did not begin to shew itsel 
 any where before the fourth century of th 
 Christian a^ra. 
 
 I have thus, as concisely as 1 could, (for to 
 their attainment of truth in such inquiries as 
 these, it is much more necessary to make peo- 
 ple think tlian to make them read,) stated the 
 grounds and reasons of my own rejection of 
 so large a number of those Epistles, which the 
 orthodox and holy Catholic Church hath though^ 
 
5S6 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 fit to ^dopt as genuine, authentic scriptures 
 of the A p<. sties of Jesus Christ; and of the 
 strength or weakness of my arguments every 
 reader miist determine for himself. ] have only 
 further to remark, that not one of these Epis- 
 tles contains in it that necessary internal tes- 
 timony of the divine authority of the writer, 
 the spirit of prophecy ; wliilst Paul's Epistles 
 to the Corinthians, Thessaloniahs, Galatiahs, 
 and Timothy, liave the historic testimony in 
 thdr favour, strongly corroborated by that 
 arid every othei: internal evidence of authen- 
 ticity. 
 
 **VII. It remains for me to explain my rea- 
 sons for objecting also to the Epistles to the 
 seven Churches of Asia, as a spurious inter- 
 polation of" the important book of the A po- 
 calypse. 
 
 In the introduction to those prophetic vi- 
 sions, John calls them " the Revelation which 
 " God gave unto Jesus Christ, to shew unto 
 ** his servants things, which must shortly come 
 " to pass, and which he sent arid signified bi/ 
 " his angel unto his servant John." Agreeably 
 to this annunciation of the contents of the 
 book, we find, after the beginning of the 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 537 
 
 visions in the foui^th chapter, that an angel 
 is the constant mystagogue of the Apostle 
 through every scene ; but the intei'position 
 of these seven unimportant, and to us scarce- 
 ly intelhgible, Epistles, occasions a most un- 
 accountable inconsistency in the writer, as it 
 makes him, immediately after the above de- 
 claration, introduce a vision, in which, not an 
 •nngel sent by Jesus Christ, but Jesus Christ 
 himself^ is represented as the sole personage 
 of the vision^ appearing under a very extra- 
 ordinary figure, attended with very extraor- 
 dinary emblems^ for no other purpose, that I 
 can discover, than to condemn the heresy of 
 the Nicolaitanes, and those \^ho scrupled not 
 to eat things offered to idols. Now John s 
 original book, of the Apocalypse must have 
 been written before Paul wrote bis above- 
 mentioned genuine Epistles, because in them 
 he several times refers to it; ^nd from them, 
 and that part of his history which is subse^ 
 quent to his writing some of them, we learn 
 both that he himself spoke of eating things, 
 which had been offered to idols as innocent 
 in itself, and also that he knew nothing of 
 these disciples of Nicolaus, though these seven 
 churches were all of his own planting; and 
 
 Y 
 
3^8 THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 though these visionary Epistles represent 
 the heresy as subsisting at the time wheil 
 they were written. The only prophetic 
 part of them also, if any part can pro- 
 perly be called so*, is absolutely false; for 
 whilst some are threatened with havino; 
 their candlestick, that is their church, re- 
 moved out of its place, and others with other 
 signal punishments and marks of his resent- 
 ment, the churches of Smyrna and Philadel- 
 phia are favoured and approved ; and the lat- 
 ter is particularly assured, that, " because she 
 
 s" had kept the word of his patience^ he would 
 " also keep her from the hour of temptation, 
 *' which should come upon all the world to 
 " try them that dwell upon the earth/' Yet 
 the churches of Smyrna and Philadelphia 
 have been both involved in the same common 
 sufferings and calamities with all the other 
 churches of Asia; and have had their candle- 
 
 ^ sticks removed out of their places, and sup- 
 
 , planted by the lamps of Mahomed. Besides, 
 in order to predict the leading circumstances 
 
 .,0f the subsequent prophetic vision, our Savi- 
 ;^ur,must have known, that the church of 
 Philadelphia and of Smyrna, and all the other 
 churches iu Asia, would unite, under the de- 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. 33g 
 
 nomination of tlie Greek church, to form the 
 predicted apostasy from his religion ; and, by 
 means of an Hierarchy estabhshed by the 
 Emperor Constantine, become, at no very 
 distant period, the first grand object of the 
 chief prediction of this very Apocalypse: he 
 therefore could never have dictated Epistles 
 to those churches in such terms as thes^. 
 
 Y 2 ^ 
 
CONCLUSION, 
 
 ^UCH, candid Reader, are the arguments 
 ^^ which have long ago induced the Author 
 of these pages, to regard so large a part of 
 the canonical scriptures as spurious fictions, 
 of no authority, and undeserving the attention 
 of a disciple of Jesus Christ. What effect 
 they may have upon the minds of his readers 
 in general, is not in his power to determine. 
 But it is great satisfaction to him, that, be- 
 sides the demand of the Public for ^ new edi- 
 tion, he has received from many individuals^ 
 in different aqd distant parts of the kingdom, 
 the most unequivocal testimony of their ap- 
 probation. And whosoever will attentively 
 examine those writings, which, thus convinced, 
 lie refuses to adjnit into, his Creed, v.ill find, 
 that they alone have given cause for that 
 voluminous ini)ndatipn of school-divinity, and 
 those endless theological controversies, that 
 have for so many ages oppressed the literature 
 
THR EVANGELISTS. Ut 
 
 
 
 
 id fatigued the patiQiice of Europe; that 
 they alone have been the source of those wild, 
 irrational systenjs, which have so long misled 
 people from the plain, straight, perspicuous 
 paths of true religion^ into the manifold, devi-. 
 ous wanderings of th.at obscure labyrinth of 
 fabulous superstition, whose impious doctrines, 
 having nothing to do with reason, ^nd apply-r 
 ing only to the passions, have so exasperated 
 the minds of men against each other, and so 
 inhumanly, as well as unchristianly, hardened 
 their he^rta, a$ to produce frequently, in every 
 nation of Christendom, under the plea of godly, 
 ^eal, scenes pf the most barbarous violence 
 3nd brutal cruelty^ Doctrines, which (since 
 statesmen have b0en wise enough to discou- 
 rage the spirit of religious persecution,) have 
 tilled the nominally Christian world with a 
 continually increasing variety of sects, both 
 the teachers and disciples of which, according 
 to the prophetic description long since given 
 of them by the Apostle Paul, though from 
 infancy to old age they are ever learnings are 
 never able to attain a rational, satisfactory in* 
 tt^iligence of the religion they continue to pro- 
 fess, nor to come to the knowledge of the obvious 
 ^nd simple, but important, truths joi the New 
 
m- THE DISSONANCE OF 
 
 Covenant of the Gospel. Dpctrine^ which, well 
 knowing them to have had their origin only 
 in the second and third centuries, and finding 
 them to be pointed out by the finger of God 
 himself, as the falsehoods and fabulous fic- 
 tions of the predicted Antichristian Apostasy, 
 which, when supported by the power of the 
 civil magistrate, would for so many centu^ 
 ries supplant the genuine Religion of the New 
 Covenant, preached by Christ and his Apos- 
 tles, the Author glories in having strenuously 
 combated, for near thirty years, by argu- 
 ments which have never yet been refuted. 
 And now, having attained the advanced age 
 erf his seventy-fifth year, amidst the increas- 
 ing bodily infirmities and debility, which 
 he reasonably considers as admonitions of 
 his iapproaching dissolutioii, he blesses God 
 for his gracious goodness, in having con- 
 tinued to him the entire preservation of his 
 mental faculties, which has enabled him to 
 give -the Public a Second Edition of this 
 Work; in which he hopes they will find 
 many arguments considerably improved and 
 strengthened. A'nd now, being conscious of 
 having faithfully discharged his duty to God, 
 rris Saviour, and to 'his fellow-creatures, . ta 
 
THE EVANGELISTS. . 543' 
 
 tlie best of the abilities that God has given 
 him^ hechearfully resigns himself to his mor- 
 tal fate, in a firm confidence of inheriting ia 
 another hfe the blessed rewards of that Co- 
 venant, in the cause of which he has so long 
 coo tended almost aloni?.- ^ 
 
 .cut 5A»rr— 
 
 ir«t/fcerj Printer. 
 
ERRATA. 
 
 I*agc 19— Line 14— F<w ^e, rcM the, 
 
 104— ^ofc— Line T^Read tells us. 
 
 160— Line 21 — For Asphalites, read Asphaltites. 
 
 161 — Note — Line 5 — For repentanc, read repentaneit,' 
 
 162— Line 27-^For Pharisess, read Pharisee*. 
 
 176— Line ^^Dtle up. 
 
 299— Line Z^-^Bdc frorai. 
 
Y,C I Oi 379 
 
 y -f 
 
 
 So 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
'^^^i^' 
 
 r^®^'"