Was not this the first point which would be considered as fundamental in the propagation of Christianity? Would they not begin with ascertaining the infallible correctness and truth of the sacred books?

What, then, do the Fathers declare as to the opinion of the church in the first centuries, on the subject of the inspiration of the scriptures?

1. First, as the sacred writers of the New Testament cited passages from the Old Testament with the solemn title of SCRIPTURE, without any addition, as expressive of the inspiration of the books of the Jewish canon; so the Christian Fathers, coeval with the apostles, constantly quote the writings of the New Testament under the same name.

2. Again, the other titles which they familiarly attribute to the New Testament, almost all imply their divine inspiration. They call them, The Word of God, The Voice of God, The Oracles of Heaven, The Oracles of the Holy Ghost," and especially they apply to them the expression which we have already noticed, as containing the sum of the whole argument, ypan OEÓTVEVOTOS, divinely-inspired scripture.

3. Further, the distinction which the ancient Fathers made between canonical and apocry

phal books, turned on this very point of inspiration. They accounted other writings, however true upon the whole and edifying, not canonical, because not inspired by the Holy Ghost.

4. Then as to the innumerable passages in which they speak their own sentiments, and that of the church, on the subject,

Hear, first, Clemens Romanus, Bishop of Rome, (A. D. 91-110,) a contemporary with the apostles, to whom we have frequently referred already. "The apostles," says he,

66

preached the gospel, being filled with the Holy Ghost-the scriptures are the true words of the Spirit-Paul wrote to the Corinthians things true by the aid of the Spirit—he, being divinely-inspired, admonished them, by an epistle, concerning himself and Cephas and Apollos."

Justin Martyr (A.D. 89-164) says, that "the gospels were written by men full of the Holy Ghost."

Irenæus (A. D. 97-202) declares that "all the apostles received the gospel by divine revelation that the scriptures were dictated by the Spirit of God-and that therefore it is wickedness to contradict them, and sacrilege to make any alteration in them."

Theophilus, (A. D. 168-181,) citing the authors of the Old and New Testament, says, "that both the one and the other spake, being inspired by one and the same Spirit."

"These things," he also observes, "the Holy Scriptures teach us, and all who were moved by the Holy Spirit."

Clemens Alexandrinus (A. D. 191) says, "that the whole scriptures are the law of God, and that they are all divine, and that the evangelists and apostles wrote by the same Spirit that inspired the apostles."

Tertullian, (A. D. 150—220,) in several passages, attributes the scriptures to the Spirit, and once expressly says, that "the majesty of the Holy Ghost suggested what St. Paul wrote." 10

Origen (A. D. 230) teaches, that "the scriptures proceeded from the Holy Spirit, that there is not one tittle in them but what expresses a divine wisdom, that there is nothing in the law, or the prophets, or the gospels, or the epistles, which did not proceed from the fulness of the Spirit, that we ought, with all the faithful, to say, that the scriptures are divinely-inspired;

10 Et ideo Majestas Spiritus Sancti, perspicax ejusmodi sensuum, et in ipsa ad Thessalonicenses Epistola, suggerit.— De Resur: Carnis, c. 24.

that the gospels are admitted as divine in all the churches of God, and that the scriptures are no other than the organs of God."

The Emperor Constantine wrote unto the Council of Nice, (A. D. 323,) and called the scriptures," the doctrine of the Holy Ghost in writing."

An ancient writer in Eusebius, (A. D. 315,) says, "that they who corrupt the sacred scriptures, either do not believe that the Holy Spirit uttered the divine scriptures, and then they are infidels; or think themselves wiser than the Spirit, and so seem to be possessed.'

Can it be necessary to pursue our quotations further? Can anything be more clear than the inference from such testimony? In short, to admit the full divine inspiration of the New Testament was, in the early church, the test of Christianity. The question then was, whether the religion itself came from God; but no doubt was raised whether the books were infallibly superintended and dictated by the Holy Spirit.

And this is, in truth, the real question to be determined now. An opponent may, if he is able, controvert the arguments we have adduced for the divine authority of the Christian religion; he may refuse his assent to the mira11 Lamotte; Lardner; Dodd. Lect.

culous testimony, the fulfilment of the scheme of prophecy, the proofs from the propagation and good effects of the gospel; that is, he may throw us back on our former lectures. This would be fair and equitable, if he has anything solid to advance. But after he has admitted, as every candid enquirer must, the miracles and prophecies and divine original of Christianity, after he has allowed the extraordinary powers conferred on the apostles, after he has examined and ratified all their credentials and qualifications for establishing a new religion, and for overthrowing all existing modes of error and superstition, it is too late to turn round and deny the full inspiration and infallible truth of the books written under the immediate assistance, and with the authority, and in the name, of Almighty God.

The additional confirmation of this evidence from the internal character of the sacred books, and the consideration of some practical deductions from the doctrine of the inspiration, must be deferred till the next lecture.

In the mean time, let what has been advanced determine the young Christian, according to our text, to continue with greater firmness in the things that he has learned and been assured of. Let him study with more entire submission of