The Lost Gospel and Its Contents by Michael F. Sadler (best e book reader android txt) 馃摃
Excerpt from the book:
Read free book 芦The Lost Gospel and Its Contents by Michael F. Sadler (best e book reader android txt) 馃摃禄 - read online or download for free at americanlibrarybooks.com
Download in Format:
- Author: Michael F. Sadler
Read book online 芦The Lost Gospel and Its Contents by Michael F. Sadler (best e book reader android txt) 馃摃禄. Author - Michael F. Sadler
dead, and moreover some professing to do miracles, and to confer the power of doing miracles in the name and by the power of this risen man.
Let the reader, I say, try to imagine all this, and then he will be able to judge of the credulity with which the author credits his readers when he writes:--
"All history shows how rapidly pious memory exaggerates and
idealizes the traditions of the past, and simple actions might
readily be transformed into miracles as the narrative circulated, in
a period so prone to superstition, and so characterized by love of
the marvellous." (Vol. ii. p. 209.)
"All history," the author says; but why does he not give us a few instances out of "all history," that we might compare them with this Gospel account, and see if there was anything like it?
Such a story, if false, is not a myth. A myth is the slow growth of falsehood through long ages, and this story of the Resurrection was written circumstantially within twenty years of its promulgation, by one who had been an unbeliever, and who had conferred with those who must have been the original promoters of the falsehood, if it be one.
To call such a story a myth, is simply to shirk the odium of calling it by its right name, or more probably to avoid having to meet the astounding historical difficulty of supposing that men endured what the Apostles endured for what they must have known to have been a falsehood, and the still more astounding difficulty that One Whom the author of "Supernatural Religion" allows to have been a Teacher Who "carried morality to the sublimest point attained or even attainable by humanity," and Whose "life, as far as we can estimate it, was uniformly noble and consistent with his lofty principles," should have impressed a character of such deep-rooted fraud and falsehood on His most intimate friends.
The author of "Supernatural Religion" has, however, added another to the many proofs of the truth of the Gospel. In his elaborate book of 1,000 pages of attack on the authenticity of the Evangelists he has shown, with a clearness which, I think, has never been before realized, the great fact that from the first there has been but one account of Jesus Christ. In the writings of heathens, of Jews, of heretics, [199:1] in lost gospels, in contemporary accounts, in the earliest traditions of the Church, there appears but one account, the account called by its first proclaimers the Gospel; and the only explanation of the existence of this Gospel is its truth.
THE END.
[FOOTNOTES]
[3:1] Papias, for instance, actually mentions St. Mark by name as writing a gospel under the influence of St. Peter. The author of "Supernatural Religion" devotes ten pages to an attempt to prove that this St. Mark's Gospel could not be ours. (Vol. i. pp. 448-459.)
[6:1] I need hardly say that I myself hold the genuineness of the Greek recension. The reader who desires to see the false reasonings and groundless assumptions of the author of "Supernatural Religion" respecting the Ignatian epistles thoroughly exposed should read Professor Lightfoot's article in the "Contemporary Review" of February, 1875. In pages 341-345 of this article there is an examination of the nature and trustworthiness of the learning displayed in the footnotes of this pretentious book, which is particularly valuable. I am glad to see that the professor has modified, in this article, the expression of his former opinion that the excerpta called the Curetonian recension is to be regarded as the only genuine one. "Elsewhere," the professor writes (referring to an essay in his commentary on the Philippians), "I had acquiesced in the earlier opinion of Lipsius, who ascribed them ( i.e. , the Greek or Vossian recension) to an interpolator writing about A.D. 140. Now, however, I am obliged to confess that I have grave and increasing doubts whether, after all, they are not the genuine utterances of Ignatius himself."
[10:1] [Greek: Ou gar monon en Hell锚si dia S么kratous hypo logou 锚lenchth锚 tauta, alla kai en Barbarois hyp' autou tou Logou morph么thentos kai anthr么pou genomenou kai I锚sou Christou kl锚thentous.]
[10:2] Such is a perfectly allowable translation of [Greek: kai ton par' autou hyion elthonta kai didaxanta h锚mas tauta, kai ton t么n all么n hepomen么n kai exomoioumen么n agath么n angel么n straton, pneuma te to proph锚tikon sebometha kai proskynoumen.] As there is nothing approaching to angel worship in Justin, such a rendering seems absolutely necessary.
[15:1] "For the law promulgated in Horeb is now old, and belongs to you alone; but this is for all universally. Now law placed against law has abrogated that which is before it, and a covenant which comes after in like manner has put an end to the previous one; and an eternal and final law--namely, Christ--has been given to us." (Heb. viii. 6-13; Dial. ch. xi.)
[15:2] "For the true spiritual Israel and descendants of Judah, Jacob, Isaac, and Abraham (who in uncircumcision was approved of and blessed by God on account of his faith, and called the father of many nations) are we who have been led to God through this crucified Christ, as shall be demonstrated while we proceed." (Phil. iii. 3, compared with Romans, iv. 12-18; Dial. ch. xi.)
[17:1] This, of course, was a Jewish adversary's view of the Christian doctrine of the Godhead of Christ, which Justin elsewhere modifies by showing the subordination of the Son to the Father in all things.
[19:1] [Greek: En gar tois apomn锚moneumasi, ha ph锚mi hypo t么n apostol么n autou kai t么n ekeinois parakolouth锚sant么n syntetachthai, hoti hidr么s h么sei thromboi katecheito autou euchomenou.] (Dial. ch. ciii.)
[20:1] [Greek: Kai to eipein met么nomakenai auton Petron hena t么n apostol么n, kai gegraphthai en tois apomn锚moneumasin autou gegen锚menon kai touto, k.t.l.]
On this question the author of "Supernatural Religion" remarks, "According to the usual language of Justin, and upon strictly critical grounds, the [Greek: autou] in this passage must be ascribed to Peter; and Justin therefore seems to ascribe the Memoirs to that Apostle, and to speak consequently of a Gospel of Peter." (Vol. i. p. 417.)
[28:1] That of our Lord being born in a cave.
[29:1] [Greek: I么annou gar kathezomenou.]
[34:1] Justin has [Greek: hidr么s h么sei thromboi]; St. Luke, [Greek: ho hidr么s autou h么sei thromboi haimatos]. The author of "Supernatural Religion" lays great stress upon the omission of [Greek: haimatos], as indicating that Justin did not know anything about St. Luke; but we have to remember, first, that St. Luke alone mentions any sweat of our Lord in His agony; secondly, that the account in Justin is said to be taken from "Memoirs drawn up by Apostles and those who followed them ," St. Luke being only one of those who followed ; thirdly, Justin and St. Luke both use a very scarce word, [Greek: thromboi]; fourthly, Justin and St. Luke both qualify this word by [Greek: h么sei]. If we add to this the fact that [Greek: thromboi] seems naturally associated with blood in several authors, the probability seems almost to reach certainty, that Justin had St. Luke's account in his mind. The single omission is far more easy to be accounted for than the four coincidences.
[37:1] And He said unto them, "These are the words which I spake unto you while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms concerning me." (Luke xxiii. 44.)
[48:1] It is the reading of Codices B and C of the Codex Sinaiticus of the Syriac, and of a number of Fathers and Versions.
[51:1] [Greek: Hekastos gar tis apo merous tou spermatikou theiou logou to syngenes hor么n kal么s ephthenxato.]
[63:1] For instance, in vol. ii. p. 42, &c., he speaks of one of Tischendorf's assertions as "a conclusion the audacity of which can scarcely be exceeded."--Then, "This is, however, almost surpassed by the treatment of Canon Westcott."--Then, "The unwarranted inference of Tischendorf."--"There is no ground for Tischendorf's assumption."--"Tischendorf, the self-constituted modern Defensor Fidei, asserts with an assurance which can scarcely be characterized otherwise than as an unpardonable calculation upon the ignorance of his readers."--"Canon Westcott says, with an assurance which, considering the nature of the evidence, is singular."--"Even Dr. Westcott states," &c.--For Tertullian his contempt seems unbounded: indeed we way say the same of all the Fathers. Numberless times does he speak of their "uncritical spirit." The only person for whom he seems to have a respect is the heretic Marcion. Even rationalists, such as Credner and Ewald, are handled severely when they differ from him. The above are culled from a few pages.
[69:1] [Greek: Hoti Theos hypemeine genn锚th锚nai kai anthr么pos genesthai.]
[69:2] [Greek: Ex h么n diarrh锚d锚n outous autos ho staurotheis hoti Theos kai anthr么pos, kai stauroumenos kai apothn锚sk么n kek锚rygmenos apodeiknytai.]
[70:1] The reader must remember that Justin puts this expression, which seems to imply a duality of Godhead, into the mouth of an adversary. In other places, as I shall show, he very distinctly guards against such a notion, by asserting the true and proper Sonship of the Word and his perfect subordination to His Father. There is a passage precisely similar in ch. lv.
[71:1] "I continued: Moreover, I consider it necessary to repeat to you the words which narrate how He is both Angel and God and Lord, and Who appeared as a Man to Abraham." (Dial. ch. lviii.)
"Permit me, further, to show you from the Book of Exodus, how this same One, Who is both Angel, and God, and Lord, and Man." (Dial. ch. lix.)
"God begat before all creatures, a Beginning, a certain rational Power from Himself, Who is called by the Holy Spirit, now the Glory of the Lord, now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, then God, and then Lord and Logos." (Dial. ch. lxi.)
"The Word of Wisdom, Who is Himself this God, begotten of the Father of all things, and Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and the Glory of the Begetter, will bear evidence to me," &c. (Dial. lxi.)
"Therefore these words testify explicitly that He is witnessed to by Him Who established these things [ i.e. the Father] as deserving to be worshipped, as God and as Christ." (Dial. lxiii.)
The reader will find other declarations, most of which are equally explicit, in Dial. ch. lvi. (at the end), ch. lvii. (at the end), lxii. (middle), lxviii. (at middle and end), lxxiv. (middle), lxxv., lxxvi. (made Him known, being Christ, as God strong and to be worshipped), lxxxv. (twice called the Lord of Hosts), lxxxvii. (where Christ is declared to be pre-existent God), cxiii. (he [Joshua] was neither Christ, Who is God, nor the Son of God), cxv. (our Priest, Who is God, and Christ, the Son of God, the Father of all), cxxiv. (Now I have proved at length that Christ is called God), cxxv. (He ministered to the will of the Father, yet nevertheless is God), cxxvi. (thrice in this chapter), cxxvii., cxxviii., cxxix.
[73:1] I adopt this phrase because, it is used by Justin. His words are [Greek: arithm么 onta heteron]. (Dial. ch. lxii.)
[74:1] [Greek: Hoti arch锚n pro pant么n t么n ktismat么n ho Theos gegenn锚ke dynamin tina ex heautou logik锚n, k.t.l.]
[77:1] Dr. Pusey translates this passage thus:--"For all that the philosophers and legislators at any time declared or discovered aright, they accomplished according to their portion of discovery and contemplation of the Word; but as they did not know all the properties of the Word which is Christ," &c.
[77:2] Translated by Dr.
Let the reader, I say, try to imagine all this, and then he will be able to judge of the credulity with which the author credits his readers when he writes:--
"All history shows how rapidly pious memory exaggerates and
idealizes the traditions of the past, and simple actions might
readily be transformed into miracles as the narrative circulated, in
a period so prone to superstition, and so characterized by love of
the marvellous." (Vol. ii. p. 209.)
"All history," the author says; but why does he not give us a few instances out of "all history," that we might compare them with this Gospel account, and see if there was anything like it?
Such a story, if false, is not a myth. A myth is the slow growth of falsehood through long ages, and this story of the Resurrection was written circumstantially within twenty years of its promulgation, by one who had been an unbeliever, and who had conferred with those who must have been the original promoters of the falsehood, if it be one.
To call such a story a myth, is simply to shirk the odium of calling it by its right name, or more probably to avoid having to meet the astounding historical difficulty of supposing that men endured what the Apostles endured for what they must have known to have been a falsehood, and the still more astounding difficulty that One Whom the author of "Supernatural Religion" allows to have been a Teacher Who "carried morality to the sublimest point attained or even attainable by humanity," and Whose "life, as far as we can estimate it, was uniformly noble and consistent with his lofty principles," should have impressed a character of such deep-rooted fraud and falsehood on His most intimate friends.
The author of "Supernatural Religion" has, however, added another to the many proofs of the truth of the Gospel. In his elaborate book of 1,000 pages of attack on the authenticity of the Evangelists he has shown, with a clearness which, I think, has never been before realized, the great fact that from the first there has been but one account of Jesus Christ. In the writings of heathens, of Jews, of heretics, [199:1] in lost gospels, in contemporary accounts, in the earliest traditions of the Church, there appears but one account, the account called by its first proclaimers the Gospel; and the only explanation of the existence of this Gospel is its truth.
THE END.
[FOOTNOTES]
[3:1] Papias, for instance, actually mentions St. Mark by name as writing a gospel under the influence of St. Peter. The author of "Supernatural Religion" devotes ten pages to an attempt to prove that this St. Mark's Gospel could not be ours. (Vol. i. pp. 448-459.)
[6:1] I need hardly say that I myself hold the genuineness of the Greek recension. The reader who desires to see the false reasonings and groundless assumptions of the author of "Supernatural Religion" respecting the Ignatian epistles thoroughly exposed should read Professor Lightfoot's article in the "Contemporary Review" of February, 1875. In pages 341-345 of this article there is an examination of the nature and trustworthiness of the learning displayed in the footnotes of this pretentious book, which is particularly valuable. I am glad to see that the professor has modified, in this article, the expression of his former opinion that the excerpta called the Curetonian recension is to be regarded as the only genuine one. "Elsewhere," the professor writes (referring to an essay in his commentary on the Philippians), "I had acquiesced in the earlier opinion of Lipsius, who ascribed them ( i.e. , the Greek or Vossian recension) to an interpolator writing about A.D. 140. Now, however, I am obliged to confess that I have grave and increasing doubts whether, after all, they are not the genuine utterances of Ignatius himself."
[10:1] [Greek: Ou gar monon en Hell锚si dia S么kratous hypo logou 锚lenchth锚 tauta, alla kai en Barbarois hyp' autou tou Logou morph么thentos kai anthr么pou genomenou kai I锚sou Christou kl锚thentous.]
[10:2] Such is a perfectly allowable translation of [Greek: kai ton par' autou hyion elthonta kai didaxanta h锚mas tauta, kai ton t么n all么n hepomen么n kai exomoioumen么n agath么n angel么n straton, pneuma te to proph锚tikon sebometha kai proskynoumen.] As there is nothing approaching to angel worship in Justin, such a rendering seems absolutely necessary.
[15:1] "For the law promulgated in Horeb is now old, and belongs to you alone; but this is for all universally. Now law placed against law has abrogated that which is before it, and a covenant which comes after in like manner has put an end to the previous one; and an eternal and final law--namely, Christ--has been given to us." (Heb. viii. 6-13; Dial. ch. xi.)
[15:2] "For the true spiritual Israel and descendants of Judah, Jacob, Isaac, and Abraham (who in uncircumcision was approved of and blessed by God on account of his faith, and called the father of many nations) are we who have been led to God through this crucified Christ, as shall be demonstrated while we proceed." (Phil. iii. 3, compared with Romans, iv. 12-18; Dial. ch. xi.)
[17:1] This, of course, was a Jewish adversary's view of the Christian doctrine of the Godhead of Christ, which Justin elsewhere modifies by showing the subordination of the Son to the Father in all things.
[19:1] [Greek: En gar tois apomn锚moneumasi, ha ph锚mi hypo t么n apostol么n autou kai t么n ekeinois parakolouth锚sant么n syntetachthai, hoti hidr么s h么sei thromboi katecheito autou euchomenou.] (Dial. ch. ciii.)
[20:1] [Greek: Kai to eipein met么nomakenai auton Petron hena t么n apostol么n, kai gegraphthai en tois apomn锚moneumasin autou gegen锚menon kai touto, k.t.l.]
On this question the author of "Supernatural Religion" remarks, "According to the usual language of Justin, and upon strictly critical grounds, the [Greek: autou] in this passage must be ascribed to Peter; and Justin therefore seems to ascribe the Memoirs to that Apostle, and to speak consequently of a Gospel of Peter." (Vol. i. p. 417.)
[28:1] That of our Lord being born in a cave.
[29:1] [Greek: I么annou gar kathezomenou.]
[34:1] Justin has [Greek: hidr么s h么sei thromboi]; St. Luke, [Greek: ho hidr么s autou h么sei thromboi haimatos]. The author of "Supernatural Religion" lays great stress upon the omission of [Greek: haimatos], as indicating that Justin did not know anything about St. Luke; but we have to remember, first, that St. Luke alone mentions any sweat of our Lord in His agony; secondly, that the account in Justin is said to be taken from "Memoirs drawn up by Apostles and those who followed them ," St. Luke being only one of those who followed ; thirdly, Justin and St. Luke both use a very scarce word, [Greek: thromboi]; fourthly, Justin and St. Luke both qualify this word by [Greek: h么sei]. If we add to this the fact that [Greek: thromboi] seems naturally associated with blood in several authors, the probability seems almost to reach certainty, that Justin had St. Luke's account in his mind. The single omission is far more easy to be accounted for than the four coincidences.
[37:1] And He said unto them, "These are the words which I spake unto you while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms concerning me." (Luke xxiii. 44.)
[48:1] It is the reading of Codices B and C of the Codex Sinaiticus of the Syriac, and of a number of Fathers and Versions.
[51:1] [Greek: Hekastos gar tis apo merous tou spermatikou theiou logou to syngenes hor么n kal么s ephthenxato.]
[63:1] For instance, in vol. ii. p. 42, &c., he speaks of one of Tischendorf's assertions as "a conclusion the audacity of which can scarcely be exceeded."--Then, "This is, however, almost surpassed by the treatment of Canon Westcott."--Then, "The unwarranted inference of Tischendorf."--"There is no ground for Tischendorf's assumption."--"Tischendorf, the self-constituted modern Defensor Fidei, asserts with an assurance which can scarcely be characterized otherwise than as an unpardonable calculation upon the ignorance of his readers."--"Canon Westcott says, with an assurance which, considering the nature of the evidence, is singular."--"Even Dr. Westcott states," &c.--For Tertullian his contempt seems unbounded: indeed we way say the same of all the Fathers. Numberless times does he speak of their "uncritical spirit." The only person for whom he seems to have a respect is the heretic Marcion. Even rationalists, such as Credner and Ewald, are handled severely when they differ from him. The above are culled from a few pages.
[69:1] [Greek: Hoti Theos hypemeine genn锚th锚nai kai anthr么pos genesthai.]
[69:2] [Greek: Ex h么n diarrh锚d锚n outous autos ho staurotheis hoti Theos kai anthr么pos, kai stauroumenos kai apothn锚sk么n kek锚rygmenos apodeiknytai.]
[70:1] The reader must remember that Justin puts this expression, which seems to imply a duality of Godhead, into the mouth of an adversary. In other places, as I shall show, he very distinctly guards against such a notion, by asserting the true and proper Sonship of the Word and his perfect subordination to His Father. There is a passage precisely similar in ch. lv.
[71:1] "I continued: Moreover, I consider it necessary to repeat to you the words which narrate how He is both Angel and God and Lord, and Who appeared as a Man to Abraham." (Dial. ch. lviii.)
"Permit me, further, to show you from the Book of Exodus, how this same One, Who is both Angel, and God, and Lord, and Man." (Dial. ch. lix.)
"God begat before all creatures, a Beginning, a certain rational Power from Himself, Who is called by the Holy Spirit, now the Glory of the Lord, now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, then God, and then Lord and Logos." (Dial. ch. lxi.)
"The Word of Wisdom, Who is Himself this God, begotten of the Father of all things, and Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and the Glory of the Begetter, will bear evidence to me," &c. (Dial. lxi.)
"Therefore these words testify explicitly that He is witnessed to by Him Who established these things [ i.e. the Father] as deserving to be worshipped, as God and as Christ." (Dial. lxiii.)
The reader will find other declarations, most of which are equally explicit, in Dial. ch. lvi. (at the end), ch. lvii. (at the end), lxii. (middle), lxviii. (at middle and end), lxxiv. (middle), lxxv., lxxvi. (made Him known, being Christ, as God strong and to be worshipped), lxxxv. (twice called the Lord of Hosts), lxxxvii. (where Christ is declared to be pre-existent God), cxiii. (he [Joshua] was neither Christ, Who is God, nor the Son of God), cxv. (our Priest, Who is God, and Christ, the Son of God, the Father of all), cxxiv. (Now I have proved at length that Christ is called God), cxxv. (He ministered to the will of the Father, yet nevertheless is God), cxxvi. (thrice in this chapter), cxxvii., cxxviii., cxxix.
[73:1] I adopt this phrase because, it is used by Justin. His words are [Greek: arithm么 onta heteron]. (Dial. ch. lxii.)
[74:1] [Greek: Hoti arch锚n pro pant么n t么n ktismat么n ho Theos gegenn锚ke dynamin tina ex heautou logik锚n, k.t.l.]
[77:1] Dr. Pusey translates this passage thus:--"For all that the philosophers and legislators at any time declared or discovered aright, they accomplished according to their portion of discovery and contemplation of the Word; but as they did not know all the properties of the Word which is Christ," &c.
[77:2] Translated by Dr.
Free e-book: 芦The Lost Gospel and Its Contents by Michael F. Sadler (best e book reader android txt) 馃摃禄 - read online now on website american library books (americanlibrarybooks.com)
Add a comment
Comments (0)