and unto the Greeks foolishness; but unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, the Messiah, the power of God and the wisdom of God'*. That is to say, the Jews expected the Messiah to manifest himself in a manner that should be a conclusive proof of his really being the Anointed King, the true successor of his ancestor David; and to these, as the Apostle truly said, a crucified, or suffering, Messiah, like Jesus, was a stumbling-block in the way of their belief, inasmuch as he did not fulfil their expectation, which their learned co-religionist explained to them was an erroneous one. On the other hand, as regards the Gentiles, who could not be expected to know, or to care, much if any thing at all about Jesus merely as the descendant and successor of David, the notion of a king without a kingdom, one who was not and never had been a king in their estimation, was simply foolishness-an absurdity. But, explains the spiritually instructed disciple of Gamaliel, to them which are called 'αύτοις τοις κλητοιs, who are members of his 'Εκκλησια, Ecclesia or Congregation ('Church')- both Jews and Gentiles,' Jesus is the Messiah, the power of God and the wisdom of God,' he in whom is fulfilled the promise made to his forefather Abraham, in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.'

6

To the early Christians the Kingdom of God on earth under the spiritual rule of the Messiah was a mystery, as, indeed, it has continued to be to most believers down to the present day; and therefore it is not surprising that many of them should have looked for the speedy return of their Lord on earth to judge the world. It was not, and still is not, borne in mind that, in the the sight of the Eternal, a thousand years are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night'†; or, as in the Second Epistle bearing the name of St. Peter it had to be explained to those who were impatient for the second coming of the Messiah, 'Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning His pro* 1 Cor. i. 22-24. + Ps. xc. 4.

mise, as some men count slackness; but is long-suffering to usward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance' *. And when we regard the extension of the Messiah's kingdom on earth at the present day, when we witness the countless millions who have been taught to call on the name of Jesus during the two thousand years-with the Lord but two days-which have not yet fully elapsed since the Messiah began his reign; and when we further reflect on the progress which the preaching of the Gospel is making among the greater multitudes in the further East, who have only now begun to listen to its joyful tidings; we may faithfully believe that, when the third day or millennium shall dawn, every tongue will learn to acknowledge the sovereignty of the Messiah, and to repeat the words taught us by himself, Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven.'

CHAPTER III.

THE SOURCES OF THE HISTORY OF JESUS.

To those persons who believe that the Holy Scriptures contain the Word of God, to those, indeed, who accept the historical portions of the Bible as veracious records, the New Testament in itself affords sufficient evidence of the existence on earth of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of the truth of the principal occurrences of his life.

There are, however, many persons who assert, apparently not without reason, that the Gospel histories were not written at the early dates usually assigned to them, and that consequently they are not valid evidence as to the truth of the events which they narrate; whilst others contend that the opinion that Jesus was any thing more than an ordinary mortal is the invention of a

* 2 Pet. iii. 8-9.

subsequent period; and some go even so far as to doubt, if not absolutely to deny, his personal individuality.

The most effectual way of meeting such arguments is to adduce evidence which is not open to similar objections.

It will be assumed that the raisers of such objections do not contend that all history of every kind is false or fabulous. They have a reasonable faith in the Greek and Roman historians; and though demurring to the truth of their accounts of the origin and early history of their respective nations, these critics do not hesitate to believe in the events alleged to have occurred at or about the times when the narrators of those events themselves lived. No objection, then, will be raised against such writers as Suetonius, Tacitus, and the younger Pliny, when describing events which notoriously occurred in and about their own times. These three writers (as is well known) flourished in the latter half of the first and the beginning of the second century of the Christian era, and they all record matters relating to the early professors of Christianity and to the founder of that religion, in respect of which they must be accepted as trustworthy witnesses; inasmuch as they none of them were members of the new faith or favourers of it, whilst they possessed only such general, superficial, and, in part, erroneous notions of the matters to which they allude, as to establish convincingly that their statements were made spontaneously and without any interested motive or ulterior object.

The first of these writers, Suetonius, who flourished about forty years after the Crucifixion of Jesus, states that the Emperor Claudius banished from Rome all the Jews, who were continually making disturbances at the instigation of one Chrēstus' *.

Next Tacitus, who flourished some thirty years later, narrates how the Emperor Nero, in order to free himself from the obloquy of having ordered the conflagration of Rome, falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with the most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, so the founder was named, was put to death as a criminal by Pontius Pilate, Procurator of Judæa, in *Lives of the Cæsars,' Claud. xxv.

C

the reign of Tiberins; but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time, broke out again, not only throughout Judæa, where the mischief originated, but in the city of Rome also, whither all things horrible and disgraceful flow from all quarters as to a common receptacle, and where they are encouraged. Accordingly, first those were seized who confessed they were Christians; next, on their information, a vast multitude were convicted, not so much on the charge of burning the city, as of hating the human race' *.

The letter of Pliny, Proconsul of Bithynia, to the Emperor Trajan, written A.D. 100, respecting the persecution of the Christians within his province, is so well known that it is not necessary to make from it more than the following extract:— 'Some among those who were accused by a witness in person, at first confessed themselves Christians, but immediately afterwards denied it; the rest owned, indeed, they had been of that number formerly, but had now (some above three, others more, and a few above twenty years ago) renounced their error. They all worshipped your statue and the images of the gods, uttering imprecations at the same time against the name of Christ. They affirmed the whole of their guilt, or their error, to be that they met on a certain stated day before it was light, and addressed themselves in a form of prayer to Christ, or to some God, binding themselves by a solemn oath, not for the purposes of any wicked design, but never to commit any fraud, theft, or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then to reassemble to eat in common a harmless meal'†. The Roman Governor further bears testimony to the great number of Christians in Bithynia, consisting of persons of all ranks and ages, and of both sexes. In fact,' says he, this contagious superstition is not confined to the cities only, but has spread infection among the neighbouring villages and country.'

From these statements the following facts appear to be incontrovertibly established:-First, that in the reign of the Emperor * 'Annals,' xv. 44. + Letters,' x. 97.

Tiberius, extending from A.D. 25 to A.D. 41,-the accepted date is A.D. 30, which by no possibility can be far wrong,—a certain Jew, known as Christus' or 'Chrestus,' was executed as a criminal by Pontius Pilate, the Roman Governor of Judæa; secondly, that in the reign of Claudius, which extended from A.D. 41 to A.D. 54-taking the mean, it may be said to be about A.D. 48, or less than twenty years after the death of this Jew,' Christus,'—his co-religionists were banished from Rome because they were continually making disturbances, as was alleged, at his instigation; thirdly, that less than twenty years later, at the time of the conflagration of Rome, A.D. 64,-consequently six years before the fall of Jerusalem, the followers of this Christus' were no longer looked on as Jews, but were known in Rome as Christians,' and had become of such importance as to be objects of suspicion, if not of dread, to the Emperor Nero, on account of their alleged atrocities, pernicious superstitions, and hatred of the human race; and lastly, that these 'contagious superstitions' of the Christians spread so rapidly over the whole Roman empire, that at the close of the first century they were subjected to a general persecution.

The testimony on which these facts are established is beyond the reach of cavil or objection. Not one of the three heathen writers speaks of the Jewish ringleader under his proper name Jesus, nor does any one of them appear to have the remotest idea that what they imagine to be the proper name of this 'instigator' of the Jews is in truth his peculiar title of the Messiah, or Anointed King of Israel, under its Greek form Xpɩotos! This highly significant fact will be commented on in a subsequent chapter*: it is here sufficient to direct attention to its great importance.

Turning, now, to the consideration of the authenticity of the Scriptures of the New Testament, we find that whatever doubts may exist with respect to the composition of the four Gospels and several other of the canonical writings, there is none whatever as regards four (at least) of the Epistles of the Apostle *See Chapter V. page 61.