FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   542   543   544   545   546   547   548   549   550   551   552   553   554   555   556   557   558   559   560   561   562   563   564   565   566  
567   568   569   570   571   572   573   574   575   576   577   578   579   580   581   582   583   584   585   586   587   588   589   590   591   >>   >|  
ds of the clergy only."[463:2] Concerning the _time_ when the canon of the New Testament was settled, Mosheim says: "The opinions, or rather the _conjectures_, of the learned concerning the _time_ when the books of the New Testament were collected into one volume; as also about the authors of that collection, are extremely different. This important question is attended with great and almost insuperable difficulties to us in these later times."[463:3] The Rev. B. F. Westcott says: "It is impossible to point to any period as marking the date at which our present canon was determined. When it first appears, it is presented not as a novelty, but as an ancient tradition."[463:4] Dr. Lardner says: "Even so late as the middle of the _sixth century_, the canon of the New Testament had not been settled by any authority that was decisive and universally acknowledged, but Christian people were at liberty to judge for themselves concerning the genuineness of writings proposed to them as apostolical, and to determine according to evidence."[464:1] The learned Michaelis says: "No manuscript of the New Testament now extant is prior to the _sixth century_, and what is to be lamented, various readings which, as appears from the quotations of the Fathers, were in the text of the Greek Testament, are to be found in none of the manuscripts which are at present remaining."[464:2] And Bishop Marsh says: "It is a certain fact, that several readings in our common printed text are nothing more than _alterations_ made by Origen, whose authority was so great in the Christian Church (A. D. 230) that emendations which he proposed, though, as he himself acknowledged, they were supported by the evidence of no manuscript, were very generally received."[464:3] In his Ecclesiastical History, Eusebius gives us a list of what books at that time (A. D. 315) were considered canonical. They are as follows: "The four-fold writings of the Evangelists," "The Acts of the Apostles," "The Epistles of Peter," "after these the _first_ of John, and that of Peter," "_All these are received for undoubted._" "The Revelation of St. John, _some disavow_." "The books which are _gainsaid_, though well known unto many, are these: the Epistle of James, the Epistle of Jude, the _
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   542   543   544   545   546   547   548   549   550   551   552   553   554   555   556   557   558   559   560   561   562   563   564   565   566  
567   568   569   570   571   572   573   574   575   576   577   578   579   580   581   582   583   584   585   586   587   588   589   590   591   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Testament

 

settled

 
readings
 

century

 

Christian

 
authority
 

received

 

acknowledged

 

present

 

evidence


learned

 

manuscript

 
Epistle
 

proposed

 
writings
 
appears
 
Church
 

Origen

 

remaining

 

quotations


manuscripts

 

Fathers

 
Bishop
 

alterations

 

printed

 

common

 
undoubted
 

Revelation

 

Epistles

 

Apostles


Evangelists

 

disavow

 

gainsaid

 

generally

 

supported

 

emendations

 

Ecclesiastical

 
considered
 

canonical

 

History


Eusebius

 

universally

 
insuperable
 
attended
 

question

 

important

 

difficulties

 
Westcott
 

impossible

 

extremely