omplete agreement among the Church
Fathers; and that there never was any authoritative declaration on the
subject by any Church Council until the Council of Trent (Roman
Catholic) in 1545, which included in its canon all of our present
recognized books of both the Old and New Testaments, and in addition
thereto, included as canonical the Old Testament Apocrypha, which is
universally excluded from the Protestant Bibles.
As this work is designed, at least partly, to stimulate additional
study in others it may be well to cite a few examples, as I learned
them from this book, designed to prove conclusively the authenticity,
divine inspiration and infallible truth of the Holy Scriptures.
The canon of Muratori, about A.D. 160, omits Hebrews, both epistles of
Peter, James and Jude, as uncanonical, and expresses doubts as to the
Revelation.
The Peshito Syriac, about A.D. 200, omits Second Peter, Jude, Second
and Third John and Revelation.
The Latin Version Itala, about the middle of the second century, omits
James and Second Peter.
The Version of Clemens, about A.D. 202, omits Second Peter, James,
Second and Third John and Philemon.
That of Cyprian of Carthage, about A.D. 250, omits Hebrews, Second
Peter, Second and Third John, and Jude.
Eusebius, the great church historian, about A.D. 340, disputes the
authenticity of James, and omits Jude, Second Peter, second and Third
John, and doubts the Revelation. He also gives a list of "Spurious
writings" at that time, a number of which are still extant. (It was
years after this before I saw The Apocryphal New Testament.)
Ambrose of Milan, late in the fourth century, rejects Hebrews, Second
and Third John, Jude, James, and Philemon.
Chrysostom, of Antioch, about A.D. 400, omits Second Peter, Jude,
Second and Third John, and Revelation.
Jerome, about A.D. 420, rejects Hebrews, doubts James and Jude, and
attributes Second and Third John to John, a Presbyter of Ephesus, and
not the Apostle John.
I have only cited the names of those who _did not_ accept the present
canon. That many of the Church Fathers, perhaps a majority of them,
did accept it is not questioned. I have cited these instances--and not
near all our author gives--to show that opinion on this subject was by
no means unanimous in this early day; nor was all the intelligence,
ability and character on one side. I quote it also to show that the
teachings of my church concerning those books, that ther
|