Page:The Collected Works of Theodore Parker Discourse volume 1.djvu/282

Rh unquestionable genuineness, and others whose spurious character is almost demonstrated. Modern criticism and ancient authority seem to decide that the Epistle to the Hebrews is not the work of Paul, but of some unknown author; that the second Epistle of Peter is not from that apostle, but from one who, as Scaliger said, “abused his leisure time;” the second and third of John, the Epistles of James and Jude, are not from the apostolic persons whose names they bear; and that the book of the Revelation is not the work of John the Evangelist. Serious objections have been brought against some other epistles, many of which appear to be well founded, and against some of the Evangelists alluded to already.

Then if the above remarks be correct, there are seven works in the New Testament whose claim to apostolical authority was anciently doubted with good reason. These disputed writings may be neglected in the present examination. If the other writings, whose claim to an apostolic origin is supposed to be stronger, are not found miraculous and infallible, still less shall be expected of these. The rest of the New Testament may be divided into the epistolary and the historical writings.

These are the oldest Christian documents; the works of Paul, Peter, and John, the most illustrious of the early disciples, the “chiefest apostles,” and most instrumental in founding the Christian church. If any of the early Christians received miraculous inspiration, it must be the apostles; if any of the apostles, it must be one, or all, of these three. To determine their claims, the works of the three may be examined together, for the sake of brevity.

Now at the first view of these fifteen epistles, it does not appear that any miraculous inspiration was required to write these more than the letters of St Cyprian or Fenelon. They contain nothing above the reach of human faculties,