a very serious difficulty. We know the character of the writers only from themselves; they relate much from hearsay; they continually mingle their own personal prejudices in their work; their testimony was not reduced to writing, so far as we know, till long after the event; we see that they were often mistaken, and did not always understand the words or actions of their teacher; that they contradict one another, and even themselves; that they mingle with their story puerile notions and tales which it is charitable to call absurd; that they do not write for a purely historical purpose, relating facts as they were, but with a doctrinal or controversial aim. Such testimony could not be received if found in Valerius Maximus and Livy, or offered in a court of justice when only a few dollars were at stake, without great caution.
Now the difficulty in this case is enormous. It has been felt from an early age. To get rid of the evil, it has been taught, and even believed, that the Evangelists and Apostles were miraculously inspired to such a degree that they could commit no mistake of any kind in this matter, and had none of the defects above hinted at. The assumption is purely gratuitous: there is not a fact on which to base it. The writers themselves never claim it. From the doctrine of inspiration as before laid down, it appears such infallibility is not possible; and from an examination of the facts of the case, it appears it was not actual: the Evangelists differ widely from the Apostles; the Synoptics[1] give us in Jesus a very different being from the Christ whom John describes, and all four make such contradictory statements on some points, as to show they were by no means infallibly inspired, for in that case not only the smallest contradiction would have been impossible, but, without concert, they must all have written exactly the same thing, yet John omits the most surprising facts, the Synoptics the most surprising doctrines.
What has been said is sufficient to show that we must proceed with great caution in accepting the statements of the Gospels. The most careless observer discovers inconsistencies, absurd narrations; finds actions attributed to Jesus, and words put in his mouth, which are directly at variance with his great principles, and the general tone
- ↑ Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
