New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1871-03-07
REMAINS LIFE OF JESUS.
DIR. M'CosH ON ITS FALLACIEs.


his course upon Natural Theology and Apologetles
at the Madison-square Presbyterian Church before
a large audience last evening The points have
been discussing in my previous lectures, said he.
have bearing on both natural and re-
yealed religion. II tho soul OF be
material. is not easy 10 how rise TO the
idea Of an immateria God. Ijon heartily with all those
who endeayor 10 establish the fundamental truths Of
natural religion and my hope that the Untarans and
others Of similar belief will Join me in making these
truths clear But with special object before this
evening, cannot enter on the wide subject Of the evil
evidences turns around the life Of Christ, and an
ingenious attempt has been made 10 disprove it, But
are two and only two, in which s reality can be
entirely fabulous mingled Of fact and fiction that
the truth cannot he dcened This is the method used
BY Gr0te In dealing with the siege of Troy There have
been assaiaDts who took this ground in attempting TO
undermine confidence n the Gospels. but they gnO
minOusly failed Our Lord lived IN historical. NOT fau
lous times, and the Gospels are simple artoss, aud lie
If we maintain that the career OF our Lord "a not an
historical event. shall have 10 give up all the facts of
the Great, aud Z Julius Caesar Renan saw this d.
lomma and avoided it by following another method,
which In turn plunged him into difficulties peculiar to
that Jesus lived and died recorded, hut he accepts
some OF the facts alleged and rejects others.
Of disadvantages that he objects 10 the use
OF the weapons employ but in the case ot NJ Renan,
him with those which he himself uses.
II to affirm that Shakespeare wrote the hlstor
cal dramas but not the philosophc Hamlet" We
should reply that have as good proof Of authorship
the in the other and that besides there
internal evidence that the great poet wrote the latter
tragedy. In the way 1t may be argued regarding
the authorship OF the Gospels.
But what does Renan admit He admits that
Matthew wrote Gospel and Was an eye and ear VIII
Of the events he naraes. He grants that the par
abes could not have been altered and that thus have
them ss they were delivered. lie admits That Marx,
relative Of Peter wrote Gospel that neither Matthew
Mark men Of genius; and that both Gospels
written less than 40 years after the crucnNOn OF
Christ. But he asserts that they underwent change
from persons nerpoGiing facts in the margin II this
variations; whereas we find the two Gospels
in their present FORM 50 far back ga the second century
those OF Matthew aud Mark. He admits that he prOba
bly, obtained his information from eye-witnesses, but
viii not allow that he wrote before the destruction OF
Jerusalem, IS that would verify the prediction OF
tie event by Lord. Renan also accuses
HIM Of copying traditions, but at that carry
day when tho actors in the events described
were s living there could he no traditions any more
ing the career Of Henry Clay other recently
deceased Renan does not know what TO DO win JOhs
Gospel though lie is certain that John its author,
and that he very intimate with our Lord. He main
tans that portions OF the 2lst chapter were added by
coemporary but there IL internal evidence which proves
the contrary.
nOrast in tho second no Il brought into contact with
emBtered thus Is constructed one OF the most base
ess OF historical theories put forth. In the fret
10 be very engaging light. He was
OF ravshng form and comelinoss that attracted all,
he be9ns TO be refofmer and preacher OF higher
morality. surrounded by his disciples he traYerses
Galee in the midst Of perpetual Jtte Our Lord and
His followers also described admirne the beautiful
scenery Of the country they passed through the former
seated on
50 far Keenan, In reply the speaker asserted that no
early Christian writer described the person OF Christ aud
that instead Of riding, occasion specially
corded, lie Invariably walked that however much the
Savior may have admired the beauties of nature, his
disciples were not men likely 20 he affected by them
nor was 10 probable that Peter and John went into
rhapsCdies Ike OardingschOOl girls OF the nine
teenth century. But how could the mere carpen-
tcTs have pronounced the sublime Sermon on
the Mount Although Jesus was from the beginning
Inoralist he was from the first than lnOralisf
The speaker then considered the Sermon In detail ana
found opposed ia toto 10 the romantic theory OF Renan
He then took up critics second period arguing that
it quite visionary his theory OF the hrst as
shown by reference TO passages which Renan HIM
self admitted 10 DE credible
The third period, in which Renan charged our Lord
with deception the raising OF Lazarus, Dr. McCo-h
approached with great aversion The savior, according
Keenan, had found that his ideas could not be reazed
und hurried 10 his death as % sacrifice tlat could
not be avoided. In reply IL shown that Jesus dd
not commence 70 work miracles IN this tbifd
period, as IL proved 10y the statements or
Matthew and Mark. II Jesus was the pure inOralat
that Renan represents Him 10 be in His hrs period ne
could not have become party To deception III the
tory Instead of being embittered toward the close OF
His career, Our Lord became more faithful III ms
warnings and many OF have felt that the prospect 81
HI. death adds O pathOs 10 his heart-utteTances.
Dr. McCosh here announced that in his next lecture ne
would scuss the subject from positive standpoint,
and devote the concluding essay OF the course 0 con-
sldeTatiOn Of the evidences of Christianity