The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-12-09

p,onso service TO the Christian Church'
IL il well known that certain WRITINGS
81 distinguished men, who were Lot Apo9
Ties and did not claim 70 be inspired VIZ
publicly read in the early chudcne''
Among these were Clement OF h"hi''
Itermas and others These writings were
soparated from those Of the Apostles pe
fora our New Testament collec'loh W.
made II this had not been done IL ihlsn,
be difficult. nay impossible, FOR Us 10 lei'
today which books are OF Apostolic "u-
thorlty. 40 ,.,o,s
In making mp the collections some o1oAS
were found. about whose inspired au'"o'
ity there was no question. Ahons ~.
were the -Four Gospels, Acts t'oi'i'lis'
FIRST and Second Corinthians Galatians
Enheslans philippians. Colossidns, FIRST
and Second Thessalonians. First ana SIC
ond Timothy. Titus. Philemon, First Jonh
ord Eirst peter. In this list we nnd the
works NJ two evangelsts who were not Oh
the Apostolic College, that Is, not OF Inc
Twelve" But these two writer's were
known TO have been Apostolic assistants
and according 20 the unanimous tesu.
monv OF the earliest Christian fathers
Mark wrote under the direction OF Peter
and Luke under that OF PAU.
However this may be, theie u ho
sound reason for doubling the eenuile
ness nor the inspired authority OF elther
Mark or Luke. We know that tney W.
18th assistants OF Paul in his missionary
,o,,r. snd n there had not been abundant
Guidance Of their authority, the slhs''
,,ct that they were not OF the tweiNe
,.o,,,d almost certainly have excluuou
tbeir writings from the canon Tor We
| l,nnw that the earliest collections WIZ
made with caution. and that the claims OF
| the several books were canVasseu P"''S
| freely -. ,orverse
mind 20 ind objections 70 the dccepta'lec
| of those writer's as authorizes III 'ps ~
| religious. But such objections heeu ~
| disturb US: for such minds can an. ~
! end what they call reasons for ques''O"
ing the authority of Christ nimseH'
JESUS MADE FLOWS.
II is possible FOR the advanced cri'los
10 say-and, indeed, some OF theih W No.
| hesitate TO say-that jesus nou ~ lit
| ,,ortunftv TO become acquainted WIN
ri,,,ar ,ba processes or the results or
modern science; and 10 certain class OF
| minds this view IS not without pldusl-
| hiIitv Justin Martyr, the earliest OF 'he
| ohuroh fathers after the apos'ohc age
| horn to5 A d., says that Jesus mace
Nous Nobody imagines mat nc a"'s'-
noted the modern improvements III use
,nannfaeture OF this implement; ne tilaus !,
| the NOV of the period. Why then shouIo
90 credit him with a knowledge OF DID
| lical criticism. a science which - essen
| tiaiIv modern? But when we ma tne
| Ne stsr saving Of Moses. He wrote OK
me-. when we find Him quoting Deu-
teronony and calling 1t Scripture qnouhs
| Genesis and calling it the Word OF Goa
quoting the prophecies Of Isaiah ana say
,ro that they are fulfilled in NM the
chrlst-then 1t cannot be denied mat
Jesus does profess TO know wha1 RE -
| talking about: and unless He was capable
| ~ protesting to be familiar with maI'e.s
~ which He was really and profoundiy
icuorant. then this dilemma - inevitanle
| He was right in ;hesa statements o'
else He Is no sort Of authority ~ DID,
| l,cal Interpretation and His enemies were
| right in saying. ale deceiveth nc peo-
ME" The las horn OF the dilemma IL me
| ono upon which the inexorable logic OF inc
| case has driven the most advanced OF
| the critics. and sharp horn IL Is. In
| our day we have scant respect Tor the
| preacher who authoritatively expounda
texts Of whose meaning hA Is rnasnsatly