It is long since Infidelity has found its advocates among the truly learned. Among the guesses and speculations of a small portion of unsanctified medical men, she still finds now and then a champion. Historians and philosophers have long since discussed her pretensions. And now from the Jurists and Lawyers, the practical masters of this kind of investigation, works are appearing, whereby not only an earnest reception of the Gospel is manifested, but the mode and means of action and of credit by which all human affairs are governed.
We lose in respect to our own investigations on this subject by its very sacredness. We have an idle dread, that it is not open to free investigation: to severe practical tests. We need to be invited, to be pressed to examine this subject freely. Dr. Chalmers in one department of this inquiry has led the way. Mr. Greenleaf in another has also presented an example. And it will not be competent, after these men have thus investigated and taught the rules and laws of investigation, for any man who is not willing to arrogate superior claims to learning and ability, to turn aside superciliously from an examination of the Gospels.
Such are our views of this work, which we commend to all: to the legal profession, from the character of its topics and the rank of its author: to men desirous of knowledge, in every rank in life, because of its presenting this subject under such a treatment as every-day practical questions are treated with. [pg v] It does not touch the intrinsic evidences of the Gospel: those which to the believer are, after all, the highest proofs. But it is to be remembered, that these are proofs which are not satisfactory until an examination of the outward evidences has led men to the conviction, that the Gospels cannot be false.
FROM THE “NORTH AMERICAN REVIEW.”
Professor Greenleaf on the Gospels, and Strauss' “Life of Jesus.”—Of course we place the titles of these two books together only by way of contrast. They relate, it is true, to the same general subject; but it is hard to conceive of two works more unlike in their scope, character, and purpose. The object of the one is to prove, and of the other to disprove, the Christian religion. The one is the production of an able and profound lawyer, a man who has grown grey in the halls of justice and the schools of jurisprudence,—a writer of the highest authority on legal subjects, whose life has been spent in weighing testimony and sifting evidence, and whose published opinions on the rules of evidence are received as authoritative in all the English and American tribunals,—for fourteen years the highly respected colleague of the late Mr. Justice Story, and now the honoured head of the most distinguished and prosperous school of English law in the world. The other is the work of a German professor and speculatist, also profoundly learned in his way,—an ingenious and erring framer of theories of the most striking character, almost unheard of till his brain either conceived them or gave them currency, though relating to topics with which men have been familiar for eighteen centuries,—a subtle controversialist, whose work, as he himself avows, is deeply tinged with the most strongly marked peculiarities of the philosophy and theology of his countrymen. We presume the most ardent admirer of Dr. Strauss will not object to our characterising the two works as excellent specimens, the one of clear and shrewd English common sense, the other of German erudition, laborious diligence, and fertility in original speculation. And if the subject of inquiry were one that involved his own temporal and immediate interests, and it were necessary to determine which of these two writers would give the wiser and safer counsel, or the more trustworthy opinion, we suppose the same person would agree with us in making the choice.
On the publishers announcing to Professor Greenleaf their wish to introduce his Harmony to the notice of the British Public, he with equal promptitude and kindness communicated to them some important additions to his Introduction, and also numerous valuable notes, more particularly adapted to the use of Theological Students. These are now printed for the first time: and at the suggestion of a very eminent and learned clergyman of the Established Church, the publishers have added in an Appendix an accurate and elegant translation of the late learned French Advocate, A. M. J. J. Dupin's Refutation of the eminent Jewish writer, Joseph Salvador's “Trial and [pg vi] Condemnation of Jesus,” executed by the late distinguished American Lawyer and Statesman, John Pickering, LL.D., Counsellor at Law, and President of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (sometime Secretary to the American Embassy in this country); who has most truly characterised M. Dupin's examination of Salvador, as being “conducted with an ability, learning, animation, and interest, that leave nothing to be desired.”
To The Members Of The Legal Profession.
Gentlemen,
The subject of the following work I hope will not be deemed so foreign to our professional pursuits, as to render it improper for me to dedicate it, as I now respectfully do, to you. If a close examination of the evidences of Christianity may be expected of one class of men more than another, it would seem incumbent on us, who make the law of evidence one of our peculiar studies. Our profession leads us to explore the mazes of falsehood, to detect its artifices, to pierce its thickest veils, to follow and expose its sophistries, to compare the statements of different witnesses with severity, to discover truth and separate it from error. Our fellow-men are well aware of this; and probably they act upon this knowledge more generally, and with a more profound repose, than we are in the habit of considering. The influence, too, of the legal profession upon the community is unquestionably great; conversant, as it daily is, with all classes and grades of men, in their domestic and social relations, and in all the affairs of life, from the cradle to the grave. This influence we are constantly exerting for good or ill; and hence, to refuse to acquaint ourselves with the evidences of the Christian religion, or to act as though, having fully examined, we lightly esteemed them, is to assume an appalling amount of responsibility.