November 1928
654
T h e
K i n g ' s
B u s i n e s s
How full of strength I built my castle high, And hoped from off the heights great things to see, To scan both lower earth and higher sky, Find new fields to conquer waiting me. Now, Lord, must I put it all aside, .And, humbled, watch the busy throng go by? Must I sit waiting while the hurried tide Carries all beyond me, and not ask why? Help me to know just what is best; What hidden purpose hast Thou for me. Let me, O Lord, e’en in this rest, Find Something yet to do for thee. Hein me to be brave, by faith to walk, Though the path dark and hidden be; Hold fast my hand and with me walk Till I can, unquestioning, trust in Thee.
years have passed, and the writer has traveled far from that little city of Norwich in the Chenango Valley of New York State, yet he is. still meeting people who want to know if he is the son of Leroy J. Brooks, that godly doc tor whose Christlike life pointed them out the road to heaven. More and more may it be impressed upon us that all our good words amount to nothing for Christ unless they are backed up by good works. This is the mucilage needed in these days to make the Gospel stick. Gifted defenders of the Faith can never win the day with mere oratory and printer’s ink. He who lifts another’s load, soothes an other’s smart, brightens another’s darkness, puts music into another’s soul—in the name of Christ—he it is who puts “go” into “Gospel” and at the same time enters here on earth into his Master’s joy. Ä gfe éâ> '(& when its truth is established by competent and satis factory evidence. The rule of municipal law as to the genuineness of ancient writings is clear, undoubted, familiar, perfectly well established, and often applied in the courts. It is th is: Every document apparently ancient, com ing from the proper repository or custody and bearing on its face no marks of forgery, the law presumes to be gen uine, and casts upon the opposite party the burden' of proving it to be otherwise; and it may be read in evidehce unless the opposing party is able successfully to impeach it ( Greenleaf on Evidence, Sections 34,142, 570). The term “evidence” indeed was first applied to documents, and pot to oral testimony (2 Pollock and Mailand, Hist. Law 625.). This presumption resembles many other legal presump tions. For example: that a man is presumed innocent until he is proven guilty; and that everything has been done fairly and legally until it is proved otherwise.). The writings of the New Testament fall precisely within this rule. These writings are found in the cjisv tody of the church; that is, found in the place where; tjiey would naturally be looked for, and they are found;.in familiar use in every Christian community from the days of their composition. All the ancient manuscripts of the New Testament we now possess are written on parchment or vellum, and the number and antiquity of these manuscripts are surpris- ingly great, and far greater than in the case of the manu scripts of any of the celebrated and unquestioned writings, of classic antiquity or of any of the universally accepted law books and statutes of Rome or England. We have manuscripts nearer to' the lifetime of the apostles than we are to the lifetime of the Pilgrim Fathers, the writers of which could have known those who themselves knew the apostles. We have less than thirty of the manuscripts of PJaip and Herodotus, and none of them are one thousand years old. The Emperor Constantine directed fifty copies of the New Testament to be made and distributed, and there is less controversy in regard to the text of the New Testq-
Can one but breathe a note of praise at Thanksgiving time for the memory of a godly father? Twenty-eight
The Principles of Legal Evidence B y t h e L ate H on . A lfred R ussell , L.L . D. Detroit, Michigan
f ODERN unbelief seeks to overthrow the his- i torical c h a r a c t e r - o f the New Testament 7 records, and to treat them as mythological, as A Niebuhr t r e a t s the traditions concerning Sh Romulus and Remus. The events recorded occupy a period not longer than the lifetime of a man. The collection consists of twenty-seven independent documents, written by sev eral persons at different dates, as follows; Four biogra phies of Christ, twenty-one letters written by those engaged in the spread of the new religion, one church history, for a period of about fourteen years after the ascension. What I desire to show is, that the historical evidence of the life, teachings, miracles, death, resurrection and ascension of the founder of Christianity and of its first propagators, is of an authentic and satisfactory character, according to the principles of legal evidence administered in the courts of common law under our civil government. The inquiry under our rules of legal evidence in the courts, in trials of fact, is not whether it is possible that the testimony may be false, but whether there is sufficient probability that it is true. The foundation of our religion is a basis of fact. The existence and ministry of its Founder, His doctrines and miracles, His death, resur rection and ascension, are set forth by His biographers as facts, and in a great degree within their personal knowl edge. The ancient writings of the New Testament con tain the knowledge we have of these facts, and our inquiry divides itself into two parts. 1st. Are those ancient writings proved to be genuine, according to the principles of law applied where ancient documents are offered as evidence in our courts of law? 2nd. Are the authors of these writings (if the writ ings are received as genuine) entitled to belief as wit nesses if we examine their testimony as if it were pro duced in court ? G e n u in e n e s s of D ocument First, then, as to the genuineness of the documents: This is a proposition of fact; such a proposition is proved
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker