The Holy Quran with Five Volume Commentary (Vol 1) — Page lxvii
GENERAL INTRODUCTION except for what the Scribes and Pharisees had themselves added to it. But the New Testament seeks to correct not only what the Scribes and Pharisees had invented but also what Moses and subsequent Prophets had taught in their time. This position is contradictory. One part of the New Testament teaches one thing, another part quite another. When a book contradicts itself, it cannot be the work of the same author, at any rate, of a sane author. The books of the New Testament are said to have been dictated by the disciples of Jesus, and we cannot say that the disciples were not sane. The great disciples of Prophets always possess a high degree of sanity. We must, therefore, conclude that the disciples did not dictate any such thing. They talked as they went about. Those who heard them passed on the substance of what they heard to others. When these others sat down to record what they had heard, they added many of their own thoughts. The result was the New Testament as we know it today, a bundle of contradictions. Testimony of Christian Scholars After citing the internal evidence on the confused character of the New Testament, we cite the testimony of Christian scholars: (i) In the commentary of the Bible by Horn (1882) we have that the facts relating to the composition of the Gospels, which have reached us from the ancient historians of the Church, are so uncertain and so slender that no definite conclusion can be drawn from them. Even the best authorities seem to accept as gospel truth the speculations current in their time, and, out of sheer reverence, those who come after accept their authority. The narratives, partly false and partly true, pass from one writer to another and after a time begin to be treated as though they were above criticism (Vol. 4, Pt. 2. chap. 2). (ii) In the same volume we have that the first Gospel seems to have been recorded in the year 37 or 38 or 41 or 43 or 48 or 61-62 or 64 A. D. ; the second at any time from 56 to 65 A. D. , probably between 60 and 63; the third in 53 or 63 or 64; and the fourth in 68 or 69 or 70 or 97 or 98 A. D. The evidence with regard to the Epistle to the Hebrews, the second Epistle of Peter and the second and third Epistles of John, the Epistle of James and the Epistle of Jude, the Revelation of St. John the divine and the first Epistle of John, is so confused that we had better not speak of it. These have been attributed to the disciples without any sound reasons. (iii) Eusebius in his History of the Church writes that the first Epistle of Peter is genuine. His second Epistle has never been part of the Holy Book, but has been current in reading (Vol. 3, chap. 3). xli