reception of the Gospels is a proof that their history is true and consistent'; for, since the writing of the Gospels, many heresies have arisen, holding opinions contrary to what is contained in them, who yet receive the Gospels either entire or in part *" I am not moved by what may seem a deduction from Chrysostom's testimony, the words " entire or in part;" for if all the parts which ever were questioned in our Gospels, were given up, it would not affect the miraculous origin of the religion in the smallest degree: e. g.

Cerinthus is said by Epiphanius to have received the Gospel of Matthew, but not entire. What the omissions were, does not appear. The common opinion, that he rejected the first two chapters, seems to have been a mistaket. It is agreed, however, by all who have given any account of Cerinthus, that he taught that the Holy Ghost (whether he meant by that name a person or a power) descended upon Jesus at his baptism; that Jesus from this time

* Lardner, vol. x. p. 816.

Jb, vol. ix. ed. 1788, p. 322,

performed many miracles, and that he appeared after his death. He must have retained therefore the essential parts of the history.

Of all the ancient heretics, the most extraordinary was Marcion*. One of his tenets was the rejection of the Old Testament, as proceeding from an inferior and imperfect deity; and in pursuance of this hypothesis, he erased from the New, and that, as it should seem, without entering into any critical reasons, every passage which recognised the Jewish Scriptures. He spared not a text which contradicted his opinion. It is reasonable to believe

that Marcion treated books as he treated texts; yet this rash and wild controversialist published a recension, or chastised edition, of Saint Luke's Gospel, containing the leading facts, and all which is necessary to authenticate the religion. This example affords proof, that there were always some points, and those the main points, which neither wildness nor rashness, neither the fury of opposition, nor the intem

* Lardner, sect. ii. c. x. Also Michael, vol. i. c. i. sect. xviii,

perance of controversy, would venture to call in question. There is no reason to believe that Marcion, though full of resentment against the Catholic Christians, ever charged them with forging their books. "The Gospel of Saint Matthew, the Epistle to the Hebrews, with those of Saint Peter and Saint James, as well as the Old Testament in general," he said, were writings not for Christians but for Jews *" This declaration shews the ground upon which Marcion proceeded in his mutilation of the Scriptures, viz. his dislike of the passages or the books. Marcion flourished about the year 130.

Dr Lardner, in his General Review, sums up this head of evidence in the following words: "Noetus, Paul of Samosata, Sabellius, Marcellus, Phontinus, the Novatians, Donatists, Manicheans †, Priscillianists, beside Artemon, the Audians,

I have transcribed this sentence from Michaelis, (p. 38), who has not, however, referred to the authority upon which he attributes these words to Marcion.

+ This must be with an exception, however, of Faustus, who lived so late as the year 384.

the Arians, and divers others, all received most or all the same books of the New Testament which the Catholics received; and agreed in a like respect for them as written by apostles, or their disciples and companions *.

99

* Lardner, vol. xii. p. 12. Dr Lardner's future inquiries supplied him with many other instances.

SECTION EIGHTH.

The four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, thirteen Epistles of Saint Paul, the First Epistle of John, and the first of Peter, were received without doubt by those who doubted concerning the other books which are included in our present Canon.

I

STATE this proposition, because, if made out, it shews that the authenticity of their books was a subject amongst the early Christians of consideration and inquiry; and that, where there was cause of doubt, they did doubt; a circumstance which strengthens very much their testimony to such books as were received by them with full acquiescence.

I. Jerome, in his account of Caius, who was probably a presbyter of Rome, and who flourished near the year 200, records of him, that reckoning up only thirteen