the attention of my readers; and, such being the case, I was desirous of saving this portion of my labors from the accidents to which a manuscript is exposed.

It is my purpose next to show the strong confirmation of the more direct historical evidence, afforded by the manner in which the Gospels were regarded by the early Gnostic heretics; a field which, though not untrodden, has been unexplored; and then, after endeavouring to remove some misapprehensions respecting the historical, to proceed to the collateral evidence for the genuineness of the Gospels. The larger portion of the manuscript of the remainder of the work has been written; but it is yet to be subjected to revision, and, after my past experience, it would be unwise for me to hazard a calculation respecting the time that may be required to prepare for the public the two volumes which will finish my design. Should life and health be granted me, I shall proceed as I have proposed; but it should be observed that this volume is, in its nature, an independent work, and might have been so published, had no others been intended to follow.

Cambridge, 19 February, 1837.

CONTENTS.

INTRODUCTION.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

. 1

What is meant by the genuineness of the Gospels, p. 1.

-Early testimony to their genuineness has been af-

firmed to be wanting, pp. 1-8.-Theory of Eichhorn

respecting the formation of the first three Gospels,

and of other gospels supposed to have been in use

before those now received, by successive additions of

transcribers to the text of an Original Gospel, pp. 9-

17. Remarks, pp. 17, 18.

PART I.

PROOF THAT THE GOSPELS REMAIN ESSENTIALLY

THE SAME AS THEY WERE ORIGINALLY COM-

POSED

CHAPTER I.

19

ARGUMENT FROM THE AGREEMENT OF THE RESPECTIVE

COPIES OF THE FOUR GOSPELS

21

The proposition, that the Gospels remain essentially the

b

same explained, p. 21, seq.—They have suffered, like

all other ancient writings, from the accidents of tran-

scription, p. 22. -Passages in the Received Text that

may be regarded as spurious or suspicious, pp. 23–27.

-Proof that the Gospels remain essentially the same

as they were originally composed from the agreement

among the present copies of them, pp. 27-35. - This

agreement not to be accounted for by supposing any

archetypes for our present copies of the Gospels other

than the original exemplars, pp. 35–42. — Argument

from the agreement among the copies of the Gospels

extant at the end of the second century, pp. 43–56.

CHAPTER II.

ARGUMENTS DRAWN FROM OTHER CONSIDERATIONS.

-

From the high value ascribed to the Gospels by the

Christians of the first two centuries, pp. 57– 67. —

From their strong censure of the mutilations and

changes which they charge some heretics, particularly

Marcion, with having made in the text of the Gospels,

pp. 67, 68. From the character of the various read-

ings in Origen's manuscripts of the Gospels, particularly

mentioned or referred to by him, pp. 68–76. — From

the notices of various readings in other ancient writ-

ers, p. 77. From the striking characteristics of the

respective Gospels being preserved throughout in all

of them, showing that each is essentially the work of

an individual author, pp. 78-82.- Particularly from

their being written throughout in Hebraistic Greek,

pp. 82-84.- From their not betraying marks of a

later age than that assigned for their composition, or

incongruities with the character and circumstances of

their supposed authors, pp. 84-86. From their con-

sistency in their representations of the character of

Christ, pp. 86-88.—Summary of preceding arguments,

pp. 88-90. Particular remarks on the Gospel of

Matthew, pp. 90-92.- Conclusion, pp. 92, 93.

CHAPTER III.

OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED

.

. 94

General remarks, pp. 94, 95.-The theory of the corrup-

tion of the Gospels as connected with that of an

Original Gospel from which the first three, in common

with many apocryphal gospels, were derived, remarked

upon, pp. 95-100.- Assertion of Eichhorn respecting

arbitrary alterations in manuscripts before the invention

of printing, p. 100.- Examination of a passage from

Celsus, pp. 101-104.- Of a passage from Clement of

Alexandria, pp. 104-107.- Conclusion, pp. 107, 108.

PART II.

HISTORICAL EVIDENCE THAT THE GOSPELS HAVE

BEEN ASCRIBED TO THEIR TRUE AUTHORS

CHAPTER I.

.

109

EVIDENCE FROM THE GENERAL RECEPTION OF THE

GOSPELS AS GENUINE AMONG CHRISTIANS DURING THE

LAST QUARTER OF THE SECOND CENTURY

The proposition that they were so received generally ad-

mitted, p. 111.- Evidence of it from Irenæus, pp. 112-

118.- From Theophilus, pp. 118, 119.- From Tertul-

lian, pp. 119-122.- From Clement of Alexandria,

pp. 122-124.- From Celsus, pp. 124-130.- From

Origen, pp. 130-133.- Remarks on this evidence.

111