suspected the authenticity of these books, or ever insinuated that Christians were mistaken in the authors to whom they ascribed them. Not one of them expressed an opinion upon this subject different from that which was holden by Christians. And when we consider how much it would have availed them to have cast a doubt upon this point, if they could; and how ready they showed themselves to be to take every advantage in their power; and that they were all men of learning and inquiry; their concession, or rather their suffrage, upon the subject, is extremely valuable.

In the case of Porphyry, it is made still stronger, by the consideration that he did in fact support himself by this species of objection when he saw any room for it, or when his acuteness could supply any pretence for alleging it. The prophecy of Daniel he attacked upon this very ground of spuriousness, insisting that it was written after the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, and maintains his charge of forgery by some far-fetched indeed, but very subtle criticisms. Concerning the writings of the New Testament, no trace of this suspicion is anywhere to be found in him.1

1 Michaelis' Introduction to the New Testament, vol. i. p. 43, Marsh's Translation.

THIS species of evidence comes later than the rest; as it was not natural that catalogues of any particular class of books should be put forth until Christian writings became numerous; or until some writings showed themselves, claiming titles which did not belong to them, and thereby rendering it necessary to separate books of authority from others. But, when it does appear, it is extremely satisfactory; the catalogues, though numerous, and made in countries at a wide distance from one another, differing very little, differing in nothing which is material, and all containing the four Gospels. To this last article there is no exception.

I. In the writings of Origen which remain, and in some extracts preserved by Eusebius, from works of his which are now lost, there are enumerations of the books of Scripture, in which the four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles are distinctly and honourably specified, and in which no books appear besides what are now

received. The reader, by this time, will easily recollect that the date of Origen's works is A.D. 230.

II. Athanasius, about a century afterwards, delivered a catalogue of the books of the New Testament in form, containing our Scriptures and no others; of which he says, "In these alone the doctrine of religion is taught: let no man add to them, or take anything from them."3

III. About twenty years after Athanasius, Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, set forth a catalogue of the books of Scripture, publicly read at that time in the Church of Jerusalem, exactly the same as ours, except that the "Revelation" is omitted.4

IV. And fifteen years after Cyril, the council of Laodicea delivered an authoritative catalogue of canonical Scripture, like Cyril's, the same as ours, with the omission of the "Revelation."

V. Catalogues now became frequent. Within thirty years after the last date, that is, from the year 363 to near the conclusion of the fourth century, we have catalogues by Epiphanius,5 by Gregory Nazianzen, by Philaster, bishop of Brescia in Italy,7 by Amphilochius, bishop of

2 Lardner, Cred., vol. iii. p. 234, &c.: vol. viii. p. 196. 9 Ibid., vol. viii. p. 223.

5 Ibid, p. 368.

Lardner, Cred., vol. ix. p. 373.

Ibid., p. 270.
Ibid., vol. ix. p. 132.

Iconium, all, as they are sometimes called, clean. catalogues (that is, they admit no books into the number besides what we now receive), and all, for every purpose of historic evidence, the same as ours.8

VI. Within the same period Jerome, the most learned Christian writer of his age, delivered a catalogue of the books of the New Testament, recognizing every book now received, with the intimation of a doubt concerning the Epistle to the Hebrews alone, and taking not the least notice of any book which is not now received.9

VII. Contemporary with Jerome, who lived in Palestine, was Saint Augustine, in Africa, who published likewise a catalogue, without joining to the Scriptures, as books of authority, any other ecclesiastical writer whatever, and without omitting one which we at this day acknowledge.1

VIII. And with these concurs another contemporary writer, Rufen, presbyter of Aquileia, whose catalogue, like theirs, is perfect and unmixed, and concludes with these remarkable words:" These are the volumes which the fathers have included in the canon, and out of

Epiphanius omits the Acts of the Apostles. This must have been an accidental mistake, either in him or in some copyist of his work; for he elsewhere expressly refers to this book, and ascribes it to Luke.

Lardner, Cred., vol. x. p. 77.

1 Ibid., p. 213.

which they would have us prove the doctrine of our faith.2

SECTION XI.

THESE PROPOSITIONS CANNOT BE PREDICATED OF ANY OF THOSE BOOKS WHICH ARE COMMONLY

APOCRYPHAL BOOKS OF THE

CALLED
TESTAMENT.

NEW

I Do not know that the objection taken from apocryphal writings is at present much relied upon by scholars; but there are many, who, hearing that various Gospels existed in ancient times under the names of the Apostles, may have taken up a notion, that the selection of our present Gospels from the rest was rather an arbitrary or accidental choice, than founded in any clear and certain cause of preference. To these it may be very useful to know the truth of the case. I observe, therefore,

I. That besides our Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, no Christian history, claiming to

2 Lardner, Cred., vol. x. p. 187.

A catalogue, still earlier than any of those mentioned by Paley, and ascribed to the second century, is contained in the fragment published by Muratori (Antiq. Ital. tom. iii. p. 854). What remains of it contains the Gospels of Saint Luke and Saint John, the Acts of the Apostles, thirteen of the Epistles of St. Paul, the Epistle of Saint Jude, the first and second of Saint John, and the Apocalypse.-EDITOR.