"In the next passage to be here taken, Tertullian asserts against Marcion the genuineness and integrity of the copies of St. Luke's gospel, owned by himself, and by Christians in general. For this he appeals to divers apostolical churches. He asserts, at the same time, the truth of the other three gospels, and that Christians had the fullest persuasion of the genuineness and authority of the gospels which they had received, upon the ground of a very sure and credible testimony of the churches from the time of writing them to his own age. In a word,' says he, if it be certain that is most genuine which is most ancient, that most ancient which is from the beginning, and that from the beginning which is from the apostles, in like manner it will be also certain, that has been delivered from the apostles which is held sacred in the churches of the apostles. Let us, then, see what milk the Corinthians received from Paul, to what rule the Galatians were reduced, what the Philippians read, what the Thessalonians, the Ephesians, and, likewise, what the Romans recite, who are near to us, with whom both Peter and Paul left the gospel sealed with their blood. We have, also, churches which are the disciples of John; for, though Marcion rejects his Revelation, the succession of bishops traced up to the beginning will show it to have John for its author. We know, also, the original of other churches, [that is, that they are apostolical.] I say then that with them, but not with them only which are apostolical, but with all who have fellowship with them in the same faith, is that gospel of Luke received from its first publication, which we so zealously maintain :' —that is, the genuine entire gos

pel of Luke, not that which had been curtailed and altered by Marcion. He adds presently afterwards,-The same authority of the apostolical churches will support the other gospels, which we have from them, and according to them, [that is, according to their copies:] I mean, John's, and Matthew's, although that likewise which Mark published may be said to be Peter's, whose interpreter Mark was. For, Luke's digest, also, is often ascribed to Paul. And, indeed, it is easy to take that for the master's which the disciples have published.'

As the two genealogies of Christ given by Matthew and Luke have been from an early period a source of doubt and difficulty, it may not be superfluous

to remark that the former is distinctly quoted by Tertullian, in the following terms:-" Matthew, the most faithful historian of the gospel, as being a companion of the Lord, for no other reason than that we might be informed of the origin of Christ according to the flesh, began in this manner; The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.'*-A still stronger testimony on this subject is furnished by Julius Africanus, a contemporary, and, perhaps, a fellowcountryman of Tertullian, reported by Jerome to have flourished during the reign of the emperor Heliogabalus, that is, between the years 218 and 222. This very eminent and learned man seems to have chiefly resided in Palestine, where he, probably, became bishop of Emmaus near Tiberias, which, at his intercession in an embassy sent to Rome for the purpose, was about that time rebuilt under the

• Lardner's Credibility, Vol. II. pp. 256-258, 261.

name of Nicopolis. In a letter to Aristides, he endeavours to reconcile the two genealogies by an account which, he affirms, "was given by some who were kinsmen of our Lord according to the flesh," and represents the pedigree recorded by Matthew as the natural, and that by Luke as the legal line. In explaining this view he remarks," Thus, we have found Jacob and Eli, though of different families, brothers by the same mother; one of whom, Jacob, his brother Eli having died without issue, took his wife, and begat of her the third, Joseph, according to nature and reason his own son, wherefore also it is written, And Jacob begat Joseph,' but, according to law, he was the son of Eli, for Jacob, being his brother, raised up seed unto him. For which reason, neither is that genealogy destitute of authority which the evangelist Matthew rehearses thus, And Jacob begat Joseph.' On the other hand, Luke, being, as was supposed,' for he adds this withal, the son of Joseph, who was the son of Eli, who was the son of Melchi.' He could not more plainly and properly express that kind of descent which is according to law."-" Whatever," observes Dr. Lardner, "becomes of this method of reconciling the two evangelists, here is a very valuable testimony to their gos pels, and, in particular, a cogent argument for the genuineness of the beginning of St. Matthew's." -In quoting another statement of Julius Africanus, that "all the books of the Old Testament were written in Hebrew, and from thence were translated into Greek," he judiciously remarks that it implies "there was a collection of books called the New Testament, for which he had the like respect with that paid to the

After Julius Africanus, there is no father of the church who can with probability be supposed to have had personal intercourse with apostolical Christians; and the statements respecting the evangelists given by the three following distinguished authors, who succeeded each other at intervals of seventy or eighty years, are, therefore, here adduced, not so much on their own account, as because, owing to their extraordinary erudition and high authority, they may reasonably be regarded as having collected all previons reports of any value, and as having stated those views of the subject which, after the fullest inquiry, and the most mature consideration, were finally entertained by the great body of the Christian church.

Origen was born in Egypt, perhaps in Alexandria, in the year 184, or 185. His father Leonides, who suffered martyrdom in 202, admired his genius, and gave him an excellent education under the most esteemed masters, among whom were Clement of Alexandria, and Ammonius Saccas. On the death of Leonides his family was reduced to poverty, and Origen was compelled to sell his library, and to engage in teaching for support. Such was his early proficiency in biblical knowledge, that, at the age of eighteen, he was appointed president of the catechetical school, and soon attained great celebrity. After some years, he removed to Cæsarea in Palestine, where he became a presbyter, and passed much of the remainder of his life, but travelled

• Lardner's Credibility, Vol. II. pp 431, 432, 436–440,

at intervals in Italy, Greece, Arabia, Asia Minor, &c.; and, at length, died and was buried at Tyre, in the seventieth year of his age. Throughout life he devoted his chief attention to the study and illustration of the scriptures, which he perused and published in their original languages, and in various versions. His learning and industry were unrivalled, his notoriety and influence most extensive, and his works so numerous that it has been said no one could read them all, and that it required a separate work to describe them. The following is the account of the evangelists given by this distinguished man.- "In Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History," says Dr. Lardner, "is a chapter with this title, How Origen mentions the scriptures of both testaments."

... After reciting Origen's catalogue of the scriptures of the Old Testament, Eusebius proceeds,

But, in the first book of his commentaries on the gospel of Matthew, [Origen,] observing the ecclesiastical canon, declares that he knew only four gospels, expressing himself thus:-"As I have learned by tradition concerning the four gospels, which alone are received without dispute by the whole church of God under heaven. The first was written by Matthew, once a publican, afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, who delivered it to the Jewish believers, composed in the Hebrew language. The second is that according to Mark, who wrote it as Peter dictated it to him, who, therefore, also calls him his son, in his catholic epistle, 1 Peter, v. 13; saying, 'The church which is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you, and so doth Mark my son.' The third is that according to Luke, the gospel commended by Paul, published

for the sake of the Gentile converts. Romans, xvi. 25; 2 Tim. ii. 8. Lastly, that according to John. ... But, why need I speak of John, who leaned upon the breast of Jesus, who has left us one gospel, professing at the same time that he was able to write more than even the world itself could contain?" John, xxi. 20, 25.

That the four gospels here described were alone possessed of canonical authority is thus strongly asserted by Origen, in his observations on the preface of Luke :"As, of old, among the Jewish people, many pretended to the gift of prophecy, and there were some false prophets, one of whom was Ananias son of Agor, but others were prophets, and there was among the people the gift of discerning spirits, by which some were owned as prophets, others were rejected, as it were by skilful money-changers, so also now, under the New Testament, many took in hand to write gospels, but all have not been received. And that, not four gospels only, but very many were written, out of which those we have were chosen, and delivered to the churches, we may perceive even from Luke's preface, which is thus: Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration.' Luke i. 1. His expression of their

taking in hand' contains a tacit accusation of those who, without the gift of the Holy Spirit, took upon them to write gospels; for Matthew, and Mark, and John, and Luke, did not take in hand to write, but, being full of the Holy Ghost, wrote gospels. Many, therefore, took in hand to set forth in order a narration of those things

which are most surely known among us. The churches have four gospels, heresies have very many, of which one is en