Nor does it fubtract much from the value of the argument, that these two writings partly come within it, because we allow them to be the genuine writings of apostolical men. There is not the leaft evidence, that any other gofpel, than the four which we receive, was ever admitted to this diftinction.

SECT. VI.

Commentaries were anciently written upon the fcriptures; harmonies formed out of them; different copies carefully collated; and verfions made of them into different languages.

NO greater proof can be given of the esteem in which these books were holden by the ancient Chriftians, or of the sense then entertained of their value and importance, than the induftry bestowed upon them. And it ought to be obferved, that the value and importance of thefe books confifted entirely in their genuineness and truth. There was nothing in them as works of taste, or as compofitions, which could have induced any one to have written a note upon them. Moreover it fhows that they were even then confidered as ancient books. Men do not write comments upon publications of their own times: therefore the teftimonies cited under this head afford an evidence which carries up the evangelic writings much beyond the age of the testimonies themselves, and to that of their reputed authors.

I. Tatian, a follower of Juftin Martyr, and who flourished about the year 170, compofed a harmony, or collation of the gofpels, which he called Diatefaron of the four. The title, as well as the work, is remarkable; because it shows that then, as now, there were four, and only four gofpels, in general use with Christians. And this was little more than a hundred years after the publication of fome of them.

II. Pantænus, of the Alexandrian school, a man of great reputation and learning, who came twenty years after Tatian, wrote many commentaries upon the holy fcriptures, which, as Jerome teftifies, were extant in his time.

III. Clement of Alexandria wrote fhort explications of many books of the Old and New Teftament.

IV. Tertullian appeals from the authority of a later verfion then in ufe to the "authentic Greek."a

V. An anonymous author, quoted by Eufebius, and who appears to have written about the year 212, appeals to the ancient copies of the fcriptures, in refutation of fome corrupt readings alleged by the followers of Artemon. b

VI. The fame Eufebius, mentioning by name feveral writers of the church who lived at this time, and concerning whom he fays, there ftill remain divers monuments of the laudable industry of those ancient and ecclefiaftical men," (i. e. of Christian writers, who were confidered as ancient in the year 300) adds, “there are befides treatises of many others, whofe names we have not been able to learn, orthodox and ecclefiaftical men, as the interpretations of the divine fcriptures, given by each of them, fhow."c

VII. The five laft teftimonies may be referred to the year 200, immediately after which, a period of thirty years gives us, Julius Africanus, who wrote an epiftle upon the apparent difference in the genealogies in Matthew and Luke, which he endeavours to reconcile by the diftinction of natural and legal defcent, and conducts his hypothefis with great industry through the whole series of generations;d

Ammonius, a learned Alexandrian, who compofed, as Tatian had done, a harmony of the four gofpels; which proves, as Tatian's work did, that there were four gofpels, and no more, at this time in ufe in the church. It affords alfo an instance of the zeal of Chriftians for those writings, and of their folici tude about them ;e

And, above both thefe, Origen, who wrote commentaries, or homilies, upon most of the books included in the New Testament, and upon no other books but thefe. In particular, he wrote upon St. John's gofpel, very largely upon St. Matthew's, and commentaries, or homilies, upon the Acts of the apostles.f VIII. In addition to thefe, the third century likewise contains,

Dionyfius of Alexandria, a very learned man, who compared, with great accuracy, the accounts in the four gofpels of the time of Chrift's refurrection, adding a reflection which fhewed his opinion of their authority :-"Let us not think that the evan

a Ib. p. 638.
cb. vol. II. p. 551.
Ib. p. 122.

b Ib. vol. III. p. 46.

a Ib, vol. III. p. 170. f Ib. p. 352, 192, 202, 245,

gelifts difagree, or contradict each other, although there be fome fmall difference; but let us honeftly and faithfully endeavour to reconcile what we read."a

Victorin, bishop of Pettaw in Germany, who wrote comments upon St. Matthew's gofpel;b

Lucian, a prefbyter of Antioch, and Hefychius, an Egyptian. bishop, who put forth editions of the New Teftament.

IX. The fourth century fupplies a catalogue of fourteen. writers who expended their labours upon the books of the New Testament, and whose works or names are come down to our times; amongst which number, it may be fufficient, for the purpofe of fhowing the fentiments and the ftudies of learned Chriftians of that age, to notice the following:

Eufebius, in the very beginning of the century, wrote exprefsly upon the difcrepancies obfervable in the gofpels, and likewife a treatife, in which he pointed out what things are related by four, what by three, what by two and what by one evangelift. This author alfo teftifies, what is certainly a material piece of evidence, "that the writings of the apostles had obtained fuch an esteem, as to be tranflated into every language both of Greeks and Barbarians, and to be diligently studied by all nations."e This teftimony was given about the year 300; how long before that date these translations were made, does not appear.

Damafus, bishop of Rome, correfponded with St. Jerome upon the expofition of difficult texts of fcripture; and, in a letter ftill remaining, defires Jerome to give him a clear explanation of the word Hofanna, found in the New Teftament; "he (Damafus) having met with very different interpretations of it in the Greek and Latin commentaries of Catholic writers which he had read."f This laft clause shows the number and variety of commentaries then extant.

Gregory of Nyffen, at one time, appeals to the most exact copies of St. Mark's gofpel; at another time, compares together, and propofes to reconcile, the feveral accounts of the refurrection given by the four evangelifts; which limitation proves, that there were no other hiftories of Chrift deemed authentic befide thefe, or included in the fame character with thefe. This writer obferves, acutely enough, that the difpofition of the clothes in the fepulchre, the napkin that was about our Saviour's head not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself, did not bespeak the terror and hurry of thieves, and therefore refutes the ftory of the body being ftolen.a

Ambrofe, bishop of Milan, remarked various readings in the Latin copies of the New Tetament, and appeals to the original Greek;

And Jerome, towards the conclufion of this century, put forth an edition of the New Teftament in Latin, corrected, at lealt as to the gofpels, by Greek copies, "and thofe (he fays) ancient."

Laftly, Chryfoftom, it is well known, delivered and published a great many homilies, or fermons, upon the gofpels and the Acts of the apoftles.

It is needless to bring down this article lower; but it is of importance to add, that there is no example of Christian writers of the three first centuries compofing comments upon any other books than those which are found in the New Teftament, except the fingle one, of Clement of Alexandria commenting *pon a book called the Revelation of Peter.

Of the ancient verfions of the New Teftament one of the most valuable is the Syriac. Syriac was the language of Palestine when Christianity was there first established. And although the books of fcripture were written in Greek, for the purpose of a more extended circulation than within the precincts of Judea, yet it is probable that they would foon be tranflated into the vulgar language of the country where the religion first prevail. ed. Accordingly a Syriac tranflation is now extant, all along, fo far as appears, used by the inhabitants of Syria, bearing many internal marks of high antiquity, fupported in its pretenfions by the uniform tradition of the Eaft, and confirmed by the dif covery of many very ancient manufcripts in the libraries of Europe. It is about 200 years fince a bishop of Antioch fent a copy of this tranflation into Europe to be printed; and this

a Ib. p. 163.

feems to be the first time that the translation became generally known to these parts of the world. The bishop of Antioch's teftament was found to contain all our books, except the second epistle of Peter, the second and third of John, and the Revelation; which books however, have fince been discovered in that language in fome ancient manufcripts of Europe. But in this collection, no other book, befide what is in ours, appears ever to have had a place. And, which is very worthy of ob servation, the text, though preserved in a remote country, and without communication with ours, differs from ours very little, and in nothing that is important.

a

Our feriptures were received by ancient Chriflians of different feats and perfuafions, by many heretics as well as Catholics, and were ufually appealed to by both fides in the controverfies which arose in thofe days.

THE three most ancient topics of controverfy amongst Chrif tians were the authority of the Jewish inftitution, the origin of evil, and the nature of Chrift. Upon the first of these, we find in very early times, one clafs of heretics rejecting the old Teftament entirely, another contending for the obligation of its law, in all its parts, throughout its whole extent, and over every one who fought acceptance with God. Upon the two latter fubjects a natural, perhaps, and venial, but a fruitlefs, eager and impatient curiofity, prompted by the philofophy and by the fcholaftic habits of the age, which carried men much into bold hypothefes and conjectural folutions, raised amongst fome who profeffed Chriftianity very wild and unfounded opinions. I think there is no reafon to believe, that the number of thefe bore any confiderable proportiin to the body of the Chriftian church; and amidst the difputes, which fuch opinions neceffarily occafioned, it is a great fatisfaction to perceive, what in a vast plurality of instances we do perceive, all fides recurring to the fame fcriptures.

I. Bafilides lived near the age of the apoftles, about the

a Jones on the canon, vol. I. c. 14.

b The materials of the former part of this fection are taken from Dr. Lardner's history of the heretics of the two first centuries publifh