CHAP. IV.

A fummary Recapitulation of the Evidences mentioned above.

I WILL now reduce into order the depofitions of the witneffes, who have been already separately examined, and enable the reader to perceive at one view what has been the opinion of men during the two first centuries and half on each individual book of the New Teftament.

1. The Gospel by St. Matthew IS pronounced to be a genuine work of the Evangelift whofe name it bears, 1. by Papias, 87*; 2. by many ancient writers of the first century, confulted

*The figures after the names of the different witnesses enumerated in this chapter, refer to the pages. of this work, where their evidences may be found.

by

by Eufebius, 89; 3. by Justin Martyr, 105; 4. Tatian, 136; 5. Irenæus, 110; 6. Athenagoras, 117; 7. Theophilus of Antioch, 123; 8. Clement of Alexandria, 125; 9. Tertullian, 132; 10. Ammonius 153; 11. Julius Africanus, 154; 11. Origen, 155; and by all the primitive writers, without exception, whom Eufebius had read, 169.

And this may be inferred alfo, yet only with a degree of probability, from the writings of Barnabas, 37; Clement of Rome, 53; Ignatius, 78; and Polycarp, 81".

u Lardner has collected together the evidences of the later witneffes in his Supplement to the first book of the fecond part of the Gofpel Hiftory, vol. i. p. 95 -102. of the first edition.-He has treated of them more copiously in the work which has been fo often mentioned, his Credibility of the Gofpel Hiftory.In the Supplement he has generally confined himself to those witneffes who determine alfo the time when the different books of Holy Writ were compofed. The reader will therefore find, more witneffes enumerated in my Catalogue than in his.

II. The

II. The Gospel by St. Mark

IS declared to be a genuine writing of the Evangelift, to whom it is afcribed, by 1. Papias, 87; 2. many ancient writers of the firft century, confulted by Eufebius, 89; 3. Justin Martyr, 105; 4. Tatian, 136; 5. Irenæus, 110; 6. Clement of Alexandria, 125; 7. Tertullian, 132; 8. Ammonius, 153; 9. Origen, 155; and by all the ancients whom Eufebius had read, 169.

Clement of Rome, 53; and Ignatius, 78, were, probably, of the fame opinion".

III. The Gospel and Acts of the Apoftles by St. Luke,

ARE adopted as the undeniable works of St. Luke, the companion and difciple of St. Paul, by, 1. the ancient writers of the first century, confulted

w For the later witneffes, fee Lardner's Supplement, vol. i. p. 173-180. of the first edition.

by

by Eufebius, 89; 2. Juftin Martyr, 105; 3. Tatian, 136; 4. Irenæus, 110; 5. Clement of Alexandria, 125; 6. Tertullian, 132; 7. Ammonius, 153; 8. Julius Africanus, 154; 9. Origen, 155; and by all the ancient writers quoted by Eufebius, 169,

Clement of Rome, 53; Ignatius, 78; Polycarp, 81; and the Communities at Lyons and Vienne, 141, may also, perhaps, be reckoned among the number of witneffes *.

IV. The Gospel by St. John

IS, with great unanimity and particular refpect, confidered as the genuine writing of this Apoftle by, 1. the ancient writers of the firft century, confulted by Eufebius, 89; 2. by Juftin Martyr, 105; 3. Tatian, 109. 136; 4. Irenæus, 110; 5. Theophilus of An

For the later witneffes, fee Lardner's Supplement, vol i. p. 218-227. first edition,

tioch, 123; 6. Clement of Alexandria, 125; 7. Tertullian, 132; 8. Ammonius, 153; 9. Origen, 155; and by all the Fathers cited by Eufebius, 169. To these might be added the Communities at Lyons and Vienne, 141”.

V. The Epiftle of St. Paul to the
Romans

IS declared to be authentic by, 1. Irenæus, 111; 2. Theophilus of Antioch, 123; 3. Clement of Alexandria, 125; 4. Tertullian, 132; 5. Caius, 150;

y Ibid. p. 382-390. The Alogi, a fect that existed in the second century, are said to have rejected it. But we have no information concerning these Alogi that can be depended on: for, properly speaking, we have none else befides the later and uncertain accounts of Philaftrius and Epiphanius. And were the cafe otherwise, still what can the testimony, or rather the bare affertion of anonymous perfons avail, when opposed to the unanimous, confiderate, and weighty evidences of all the ancients, both learned and unlearned. See Walch's Hittory of Hereticks, vol. i. p. 569, fq. of the original; and Profeffor Schroeckh's Ecclef. Hift. vol. iii. p. 175. feq. of the original.