authorities of the Scriptures of the Old and New Teftament.

7. I have produced Theophilus of Antioch above (p. 122.) as an evidence for the authenticity of the Gofpels of St. Matthew and St. John, of the Epiftle to the Romans, and alfo of the firft Epiftle to Timothy.—Did the work which he wrote against Hermogenes, προς την αίρεσιν Ερμογένους, ftill exift, we might likewife prove from hin the antiquity of the Revelation of St. John'.

8. Pantænus, whom Eufebius", apparently by mistake, mentions as prefident of the catechetical fchool at Alexandria, was, as this author informs us, fuch a faithful and learned

1 See Eufebius, Hift. Ecclef. Lib. IV. cap. xxiv. p. 287,-who fays, that Theophilus in the abovementioned book had taken some of his proofs from the Revelation of St. John, EV εκ της αποκαλύψεως

Ιωαννου κεχρηται μαρτυρίαις.

Hift. Ecclef. Lib. V. cap. x. p. 222, 223.-See Lardner's Credibility, vol. ii. p. 203.

fupporter

fupporter of Christianity, that he would have inftructed pofterity as usefully by his writings, as he did his contemporaries by his fermons.-He preached the Gospel in India", and is faid to have found there the Gospel of St. Matthew in the Hebrew language ". Whether this information, which Eufebius gives in a doubtful manner, be true or not, nevertheless it proves thus

a The old ecclefiaftical hiftorians mean frequently by this name Arabia Felix; fee Michaelis Intr. to the N. T. vol. iii. p. 124. of the learned Mr. Marth's Trans.; but here it is India properly fo called, India on the Ganges. Chriftianity was preached there in the first century by the Apoftle St. Thomas. This is afferted-1. By the ancient writers confulted by Eufebius, Hift. ecclef. iii. 1. v. 10.-2. By the most learned hiftorians of the Eaft, Affeman bibl. orient. tom. III. par. i. p. 611, and par. ii. p. 25.—And 3. By those Christian sects, which have existed from the moft early antiquity in India, particularly on the coafts of Malabar, who have an ancient tradition to the fame purpose, and therefore call themselves St. Thomas's Chriftians.-La Croze, 38.

• Eufebius 1. cit. ενθα λογος ευρειν αυτον το πρώτο το κατα Ματθαίον ευαγγελιον, κ. το λο

much,

much, that the Gospel of St. Matthew was already known in the earliest ages. -According to Jerom's relation", he, compofed alfo certain commentaries on the Bible.

9. The work of Clement of Alexandria, in which he principally confidered the Holy Scriptures of the Chriftians, his Hypotupofes, is also loft, except a few fragments. It contained explications of many books both of the Old and New Teftament, efpecially of the Epiftles of St. Paul, and of the Catholic Epiftles -Eufebius has preferved the following information from it'-That the Epiftle to the Hebrews was written by St. Paul in the Hebrew language, and translated into Greek by St. Luke his companion; that the Gof

P Hujus multi →→ in fanctam fcripturam extant Commentarii. De vir. illuftr. cap. xxxvi.

9 Eufebius. Hift. Ecclef. Lib. VI. cap. xiv. P. 273. et Photius, Biblioth. Codice cix. p. 287. edit. Andr. Schotti. Rothomagi, 1653. folio.

pels which contain the Genealogies (viz. of St. Matthew and St. Luke) were composed before the others; that St. Mark wrote his Gofpel at the requeft of St. Peter's difciples at Rome, and that St. Peter was fo far from rejecting it, that, at the instigation of the Holy Ghoft, he imparted a divine confequence to it'; and that St. John

had

Loc. cit. Comp. Lib. II. cap. xv. pag. 64. Tvorτa de To Teaxov (viz. that St. Mark had compofed in writing the speeches of St. Peter, at the requeft of the Romans) φασι τον Αποςολον (St. Peter) αποκαλύψαντος αυτῷ του Πνεύματος ήσθηναι τη των ανδρων προθυμία, κυρωσαι τε την γραφην (the Gofpel of St. Mark) εις εντευξιν ταις εκκλησίαις. The fentence αποκαλυψαντος αυτῷ του Πνεύματος has been always referred by tranflators to the preceding words; but if it be construed with those which follow, every difficulty will vanish.-" Peter, having discovered what had been done, and being inftigated by the Holy Ghoft, granted the defire of those men, (the Romans) and gave his fanction to the Gospel of St. Mark, that it fhould be read in the Chriftian communities." Lardner torments himself with the difficulty of this paffage; Credibility, vol. ii. p. 215. But amidst all his obfervations he has not reflected that the structure of the words

8

had written πνευματικον ευαγγέλιον, a Gof pel which treated especially of the divine nature of Chrift, the others being principally employed on his human. Τον . . . Ιωάννην εσκαίον συνιδοντα, ότι τα σωματικά εν τοις ευαγίελιοις δεδηλωται, πρόβαπεντα υπο των γνωριμων πνευματι θεοφορηθεντα πνευματικον ποιησαι ευαγγέλιον. Eufebius and Jerom would have per. formed ftill greater fervice to pofterity, had they made longer and more com plete extracts from thofe writings of confiderable teachers which exifted in their times. Both of them notice various teachers of the fecond century who had written commentaries on the fcriptural books. But as they are filent on their contents, we can neither determine what information thefe

words in Eufebius does not by any means neceffitate the conne&tion of αποκαλυψ. κ. τ. λ. with γνοντά Aπorohov: as if the Holy Ghost had revealed to St. Peter, that the Romans had petitioned St. Mark to compofe his Gospel, and that he had granted their request.