No. 6,
The FREETHINKER'S
TEXT-BOOK.
EDITED BY
CHARLES BRADLAUGH, ANNIE BESANT, AND
CHARLES WATTS.
PART II.
CHRISTIANITY.
BY ANNIE BESANT.
Issued by authority of the National Secular Society^
LONDON :
Charles Watts, 17, Johnson's Court, Fleet ST;REj::f.
PRIC& SIXPENCE.
No, 7, Part IL^ will be ready November ^th.
PAMPHLETS, ETC., BY CHARLES WATTS.
Secularism in it3 Various Relations, 56 pages
Merits and Demerits of Secularism. Debate on the abore
Christian Evidences Criticised. The National Secular Society's
Reply to the Christian Evidence Society
The Bible and Chyistianity
The Origin of Christianity and the Historical Value of the
New Testament Two Nights' Discussion with the Rev.
B. H. Cowper.
Four Nights' Discussion with the Rev. Alex. Stewart, of Aber-
deen, on Belief in God and Authenticity of the Four Gospels
Why am I an Atheist ? or Theism Criticised
Freethought and Modern Progress
Christianity : its Nature and Influence
Science and the Bible Antagonistic
Christian Scheme of Redemption, second editioii
The Philosophy of Secularism, second edition
A Defence of Secular Principle^
The Character of Christ
Origin of Christianity
Historical Yaliue of the New Testament
Miracles
Prophecies
The Progress of the Christian Religion
Practicability of Christianity, its Influence oa Humain Conduct 0
The Christian Deity
The Moral Value of the Bible
The Bible : is it Reliable as a Guide ?
The Christian's Notion of Man's Ultimate State of Existence
Atheism and Crime
National Seoilar Society's Tracts — No. 5, Secular Teachings.
No. 6, Secular Work. Psr hundred (post free>
*• Conservative Reaction "
The English Monarchy and American Republicanism
Toryism Tested by th« Records of History
The Govcrnisaient asd the People : a Plea for Reform
Republicanism : Reply to Mr. John Bright
Photograph, with Autograph, of Mr. Charles Watts, post free, Nine-
pence. Societies taking a dozen and upwards can be supplied at the
rate of 6s. 6d. for twelve, post free.
Published ^\eekly, price Twopence (2s. SJd. per Quartei
post free),
JOURNAL OF RADICALISM & FREETHOUGHT.
Edited by Charles Bradlaugh. Sub-edited
BY Charles Watts.
Handsomt large Photograph of Mr. Bradlaugh, for
framing, price as, 6d.
Companion Photograph of Mrs. Besant, price as. 6d.
London : C. Watts, 17, Johnson's Coiirt, Fleet Street
0
6
0
6
0
8
0
6
0
6
1
0
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
i
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
' CHRISTIANITY. 239
even praiseworthy, to deceive, and even to use the expedient
of a lie, in order to advance the cause of truth and piety.
The Jews, who lived in Egypt, had learned and received
this maxim from them, before the coming of Christ, as
appears incontestably from a multitude of ancient records ;
and the Christians were infected from both these sources
with the same pernicious error,' as appears from the
number of books attributed falsely to great and vener-
able names, from the Sibylline verses, and several
suppositious productions which were spread abroad in this
and the following century. It does not, indeed, seem pro-
bable that all these pious frauds were chargeable upon the
professors of real Christianity, upon those who entertained
just and rational sentiments of the religion of Jesus. The
greatest part of these fictitious writings undoubtedly flowed
from the fertile invention of the Gnostic sects, though it
cannot be affirmed that even true Christians were entirely
innocent and irreproachable in this matter" (Ibid, p. 55).
" This disingenuous and vicious method of surprising their
adversaries by artifice, and striking them down, as it were,
by lies and fiction, produced, among other disagreeable
effects, a great number of books, which were falsely attri-
buted to certain great men, in order to give these spurious
productions more credit and weight" (Ibid, page 77).
These forged writings being so widely circulated, it will
be readily understood that "It is not so easy a matter
as is commonly imagined rightly to settle the Canon
of the New Testament. For my own part, I declare, with
many learned men, that, in the whole compass of learning,
I know no question involved with more intricacies and
perplexing difficulties than this. There are, indeed,
considerable difficulties relating to the Canon of the
Old Testament, as appears by the large controversies be-
tween the Protestants and Papists on this head in the last,
and latter end of the preceding, century ; but these are
solved with much more ease than those of the New In
settling the old Testament collection, all that is requisite is
to disprove the claim of a few obscure books, which have
but the weakest pretences to be looked upon as Scripture ;
but, in the New, we have not only a few to disprove, but a
vast number to exclude [from] the Canon, which seem to 1
have much more right to admission than any of the apocry-
phal books of the Old Testament ; and, besides, to evidence-
the genuineness of all those which we do receive, sincgj, ,
240 THE FREETHINKER S TEXT-BOOK.
according to the sentiments of some who would be thought
learned, there are none of them whose authority has not
been controverted in the earHest ages of Christianity
The number of books that claim admission [to the canon]
is very considerable. Mr. Toland, in his celebrated cata-
logue, has presented us with the names of above eighty
There are many more of the same sort which he has not
mentioned" (J. Jones on ''The Canon of the New Testa-
ment," vol. i.,pp. 2 — 4. Ed. 1788).
The following list will give some idea of the number of
the apocryphal writings from which the four Gospels, and
other books of the New Testament, finally emerge as
canonical : —
Gospels.
1. Gospel according to the Hebrews.
2. Gospel written by Judas Iscariot,
3. Gospel of Truth, made use of by the Valentinians.
4. Gospel of Peter.
5. Gospel according to the Egyptians.
6. Gospel of Valentinus.
7. Gospel of Marcion,
8. Gospel according to the Twelve Apostles.
9. Gospel of Basilides.
10. Gospel of Thomas (extant).
11. Gospel of Matthias.
12. Gospel of Tatian.
13. Gospel of Scythianus.
14. Gospel of Bartholomew.
15. Gospel of Apelles.
16. Gospels published by Lucianus and Hesychius.
17. Gospel of Perfection.
18. Gospel of Eve.
19. Gospel of Philip.
20. Gospel of the Nazarenes (qy. same as first).
- 21. Gospel of the Ebionites.
22. Gospel of Jude.
23. Gospel of Encratites.
24. Gospel of Cerinthus.
25. Gospel of Merinthus.
26. Gospel of Thaddasus.
27. Gospel of Barnabas.
28. Gospel of Andrew.
29. Gospel of the Infancy (extant).
CHRISTIANITY. 24 1
30. Gospel of Nicodemus, or Acts of Pilate and Descent
of Christ to the Under World (extant).
31. Gospel of James, or Protevangelium (extant).
32. Gospel of the Nativity of Mary (extant).
2^. Arabic Gospel of the Infancy (extant).
34. Syriac Gospel of the Boyhood of our Lord Jesus
(extant).
Miscellaneous.
35. Letter to Agbarus by Christ (extant).
36. Letter to Leopas by Christ (extant).
37. Epistle to Peter and Paul by Christ.
.38. Epistle by Christ produced by Manichees.
39. Hymn by Christ (extant).
40. Magical Book by Christ.
.41. Prayer by Christ (extant).
42. Preaching of Peter.
43. Revelation of Peter.
44. Doctrine of Peter.
45. Acts of Peter.
46. Book of Judgment by Peter.
47. Book, under the name of Peter, forged by Lentius.
48. Preaching of Peter and Paul at Rome.
49. The Vision, or Acts of Paul and Thecla.
50. Acts of Paul.
51. Preaching of Paul.
.52. Piece under name of Paul, forged by an ** anony-
mous writer in Cyprian's time."
53. Epistle to the Laodiceans under name of Paul
(extant).
54. Six letters to Seneca under name of Paul (extant).
55. Anabaticon or Revelation of Paul.
56. The traditions of Matthias.
57. Book of James.
58. Book, under name of James, forged by Ebionites.
59. Acts of Andrew, John, and Thomas. '
60. Acts of John.
61. Book, under name of John, forged by Ebionites.
62. Book under name of John.
6^. Book, under name of John, forged by Lentius.
64. Acts of Andrew.
65. Book under name of Andrew.
66. Book, under name of Andrew, by Naxochristes and
Leonides.
67. Book under name of Thomas.
242 THE FREETHINKERS TEXT-BOOK.
68. Acts of Thomas.
69. Revelation of Thomas.
70. Writings of Bartholomew.
71. Book, under name of Matthew, forged by Ebionites.
72. Acts of the Apostles by Leuthon, or Seleucus.
73. Acts of the Apostles used by Ebionites.
74. Acts of the Apostles by Lenticius.
75. Acts of the Apostles used by Manichees.
76. History of the Twelve Apostles by Abdias (extant).
77. Creed of the Apostles (extant).
78. Constitutions of the Apostles (extant).
79. Acts, under Apostles' names, by Leontius.
80. Acts, under Apostles' names, by Lenticius.
81. Catholic Epistle, in imitation of the Apostles of
Themis, on the Montanists.
82. Revelation of Cerinthus, nominally apostolical.
S;^, Book of the Helkesaites which fell from Heaven.
84. Books of Lentitius.
85. Revelation of Stephen.
S6, Works of Dionysius the Areopagite (extant).
87. History of Joseph the carpenter (extant).
88. Letter of Agbarus to Jesus (extant).
89. Letter of Lentulus (extant).
90. Story of Veronica (extant).
91. Letter of Pilate to Tiberius (extant).
92. Letters of Pilate to Herod (extant).
93. Epistle of Pilate to Caesar (extant).
94. Report of Pilate the Governor (extant).
95. Trial and condemnation of Pilate (extant).
96. Death of Pilate (extant).
97. Story of Joseph of Arimathaea (extant).
98. Revenging of the Saviour (extant).
99. Epistle of Barnabas.
100. Epistle of Poly carp.
loi — 15. Fifteen epistles of Ignatius (see above, pages-
217 — 220.)
116. Shepherd of Hermas.
117. First Epistle to the Corinthians of Clement (possibly
partly authentic).
118. Second Epistle to the Corinthians of Clement.
119. Apostolic Canons of Clement.
120. Recognitions of Clement and Clementina.
12 T — 122. Two Epistles of St. Clement of Rome (written
in Syriac).
CHRISTIANITY. 243
123 — 128. Six books of Justin Martyr.
129 — 132. Four books of Justin Martyr.
The above are collected from Jones' On the Canon,
Supernatural Religion, Eusebius, Mosheim's Ecclesiastical
History, Cowper's Apocryphal Gospels, Dr. Giles' Christian
Records, and the Apostolic Fathers,
After reading this list, the student will be able to appre-
ciate the value of Paley's argument, that, " if it had been
an easy thing in the early times of the institution to have
forged Christian writings, and to have obtained currency
and reception to the forgeries, we should have had many
appearing in the name of Christ himself" ("Evidences,"
p. 106). Paley acknowledges " one attempt of this sort,
deserving of the smallest notice;" and, in a note, adds
three more of those mentioned above. Let us see
what the evidence is of the genuineness of the letter
to Agbarus, the " one attempt " in question, as given
by Eusebius. Agbarus, the prince of Edessa, reigning
•" over the nations beyond the Euphrates with great glory,"
was afflicted with an incurable disease, and, hearing of
Jesus, sent to him to entreat deliverance. The letter of
Agbarus is carried to Jesus, " at Jerusalem, by Ananias, the
courier," and the answer of Jesus, also written, is returned
by the same hands. The letter of Jesus runs as follows,
and is written in Syriac : " Blessed art thou, O Agbarus,
who, without seeing me, hast believed in me ! For it is
written concerning me, that they who have seen me will not
believe, that they who have not seen me may believe and
live. But in regard to what thou hast written, that I
^should come to thee, it is necessary that I should fulfil all
things here, for which I have been sent. And, after this
fulfilment, thus to be received again by Him that sent me.
And after I have been received up, I will send to thee a
certain one of my disciples, that he may heal thy affliction,
and give life to thee, and to those who are with thee."
After the ascension of Jesus, Thaddaeus, one of the seventy,
is sent to Edessa, and lodges in the house of Tobias, the
son of Tobias, and heals Agbarus and many others.
^^ These things were done in the 340th year " (Eusebius
does not state what he reckons from). The proof given by
Eusebius for the truth of the account is as follows : " Of
this also we have the evidence, in a written answer, taken
from the public records of the city of Edessa, then under
vthe government of the king. For, in the public registers
244 THE FREETHINKER S TEXT-BOOK.
there, which embrace the ancient history and the transac-
tions of Agbarus, these circumstances respecting him are
found still preserved down to the present day. There is
nothing, however, like hearing the epistles themselves,
taken by us from the archives, and the style of it, as it has
been literally translated by us, from the Syriac language "
C^Eccles. Hist.," bk. i., chap. xiii.). And Paley calls this
an attempt at forgery, '^ deserving of the smallest notice,"
and dismisses it in a few lines. It would be interesting to
know for what other " Scripture," canonical or uncanonical,
there is evidence of authenticity so strong as for this ;
exactness of detail in names ; absence of any exaggeration
more than is implied in recounting any miracle ; the trans-
action recorded in the public archives ; seen there by Euse-
bius himself; copied down and translated b]'^ him; such
evidence for any one of the Gospels would make belief far
easier than it is at present. The assertion of Eusebius was
easily verifiable at the time (to use the favourite argument
of Christians for the truth of any account) ; and if Eusebius
here wrote falsely, of what value is his evidence on any
other point ? A Freethinker may fairly urge that Eusebius
is not trustworthy, and that this assertion of his about the
archives is as likely to be false as true ; but the Christian
can scarcely admit this, when so much depends, for him,
on the reliability of the great Church historian, all whose
evidence would become worthless if he be once allowed to
have deliberately fabricated that which did not exist.
We have already noticed the writings of the Apostolic
Fathers, and pointed out the numerous forgeries circulated
under their names, and the consequent haze hanging over
all the early Christian writers, until we reach the time of
Justin Martyr. Thus we entirely destroy the whole basis of
Paley's argument, that " the historical books of the New
Testament are quoted, or alluded to, by a series of
Christian writers, beginning with those who were contem-
porary with the Apostles, or who immediately followed
them" (" Evidences," page m;) for we have no certain
writings of any such contemporaries. In dealing with
the positions / and //., we shall seek to prove that in
the writings of the Apostolic Fathers — taking them as
genuine — as well as in Justin Martyr, and in other Chris-
tian works up to about a.d. i8o, the quotations said to
be from the canonical Gospels conclusively show that other
Gospels were used, and not our present ones ; but no fur-
CHRISTIANITY. 245
ther evidence than the long list of apocryphal writings,
given on pp. 240 — 243 is needed in order to prove our first
proposition, that forgeries^ hearing the name of Christy of the
apostles, and of the early faihei^s, were very common in the
primitive Church,
B. " That there is nothing to distinguish the canonical
from the apocryphal zvritingsy '' Their pretences are
specious and plausible, for the most part going under
the name of our Saviour himself, his apostles, their com-
panions, or immediate successors. They are generally
thought to be cited by the first Christian writers with the
same authority (at least, many of them) as the sacred books
we receive. This Mr. Toland labours hard to persuade
us ; but, what is more to be regarded, men of greater merit
and probity have unwarily dropped expressions of the like
nature. Everybody knows (says the learned Casaubon
against Cardinal Baronius) that J^ustin Martyr, Clemens
Alexa7id7inus, Tertullian, and the rest of the primitive writers^
were wont to approve and cite hooks which now all men knoiv
to he apocryphal. Clemens Alexandrinus (says his learned
annotator, Sylburgius) was too much pleased with apocry-
phal writings. Mr. Dodwell (in his learned dissertation on
Irenaeus) tells us that, till Trajan, or, perhaps, Adriaji's
time, no canon was fixed ; the supposititious pieces of the
heretics were received hy the faithful, the ap^stles^ writings
hound tcp with theirs, and indifferently used in the
churches. To mention no more, the learned Mr.
Spanheim observes, that Clemens Alexandrinus and
Origen very oftcft cite apocryphal hooks under the express
name of Scripture. How much Mr. Whiston has
enlarged the Canon of the New Testament, is suffi-
ciently known to the learned among us. For the sake of
those who have not perused his truly valuable books I
would observe, that he imagines the ^ Constitutions of the
Apostles ' to be inspired, and of greater authority than the
occasional writings of single Apostles and Evangelists.
That the two Epistles of Clemens, the Doctrine of the
Apostles, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Shepherd of Hermas,
the second book of Esdras, the Epistles of Ignatius, and
the Epistle of Polycarp, are to be reckoned among the
sacred authentic books of the New Testament ; as also that
the Acts of Paul, the Revelation, Preaching, Gospel and
Acts of Peter, were sacred books, and, if they were extant,
should be of the same authority as any of the rest"
246 THE freethinker's TEXT-BOOK.
(J. Jones, on the " Canon," p. 4 — 6). This same learned
writer further says : " That many, or most of the books of
the New Testament, have been rejected by heretics in the
first ages, is also certain. Faustus Manichseus and his
followers are said to have rejected all the New Testa-
ment, as not written by the Apostles. Marcion re-
jected all, except St. Luke's Gospel. The Manichees
disputed much against the authority of St. Matthew's
Gospel. The Alogians rejected the Gospel of St. John
as not his, but made by Cerinthus. The Acts of the
Apostles were rejected by Severus, and the sect of his
name. The same rejected all Paul's Epistles, as also did the
Ebionites, and the Helkesaites. Others, who did not reject
all, rejected some particular epistles Several of the books
of the New Testament were not universally received, even
among them who were not heretics, in the first ages
Several of them have had their authority disputed by
learned men in later times" (Ibid, pp. 8, 9).
If recognition by the early writers be taken as a proof of
the authenticity of the works quoted, many apocryphal
documents must stand high. Eusebius, who ranks together
the Acts of Paul, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Revelation
of Peter, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Institutions of the
Apostles, and the Revelation of John (now accounted
canonical) says that these were not embodied in the Canon
(in his time) " notwithstanding that they are recognised by
most ecclesiastical writers" ("Eccles. Hist," bk. iii.,
chap. XXV.). The Canon, in his time, was almost the same
as at present, but the canonicity of the epistles of James
and Jude, the 2nd of Peter, the 2nd and 3rd of John, and
the Revelation, was disputed even as late as when he
wrote. Irenaeus ranks the Pastor of Hermas as Scripture ;
"he not only knew, but also admitted the book called
Pastor" (Ibid, bk. v., chap. viii.). "The Pastor of Hermas
is another work which very nearly secured permanent
canonical rank with the writings of the New Testament. It
was quoted as Holy Scripture by the Fathers, and held to
be divinely inspired, and it was publicly read in the
churches. It has place with the Epistle of Barnabas in the
Sinaitic Codex, after the canonical books" ("Supernatural
Religion," vol. i., p. 261).
The two Epistles of Clement are only "preserved to us in
the Codex Alexandrinus, a MS. assigned by the most compe-
tent judges to the second half of the fifth, or beginning of
CHRISTIANITY. 247
the sixth century, in which these Epistles follow the books
of the New Testament. The second Epistle thus
shares with the first the honour of a canonical position in one
of the most ancient codices of the New Testament " (" Sup.
Rel.," vol. i., p. 220). These epistles are, also, amongst
those mentioned in the Apostolic Canons. " Until a com-
paratively late date this [the first of Clement] Epistle was
quoted as Holy Scripture" (Ibid, p. 222). Origen quotes
the Epistle of Barnabas as Scripture, and calls it a
"Catholic Epistle" (Ibid, p. 237), and this same Father
regards the Shepherd of Hermas as also divinely inspired.
(Norton's "Genuineness of the Gospels," vol. i., p. 341).
Gospels, other than the four canonical, are quoted as
authentic by the earliest Christian writers, as we shall see in
establishing position h ; thus destroying Paley's contention
("Evidences," p. 187) that there are no quotations from
apocryphal writings in the Apostolical Fathers, the fact
being that such quotations are sown throughout their sup-
posed writings.
It is often urged that the expression, " it is written," is
enough to prove that the quotation following it is of cano-
nical authority.
"Now with regard to the value of the expression,
'it is written,' it may be remarked that in no case
could its use, in the Epistle of Barnabas, indicate more
than individual opinion, and it could not, for reasons
to be presently given, be considered to represent the
opinion of the Church. In the very same chapter in which
the formula is used in connection with the passage we
are considering, it is also employed to introduce a quotation
from the Book of Enoch, Trcpl ov yiypairTai ws 'Ei/w^ Xeya,
and elsewhere (c. xii.) he quotes from another apocryphal
book as one of the prophets He also quotes (c. vi.) the
apocryphal book of Wisdom as Holy Scripture, and in like
manner several unknown works. When it is remembered
that the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, the Pastor
of Hermas, the Epistle of Barnabas itself, and many other
apocryphal works have been quoted by the Fathers as
Holy Scripture, the distinctive value of such an expression
may be understood" (Ibid, pp. 242, 243). "The first
Christian writers quote ecclesiastical books from time
to time as if they were canonical" (Westcott on "The
Canon," p. 9). " In regard to the use of the word yeypaTrrat,
introducing the quotation, the same writer [Hilgenfeld]
248 THE freethinker's TEXT-BOOK.
urges reasonably enough that it cannot surprise us at a
time when we learn from Justin Martyr that the Gospels
w^ere read regularly at public worship [or rather, that the
memorials of the Apostles were so read] ; it ought not, how-
ever, to be pressed too far as involving a claim to special
divine inspiration, as the same word is used in the epistle
in regard to the apocryphal book of Enoch ; and it is clear,
also, from Justin, that the Canon of the Gospels was not
yet formed, but only forming'' ("Gospels in the Second
Century," Rev. W. Sanday, p. 73. Ed, 1876). Yet, in spite of
all this, Paley says, " The phrase, ^ it is written,' was the very
form in which the Jews quoted their Scriptures. It is not
probable, therefore, that he would have used this phrase,
and without qualification, of any books but what had
acquired a kind of Scriptural authority" ('^Evidences,"
p. 113). Tischendorf argues on Paley's lines and says
that "it was natural, therefore, to apply this form of ex-
pression to the Apostles* writings, as soon as they had been
placed in the Canon with the books of the Old Testament.
When we find, therefore, in ancient ecclesiastical writings,
quotations from the Gospels introduced with this formula,
* it is written,' we must infer that, at the time when the ex-
pression was used, the Gospels were certainly treated as of
equal authority with the books of the Old Testament "
(" When Were Our Gospels Written ? " p. 89. Eng. Ed.,
1867). Dr. Tischendorf, if he believe in his own argument,
must greatly enlarge his Canon of the New Testament.
Paley's further plea that " these apocryphal writings were
not read in the churches of Christians" ("Evidences," p. 187)
is thoroughly false. Eusebius tells us of the Pastor of Hermas :
" We know that it has been already in public use in our
churches" ("Eccles. Hist.,"bk. iii., ch. 3). Clement's Epistle
"was publicly read in the churches at the Sunday meetings
of Christians" ("Sup. Rel," vol. i., p. 222). Dionysius of
Corinth mentions this same early habit of reading any valued
writing in the churches : " In this same letter he mentions
that of Clement to the Corinthians, showing that it was the
practice to read in the churches, even from the earliest
times. ^ To-day,' says he, * we have passed the Lord's
holy-day, in which we have read your epistle, in reading
which we shall always have our minds stored with admoni
tion, as we shall, also, from that written to us before by
Clement'" (Eusebius' " Eccles. Hist," bk. iv., ch. 23).
So far is "reading in the churches" to be accepted as a
CHRISTIANITY. 249
proof, even of canonicity, much less of genuineness, that
Eusebius remarks that "the disputed writings" were
"publicly used by many in most of the churches " (Ibid,
bk. iii., ch. 31). Paley then takes as a further mark of
distinction, between canonical and uncanonical, that the
latter " were not admitted into their volume " and " do not
appear in their catalogues," but we have already seen that
the only MS. copy of Clement's first Epistle is in the Codex
Alexandrinus (see ante p. 246), while the Epistle of Barnabas
and the Pastor of Hermas find their place in the Sinaitic
Codex (see ante p. 246) ; the second Epistle of Clement is
also in the Codex Alexandrinus, and both epistles are in
the Apostolic constitutions (see ante p. 247). The Canon
of Muratori — worthless as it is, it is used as evidence by
Christians — brackets the Apocalypse of John and of Peter
(" Sup. Rel.," vol. ii., p. 241). Canon Westcott says :
" 'Apocryphal' writings were added to manuscripts of the
New Testament, and read in churches ; and the practice
thus begun continued for a long time. The Epistle of
Barnabas wr.s still read among the 'apocryphal Scriptures'
in the time of Jerome ; a translation of the Shepherd of
Hermas is found in a MS. of the Latin Bible as late as the
fifteenth century. The spurious Epistle to the Laodicenes
is found very commonly in English copies of the Vulgate
from the ninth century downwards, and an important
catalogue of the Apocrypha of the New Testament is added
to the Canon of Scripture subjoined to the Chronographia
of Nicephorus, published in the ninth century " (" On the
Canon," pp. 8, 9). Paley's fifth distinction, that they
" were not noticed by their [heretical] adversaries " is as
untrue as the preceding ones, for even the fragments of
" the adversaries " preserved in Christian documents bear
traces of reference to the apocryphal writings, although,
owing to the orthodox custom of destroying unorthodox
books, references of any sort by heretics are difficult to
find. Again, Paley should have known, when he asserted
that the uncanonical writings were not alleged as of
authority, that the heretics did appeal to gospels other than
the canonical. Marcion, for instance, maintained a Gospel
varying from the recognised one, while the Ebionites con-
tended that their Hebrew Gospel was the only true one.
Eusebius further tells us of books " adduced by the heretics
under the name of the Apostles, such, viz., as compose the
Gospels of Peter, Thomas, and Matthew, and others beside
250 THE freethinker's TEXT-BOOK.
them, or such as contain the Acts of the Apostles, by Andrew
and John, and others " (" Eccles. Hist," bk. iii., ch. 25. See
also ante p. 246). It is hard to believe that Paley was so
grossly ignorant as to know nothing of these facts ; did he
then deliberately state what he knew to be utterly untrue ?
His last " mark" does not touch our position, as the com-
mentaries, etc., are too late to be valuable as evidence for
the alleged superiority of the canonical writings during the
first two centuries. The other section of Paley's argument,
that " when the Scriptures [a very vague word] are quoted,
or alluded to, they are quoted with peculiar respect, as
books sui generis ^^ is met by the details given above as to
the fashion in which the Fathers referred to the writings
now called uncanonical, and by the evidence adduced in
this section we may fairly claim to have proved that, so far
as external testimony goes, there is nothiftg to distinguish
the canonical from the apocryphal writings.
But there is another class of evidence relied upon by Chris-
tians, wherewith they seek to build up an impassable barrier
between their sacred books and the dangerous uncanonical
Scriptures, namely, the intrinsic difference between them, the
dignity of the one, and the pueriUty of the other. Of the
uncanonical Gospels Dr. Ellicott writes : " Their real
demerits, their mendacities, their absurdities, their coarse-
ness, the barbarities of their style, and the inconsequence
of their narratives, have never been excused or condoned"
("Cambridge Essays," for 1856, p. 153, as quoted in
introduction of "The Apocryphal Gospels," by B. H.
Cowper, p. X. Ed. 1867). " We know before we read them
that they are weak, silly, and profitless — that they are despic-
able monuments even of religious fiction" (Ibid, p. xlvii).
How far are such harsh expressions consonant with fact ?
It is true that many of the tales related are absurd, but are
they more absurd than the tales related in the canonical
Gospels? One story, repeated with variations, runs as
follows : " This child Jesus, being five years old, was play-
ing at the crossing of a stream, and he collected the running
waters into pools, and immediately made them pure ; and
by his word alone he commanded them. And having
made some soft clay, he fashioned out of it twelve sparrows;
and it was the Sabbath when he did these things. And
there were also many other children playing with him.
And a certain Jew, seeing what Jesus did, playing on the
Sabbath, went immediately and said to Joseph, his father,
CHRISTIANITY. 25 X
Behold, thy child is at the water-course, and hath taken
clay and formed twelve birds, and hath profaned the Sabbath.
And Joseph came to the place, and when he saw him, he
cried unto him, saying, Why art thou doing these things on
the Sabbath, which it is not lawful to do? And Jesus
clapped his hands, and cried unto the sparrows, and said to
them. Go away ; and the sparrows flew up and departed,
making a noise. And the Jews who saw it were astonished,
and went and told their leaders what they had seen Jesus
do " (" Gospel of Thomas : Apocryphal Gospels," B. H.
Cowper, pp. 130, 131). Making the water pure by a word
is no more absurd than turning water into wine (John ii.
I — 11) ; or than sending an angel to trouble it, and thereby
making it health-giving (John v. 2 — 4); or than casting a tree
into bitter waters, and making them sweet (Ex. xv. 25). The
fashioning of twelve sparrows out of soft clay is not stranger
than making a woman out of a man's rib (Gen. ii. 21);
neither is it more, or nearly so, curious as making clay with
spittle, and plastering it on a blind man's eyes in order to
make him see (John ix. 6) ; nay, arguing a la F. D.
Maurice, a very strong reason might be made out for this
proceeding. Thus, Jesus came to reveal the Father to
men, and his miracles were specially arranged to show how
God works in the world ; by turning the water into wine^
and by multiplying the loaves, he reminds men that it is
God whose hand feeds them by all the ordinary processes
of nature. In this instructive miracle of the clay formed
into sparrows, which fly away at his bidding, Jesus reveals
his unity with the Father, as the Word by whom all things
were originally made ; for " out of the ground, the Lord
God formed every beast of the field and every fowl of the
air" (Gen. ii. 19) at the creation, and when the Son was
revealed to bring about the new creation, what more appro-
priate miracle could he perform than this reminiscence of
paradise, clearly suggesting to the Jews that the Jehovah,
who, of old, formed the fowls of the air out of the ground,
was present among them in the incarnate Word, performing
the same mighty work? Exactly in this fashion do Maurice,
Robertson, and others of their school, deal with the mira-
cles of Christ recorded in the canonical gospels (see
Maurice on the Miracles, Sermon IV., in " What is Revela-
tion ?"). The number, twelve, is also significant, being that
of the tribes of Israel, and the local colouring — the com-
plaining Jews and the violated Sabbath — ^is in perfect har-
252 THE freethinker's TEXT-BOOK.
mony with the other gospels. The action of Jesus, vindi-
cating the conduct complained of by the performance of a
miracle, is in the fullest accord with similar instances related
in the received stories. It is, however, urged that some of
the miracles of Jesus, as given in the apocrypha, are dis-
honouring to him, because of their destructive character ;
the son of Annas, the scribe, spills the water the child Jesus
has collected, and Jesus gets angry and says, " Thou also
shalt wither like a tree ;" and " suddenly the boy withered
altogether " (Ap. Gos., p. 131). This seems in thorough unity
with the spirit Jesus showed in later life, when he cursed the
fig-tree, because it did not bear fruit in the wrong season,
and " presently the fig-tree withered away "(Matt. xxi. 19).
Or a child, running against him purposely, falls dead ; or a
master lifting his hand against him, has the arm withered
which essays to strike. Later, of Judas, who betrays him,
we read that, " falling headlong, he burst asunder in the
midst, and all his bowels gushed out " (Acts i. 18) ; while, in
the Old Testament, which speaks of Christ, we are told, in
figures, we learn that, when Jeroboam tried to seize a pro-
phet, ^' his hand, which he put forth against him, dried up,
so that he could not pull it in again to him '' (i Kings xiii. 4).
If destructiveness be thought injurious when related of
Jesus, what shall we say to the wanton destruction of the
herd of swine which Jesus filled with devils, and sent racing
into the sea? (Matt. viii. 28 — 34.) The miracle the child
works to rectify a mistake of his father's in his carpenter's
business, taking hold of some wood which has been cut
too short and lengthening it, is certainly not more silly than
the miracle worked by the man when money is short, and
he (Matt. xvii. 24 — 27) sends Peter to catch a fish with
money in its mouth (why not, by the way, hnve fished
directly for the coin ? it would be quite as possible for a
coin to transfix itself on a hook, as for a fish, with a piece
of money in its mouth, to swallow a hook). Other miracles
recorded in the apocryphal gospels, of healing and of
raising the dead, are identical in spirit with those told of
him in the canonical. We may also remark that, unless
there were some received traditions of miracles worked by
Jesus in his household, there is no reason for the evident
expectation of some help which is said to have been shown
by Mary when the guests want wine at the wedding (John ii.
3 — 5)' That verse 11 states that this was his first miracle is
only one of the many inconsistencies of the gospel storieSr
CHRISTIANITY. 253
Passing from these gospels of the infancy to those which
tell of the sufferings of Jesus, we shall find in the " Gospel
of Nicodemus, or Acts of Pilate," much that shows their
full accordance with the received writings of the New Testa-
ment. This point is so important, as equalising the canoni-
cal and uncanonical gospels, that no excuse is needed for
proving it by somewhat extensive extracts. The gospel
opens as follows : *' I, Ananias, a provincial warden, being
a disciple of the law, from the divine Scriptures recognised
our Lord Jesus Christ, and came to him by faith ; and was
also accounted worthy of holy baptism. Now, when search-
ing the records of what was wrought in the time of our
Lord Jesus Christ, which the Jews laid up under Pontius
Pilate, I found that these Acts were written in Hebrew, and
by the good pleasure of God I translated them into Greek
for the information of all who call on the name of our Lord
Jesus Christ, under the government of our Lord Flavius
Theodosius, the 17th year, and in the 6th consulate of
Flavius Valentinianus, in the 9th indiction." It may
here be noted for what it is worth that Justin Martyr (ist
Apology, chap, xxxv.) refers the Romans to the Acts of
Pilate as public documents open to them, which is testi-
mony far stronger than he gives to any canonical gospel.
"In the 15th year of the government of Tiberius Caesar,
King of the Romans, and of Herod, King of Galilee, the
9th year of his reign, on the 8th before the calends of April,
which is the 25th of March ; in the consulship of Rufus and
Rubellio ; in the 4th year of the 202nd Olympiad, when
Joseph Caiaphas was high priest of the Jews. Whatsoever,
after the cross and passion of our Lord Jesus Christ, the
Saviour God, Nicodemus recorded and wrote in Hebrew,
and left to posterity, is after this fashion "(" Apocryphal
Gospels," B. H. Cowper, pp. 229, 230). In the first
chapter we learn how the Jews came to Pilate, and accuse
Jesus, " that he saith he is the son of God and a king ;
moreover, he profaneth the Sabbaths, and wisheth to abolish
the law of our fathers." After some conversation, Jesus is
brought, and in chap. 2 we read the message from Pilate's
wife, and " Pilate, having called the Jews, said to them, Ye
know that my wife is religious, and inclined to practise
Judaism with you. They said unto him, Yea, we know it.
Pilate saith to them. Behold my wife hath sent to me,
saying, Have nothing to do with this just man, for I have
suffered very much because of him in the night. But the
254 THE freethinker's TEXT-BOOK.
Jews answered, and said to Pilate, Did we not tell thee that
he is a magician ? Behold, he hath sent a dream to thy
wife." The trial goes on, and Pilate declares the innocence
of Jesus, and then confers with him as in John xviii. 33 — 37.
Then comes the question (chaps, iii. and iv.) : " Pilate saith
unto him. What is truth ? Jesus saith to him, Truth is
from heaven. Pilate saith. Is truth not upon earth ? Jesus
saith to Pilate, Thou seest how they who say the truth are
judged by those who have power upon earth. And, leaving
Jesus within the praetorium, Pilate went out to the Jews,,
and saith unto them, I find no fault in him." The con-
versation between Pilate and the Jews is then related more
fully than in the canonical accounts, and after this follows
a scene of much pathos, which is far more in accord with
the rest of the tale than the accepted story, wherein the mul-
titude are represented as crying with one voice for his death.
Nicodemus (chap, v.) first rises and speaks for Jesus :
" Release him, and wish no evil against him. If the mira-
cles which he doth are of God, they will stand ; but, if of
men, they will come to nought Now, therefore, release
this man, for he is not deserving of death." Then (chaps,
vi., vii., and viii.) : " One of the Jews, starting up, asked
the governor that he might say a word. The governor
saith, If thou wilt speak, speak. And the Jew said, I lay
thirty-eight years on my bed in pain and affliction. And
when Jesus came, many demoniacs, and persons suffering
various diseases, were healed by him ; and some young men
had pity on me, and carried me with my bed, and took me
to him ; and when Jesus saw me, he had compassion, and
said the word to me. Take up thy bed, and walk ; and I
took up my bed and walked. The Jews said to Pilate, Ask
him what day it was when he was healed. He that waS;
healed said, On the Sabbath. The Jews said. Did we not; .
tell thee so ? that on the Sabbath he healeth and cast^h ^
out demons ? And another Jew, starting up, said, I ^as
bom blind ; I heard a voice, but saw no person ; and as -
Jesus passed by, I cried with a loud voice, Have pity on
me. Son of David, and he had pity on me, and placed his
hands upon my eyes, and immediately I saw. And another
Jew, leaping up, said, I was a cripple, and he made me
straight with a word. And another said, I was a leper,
and he healed me with a word. And a certain woman cried
out from a distance, and said, I had an issue of blood, arid
I touched the hem of his garment, and my issue of blood.
CHRISTIANITY. 255
Avliich had been for twelve years, was stayed. The Jews
said, We have a law not to admit a woman to witness. And
others, a multitude, both of men and of women, cried and
said, This man is a prophet, and demons are subject unto
him. Pilate said to those who said that demons were sub-
ject to him, Why were your teachers not also subject to
him ? They say unto Pilate, We know not. And others
said, That he raised up Lazarus from the sepulchre, when
he had been dead four days. And the governor, becoming
afraid, said to all the multitude of the Jews, Why will ye
shed innocent blood ?" The story proceeds much as in
the gospels, the names of the malefactors being given ; and
when Pilate remarks the three hours' darkness to the Jews,
they answer, " An eclipse of the sun has happened in the
usual manner '' (chap. xi.). Chap. xiii. gives a full account
of the conversation between the Jews and the Roman
soldiers alluded to in Matt, xxviii. ii — 15. The remaining
chapters relate the proceedings of the Jews after the resur-
rection, and are of no special interest. There is a second
Gospel of Nicodemus, varying on some points from the
one quoted above, which assumes to be " compiled by a
] eW; named ^neas ; translated from the Hebrew tongue
into the Greek, by Nicodemus, a Roman Toparch/'' Then
we find a second part of the Gospel of Nicodemus, or
*^ The Descent of Christ to the Under World," which relates
how Jesus descended into Hades, and how he ordered
Satan to be bound, and then he ^^ blessed Adam on th6
forehead with the sign of the cross ; and he did this also
to the patriarchs, and the prophets, and martyrs, and fore-
fathers, and took them up, and sprang up out of Hades." This
story manifestly runs side by side with tlie tradition in
I Pet. iii. 19, 20, wherein it is stated that Jesus ^*went and
preached unto the spirits in prison," and that preaching
is placed between his death (v. 18) and his resurrection
(v. 21). The saving by baptism (v. 21) is also alluded to
in this connection in Nicodemus, wherein (chap, xi.) the
dead are baptised. The Latin versions of the Gospels of
Nicodemus vary in details from the Greek, but not more
than do the four canonical. In these, as in all the apocry-
phal writings, there is nothing specially to distinguish them
from the accepted Scriptures ; improbabilities and contra-
dictions abound in all ; miracles render them all alike in-
credible ; myriad chains of similarity bind them all to each
other, necessitating either the rejection of all as fabulous,
256 THE freethinker's TEXT-BOOK.
or the acceptance of all as historical. Whether we regard
external or internal evidence, we come to the same conclu-
sion, tJiat there is nothing to distinguish the canonical from
the uncanonical writings.
C. That it is not known where, when, by whom, the canofii-
cal writings zuere selected. Tremendously damaging to the
authenticity of the New Testament as this statement is, it
is yet practically undisputed by Christian scholars. Canon
Westcott says frankly : " It cannot be denied that the
Canon was formed gradually. The condition of society
and the internal relations of the Church presented obstacles
to the immediate and absolute determination of the ques-
tion, which are disregarded now, only because they have
ceased to exist. The tradition which represents St. John as
fixing the contents of the New Testament, betrays the spirit
of a later age '' (Westcott '' On the Canon," p. 4). " The
track, however, which we have to follow is often obscure
and broken. The evidence of the earliest Christian writers
is not only uncritical and casual, but is also fragmentary ''
(Ibid, p. 11). ^' From the close of the second century, the
history of the Canon is simple, and its proof clear
Before that time there is more or less difficulty in making
out the details of the question Here, however, we are
again beset with peculiar difficulties. The proof of the
Canon is embarrassed both by the general characteristics
of the age in which it was fixed, and by the particular
form of the evidence on which it first depends. The
spirit of the ancient world was essentially uncritical " (Ibid,
pp. 6 — 8). In dealing with ^^the early versions of the New
Testament,'' Westcott admits that '^ it is not easy to over--
rate the difficulties which beset any inquiry into the early
versions of the New Testament " (" On the Canon," p. 231).
He speaks of the '^comparatively scanty materials and
vague or conflicting traditions " (Ibid). The " original ver-
sions of the East and West " are carefully examined by
him; the oldest is the " Peshito," in Syriac — i.e., Aramaean,
or Syro-Chaldaic. This must, of course, be only a transla-
tion of the Testament, if it be true that the original books
were written in Greek. The time when this version was formed
is unknown, and Westcott argues that "' the very obscurity
which hangs over its origin is a proof of its venerable
-age" (Ibid, p. 240); and he refers it to "the first half
of the second century," while acknowledging that he does
:So " without conclusive authority " (Ibid). The Peshito
CHRISTIANITY. 257
■omits the second and third epistles of John, second of
Peter, that of Jude, and the Apocalypse. The origin of
the Western version, in Latin, is quite as obscure as that
of the Syriac; and it is also incomplete, compared with
the present Canon, omitting the epistle of James and the
second of Peter (Ibid, p. 254). All the evidence so labo-
riously gathered together by the learned Canon proves our
proposition to demonstration. But, it is admitted on all
hands, that ** it is impossible to assign any certain time when
a collection of these books, either by the Apostles, or by
any council of inspired or learned men, near their time,
was made The matter is too certain to need much to
be said of it ^^ (Jones " On the Canon,^' vol. i, p. 7).
Jones adds that he hopes to confute " these specious ob-
jections in the fourth part of this book," in which he
endeavours to prove the Gospels and Acts to be genuine^
so that it does not much matter when they were collected
together. In the time of Eusebius the Canon was still
unsettled, as he ranks among the disputed, and spurious
works, the epistles of James and Jude, second of Peter,
second and third of John, and the Apocalypse (^' Eccles.
Hist," bk. iii., chap. 25). It is not necessary to offer any
further proof in support of our position, that it is not
.known where, when, by ivhom, the canonical zuritings zaere
selected.
D. That before about a.d. 180 there is no trace of four
gospels among the Christians. The first step we take in
attacking the four canonical gospels, apart from the wTitings
of the New Testament as a whole, is to show that there
was no '^ sacred quaternion " spoken of before about
A.D. .180, /.^., the supposed time of Irenaeus. Irenaeus is
said to have been a bishop of Lyons towards the close of
the second century ; we find him mentioned in the letter
sent by the Churches of Vienne and Lyons to ^^ brethren in
Asia and Phrygia," as ^^ our brother and companion Irenaeus,"
.and as a presbyter much esteemed by them ('' Eccles.
Hist." bk. v., chs. i, 4). This letter relates a persecution
which occurred in ^' the 17th year of the reign of the
Emperor Antoninus Verus," i.e., a.d. 177. Paley dates the
letter about a.d. 170, but as it relates the persecution of
a.d. 177, it is difiicult to see how it could be written about
seven years before the persecution took place. In that
persecution Pothinus, bishop of Lyons, is said to have been
slain ; he was succeeded by Irenaeus (Ibid bk. v., ch. 5),
25B THE freethinker's TEXT-BOOK.
who, therefore, could not possibly have been bishoj^ before
A.D. 177, while he ought probably to be put a year or two
later, since time is needed, after the persecution, to send the
account of it to Asia by the hands of Irenaeus, and he must
be supposed to have returned and to have settled down in
Lyons before he wrote his voluminous works ; a.d. 180 is,
therefore, an almost impossibly early date, but it is, at any
rate, the very earliest that can be pretended for the
testimony now to be examined. The works against heresies
were probably written, the first three about a.d. 190, and
the remainder about a.d. 198. Irenaeus is the first
Christian writer who mentions four Gospels ; he says :^
^^ Matthew^ produced his Gospel, wTitten among the
Hebrews, in their ow^n dialect, whilst Peter and Paul pro-
claimed the Gospel and founded the church at Rome.
After the departure of these, Mark, the disciple and in-
terpreter of Peter, also transmitted to us in writing what had
been preached by him. And Luke, the companion of
Paul, committed to wTiting the Gospel preached by him.
Afterwards John, the disciple of our Lord, the same that
lay upon his bosom, also published the Gospel, whilst he
was yet at Ephesus in Asia" (Quoted by Eusebius, bk. v.,
ch. 8, from 3rd bk. of " Refutation and Overthrow of False
Doctrine," by Irenaeus).
The reasons which compelled Irenaeus to believe that
there must be neither less nor more than four Gospels in
the Church are so convincing that they deserve to be
here put on record. "It is not possible that the Gospels
can be either more or fewer in number than they are. For,
since there are four zones [sometimes translated " corners "
or '^ quarters "] of the world in which we live, and four
Catholic spirits, while the Church is scattered throughout
all the vforld, and the pillar and grounding of the Church
is the Gospel and the spirit of life ; it is fitting she should
have four pillars, breathing out immortality on every side,
and vivifying men afresh. From w^hich fact it is evident
that the Word, the Artificer of all. He that sitteth upon the
Cherubim, and contains all things. He who was manifested to
men, has given us the Gospel under four aspects, but bound
together by one Spirit For the Cherubim too were four-
faced, and their faces were images of the dispensation of the
Son of God And, therefore, the Gospels are in accord
with these things, among which Christ Jesus is seated"
('^ Irenaeus," bk. iii., chap, xi., sec. 8).
CHRISTIANITY. 259
The Rev. Dr. Giles, writing on Justin Martyr, the great
Christian apologist, candidly says : " The very names of
the Evangelists Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, are never
mentioned by him — do not occur once in all his works. It
is, therefore, childish to say that he has quoted from our
existing Gospels, and so proves their existence, as they now
are, in his own time He has nowhere remarked, like
those Fathers of the Church who lived several ages after
him, that there ^r^foiir Gospels of higher importance and
estimation than any others All this was the creation of
a later age, but it is wanting in Justin Martyr, and the
defect leads us to the conclusion that our four Gospels had
not then emerged from obscurity, but were still, if in being,
confounded with a larger mass of Christian traditions which,
about this very time, were beginning to be set down in
writing'"' ("Christian Records," pp. 71, 72).
Had these four Gospels emerged before a.d. i8o, we
should most certainly find some mention of them in the
Mishna. " The Mishna, a collection of Jewish traditions
compiled about the year i8o, takes no notice of Christianity,
though it contains a chapter headed ^ De Cultu Peregrino,
*of strange worship.' This omission is thought by Dr.
Paley to prove nothing, for, says he, ' it cannot be disputed
but that Christianity was perfectly well known to the world
at this time.' It cannot, certainly, be disputed that Chris-
tianity was beginning to be known to the world, but whether
it had yet emerged from the lower classes of persons
among whom it originated, may well be doubted. It is a
prevailing error, in biblical criticism, to suppose that the
whole world was feelingly alive to what was going on in
small and obscure parts of it. The existence of Christians
was probably known to the compilers of the xMishna in 180,
even though they did not deign to notice them, but they
could not have had any knowledge of the New Testament,
or they would undoubtedly have noticed it ; if, at least, we
-are right in ascribing to it so high a character, attracting
(as Ave know it does) the admiration of every one in every
country to which it is carried " (Ibid, p. 35).
There is, however, one alleged proof of the existence of
four, and only four, Gospels, put forward by Paley : —
•^ Tatian, a follower of Justin Martyr, and who flourished
about the year 170, composed a harmony or collection of
the Gospels, which he called Diatessaron, of the Four.
This title, as well as the work, is remarkable, because it
26o THE FREETHINKER'S TEXT-BOOK.
shows that then, as now, there were four, and only four,
Gospels in general use with Christians " (" Evidences," pp.
154, 15s). Paley does not state, until later, that the
'' follower of Justin Martyr " turned heretic and joined the
Encratites, an ascetic and mystic sect who taught abstinence
from marriage, and from meat, etc. ; nor does he tell us
how doubtful it is what the Diatessaron — now lost — really
contained. He blandly assures us that it is a harmony of
the four Gospels, although all the evidence is against him..
Irenaeus, as quoted by Eusebius, says of Tatian that
'^ having apostatised from the Church, and being elated
with the conceit of a teacher, and vainly puffed up as if he
surpassed all others," he invented some new doctrines, and
Eusebius further tells us : *^ Their chief and founder,
Tatianus, having formed a certain body and collection
of Gospels, I know not how, has given this the title
Diatessaron, that is the Gospel by the four, or the Gospel
formed of the four" (^' Eccles. Hist," bk. iv., ch. 29).,
Could Eusebius have written that Tatian formed this, /
know not ho7u, if it had been a harmony of the Gospels-
recognised by the Church when he wrote ? and how is it
that Paley knows all about it, though Eusebius did not ?
And still further, after mentioning the Diatessaron, Eusebius
says of another of Tatian' s hooks : ^' This book, indeed^
appears to be the most elegant and profitable of all his
works " (Ibid). More profitable than a harmony of the
four Gospels ! So far as the name goes, as given by
Eusebius, it would seem to imply one Gospel written by
four authors. Epiphanius states : ^^ Tatian is said to have
composed the Gospel by four, which is called by some, the
Gospel according to the Hebrews " (^' Sup. Rel.," vol. ii.,
p. 155). Here we get the Diatessaron identified with the
widely-spread and popular early Gospel of the Hebrews.
Theodoret (circa a.d. 457) says that he found more than 200
such books in use in Syria, the Christians not perceiving
" the evil design of the composition ;" and this is Paley's
harmony of the Gospels ! Theodoret states that he took
these books away, " and instead introduced the Gospels of
the four Evangelists ;" how strange an action in dealing
with so useful a work as a harmony of the Gospels, to
confiscate it entirely and call it an evil design ! To com-
plete the value of this work as evidence to "four, and only
four. Gospels," we are told bv Victor of Capua, that it was
also called Diapente, i.e., " by five " {" Sup. Rel.," vok ii.,.
CHRISTIANITY. .2()I
p. 153). In fact, there is no possible reason for calling the
work — whose contents aie utterly unknown — a harmofiy of
the Gospels at all ; the notion that it is a harmony is the
purest of assumptions. There is some slight evidence in
favour of the identity of the Diatessaron with the Gospel of
the Hebrews. '^ Those, however, who called the Gospel
used by Tatian the Gospel according to the Hebrews, must
have read the work, and all that we know confirms their
conclusion. The work was, in point of fact, found in wide
circulation precisely in the places in which, earUer, the
Gospel according to the Hebrews was more particularly
current. The singular fact that the earliest reference to
Tatian's ^ harmony ' is made a century and a half after its
supposed composition, that no writer before the sth century
had seen the work itself, indeed, that only two writers
before that period mention it at all, receives its natural
explanation in the conclusion that Tatian did not actually
compose any harmony at all, but simply made use of the
same Gospel as his master Justin Martyr, namely, the
Gospel according to the Hebrews, by which name his
Gospel had been called by those best informed '^ (" Sup.
E.el.,'' vol. ii., pp. 158, 159). As it is not pretended by any
that there is any mention of foitr Gospels before the time
of Irenaeus, excepting this "harmony," pleaded by some as
dated about a.d. 170, and by others as between 170 and
180, it would be sheer waste of time and space to prove
further a point admitted on all hands. This step of our
argument is, then, on solid and unassailable ground — that
before abotit a.d. 180 there is no trace 0/ fovr Gospels among
the Christians.
E. That, before that date, Matthew, Mai^k, Luke, and
yoJin, are not selected as the four evangelists. This position
necessarily follows from the preceding one, since four evan-
gehsts could not be selected until four Gospels were recog-
nised. Here, again, Dr. Giles supports the argument we
are building up. He says : " Justin Martyr never once
mentions by name the evangelists Matthew, Mark, Luke,
and John. This circumstance is of great importance ; for
those who assert that our four canonical Gospels are con-
temporary records of our Saviour's ministry, ascribe them
to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and to no other writers.
In this they are, in a certain sense, consistent ; for contem-
porary writings [? histories] are very rarely anonymous. If
so, how could they be proved to be contemporary ? Justin
262 TflE freethinker's TEXT-BOOK.
Martyr, it must be remembered, wrote in 150 ; but neither
he, nor any writer before him, has alluded, in the
most remote degree, to four specific Gospels, bearing the
names of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Let those who
think differently produce the passages in which such men-
tion is to be found " ('' Christian Records," Rev. Dr. Giles,
p. 73). Two of these names had, however, emerged a little
earlier, being mentioned as evangelists by Papias, of Hiera-
polis. His testimony will be fully considered below in esta-
blishing position g.
F. T/iaf there is no evidence that the four Gospels mentioned
about that date were the same as those we have now. This
brings us to a most important point in our examination ;
for we now attack the very key of the Christian position —
viz,, that, although the Gospels be not mentioned by name
previous to Irenaeus, their existence can yet be conclusively
proved by quotations from them, to be found in the writings
of the Fathers who lived before Irenaeus. Paley says :
^'The historical books of the New Testament — meaning
thereby the four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles — are
quoted, or alluded to, by a series of Christian writers, be-
ginning with those who were contemporary with the Apostles
or who immediately followed them, and proceeding in close
and regular succession from their time to the present."
And he urges that " the medium of proof stated in this pro-
position is, of all others, the most unquestionable, the least
liable to any practices of fraud, and is not diminished by
the lapse of ages'' (^^ Evidences," pp. in, 112). The
writers brought in evidence are : Barnabas, Clement, Her-
nias, Ignatius, Poly carp, Papias, Justin Martyr, Hegesippus,
and the epistle from Lyons and Vienne. Before examining
the supposed quotations in as great detail as our space will
allow, two or three preliminary remarks are needed on the
value of this offered evidence as a whole.
In the first place, the greater part of the works brought
forward as witnesses are themselves challenged, and their
own dates are unknown ; their now accepted writings are
only the residuum of a mass of forgeries, and Dr. Giles
justly says : '' The process of elimination, which gradually
reduced the so-called writings of the first century from two
folio volumes to fifty slender pages, would, in the case of
any other profane works, have prepared the inquirer for
casting from him, with disgust, the small remnant, even if
not lully convicted of spuriousness ; for there is no other
CHRISTIANITY. 263
case in record of so wide a disproportion between what is
genuine and what is spurious " (Christian Records," p. 67).
Their testimony is absolutely worthless until they are them-
selves substantiated ; and from the account given of them
above (pp 214 — 221, and 232 — 235), the student is in
a position to judge of the value of evidence depend-
ing on the Apostolic Fathers. Professor Norton re-
marks : " When w^e endeavour to strengthen this evi-
dence by appeahng to the writings ascribed to Apos-
tolical Fathers, we, in fact, weaken its force. At the very
extremity of the chain of evidence, where it ought to be
strongest, we are attaching defective links, which will bear
no weight" (" Genuineness of the Gospels," vol. i., p. 357).
Again, supposing that we admit these witnesses, their repeti-
tion of sayings of Christ, or references to his life, do not
— in the absence of quotations specified by them as taken
from Gospels written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John — -
Throve that, because similar sayings or actions are recorded
in the present canonical Gospels, therefore, these latter ex-
isted in their days, and were in their hands. Lardner says
on this point : " Here is, however, one difiiculty, and 'tis a
difficulty which may frequently occur, whilst we are con-
sidering these very early writers, who were conversant with
the Apostles, and others v/ho had seen or heard our Lord ;
and were, in a manner, as well acquainted with our Saviour's
doctrine and history as the Evangelists themselves, unless
their quotations or allusions are very express and clear.
The question, then, here is, whether Clement in these places
refers to words of Christ, written and recorded, or whether
he reminds the Corinthians of words of Christ, which he and
they might have heard from the Apostles, or other eye-and-
ear-witnesses of our Lord. Le Clerc, in his dissertation on
the four Gospels, is of opinion that Clement refers to
written words of our Lord, which were in the hands of the
Corinthians, and well known to them. On the other hand,
I find, Bishop Pearson thought, that Clement speaks of
words which he had heard from the Apostles themselves, or
their disciples.- I certainly make no question but the three
first Gospels were writ before this time. And I am well
satisfied that Clement might refer to our written Gospels,
though he does not exactly agree with them in expression.
But whether he does refer to them is not easy to determine
concerning a man who, very probably, knew these things
before they vrere committed to writing ; and, even after
264 THE FREETHINKER'S TEXT-BOOK.
they were so, might continue to speak of them, in the same
manner he had been wont to do, as things he was well
informed of, without appealing to the Scriptures themselves''
{'' CredibiHty,'' pt. IL, vol. i., pp. 68—70). Canon West-
cott, after arguing that the Apostolic Fathers are much
influenced by the Pauline Epistles, goes on to remark :
'^ Nothing has been said hitherto of the coincidences be-
tween the Apostolic Fathers and the Canonical Gospels.
From the nature of the case, casual coincidences of lan-
guage cannot be brought forward in the same manner to
prove the use of a history as of a letter. The same facts
and words, especially if they be recent and striking, may
be preserved in several narratives. References in the sub-
apostolic age to the discourses or actions of our Lord, as we
find them recorded in the Gospels, show, as far as they go,
that what the Gospels relate was then held to be true ; but
it does not necessarily follow that they were already in use.
and w^ere the actual source of the passages in question. On
the contrary, the mode in which Clement refers to our
Lord's teaching — ' the Lord said,' not ' saith ' — seems to
imply that he was indebted to tradition, and not to any
written accounts, for words most closely resembling those
which are still found in our Gospels. The main testimony
of the Apostolic Fathers is, therefore, to the substance, and
not to the authenticity, of the Gospels " {^' On the Canon,"
pp. 51, 52). An examination of the Apostolic Fathers gives
us little testimony as to *'the substance of the Gospels ;''
but the whole passage is here given to show how much
Canon Westcott, writing in defence of the Canon, finds
himself obliged to give up of the position occupied by
earlier apologists. Dr. Giles agrees with the justice of these
remarks of Lardner and Westcott. He writes : "" The say-
ings of Christ were, no doubt, treasured up like household
jew^els by his disciples and followers. Why, then, may we
not refer the quotation of Christ's words, occurring in the
ApostoHcal Fathers, to an origin of this kind ? If we ex-
amine a few of those quotations, the supposition, just
stated, will expand into reality The same maybe said
of every single sentence found in any of the Apostolical
Fathers, which, on first sight, might be thought to be a
decided quotation from one of the Gospels according to
Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. It is impossible to deny
the truth of this observation ; for we see it confirmed by the
fact that the Apostolical Fathers do actually quote Moses,
CHRISTIANITY. 265
and other old Testament writers, by name — ^ Moses hath
said/ ^ but Moses says/ etc. — in nmiierous passages. But
we nowhere meet with the words, ^ Matthew hath said in
his Gospel,' ^John hath said,' etc. They always quote,
not the words of the Evangelists, but the words of Christ
himself directly, which furnishes the strongest presumption
that, though the sayings of Christ were in general vogue,
yet the evangelical histories, into which they were afterwards
embodied, were not then in being. But the converse of
this view of the case leads us to the same conclusion.
The Apostolical Fathers quote sayings of Christ which
are not found in our Gospels There is no proof
that our New Testament was in existence during the lives
of the Apostolical Fathers, who, therefore, could not make
citations out of books which they had never seen " ('^ Chris-
tian Records," pp. 51 — 53). "There is no evidence that
they [the four Gospels] existed earUer than the middle of
the second century, for they are not named by any writer
who lived before that time" (Ibid, p. 56). In searchingfor
evidence of the existence of the Gospels during the earlier
period of the Church's history. Christian apologists have
hitherto been content to seize upon a phrase here and there
somewhat resembling a phrase in the canonical Gospels,
and to put that forward as a proof that the Gospels then
were the same as those we have now. This rough-and-
ready plan must now be given up, since the most learned
Christian writers now agree, with the Freethinkers, that such
a method is thoroughly unsatisfactory.
Yet, again, admitting these writers as witnesses, and
allowing that they quote from the same Gospels, their
quotations only prove that the isolated phrases they use
were in the Gospels of their day, and are also in the present
ones ; and many such cases might occur in spite of great
variations in the remainder of the respective Gospels, and
would by no means prove that the Gospels they used were
identical with ours. If Josephus, for instance, had ever
quoted some sentences of Socrates recorded by Plato, that
quotation, supposing that Josephus were reliable, would
prove that Plato and Socrates both lived before Josephus,
and that Plato wrote down some of the sayings of Socrates;
but it Avould not prove that a version of Plato in our hands
to-day was identical with that used by Josephus. The scat-
tered and isolated passages woven in by the Fathers in their
works would fail to prove the identity of the Gospels of the
266 THE freethinker's TEXT-BOOK.
second century with those of the nineteenth, even were
they as like parallel passages in the canonical Gospels as
they are unlike tbem.
It is '' important," says the able anonymous writer of
^- Supernatural Religion," '' that we should constantly bear
in mind that a great number of Gospels existed in the early
Church which are no longer extant, and of most of which
even the names are lost. We will not here do more than
refer, in corroboration of this fact, to the preliminary state-
ment of the author of the third Gospel : * Forasmuch as
many {ttoXXoi) have taken in hand to set forth a declara-
tion of those things which are surely believed among us,
etc' It is, therefore, evident that before our third synoptic
was written, many similar works were already in circulation.
Looking at the close similarity of the large portions of the
three synoptics, it is almost certain that many of the ttoXXol
here mentioned bore a close analogy to each other, and to
our Gospels ; and this is known to have been the case, for
instance, amongst the various forms of the ' Gospel accord-
ing to the Hebrews,' distinct mention of which we meet
with long before we hear anything of our Gospels. When,
therefore, in early writings, we meet with quotations closely
resembling, or, we may add, even identical with passages
which are found in our Gospels — the source of which, how-
ever, is not mentioned, nor is any author's name indicated
— the similarity, or even identity, cannot by any means be
admitted as evidence that the quotation is necessarily from
our Gospels, and not from some other similar work now no
longer extant ; and more especially not when, in the same
writings, there are oiher quotations from apocryphal sources
different from our Gospels. Whether regarded as historical
records or as writings embodying the mere tradition of the
early Christians, our Gospels cannot for a moment be recog-
nised as the exclusive depositaries of the genuine sayings
and doings of Jesus ; and so far from the common posses-
sion by many works in early times of such words of Jesus,
in closely similar form, being either strange or improbable^
the really remarkable phenomena is that such material
variation in the report of the more important historical
teaching should exist amongst them. But whilst similarity
to our Gospels in passages quoted by early writers from
unnamed sources cannot prove the use of our Gospels,
variation from them would suggest or prove a different
origin ; and, at least, it is obvious that quotations which do
CHRISTIANITY. 267
not agree with our Gospels cannot, in any case, indicate
their existence" (" Sup. Rel," vol. i., pp. 217 — 219).
We will now turn to the Avitness of Paley's Apostolic
Fathers, bearing always in mind the utter worthlessness of
their testimony ; worthless as it is, however, it is the only
evidence Christians have to bring forward to prove the
identity of their Gospels with those [supposed to have been]
written in the first century. Let us listen to the opinion
given by Bishop Marsh : " From the Epistle of Barnabas,
no inference can be deduced that he had read any part of
the New Testament. From the genuine epistle, as it is
called, of Clement of Rome, it may be inferred that
Clement had read the first Epistle to the Corinthians.
From the Shepherd of Hennas no inference whatsoever
can be drawn. From the Epistles of Ignatius, it may be
concluded that he had read St. Paul's Epistle to the
Ej^hesians, and that there existed in his time evangelical
writings, though it cannot be shown that he has quoted
from them. From Polycarp's Epistle to the Philippians, it
appears that he had heard of St. Paul's Epistle to that
community, and he quotes a passage which is in the
first Epistle to the Corinthians, and another which is in the
Epistle to the Ephesians ; but no positive conclusion can
be drawn with respect to any other epistle, or any of the
four Gospels " (Marsh's " Michaehs," vol. i., p. 354, as
quoted in Norton's *^ Genuineness of the Gospels," vol. i.,
p. 3). Very heavily does this tell against the authenticity
of these records, for '' if the four Gospels and other books
were written by those who had been eye-witnesses of
Christ's miracles, and the five Apostolic Fathers had con-
versed with the Apostles, it is not to be conceived that
they would not have named the actual books themselves
which possessed so high authority, and would be looked up
to with so much respect by all the Christians. This is the
only way in which their evidence could be of use to support
the authenticity of the New Testament as being the work
of the Apostles ; but this is a testimony which the ^we
Apostolical Fathers fail to supply. There is not a single
sentence, in all their remaining works, in which a clear
allusion to the New Testament is to be found " ('' Christian
Records," Rev. Dr. Giles, p. 50).
Westcott, while claiming in the Apostolic Fathers a
knowledge of most of the epistles, writes very doubtfully
as to their knowledge of the Gospels (see above p. 264), and
26S THE freethinker's TEXT-BOOK.
after giving careful citations of all possible quotations, he
sums up thus : " I. No evangelic reference in the Apostolic
Fathers can be referred certainly to a written record. 2. It
appears most probable from the form of the quotations that
they were derived from oral tradition. 3. No quotation
contains any element which is not substantially preserved
in our Gospels. 4. When the text given differs from the
text of our Gospels it represents a later form of the
evangelic tradition. 5. The text of St. Matthew corres-
ponds more nearly than the other synoptic texts with the
quotations and references as a whole " {'' On the Canon/'
p. 62). There appears to be no proof whatever of con-
clusions 3 and 4, but we give them all as they stand. But
we will take these Apostolic Fathers one by one, in the
order used by Paley.
Barnabas. We have already quoted Bishop Marsh and
Dr. Giles as regards him. There is '' nothing in this epistle
worthy of the name of evidence even of the existence of
our Gospels" ("Sup. Rel," vol. i., p. 260). The quotation
sometimes urged, "There are many called, few chosen," is
spoken of by Westcott as a " proverbial phrase," and
phrases similar in meaning and manner may be found in
iv. Ezra,viii. 3, ix. 15 ("Sup. Rel.," vol. i., p. 245); in the latter
work the words occur in a relation similar to that in which
we find them in Barnabas ; in both the judgment is
described, and in both the moral drawn is that there are
many lost and few saved ; it is the more likely that the
quotation is taken from the apocryphal work, since many
other quotations are drawn from it throughout the epistle.
The quotation " Give to every one that asketh thee," is not
found in the supposed oldest MS., the Codex Sinaiticus,
and is a later interpolation, clearly written in by some
transcriber as appropriate to the passage in Barnabas. The
last supposed quotation, that Christ chose men of bad
character to be his disciples, that " he might show that he
came not to call the righteous, but sinners," is another
clearly later interpolation, for it jars with the reasoning of
Barnabas, and when Origen quotes the passage he omits
the phrase. In a work which " has been ^^Titten at the
request, and is published at the cost of the Christian Evi-
dence Society," and which may fairly, therefore, be taken as
the opinion of learned, yet most orthodox, Christian opinion,
the Rev. Mr. Sanday writes: "The general result of our
examination of the Epistle of Barnabas may. perhaps, be
CHRISTIANITY. 269
Stated thus, that while not supplying by itself certain and
conclusive proof of the use of our Gospels, still the pheno-
mena accord better with the hypothesis of such a use.
This epistle stands in the second line of the Evidence,
and as a witness is rather confirmatory than principal"
(•'Gospels in the Second Century,'' p. 76. Ed. 1876). And
this is all that the most modern apologetic criticism can
draw from an epistle of which Paley makes a great display,
saying that ''if the passage remarked in this ancient writing
had been found in one of St. Paul's Epistles, it would
have been esteemed by every one a high testimony to St.
Matthew's Gospel" (''Evidences," p. 113).
Clement of Rome. — " Tischendorf, who is ever ready
to claim the slightest resemblance in language as a reference
to new Testament writings, admits that although this Epistle
is rich in quotations from the Old Testament, and here and
there that Clement also makes use of passages from Pauline
Epistles, he now^here refers to the Gospels " (" Sup. Rel.,"
vol. i. pp. 227, 228). The Christian Evidence Society, through
Mr. Sanday, thus criticises Clement : " Now what is the bear-
ing of the Epistle of Clement upon the question of the cur-
rency and authority of the Synoptic Gospels ? There are
two passages of some length which are, without doubt,
evangelical quotations, though whether they are derived
from the Canonical Gospels or not may be doubted '*
("Gospels in the Second Century," page 61). After
balancing the arguments for and against the first of
these passages, Mr. Sanday concludes : " Looking at the
arguments on both sides, so far as we can give them, I in-
cline, on the w^hole, to the opinion that Clement is not
quoting from our Gospels ; but I am quite aware of the
insecure ground on which this opinion rests. It is a nice
balance of probabilities, and the element of ignorance is so
large that the conclusion, whatever it is, must be purely
provisional. Anything like confident dogmatism on the
subject seems to me entirely out of place. Very much the
same is to be said of the second passage " (Ibid, p. 66).
The quotations in Clement, apparently from some other
evangelic work, will be noted under head //, and these are
those cited in Paley.
Hermas. — Tischendorf relinquishes this work also as evid -
ence for the Gospels. Lardner writes : " In Hermas are no
express citations of any books of the New Testament" ("Cre-
dibihty," vol. i. Dt. 2, p. 116). He thinks, however, that he
2 70 THE FREETHINKER'S TEXT-BOOK.
can trace '^ allusions to '^ 'Svords of Scripture." Westcott says
that ''The 6"/^^//^^^^ contains no definite quotation from either
Old or New Testament " ("On the Canon," p. 197); but
he also thinks that Hermas was " familiar with " some
records of " Christ's teaching." Westcott, however, does
not admit Hermas as an Apostolic Father at all, but places
him in the middle of the second century. " As regards the
direct historical evidence for the genuineness of the Gospels,
it is of no importance. No book is cited in it by name.
There are no evident quotations from the Gospels " (Norton's
" Genuineness of the Gospels," vol. i., pp. 342, 343).
Ignatius. — It would be wasted time to trouble about
Ignatius at all, after knowing the vicissitudes through which
his supposed works have passed (see ante pp. 217 — 220) ;
and Paley's references are such vague ''quotations" that they
may safely be left to the judgment of the reader. Tischen-
dorf, claiming two and three phrases in it, says somewhat
confusedly : '' Though we do not wish to give to these
references a decisive value, and though they do not exclude
all doubt as to their applicability to our Gospels, and more
particularly to that of St. John, they nevertheless undoubt-
edly bear traces of such a reference " (" When were our
Gospels Written," p. 61, Eng. ed.). This conclusion refers,
in Tischendorf, to Polycarp, as well as to Ignatius. In
these Ignatian Epistles, Mr. Sanday only treats the Cure-
tonian Epistles (see ante, p. 218) as genuine, and in these
he finds scarcely any coincidences with the Gospels. The
parallel to Matthew x. 16, '' Be ye, therefore, wise as ser-
pents and harmless as doves," is doubtful, as it is possible
" that Ignatius may be quoting, not directly from our Gos-
pel, but from one of the original documents (such as Ewald's
hypothetical ' Spruch-Sammlung '), out of which our Gospel
was composed" (''Gospels in the Second Century," p. 78).
An allusion to the " star " of Bethlehem may have, " as it
appears to have, reference to the narrative of Matt, ii
[but see, ante, p. 233, where the account given of the star
is widely different from the evangelic notice]. These are
(so far as I am aware) the only coincidences to be found
in the Curetonian version " (Ibid, pp. 78, 79).
Polycarp. — This epistle lies under a heavy weight of
suspicion, and has besides Httle worth analysing as possible
quotations from the Gospels. Paley quotes, " beseeching
the all-seeing God not to lead us into temptation." Why
not finish the passage ? Because, if he had done so, the con-
CHRISTIANITY. 27I
text would have shown that it was not a quotation from a
gospel identical with our own — " beseeching the all-seeing
God not to lead us into temptation, as the Lord hath said,
The spirit, indeed, is willing, but the flesh is weak." If this
be a quotation at all, it is from some lost gospel, as these
words are nowhere found thus conjoined in the Synoptics.
Thus briefly may these Apostolic Fathers be dismissed,
since their testimony fades away as soon as it is examined,
as a mist evaporates before the rays of the rising sun. We
will call up Paley-s other witnesses.
Papias. — In the fragment preserved by Eusebius there is
no quotation of any kind ; the testimony of Papias is to the
names of the authors of two of the Gospels, and will be
considered under g.
Justin Martyr. — We now come to the most important
of the supposed witnesses, and, although students must
study the details of the controversy in larger works, we will
endeavour to put briefly before them the main reasons why
Freethinkers reject Justin Martyr as bearing evidence to
the authenticity of the present Gospels, and in this resu7ni
we begin by condensing chapter iii. of "Supernatural
Religion, vol. i.,pp. 288 — 433, so far as it bears on our
present position. Justin Martyr is supposed to have died
about A.D. 166, having been put to death in the reign of
Marcus Aurelius ; he was by descent a Greek, but became
a convert to Christianity, strongly tinged with Judaism.
The longer Apology, and the Dialogue with Trypho, are
the works chiefly relied upon to prove the authenticity. The
date of the first Apology is probably about a.d. 147 ; the
Dialogue was written later, perhaps between a.d. 150 and
160. In these writings Justin quotes very copiously from
the Old Testament, and he also very frequently refers to
facts of Christian history, and to sayings of Jesus. Of
these references, for instance, some fifty occur in the first
Apology, and upwards of seventy in the Dialogue with
Trypho ; a goodly number, it will be admitted, by means
of which to identify the source from which he quotes.
Justin himself frequently and distinctly says that his
information and quotations are derived from the '^ Memoirs
of the Apostles," but, except upon one occasion, which we
shall hereafter consider, when he indicates Peter, he never
mentions an author's name. Upon examination it is found
that, with only one or two brief exceptions, the numerous
quotations from these "Memoirs" differ more or less
2 72 THE FREETHINKER'S TEXT-BOOK.
widely from parallel passages in our Synoptic Gospels, and
in many cases differ in the same respects as similar quota-
tions found in other writings of the second century, the
writers of which are known to have made use of un-
canonical Gospels ; and further, that these passages are
quoted several times, at intervals, by Justin, with the same
variations. Moreover, sayings of Jesus are quoted from
the '' Memoirs '' which are not found in our Gospels at all,
and facts in the life of Jesus, and circumstances of Christian
history, derived from the same source, not only are not
found in our Gospels, but are in contradiction with them.
Various theories have been put forward by Christian apolo-
gists to lessen the force of these objections. It has been
suggested that Justin quoted from memory, condensed
or combined to suit his immediate purpose ; that the
*^ Memoirs " were a harmony of the Gospels, with additions
from some apocryphal work ; that along with our Gospels
Justin used apocryphal Gospels ; that he made use of our
Gospels, preferring, however, to rely chiefly on an apocry-
phal one. Results so diverse show how dubious must be
the value of the witness of Justin Martyr. Competent
critics almost universally admit that Justin had no idea of
ranking the " Memoirs of the Apostles " among canonical
writings. The word translated '' Memoirs" would be more
correctly rendered " Recollections," or " Memorabilia,"
and none of these three terms is an appropriate title for
works ranking as canonical Gospels. Great numbers of
spurious writings, under the names of apostles, were current
in the early Church, and Justin names no authors for the
"Recollections" he quotes from, only saying that they
were composed **by his Apostles and their followers,"
clearly indicating that he was using some collective
recollections of the Apostles and those who followed them.
The word *• Gospels," in the plural, is only once applied
to these "Recollections;" "For the Apostles, in the
' Memoirs ' composed by them, which are called Gospels.""
" The last expression a /caXctrat evayyeXat, as many scholars
have declared, is a manifest interpolation. It is, in all
probability, a gloss on the margin of some old MS. which
some copyist afterwards inserted in the text. If Justin
really stated that the " Memoirs " were called Gospels, it
seems incomprehensible that he should never call them so
himself. In no other place in his writings does he apply
the plural to them, but, on the coAtrary, we find Trypha
CHRISTIANITY. 273
referring to the ' so-called Gospel/ which he states that he
had carefully read, and which, of course, can only be
Justin's * Memoirs,' and again, in another part of the same
dialogue, Justin quotes passages which are written ' in the
Gospel.' The term * Gospel ' is nowhere else used by Justin
in reference to a written record." The public reading of
the Recollections, mentioned by Justin, proves nothing,
since many works, now acknowledged as spurious, were thus
read (see ante, pp. 248, 249). Justin does not regard the
Recollections as inspired, attributing inspiration only to
prophetic writings, and he accepts them as authentic solely
because the events they narrate are prophesied of in the
Old Testament. The omission of any author's name is
remarkable, since, in quoting from the Old Testament, he
constantly refers to the author by name, or to the book
used; but in the very numerous quotations, supposed to
be from the Gospels, he never does this, save in one single
instance, mentioned below, when he quotes Peter. On the
theory that he had our four Gospels before him, this is the
more singular, since he would naturally have distinguished
one from the other. The only writing in the New Testa-
ment referred to by name is the Apocalypse, by " a certain
man whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ,"
and it is impossible that John should be thus mentioned,
if Justin had already been quoting from a Gospel bearing
his name under the general title of Recollections. Justin
clearly quotes from a written source and excludes oral
tradition, saying that in the Recollections is recorded
" everything that concerns our Saviour Christ." (The
proofs that Justin quotes from records other than the
Gospels will be classed under position /^, and are here
omitted.) Justin knows nothing of the shepherds of the
plain, and the angelic appearance to them, nor of the star
guiding the wise men to the place where Jesus was,
although he relates the story of the birth, and the visit of
the wise men. Two short passages in Justin are identical
with parallel passages in Matthew, but " it cannot be too
often repeated, that the mere coincidence of short
historical sayings in two works by no means warrants the
conclusion that the one is dependent on the other." In the
first Apology, chaps, xv., xvi., and xvii. are composed almost
entirely of examples of Christ's teaching, and with the ex-
ception of these two brief passages, not one quotation agrees
verbally with the canonical Gospels. We have referred to
274 THE freethinker's TEXT-BOOK.
one instance wherein the name of Peter is mentioned in
connection with the Recollections. Justin says : " The
statement also that he (Jesus) changed the name of Peter,
one of the Apostles, and that this is also written in his
* Memoirs,'" etc. This refers the " Memoirs'' to Peter, and
it is suggested that it is, therefore, a reference to the Gospel
of Mark, Mark having been supposed to have written his
Gospel under the direction of Peter. There was a " Gospel
according to Peter" current in the early Church, probably
a variation from the Gospel of the Hebrews, so highly
respected and so widely used by the primitive writers. It
is very probable that this is the work to which Justin so often
refers, and that it originally bore the simple title of *^ The
Gospel," or the " Recollections of Peter." A version of
this Gospel was also known as the " Gospel According to
the Apostles," a title singularly like the " Recollections of
the Apostles " by Justin. Seeing that in Justin's works his
quotations, although so copious, do not agree with parallel
passages in our Gospels, we may reasonably conclude that
** there is no evidence that he made use of any of our
Gospels, and he cannot, therefore, even be cited to prove their
very existence, and much less the authenticity and character
of records whose authors he does not once name." Passing
from this case, ably worked out by this learned and clever
writer (and we earnestly recommend our readers, if possible,
to study his careful analysis for themselves, since he makes
the whole question thoroughly intelligible to English readers,
and gives them evidence whereby they can form their own
judgments, instead of accepting ready-made conclusions),
we will examine Canon Westcott's contention. He admits
that the difficulties perplexing the evidence of Justin are
*' great ;" that there are " additions to the received narra-
tive, and remarkable variations from its text, which, in
some cases, are both repeated by Justin and found also in
other writings " (" On the Canon," p. 98). We regret to
say that Dr. Westcott, in laying the case before his readers,
somewhat misleads them, although, doubtless, unintention-
ally. He speaks of Justin telling us that " Christ was
descended from Abraham through Jacob, Judah, Phares,
Jesse, and David," and omits the fact that Justin traces the
descent to Mary alone, and knows nothing as to a descent
traced to Joseph, as in both Matthew and Luke (see below,
under Ji), He speaks of Justin mentioning wise men " guided
by a star," forgetting that Justin says nothing of the guid-
CHRISTIANITY. 275
ance, but only writes : " That he should arise like a star
from the seed of Abraham, Moses showed beforehand
Accordingly, when a star rose in heaven at the time of his
birth, as is recorded in the " Memoirs " of his Apostles, the
Magi from Arabia, recognising the sign by this, came and
worshipped him" ("Dial.," ch. cvi.). Pie speaks of Justin
recording " the singing of the Psalm afterwards " (after the
last supper), omitting that Justin only says generally (Dial,"
ch. cvi., to which Dr. Westcott refers us) that " when living
with them (Christ) sang praises to God." But as we here-
after deal with these discrepancies, we need not dwell on
them now, only warning our readers that since even such a
man as Dr. Westcott thus misrepresents facts, it will be well
never to accept any inferences drawn from such references
as these without comparing them with the original. One
of the chief difficulties to the English reader is to get a re-
liable translation. To give but a single instance. In the
version of Justin here used (that published by T. Clark,
Edinburgh), we find in the " Dialogue," ch. ciii., the follow-
ing passage : " His sweat fell down like drops of blood
while he was praying." And this is referred to by Canon
Westcott (p. 104) as a record of the "bloody sweat." Yet,
in the original, there is no word analogous to " of blood ;" the
passage runs : " sweat as drops fell down," and it is recorded
by Justin as a proof that the prophecy, " my bones are
poured out like watery' was fulfilled in Christ. The clumsy
endeavour to create a likeness to Luke xxii. 44 destroys
Justin's argument. Further on (p. 113) Dr. Westcott admits
that the words " of blood " are not found in Justin ; but it
is surely misleading, under these circumstances, to say that
Justin mentions " the bloody sweat." Westcott only main-
tains seven passages in the whole of Justin's writings, wherein
he distinctly quotes from the " Memoirs;" />., only seven that
can be maintained as quotations from the canonical Gospels
— the contention being that the " Memoirs " are the Gos-
pels. He says truly, if naively, " The result of a first view
of these passages is striking." Very striking, indeed ; for,
" of the seven, five agree verbally with the text of St. Mat-
thew or St. Luke, exhibiting^ indeed^ three slight various read-
ings 7iot elsewhere found, but such as are easily explicable.
The sixth is a condensed summary of words related by St.
Matthew ; the seventh alone presents an important variation
in the text of a verse, which is, however, otherwise very un-
certain "(pp. 130, 131. The italics are our own). That
276 THE freethinker's TEXT-BOOK.
IS, there are only seven distinct quotations, and all of these,
save two, are different from our Gospels. The whole of
Dr. Westcott's analysis of these passages is severely criticised
in " Supernatural Religion," and in the edition of 1875 of
Dr. Westcott's book, from which we quote, some of the
expressions he previously used are a little modified. The
author of " Supernatural Religion " justly says : '' The
striking result, to summarise Canon Westcott's own words,
is this. Out of seven professed quotations from the
* Memoirs,' in which he admits we may expect to find the
exact language preserved, five present three variations ; one
is a compressed summary, and does not agree verbally at
all ; and the seventh presents an important variation "
(vol. i., p. 394).
Dr. Giles speaks very strongly against Paley's distortion
of Justin Martyr's testimony, complaining : " The works of
Justin Martyr do not fall in the way of one in a hundred
thousand of our countrymen. How is it, then, to be depre-
cated that erroneous statements should be current about
him ! How is it to be censured that his testimony should
be changed, and he should be made to speak a falsehood 1"
(" Christian Records," p. 71). Dr. Giles then argues that
Justin would have certainly named the books and their
authors had they been current and reverenced in his time ;
that there were numberless Gospels current at that date ;
that Justin mentions occurrences that are only found related
in such apocryphal Gospels. He then compares seventeen
passages in Justin Martyr with parallel passages in the
Gospels, and concludes that Justin "gives us Christ's sayings
in their traditionary forms, and not in the words which are
found in our four Gospels." We will select two, to show his
method of criticising, translating the Greek, instead of giving
it, as he does, in the original. In the Apology, ch. xv.,
Justin writes : " If thy right eye offend thee, cut it out, for
it is profitable for thee to enter into the kingdom of heaven
with one eye, than having two to be thrust into the ever-
lasting fire." "This passage is very like Matt. v. 29 : ^If
thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from
thee ; for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members
should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into
hell.' But it is also like Matt, xviii. 9 : ' And if thine eye
offend thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee ; it is better
for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having
two eyes to be cast into hell-fire.' And it bears an equal
CHRISTIANITY. 277
likeness to Mark ix. 47 : ' And if thine eye offend thee,
pluck it out ; it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom
of God with one eye than, having two eyes, to be cast into
hell-fire/ Yet, strange to say, it is not identical in words
with either of the three " (pp. S^, 84). '^ I came not to call
the righteous but sinners to repentance." " In this only
instance is there a perfect agreement between the words of
Justin and the canonical Gospels, three of which, Matthew,
Mark, and Luke, give the same saying of Christ in the
same words. A variety of thoughts here rush upon the
mind. Are these three Gospels based upon a common
document? If so, is not Justin Martyr's citation drawn
from the same anonymous document, rather than from the
three Gospels, seeing he does not name them ? If, on the
other hand, Justin has cited them accurately in this in-
stance, why has he failed to do so in the others ? For no
other reason than that traditionary sayings are generally
thus irregularly exact or inexact, and Justin, citing from
them, has been as irregularly exact as they were " (Ibid,
p. 85). " The result to which a perusal of his works will
lead is of the gravest character. He will be found to quote
nearly two hundred sentiments or sayings of Christ ; but
makes hardly a single clear allusion to all those circum-
stances of time or place which give so much interest to
Christ's teaching, as recorded in the four Gospels. The
inference is that he quotes Christ's sayings as delivered by
tradition or taken down in writing before the four Gospels
were compiled " (Ibid, pp. 89, 90). Paley and Lardner
both deal with Justin somewhat briefly, calling every pas-
sage in his works resembling slightly any passage in the
Gospels a "quotation;" in both cases only ignorance of
Justin's writings can lead any reader to assent to the infe-
rences they draw.
Hegesippus was a Jewish Christian, who, according to
Eusebius, flourished about a.d. 166. Soter is said to have
succeeded Anicetus in the bishopric of Rome in that year,
and Hegesippus appears to have been in Rome during the
episcopacy of both. He travelled about from place to place,
and his testimony to the Gospels is that "in every city the
doctrine prevails according to what is declared by the law,
and the prophets, and the Lord" (" Eccles. Hist," bk. iv.,
eh. 22). Further, Eusebius quotes the story of the death of
James, the Apostle, written by Hegesippus, and in this
James is reported to have said to the Jews : " Why do ye
278 THE freethinker's TEXT-BOOK.
now ask me respecting Jesus, the Son of Man ? He is now
sitting in the heavens, on the right hand of great power,
and is about to come on the clouds of heaven/' And when
he is being murdered, he prays, " O Lord God and Father,
forgive them, for they know not what they do " (see
"Eccles. Hist," bk. ii., ch. 23). The full absurdity of re-
garding this as a testimony to the Gospels will be seen when
it is remembered that it is implied thereby that James, the
brother and apostle of Christ, knew nothing of his words
until he read them in the Gospels, and that he was mur-
dered before the Gospel of Luke, from which alone he could
quote the prayer of Jesus, is thought, by most Christians, to
have been written. One other fragment of Hegesippus is pre-
served by Stephanus Gobarus, wherein Hegesippus, speak-
ing against Paul's assertion " that eye hath not seen, nor ear
heard," opposes to it the saying of the Lord, " Blessed are
your eyes, for they see, and your ears that hear." This is
paralleled by Matt. xiii. 16 and Luke x. 23. " We need
not point out that the saying referred to by Hegesippus,
whilst conveying the same sense as that in the two Gos-
pels, differs as materially from them as they do from each
other, and as we might expect a quotation taken from a
different, though kindred, source, like the Gospel according
to the Hebrews, to do " (" Sup. Rel.," vol. i., p. 447). Why
does not Paley tell us that Eusebius writes of him, not that
he quoted from the Gospels, but that " he also states some
particulars from the Gospel of the Hebrews and from the
Syriac, and particularly from the Hebrew language, showing
that he himself was a convert from the Hebrews. Other
matters he also records as taken from the unwritten tradi-
tion of the Jews " ("Eccles. Hist.," bk. iv., ch. 22). Here,
then, we have the source of the quotations in Hegesippus,
and yet Paley conceals this, and deliberately speaks of him
as referring to our Gospel of Matthew !
Epistle of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne.—
Paley quietly dates this a.d. 170, although the persecution it
describes occurred in a.d. 177 (see ante, pp. 257, 258). The
" exact references to the Gospels of Luke and John and to
the Acts of the Apostles," spoken of by Paley (" Evidences,"
p. 125), are not easy to find. Westcott says : " It contains
no reference by name to any book of the New Testament,
but its coincidences of language with the Gospels of St.
Luke and St. John, with the Acts of the Apostles, with the
Epistles of St. Paul to the Romans, Corinthians (?), Ephe-
CHRISTIANITY. 279
sians, PhiHppians, and the First to Timothy, with the first
Catholic Epistles of St. Peter and St. John, and with the
Apocalypse, are indisputable" ("On the Canon,'' p. 336).
Unfortunately, neither Paley nor Dr. Westcott refer us to
the passages in question, Paley quoting only one. We will,
therefore, give one of these at full length, leaving our readers
to judge of it as an " exact reference :" " Vattius Epagathus,
one of the brethren who abounded in the fulness of the
love of God and man, and whose walk and conversation had
been so unexceptionable, though he was only young, shared
in the same testimony with the elder Zacharias. He walked
in all the commandments and righteousness of the Lord
blameless, full of love to God and his neighbour" ('' Euse-
bius," bk. v., chap. i). This is, it appears, an "exact
reference " to Luke i. 6, and we own we should not have
known it unless it had been noted in " Supernatural Reli-
gion." Tischendorf, on the other hand, refers the allusion
to Zacharias to the Protevangelium of James ("Sup. Rel.,"
vol. ii., p. 202).
The second " exact reference " is, that Vattius had " the
Spirit more abundantly than Zacharias ; " " such an un-
necessary and insidious comparison would scarcely have
been made had the writer known our Gospel and regarded
it as inspired Scripture " (" Sup. Rel.," vol. ii., p. 204).
The quotation " that the day would come when everyone
that slayeth you will think he is doing God a service," is
one of those isolated sayings referred to Christ which might
be found in any account of his works, or might have been
handed down by tradition. This epistle is the last witness
called by Paley, prior to Irenaeus, and might, indeed, fairly
be regarded as contemporary with him.
Although Paley does not allude to the " Clementines,"
books falsely ascribed to Clement of Rome, these are some-
times brought to prove the existence of the Gospels in the
second century. But they are useless as witnesses, from
the fact that the date at which they were themselves written
is a matter of dispute. " Critics variously date the com-
position of the original Recognitions from about the middle
of the second century to the end of the third, though the
majority are agreed in placing them, at least, in the latter
century " (" Sup. Rel.," vol. ii., p. 5). " It is unfortunate
that there are not sufficient materials for determining the
date of the Clementine HomiHes " (" Gospels in the Second
Century," Rev. W. Sanday, p. 161). Part of the Clemen-
28o THE freethinker's TEXT-BOOK.
tines, called the "Recognitions," is useless as a basis for
argument, for these " are only extant in a Latin translation
by Rufinus, in which the quotations from the Gospels have
evidently been assimilated to the canonical text which
Rufinus himself uses '^ (Ibid). Of the rest, " we are struck
at once by the small amount of exact coincidence, which
is considerably less than that which is found in the quota-
tions from the Old Testament" (Ibid, p. i68). "In the
Homilies there are very numerous quotations of expressions
of Jesus, and of Gospel History, which are generally placed
in the mouth of Peter, or introduced with such formula as
* The teacher said,' 'Jesus said,' ' He said,' ' The prophet
said,' but in no case does the author name the source from
which these sayings and quotations are derived De
Wette says, 'The quotations of evangelical works and
histories in the pseudo-Clementine writings, from their free
and unsatisfactory nature, permit only uncertain conclusions
as to their written source.' Critics have maintained very free
and conflicting views regarding that source. Apologists, of
course, assert that the quotations in the Homilies are taken
from our Gospels only. Others ascribe them to our
Gospels, with a supplementary apocryphal work, the Gospel
according to the Hebrews, or the Gospel according to
Peter. Some, whilst admitting a subsidiary use of some of
our Gospels, assert that the author of the Homilies
employs, in preference, the Gospel according to Peter ;
whilst others, recognising also the similarity of the pheno-
mena presented by these quotations with those of Justin's,
conclude that the author does not quote our Gospels at
all, but makes use of the Gospel according to Peter, or the
Gospel according to the Hebrews. Evidence permitting of
such divergent conclusions manifestly cannot be of a
decided character" ("Sup. Rel," vol. ii., pp. 6, 7).
OnBasilides (teaching c. a. d. i35)andValentinus(A.D.i4o),
two of the early Gnostic teachers, we need not delay, for there
is scarcely anything left of their writings, and all we know of
them is drawn from the writings of their antagonists ; it is
claimed that they knew and made use of the canonical
Gospels, and Canon Westcott urges thisviewof BasiUdes, but
the writer of " Supernatural Religion " characterises this plea
" as unworthy of a scholar, and only calculated to mislead
readers who must generally be ignorant of the actual facts
of the case" (vol. ii., p. 42). Basilides says that he
received his doctrine from Glaucias, the "interpreter of
CHRISTIANITY. 281
Peter," and "it is apparent, however, that Basilides, in
basing his doctrines on these apocryphal books as inspired,
and upon tradition, and in having a special Gospel called
after his own name, which, therefore, he clearly adopts as
the exponent of his ideas of Christian truth, absolutely
ignores the canonical Gospels altogether, and not only does
not offer any evidence for their existence, but proves that
he did not recognise any such works as of authority.
Therefore, there is no ground whatever for Tischendorf s
assumption that the Commentary of Basilides *0n the
Gospel ' was written upon our Gospels, but that idea is, on
the contrary, negatived in the strongest way by all the facts
of the case " (" Sup. Rel.," vol. ii., pp. 45, 46). Both with
this ancient heretic, as with Valentinus, it is impossible to
distinguish what is ascribed to him from what is ascribed to
his followers, and thus evidence drawn from either of them
is weaker even than usual.
Marcion, the greatest heretic of the second century,
ought to prove a useful witness to the Christians if the
present Gospels had been accepted in his time as canonical.
He was the son of the Christian Bishop of Sinope, in
Pontus, and taught in Rome for some twenty years, dating
from about a.d. 140. Only one Gospel was acknowledged
by him, and fierce has been the controversy as to what this
Gospel was. It is only known to us through his antago-
nists, who generally assert that the Gospel used by him was
the third Synoptic, changed and adapted to suit his
heretical views. Paley says, " This rash and wild contro-
versialist published a recension or chastised edition of St.
Luke's Gospel" (" Evidences," p. 167), but does not con-
descend to give us the smallest reason for so broad an
assertion. This question has, however, been thoroughly
debated among German critics, the one side maintaining
that Marcion mutilated Luke's Gospel, the other that
Marcion's Gospel was earlier than Luke's, and that Luke's
was made from it ; while some, again, maintained that both
were versions of an older original. From this controversy
we may conclude that there was a strong likeness between
Marcion's Gospel and the third Synoptic, and that it is
impossible to know which is the earlier of the two. The
resolution of the question is made hopeless by the fact that
**the principal sources of our information regarding
Marcion's Gospel are the works of his most bitter
denouncers Tertullian and Epiphanius" ("Sup. Rel.,"
282 THE freethinker's TEXT-BOOK.
vol. ii., p. SS). " At the very best, even if the hypothesis
that Marcion's Gospel was a mutilated Luke were estab-
lished, Marcion affords no evidence in favour of the
authenticity or trustworthy character of our third Synoptic.
His Gospel was nameless, and his followers repudiated the
idea of its having been written by Luke; and regarded
even as the earliest testimony for the existence of Luke's
Gospel, that testimony is not in confirmation of its genuine-
ness and reliability, but, on the contrary, condemns it as
garbled and interpolated" (Ibid, pp. 146, 147).
It is scarcely worth while to refer to the supposed evi-
dence of the '^ Canon of Muratori," since the date of this
fragment is utterly unknown. In the year 1740 Muratori
published this document in a collection of Italian anti-
quities, stating that he had found it in the Ambrosian
library at Milan, and that he believed that the MS. from
which he took it had been in existence about 1000 years. It
is not known by whom the original was written, and it bears no
date: it is but a fragment, commencing : " at which, neverthe-
less, he was present, and thus he placed it. Third book of the
Gospel according to Luke." Further on it speaks of *^ the
fourth of the Gospels of John." The value of the evidence
of an anonymous fragment of unknown date is simply ;///.
" It is by some affirmed to be a complete treatise on the
books received by the Church, from which fragments have
been lost ; while others consider it a mere fragment itself.
It is written in Latin, which by some is represented as
most corrupt, whilst others uphold it as most correct. The
text is further rendered almost unintelligible by every
possible inaccuracy of orthography and grammar, which is
ascribed diversely to the transcriber, to the translator, and
to both. Indeed, such is the elastic condition of the text,
resulting from errors and obscurity of every imaginable
description, that, by means of ingenious conjectures, critics
are able to find in it almost any sense they desire. Con-
siderable difference of opinion exists as to the original
language of the fragment, the greater number of critics
maintaining that the composition is a translation from the
Greek, while others assert it to have been originally written
in Latin. Its composition is variously attributed to the
Church of Africa, and to a member of the Church in
Rome" ("Sup. Rel.," vol. ii., pp. 238, 239). On a dis-
putable scrap of this kind no argument can be based;
there is no evidence even to show that the thing was in
CHRISTIANITY. 283
existence at all until Muratori published it; it is never
referred to by any early writer, nor is there a scintilla of
evidence that it was known to the early Church.
After a full and searching analysis of all the documents,
orthodox and heretical, supposed to have been written in the
first two centuries after Christ, the author of " Supernatural
Religion '' thus sums up : — " After having exhausted the
literature and the testimony bearing on the point, we have
not found a single distinct trace of any one of those Gospels
during the first century and a half after the death of Jesus
Any argument for the mere existence of our Synoptics
based upon their supposed rejection by heretical leaders
and sects has the inevitable disadvantage, that the very
testimony which would show their existence would oppose
their authenticity. There is no evidence of their use by
heretical leaders, however, and no direct reference to them
by any writer, heretical or orthodox, whom we have
examined '' (vol. ii., pp, 248, 249). Nor is the fact of this
blank absence of evidence of identity all that can be
brought to bear in support of our proposition, for there is
another fact that tells very heavily against the identity of
the now accepted Gospels with those that were current in
earlier days, namely, the noteworthy charge brought against
the Christians that they changed and altered their sacred
books; the orthodox accused the unorthodox of varying
the Scriptures, and the heretics retorted the charge with
equal pertinacity. The Ebionites maintained that the
Hebrew Gospel of Matthew was the only authentic Gospel/
and regarded the four Greek Gospels as unreliable. The Mar-
cionites admitted only the Gospel resembling that of Luke,
and were accused by the orthodox of having altered that to
suit themselves. Celsus, writing against Christianity, for-
mulates the charge : " Some believers, like men driven by
drunkenness to commit violence on themselves, have
altered the Gospel history, since its first composition, three
times, four times, and oftener, and have re-fashioned it, so
as to be able to deny the objections made against it"
("Origen Cont. Celsus," bk. ii., chap. 27, as quoted by
Norton, p. 63). Origen admits '' that there are those who
have altered the Gosj^els," but pleads that it has been done
by heretics, and that this "is no reproach against true
Christianity" (Ibid). Only, most reverend Father of the
Church, if heretics accuse orthodox, and orthodox accuse
heretics, of altering the Gospels, how are we to be sure
284 THE freethinker's TEXT-BOOK.
that they have come down unaltered to us ? Clement of
Alexandria notes alterations that had been made. Diony-
sius, of Corinth, complaining of the changes made in
his own writings, bears witness to this same fact : " It is
not, therefore, matter of wonder if some have also attempted
to adulterate the sacred writings of the Lord, since they
have attempted the same in other works that are not to be
compared with these " (*^ Eusebius," bk. iv., ch. 23).
Faustus, the Manichaean, the great opponent of Augustine,
writes : " For many things have been inserted by your an-
cestors in the speeches of our Lord, which, though put
forth under his name, agree not with his faith ; especially
since — as already it has been often proved by us — that these
things were not written by Christ, nor his Apostles, but a
long while after their assumption, by I know not what sort
of half Jews, not even agreeing with themselves, who made
up their tale out of report and opinions merely ; and yet,
fathering the whole upon the names of the Apostles of the
Lord, or on those who were supposed to have followed the
Apostles ; they mendaciously pretended that they had
written their lies and conceits according to them '' (Lib. 33,
ch. 3, as quoted and translated in " Diegesis," pp. 61, 62).
The truth is, that in those days, when books were only
written, the widest door was opened to alterations, addi-
tions, and omissions ; incidents or remarks written, perhaps,
in the margin of the text by one transcriber, were trans-
ferred into the text itself by the next copyist, and were
thereafter indistinguishable from the original matter. In
this way the celebrated text of the three witnesses (i John,
v. 7) is supposed to have crept into the text. Dealing
with this, in reference to the New Testament, Eichhorn
points out that it was easy to alter a manuscript in trans-
cribing it, and that, as manuscripts were written for indivi-
dual use, such alterations were considered allowable, and
that the altered manuscript, being copied in its turn, such
changes passed into circulation unnoticed. Owners of
manuscripts added to them incidents of the life of Christ,
or any of his sayings, which they had heard of, and which
were not recorded in their own copies, and thus the story
grew and grew, and additional legends were incorporated
with it, until the historical basis became overlaid with myth.
The vast number of readings in the New Testament, no less
— according to Dr. Angus, one of the present Revision
Committee — than 100,000, prove the facility with which
CHRISTIANITY. 285
variations were introduced into MSS. by those who had
charge of them. In heated and angry controversy between
different schools of monks appeals were naturally made to
the authority of the Scriptures, and what more likely — indeed
more certain — than that these monks should introduce
variations into their MS. copies favouring the positions for
which they were severally contending ?
The most likely way in which the Gospels grew into their
present forms is, that the various traditions relating to Christ
were written down in different places for the instruction of
catechumens, and that these, passing from hand to hand,
and mouth to mouth, grew into a large mass of disjointed
stories, common to many churches. This mass was gra-
dually sifted, arranged, moulded into historical shape,
which should fit into the preconceived notions of the Mes-
siah, and thus the four Gospels gradually grew into their
present form, and were accepted on all hands as the legacy
of the apostolic age. No careful reader can avoid noticing
the many coincidences of expression between the three
synoptics, and deducing from these coincidences the con-
clusion that one narrative formed the basis of the three his-
tories. Ewald supposes the existence of a Spricchsammlung
— collected sayings of Christ — but such a collection is not
enough to explain the phenomena we refer to. Dr. David-
son says : " The rudiments of an original oral Gospel were
formed in Jerusalem, in the bosom of the first Christian
Church ; and the language of it must have been Aramaean,
since the members consisted of Galileans, to whom that
tongue was vernacular. It is natural to suppose that they
were accustomed to converse with one another on the life,
actions, and doctrines of their departed Lord, dwelling on
the particulars that interested them most, and rectifying the
accounts given by one another, where such accounts were
^ erroneous, or seriously defective. The Apostles, who were
^ eye-witnesses of the public life of Christ, could impart cor-
rectness to the narratives, giving them a fixed character in
regard to authenticity and form. In this manner an ori-
ginal oral Gospel in Aramaean was formed. We must not,
however, conceive of it as put into the shape of any of our
present Gospels, or as being of like extent ; but as con-
sisting of leading particulars in the life of Christ, probably
the most striking and the most affecting, such as would
leave the best impression on the minds of the disciples.
The incidents and sayings connected with their Divine
286 THE freethinker's TEXT-BOOK.
Master naturally assumed a particular shape from repetition,
tliough it was simply a rudimental one. They were not
compactly linked in regular or systematic sequence.
They were the oral germ and essence of a Gospel, rather
than a proper Gospel itself, at least, according to our
modern ideas of it But the Aramaean language was soon
laid aside. When Hellenists evinced a disposition to
receive Christianity, and associated themselves with the
small number of Palestinian converts, Greek was neces-
sarily adopted. As the Greek-speaking members far out-
numbered the Aramaean-speaking brethren, the oral Gospel
was put into Greek. Henceforward Greek, the language of
the Hellenists, became the medium of instruction. The
truths and facts, before repeated in Hebrew, were now
generally promulgated in Greek by the apostles and their
converts. The historical cyclus, which had been forming
in the Church at Jerusalem, assumed a determinate
character in the Greek tongue " (" Introduction to the New
Testament," by S. Davidson, LL.D., p. 405. Ed. 1848).
Thus we find learned Christians obliged to admit an unin-
spired collection as the basis of the inspired Gospel, and
laying down a theory which is entirely incompatible with
the idea that the Synoptic Gospels were written by
Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Our Gospels are degraded
into versions of an older Gospel, instead of being the
inspired record of contemporaries, speaking '' that we do
know."
Canon Westcott writes of the three Synoptic Gospels,
that " they represent, as is shown by their structure, a
common basis, common materials, treated in special ways.
They evidently contain only a very small selection from
the words and works of Christ, and yet their contents are
included broadly in one outline. Their substance is evi-
dently much older than their form The only explana-
tion of the narrow and definite limit witliin which the
evangelic history (exclusive of St. John's Gospel) is con-
fined, seems to be that a collection of representative words
and works was made by an authoritative body, such as the
Twelve, at a very early date, and that this, which formed
the basis of popular teaching, gained exclusive currency,
receiving only subordinate additions and modifications.
This Apostolic Gospel — the oral basis, as I have endea-
voured to show elsewhere, of the Synoptic narratives —
dates unquestionably from the very beginning of the
WORKS BY C. BRADLAUGH,
PoliticaL
Impeachment of the House of Brunswick 1 O
Cromwell and Washington ; A Contrast o 6
American Politics 0 2
Life of George Prince of Wales, with Recent Contrasts and
Coincidences 0 2
Letter from a Freemason to Albert Edward, Prince of Wales 0 1
The Land Question (for general distribution) 0 ^
Why do Men Starve ? 0 1
Poverty, and its effects on the Political Condition of the People 0 1
Labour's Prayer 0 1
Real Representation of the People (fourth edition) 0 2
The Land, the People, and the Coming Struggle (2nd edition) 0 2
Letter to Dr. Kenealy 0 1
Letter to the Prince of Wales on his Indian Visit 0 1
Theological,
Three Replies to the Three Discourses of the Bishop of Peter-
borough on Christianity, Scepticism, and Faith 1 0
Heresy : its Morality and Utility 0 9
Six Letters to the Bishop of Lincoln on the Inspiration of the
Bible 0 G
When Were our Gospels Written ? A reply to Dr. Tischendorf
and the Religious Tract Society 0 6
Has Man a Soul ? 0 2
Is there a God ? 0 1
Who was Jesus Christ? 0 1
What did Jesus Christ Teach 0 1
The Twelve Apostles 0 1
The Atonement . 0 1
New Life of David 0 i
New Life of Jacob 0 1
New Life of Jonah 0 1
Life of Abraham 0 1
Life of Moses 0 I
Were Adam and Eve our First Parents ? 0 1
A Few Words about the Devil 0 1
National Secular Society's Tracts — 1. Address to Christians,
2. Who was Jesus? 7. What is Secularism? 8. Who are
the Secularists ? Per hundred (post free Is 2d) I 0
Polemical Essays, Volumes I. and II., each 1 0
Debates.
Two Nights with Mr. Thomas Cooper, on the Being and Attri-
butes of God 0 6
God, Man, and the Bible. Three Nights with the Rev. D. Baylee 0 G
Is there a God ? Two Nights with Alexander Robertson, of Dun-
donnochie, at Edinburgh. With preface by Austin Holyoake 0 G
Autobiography of Mr. Bradlaugh 0 .3
Published by C. Watts, 17, Johnson's Court, Fleet Street, B.C.
WOEKS BY MRS, ANNIE BESANT.
History of the Great French Revolution. A Course of Six Lec^
tures. Cloth, lettered 2 6
(May be had in parts— Parts I to V. 3d. each : Part VI. 4d.)
The Secular Song and Hymn Book. Second edition, cloth, gilt I o
The Political Status of Women O 4
Auguste Comte : his Philosophy, his Religion, and Sociology o 6
The True Basis of Morality o 2
Civil and Religious Liberty o 3
Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity o i
Landlords, Tenant Farmers, and Labourers o i
Giordano Bruno o i
The God Idea in the Revolution ^ ^ . ^ ^
Catholicism and Rationalism : a Review of a Two Night's Dis-
cussion between Charles Watts and ** A Catholic," held at the
Hall of Science, Old Street, With an Essay on the Relative
Merits of Secularism and Catholicism .02
The Gospel of Christianity and the Gospel of Freethought o 2
National Secular Society's Tracts— No 3, Secular Morality. No.
4, The Bible and Woman. Per hundred (post free, is 2d) I o
Civil and Religious Liberty ; Political Status of Women ; True
Basis of Morality ; Landlords, Tenant Farmers, and Labourers ;
and Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. Bound in one volume i o
THE FEEETHINKER'S TEXT-BOOK.
Nos. I, 2, 3, and 4, Part I., "Man : Whence and How,"
aind "Religion: What and Why," by. Charles Brad-
laugh, complete in themselves, price Sixpence each Part.
Part I., containing the whole four numbers, may be had,
bound in cloth, price 2s. 6d.
Just published, price 6d., Report of
THE GREAT DISESTABLISHMENT DEBATE
OF THE
DISESTABLISHMENT AND DISENDOWMEMT OF
THE STATE CHURCH A POLITICAL NECESSITY,
Between Mr. William Simpson (who contested Liverpool
in the working man's interest at the General Election of
1874), and Mr. Charles Bradlaugh, held at the Concert
Hall, Lord Nelson Street, Liverpool, July 4th and 5th, 1876.
Now ready, price Sixpence, Verbatim Report of
TAVO NIOHTS' DEBi^TK
Between Mr. W. R. Browne, M. A., Fellow of Trinity College,
Cambridge (on behalf of the Christian Evidence Society), and Mr. C.
Bradlaugh (on behalf of the National Secular Society), on the quesftion,
''CAN MIEACLES BE PROVED POSSIBLE T
t the Albert Hall, Mechanics' Institute, Leeds, on Api
and 28th, 1876.
London : C. Watts, 17, Johnson's Court, Fleet Street.
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11