as foon as their errors and imperfections were obferved; that is, as foon as their contents became known to any of the Apoftles; to furnish them with completer and more accurate memoirs which accordingly Four of them have done, And that these Four were received by the Chriftian Church in general, as genuine and authentie records, the earlieft Chriftian Writers evidently fhew. Yet, at the fame time, they mention palfages relative to our bleffed Lord, which are not recorded in these Four Gofpels; fome of which they might very poffibly have from the other Gofpels just mentioned; and fome perhaps from the unwritten difcourfes of the Apostles and their companions, which would not quickly be for gotten.

Soon after the publication of Christianity, before all the Apoftles were dead, Sects arofe who feparated themselves, fome in fewer particulars, fome in more, entirely from its Profeffors; whom St. John calls Antichrifts; and of whom he fays, They went out from us, but they were not of us *. Thefe, in procefs of time, forged Gofpels of their own under different names; but learned men have proved, that the names were far more in number than the Gofpels, fome of them having two or three names at least. But no one of these Gofpels is mentioned by any Writer of the First Century; and but Seven at moft by any of the Second; and one of thefe, bearing the title of the Gospel of Judas Iscariot, may well be ftruck out of the lift. And no ancient Chriftian Writer quotes any of the Gofpels that are loft with any marks of approbation, but for the moft part as being fpurious. So far from true is the prefacer's affertion," That there were upwards

"of a Dozen Gofpels, which were current, and "stood on almoft equal footing of authority, for "more than an hundred years after CHRIST."

In the Third Century, indeed, Four more Gof pels are mentioned, and many more in the fol lowing ones. But thefe came too late to gain credit with perfons of any character and judg ment. And it ought to be very particularly obferved, that among All the various Gofpels, which were at any time mentioned, our Author's Gof pel of Pure Morality, unmixed with any thing elfe, never appears to have been feen or heard of a fufficient proof furely, had we no other to allege, that no fuch Gospel ever exifted. Some of thofe we have laft mentioned contained doctrines contrary to the first principles of Natural Religion; and fome, to the plaineft articles of the Chriftian Faith. Another fort might be harmless enough; but after the fpreading of those which we now have, they became of little or no ufe; and of courfe were gradually difregarded, and at length loft,

1

But the Prefacer tells us further, that "the Canon of the New Testament was not fettled till "more than an hundred years after CHRIST." And if he means, that it was not fettled fooner by any general Council, how could it? Some of the Books were not written till near the end of the First Century. The Epiftles, being occafional writings, and most of them sent to particular Churches, could not be communicated to the whole Christian World, and received by it, under fome confiderable time, Nor could the Profef fors, or even the Teachers of Christianity, who were often perfecuted, and always in danger, meet in great numbers from diftant parts of the world, with any convenience, or fafety: neither was there need of their meeting for the purpofe

of

of fettling the Canon. That was gradually and effectually fettled by the acceptance of the feveral Books in each Church; nor is there the leaft reason to imagine they would receive any with out that proper evidence, which it was in their power to obtain. For want of it in relation to two or three, fome Churches delayed accepting them; an evident proof both of their honefty and care: though had These never been accepted, the Chriftian Faith would have been just the fame as it now is. And they were fo unanimous in their acceptance of the reft, without any appearance, and indeed without any means of con cert, as they never could have been, had they not all proceeded upon obviously good grounds. It is true, there were perfons who rejected, fome one part, fome another, the better to fupport their own wild notions; just as our Author would reject the greater part of every Book to support his. But thefe did not call in queftion the genuineness of the Books themselves, or the knowledge of their Authors; but arbitrarily disowned their authority; and little regard was paid to fuch diffentients. All the catalogues given us by the early Writers agree very well in the main; and must have been formed upon the much earlier fentiments and ufage of the Churches round them. Even the Emperor Julian himself; well acquainted as he was with the Chriftian cause, and defirous as he was to ufe every argument against it; was fo fenfible of the authority of the Sacred Books of the Chriftians, as to be driven to wifh he could have utterly destroyed Them, and all the writings of the Profeffors of Chriftianity, relating to them*.

*See his Letter to Ecdicius Governour of Egypt, upon the death of Georgius Bishop of Alexandria. O 4

The

*

The Prefacer fpeaks of fraud and imposture, and afferts," it is acknowledged that fuch ar

tifices were made ufe of;" and that therefore we may doubt the authenticity of the New Testament as it has reached us.-Let him inform us, When fuch artifices were made ufe of, and by whom any fuch artifices are acknowledged. When he fays, "That the collection was doubtless formed "according to the knowledge, tafte, genius, tempers, views, and difpofitions of the Compiler or Compilers, who adopted and rejected according to their inclinations, interefts, and defigns;" -He feems to have fancied, that only one or two perfons, or at most a few more, were concerned in this work, and had it both in their will and their power to make as free with the Books of the New Teftament, as he and his friend would. But fuch extravagant liberties could no more be taken with fuccefs at that time, than they can now. The primitive Profeffors of the Gofpel did not value themselves on their taste and genius; nor had they any inclinations, views, or interefts, but to learn their Duty, and to practise it, at the hazard of their lives. Multitudes of Congregations had been long poffeffed of the Books in which it was contained, and which must have come to them by different ways, and through different hands. Sooner or later enquiries would unavoidably be made, how far they all agreed in receiving the fame Books. Had any confiderable part of them dif agreed, in any confiderable number of Books; as they probably would, had they followed any other Guide than that of obvious and fufficient Evi dence, this difagreement must have become an object of attention, and long and warm disputes about it must have arifen: but no fuch disputes

# P. 19:

ever

ever did arife; and therefore certainly no fuch differences were ever found among them. Accordingly there is great harmony between the lifts delivered by private Writers: and when, upon the multiplication of forgeries in the Third and Fourth Centuries, (for whatever the Prefacer may fay, there were few in comparison before;) it was thought proper to guard against them by a more public declaration; the present Canon was, not first settled, but recognized; without any contradiction, as far as we know; by the Council of Laodicea, held about the year 960; excepting only that the Book of Revelation was not then inferted; being ftill thought of doubtful authority by fome; though it had been long before acknowledged by others, and foon after was fo by almoft All*.

To infinuate further, as the Writer here does, that the Canon of the New Testament cannot fafely be relied on, unless we fuppofe, that those who originally fettled it were either divinely inspired; or at least endowed with fo uncommon a degree of honesty, wisdom, penetration, and impartiality, as could not poffibly fuffer them to make a miftake; and therefore, that fince we know not Who they were, and must not take all this for granted concerning them, we cannot rely upon the com pilation they made; - This is, if not difinge nuous, at least abfurd. There must have been a time, when the evidence that the Books of the New Teftament were written by the Apostles was fo clear, that it could require neither inspiration, nor any thing more than an honeft enquiry into the plain matter of fact, to know affuredly that they were fo. And that the Books of the prefent Ca

For the proofs of the facts here afferted, fee Richardson's Canon of the New Teftament vindicated; and Jones's Method of fettling the Canonical Authority of the New Teftament.

поп,

30

1