marks of notice or commendation.  Of the apostles, I hardly know any one of whom less is said than of Matthew, or of whom the little that is said is less calculated to magnify his character.  Of Mark, nothing is said in the Gospels; and what is said of any person of that name in the Acts, and in the epistles, in no part bestows praise or eminence upon him.  The name of Luke is mentioned only in St Paul’s epistles,* and that very transiently.  The judgment, therefore, which assigned these writings to these authors proceeded, it may be presumed, upon proper knowledge and evidence, and not upon a voluntary choice of names.

VI.  Christian writers and Christian churches appear to have soon arrived at a very general agreement upon the subject, and that without the interposition of any public authority.  When the diversity of opinion which prevailed, and prevails among Christians in other points, is considered, their concurrence in the canon of Scripture is remarkable, and of great weight, especially as it seems to have been the result of private and free inquiry.  We have no knowledge of any interference of authority in the question before the council of Laodicea in the year 363.  Probably the decree of this council rather declared than regulated the public judgment, or, more properly speaking, the judgment of some neighbouring churches; the council itself consisting of no more than thirty or forty bishops of Lydia and the adjoining countries.+ Nor does its authority seem to have extended further; for we find numerous Christian writers, after this time, discussing the question, “What books were entitled to be received as Scripture,” with great freedom, upon proper grounds of evidence, and without any reference to the decision at Laodicea.

_________

* Col. iv. 14. 2Tim. iv. 11.  Philem. 24. + Lardner, Cred. vol. viii.  P.291, et seq. _________

These considerations are not to be neglected:  but of an argument concerning the genuineness of ancient writings, the substance, undoubtedly, and strength, is ancient testimony.

This testimony it is necessary to exhibit somewhat in detail; for when Christian advocates merely tell us that we have the same reason for believing the Gospels to be written by the evangelists whose names they bear as we have for believing the Commentaries to be Caesar’s, the Aeneid Virgil’s, or the Orations Cicero’s, they content themselves with an imperfect representation.  They state nothing more than what is true, but they do not state the truth correctly.  In the number, variety, and early date of our testimonies, we far exceed all other ancient books.  For one which the most celebrated work of the most celebrated Greek or Roman writer can allege, we produce many.  But then it is more requisite in our books than in theirs to separate and distinguish them from spurious competitors.  The result, I am convinced, will be satisfactory to every fair inquirer:  but this circumstance renders an inquiry necessary.