The testimony of Papias to these two epistles, though indirect, is conclusive.  Eusebius says, Hist.  Eccl. 3. 39, “The same Papias has employed testimonies from the first epistle of John, and in like manner of Peter.”  Polycarp says, Epistle to the Philippians, ch. 7, “For every one who confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is anti-Christ,” with evident reference to 1 John 4:3.  Eusebius says also, Hist.  Eccl. 4. 14, that in the same epistle to the Philippians Polycarp “has employed certain testimonies from the first epistle of Peter;” and when we examine the epistle we find several certain references to it, among which are the following:  “In whom, though ye see him not, ye believe; and believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable, and full of glory.”  Chap. 1 compared with 1 Pet. 1:8.  “Believing in him who raised up our Lord Jesus Christ from the dead, and gave him glory, and a seat at his right hand.”  Chap. 2 compared with 1 Pet. 1:21.

9.  The relation of the gospel history to the writings now under consideration—­the book of Acts and the apostolic epistles—­is of the most intimate and weighty character.  The truth of the earlier narratives contained in the gospels implies the truth of these later works; for, as already remarked, they are the natural sequel of the events there recorded.  On the other hand, the truth of these later writings implies the truth of the gospel history; for in that history they find their full explanation, and without it they are, and must ever remain, inexplicable.  All the parts of the New Testament constitute one inseparable whole, and they all shed light upon each other.  Like a chain of fortresses in war, they mutually command each other.  Unless the whole can be overthrown, no one part can be successfully assailed.  But to overthrow the whole is beyond the power of man; for God has guarded it on every side by impregnable bulwarks of evidence.

10.  A special argument for the truth of the Scripture history of the apostle Paul may be drawn from the numerous undesigned coincidences between the events recorded in the book of Acts and those referred to in the epistles.  This work has been accomplished with great ability and skill by Paley in his Horae Paulinae, to which the reader is referred.  The argument is very conclusive; for when we consider the “particularity of St. Paul’s epistles, the perpetual recurrence of names of persons and places, the frequent allusions to the incidents of his private life, and the circumstances of his condition and history, and the connection and parallelism of these with the same circumstances in the Acts of the Apostles, so as to enable us, for the most part, to confront them one with another,” we must be satisfied that the truth of the history can alone explain such a multitude of coincidences, many of them of a minute character, and all of them manifestly undesigned.

CHAPTER VI.