Eusebius had already quoted the passage from Phlegon, giving the very words. In the first quotation, Phlegon says: "The sun was eclipsed; there was an earthquake in Bithynia, and many houses were overturned in Nice." This is given as the language of Phlegon. Afterward, Phlegon is made to say, "In the fourth year," etc., "there was an eclipse of the sun, the greatest," etc., "and it was night, the sixth hour of the day," etc., and "there was a great earthquake in Bithynia which overturned many houses in Nice." All this new matter prefixed to the quotation, and the quotation itself different. What was only "an earthquake," (giving the very words, as he said, of Phlegon), becomes, in the second quotation, "a great earthquake," and the statement that "the sun was eclipsed," becomes swollen into a long sentence, full of additional circumstances. Then a heathen historian, for the purpose of sustaining the Christian religion, narrates an earthquake, and an eclipse of the sun, taking place at the very hour when Christ was crucified, although the moon was at the full!

This was only equaled by making a Jewish historian declare that Jesus "was the Christ."

THE FORGERY ON THALLUS.

Eusebius makes Thallus, another heathen historian, who wrote about 220, testify to the eclipse of the sun. The following is the language of our his

torian :

"There was a dreadful darkness over the whole world, and the

rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many buildings were overturned in Judea, and in other parts of the earth. This darkness Thallus calls an eclipse of the sun, in the third book of his histories; but as seems to me very improperly; for the Jews keep the passover in the fourteenth day of the moon; at which time an eclipse of the sun is impossible."-[Eusebius, Canon. Chron. Græce, by Scaliger, p. 77.

Since quoting from Phlegon, Eusebius appears to have become enlightened in regard to the possibility of an eclipse of the sun when the moon is at its full. Nevertheless, he persists in perpetrating these forgeries on the heathen writers. He has no compunction in making Thallus, a heathen, in his anxiety to support the gospel historians, declare that there was an eclipse of the sun at the crucifixion of Christ.

This forgery Eusebius undertakes to father upon Africanus, quoting as from that writer the words which are attributed to Thallus. As the works of Africanus are lost, there is no way of determining the question with complete certainty. There is no reasonable doubt, however, that the passage emanated, in the first instance, from the author of the church history.

He

Thallus was a Syrian, and wrote in Greek. is cited by Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Minucius Felix, Lactantius and Theophilus, no one of whom ever claimed that his works contained any such passage, nor was the passage known, so far as we have any any evidence, to any other ancient writer.

THE FORGERY ON PORPHYRY.

Eusebius quotes, as evidence of the truth of the Christian religion, from a pretended work of Por

phyry, entitled "The Philosophy of Oracles," a work never heard of before the time of Eusebius, and never since, but from those who accept as authority the author of the ecclesiastical history. The majority of scholars are pretty well satisfied that such a work never existed.

Porphyry flourished in the latter part of the third century. He was an active opponent of the Christian religion. He wrote so strongly and powerfully against it, that his writings were, by an edict of Constantine, condemned to the flames. Porphyry is made to speak of Christianity as the "prevailing religion;" which it was not, until some time after Porphyry.

It was probably not until after the destruction of the writings of Porphyry, in accordance with the decree of Constantine, that this bold attempt was made to bring him in as a witness in favor of the very religion which he so powerfully opposed.

The "Philosophy of Oracles" has been branded as spurious by Van Dale,' by Fontenelle, and other able writers.

Other portions of the works of the church historian, have been suspected.

Dr. Dodwell, Thirlby, and Dr. Jortin thought the letter of rescript of Antoninus Pius, as given by Eusebius, was a forgery. It is generally suspected that the correspondence between Christ and Abgarus is a literary work of the same character.

(1.) De Orac. Ethnic. p. 14.

(2.) Hist. of Oracles, Diss. 1, ch. 4.

[See Note IV.]

Such was the first chronicler of church history whose works have come down to us. Such is the witness, the only witness to any thing which would indicate, with any definiteness, the existence of any of the canonical gospels earlier than about A. D. 170.

"Reject Eusebius," says Prof. Stowe, "and what have we for a history of the Christian churches of the first three centuries, or of the books used as scripture in those churches ?"-[History of the Bible, P. 47.

And yet, the truth requires that he should not at all be relied upon, except where he is supported by earlier, or at least contemporary writers, or by strong circumstantial evidence.

CHAPTER

XXIV.

REVIEW OF THE THIRD AND FOURTH PERIODS.

A. D. 120 to 170.

Since leaving the apostolic fathers, we have traveled, by the uncertain light of patristic literature, through half a century;-the last half of a period well characterized by Dr. Westcott as the dark age of church history. (A. D. 70 to 170.)

We have met with twenty-six Christian writers, some of them persons of much celebrity, and all of them writers of considerable repute, besides others of less note, and with various anonymous works, including the three most famous so-called apocryphal gospels.

In all this mass of Christian literature, there is not to be found a single mention of any of the canonical gospels. Not one of all these writers, in any work which has been preserved, has mentioned Luke, Mark, John or Matthew, as the author of a gospel.

The Gospel of Marcion, written about A. D. 145, bears internal evidence of having preceded Luke,