there were four gospels because there are four quarters in heaven whence the winds come, and because, in Ezekiel's vision (Ezek. i. 4—10), the "living creatures" had four "likenesses of their faces," viz., a man supposed to represent Matthew, a lion representing John, an ox symbolic of Luke, and an eagle typifying Mark. -Iren. adv. Hæres. iii. 11.

That Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, wrote the compositions attributed to them, we believe merely because those compositions bear their names, which is but little proof, when it is remembered that, early in the history of the Church, it was held to be no fault, but an allowable if not a praiseworthy pious fraud, to pass off any writing that could be useful, as coming from the hand of an Apostle or some companion of the Apostles. Who the three first evangelists were we have only the vaguest tradition to inform us. Why books which were read in the Christian congregations and highly esteemed, like the first Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians and the other writings of the Apostolic Fathers, should have been ultimately excluded from the Canon, it is not easy to explain, especially when it is remembered, that down to the days of Eusebius (A.D. 320), and indeed much. later, the gravest doubts were entertained as to the canonicity of the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistle of James, the second Epistle of Peter, the second and third Epistles of John, the Epistle of Jude, and the Revelation of John. So much, and far more, of confusion and uncertainty hangs over the history of the New Testament Canon no less than the Old.

We have not attempted an examination of the subject of the Canon of Scripture, for that is not our present theme; but we have probably seen enough to show us how much difficulty and obscurity environ this very important subject: and we have perhaps seen enough to show us that the broad distinction between canonical and uncanonical writings is one set up by the dogmatic definitions of man rather than by the actual differences which sever the two classes of composition. At all events we have taken a sufficient glimpse at the history of the Canon to convince us that the inspiration and infallibility of the Bible must be proved by some other evidence or it will never rest securely on the canonicity of Scripture.

Connected with this argument concerning canonicity is a feeling which, we can readily understand, will arise in some minds. What, it may be said, do you tamper with the canon of Scripture? Would you venture to add Ecclesiasticus to the Old Testament, and, possibly, to subtract the epistle of Jude from the New? Do you not remember that the last book in the Bible terminates with the words: "If any man shall add unto these "things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are "written in this book; and if any man shall take away "from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall "take away his part out of the book of life, and out of "the holy city, and from the things which are written "in this book?" Do you dare, in the face of this denunciation, to say that the history of the canon of Scripture is dark and full of doubt?

Our answer to such a challenge is that we are convinced the system of addition and diminution, alluded to in this passage of the Apocalypse, is that which takes place when men perversely interpret the record of this vision in such ways that it may seem to condemn any good which God has not condemned, or to excuse any evil which the God of truth has condemned. If any man wilfully distort this book, in order to make it square with his own wicked or uncharitable prejudices, then such an one-and we hope there never was such an one-seems to us to incur this dread denunciation. At all events, whatever else this passage may mean, no man of ordinary information can suppose that the writer of the Apocalypse framed his words as a conclusion of the Bible and to put a seal on the New Testament canon; for it is well known and all but universally acknowledged that-if it be not certain that the Apocalypse was one of the very earliest of the New Testament writings, composed in the reign of Nero-at least, it was far from being the latest New Testament writing. Indeed, the popular notion-as shown in Nicholls' Help to Reading the Bible, and in many similar works—represents the Apocalypse as having been composed by John before his Epistles and before his Gospel. But, on this supposition, John would, according to our objector's idea, have excluded himself from the book of life, for he, subsequently to penning the book of the Revelation," added unto those things" by writing three letters and a gospel. Besides, it is not only in the New Testament that we meet with such a passage as our objector

urges against us. In Deuteronomy (iv. 2) we read—

"Ye shall not add unto the word which I command

"you,

you, neither shall ye diminish aught from it, that ye "may keep the commandments of the Lord your God "which I command you." Now, if the text in Revelation closed the canon of the New Testament, must not its parallel in the Pentateuch have likewise closed the more ancient canon? And, if so, by what right do any compositions, save the so-called five books of Moses, claim a place in the Jewish Canon?

Thus manifestly does our objector's interpretation destroy the canonicity of some of the New Testament writings, and of most of the Old Testament. We hope he will try our interpretation of Rev. xxii. 18, 19; but, whether he will do this or not, his argument against us plainly fails.

CHAPTER VII.

THE PROMISES BY WHICH OUR LORD IS SUPPOSED ΤΟ HAVE GUARANTEED THE INSPIRATIONAL INFALLIBILITY OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

OUR next inquiries will be directed to an investigation of the promises by which Jesus is said to have guaranteed infallibility to the New Testament writers.

The first of these promises is recorded by Matthew.* It is to the effect that the twelve shall be put on trial in course of persecution, but that they need take no thought how or what they shall speak for "it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak, for "it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your father "which speaketh in you."

66

This we regard as a most important passage in its bearing on our present subject. Let us notice it with an exactness proportioned to its importance. On comparing the narratives, given by Mark and Luke, of the events connected with this discourse of our Lord, it is evident that Jesus was preparing his twelve apostles for a temporary separation from himself during which they were, in six parties of two each, to preach exclusively to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. This mission was committed to the twelve, and was discharged by them as we learn from Mark and Luke.

* Matt. x. 19, 20; Mark vi. 7, &c.; Luke ix. 1, &c.