that no less than ninety-three Gospel manuscripts were in existence by the end of the second century, which had increased to 200 at the end of the fourth century. Of these MSS. twenty-seven are now considered "canonical,” the rest being classed as "apocryphal." Twelve of the canonical writings were excluded at first, though subsequently received as canonical. One of the rejected Gospels, which circulated among the Christians of the first three centuries, contained the doctrine of a Trinity, but not the modern Christian Trinity, which was promulgated in 327. Twenty-eight of the rejected writings are mentioned or referred to in the canonical books. So that, out of this miscellaneous accumulation of monkish writings, most of which were accepted during the first four centuries as the genuine writings of Christians, and inspired by "the Spirit of God," only four Gospels and twenty-three Epistles are now received as genuine! And the spirit of God, which was to lead these early Christians "into all truth," misled them into accepting writings as genuine and inspired which were afterwards decided to be spurious! "The more distant monasteries, however, and the earliest Christian sects-the Ebionites, Corinthians, etc.-denied that any one even of the Four Gospels, except that of Matthew, was genuine; and from that Gospel they excluded as forgeries the two first chapters, which were not found in the original copies; and both Jerome and Epiphanius allow that this is true."*"

The Gospel of the Essenes was in all probability the original Gospel in use among the Jessæans (First Christians), and from which a Gospel according to the Hebrews was taken. The miraculous legends and romances of the Essenian Scriptures merely required a change in names, with Jesus as the hero, to become the Scriptures of the new sect. Neither of these Gospels contained any account of the miraculous conception and birth of Jesus; and it was probably from this Gospel that the Matthew Gospel, commencing at chapter iii., was taken. The fact of these early Gospels omitting all account of the birth, and the almost universal refusal of acceptance in later days of chapters i. and ii. of Matthew by the distant Churches, are strong presumptive evidence that the story was an afterthought and a fabri

* L. Mitchell, Religion in the Heavens.

cation. None of the Gospels contemporaneous with Apostolic times are now extant; all are lost.

The fact of both the (original) Matthew and Mark Gospels commencing with accounts of John the Baptist suggests the fact that John was at first accepted as the expected Messiah, and that the Gospels were those of John, not Jesus. That this was so may be accepted as a fact, for that sect of Essenes, or Therapeuta, who became the followers of John, were called Hemero-Baptists, Nazarites or Mandaites; and Eusebius tells us that the Apostles were Therapeutæ, and the ancient writings of the latter were the Apostolic Gospels and Epistles. John the Baptist, from being a Messiah on his own account, and possessed of apostles, is very cleverly transformed into a "forerunner" of the Christian Messiah. But that the Matthew Gospel, as it is now received, was a monkish manipulation of a much later date is evidenced by the use on two occasions, in chapter xxviii., of the naïve expression, "even to the present day."

Three accounts are given of the manner in which the Four Gospels were selected as the only "inspired" ones. (1) That by Pappus, or Popius, in his "Synodicon" to the Council of Nicea (325), says that 200 versions of the Gospel were placed under a Communion Table, and, while the Council prayed, the inspired books jumped on the slab, but the rest remained under it. (2) That by Irenæus says "the Church selected the four most popular of the Gospels." This pillar of the Church said: "It is meet and right to have four Gospels, and no more, because there are four corners of the earth, and four winds of heaven!" (3) That by the Council of Laodicea (366) says that "each book was decided by ballot. The Gospel of Luke escaped by one vote, while the Acts of the Apostles and the Apocalypse were rejected as forgeries." Which of these contradictory accounts are we to beleive?

The first knowledge we have of the four Canonical Gospels is from Irenæus-a presbyter, born at Smyrna, and subsequently Bishop of Lyons-who, in the early part of the second century, intimated that he had "received four Gospels as authentic Scripture"; but he carefully avoids, with the usual vagueness and dissimulation of monkish writers, mentioning from whom he received them, who were the authors of them, or when they were written. But it is not only the

Matthew Gospel which has had additions made to it, for the latter portion of the last chapter of this Gospel was not found in the original; and in the Mark Gospel the portion in chapter xvi., from verse 9, is an interpolation; in Luke, chapter xxii., containing the story of the angel and the agony of the Saviour, is also an interpolation; as are also verses 3 to II of chapter viii., and the latter portion of the last chapter of the John Gospel. It is impossible to say when, or by whom, these interpolations, as well as the bogus prophecies to be found in the Gospels, were made; but there is a strong probability that these latter, with the oftrepeated "that it might be fulfilled as was spoken by the prophet," did not form part of the original Gospel as prepared for the Jessæans. The first verse of the John Gospel is copied word for word from Plato; and the rest of the Gospel, and the Epistle to the Hebrews, are imitations of Philo's manner and style of writing. "The writer of John attempts," says Mitchell, "to translate Philo's 'Logos' into 'word,' whereas the real meaning of logos was the principle of reason." In all probability Irenæus himself was the writer of this Gospel, and his friend Clement of Alexandria the fabricator of Matthew; Mark and Luke being improved and embellished copies. That John was not the author of the Gospel attributed to him is evident from the following (xxi. 24): "This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true."

In the first three Gospels, called "Synoptic," the verbal agreement in some parts is so complete that the conclusion is inevitable that they have been copied from each other; Mark and Luke probably from Matthew, which is the oldest of the Canonical Gospels, or from a common source. Luke and Acts are evidently written by the same person, and the writer copied to a large extent from the Matthew Gospel. The Luke writer (chapter iii. 2) makes the Jews to have two high priests!-which is proof against his being a Jew, and against his possessing knowledge of Jewish customs.

As to the truth of the Gospel story, we do not possess the testimony of a single person to the actual occurrence of any of the events related in the Gospels, the narrative representing merely what was believed among the Jessæans and later Christians during the first century. And belief was

then very elastic, each day adding something fresh to the fundamental chain that was being forged. Most of the narratives are identical with similar legends to be found in Buddhist and other writings, which found their way from the Essenes to the Jessæans, and from them again to the Christians. That these monkish fabricators of sacred scriptures were not particular as to truth, provided that it was for the good of the cause they were advocating, is readily admitted by their own writers. The favourite apostle of the Christian cosmogony (Paul), strongly suspected now to be a fictitious character, is alleged to have said: "For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory, why yet am I judged a sinner?" (Rom. iii. 7). The fictitious Paul, therefore, did not object to lie, provided it added to the glory of his god. Eusebius says (lib. viii., xxi.) that he has related "what might redound to the glory," and that he "has suppressed all that could tend to the disgrace, of religion." Such an admission of the violation of the fundamental law of history speaks for itself.

But infinitely the worst impeachment of all is that of gross interpolation and a wilful falsifying of scriptures. This charge, be it remembered, is made, not by enemies. only, but by the most honoured of the Christian Fathers and historians. Eusebius, again, said it was "lawful and fitting to employ falsehood on behalf of the Church "; and he speaks of the gross prevalence of "sacred forgeries and lying frauds......Whole paragraphs have been foisted in by our predecessors." Origen says: "It is not only justifiable, but our bounden duty, to lie and deceive, if by such guiles we can catch souls." Augustine says: "Many things have been added by our forefathers, even to the words of our Lord himself. Sentences have been added neither uttered by Christ nor yet written by any one of his apostles, no one knows by whom." Faustus also said: Words and whole paragraphs have been inserted into the books of Scripture ad libitum." Mosheim says: "Not only after the Saviour's ascension various histories of his life and doctrine, full of impositions and fables, were composed by persons......who were superstitious, simple, and addicted to pious frauds; but afterwards various spurious writings were palmed upon the world, inscribed with the name of the apostles" (cent. i., part ii., chap. ii., 17). Again, he says:

66

L

"Another error among the Christians was to deceive and lie for the sake of truth and piety...... The vice early spread among the Christians" (cent. ii., part ii., iii., 15). And these pious forgers had it all their own way, for whatever they wrote could not be refuted, everyone being dead who could expose the fraud.

But, "besides forging, lying, and deceiving for the cause of Jesus, the Christian Fathers destroyed all evidence against themselves and their theology which they came across.'

The magnificent and priceless lesser library at Alexandria, "The Serapeum," collected by the Ptolemies, and to which was added after the destruction of the greater library (the Bruchium) by Julius Cæsar, that of Pergamus, collected by Eumenes of Persia, together containing over 300,000 books, was wantonly destroyed by order of Theophilus, Christian Bishop of that city. The Christian Emperor Theodosius (346–395), who ordered the destruction of the Temple of Serapis, and forcibly established the doctrine of the Trinity, decreed that "all writings whatsoever...... written against the Christian religion..............shall be committed to the fire." The priests took special care, says Mitchell, "to destroy all scientific literature, and all pagan writings, and the writings of the philosophers, who exposed the immoral rites and secrets of the new sect, which had its origin among the lowest grades of the people." The Emperor Julian said: "It is enough for you to seduce a few slaves and beggars."

Very little, if anything, is known concerning the Epistles, and nothing concerning the reputed author Paul, for there is not a tittle of evidence to show that Paul ever existed. His alleged Epistle to the Ephesians is a mere amplification of the Epistle to the Colossians; 78 out of 155 verses, of which it consists, contain expressions identical with the latter Epistle; and the epithet "holy," as applied to the apostles, was never used in Apostolic times. In the Epistle to the Hebrews (chapter xi.) all the passages referring to faith are copied from Philo. The Epistle of James is generally admitted to be spurious.

Some of the N. T. writings are alleged to have been written in Greek, and some in Latin; Matthew in SyroChaldaic; Mark, Luke, John, the Acts, and the Epistle to the Romans in Greek. Yet they are reputed to have been written by ignorant Galilean fishermen, who could not have