E. That, before that date, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, are not selected as the four evangelists. This position necessarily follows from the preceding one, since four evangelists could not be selected until four Gospels were recognised.  Here, again, Dr. Giles supports the argument we are building up.  He says:  “Justin Martyr never once mentions by name the evangelists Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.  This circumstance is of great importance; for those who assert that our four canonical Gospels are contemporary records of our Saviour’s ministry, ascribe them to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and to no other writers.  In this they are, in a certain sense, consistent; for contemporary writings [? histories] are very rarely anonymous.  If so, how could they be proved to be contemporary?  Justin Martyr, it must be remembered, wrote in 150; but neither he, nor any writer before him, has alluded, in the most remote degree, to four specific Gospels, bearing the names of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.  Let those who think differently produce the passages in which such mention is to be found” ("Christian Records,” Rev. Dr. Giles, p. 73).  Two of these names had, however, emerged a little earlier, being mentioned as evangelists by Papias, of Hierapolis.  His testimony will be fully considered below in establishing position g.

F. That there is no evidence that the four Gospels mentioned about that date were the same as those we have now. This brings us to a most important point in our examination; for we now attack the very key of the Christian position—­viz., that, although the Gospels be not mentioned by name previous to Irenaeus, their existence can yet be conclusively proved by quotations from them, to be found in the writings of the Fathers who lived before Irenaeus.  Paley says:  “The historical books of the New Testament—­meaning thereby the four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles—­are quoted, or alluded to, by a series of Christian writers, beginning with those who were contemporary with the Apostles or who immediately followed them, and proceeding in close and regular succession from their time to the present.”  And he urges that “the medium of proof stated in this proposition is, of all others, the most unquestionable, the least liable to any practices of fraud, and is not diminished by the lapse of ages” ("Evidences,” pp. 111, 112).  The writers brought in evidence are:  Barnabas, Clement, Hermas, Ignatius, Polycarp, Papias, Justin Martyr, Hegesippus, and the epistle from Lyons and Vienne.  Before examining the supposed quotations in as great detail as our space will allow, two or three preliminary remarks are needed on the value of this offered evidence as a whole.