-
Articles_of_he_Bishop_of_Uramiah, page : 294
Apostles and others who were the eyewitnesses of those events
and doctrines, and that the author very attentively examined
them all and chose only such as he considered true or trust-
worthy. Moreover, it is quite evident from the confession
of St. Luke himself, as it may be easily deducted from his
preface, that he claims no direct revelation made to himself,
nor does he attribute any inspiratory character to his book.
It may, too, be safely assumed that the first and the fourth
Gospels were either not written when Luke compiled his own
narrative, or that he had not seen them; for he could not
have ventured to counterpoise or contradict the Gospels
written by the two Apostles, Matthew and John.
These brief observations, which can be multiplied, must
convince every impartial reader that the so-called "Four
Gospels" do not exhibit the necessary features which are
indispensable for any Scripture claiming a divine inspiration.
The Churches have believed that the author of the third
and doctrines, and that the author very attentively examined
them all and chose only such as he considered true or trust-
worthy. Moreover, it is quite evident from the confession
of St. Luke himself, as it may be easily deducted from his
preface, that he claims no direct revelation made to himself,
nor does he attribute any inspiratory character to his book.
It may, too, be safely assumed that the first and the fourth
Gospels were either not written when Luke compiled his own
narrative, or that he had not seen them; for he could not
have ventured to counterpoise or contradict the Gospels
written by the two Apostles, Matthew and John.
These brief observations, which can be multiplied, must
convince every impartial reader that the so-called "Four
Gospels" do not exhibit the necessary features which are
indispensable for any Scripture claiming a divine inspiration.
The Churches have believed that the author of the third