He likewise bears direct testimony to the _authenticity_ of the four Gospels and the Revelation of St. John; affirming that St. Matthew wrote his in Hebrew for the use of the Jews, at the time when St. Peter and St. Paul conjointly were preaching and establishing the Church at Rome(310); that after their departure, St. Mark committed to writing what he had heard from St. Peter, and St. Luke what he had heard from St. Paul(311); that St. John wrote his Gospel at Ephesus, to oppose the errors of Cerinthus(312), and that he was likewise the author of the Revelation which bears his name(313), the visions of which he saw towards the close of the reign of Domitian(314). It is curious that Irenæus quotes a passage as written either by Isaiah or Jeremiah, which does not appear in our present copies(315). Justin Martyr had quoted it before him, and asserted that it had been wilfully erased by the Jews from the Hebrew copies(316). Now, however, it does not appear even in the Septuagint. He likewise records a saying or two as our Lord’s which do not appear in the New Testament(317): the latter of which indeed few persons will believe to have been spoken by our Lord. He informs us that the Ebionites use only St. Matthew’s Gospel, and reject St. Paul(318); that Marcion curtailed St. Luke, and in effect the whole Gospel(319); that Cerinthus used St. Mark, and the Valentinians St. John(320), and invented a Gospel of their own; and that the Montanists reject St. John’s Gospel and St. Paul(321). It appears, however, that the Gnostics did in fact quote, at least when arguing with Christians, the self‐same books which we now have; for all the passages of Scripture which Irenæus brings forward as perverted by them correspond with our present copies. Irenæus was of opinion that the whole of the sacred books of the Old Testament were lost during the Babylonish captivity, and that Ezra restored them by divine inspiration(322). He likewise fully believed the fable of Aristeas concerning the translation of the Septuagint by the direction of one of the Ptolemies, whom he names _the son of Lagus_(323). He does not relate it with all the particularity of Josephus; but he relates the separation of the seventy interpreters from each other, and their miraculous agreement in the same words and phrases from beginning to end. It is clear, therefore, that he believed in the inspiration of the Septuagint, so far as it is a translation of the Hebrew; and no wonder that he was unable to avoid extending the same feeling to the other books which commonly accompany the translated portion. He likewise mentions Theodotion of Ephesus, and Aquila of Pontus, both Jewish proselytes, as having wrongly translated Isaiah vii. 14(324). Theodotion was the contemporary of Irenæus, and must have published his version so recently, that it is wonderful that Irenæus should have seen it.