Lastly, he mentions and distinguishes between the genuine and ancient copies of the Scriptures and the incorrect ones(325). Having noticed all the _external_ matter, let us come to the opinions of Irenæus in regard to the _use and value_ of the holy Scriptures, and the method of _understanding_ them. Although here his example is more forcible than his precepts, it is satisfactory that he speaks very definitely, and to the purpose. For instance, he informs us that, after the Apostles had preached the Gospel orally, they took care that the substance of their preaching should be put in writing, to be the ground and pillar of our faith(326). It is very remarkable that he should use this very phrase in speaking of the Gospel, which St. Paul had used in speaking of the Church itself; showing apparently that it was by the custody of the Scriptures that the Church was to sustain its office. Indeed he expresses this in so many words in another passage, when he says that the truth is preserved by the keeping and reading of the Scripture, and preaching consistently with it(327). His own practice is perfectly consistent with his principles. When he enters into controversy, his first appeal, indeed, in the particular case in hand, was to common sense, as showing the extreme absurdity and glaring contradiction of the Gnostic theories(328). But as they claimed revelation for their authority, he then goes to the Scripture, as the only authentic _record_ of revelation(329); and it is evident that, on his own account, he would never have appealed to any other authority in support of the _great and leading doctrines_ he has to deal with. When he does bring in tradition as an independent and collateral _witness_ of revelation, he does so because the Gnostics themselves appealed to tradition(330) as something more certain than Scripture. And having met them upon this ground, he goes on(331), in the large remaining portion of his treatise, to refute their systems by the induction of passages from the successive portions of the Old and New Testaments. Clearly, therefore, his disposition, where the question was what God had revealed, would be to go, first of all, and entirely, if possible, to Scripture; for whereas the heretics held that the inspired volume was obscure and uncertain(332), he maintained that there were truths contained in it without any doubt or obscurity, and that those were the things in which the sound‐minded and pious would chiefly meditate(333). And with regard to those things which are obscure and doubtful, he taught that we should endeavour to explain them by those parts which are unambiguous(334).