The great fundamental truth to be first laid down, is _this_--that the Gospels are not _four_--but _one_. The Ancients knew this very well. Εὐαγγελισταὶ μὲν τέσσαρες,--Εὐαγγέλιον δὲ ἕν--says Origen[360]: "the Gospel-_writers_ are four,--but the _Gospel_ is one." And the ancients recorded this mighty verity four times over on the first page of the Gospel, lest it should ever be forgotten; and there it stands to this day:--the Gospel,--the _one_ Gospel κατὰ,--_according to_--St. Matthew,--_according to_ St. Mark,--_according to_ St. Luke,--_according to_ St. John. Like that river which went out of Eden to water the Garden,--it was by the HOLY GHOST "parted, and became into four heads."--The Gospels therefore, (to call them by their common name,) are not to be regarded as four witnesses, or rather as four culprits, brought up on a charge of fraud. Rather are they Angelic voices singing in sweetest harmony, but after a method of Heavenly counterpoint which must be studied before it can be understood of Men. And next,--There is one great principle, and one only, which needs to be borne in mind for the effectual reconciliation of _every discrepancy_ which the four narratives present: namely, that you should approach them in exactly the same spirit in which you approach the statement of any man of honour of your acquaintance. Whether the Apostles of the LAMB,--men whom we believe to have been inspired by the Holy Spirit of the Everlasting GOD,--are not entitled to far higher respect, far higher consideration, at our hands,--I leave _you_ to decide. As one whose joy and crown it has been to weigh every word in the Gospel in hair-scales, I am prepared to risk the issue. Be only as fair to the four Evangelists as you are to one another; and I am quite confident about the result. I appeal to the experience of every thoughtful man among you who has at all given his mind to the subject of evidence, whether it be not the fact,--(1st) That when two or more persons are giving true versions of the same incident, their accounts will sometimes differ so considerably, that it will seem at first sight as if they could not possibly be reconciled: and yet (2ndly), That a single word of explanation, the discovery of one minute circumstance,--perfectly natural when we hear it stated, yet most unlikely and unlooked-for,--will often suffice to remove the difficulty which before seemed unsurmountable; and further, that when this has been done, the entire consistency of the several accounts becomes apparent; while the harmony which is established is often of the most beautiful nature. (3rdly) That when (for whatever reason) two or more versions of the same incident are _not_ correct, no ingenuity can ever possibly reconcile them, _as they stand_. They lean apart in hopeless divergence. In other words, they _contradict_ one another.