2 On the Canon, p. 166. Dr. Westcott, in the first instance, translates the expression: [------] "the Scriptures of the New Testament." In a note to his fourth edition, however, he is kind enough to explain: "Of course it is not affirmed that the collection here called [------] was identical with our 'New Testament,' but simply that the phrase shows that a collection of writings belonging to the New Testament existed," p. 188, n. 2. Such a translation, in such a work, assuming as it does the whole question, and concealing what is doubtful, is most unwarrantable. The fact is that not only is there no mention of the New Testament at all, but the words as little necessarily imply a "collection" of writings as they do a "collection" of the Epistles of Dionyaius. {162} Lord:" "It is not easy to settle what this term means," although he adds his own personal opinion, "but most probably it refers to the Gospels as containing the sayings and doings of the Lord. It is not likely, as Lardner supposes, that such a term would be applied to the whole of the New Testament"(1) The idea of our collected New Testament being referred to is of course quite untenable, and although it is open to argument that Dionysius may have referred to evangelical works, it is obvious that there are no means of proving the fact, and much less that he referred specially to our Gospels. In fact, the fragments of Dionysius present no evidence whatever of the existence of our Synoptics. In order further to illustrate the inconclusiveness of the arguments based upon so vague an expression, we may add that it does not of necessity apply to any Gospels or works of Christian history at all, and may with perfect propriety have indicated the Scriptures of the Old Testament. We find Justin Martyr complaining in the same spirit as Dionysius, through several chapters, that the Old Testament Scriptures, and more especially those relating to the Lord, had been adulterated, that parts had been taken away, and others added, with the intention of destroying or weakening their application to Christ.(2) Justin's argument throughout is, that the whole of the Old Testament Scriptures refer to Christ, and Tryphon, his antagonist, the representative of Jewish opinion, is made to avow that the Jews not only wait for Christ, but, he adds: "We admit that all the Scriptures which you have cited refer to him."(3) Not only, therefore, were the Scriptures of the Old Testament {163}