The fact is, very little is known of the New Testament, but too much is well known to receive it in _evidence_ in a matter of so much importance. The narratives it contains would be _ruled out of court_ in any civilized country on the globe. It is evidently a huge _compilation_ of what was at best only _traditions_ among the nations of the earth, and even these traditions, mixed and mangled as they are, must have another and a more rational explanation than an historical or a literal one. This book _cannot be an infallible divine revelation_. Let us see whether we cannot find out what was really intended to be taught by the different writers. CHAPTER X. THE DRAMA OF THE GOSPELS _“Great is the mystery of godliness.”—1 Tim. 3:16._ _“We speak the wisdom of God in a mystery.”—1 Cor. 2:7._ _“I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say.”—1 Cor. 10:15._ IN early times every prominent religious teacher had his own gospel, as Paul asserts that he had his. The books that were canonized did not by any means shape the belief of the early Christians, but, on the contrary, their beliefs shaped the character of the books. “The question of a ‘Catholic canon,’” says Professor Davidson, “was realized about the same time as the idea of a Catholic Church.” The partisanship, low trickery, and mob violence by which votes of councils were obtained to establish ecclesiastical dogmas, the canonicity of Scriptures, etc., were such as now-a-days characterize a political meeting in the slums of an American city. While, therefore, we quote the statements of the Gospels to prepare the way for the presentation of our points of argument, we do so only for convenience. They cannot, by any rule of sound criticism, testimony of contemporary writers, or even of spiritual discernment, be accepted as historical. The composition of the four Gospels indicates in many ways that they were originally collections of _religious stories_, each of which has a moral of its own, like the fables of Æsop, or, more properly, the narratives concerning Buddha given in the _Dhammapada_. This was a common mode of writing in early times. History and biography were hardly considered. Hence contradictions of verbal statement were not counted as of any importance. This is probably the reason why the transcribers neglected to remove the conflicts of statement and other inaccuracies that abound in the Gospels. It is also more than probable that many parts of these works which have a narrative form were later interpolations. The first two chapters of Matthew and the first two in the Gospel according to Luke are unequivocally of this character. The style and diction are conspicuously unlike the language of the other parts of those works, as will appear on the slightest notice.