And this probability becomes almost a certainty in the light of modern discoveries. For quantities of old _papyri_ have been found in Egypt, which show that at the time of Christ, writing was in common use among all classes; soldiers, farmers, servants, schoolboys, were all accustomed to write. Therefore, as it has been well said, 'so far as antecedent probability goes, founded on the general character of preceding and contemporary society, the first Christian account of the circumstances connected with the death of Jesus must be presumed to have been written in the year when Jesus died.'[204] And since St. Luke, when he was at Jerusalem met several of the _elders_ there, including Christ's brother, St. James,[205] he probably had access to all existing documents. [Footnote 204: Ramsay, Transactions of Victoria Institute, vol. xxxix., 1907, p. 203.] [Footnote 205: Acts 21. 18.] There is thus no reason to doubt his own statement, that he had ample means of knowing the truth, _from the beginning_. And this, he says, was the very reason why he determined to write; so a more trustworthy historian can scarcely be imagined.[206] Fortunately, however, though dividing the Gospels into their original parts is an interesting study, it is in no way essential to our present argument. [Footnote 206: Luke 1. 2-3.] (3.) _Their probable date._ We now come to the _probable date_ of the first three Gospels; and there are strong reasons for fixing this before the fall of Jerusalem, in A.D. 70. In the first place several _subjects_ are discussed, such as the lawfulness of the Jews paying tribute to Cæsar,[207] which would have had no interest after that event. And that conversations on such subjects should have been composed in later days, or even thought worth recording, is most unlikely. Nor are Christ's instructions as to what persons should do when they bring their gifts to the altar, likely to have been recorded after the altar, and everything connected with it, had been totally destroyed.[208] [Footnote 207: Matt. 22. 17.] [Footnote 208: Matt. 5. 24.] Secondly, nearly all the _parables_ of Christ have very strong marks of truthfulness, as they are thoroughly natural in character, and suit the customs and scenery of Palestine. Moreover, they are unique in Christian literature. However strange we may think it, the early Christians never seem to have adopted Christ's method of teaching by parables. Yet, if they had composed these parables, instead of merely recording them, they would doubtless have composed others like them. It is hence probable that these discourses are genuine; and, if so, they must obviously have been written down very soon afterwards.