For they say, according to our Author's antique Translation,
That the other Evangelists having committed to writing on∣ly the Gests of our Saviour, during one Years space: There∣fore the Apostle John, being thereto requested, declared in a Gospel according to him, the time that was passed over by the other Evangelists, and what was done by our Saviour therein.
It is very true, That the one of these is different from the other; but tho they are different, they are not contradictory and inconsistent. For then, not only the Archbishop would contra∣dict himself, who elsewhere gives the same account, and tells us from Eusebius
That St John wrote his Gospel last, and that on purpose to supply the Omissions of the other Evangelists;
but the Fathers also would contradict one another, and often themselves; who sometimes give the one, and sometimes the other, and sometimes both as the reasons of St.
John's writing, (as I shall presently shew). By which way of arguing,
Epipha∣nius, Eusebius, and St.
Jerome, &c. will closh one with another; when the first of these saith, St.
John wrote his Gospel by the impulse of the Holy Ghost; and the other says, it was at the instance of the
Asian Bishops. But now, as these two may well be accommodated, and are consistent; so it is in the Ac∣count given by the Ancients of the occasion of St.
John's wri∣ting the Gospel; therefore St.
Jerom joyns them together, and after he had said, That St.
John wrote it in Confutation of
Ce∣rinthus, and other Hereticks; adds, there is also
another Cause, and then falls in with
Eusebius.
So Irenaeus expresly So Epiphanius.
And thus Sandius doth acknowledg, That against the Heresy of Cerinthus and Ebion,, St. John (as we have it by Tradition) wrote his Gospel.
Thus far then we are safe, and have the suffrage of Antiqui∣ty on our side, that St. John wrote his Gospel against the He∣resies of Cerinthus and Ebion. And indeed, by our Author's reply to this part, we may guess, That when he met with these two Names in the Church-History, he met with nothing against it. For thus he goes on.
First, As to Ebion, concerning him, It is, saith he, doubted by the Criticks, whether there was any such Man: Nay, a little after, he is got above the Criticks, and positively affirms, That Ebion