Note 87 — PRELIMINARY REMARKS (continued 2)
Reading edition
"The horizon which his view embraced was much narrower than St. Paul's,"—who had enlarged his mind by foreign travel, (p. 168.)
In a note, we are informed that "at any rate his Gospel cannot, by external evidence, be attached to the person (!) of St. John as its author." "Many persons," (it is added,) "shrink from a bonâ fide examination of the 'Gospel question,' because they imagine, that unless the four Gospels are received as ... entirely the composition of the persons whose names they bear, and without any admixture of legendary matter or embellishment in their narratives, the only alternative is to suppose a fraudulent design in those who did compose them." (p. 161.) ... May one who has not shrunk from 'the Gospel question' be permitted to regret that the Reverend writer has not specified the charges which he thus vaguely brings against the Gospels? What, pray, is the legendary matter; and which are the embellishments?
In the same page we read of "the first, or genuine, epistle of St. Peter." Is not his second epistle genuine, then?