Chapter I.—On the Authority of the Gospels.
Chapter II.—On the Order of the Evangelists, and the Principles on Which They Wrote.
Chapter IV.—Of the Fact that John Undertook the Exposition of Christ’s Divinity.
Chapter IX.—Of Certain Persons Who Pretend that Christ Wrote Books on the Arts of Magic.
Chapter XIII.—Of the Question Why God Suffered the Jews to Be Reduced to Subjection.
Chapter XVII.—In Opposition to the Romans Who Rejected the God of Israel Alone.
Chapter XIX.—The Proof that This God is the True God.
Chapter XXII.—Of the Opinion Entertained by the Gentiles Regarding Our God.
Chapter XXIII.—Of the Follies Which the Pagans Have Indulged in Regarding Jupiter and Saturn.
Chapter XXVIII.—Of the Predicted Rejection of Idols.
Chapter XXXI.—The Fulfilment of the Prophecies Concerning Christ.
Chapter XXXIV.—Epilogue to the Preceding.
Chapter VI.—On the Position Given to the Preaching of John the Baptist in All the Four Evangelists.
Chapter VII.—Of the Two Herods.
Chapter XII.—Concerning the Words Ascribed to John by All the Four Evangelists Respectively.
Chapter XIII.—Of the Baptism of Jesus.
Chapter XIV.—Of the Words or the Voice that Came from Heaven Upon Him When He Had Been Baptized.
Chapter XVI.—Of the Temptation of Jesus.
Chapter XVII.—Of the Calling of the Apostles as They Were Fishing.
Chapter XVIII.—Of the Date of His Departure into Galilee.
Chapter XIX.—Of the Lengthened Sermon Which, According to Matthew, He Delivered on the Mount.
Chapter XXI.—Of the Order in Which the Narrative Concerning Peter’s Mother-In-Law is Introduced.
Chapter XXIX.—Of the Two Blind Men and the Dumb Demoniac Whose Stories are Related Only by Matthew.
Chapter XVII.—Of the Harmony of the Four Evangelists in Their Notices of the Draught of Vinegar.
Chapter X.—Of the Evangelist John, and the Distinction Between Him and the Other Three.
Chapter VII.—Of the Two Herods.
20. But with respect to the mention of Herod, it is well understood that some are apt to be influenced by the circumstance that Luke has told us how, in the days of John’s baptizing, and at the time when the Lord, being then a grown man, was also baptized, Herod was tetrarch of Galilee;280 Luke iii. 1–21. whereas Matthew tells us that the boy281 Puerum. Jesus returned from Egypt after the death of Herod. Now these two accounts cannot both be true, unless we may also suppose that there were two different Herods. But as no one can fail to be aware that this is a perfectly possible case, what must be the blindness in which those persons pursue their mad follies, who are so quick to launch false charges against the truth of the Gospels; and how miserably inconsiderate must they be, not to reflect that two men may have been called by the same name? Yet this is a thing of which examples abound on all sides. For this latter Herod is understood to have been the son of the former Herod: just as Archelaus also was, whom Matthew states to have succeeded to the throne of Judæa on the death of his father; and as Philip was, who is introduced by Luke as the brother of Herod the tetrarch, and as himself tetrarch of Ituræa. For the Herod who sought the life of the child Christ was king; whereas this other Herod, his son, was not called king, but tetrarch, which is a Greek word, signifying etymologically one set over the fourth part of a kingdom.
CAPUT VII. De duobus Herodibus.
20. Sed plane de Herode solet movere nonnullos quod Lucas narravit, in diebus baptismi Joannis Herodem fuisse tetrarcham Galilaeae, quando etiam Dominus juvenis baptizatus est (Luc. III, 1-21); Matthaeus autem, mortuo Herode, dicit puerum Jesum ab Aegypto remeasse: quod utrumque verum esse non potest, nisi duo fuisse intelligantur Herodes. Quod cum fieri potuisse nemo nesciat, qua caecitate insaniunt, qui procliviores sunt ad calumniandum evangelicae veritati, quam paululum consideratiores, ut duos homines eodem vocabulo appellatos intelligant? cujus rei exemplis plena sunt omnia. Nam iste posterior Herodes prioris Herodis filius fuisse perhibetur; sicut Archelaus, quem Matthaeus in Judaeae regnum patri mortuo successisse commemorat (Matth. II, 19-22); sicut Philippus, quem fratrem tetrarchae Herodis et ipsum Ituraeae tetrarcham Lucas insinuat. Rex enim fuit Herodes ille qui quaerebat animam pueri Christi; Herodes autem alius filius ejus, non rex, sed tetrarcha dictus est, quod nomen raecum a parte regni quarta inditum resonat.