Charles Bradlaugh opens his 1881 pamphlet by framing it as a direct response to a Religious Tract Society publication: a translation of Constantin Tischendorf's When were our Gospels Written? Bradlaugh immediately signals his adversarial stance, characterizing Tischendorf's work as a piece of advocacy rather than scholarship. The prefatory note reveals that the pamphlet originated in 1867 and was updated for a fourth edition, drawing on then-recent works like Supernatural Religion and Besant's Freethinkers' Text-Book. Bradlaugh's voice is sharp and polemical, aiming to dismantle what he sees as Tischendorf's reckless claims.

A Combative Opening and the Stakes of the Debate

Bradlaugh wastes no time establishing the pamphlet's polemical tone. He quotes the Religious Tract Society's claim that “on the credibility of the four Gospels the whole of Christianity rests, as a building on its foundations,” then proposes to examine Tischendorf's advocacy and the genuineness of the Gospels. The language is direct and confrontational: Bradlaugh refers to Tischendorf's “reckless statements” and “audacious flourishes.” He highlights the Society's boast that the pamphlet had been printed multiple times in German, French, Dutch, and Russian, and even endorsed by an archbishop with papal approval—a detail Bradlaugh uses to underscore the perceived threat. The opening paragraphs establish a rhythm of accusation and counter-argument, with Bradlaugh positioning himself as a skeptical investigator against an overconfident establishment.

Exposing Rhetorical Tactics and Evidential Gaps

Bradlaugh's method is to scrutinize Tischendorf's specific claims, often by pointing out missing evidence or logical leaps. For instance, he challenges Tischendorf's assertion that Polycarp vouched for John's authorship of the fourth Gospel. Bradlaugh notes that in Polycarp's only extant epistle, the Gospel of John is never mentioned, and no passage can be identified with it. He accuses Tischendorf of forgetting that “the highest duty of an advocate is to make the truth clear.” Similarly, Bradlaugh attacks Tischendorf's use of the Muratorian Canon, calling it “utterly valueless as evidence” because its date and authorship are uncertain, and no early church father referred to it. Bradlaugh also points out that Tischendorf confidently dates Justin Martyr's first apology to 139 AD, ignoring scholarly disagreement that places it as late as 150–160 AD. These examples illustrate Bradlaugh's focus on the gap between Tischendorf's certainty and the actual evidence.

The Pamphlet's Structure and Rhetorical Pace

The pamphlet's structure mirrors a courtroom cross-examination. Bradlaugh moves from one Tischendorf claim to the next, each time presenting a counter-argument or highlighting an omission. The pace is brisk, with short paragraphs and frequent rhetorical questions, such as “Do the Religious Tract Society regard English Infidels as so utterly ignorant that they thus intentionally seek to suggest a falsehood?” This interrogative style keeps the reader engaged and reinforces Bradlaugh's role as a truth-seeker. The language is occasionally sarcastic, as when he calls Tischendorf the “able decipherer of illegible parchments.” The pamphlet's brevity—around 17,000 words—means Bradlaugh cannot exhaustively treat every point, but he aims to provide an “index” to matters more fully covered elsewhere. The result is a focused, fast-paced polemic that prioritizes exposing weak arguments over constructing a comprehensive alternative case.

Bradlaugh's pamphlet is best read as a specimen of Victorian freethought polemic, where the author's combative voice is as important as his arguments. Readers should attend to how Bradlaugh selects and frames evidence, and compare his citations with the sources he references. The pamphlet does not aim to prove a specific date for the Gospels but to undermine the confidence of Tischendorf's claims. For a fuller picture, consult the works Bradlaugh cites, such as Supernatural Religion and Besant's Freethinkers' Text-Book, which he presents as more thorough treatments.