Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

We may regard it then, I conceive, as an established fact that Tatian's Diatessaron was a Harmony of our four Gospels. So difficult and laborious a work would hardly have been undertaken, except to meet a want which had been widely felt. It implies that the four books used were recognized by those for whom it was intended as authoritative, and as possessing equal authority. Can we then believe that Tatian's Harmony represented a different set of books from the "Memoirs called Gospels" of his master Justin, which were read at the meetings for public worship in churches all over the Christian world as the authentic records of the life and teaching of Christ, the production of Apostles and their companions? Does not Tatian's unquestionable use of the Gospel of John in particular confirm the strong presumption from other facts that this Gospel was included in the "Memoirs" used by his master and by Christians generally twenty years before?

This presumption receives further confirmation from other testimonies to the existence and use of the Fourth Gospel between the time of Justin Martyr and Irenæus.

The treatise or fragment On the Resurrection, which Otto with many others ascribes to Justin, if not genuine, probably belongs to this period. In c. I we read, "The Logos of God, who was [or became] his Son, came to us clothed in flesh, revealing both himself and the Father, giving to us in himself the resurrection from the dead and the eternal life which follows." The allusions here to John i. 1, 14; xiv. 9; xi. 25, 26, seem unmistakable. So in c. 9, "He permitted them to handle him, and showed in his hands the marks of the nails," we have a reference to John xx. 25, 27, as well as to Luke χχίν. 39.

Melito, bishop of Sardis (cir. A.D. 165), in a fragment from

Note A, under no. 4.) In Matt. xix. 17, the text is given in Ephraem's commentary in different forms, but it seems to be, substantially, "Unus tantum est bonus, Pater (or Deus Pater) qui in cælis" (Moesinger, pp. 169, 170, 173); similarly, Justin Martyr once (Dial. c. 101), the Naassenes in Hippolytus (Adv. Hær. v. 7, p. 102), the Marcosians in Irenæus (Hær. i. 20. §2), and the Clementine Homilies (xviii. 1, 3); see, for the numerous variations of reading here, Tischendorf's N.T. Gr. ed. 8va, in loc. Notice also the reading of John vii. 8 ("Non ascendo," Moesinger, p. 167); John iii. 13, quoted without the last clause of text. recept. (pp. 187, 189, comp. 168); John x. 8 (ante me, p. 200); Luke xxii. 44 (“et factus est sudor ejus ut guttæ sanguinis," p. 235; comp. Justin, Dial. c. 103).

his work on the Incarnation preserved by Anastasius Sinaita, speaks of Christ as "giving proof to us of his deity by signs [wrought] in the three years after his baptism, and of his humanity in the thirty years before his baptism." This assignment of a duration of three years to his ministry must have been founded on the Gospel of John, which mentions three Passovers (ii. 13; vi. 4; xi. 55) besides the "feast of the Jews" referred to in John v. I.

Claudius Apollinaris, bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia (cir. A.D. 166), in a treatise on the Paschal Festival, refers to the apparent difference between John and the Synoptic Gospels as to the time of the death of Jesus. Apollinaris, relying on the Gospel of John, held that it was on the day on which the paschal lamb was killed, the 14th of Nisan; his opponents, appealing to the Gospel of Matthew, maintained that it was on the day following. Both Gospels were evidently received as authoritative by both parties. He also refers in the same work to the piercing of the side of Jesus and the effusion of water and blood, mentioned only by John (xix. 34).

The Epistle of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons in Gaul to those of Asia and Phrygia, giving an account of their persecutions (A.D. 177), quotes the following as the words of the Lord: "There shall come a time in which whosoever killeth you shall think that he is offering a religious service to God," λατρείαν προσφέρειν τῷ θεῷ. The expression in the last clause is the same which is inadequately rendered in the common version "doeth God service" (John xvi. 2).|| The use of the word παρákλŋτos a little before in the Epistle, "having the

*See Anast. Sinait. Hodeg. or Viæ Dux, c. 13, in Migne, Patrol. Gr. lxxxix. col. 229, or Melito, Frag. vi. in Otto, Corp. Apol. Christ., vol. ix. (1872), p. 416.

+Chronicon Paschale, vol. i., pp. 13, 14, ed. Dindorf; Apollinaris in Routh's Rell. sacra, ed. alt. (1846), i. 160; or Otto, Corp. Apol. Christ., ix. 486 f.

Ibid. p. 14, ed. Dindorf; Routh, ibid. p. 161; Otto, ubi supra. For a full view of the evidence of Melito and Apollinaris, and of the considerations which give it weight, see Lightfoot's article, "The Later School of St. John," in the Contemporary Review for February, 1876, xxvii. 471 ff.

The letter is preserved in large part by Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. v. cc. 1-4. It may be consulted conveniently in Routh, Rell. sacra, i. 295 ff., ed. alt. For the quotation, see Epist. c. 4; Routh, p. 300; Euseb. v. 1. § 15.

Paraclete within him," also suggests the Gospel of John; comp. John xiv. 16, 17.*

Athenagoras the Athenian (cir. A.D. 176), in his Plea for Christians addressed to M. Aurelius and Commodus, speaking of "the Logos of God the Father," says that "through him all things were made" (di avτov пávтa ¿YÉVETO), the Father and the Son being one; and the Son being in the Father, and the Father in the Son"; language which seems evidently founded on John i. 3; x. 30, 38; xiv. 10, II; xvii. 21, 22.†

Theophilus, bishop of Antioch A.D. 169–181, in his work in defence of Christianity addressed to Autolycus (a.D. 180), says, "The Holy Scriptures teach us, and all who were moved by the Spirit, among whom John says, 'In the beginning was the word [or Logos], and the Word was with God."" He proceeds to quote John i. 3.‡

The Muratorian Canon (cir. A.D. 170), as has already been mentioned, ascribes the Gospel to the Apostle John, and gives an account of the circumstances under which it was written, fabulous doubtless in some of its details, but having probably a basis of truth. ||

Celsus, the celebrated heathen adversary of Christianity (A.D. 178, Keim), professedly founds his statements concerning the history of Christ on "the writings of his disciples ";" and his accounts are manifestly based on our four Gospels,††

[ocr errors]

*Epist. c. 3; Routh, p. 298; Euseb. v. 1. § 10. In the same section we have other expressions apparently borrowed from John xv. 13 and 1 John iii. 16. See, further, Lightfoot's article, "The Churches of Gaul," in the Contemp. Review for August, 1876, xxviii. 405 ff. An English translation of the Fragments of Melito and Apollinaris, and of the Epistle of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons, will be found appended to vol. ii. of Lactantius, in vol. xxii. of the AnteNicene Christian Library.

+Suppl. pro Christ. c. 10, p. 46, ed. Otto.

‡Ad Autol. ii. 22, pp. 118-120, ed. Otto.

See on this subject Lightfoot in the Contemp. Review for October, 1875, xxvi. 835 ff.; Matthew Arnold, God and the Bible, p. 248 (Eng. ed.); and Westcott, "Introd. to the Gospel of St. John," in The Holy Bible... with... Commentary, etc., ed. by F. C. Cook, N.T., vol. ii.

p. xxxv.

**Origen, Cels. ii. 13, 74; comp. 32, 53. He quotes these writings as possessing among Christians unquestioned authority: "We need," says he, "no other witness; for your own swords” (ii. 74).

you fall

upon

†† See fully in Lardner, Testimonies of Ancient Heathens, ch. xviii., Works, vii. 210-278; Kirchhofer, Quellensammlung zur Gesch. des neutest. Canons (1844), PP. 330-349; Keim, Celsus' Wahres Wort (1873), pp. 223-230. Comp. Norton, Genuineness of the Gospels, i. 142 ff.; E. A. Abbott, art. Gospels, in the Encyc. Britannica, 9th ed., x. 818.

66

though he does not name their authors. He refers to several circumstances peculiar to the narrative of John, as the blood which flowed from the body of Jesus at his crucifixion,* and the fact that Christ "after his death arose, and showed the marks of his punishment, and how his hands had been pierced." † He says that some relate that one, and some that two angels came to the sepulchre, to announce that Jesus was risen." Matthew and Mark speak of but one angel, Luke and John mention two. He says that the Jews "challenged Jesus in the temple to produce some clear proof that he was the Son of God." He appears also to allude to the cry of Jesus, "I thirst," recorded only by John.** Referring to a declaration of Jesus, he satirically exclaims, "O Light and Truth!" designations of Christ characteristic of John's Gospel.†† He says that Jesus "after rising from the dead showed himself secretly to one woman only, and to his boon companions."‡‡ Here the first part of the statement seems to refer to John's account of the appearance of Christ to Mary Magdalene.

The heretical writings of this period clearly recognize the Fourth Gospel. Notwithstanding several apparent quotations or allusions, it was formerly maintained that the author of the Clementine Homilies could not possibly have used this Gospel, it being in such opposition to his opinions. But since the discovery of the Codex Ottobonianus, containing the missing portion of the book (first published by Dressel in his edition of the Homilies in 1853), there has been a change of view. That portion contains so clear a quotation of John ix. 1-3 (Hom. xix. 22) that Hilgenfeld has handsomely retracted his denial;|||| and, though Scholten and Supernatu

*Origen, Cels. ii. 36, also i. 66; comp. John xix. 34.

+Origen, Cels. ii. 55, 59; John xx. 25, 27.

Origen, Cels. v. 52, 56; John xx. 12; comp. Luke xxiv. 4, 23.
Origen, Cels. i. 67; John ii. 18; comp. x. 23, 24. (Matt. xxi. 23.)

**Origen, Cels. ii. 37; John xix. 28.

tt Origen, Cels. ii. 49; John viii. 12; ix. 5; xii. 46; xiv. 6.

‡‡ Origen, Cels. ii. 70; John xx. 14-18. Compare, however, the Addition to Mark, xvi. 9. Einleit. in d. N.T., p. 43 f., note; comp. Matthew Arnold, God and the Bible, p. 277 Volkmar also recognizes the use of the Fourth Gospel here, but only as "an unapostolic novum

ral Religion still resist the evidence, there can be little doubt about the final verdict of impartial criticism. Besides this passage and that about the new birth,* the Gospel of John seems to be used twice in Hom. iii. 52, once in a free quotation: "I am the gate of life; he that entereth in through me entereth into life, for there is no other teaching that can save" (comp. John x. 9, 10); and again, “My sheep hear my voice" (comp. John x. 27).

More important, and beyond any dispute, is the evidence of the use of the Fourth Gospel as the work of the Apostle John by the Gnostics of this period. Ptolemy, the disciple of Valentinus, in his Epistle to Flora, preserved by Epiphanius (Hær. xxxiii. 3), quotes John i. 3 as what "the Apostle says ";† and, in the exposition of the Ptolemæo-Valentinian system given by Irenæus, a long passage is quoted from Ptolemy or one of his school in which he is represented as saying that "John, the disciple of the Lord, supposes a certain Beginning," etc., citing and commenting on John i. I-5, 14, 18, in support of the Valentinian doctrine of the Ogdoad. The Valentinians, indeed, as we are told by Irenæus elsewhere, used the Gospel of John most abundantly (Hær. iii. 11. § 7). Heracleon, another disciple of Valentinus, wrote a commentary on it, large extracts from which are preserved by Origen. || The book commonly cited as Excerpta Theodoti or Doctrina Orientalis, a compilation (with criticisms) from the writings of Theodotus and other Gnostics of the second century, ascribed to Clement of Alexandria and

[ocr errors]

(Ursprung uns. Evv., 1866, p. 62 f., 134 f.). The question is well treated by Sanday, The Gospels in the Second Century, pp. 293 ff. It is to be observed that the incident of "the man blind from his birth" is introduced in the Homilies (xix. 22) as it is in the Apostolical Constitutions (v. 7. § 17) with the use of the definite article, as something well-known to the readers of the book. How does this happen, if the writer is taking it from "an unapostolic novum"? Drummond and Sanday have properly called attention to this use of the article.

*Hom. xi. 26; see pp. 29, 31.

+ I follow the text of Dindorf in his edition of Epiphanius, vol. ii., pp. 199, 200, who reads τά τε πάντα for ἅτε πάντα and γεγονέναι οὐδέν for γέγονεν οὐδέν.

Iren. Hær. i. 8. § 5. The old Latin version of Irenæus, which is often more trustworthy than the Greek as preserved by Epiphanius, ends the section referred to with the words: Et Ptolemæus quidem ita. For the Greek, generally, see Epiphanius, Hær. xxxi. 27, in Dindorf's edition, which gives the best text.

These are collected in Grabe's Spicilegium SS. Patrum, etc., ii. 85-117, 237, ed. alt. (1714), and in Stieren's Irenæus, i. 938-971.

« ForrigeFortsett »